RSS
在我 塔基杂志 检讨 of Carl Zimmer’s new book on heredity, 她有她妈妈的笑声, I trot out my dusty old casino analogy response to Richard Lewontin’s famous 85-15 argument about why race more or less doesn’t exist genetically:
Zimmer’s better argument against the genetic reality of race relies upon 46-year-old warmed-over Lewontinism. In 1972, Lewontin argued that 85 percent of total genetic diversity exists among individuals within racial groups, while only 15 percent tracks to geographic ancestry.
乍一看，这似乎令人惊讶，但停下来想一想，不同种族的人是多么不同。考虑一下目前的 NBA 总决赛。克利夫兰骑士队的头号得分手勒布朗·詹姆斯身材魁梧，而金州勇士队的头号得分手凯文·杜兰特则身材细长。
Durant, who scored 43 in game 3, isn’t as spindly as he 以前是. 但还是……
Therefore, ask Lewontin and Zimmer, what possible importance could there be in that measly 15 percent?
Zimmer quotes Lewontin on p. 209: “Since such racial classification is now seen to be of virtually no genetic or taxonomic significance either, no justification can be offered for its continuance.”
Just ignore it. “Where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise.”
Of course, both basketball stars have significant sub-Saharan ancestry, as do most of their teammates. That 15 percent of genetic diversity that is not random apparently matters in helping cause the famously unequal racial makeup of the NBA.
A thought experiment: Imagine there is an Indian reservation casino where 85 percent of the spins of the roulette wheel are random, but the other 15 percent of the spins come up red if your croupier is an American Indian or black if your croupier is an African-American. Would you like to know that fact?
Yes, you would. A 15-percentage-point edge in making predictions is huge.
I first used this casino thought experiment way back in 2000. My question is: Did I get something really wrong with this? (I doubt that my arithmetic logic is all that accurate, but did I get it right within an order of magnitude?)
If not, why are intelligent people still promoting Lewontin’s 85-15 Ratio as the Be All and End All about race?
Or is just that there’s no market for a realistic perspective that the race glass is part full and part empty?
Or is it too easy to understand so it sounds lowbrow?
Update: Commenter res calculates that even sex accounts for less than half of the variation in height:
因此，如果有人感兴趣，我会继续在 NHANES III 中对大约 8,000 名成年人进行分析：
NHANES is a scientific survey the feds conduct periodically for the benefit of the clothing industry to find out what sizes American consumers are
结果是，两组的 Cohen's d 略高于 1.75，性别变量解释了略高于 44% 的身高差异。
Of course male or female is a very big deal in predicting height. But even the sex-height glass is less than half full.
Basically, making accurate predictions is hard. Therefore, every little edge helps.
So, the figure for height:sex (44%) is about 3 times as big as Lewontin’s figure for race overall (15%).
It’s important to note that while races can differ very sharply on some traits, there are often other traits where they don’t differ much at all: for example, in the US, whites and blacks tend to be quite similar in height.
Judging from the NHANES figures I looked at a decade ago for the height of blacks and whites, race only is minimally useful in predicting height: white males age 20-39 are something like 0.4 inches taller than blacks at the median, but blacks have a greater standard deviation. So there are a few more Kevin Durant sized blacks than whites on average.
But mostly knowing whether somebody is black or white doesn’t help you much in predicting his height. I’d guess that race only matters a few percentage points at most for predicting height among blacks and whites.
(Hispanic ethnicity is fairly important, though, for predicting height, although some of that is not genetic and can change over the generations.)
Also, keep in mind that just because whites and blacks in America are mostly about the same height doesn’t mean that they necessarily have the same gene variants for height. It could be that they tend to have different genes, but they just happen to come out about equal.
On the other hand, there are non-height related racial differences that also matter in the NBA. From my 塔基杂志 检讨 of Barack Obama’s favorite HBD book, David Epstein’s 运动基因:
BYU economist Joseph Price provided Epstein with some intriguing data on NBA players:
…the average white American NBA player was 6’7.5” with a wingspan of 6’10.” The average African-American NBA player was 6’5.5” with 6’11” wingspan; shorter but longer.
Epstein adds that the average African American in the NBA can jump 29.6” versus 27.3” for whites. Combined with the extra inch of reach, that helps explain the preponderance of blacks in a game where the single most important metric is how high in the air you can get your hand. One scientist told Epstein, “So maybe it’s not so much that white men can’t jump. White men just can’t reach high.”
It’s somewhat futile to pursue 细微差别 in a War between Good and Evil.
I have an image of a person who knows better but agrees to say the Appropriate Thing to get some perfectly understandable incentive.
What I find mysterious is what the hell are they offering people in an age without castles? Line-cutting at Disneyland? Real estate? Spots for the kids in exclusive, all-but-guaranteed-Harvard schools? Are people conforming purely out of herd instinct? What glory did Kurt Eichenwald lay his tremellose paws upon for being such an Eichenwald?
if group A and group B are competing and group A can persuade group B to breed with a lower IQ population group C then group B's average IQ would decrease and group A wins - even if it takes a century or two.
回复：@ J.Ross
Individuals who state the inappropriate facts will lose their job, source of income , status and be ostracized from mainstream society. Recent examples include noted actors, scientists, college administrators, computer programmers etc. While in Europe perpetrators will be incarcerated for expressing unorthodox opinions, they even jail 80 year-old grandmothers and noted historians for stating their opinions.
Anyone who acknowledges the differences between men and women will be quickly fired from any position they hold at any Fortune 500 firm. Anyone who notices the disparity between racial groups will be swiftly labeled a "racist" and face the consequences. SJWs have millions of informants who have infiltrated most companies, churches, schools and playgrounds across America. Social media is policed by thousands of enforcers looking for any indication of non-compliance. Violators are quickly reported to the authorities and banned from Twitter, Facebook, Youtube and their Google accounts will be shutdown.
回复：@ J.Ross，@ bomag
It isn’t low-brow if you use world “croupier.”
OT But I didn’t order any pizza …
https://www.wsbtv.com/www.wsbtv.com/news/local/north-fulton-county/metro-sex-trafficking-sting-rescues-nearly-160-children-authorities-say/764243882
One hundred and sixty kids kept like pets in a nice neighborhood. Rioting, illegal immigration, gun-running, and terrorism aren’t the only crimes Obama winked at.
pipin' hot!
mass immigration of cheap labor creates a demand for mass ultra-cheap prostitution which is generally filled by forcing children - whether it's trafficked hispanic girls to service hispanic cheap labor in the USA or clan-raped native European girls to service muslim cheap labor in Europe.
