Common deleterious recessives: info for Taleb.

There are two reasons that you might see common deleterious recessive alleles in a population.

Founder effects or other bottlenecks:  the population is so small that some ungood mutations have become unusually common, just by chance. The total number of bad mutations is generally not higher, but particular ones are.  Since they’re usually recessive, a 10% frequency of one bad gene causes more trouble [ 1% homozygotes)  than 5% frequency of two different bad genes [ 0.5% homozygotes] .

If you mix a lot with neighboring populations,  gene frequencies tend to even out.  But endogamy is not the cause: it’s going through a time of very small population size.  You’re not going to see a lot of unusually common Mendelian diseases driven by mutation  in a population that has been large for a long time, even if they are endogamous.

Second reason is that an allele has heterozygote advantage, increases the fitness of heterozygotes, like sickle-cell or cystic fibrosis. These tend to cluster in metabolic paths related to the selective agent: in areas with lots of malaria, you see a number related to hemoglobin or the red cell. We have fairly recently found a couple that defend against sleeping sickness: likely we will find more.

Common deleterious mutations due to bottlenecks are random: they don’t cluster in  metabolic paths.

Most deleterious mutations are rare, haven’t been around for long.  If you marry your first cousin, the odds of a kid being a homozygote for some such go way up, since the cousin has a fair chance of sharing that rare mutation.  On the other hand, if the mutation is common in your population, due to chance or selection, your children have  a noticeable risk for being homozygotes even when you and your mate are not closely related.  In other words, Tay-Sachs in Ashkenazi Jews is not a product of inbreeding.

Since the average person has many rare deleterious mutations, with effects ranging from lethal to being a little subpar, children of such consanguineous unions have a spectrum of problems, ranging instant death ( rare) to ” not very healthy”, not so rare. On average, kids of first cousins seem to have have about twice as many serious genetic problems, average about 5 iq points lower  & 0.7 cm shorter.

Where is inbreeding a problem? Much of the Moslem world.

Acceptance of consanguineous unions is increasing in liberal circles, since A. It’s an Islamic thing and B. It’s obviously stupid.

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

109 Responses to Common deleterious recessives: info for Taleb.

  1. kot says:

    Acceptance of consanguineous unions is increasing in liberal circles

    News to me

    • Rosenmops says:

      Liberals will not criticize Muslims for marrying their cousins. Criticizing Muslims for any reason is racist and xenophobic and would make you literally Hitler.

    • teageegeepea says:

      I’ve heard it’s a problem in the UK that so many Pakistani children are the result of inbreeding (sometimes multiple sequential generations) and have a higher rate of birth defects. I haven’t heard of that being much of an issue in the US. I don’t know to what extent that’s because a lower percent of the population is Muslim, our Muslims are less heavily Pakistani, or if the same ethnicities just engage in cousin-marriage less frequently here. I once came across the blog of an activist who wanted to end all laws against consanguineous relationships (including between parents & children), and while she was British, I don’t think she was Muslim.

      • sprfls says:

        My friend is a genetic counselor in New York. I can assure you it’s a MAJOR problem in the Pakistani community here.

      • Ulysses says:

        In both Pakistan and Saudi arabia the rate of consanguineous marriage to 1st cousins is over 50%, highest rates in the world

      • They also use marriage as a means to bring their relatives over to the UK. If we banned marriage closer than 3rd cousins (for health reasons, honest, because muh NHS), it would have a significant impact on immigration – I think a lot of them would go for a sharia-compliant unrecognised marriage with a close cousin in the UK over a distant cousin from Pakistan.

        On the other hand, it means the terrorists they produce aren’t that smart, so it has its upsides.

    • Greying Wanderer says:

      media first, media controlled zombies second

  2. RCB says:

    In terms of expressing the deleterious genotype (homozygous recessive): populations that have recently increased their rate of inbreeding (due to cultural or environmental changes, whatever) will certainly show higher load due to deleterious recessives, because selection has not yet had time to purge them (as it would in the long run). By “recently” I mean on an evolutionary timescale: hundreds of years can easily not be enough time, depending on strength of selection.

    The frequency of the allele itself (not the genotype) of course will not tend be higher, which is what you seem to be talking about.

    Technically I’d say that if a trait shows heterozygote advantage, then there isn’t a recessive allele. You only get heterozygote advantage if the heterozygote is different, which means one allele doesn’t hide the other. In practice sometimes one allele is “mostly” dominant, i.e. heterozygote is a lot more like one than the other, in which case we say one allele is effectively recessive. Nitpicking.

  3. On average, kids of first cousins seem to have have about twice as many serious genetic problems, average about 5 iq points lower & 0.7 cm shorter.

    Ashkenazim, who are highly interrelated, live significantly longer than average and tend to stay healthy longer.

    It all depends on what you’re concentrating.

    • pyrrhus says:

      I have known or worked with many Ashkenazim living on the North Shore lakefront of Chicago..A very high percentage of those with children have at least one kid with serious to lethal birth defects, the mildest of which is autism…..In the words of a local MD, treating such conditions is a major medical practice all by itself in the area, which has a high percentage of Jews..So the parents may live a long time, but some of their kids don’t.

    • The G_man says:

      Except for Neteurei Karta and few other sects of similar size, cousin marriage is almost non-existent among Ashkenazi Jews. The fact that they are ‘highly interrelated’ causes its own problems, but these have nothing to do with inbreeding. Cochran explicitly mentioned this.

  4. Smithie says:

    Plutarch, I believe, wrote that Cleopatra spoke nine languages. I don’t believe it, but I’m wondering how functional she and some of the other rulers of Egypt and the Inca could have been. Is it even possible she could have ever been pretty, let alone not retarted?

    There must be a hard limit on how messed up you can be and live. Then a second limit on how functional one can be and have a click of supporters, while doing away with other claimants.

    • teageegeepea says:

      I always found the amount of inbreeding in George R. R. Martin’s Targaryens to be implausible, generalizing from European royalty we know about. But he justified it by saying it was inspired by the Ptolemaic dynasty, and I don’t know what to say about reality being unrealistic.

      • gcochran9 says:

        It is implausible. There may have been some unofficial, eugenic, between-the-sheets action going on there.

      • Coagulopath says:

        The series has some weird stuff going on. Isn’t the Mountain that Rides 8ft tall and 420 pounds? A man that big would find it difficult to stand up unassisted, let alone riding and fighting in heavy plate mail.

