And now for a word from our sponsor

Running this blog takes time. If you like it, you can help it continue by contributing. Paypal is already set up. If people want to use a credit card, I can check out other methods. This might require a transition to wordpress.org. Checks work: write to gcochran9@comcast.net for details. Worn, blood-stained tens and twenties are always welcome. Along with Krugerrands and cans of Spam, which would for sure be air-dropped on Vanuatu. Just the Spam.

Henry is willing to give the occasional talk for free, as part of his public education mission. I am willing to give talks for money or some close approximation thereof.

if you have a puzzle that no one’s been able to solve, I might take a stab at it – for $$. Particularly if it falls into one my areas of expertise – algorithm development, signal processing, image recovery, adaptive optics, simulations, strategic analysis, and genetics (creating super-Neanderthals, for example). Among other things.

Some T-shirts are still available.

If you’d like to see something different on this blog, this is the time to suggest it. The odds are that I won’t do it, but you never know.

P.S. Bitcoin address is 1JayHvhHCRG4RTAV87EiETy4Vnwp66Q74q

P.P.S. You can transfer frequent flier miles to my Delta SkyMiles Account: 2645857695.

P.P.P.S. there must be other ways of transmitting pseudo-valuta that haven’t occurred to me. Game gold in WOW? Gift cards? Barter?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to And now for a word from our sponsor

  1. dave chamberlin says:

    yer worth it. OK.

    • Anonymous says:

      There ain’t no damn money in blogging and trying to make a living off of non fiction books is HARD. Meanwhile the online university system is a cash cow. I’d pay to take a class at Cochran’s School of Teaching Whatever He Damn Well Feels Like. There is no reason for you to hand over most of the dough to Phoenix University or some over scam school. Get twenty students, make shell out 300 bucks each and make us book slaves like you did that poor little Ginny a decade back. Have us discuss what we have read in some ongoing chat room while you just pop in now and then with a “no that’s wrong and here’s why” comment now and then.

  2. Anonymous says:

    What’s your bitcoin address?

  3. dieter says:

    Have you tried asking the Russians for money? They are concerned about homosexuality and have recently banned gay propaganda.

  4. The fourth doorman of the apocalypse says:

    What percentage of people with IQs above 105 does a society need to prevent collapse? Does it depend on the level of centralized control of resources?

  5. RJ says:

    I think a donation is in order and worthwhile. My time here has been more or less enjoyable.

    Anyway, if you’re looking for suggestions, I wouldn’t mind hearing some more of your thoughts on common diseases/maladies and the role of pathogens.

  6. Ron Pavellas says:

    I often don’t understand the implications of your assertions and questions, but as with RJ (above) I enjoy reading them. I have made a modest donation thru Paypal. Here’s my suggestion in the form of a question:

    Being lactose intolerant (as was my mother) AND having Beta Thalassemia minor (three grandparents were born in Greece), I wonder about the survival or fitness value of these traits. My mother lived to age 90; father to age 87.

    • gcochran says:

      Lactose intolerance is the default state of mankind. No harm in it unless you have to live on milk. Beta thalassemia minor means you’re a carrier for a common malaria defense. Problems are rare – you might want to avoid extreme exertion at high altitude. .

      • Ron Pavellas says:

        Interesting about the lactose intolerance. Thanks.

        Right, about the thalassemia. I found, when younger, that I couldn’t walk upward of 12,000 feet elevation in the Sierra Nevada. My lungs just couldn’t pump enough air to sufficiently oxygenate my smaller red blood cells. The main danger in the thalassemia, I have found, is that many MDs are unaware of it and prescribe iron pills, uselessly. When I was a child this just caused constipation with no improvement in my haemoglobin level.

      • Jason says:

        Ah, but the harm is all emotional. It’s done to you when your friends are all eating ice cream, and knowing that if you should join them you are in for a world of hurt. Donation on the way.

  7. Anonymous says:

    You should charge more for your book. I already bought it, but I would definitely pay more for the next one. Thanks for what you two do, what an education.

  8. misdreavus says:

    Done!

  9. Portlander says:

    Your take on LFTR’s?

    Kirk Sorensen makes a compelling sounding case, but then charismatic zealots always do. So far the only con I’ve heard brought up is gamma radiation embrittles the steel in the plant. Yet, even if true, the amount of energy LFTR’s are supposed to yield makes it seem like that could be overcome with redundancy and a hot-swappable design for all the major parts.

    I quit my job last week to concentrate full-time on my tech start-up. (Aye, sounds ridiculous when I put it that way) So I can’t deliver on a really eye-catching tip, but maybe others are interested in the question as well? Five people at $20 a pop would make for a nice dinner with the missus, no? Mother’s Day is this weekend…

  10. J McGill says:

    Sorry, I’m the anonymous poster above who suggested charging more for your book. I was referring to the Kindle compilation of your blog posts. I think it’s worth far more than you charge for it. Check with Sailer about different means of accepting donations, it’s fairly easy to donate to him with a card, I do it every year. I’d be happy to do the same with the two of you. Much better value than the magazines to which I once subscribed. Thanks again.