回复：@ J.Ross
Letting leftists derail a discussion of race by engaging with their critique on the concept of race is wrong no matter what you say.
The only time it should ever be used is to troll them. “Black lives matter!” “But race doesn’t exist, we share 99.9% of our DNA.”
“You company is all white!” “Who is to say who is white? I don’t see color, I just see people.”
OT 我们需要不断担心俄罗斯的真正原因是缺乏保护国家免受中国等真正威胁的兴趣或能力，这在很大程度上要归功于平权行动。
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/06/06/troubling-us-navy-review-finds-widespread-shortfalls-in-basic-seamanship/
华盛顿——美国水面舰队高级领导人进行的为期三个月的内部审查发现，近 85% 的下级军官的船舶操纵技能存在一些或严重的问题，而且许多人在出现危险时难以做出果断反应，将自己的船只从危险中解救出来。根据《防务新闻》获得的内部消息，存在立即发生碰撞的风险。
在水面作战军官学校的领导下，一月至三月期间，在全船队的桥楼导航模拟器上随机挑选了具有 OOD 资格的一级军官（舰队中最新的军官），对甲板军官进行了能力检查。 在接受评估的 164 名警官中，只有 27 名“没有问题”通过。 根据海军最高水面战军官理查德·布朗中将发布的消息，另外 108 艘完成时存在“一些担忧”，29 艘则存在“严重担忧”。
领导太平洋海军水面部队的布朗称这一结果“发人深省”。
这些评估提出了令人苦恼的问题，即初级军官在到达第一个指挥部之前和到达时所接受的船舶操纵培训水平。 布朗周二在五角大楼接受《国防新闻》采访时表示，这些检查将用于为年轻军官的新培训提供信息，并且变化已经在进行中，这表明海军在事件发生后认真对待自我评估和改进。去年夏天，两次灾难夺去了 17 名水手的生命。
检查中发现的缺陷包括：
警官们在操作雷达和手头相关工具方面遇到了困难，这个问题是菲茨杰拉德事故发生后出现的。
军官们牢牢掌握了海上船舶航行的国际道路规则，但在值班期间，特别是在能见度较低的情况下，很难实际应用这些规则。
大多数军官能够避免在模拟器中与其他船只发生近距离接触，但那些发现自己处于极端情况的军官“往往没有能力立即采取行动避免碰撞”——这是造成人员伤亡的直接因素2017 年约翰·S·麦凯恩 (John S. McCain) 和菲茨杰拉德 (Fitzgerald) 相撞事故中。
布朗在给舰队的信息中表示，OOD 能力审查应该呼吁地面社区采取行动，纠正其缺点。
布朗在消息中表示：“虽然 OOD 能力检查是及时的快照，但我们必须现实地面对他们所揭示的初级合格人员核心能力方面的系统性缺陷。” “作为一个社区，我们可以而且必须解决我们的缺陷，并确保我们的资格证书背后有有意义的经验。”
消息中列出的令人担忧的领域让人想起 2017 年发生的令人不安的事故。 就麦凯恩号而言，尽管指挥官在场，但就在该船必须立即采取行动避免碰撞的那一刻，舰桥上却出现了混乱和犹豫不决的情况。
Perhaps the USN needs to just go with Left and Right instead of Port and Starboard. This is the 21st century, after all.
Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @njguy73
海岸警卫队也未能幸免。 它没有后备军官训练队计划。 他们有一个叫做“大学生预调试计划”的项目。
https://www.gocoastguard.com/active-duty-careers/officer-opportunities/programs/college-student-pre-commissioning-initiative
这似乎是一个很好的计划，并且有人可能会感兴趣，直到发现只有来自非常有限数量的大学的学生才有资格参加。
Education:
是在指定为少数族裔服务的认可学院或大学的全日制学士学位课程中注册、接受注册或待接受（如果接受，必须在开始 CSPI 之前提交接受信）的大二或大三本科生研究所（MSI）。
历史上的黑人学院和大学
主要是黑人机构
西班牙裔服务机构
亚裔美国人和美洲原住民太平洋岛民服务机构
美国印第安部落控制的学院和大学
阿拉斯加 [& 夏威夷] 本土服务机构
美洲原住民服务，非部落机构
少数民族学生人数平均至少占总学生人数的 50% 的大学
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority-serving_institution
美国大约有 5,300 所学院和大学。
历史上的黑人学院和大学
关于106
主要是黑人机构
不明
西班牙裔服务机构
关于250
亚裔美国人和美洲原住民太平洋岛民服务机构
关于132
美国印第安部落控制的学院和大学
关于32
阿拉斯加 [& 夏威夷] 本土服务机构
关于4
美洲原住民服务，非部落机构
不明
少数民族学生人数平均至少占总学生人数的 50% 的大学
不明
我不相信学生可以参加这个 CG 项目的大学总数能超过美国所有大学的 25%，而且几乎所有这些都将在美国南部三分之一的地方。
What do you expect if you call a ship McCain?
关于赌场的类比，人们通常不喜欢考虑赔率，尤其是非赌徒。不直观，这会让他们的眼睛变得呆滞。我自己也尝试一下，为了享受击落 Lewontin 的乐趣……
– 汽车品牌仅仅是一种社会建构。考虑一下福特和马自达，它们的产品线上下都有相似的车型。但请考虑一下超小型轿车与 SUV 以及小型货车与肌肉车有何不同。
– 人类生长激素的功效仅仅是一种社会建构。考虑一项针对同卵双胞胎的研究，其中一个兄弟姐妹在童年时期接受给定剂量，而另一个则接受安慰剂。由此产生的平均身高差异仅为 18 英寸，但每个实验组中成年成年人的身高相差超过 XNUMX 英寸。
– 饮料类型仅仅是一种社会建构。几乎每种酒精饮料都有相应类型的汽水。但请考虑一下每个类别中的巨大多样性。
一盒 12 美元的葡萄酒和一瓶 120 美元的葡萄酒之间的区别仅仅是一种社会结构。
事实上，据我所知，这可能是真的。
但我没有太多的味觉或嗅觉，所以我愿意假设花 120 美元的人知道他们在说什么。
回复：@Ganderson、@Anonymous、@Zippy、@Alec Leamas、@Anonymous、@Paleo Liberal、@Olorin、@Anon87
- Car brands are merely a social construct. Consider Ford and Mazda which have similar models up and down the product line. But consider how different subcompact sedans are from SUV's and minivans are from muscle cars.