        • Patrick Boyle says:

          I don’t think so. I don’t watch the TV series “Game of Thrones” but I do know that 420 lbs is not that much these days. When I was younger I was 6’4″ and about 280 lbs. Pretty big. I watched the TV series “World’s Strongest Men”. Most of the competitors were around my size although I was never remotely that strong. But recently the top competitors are about 6’9″ and over 400 lbs. I expect in the near future we will see 500 lbs men who are seven feet tall competing for this title. It’s not much of a sport, more like a display of side show freaks. But they can move about and could wear armor.

          i don’t believe you can get to be 8 feet tall except by a pituitary tumor. I think polygenic giants stop around seven and a half feet. There are plenty of basketball players who are as much as seven and a half feet tall. They get up and down the court just fine but this seems to be the limit for normal locomotion. Almost all of the historical eight footers are photographed with a cane or crutches or the assistance of others.

          I await being corrected.

        • R. says:

          I don’t recall his exact height but it was more along the lines of 7 feet than 8. Supposedly eight? Might just be that no one really dared to measure him; in the books he’s described as a short tempered brute with no conscience and a tendency towards extreme violence.

          FYI, the strongman who played him, Hafthorn Bjornson does weigh something around 420 lbs, and I daresay he’d have little trouble fighting in plate mail. You can find videos of him deadlifting almost half a metric ton (472 kg).

          • Anonymous says:

            Bjornson isn’t even 7′ though – I think he might be 6′ 9”. If the Mountain was really 8 feet tall he’d probably need to be closer to 700 pounds to be structurally viable.

            He’s probably just said to be eight feet tall because Martin is an amorphous blob of lard who doesn’t know the first thing about physicality and never bothered to do his research. This is a common problem among fantasy writers.

        • Glengarry says:

          “A man that big would find it difficult to stand up unassisted, let alone riding and fighting in heavy plate mail.”

          And what about the horse!

      • Smithie says:

        Artificial cranial deformation seems so bizarre that I used to wonder if the practice was an attempt to mirror or even exaggerate a distortion in facial features caused by incest.

      • Jokah Macpherson says:

        Razib Khan even did a podcast on the implausibility of this. I found it entertaining and I’ve never read nor watched Game of Thrones.

      • ThoseSicklesThough says:

        GRRM admitted that the people he writes about are stronger, taller and more hardy than would be expected from Earth humans. Like them regularly surviving decades long winters and wounds never seeming to get infected quite as often. The cockl- and ballless Unsullied being elite Warriors lacking all that testosterone and the sisterfuckers just getting the occasional mental health issue, rather than what real-life inbred aristocracy gets with just cousin marriage. Theon kinda sorta makes sense in the books being visibly aged, gaunt, decrepit and utterly of his rockers (yet still somehow enduring Stannis having him hang from the ceiling in chains). In the show Theon has his mojo back and even can look people in the eye! And Arya has either Wolverine healing factor + Spiderman reflexes (no way she could have dodged that hit from Brienne) or (my personal theory) is already dead and has been replaced by a faceless woman (the waif).
        The cannon answer is basically: Don’t worry about it.

    • mtkennedy21 says:

      Cleopatra was Greek a d Muhammed was still an itch in his great grandfather’s pants.

  5. Sarhan says:

    My brother married a chinese women and their children are healthy. We are from Azerbaijan.

    Should I marry a white women to avoid common deleterious recessive alleles?

    • gcochran9 says:

      Anybody from very far away ( even 100 miles) would be unlikely to share rare deleterious alleles, while someone from any other racial group would be unlikely to share common ones. But I don’t know of any such in Azerbaijan: I don’t think there are a lot of malaria defense variants there.

      Find someone with good qualities, that cares for you and isn’t your first cousin. And is of the opposite sex.

      • adreadline says:

        Gregory Cochran: adaptative optics consultant, anthropology professor, pick-up artist and dating advisor (alert: mixed reviews on Tinder; ”he convinced me to read some Greek scholar” says one)

      • Alex says:

        What about outbreeding depression? No rare deleterious alleles, but you might break up gene complexes that lead to good traits in both groups if the two people are from sufficiently distant backgrounds.

    • Aldon says:

      No racemixing.

  6. Greying Wanderer says:

    “In other words, Tay-Sachs in Ashkenazi Jews is not a product of inbreeding.”

    this may be dumb but given the whole malaria protection, heterozygous thing and cities being a population sink for most of history due to various diseases could an almost exclusively urban population develop negative mutations which spread regardless because they conferred protection against one of those common urban diseases (whatever they were: cholera, dysentery)?

  7. Nomen Est Omen says:

    Acceptance of consanguineous unions is increasing in liberal circles, since A. It’s an Islamic thing and B. It’s obviously stupid.

    I think they prefer to ignore it. They’ve had lots of practice in the UK. From 2005:

    Ban Asian marriages of cousins, says MP

    Marriages between cousins should be banned after research showed alarming rates in defective births among Asian communities in Britain, a Labour MP said last night. The report, commissioned by Ann Cryer, revealed that the Pakistani community accounted for 30 per cent of all births with recessive disorders, despite representing 3.4 per cent of the birth rate nationwide. — The Daily Telegraph, 16 Nov 2005.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1503074/Ban-Asian-marriages-of-cousins-says-MP.html

    At the same time, Anne Cryer was trying to alert her fellow liberals that there were a few problems with the “grooming” of white girls by members of the Muslim community. Thankfully, more and more Muslims are being elected as Labour MPs and councillors, so Islamophobia like Cryer’s is pretty much gone from the Labour party. Anti-semitism, strangely enough, is flourishing. But the Jewish community are still fully behind lots more Muslim immigration and lots more welfare subsidies for on-site increase of the Muslim population.

    • The G_man says:

      Anti-semitism, strangely enough, is flourishing. But the Jewish community are still fully behind lots more Muslim immigration and lots more welfare subsidies for on-site increase of the Muslim population.

      What? Jews are significantly more likely to vote Tory than English Whites.

      Kmacianity is slowly, but surely slouching from ‘Jews are way to the left of Whites’ to ‘Jews aren’t far enough to the Right of whites’.

      • Nomen Est Omen says:

        What? Jews are significantly more likely to vote Tory than English Whites.

        Oh yes, the ferociously right-wing and race-realist Tories, who brought in gay marriage and wail about how unfair the justice system etc are to poor misunderstood members of the Black community.

        As you well know, the Tories have made no attempts to end Muslim immigration or to shut off welfare-subsidies to the on-site Muslim community. Or to do anything about “cousin-marriage”. But they are massive supporters of Israel. Especially those, like Sajid Javid, who have their eyes on the top job. Funnily enough, there seems to be a connection between the Tories being funded by the Community and the Tories adopting.Community-friendly policies.

        Kmacianity is slowly, but surely slouching from ‘Jews are way to the left of Whites’ to ‘Jews aren’t far enough to the Right of whites’.

        Opponents of Kmacianity have never needed to slouch anywhere. They’ve always been based in Jerusalem, spiritually if not literally, and have always obfuscated and weaselled.