  11. gcochran says:

    So far, not many have sold. Feel free to write a review, if you liked it.

    I’ll check out credit-card donation options.

  12. put a flattr button on your blog http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flattr
    I have used that to pay Steve Sailer. I want to put the button on my blog, but lack the patience to go through the tedious steps

  13. In the meantime I have dropped you a beer through old-fashioned PayPal. My question is: how do we introduce genetics to the general public, such that it re-enters popular consciousness? No alleles, no pleiotropy, nothing which would scare off those who can just about calculate the cost of carpeting a room, given the dimensions of a room and the cost per square yard, but who know how very well how to make children. (Not a job for you, simply some guidance as to how we outsource the problem).

    • Greying Wanderer says:

      “how do we introduce genetics to the general public”

      Talk about stuff where genetics overlaps with what the average person is interested in e.g. fertility, anything to do with sex and violence etc.

  14. mathlogic says:

    Ok, youtube channel can generate profit in you have enough viewing or comments.

  15. BB753 says:

    If you still want smart grandchildren, I might contribute.

  16. Educated Breeder says:

    Have you considered cooking and selling meth?

  17. Anonymous says:

    James Thompson – you need to destroy myth of the gas chambers. Because anything to do with race and IQ will eventualuy lead to “well you want to gas people”. And YKW are very adept at this.

  18. nameless37 says:

    Deciphering Voynich manuscript sounds like it falls roughly within your areas of expertise (you might need to brush up on linguistics). Can’t offer you any $$, but I’m pretty sure that there’s a book and maybe some TV appearances for you in it if you succeed.

  19. Andrew says:

    OK, I donated some loose change I found under my couch. The topics here are thought provoking and educational, but I think you are preaching to the choir.

    If there was a some visible effort to recruit young folks into taking on future research on the topic, I could possibly find something more substantial.

    Thanks

  20. Mihaly says:

    Have you ever thought about doing vlog entries?

    • gcochran9 says:

      Mostly I agree with them. I never thought that population history, meaning bottlenecks and expansions and such, would have much influence on the amount of genetic load per person. But a significantly increased mutation rate would, and that’s what you would get from a high paternal age. And some populations have that high paternal age.

      The other questions is whether the various codes that attempt to predict the severity of a given mutation were biased because an overreliance on the reference sequence. I have to look at that more – maybe they’re right. I never put much stock in those codes anyhow, because they don’t even agree with each other very often.

      The higher levels of loss-of-function mutations n Africans, seen in both the whatshisname and Tennessen articles, still remain: frameshifts or stop codons are pretty easy to recognize. Odd that they don’t mention the whatshisname paper.

      More research is needed. Always wanted to say that.

  21. Rudolf Winestock says:

    Above the donate button, you have “You too can contribute to my secret army of the night!” In the previous weblog entry, you noted that “reason isn’t the only tool” available to deal with obscurantists. Is this a joke, or does your secret army of the night exist in one of those parallel universes you sometimes talk about?

    Perhaps I shouldn’t have made the connection in such a public way.

  22. erica says:

    You said raising fertility rates among high IQ women shouldn’t be too hard. Asked “How?” you replied, “Fashion.”

    Hope you expand on that response.

    • Discard says:

      Erica, I’m not him, but it seems to me that people will do all kinds of foolish, inconvenient, or expensive things because of what they read or see or hear from popular media. For women, that could be four inch heels, tight pants on big butts, rings in their noses, adoption of Haitian babies, and tattoos. For men, $40,000 pick-up trucks with big off road tires, Harley-Davidsons they ride with apprehension twice a year, razors that leave a two-day beard, earrings, and tattoos.
      Buy off or replace a few hundred professional trend setters, and watch the disappearance of casual body mutilation, Haitian adoptees, stupid shoes and silly motor vehicles, and the return of mid-calf dresses, fedoras, and the right sort of babies.

      Yes, I know it’s more complex than that, but I’ve not got a dissertation in me today.

      • Ron Pavellas says:

        John Adams and T.Jefferson discussed “the tinsel aristocracy,” of which we moderns have plenty. I agree with the premise here about fashion being a motivator for behavior. Those who create the fashion are the aristocracy (well, first, the royalty, but the Obama’s haven’t quite got into this category yet). Look how the politicians court the tinsel aristocracy in Hollywood. Maybe we can convince Lady Gaga to settle down and have lots of babies? Hmmm. How about Scarlett Johansson?