- The efficacy of Human Growth Hormone is merely a social construct. Consider a study on identical twins where one sibling receives a given dosage during childhood while the other receives a placebo. The resulting average difference in height is only four inches, but the full-grown adults range in height by over 18 inches within each experimental group.
- Beverage types are merely a social construct. For almost every alcoholic drink there's a corresponding type of soda pop. But consider the massive variety within each category.
回复：@Steve Sailer
一盒 12 美元的葡萄酒和一瓶 120 美元的葡萄酒之间的区别仅仅是一种社会结构。
事实上，据我所知，这可能是真的。
但我没有太多的味觉或嗅觉，所以我愿意假设花 120 美元的人知道他们在说什么。
I’ve drunk a few bottles of expensive wine in my day, and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I’m pretty sure though, if you swapped the liquid in the ‘82 Mouton with a $10 table wine I wouldn’t notice.
In blind taste tests, modestly priced wines almost always beat very expensive ones both amongst the general public and wine enthusiasts.
Similarly, in double blind listening tests, people prefer the sound of simple two way small box speakers over very expensive audiophile ones, whether the subject listeners are audiophiles, recording engineers or musicians, so long as material without deep bass content is used. When it is, small two way box speakers with external actively powered subwoofers and wide range big systems like Altec VOTTs or Klipschorns are equally preferred.
And of course, modestly priced (by comparison, e.g, $10 to 50K) new violins are indistinguishable from seven or eight figure Old Cremona violins by violinists and classical music listeners.
None of which matters in the least to purveyors or customers in the carriage trades.
Replies: @dieter kief, @EdwardM
@史蒂夫·塞勒
On the $12.00 versus $120 wine issue, I don't think it's a pure social construct, or at least it's not made up. I do think there is some element of social conditioning -- people who drink expensive wine may be more inclined to like it because of the reputation of the wine. But they do blind tastings on a regular basis, and the expensive wines tend to win them.
I've found this to be true when I do it. Mrs. Zippy and I do spend between $50 and $250 on wine on a regular basis, and we often hold dinner parties where we will serve foods and sample multiple wines. (We use the Coravin device, which allows one to "open" wine without opening it, assuming it uses a natural cork.)
We put the wines in opaque bags, so they are unknown to the diners. When dinner is over, we will ask for opinions and unveil the wines. I will often include a range of wines -- I recently did it with a $180 bottle, a $60 bottle, and Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's, often known as "Two Buck Chuck," though I think it's closer to $3 or $4 these days.
The result is uniformly that my guests like the more expensive wines more. I've done this with cheapo wines and some nice wines at least 30 times, and the cheapo wine has never, ever won. By cheapo I mean $20 or under. And I've had other people put the wines in the bags, so I am the one who is blind-tasting. And I've never picked the sub $20 stuff.
Now, sometimes the $50 bottle will beat the $100 plus bottle. As you go up the quality scale, diminishing returns sets in, and the differences become more subtle and individual tastes come into play. So I might genuinely like an $80 bottle more than a $200 bottle, but I'm very unlikely to just love Barefoot or Two Buck Chuck as much as either. I have had some very expensive wines -- more than $500 a bottle, or even four figures. They were great! But the difference between the $500 bottle that I love and the $150 bottle that I also love is so subtle and the marginal cost is so much higher that it's not worth the additional $350 to me. But the difference between the $10 or $20 and the $50 - $250 bottles I now buy is so significant that the marginal cost is worth it.
葡萄品种和陈酿也增加了额外的复杂性。
至少根据我的经验，在寻找低价红酒或浏览劣质酒单时，加州仙粉黛是一个不错的选择。无论出于什么原因，便宜的 Zins 都相当不错。
意大利基安蒂葡萄酒可能有点粗糙，尤其是便宜的一面，但搭配辛辣的番茄配方，它们确实很有效。关于葡萄酒和食物的搭配的说法确实是正确的。 （对于那些想粗略地了解这一原理的人来说，刷牙后立即喝一口橙汁。你吃的东西确实会影响你对葡萄酒的品味。）
对于昂贵的葡萄酒，我真诚地认为巴黎的判断是正确的，加州赤霞珠通常会胜过同等价格的波尔多葡萄酒。
I never, ever buy cheap pinot noir. Pinot noir is really delicate and very hard to grow. Because it requires very careful handling, cheapo pinot noir is just bad. Also, in the United States, a wine label that specifies a single variety only means that at least 75% of the wine is that variety -- it might be blended. Pinot noir should never be blended, unless it's being used to make sparkling wine. As opposed to cabernet sauvignon, which is usually better blended. For cheap American pinot noir, it's a darn good bet there there is something else thrown into the bottle, because that something else will almost certainly be cheaper and easier to grow than pinot noir.
相比之下，勃艮第红葡萄酒在法律上只能是黑皮诺。我个人势利的观点是，虽然俄勒冈州甚至加利福尼亚州也出产一些优质的黑皮诺，但没有什么比优质的勃艮第葡萄酒更好的了。很多人都同意我的观点，这就是勃艮第葡萄酒如此昂贵的原因。
Also, some people just plain don't like certain wines. If you don't like Port, for example, you probably won't be able to tell the difference between an awesome Port aged fifty years and a terrible one. It all tastes like cough syrup!
衰老带来了另一种复杂性。有些葡萄酒不会随着陈酿而改善，有些会变得更糟。即使是最适合陈酿的葡萄酒也会在某个时候变质。那些拍卖出数十万美元的 19 世纪葡萄酒，如果有人愚蠢到打开一瓶喝下去，那可能会很糟糕。
但确实有些葡萄酒在气候控制室的架子上放置十年后会变得更好。有些酒在年轻时单宁含量很高，除非陈酿十年或在饮用前醒酒几个小时，否则味道会很糟糕。 （醒酒只是加速老化。）
我确实认为存在一些社会条件因素，就像在纸板盒中提供的相同食物可能不如在白色桌布餐厅优雅地摆盘时那么吸引人。但我认为大多数人都能分辨出一块真正好的牛排和一块真正糟糕的牛排，即使没有这些社交线索。
So maybe it's, well, some of both?