        • Lot says:

          Even as you dispute G_Man, you illustrate his point. English Jews are about 77-13 Tory/Labour v 45-40 other white groups.

          https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Poll-Only-13-percent-of-British-Jews-intend-to-vote-Labor-494366

          But that’s not enough, as less than 1% of the UK population, they need to do a better job of supporting the right faction within the right! Also, while block voting for the Tories while Muslims block vote for Labour (about 85% rate), Jews are nonetheless secretly advocates of mass Muslim migration. You just know it based on… anecdotes involving the 13% who still favor Labour.

          • Tanturn says:

            I’m pretty sure if you surveyed Jewish attitudes toward immigration, you’d find they were significantly to the Left of the average Brit, just as they are significantly to the Left of the average American. Indeed, Anepigone has shown that the attitudes of Jews are consistently to the Left of the average White Democrat on immigration.

            • Nomen Est Omen says:

              Tanturn, please don’t try to confuse the issue with facts and logic. British Jews vote Tory, therefore their support for Muslim immigration is irrelevant. They vote Tory. Not Labour. That’s all you need to know.

          • Nomen Est Omen says:

            Even as you dispute G_Man, you illustrate his point. English Jews are about 77-13 Tory/Labour v 45-40 other white groups.

            I thought I had made clear that voting Tory does not mean opposing Muslim immigration. Possibly you’re not proficient enough in English to understand? The Tories are not a conservative party and may soon supply the UK with its first Muslim prime minister, one Sajid Javid. He is continually making v. sycophantic speeches to Jewish organizations and assuring them that he intends to serve only the interests of the folk who matter. And that does not include either Britiish whites or British Muslims. If you want to understand why the Tories are so slavishly pro-Israel and pro-Community, investigate the background of say, Sir Mick Davis, the Chief Executive and Treasurer of the Conservative Party.

            You just know it based on… anecdotes involving the 13% who still favor Labour.

            No, I know it because of the endless stream of statements and initiatives from the Jewish Community expressing solidarity with Muslims and calling on the UK to welcome Muslim refugees and immigrants. For example, the Dubbs Amendment, issued explicitly in the name of a Jewish Holocaust survivor who came to Britain with the Kindertransport.

            If you can produce some Jews who criticize a parallel being made between highly intelligent and civilized Jewish refugees from Nazism and inbred, ill-educated, unintelligent refugees from the interminable Muslim civil wars, please produce them. I can produce such a critic and guess what? She’s not mainstream. But these caring and compassionate voices from the Communty are v. mainstream::

            How the Jewish community is helping refugees integrate in Britain
            The Jewish community responded to the refugee crisis in large numbers after the publication of the shocking image of Alan Kurdi etc
            Meet the refugees who sought sanctuary with Jewish volunteers
            Jews will not be “cowed” from helping refugees, community leaders have vowed after the Pittsburgh shooting
            Synagogue persuades Barnet to take more refugees
            ‘As former child refugees ourselves, we believe the UK government should give more children at risk the same life-saving opportunity that we …

            etc, etc, etc

            • The G_Man says:

              Right, except that you are just repeating my point. Jews are to the right of British whites, but they are not far enough to the right of British whites. I agree, as far as it goes, they should be farther to the right of British whites than they are.

              • Nomen Est Omen says:

                No, they aren’t to the “right” of British whites. British whites have always opposed mass immigration and the censorship of racial topics. British Jews have always supported both, for obvious reasons. The Tories are not right-wing any more than the neo-cons are. If you know about the Jewish community in the UK (as you must), you also know that they like Muslim immigration just as much as the Jewish community in the US do. If you disagree, let’s see some links.

                Maybe you’d understand your own dishonesty better if you see it from another angle. Suppose you said to a Muslim apologist that British Muslims were anti-gay and anti-feminist. The Muslim apologist says indignantly: “But Muslims vote overwhelmingly for Labour!” Does that refute the proposition that Muslims are anti-gay and anti-feminist? Of course not. Muslims vote Labour not in support of gay rights and feminism, but because Labour panders to them and because they can use Labour as a vehicle for their purposes. Ditto, mutatis mutandis, for British Jews and the Tory party.

                But the parallel isn’t exact, because Labour are actually a pro-gay and feminist party. The Tories do not oppose mass immigration by Muslims any more than their supposedly right-wing equivalents in Europe. The Tories are not right-wing: they are globalist. The exception to their globalism, of course, is that they support Bibi and Israel’s ethno-nationalism. I remember you saying that the Mizrahim weren’t up to much. You’re right. But how would you fancy exchanging them for Pakistanis, Afghans and Somalis? The Tories might soon supply Britain with its first Pakistani prime minister. If so, they will “celebrate” the disaster as an example of how they’re not “racist”. They’re cuckservative, not right-wing.

              • The G_man says:

                British whites have always opposed mass immigration and the censorship of racial topics. British Jews have always supported both, for obvious reasons.

                If you have polling data to demonstrate your claim that British Jews are more supportive of mass immigration and censorship of racial topics than British Whites, then please share. My method of assessing the ‘right-wingness’ of various groups may not be perfect, but it seems preferable to you just making stuff up.

                Suppose you said to a Muslim apologist that British Muslims were anti-gay and anti-feminist. The Muslim apologist says indignantly: “But Muslims vote overwhelmingly for Labour!” Does that refute the proposition that Muslims are anti-gay and anti-feminist?

                Clearly Muslims do not believe that opposing feminism and homosexuality in wider society is a high priority, if they indeed think it is important at all. Every four or five years British Whites get a chance to express their views on mass immigration. The Tories invariably are less pro immigration than Labour. If you don’t trust them on this, then you are, of course, welcome to vote for UKIP. Apparently a large proportion of British Whites think that cutting immigration is a lower priority than … whatever it is people vote Labour for.

                They’re cuckservative, not right-wing.

                Again, I agree, but what’s your point? Apparently 90%+ of British Whites are not right-wing as demonstrated by how they vote. You have secret ballots, nothing is stopping you voting for a right wing party. British Jews are also not right-wing, but they are less not right-wing than British Whites.

                If you know about the Jewish community in the UK (as you must), you also know that they like Muslim immigration just as much as the Jewish community in the US do.

                I grew up among moderately orthodox ‘United Synagogue’ Jews who were almost invariably Tory dries, with a few ‘old labour right’ types who were also anti-immigration. I also know a lot of “English” Haredi Jews whose political opinions don’t really map onto the conventional spectrum, but it is not uncommon, in my experience, for them to favour deporation of all Muslims. At university almost everyone I met was left-wing. but of the few right-wingers I knew almost all were Jewish. I’ve met a lot of Jews with crummy left wing beliefs along the way. but I’ve met a lot more whites with the same beliefs. I’m aware that Reform Jews are awful, but I’m also aware that the same thing is true of every single Christian denomination and almost every English organization of any importance. Quite honestly, I don’t really know what you are on about. Maybe you should get out more and talk to your fellow white people.