        –(Adams) had no confidence that those with natural born talent (sometimes called “genius”) and “virtues,” derived through family traits and education, who ascended as “natural aristocracy” would not become as corrupt as those who ascended through wealth, beauty or name–the latter group being the “tinsel aristocracy” as described by Jefferson.”–
        http://pavellas.com/2010/05/17/democratic-republicanism-vs-%CE%AC%CF%81%CE%B9%CF%83%CF%84%CE%BF%CE%B9-the-aristocracy/

    • melendwyr says:

      People will do pointless or harmful things because of fashion. Not things that are genuinely beneficial. (Example: there’s a constant market for ridiculous new diet fads, but no one’s ever found a way to weaponize the “eat less and exercise” meme, even though it works.)
      Given just how costly and difficult having children is in our society, I don’t think it’s possible to make having them fashionable.

  23. Olof says:

    How about a few posts on your rarely mentioned religious beliefs?

  24. Mike Johnson says:

    Any comments on celiac disease and specific pathogens? The latest thinking (e.g., Fasano) seems to say it’s a combination of three factors:
    (1): genetic susceptibility to gluten;
    (2): the presence of gluten;
    (3): increased gut permeability letting the trigger (gluten) escape the digestive tract.

    Lots of interesting theories surrounding (3), with the general story being ‘increased permeability is caused almost entirely by an increase in zonulin, which is mostly caused both by a decrease in bifidobacteria and a rise in E. coli+Salmonella+Shigella.’

    It all seems fairly plausible to me, but the last part is rather handwavy, and based on this causal story celiac should be *a lot* more common. I’ve long suspected there could be (4): a chronic infection of some specific pathogen, common to most cases of celiac, that greatly increases gut permeability.

    Gluten supposedly increases zonulin levels, but celiacs (off of gluten for 2+ years) have ~30x higher levels of zonulin than gluten-eating controls, which seems extreme and may indicate there’s more going on than ‘too much bad bacteria, not enough good bacteria’.

    Assorted links:
    http://physrev.physiology.org/content/91/1/151.long
    http://chriskresser.com/pioneering-researcher-alessio-fasano-m-d-on-gluten-autoimmunity-leaky-gut
    http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/2011/04/what-no-one-is-saying-about-zonulin-is.html

  25. Harold says:

    I already suggested this to Peter Frost, you might consider crowdfunding for a research project to test your Ashkenazi IQ hypothesis. There are various sites specifically for doing this, for example http://www.microryza.com. I believe Kickstarter has also been used to this end.

  26. szopeno says:

    It just came to me yesterday. IN a theory that gays are beneficial to the family, gays should privide to nephews and GC says it’s a BS because for each child not born to gay father, he would have to substantially increase the fitness of at least 4 nephews (because they share 1/4 of his genes). But what about if a population is inbred? E.g. in cases when people usually marry with their cousins. The nephews would share more genes with their gay uncle, right?
    I know that gay uncles do not provide for their nephews now, but I am only wondering about this part of the theory, e.g. how many nephews would have to have their fitness increased. This would be of course relevant only in environment, when children needs a lot of providers to survive.

    • Erik says:

      Sounds like the parents would be inbred and share more genes with their children too, so the gays still have to help more just to break even.

    • misdreavus says:

      Let’s assume that human beings were like hymenoptera, and the coefficient of relatedness between two siblings was 0.75, instead of the actual 0.5 (on average) for our species.

      Yeah, that’s still powerful dumb. Assume everybody married their first cousins, too. You’d still have to save over two nieces and nephews for every child you refuse to have. Identity by descent matters. The “gay gene” would probably never even get a foothold.

      And to this date nobody has ever witnessed identical, or even similar mating patterns in any human culture, past or present. Since we all know that homosexuality is a genetic adaptation, that has to be one powerful coincidence, right?

    • RS says:

      > This would be of course relevant only in environment, when children needs a lot of providers to survive.

      Lots of animal species lacking any sterile caste do have care of juveniles by adult sibs, uncles etc. Obviously including humans. Another example is several bird species including scrub jays. While the juveniles needing lots of care is probably one factor in this, Hamilton’s rule pretty much tells you that the greater factor is the paucity — whether temporary or resolving — of good breeding opportunities for these adults.

      There may also be species that are ecologically rather obliged to band together, where social domination/subordination forces nonsteriles into a temporary or resolving situation of nonbreeding. This happens in humans but I think there are other species that have this.

      There can be yet other factors. (Sedentary) humans are kind of exceptional in that they store and/or defend wealth, which few other animals do beyond a fairly nominal level. If you are two years old and your parents die, your uncle may suffer relatively little fitness opportunity cost by taking you in, even though he is trying to raise his own kids, if his family happens to be rather above subsistence level. I would imagine this is perhaps somewhat less likely to happen if you are a two year old hunter-gather kid whose parents die.

      • szopen says:

        Thanks for all the answers. Especially part about that parents would be more inbred too somehow missed my attention. Stupid me 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s