回复：@anonymous，@Jim Don Bob
Which might be a model to explain things like the racial composition of the NBA - lots of rarefied things like the NBA have tiers below them that act like sieves. Clearly there are more elite white High School Basketball Players than Elite white College Basketball players, and more elite white Collegiate players than elite white NBA players. Small differences in physical makeup and ability disqualify more white players at every successive level of Basketball. So when you arrive at the top few hundred Basketball players, they're overwhelmingly black, while the top 10,000 or so basketball players in the world would be much less so. That small genetic variation is most pronounced at the far edge of the outliers.
Replies: @Alfa158, @Buzz Mohawk
有趣的是， 最先进的 people have an inability to smell one or more compounds. From (http://www.worldoffinewine.com/news/subjectivity-in-wine-4999933):
Avery Gilbert, What the Nose Knows: The Science of Scent in Everyday Life (Crown, New York; 2008), pp.233–34.There have been studies showing the label affects critics' rating of a wine; on the other hand, there is the infamous equation predicting a wine's quality from it's growing conditions.
I've had the cheap stuff, and I've had the expensive stuff. I can't tell the difference, so I go with Two Buck Chuck. (Actually up to $2.99 now).
Some tests have shown that most wine snobs can't tell the difference between the expensive stuff and the cheap stuff. So if you have an empty bottle of the expensive stuff, and can find an approximate cheap wine, serve that at dinner and nobody will tell the difference.
Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Anonymouse
Winemakers, like fine art collectors, pay mainly for 出处.
Not sure about wine, but you can tell with Scotch. Drink a decent single malt, then try something like J&B. To some they might both taste like gasoline, but you can tell a quality difference. Now maybe an $80 bottle and $125, not so much? Not a bourbon fan, but compare your commodity Jack with one of the endless small batch local distilleries popping up across the counrry. Confirms Jack is junk, at least to me.
“people generally don’t like to think about odds, especially non-gamblers.”
People who never gamble have had at least one worthwhile thought about odds.
Relatedly, the Supreme Court overturned the law that said additional states could not legalize online sports betting. Congress so rarely passes anything, much less a law that is socially beneficial. Really bad move.
This message was sponsored by my fourth cousin Sheldon Adelson.
Not on television.
That's because so many of the white males you see on television are Jewish, and because many of the other white types now favored by media are "ethnic" and do not come from Northwestern European lineage.
Across the broad span of America, there are still a lot of tall, fair men. If you happen to be one of those men and you relocate to the media-centric NYC region, you find yourself sticking out above a sea of little, swarthy bastards from Ellis Island.
回复：@福布斯
Lebron James went on a “diet” during the summer of 2014 and became spindly. This was a year before the NBA was going to test HGH use starting in the 2015-2016 season. Lebron’s play was less than stellar in the first half of 2014-2015 and he wound up taking a two-week midseason hiatus coming back “revitalized”. The proposed punishment for testing positive for HGH was supposed to be a 20-game suspension for a first-time violation and a 45-game ban for a second violation, although I cannot find any indication that testing was ever implemented.
As for coming back "revitalized" PED's will do that.
勒文汀谬误 爱德华兹在 2003 年的期刊《arcle》中驳斥了这一说法，理由是他和斯卡福尔-福兹在 40 年仅 1963 年前发表的一篇论文。爱德华兹是另一位 WASP 统计生物学家，深受我们的东道主的钦佩。 他率先将主成分分析应用于遗传数据，但他会知道什么？
他的结论是，尽管 Lewontin 关于
人类遗传变异分布的总体绝对相似性是正确的，但他关于种族是统计人造物并因此是社会建构的结论是一个谬论。 这是因为祖先同地人口（“种族”）之间的相对差异是系统聚集的。 因此，如果您知道人口的一个样本具有特定的基因簇，您就可以更确定地预测它也会与其他基因簇一起出现。 您识别出的簇越多，预测您正在研究的个体或样本的种族身份的信心就越大，如果您能够分析整个基因组的高质量样本，则信心将上升到 100%。 于是就有了法医学。
当然，关于基因型的争论 数量 没有提及表型 气质，即基因型差异赋予不同种族的适应性优势。 我们知道，非常小的遗传变异可以引起深刻的表型差异。 因此，与我们关系最近的物种黑猩猩，98.5% 都是原始人类。 但正如罗纳德·里根在《博佐的睡前时光》中所证明的那样，这 1.5% 的差异在形态和行为上产生了巨大的差异。
勒万廷是一位才华横溢的技术生物学家，毫无疑问也是一位善意的人。 但他的“种族不是真实的”论点是错误的。 他一定在人生的某个阶段就知道这一点。
杰克，你的 Lewontin 谬论的链接已损坏 - 正确的链接是 点击此处.
“善意”？ 他是一个撒谎的共产主义者：
https://www.unz.com/article/vignettes-of-famous-evolutionary-biologists-large-and-small/#p_4_9:1-43
OT
Arrests for illegal border crossings top 50,000 in May for a third month running despite Trump’s much vaunted immigration crackdown
Border Patrol agents made 51,912 arrests in May for illegal crossings – more than triple the number of arrests made in April 2017
It’s the third month in a row that illegal crossing arrests topped 50,000
Arrests come amid Trump’s new ‘zero tolerance’ policy on immigration which includes the controversial move to allow agents to separate families
UK Daily Mail this morning
I'd think a rise in arrests would indicate a crackdown, i.e. stricter enforcement policy, is working. A result of stricter enforcement usually means higher arrests. A number of factors effect the number of crossings. If those crossing illegally are merely put back across the border, there's no disincentive to trying again. They're buying what are effectively lottery tickets...
The NYT's Fox Butterfield was regularly mocked for annually writing articles about the apparent conflict between a declining crime rate and higher levels of incarceration, unable to grasp the circularity present.
回复：@Clyde
很高兴我们可以来到 unz.com 并对您的 Takimag 贡献发表评论，史蒂夫。
...是的，确实...当 Taki 管理层决定停止所有即时评论而不是缓和它们时，它就失去了很多活力...尽管仍然是一流的阅读...
https://www.wsbtv.com/www.wsbtv.com/news/local/north-fulton-county/metro-sex-trafficking-sting-rescues-nearly-160-children-authorities-say/764243882
One hundred and sixty kids kept like pets in a nice neighborhood. Rioting, illegal immigration, gun-running, and terrorism aren't the only crimes Obama winked at.
回复：@El Dato，@notanon
pipin’ hot!