                The exception to their globalism, of course, is that they support Bibi and Israel’s ethno-nationalism.

                That’s really quite delusional. If you polled Tory MPs, I’m pretty confident more than 90% would prefer Likud to lose the upcoming election. The House of Commons voted 274 -12 to recognize Palestine in 2014. I realize that in your circles anything short of painting a PLO mural in your living room is considered ‘genuflecting to Israel’, but this is a bit much.
                Hell, even the Jewish community in Britain opposes Bibi about 65-35.

                The Tories might soon supply Britain with its first Pakistani prime minister.</em.

                I think it’s a bad move on principle, but he and that Indian lady are lot less bad, on the whole, than most Tory MPs.

              • Nomen Est Omen says:

                I can’t find polling data for the UK, but I suggest that polling data for the US applies here too. And try this by the philo-Semite Douglas Murray at the Jewish Chronicle:

                Yet another theme has bubbled up which it genuinely shocks me to discover. For many Jewish groups and Jewish leaders have been taking a conspicuous lead in welcoming refugees . Some initiatives – such as that to save Christian children in the Middle East who are being ”cleansed” from the region – are hugely admirable and widely appreciated. But it is specific and needed. Other initiatives and statements from Jewish leaders and groups appear to be welcoming any and all refugees and equating the plight of 1930s Jews with all 21st-century migrants. This is not just a misreading of history but an incorrect application of history. It also sets up a dangerous linkage between Jews who are already in Europe and an increasingly unpopular, current European migration policy.

                https://www.thejc.com/comment/comment/the-real-refugee-problem-bigotry-1.62877

                I don’t know that any Jews said Murray was wrong to say that. And he went on to criticize the smug pro-migration historian Simon Schama (who represents mainstream Jewish opinion, I’d suggest) and to praise the Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban. Who is of course condemned as an anti-semite because he’s not a fan of Soros and his work.

                Could you now produce some criticisms of Murray for misrepresenting the Jewish communkty? And some Jews who have criticized the parallels being drawn between intelligent Jewish refugees from Nazism and in-bred Muslim refugees from the interminable Muslim civil wars? And some Jews who have criticized the use of false accusations of “anti-semitism” to stifle debate?

                And would you agree that the CST and its pal Tell MAMA are among the chief enemies of free speech in the UK, as the ADL and SPLC are among the chief enemies of free speech in the US? Yes or no?

                The House of Commons voted 274 -12 to recognize Palestine in 2014. I realize that in your circles anything short of painting a PLO mural in your living room is considered ‘genuflecting to Israel’, but this is a bit much.

                I don’t have a “circle”. I don’t support the Palestinians or regard their problems as any of my business. I do, however, like Bibi and his intelligence and realism. He’s a greedy crook, of course, but he’s a white male, so what can you expect? I’ll write more on how the Tories really do “genuflect” to Israel.

              • The G_man says:

                I can’t find polling data for the UK, but I suggest that polling data for the US applies here too.

                I suggest it doesn’t. British Jewish and American Jewish culture are totally different, with the former being based around a blend between a watered down version of orthodoxy and 1930s Anglicanism. Among British Jews it is taken as a given that, all things being equal, the more Jewish you are, the more right wing you are. There are those who challenge that of course, just as there are those that challenge the equation of Judaism and liberalism in the U.S.

                don’t know that any Jews said Murray was wrong to say that.

                Douglas Murray is clearly correct about Jewish leaders and groups. However, the same thing is true of Anglican groups, Methodist groups, Roman Catholic groups etc. I think his rhetoric is tactically effective – at least I hope so – but he is also perfectly aware that Jews are over represented among his supporters. The fact that he can get an airing in the JC is indicative of that.

                And some Jews who have criticized the parallels being drawn between intelligent Jewish refugees from Nazism and in-bred Muslim refugees from the interminable Muslim civil wars?

                Melanie Phillips, Geoffrey Alderman. Barbara Amiel. I doubt you could find 300 gentile columnists opposing Islamic immigration (let’s say 100 to factor in Jewish over representation).

                And would you agree that the CST and its pal Tell MAMA are among the chief enemies of free speech in the UK, as the ADL and SPLC are among the chief enemies of free speech in the US? Yes or no?

                That’s pretty nuts. CST are some guys playing cops and robbers. The leadership obviously have crummy opinions and, if they didn’t, they wouldn’t get any funding.

                Look, it’s obvious that you want to take a narrative that developed out of analysing the situation in America and apply it to the UK. Makes things easier but it’s obviously not true. Jews are 1% of the population. They are not underrepresented in the media to anything like the same degree as in the U.S. and have been steadily moving Right as they have moved up the economic ladder. At present, available evidence indicates that they are to the Right of British Whites, thought that is not saying much. UK political culture as a whole is generally Pro-Palestinian and the Labour party are extremely so. The ostentatiously pro-Israel politics that exist in the U.S. just isn’t a thing in Britain.

              • Nomen Est Omen says:

                [British Jews] have been steadily moving Right as they have moved up the economic ladder

                How do you say obfuscate in Hebrew? No, they’ve moved steadily to the Tories as they’ve lost control of Labour and found the Tories ever-readier to serve Israel. The palmy, pro-Israel days of Lord Levy, Jonathan Mendelsohn, David Abrahams, et al, are probably gone for ever in Labour. The Jewish switch to the Tories has coincided with the Tories becoming ever more cuckservative. Feldman called genuine right-wing Tories “swivel-eyed nutters” for opposing gay marriage and the EU. Finkelstein no doubt agreed with him.

                Melanie Phillips, Geoffrey Alderman. Barbara Amiel. I doubt you could find 300 gentile columnists opposing Islamic immigration (let’s say 100 to factor in Jewish over representation).

                I like Mad Mel and have referred to her obliquely in this thread. Alderman is a liberal and is pro-immigration. E.g. see his article “Private colleges are being sacrificed to please the anti-immigration lobby”. And what proportion are those three of the huge over-representation of Jewish folk in the media and academia?

                I doubt you could find 300 gentile columnists opposing Islamic immigration (let’s say 100 to factor in Jewish over representation).

                If you want goy columnists who oppose mass immigration, try the Unz Review and VDare. There are lots of people there who should be big names but aren’t because they’re bad-thinkers. Steve Sailer can’t get a prestigious job like Jennifer Rubin because Sailer doesn’t have ethnic nepotism on his side. For another example of how ethnic nepotism helps, compare James Watson with the mendacious windbag Stephen Jay Gould. Or compare Greg Cochran with Amy Harmon.

                But anyway, here’s Mad Mel agreeing with me and disagreeing with you. I claimed that the Jewish community in the UK supports Muslim immigration. You pretended that Jewish support for the Tories refuted this. It doesn’t. As Mad Mel points out, when the Tories try to restrict Muslim immigration as the goyim wish, the Jewish community oppose the Tories:

                […] when he was Prime Minister, David Cameron severely limited the number of refugees [from the Muslim civil wars whom] Britain would take. But this brought down on his head the wrath of prominent members of the Jewish community. In 2015, 200 people, including 20 rabbis, signed a strongly-worded open letter from the Jewish Council for Racial Equality condemning Britain’s refusal to admit more from the Calais migrant camp.

                They compared the migrants’ plight to that of the Jewish refugees trying to flee Hitler. Other leading Jews similarly made comparisons with the Kindertransport — and even with Auschwitz. Not only was it odious to instrumentalise the Holocaust in this way, but such critics made a grotesque and unforgivable category error. Jewish refugees posed no threat to anyone. They were purely victims of murderous prejudice. But a significant number of today’s migrants are either Islamic extremists or else their family culture leaves their children wide open to radicalisation.

                This touches on another mistake made by too many in the Jewish community: the equation of antisemitism with Islamophobia. The crucial difference here is between truth and lies. Prejudice is always based on irrationality and untruth. If something is rational or true, it can’t be a prejudice. The venom directed against the Jewish people is true bigotry since it invariably consists of foul and deranged lies.

                […] Jews have a duty of conscience, but to real victims. Jihadi Islam aims to crush and conquer Christianity. It has all but wiped it out in Iraq; it burns African Christians alive in their churches. Instead of undermining the struggle to keep Britain safe, the Jewish community should surely be pressing for the admission of Christian refugees and supporting the Christian resistance against Islam — without which the west will assuredly be lost.

                https://www.thejc.com/comment/columnists/not-all-refugees-are-pure-victims-1.439708

                So Mad Mel thinks the Jewish community are “undermining the struggle to keep Britain safe.” Maybe she should change her name to Amelakite Phillips. Or maybe she knows what’s she talking about.

                The ostentatiously pro-Israel politics that exist in the U.S. just isn’t a thing in Britain.

                But some people would like it to be. For Tory genuflection to Israel, try searching for speeches by Sajid Javid, Cameron, May et al to CFI, the CST and so on. And look at the networking of the ambitious Priti Patel, who had all kinds of off-the-record meetings with Israeli politicians under the supervision of Lord Pollack. BTW, I’m not a fan of David Icke, but Pollack’s punim does make me wonder whether Icke is on to something.

                That’s pretty nuts. CST are some guys playing cops and robbers. The leadership obviously have crummy opinions and, if they didn’t, they wouldn’t get any funding.

                What, you mean the goyim are pulling CST’s strings by refusing to fund CST unless it adopts crummy opinions that harm the Jewish community? No, CST work with Tell MAMA because Jews in the UK, as in the US, see Muslims as useful tools for undermining the goyim. Muslim terrorism is good for the surveillance state, which British Jews are also big fans of. See Malcolm Rifkind and my file at the CST. (N.B. I’m not really an Aston Villa fan.)

              • The G_man says:

                If you want goy columnists who oppose mass immigration, try the Unz Review and VDare. There are lots of people there who should be big names but aren’t because they’re bad-thinkers. Steve Sailer can’t get a prestigious job like Jennifer Rubin because Sailer doesn’t have ethnic nepotism on his side. For another example of how ethnic nepotism helps, compare James Watson with the mendacious windbag Stephen Jay Gould. Or compare Greg Cochran with Amy Harmon.

                I was asking you for BRITISH columnists who oppose mass immigration and since my entire point is that you are falsely trying to equate conditions in America with those in Britain, you seem oddly keen to prove me right. You can repeat all day that British Jews are not really right-wing compared to writers on VDare and I’ll agree with you, but it doesn’t change the fact they are less not right-wing that British Whites. In 6 months, there’s a decent chance you will have a Labour government committed to open borders and every form of far-left nutdom and no doubt you’ll still find someway to maintain your delusion that British whites are seriously based and being held back by Jews.

                And what proportion are those three of the huge over-representation of Jewish folk in the media and academia?

                Not that huge. Just look at a list of famous British writers and journalists. Not a lot of Jews. You seem oddly, weirdly desperate to live in America. Why don’t you just move?

                What, you mean the goyim are pulling CST’s strings by refusing to fund CST unless it adopts crummy opinions that harm the Jewish community?

                I’m saying that if CST doesn’t have a pro-diversity and inclusion agenda it will not receive government funds, which is literally true. Conquest’s 2nd Law has also played out in the normal way. I can hardly think of a more delusional idea than the claim that CST sees ‘Muslims as useful tools for undermining the goyim’.

                As Mad Mel points out, when the Tories try to restrict Muslim immigration as the goyim wish, the Jewish community oppose the Tories:

                No, she said Jewish LEADERS and communal organisation and that is literally true. It is also true of Anglican leaders, Catholic leaders, Methodist leaders etc. and you would know this if you stopped reading American websites and just went outside.

                And look at the networking of the ambitious Priti Patel, who had all kinds of off-the-record meetings with Israeli politicians under the supervision of Lord Pollack.

                Smart move, if you can pull it off. Israel has played a non-trivial role in helping Orban secure power and more or less runs Geert Wilder’s whole operation. If Salvini can pull it off in Italy then Israel will have had a hand in that too. It’s almost as if myopically blaming the Jews for the fact that your country is a leftwing nuthouse isn’t an effective strategy. In any case,the Patel affair doesn’t prove your point at all because it didn’t advance her career and she is considered by most British Whites to be a right wing nutter.

                Alderman is a liberal and is pro-immigration. E.g. see his article “Private colleges are being sacrificed to please the anti-immigration lobby”

                I was a in a room when he declared that the Koran was equivalent to Mein Kampf, which was quite brave considering those who were present, if a little stupid (which he is, in my experience). I thought his article made a valid point. What’s the point in trying to artificially deflate migration figures by restricting international students? The title of the article is typically Guardian scummery, but it’s unlikely he wrote it.

              • Nomen Est Omen says:

                Btw, you didn’t mention Larry Auster as a sane Jewish writer. If you don’t know his writing, I highly recommend it.

                http://www.amnation.com/vfr/

                Interestingly, he more or less agreed with KMac at the end of his life. And he was a Christian convert by then.

                No, she said Jewish LEADERS and communal organisation and that is literally true.

                Mad Mel summed her critique of the Jewish love of Muslim immigration up like this: “Instead of undermining the struggle to keep Britain safe, the Jewish community should surely be pressing for the admission of Christian refugees and supporting the Christian resistance against Islam — without which the west will assuredly be lost.”