(1) By concentrating on the number of 15% you accept Lewontin methodology and thus you conduct arguments on Lewontin’s terms. He defined the rules of the game. While the Lewontinites will be driving the point that 15% is very little and thus races are not meaningful, you will be trying to come up with metaphors (not genetic examples because you do not have any) that 15% is significant which justify the concept of race. You are conducting your argument on their terms.
Instead Lewontin’s methodology should be attacked. (a) 15% is true for the very small set of genes he selected. If he selected other genes, for instance the ones responsible for skin color the same number would be significantly larger. In fact it is possible to make this number almost anything between 0% and 100% by selecting appropriate genes. (b) What is the point of using genes that are common between populations to argue the case that races do not exist? One could follow Lewontin’s approach and show that genetic distance between apes and men is lower than 15% by selecting appropriate genes. (c). This is more complex objection. Lewontin treats frequencies of various genes as independent probabilities. Race as a trait is essentially polygenic where probability of occurring of genes A and B is not equal to the product of their frequencies: f(A)F(B)≠P(A and B). Let’s suppose that we have four genes A,B,C,D and one race is defined by individuals who have genes [(A and B) or (C and D)] and the other race is defined by individuals having genes [(A and C) or (B and D)]. (Note that ‘or’ is exclusive in both cases.) These two races are two disjoint sets in terms of combinations of gene pairs. If the frequencies of genes are treated as independent probabilities these two races can be close in terms of genetic distance. Actually frequencies of genes in in both races could be the same and Lewontin would find zero genetic distance between them.
(2) I do not think that the metaphor of casino is good. It does not map on the structure of what was calculated by Lewontine. One has to get deeper to Lewontin’s methodology to see it. Lewontin calculates relative distance between populations by means of the fixation index (F-statistics) where he defines population diversity as a function that has properties of variance but is not exactly variance. And from the difference between diversities he gets the distance between populations. The distance is implied not defined.
In case of two sets we can use variance to illustrate it. Let’s A and B are two sets of numbers. Let’s. Va, Vb and Ma, Mb are variances and means and V(A ‘or’ B) is a variance of composite sum of the two sets. Now let assume (Lewontin’s also makes this assumption that all populations are the same size) A and B are of the same size. Then
The number 0.15 of Lewontin in this scenario is
This number allows us to express difference between means (without calculating them) as fraction of standard deviation SD=sqrt[V(A ‘or’ B)] of combined sum of two sets.
The value of 15% or 0.15 means that Ma-Mb is 77% of the standard deviation SD.
This seems a lot, so let’s construct an example.
We have two herds of dairy cows A and B. We calculate the fixation index for the yields of milk which comes to 15%. How much the average yield of milk of the herd A differ from the herd B. The answer is 77% of standard deviation of the milk yield of the combined herd A and B.
Would the example with cows sway anybody? Perhaps we could replace it with incomes of Jews and gentiles. The fixation index of 15% implies 77% difference between means. Jews would prefer to talk about only 15% but anti-semites would talk about 77%.
(3). So how the case could be argued?
Lewontin calculated the value of fixation index using few selected genes. Fixation is something that we do not need to know but it suppose to measure a distance between different statistical sets in terms of variance. For these genes his fixation index is 15%. If he used different genes the fixation index would be lower or significantly higher. Why Lewontin used these genes? This is what he had in 1972 but he did not use any genes responsible for external racial traits. If he used genes responsible for the color of the skin the fixation index would be much larger. Now the question whether 15% is a lot or not. He says it is very small and thus negligible. But we beg to differ. Let’s see what fixation index of 15% means for the two herds of dairy cows. Go to the example in (2).
You might want to look up "steel-manning": https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-highest-form-of-disagreement/531597/
Refusing to admit when your opponent has a valid point is just being childish.
Replies: @utu, @candid_observer
Let's try this reasoning.
Basketball aptitude has an underlying metric called "b" that follows from analysis finding a common mathematical factor underlying various tests of how well an individual plays the game . The distribution of "b" in any population follows a bell curve.
85 percent of the variation in "b" occurs within any so-called racial group but 15 percent is between these groups. That means that the bell curves for different groups overlap by quite a bit, and that people in the middle from almost any of the groups of concern can play against each other without it being lopsided.
But small shifts between bell curves for any pair of groups results in large changes in the number of persons in "the tails" of the bell curve. NBA players are the result of a long winnowing process from the cement outdoor hoops to high school to college to the pros skimming the cream of the cream, so they represent the extreme right tail of "b" where there are very large group differences.
回复：@utu
The formula you use for calculating the difference in means between two groups based on proportion of variation explained by between variation isn't correct:
It pretty much couldn't be the correct formula. The difference in the means would be only 2 SD if the variation explained by between variation was 1, instead of .15 as in your formula. Obviously the diff in means should go to infinity as the proportion of total variation explained by between variation approaches 1.I'm pretty sure the correct formula (making various assumptions, including that the SDs in question are of the two groups, not the combined group, and are equal) is this:
Let D be the difference in means between the two groups, in terms of the SD of the two groups. Let B be the proportion of the overall variation in the combined group explained by the between group variation.
然后
D = 2*SQRT(B/(1-B))
and, if desired to go the other way round,
B = D^2/(4+D^2)
Under these assumptions, if B is .15 (as per Lewontin's suggestion), then D, the difference in the means, is .84 SD (not .77 as your formula provides).
The formula also predicts the result res presented, in which he found
Plugging 1.75 into the second equation gives .434.As a sanity check, I also did some simulations at my end of various differences in the means, which worked out as they should: E.g., if D is 1, then B is .2 in the formula, and very close to that in simulation.
The result that .15 -- as per Lewontin -- should predict a difference in means of .84 SD seems pretty remarkable. It shores up Steve's argument that it's a pretty significant amount. It may actually capture quite well the difference between blacks and whites on IQ, assuming the proportion of that 1 SD difference due to genes is about 80%, not 100%. If it were 100%, the between population proportion of variation should be .2, rather than .15.
Replies: @res, @utu, @reiner Tor, @utu, @utu
很棒的评论。
Intelligence is positively correlated with conformism. (Only stupid people would go against cultural norms without a clear benefit for doing so to themselves.)
Thus, intelligent people will support even the dumbest cultural norms. In fact, being able to hold two or three contradictory concepts in your head is a sign of intelligence.
In fact, being able to hold two or three contradictory concepts in your head is a sign of intelligence.
Maybe so, but a lot of stupid people are also able to hold a number of contradictory concepts in your head. They're just simpler concepts.