                “The Jewish community.” So she obviously sees those “leaders and communal organizations” as speaking for Jews as a community. Douglas Murray sees things in the same way. Maybe they should get out more and learn about British Jews and their hardcore conservatism?

                It is also true of Anglican leaders, Catholic leaders, Methodist leaders etc. and you would know this if you stopped reading American websites and just went outside.

                The Archbishop of Canterbury is not a “leader” of the “white community”. The Community Security Trust does not claim to represent Jews as members of a religion, but Jews as a community bound by a shared ancestry and with shared enemies. There are no white “communal organisations” before whom members of the government appear and make sycophantic speeches. Jews are famous for complaining and demanding their rights, as you may have noticed from time to time in Israel. If their self-proclaimed communal leaders don’t represent “the community”, as communal newspapers like the ,Jewish Chronicle so often call it, please produce some anti-immigration, anti-Muslim British Jews who are speaking out and demanding that their leaders represent their views.

                The EDL were an implicit pro-white, anti-immigration organization. That’s why they were demonized and wrecked by the state. Brexit was an implicit pro-white, anti-immigration vote. That’s why etc. You’re right about the lunacy of whites voting Labour, but Enoch Powell was the most popular politician of his day after his speech. We have only arrived at this situation because British whites were denied their wishes on immigration for decades. But British Jews weren’t denied their wishes. Barbara Roche and Jonathan Portes were not renegades.

                I can hardly think of a more delusional idea than the claim that CST sees ‘Muslims as useful tools for undermining the goyim’.

                From the Jewish Chronicle:

                British Jewry’s leading communal security expert has explained why he felt obliged to help a Muslim group tackle Islamophobia. Richard Benson, who retired as chief executive of the Community Security Trust last year after 12 years at the helm, was appointed co-chair of the Tell Mama group this week. Tell Mama — the Mama stands for “measuring anti-Muslim attacks” — was set up to help British Muslims report discrimination and monitor incidents in a similar way to the CST’s recording of antisemitism. CST has worked closely with the group.

                https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/former-cst-boss-will-help-muslim-group-battle-islamophobia-1.53851

                WTF? British Jewry’s leading communal security expert? Again, the JC obviously needs to get out and meet all those hardcore conservative Jews who are so opposed to Muslim immigration and censorship. And it’s shocking that a shyster like Benson, who’s so out of step with genuine communal opinion, manages to pass himself off as “British Jewry’s leading communal security expert” as he slithers to a new role harming Jewish interests by working with in-bred, clannish, anti-Enlightenment Muslims. Could Mossad not arrange for a sudden heart-attack or road-accident? Or maybe he could be Eichmanned or Vanunu’d and put on trial in Jerusalem for crimes against the Community?

              • The G_man says:

                One last time. I have never said that British Jews are ‘hardcore conservatives’ I have said (see if you can get this through their head) available evidence indicates that they are somewhat to the right of British Whites.There’s nothing more to say at this point except to suggest you step off the computer and go chat to some of your fellow British White people, preferably ones with a university education, and especially those who hold positions in government funded charities and NGOs. Apparently, you’re going to be in for a shock.

                P.S. As seems to be your wont, you are also incorrect about Larry Auster. His most KMac like work was written decades before his death, though only published later, and he said that he moderated his views somewhat, which is, in any case, evident from his subsequent writings. He converted to Christianity before he published anything. Overall, I think his assessment of American Jews and is fair and proportionate, which is why he spent much of his time banging his head against a brick wall trying to get through to muttonheads like you.

              • Nomen Est Omen says:

                One last time. I have never said that British Jews are ‘hardcore conservatives’ I have said (see if you can get this through their head [my mutton-head?]) available evidence indicates that they are somewhat to the right of British Whites

                Sorry, “hardcore conservatives” was English irony and as Dear Leader Jezza says some people don’t get that. Obviously I don’t think Jews are hardcore conservatives. I don’t think they’re “right-wing” either. They vote Tory for the same reason as Muslims vote Labour: for their own tribal ends. As Mad Mel points out, the “Jewish community” (her words) support Muslim immigration. As the JC points out, “British Jewry’s leading communal security expert” is working with Tell MAMA to further advance the cause of censorship.Obviously, the JC thinks this is a positive thing. I’m sure Mad Mel and Geoffrey Alderman don’t, but they’re not represenative of the Jewish community. And if Alderman thinks the Koran is like Mein Kampf, I wonder what he thinks of the New Testament.

                Quick answers on other points:

                As a university-educated white myself (PhD in Post-Quantum Probatocephalogy), I’m well aware of the intellectual and ideological pathologies infesting the goyim. I can also see where those pathologies come from and who most effectively and enthusiastically promotes them: “British Jewry’s leading communal security expert has explained why he felt obliged to help a Muslim group tackle Islamophobia.” etc.

                P.S. As seems to be your wont, you are also incorrect about Larry Auster. His most KMac like work was written decades before his death, though only published later

                I said he more or less admitted that KMac was right, which is true. Publication was the admission.

                Overall, I think his assessment of American Jews is fair and proportionate,

                Then you too admit that KMac is more or less right.

                which is why he spent much of his time banging his head against a brick wall trying to get through to muttonheads like you.

                If I’m a muttonhead, so are Mad Mel and Douglas Murray: “Instead of undermining the struggle to keep Britain safe, the Jewish community etc.”

                The Unz Review has British writers and VDare is edited by an ex-pat Brit. James Thompson and Andrew Joyce should be much bigger names than they are. But they’re bad-thinkers and bad-thinkers are kept in their place by the likes of the ADL, SPLC, CST and Tell MAMA (as advised by British Jewry’s leading communal security expert).

                It’s almost as if myopically blaming the Jews for the fact that your country is a leftwing nuthouse isn’t an effective strategy.

                Whether it’s an effective strategy does not affect whether it’s true. IMO, Jews were necessary but by no means sufficient for the leftwing nuthouse. And I repeat: we have only become a leftwing nuthouse because British whites have been denied their wishes on immigration for decades. Brexit was their chance to say no to further enrichment. Predictably, the British state has set about sabotaging Brexit.

                In any case,the Patel affair doesn’t prove your point at all because it didn’t advance her career

                It proves my point perfectly, because It wasn’t secret talks with Israeli politicians that harmed her: it was being found out. The JC said that Lord Polak got careless. I’m sure Sajid Javid has done something similar to what she did, but he’s cleverer than her and didn’t get caught.

                she is considered by most British Whites to be a right wing nutter.

                I doubt most British whites know who Priti Patel is, even after the scandal. Their opinions don’t matter anyway in the early stages of a future prime minister’s ascent. As we can see: CFI are the people who matter. LFI once mattered too, but even if Jezza has a heart-attack or an unfortunate road-accident, it looks as tho’ Labour are going to stay muttonheaded.

  8. Citizen AllenM says:

    Fumarese Deficiency
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fumarase_deficiency

    All one should do is point NT to this- but of course that would interrupt his sashay into irrelevance.

    • ASR says:

      A very strange disease! Whole families that look like the aliens in the “To Serve Man” episode of the original “Twilight Zone”.!

  9. sprfls says:

    What are your thought for the heterozygote advantage for cystic fibrosis? I thought there was some consensus on this but briefly browsing the recent literature it still seems up in the air.

    Interested parties want to know. 😉

    • gcochran9 says:
      1. It has to exist: around 2%

      2. Nobody knows what it is.

      3. Typhoid resistance is a possible candidate.

      • sprfls says:

        Thanks. Yeah I thought there was agreement it was something like typhoid or cholera, but I came across these more recent papers that suggest something much earlier: “dusty climate” in the upper paleolithic. I’m skeptical as always, but it is intriguing (only read abstracts).

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25150458

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30593397

        • gcochran9 says:

          It could be typhoid: typhoid can be a problem even at low population density, because ~2% of those infected become carriers. So typhoid could have been a selective pressure for a long time. Can’t be cholera: cholera only expanded out of India in 1822 or so.

          The advantage has to have existed for at least a few thousand years, because the main allele (Delta-F508) is not only common across northern Europe, but can also be found at lower levels in India. It’s an Indo-European mutation.

          The carrier advantage has to have existed over [ most of ] the last thousand years, in order for it to be as common as it is today. I’ve run simulations.

    • Lot says:

      It makes all diarrhea-causing diseases less severe?

      There’s a choppy NW-SE gradient in Europe, with Ireland’s rate by far the highest, then UK, then Belgium. UK is more than 10x higher than Romania and 5x of Poland.

      This paper suggests there were several independent mutations that spread through Europe, a Celtic, Nordic, and Phoenician version.

      https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/humu.10041

  10. Aldon says:

    Not sure what’s sillier:
    A. One of Taleb’s cucks insisting he’s “ethnically Greek” (read: desperately trying to claim the Greeks as PoCs instead of White Devils) with him not denying it (read: desperately trying to place himself in with the likes of Greeks and Romans instead of the Sandmonkeys he actually belongs to like other Lebanese)

    B. Taleb insisting that Eastern Mediterranean genetics haven’t changed despite slavery and invasions.

    • Taleb banned me for asking him how Lebanon managed to inherit Arab dysfunction without Arab genetics.

      • Unladen Swallow says:

        I’m not on Twitter, I heard got into with Steve Sailer and Stefan Molyneux, did he attempt to argue with Greg as well?

        • OFWHAP says:

          I’m not sure Sailer and Taleb “got into it” per se, as Taleb seems to like Sailer and says he’s always courteous even in disagreement. However Taleb had some harsh words for Greg and referred to him as a mush-brained pseudo-scientist if my memory is correct.

    • dearieme says:

      On B the evidence favours Taleb.
      https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/26/142448

      By analogy, presumably the Palestinians are principally descended from the population of Palestine of the first century AD.

      • Ulysses says:

        Huh. Interesting a situation like that can occur right next door to Turkey. Though the study did find they did not go untouched by the Greeks / Persians. Doesn’t have the exact percentage in the extract, maybe comparable to German genetics in England? Are there no arabs in the mix or would they be similar enough not to stick out? Not terribly familiar with the genetic structure of the region.

        • sprfls says:

          Modern Lebanese 90%+ descended from Bronze Age Canaanites from Sidon. The exact model from the paper is “Lebanese can be best modelled as Sidon_BA 93±1.6% and a Steppe Bronze Age population 7±1.6%.”

          It’s unclear how much historical populations like Greeks or Persians influenced the region since you can get such an unusually good fit using only Bronze Age genomes.

      • Aldon says:

        That would make him more or less Arab. With no claim to Greece and Rome.

        • Greying Wanderer says:

          before the Arab conquest the eastern med coastal regions were dominated by Greek or Phoenician colonies – he’s saying the modern populations of those populations who were culturally insulated from the Arab conquest (i.e. Christian populations living on nice defensive mountains) haven’t changed much since the Bronze Age.

          imo he’s not coming at this from a “we wannabe ancient Greeks” angle – he’s coming at it from a “we wuz kangs” angle i.e. his people taught the ancient Greeks all they knew.

          just a guess – although i mostly like the guy so maybe i am being too charitable.

          • Aldon says:

            before the Arab conquest the eastern med coastal regions were dominated by Greek or Phoenician colonies

            Phoenicians were Semitic and genetically similar enough to modern Arabians. Pontic Greeks are more Anatolian shifted.

            his people taught the ancient Greeks all they knew.

            Which they didn’t. At most, the Phoenicians (who were Semitic) would have to get in line with the Egyptians, Anatolians, and Steppe warriors.

            • Lot says:

              “Phoenicians were Semitic and genetically similar enough to modern Arabians.”

              Based on what? Lebanon is pretty far from most of Arabia, and the population there looks closer to Greeks and Turks than Saudis, Emiratis, and Yemenis to me.

            • Greying Wanderer says:

              “Which they didn’t.”

              agreed – just commenting on the direction i think he’s coming from

              i.e. his people were a significant part of early civilization but the Arab conquest kind of buried that light under a bushel leaving all the glory to the Greeks

              (which is different from the usual narratives which is why he can annoy both camps).

    • Greying Wanderer says:

      “B. Taleb insisting that Eastern Mediterranean genetics haven’t changed despite slavery and invasions.”

      iirc the data largely supports Taleb on this (possibly due to the insulating effect of close cousin marriage which is more common in that part of the world) – it seems the Arab conquest may have been more of an elite replacement with a big cultural impact but not so much genetically – a bit like the Mongol conquest of China.

      “despite slavery”

      it seems that historically (apart from north America) slaves generally had very low reproductive success.

      • Aldon says:

        It’s already beem shown that Subsaharan mixture among MENAs increased to slavery:
        https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694

        • Greying Wanderer says:

          i was thinking the men but yes, fair enough, mostly female slave mediated i guess?

          is there a difference in that ancestral component between Christian and Muslim populations – assuming the slave dna was introduced via the slaves of the ruling elite (Muslim) and then constrained within a religious bubble by endogamous marriage after its introduction?

          • dearieme says:

            “Mostly the men”? The male slaves were almost all castrated. At least the ones marched across the Sahara to North Africa were. I don’t know about the slaves taken by Moslems sailing down the East African coast. The internet will know, though.

          • teageegeepea says:

            Yes, my understanding is that religious minorities in the Middle East were endogamous and not impacted by the influx of slaves.