回复：@ J.Ross
他的结论是，尽管 Lewontin 关于
人类遗传变异分布的总体绝对相似性是正确的，但他关于种族是统计人造物，因此是社会建构的结论是一个谬论。这是因为祖先并置人口（“种族”）之间的相对差异是系统聚集的。因此，如果您知道群体的一个样本具有特定的基因簇，您就可以更确定地预测它也会与其他基因簇一起出现。您识别出的簇越多，预测您正在研究的个体或样本的种族身份的信心就越大，如果您能够分析整个基因组的高质量样本，则信心将上升到 100%。于是就有了法医学。
当然，关于基因型的争论 数量 没有提及表型 气质，即基因型差异赋予不同种族的适应性优势。 我们知道，非常小的遗传变异可以引起深刻的表型差异。 因此，与我们关系最近的物种黑猩猩，98.5% 都是原始人类。 但正如罗纳德·里根在《博佐的睡前时光》中所证明的那样，这 1.5% 的差异在形态和行为上产生了巨大的差异。
勒万廷是一位才华横溢的技术生物学家，毫无疑问也是一位善意的人。但他的“种族不是真实的”论点是错误的。他一定在人生的某个阶段就知道这一点。
回复：@utu、@utu、@jb、@MEH 0910、@bomag、@C。范卡特
从第一句话就可以看出，他从第一天起，甚至在开始写论文之前就知道了。 在论文中，他考虑了两种多样性衡量标准，并选择了不太凸的一个（他在论文中错误地称其为凹），它产生的注视指数比其他衡量标准更小。
Speaking of the NBA finals I knew back when the season started itbqould be GSW vs C. Cavs….and then I knew GSW QOULD WIN Simply put because the Cavs are a 1 man team with a bunch ofnbenchers backing him up….
It’s funny here at work because all the black guys sit around watching the playoffs pretending thisnteamn or that 1 will win….
The GSW are the equivalent of what would have happened had Shaq and say Shawn Kemp joined the Jordan Bulls team. It would have been a super team and most broad based fans wouldve abansones the sport because wtf is the point of watching what is essentially Team USA at the Olympics beating some shit talking = college punks……whats the point watching the NBA when you already know who’s going to win
Because watching Kevin Durant sink turn around jumpers with 60%+ accuracy is a sight to behold.
Lebron James muscling through the lane for layups isn't exciting to me. Stephen Curry jacking up prayers from half court is only fun when they go in. But Durant is unbelievably good at hitting whatever shot he wants whenever his team needs it, game after game. And he's been that way his entire career.
回复：@Neoconned
他的结论是，尽管 Lewontin 关于
人类遗传变异分布的总体绝对相似性是正确的，但他关于种族是统计人造物，因此是社会建构的结论是一个谬论。这是因为祖先并置人口（“种族”）之间的相对差异是系统聚集的。因此，如果您知道群体的一个样本具有特定的基因簇，您就可以更确定地预测它也会与其他基因簇一起出现。您识别出的簇越多，预测您正在研究的个体或样本的种族身份的信心就越大，如果您能够分析整个基因组的高质量样本，则信心将上升到 100%。于是就有了法医学。
当然，关于基因型的争论 数量 没有提及表型 气质，即基因型差异赋予不同种族的适应性优势。 我们知道，非常小的遗传变异可以引起深刻的表型差异。 因此，与我们关系最近的物种黑猩猩，98.5% 都是原始人类。 但正如罗纳德·里根在《博佐的睡前时光》中所证明的那样，这 1.5% 的差异在形态和行为上产生了巨大的差异。
勒万廷是一位才华横溢的技术生物学家，毫无疑问也是一位善意的人。但他的“种族不是真实的”论点是错误的。他一定在人生的某个阶段就知道这一点。
回复：@utu、@utu、@jb、@MEH 0910、@bomag、@C。范卡特
Lewontin’s calculations of fixation index assumes that genes or alleles are not correlated. Then the probability of two genes in population is equal to the product of frequencies of these two genes in population. But this is not true. The definition of race must take into account that groups of genes are correlated with each other and the structure of these correlations (covariance matrix) are different for different races. For this reason the principal components which are linear combinations of many genes work so well to define a race. If all genes were uncorrelated with each other single genes would be principal components.
一盒 12 美元的葡萄酒和一瓶 120 美元的葡萄酒之间的区别仅仅是一种社会结构。
事实上，据我所知，这可能是真的。
但我没有太多的味觉或嗅觉，所以我愿意假设花 120 美元的人知道他们在说什么。
回复：@Ganderson、@Anonymous、@Zippy、@Alec Leamas、@Anonymous、@Paleo Liberal、@Olorin、@Anon87
I’ve drunk a few bottles of expensive wine in my day, and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I’m pretty sure though, if you swapped the liquid in the ‘82 Mouton with a $10 table wine I wouldn’t notice.
When we say that differences within races are greater than differences between races, are we really comparing like with like?
I understand there’s a lot of variation within the set of all black people: Africa is a huge continent, there were very few genetic bottlenecks, and most black people in the U.S. have some white ancestry too. But European nations had tight genetic bottlenecks relatively recently, so I would imagine they have far less intra-group genetic diversity.
This doesn’t work if you lump all whites together (e.g. Finland and Portugal would have had different bottlenecks); but on a local level it seems plausible. At the very least, your 85/15% split might be closer to 60/40.
https://www.wsbtv.com/www.wsbtv.com/news/local/north-fulton-county/metro-sex-trafficking-sting-rescues-nearly-160-children-authorities-say/764243882
One hundred and sixty kids kept like pets in a nice neighborhood. Rioting, illegal immigration, gun-running, and terrorism aren't the only crimes Obama winked at.
回复：@El Dato，@notanon
mass immigration of cheap labor creates a demand for mass ultra-cheap prostitution which is generally filled by forcing children – whether it’s trafficked hispanic girls to service hispanic cheap labor in the USA or clan-raped native European girls to service muslim cheap labor in Europe.
It creates that demand (as well as a normality of domestic abuse) but it also meets a separate, already-existing demand.
It really is the worse devils of our nature given free reign and disguised as compassion.
What I find mysterious is what the hell are they offering people in an age without castles? Line-cutting at Disneyland? Real estate? Spots for the kids in exclusive, all-but-guaranteed-Harvard schools? Are people conforming purely out of herd instinct? What glory did Kurt Eichenwald lay his tremellose paws upon for being such an Eichenwald?