    • Greying Wanderer says:

      Fuentes has missed one aspect of this which is Taleb’s long running spat with some PC academics over “we’ve always been diverse” which has probably made him less popular with the NYT than he was – this may be relevant to him getting involved in the IQ debate.

      “Alt-Right people tend to suffer from clinically low levels of intelligence.”

      if only there was some way to measure it

    • Tanturn says:

      Historically religion defined identity more than race, a Lebanese of Greek Orthodox religion would identify more with Greek than Arabic civilization. And for that matter, a Greek would identify more with a Lebanese Orthodox Christian than a Protestant or Catholic European.

      “instead of the Sandmonkeys he actually belongs to like other Lebanese”

      The thing about insults is that, to sting, they have to have some basis in reality. Talk about Black crime or Muslim terrorism or the fact that women can’t do math and that stings, because those insults are based in reality, and the targets know it. In contrast, calling Taleb a “Sandmonkey” is just bizarre. Maybe you’re living in a basement, but up here in the real world most of them identity as White, are seen as White, and behave like Whites. All you’re doing is marginalizing yourself.

      • Aldon says:

        He’s not White.

        • Lot says:

          At least in the USA, Lebanese are legally white, and Christian Lebanese have been intermarrying with regular whites for over 100 years, so are by general consensus white culturally.

          • Jim says:

            I went to high school in Vicksburg, Mississippi back in the sixties at which time it had a substantial population of people of Lebanese descent and they were little different culturally from other whites. The assertion that they were not white would have sounded bizarre to anybody at that time.

          • Aldon says:

            At least in the USA, Lebanese are legally white
            Like Mestizos I’m sure.

            Christian Lebanese have been intermarrying with regular whites for over 100 years
            Sure they were.

            so are by general consensus white culturally.
            Your “culture” doesn’t allow you to be White. It’s genes. And Lebanese have no connection to Europe.

      • Aldon says:

        Historically religion defined identity more than race

        No. Ever since the Greeks ethnic/racial descent was always held in notable regard. You had Aristotle claiming that men born in lands too extreme in climate (too hot, too cold) had different capabilities than men like him. For more on this:

        http://eugenics.net/papers/pson1.html

    • sprfls says:

      Taleb made an ass of himself with the IQ tirade, but he’s right about East Med genetics not changing much for millenia. Certainly true for Lebanese Christians.

      In fact I predicted this (may have mentioned it on this blog a few years ago) — that there was relevant structure by the Bronze Age that would be reflected in modern Levantine populations today. So far we have two sets of Levantine genomes from the Bronze Age and they are subtly but significantly different, despite only being separated by ~100 miles and ~500 years. The ones from Sidon in Lebanon are very close to modern Lebanese and Druze while the ones from Ain Ghazal in Jordan are somewhat less akin to moderns but are closer to Yemenis, Saudis, and Bedouins.

      • Aldon says:

        The Canaanite samples cluster in the actual paper well within range of Arabian and/or South Levant populations (Saudis, Bedouins, Palestinians). See:

        • Labayu says:

          @Aldon

          If you look at the supplementary PDF, you’ll see that what sprfls said was correct for the most part. Canaanites don’t really cluster with Arabians. Bedouin A and Bedouin B samples were both taken from communities in modern Israel, communities who regularly marry Palestinian women. Some Bedouin groups in the Levant are more recently arrived. They even speak noticeably different dialects. That seems to be the case with Bedouin B who are more Arabian-like, and don’t overlap at all with the Canaanite samples. The Bedouin B samples (along with the Saudi samples, and some of the Bedouin A individuals) are the ones to the right and extending below the Natufians to the lower right corner.

        • sprfls says:

          I’m very familiar with the papers and modelled the related genomes myself. As I said, the Bronze Age Levantine samples we have now are related but distinct. Of course they cluster together on a PCA of a bunch of West Eurasian samples — so what’s your point?

          In the original tweet Taleb said East Med genetics haven’t changed since the Bronze Age… I would add haven’t changed much, but basically he is correct, especially when it comes to his own ethnicity. He seems to be trying to seperate Lebanese from Arabs, at least in the modern, historical meaning of the term, which again is correct. The fact they are both Semitic and share a lot of common ancestry from before the Bronze Age I don’t think anyone would argue against, but most people, as evidenced by some responses even on this blog, imagine Muslim Arabs genetically influencing the region significantly which is simply untrue.

  11. Tono Bungay says:

    May a non-scientist absolutely uninstructed in genetics ask a question? I remember reading Anthony M. Ludovici’s argument that the Egyptian dynasties were so long-lasting precisely because of inbreeding. He held that if you choose for the best traits then homozygotism is wonderful. Is there any truth to this or is completely nuts?

    • Aldon says:

      Egypt was long lasting since it was:
      A. Homogenous
      B. Rich in resources
      C. Had no significant threats to it as a country for much of its history who could properly subjugate it rather than invade and get adsorbed.

    • Eugine Nier says:

      So an average of 100 years is considered a “long lasting dynasty”?

    • Ilya says:

      Egyptians practiced primogeniture (via primary wife). Not a recipe for improving pharaoh stock, be it with regular breeding or, especially, if inbreeding.

      Heavy inbreeding is tough to do well even with fast-breeding mammals (mice/rats), humans should definitely be out.

  12. ThoseSicklesThough says:

    Those -5 iq and -0.7cm?
    Is that measured for European couples, where such things didn’t happen for centuries, for Arabic places where everybody is related to everybody or some wild mix in between? Where did you get those numbers, they look interesting?
    Is a -5IQ effect of X not a bit of a strange thing to say,
    if those were in different places, because IQ is on a bell curve?
    Like two high IQ cousins mating, the same -5 IQ would make the child loose two hundred hundred million in the global rankings, whereas average cousins mating would loose five hundred millions. So, basically the very smart and the very stupid don’t have a lot to loose in percentile terms.
    Idk, I wish IQ was just given in percentile + stdv. I don’t see the appeal of this stupid 100 +- 50 system. Like am I supposed to be able to convert this mentally on the fly? Do people actually do that all the time or are they just nodding along like me? (“Yes, yes. 125 is somewhat bright. Hmmm. But that guy, oh golly, he’s got an Iq of 135, he told me himself! Oh, mine? Oh I wouldn’t want to say. They must have made a mistake, the test was far too easy.”)

  13. Aldon says:

    Taleb’s We Wuzzing gets smacked around:

    • Eugine Nier says:

      Ironically, much of this comment is itself wrong. Yes, the first domesticated plants were in the fertile crescent.

      As for South Americans having the jump on astronomy, sounds like someone’s been reading a South American “we waz kangz”. As for the megaliths aligned with the solstices, yes that’s a primitive form of astronomy but nowhere as sophisticated as what the Mesopotamians were doing which involved observing more than just the sun. The fact that they had writing probably helped.

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s