回复：@notanon，@Travis
if group A and group B are competing and group A can persuade group B to breed with a lower IQ population group C then group B’s average IQ would decrease and group A wins – even if it takes a century or two.
Okay, that's big picture what they're doing to us. What are they doing for the idiots churning out thought-leading columns?
回复：@Anonymous
OT：
Controversy in Brazil over whether it is racist to try to stop indigenous peoples from engaging in their traditional pastime of killing disabled infants and twins.
http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/04/09/the-right-to-kill-brazil-infanticide/
OT – a sort of sad-but-don’t-they-deserve it story of the English adjunct professoriate underclass.
https://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Great-Shame-of-Our/239148
Why so the awful terms and conditions?
Isn’t that ‘strong incentive’ similar to the ‘strong incentive’ which produced the California and Klondyke gold rushes?
The author, Kevin Birmingham (who gave up tenure to write a book) lambasts US English departments for accepting more PhD students than can possibly be appointed to tenured positions.
I’m just wondering if English professors ever apply the logic of a labour surplus that depresses wages to the whole of the United States, which also controls its own labour market? I’ve not seen many adjunct English profs clamouring ‘build the wall!“。
If we could have adjunct deans of diversity and inclusion who would have to take 6 jobs a semester to survive, we would solve a sizable percentage of what ails the universities.
They call themselves freeway flyers Considering the hatred they spew out against Whites I hope everyone of them ends up homeless without even a car to live in.
I remember an article a long time ago about the job prospects for sociology PHDs. 760 sociology PHDs that year. Only 3 tenure positions offered in the entire country.
What I find mysterious is what the hell are they offering people in an age without castles? Line-cutting at Disneyland? Real estate? Spots for the kids in exclusive, all-but-guaranteed-Harvard schools? Are people conforming purely out of herd instinct? What glory did Kurt Eichenwald lay his tremellose paws upon for being such an Eichenwald?
回复：@notanon，@Travis
Individuals who state the inappropriate facts will lose their job, source of income , status and be ostracized from mainstream society. Recent examples include noted actors, scientists, college administrators, computer programmers etc. While in Europe perpetrators will be incarcerated for expressing unorthodox opinions, they even jail 80 year-old grandmothers and noted historians for stating their opinions.
Anyone who acknowledges the differences between men and women will be quickly fired from any position they hold at any Fortune 500 firm. Anyone who notices the disparity between racial groups will be swiftly labeled a “racist” and face the consequences. SJWs have millions of informants who have infiltrated most companies, churches, schools and playgrounds across America. Social media is policed by thousands of enforcers looking for any indication of non-compliance. Violators are quickly reported to the authorities and banned from Twitter, Facebook, Youtube and their Google accounts will be shutdown.
That's Europe, where for the most part they've never had any concept of rights or freedom (Europeans think that rights are privileges dispensed under license from a God-state), and everything you're describing falls short of motivation. It'd keep my mouth shut but it wouldn't bring the sewer overflow of propaganda that less and less people read in the legacy media.
但现在...
一盒 12 美元的葡萄酒和一瓶 120 美元的葡萄酒之间的区别仅仅是一种社会结构。
事实上，据我所知，这可能是真的。
但我没有太多的味觉或嗅觉，所以我愿意假设花 120 美元的人知道他们在说什么。
回复：@Ganderson、@Anonymous、@Zippy、@Alec Leamas、@Anonymous、@Paleo Liberal、@Olorin、@Anon87
In blind taste tests, modestly priced wines almost always beat very expensive ones both amongst the general public and wine enthusiasts.
Similarly, in double blind listening tests, people prefer the sound of simple two way small box speakers over very expensive audiophile ones, whether the subject listeners are audiophiles, recording engineers or musicians, so long as material without deep bass content is used. When it is, small two way box speakers with external actively powered subwoofers and wide range big systems like Altec VOTTs or Klipschorns are equally preferred.
And of course, modestly priced (by comparison, e.g, $10 to 50K) new violins are indistinguishable from seven or eight figure Old Cremona violins by violinists and classical music listeners.
None of which matters in the least to purveyors or customers in the carriage trades.
Interesting. Didn't know that it's true for speakers, too.
A friend of mine once developed engines at Mecedes and found that the 2 liter VW engine was considerably better than the Mecedes one. In many aspects. They made a wide range of tests.
回复：@ J.Ross
Hype, marketing, and snobbery create some distortions, but over time doesn't the market adjust the valuation on different wines?
I’d say the best argument is this: Yeah, but we share 96% of our DNA with chimps and 60% (or whatever the figure is–I made that number up) with platyhelminthes. So whatever goes on at the margin must be pretty important, no?
Of course you are right. This is all so ridiculous.
Hey, take some hydrogen and combine it with 50% oxygen and what do you have? It won't even be a gas anymore.
Add one particle to some solutions and you can cause crystallization to grow from that one point and fill the whole space.
Change the fuel mixture in your car's engine by 15% and it might not even run.
This whole 15% argument is for the proles, to keep them believing the religion. No one else can possibly believe it.
你的论点很好，我对我的另一个回复做一个补充：
我们讨论的是 15% 以内的变化与其他 85% 以内的变化。让我们用德比郡的炖菜中的盐来比喻。盐在炖菜中所占的比例很小，甚至不到 1%，但可以用哈瓦那辣椒代替，看看你喜欢这道炖菜。用环氧树脂替换它，看看会发生什么。换成砒霜...
取另外85%，把牛肉换成猪肉。还是炖的，可能很好吃。用胡萝卜代替洋葱；还好。把土豆换成萝卜；可能会很不错。
你可以做一道炖菜，其中 85% 不是牛肉、不是洋葱、不是土豆，但它仍然是一道很好的炖菜。但是把那一小部分盐变成邪恶的东西，你就没有任何你想吃的东西了。
顺便说一句，当我提到“无产者”时，我并不是要侮辱“工人阶级”。我们现在都是工人阶级——全球帝国的雇员。对我来说，无产者只是一些抽象的傻瓜，他们不断地被当权者欺骗。任何一个愿意费心思考的有思想的人都不可能被这 85%/15% 的废话所愚弄。没有人。它的存在只是为了让群众相信宗教。祭司们不可能相信。
回复：@Bernardo Pizzaro Cortez Del Castro
Not an expert myself, but I’m pretty sure I’ve seen it stated (by who? — Greg Cochran maybe?) that 15% is in fact typical for most genes, and that genes like those for skin color, with much larger values, are unusual. Lewontin’s argument is still a fallacy of course, but not because Lewontin cherry picked genes to give him the results he wanted.
他的结论是，尽管 Lewontin 关于
人类遗传变异分布的总体绝对相似性是正确的，但他关于种族是统计人造物，因此是社会建构的结论是一个谬论。这是因为祖先并置人口（“种族”）之间的相对差异是系统聚集的。因此，如果您知道群体的一个样本具有特定的基因簇，您就可以更确定地预测它也会与其他基因簇一起出现。您识别出的簇越多，预测您正在研究的个体或样本的种族身份的信心就越大，如果您能够分析整个基因组的高质量样本，则信心将上升到 100%。于是就有了法医学。
当然，关于基因型的争论 数量 没有提及表型 气质，即基因型差异赋予不同种族的适应性优势。 我们知道，非常小的遗传变异可以引起深刻的表型差异。 因此，与我们关系最近的物种黑猩猩，98.5% 都是原始人类。 但正如罗纳德·里根在《博佐的睡前时光》中所证明的那样，这 1.5% 的差异在形态和行为上产生了巨大的差异。
勒万廷是一位才华横溢的技术生物学家，毫无疑问也是一位善意的人。但他的“种族不是真实的”论点是错误的。他一定在人生的某个阶段就知道这一点。
回复：@utu、@utu、@jb、@MEH 0910、@bomag、@C。范卡特
Jack, your link for Lewontin’s Fallacy is broken — correct link is 点击此处.
他的结论是，尽管 Lewontin 关于
人类遗传变异分布的总体绝对相似性是正确的，但他关于种族是统计人造物，因此是社会建构的结论是一个谬论。这是因为祖先并置人口（“种族”）之间的相对差异是系统聚集的。因此，如果您知道群体的一个样本具有特定的基因簇，您就可以更确定地预测它也会与其他基因簇一起出现。您识别出的簇越多，预测您正在研究的个体或样本的种族身份的信心就越大，如果您能够分析整个基因组的高质量样本，则信心将上升到 100%。于是就有了法医学。
当然，关于基因型的争论 数量 没有提及表型 气质，即基因型差异赋予不同种族的适应性优势。 我们知道，非常小的遗传变异可以引起深刻的表型差异。 因此，与我们关系最近的物种黑猩猩，98.5% 都是原始人类。 但正如罗纳德·里根在《博佐的睡前时光》中所证明的那样，这 1.5% 的差异在形态和行为上产生了巨大的差异。
勒万廷是一位才华横溢的技术生物学家，毫无疑问也是一位善意的人。但他的“种族不是真实的”论点是错误的。他一定在人生的某个阶段就知道这一点。
回复：@utu、@utu、@jb、@MEH 0910、@bomag、@C。范卡特
我怀疑马克思主义者勒万廷是一个善意的人。
“My question is: Did I get something really wrong with this? (I doubt that my arithmetic logic is all that accurate, but did I get it right within an order of magnitude?)
If not, why are intelligent people still promoting Lewontin’s 85-15 Ratio as the Be All and End All about race?”
Steve’s question assumes that smart people are all logical and reasonable and happy to drive to the truth. A little time with Saints Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, focusing on Original Sin, should help reveal the answer – assuming, of course, that Steve in that regard is not like the ‘there is no such thing as race crowd’ is in its pet denial realm.
关于 85-15，David Reich 的新书承认了它的局限性。这可能是导致左翼抵制的原因之一。
回复：@Buzz Mohawk
That’s because so many of the white males you see on television are Jewish, and because many of the other white types now favored by media are “ethnic” and do not come from Northwestern European lineage.
Across the broad span of America, there are still a lot of tall, fair men. If you happen to be one of those men and you relocate to the media-centric NYC region, you find yourself sticking out above a sea of little, swarthy bastards from Ellis Island.
Buzz--I'm tall in NYC. I can see over the crowd, but I'm only the third tallest out of the four boys in my family. And you be amazed at how tall many people guess me to be--if only because most average height (5'9") guys claim to be two inches taller than actual.
The morphological variation among breeds of dogs is far greater than the average variation between dogs and coyotes.
“How do the kids like their new pet coyote, Prof. Lewontin?”
回复：@Buzz Mohawk，@ Buzz Mohawk
Of course you are right. This is all so ridiculous.
Hey, take some hydrogen and combine it with 50% oxygen and what do you have? It won’t even be a gas anymore.
Add one particle to some solutions and you can cause crystallization to grow from that one point and fill the whole space.
Change the fuel mixture in your car’s engine by 15% and it might not even run.
This whole 15% argument is for the proles, to keep them believing the religion. No one else can possibly believe it.
他的结论是，尽管 Lewontin 关于
人类遗传变异分布的总体绝对相似性是正确的，但他关于种族是统计人造物，因此是社会建构的结论是一个谬论。这是因为祖先并置人口（“种族”）之间的相对差异是系统聚集的。因此，如果您知道群体的一个样本具有特定的基因簇，您就可以更确定地预测它也会与其他基因簇一起出现。您识别出的簇越多，预测您正在研究的个体或样本的种族身份的信心就越大，如果您能够分析整个基因组的高质量样本，则信心将上升到 100%。于是就有了法医学。
当然，关于基因型的争论 数量 没有提及表型 气质，即基因型差异赋予不同种族的适应性优势。 我们知道，非常小的遗传变异可以引起深刻的表型差异。 因此，与我们关系最近的物种黑猩猩，98.5% 都是原始人类。 但正如罗纳德·里根在《博佐的睡前时光》中所证明的那样，这 1.5% 的差异在形态和行为上产生了巨大的差异。
勒万廷是一位才华横溢的技术生物学家，毫无疑问也是一位善意的人。但他的“种族不是真实的”论点是错误的。他一定在人生的某个阶段就知道这一点。
回复：@utu、@utu、@jb、@MEH 0910、@bomag、@C。范卡特
你太好了。 他极其傲慢，并因在服务于政治议程时犯技术错误而闻名。
一盒 12 美元的葡萄酒和一瓶 120 美元的葡萄酒之间的区别仅仅是一种社会结构。
事实上，据我所知，这可能是真的。
但我没有太多的味觉或嗅觉，所以我愿意假设花 120 美元的人知道他们在说什么。
回复：@Ganderson、@Anonymous、@Zippy、@Alec Leamas、@Anonymous、@Paleo Liberal、@Olorin、@Anon87
关于 12.00 美元与 120 美元葡萄酒的问题，我不认为这是一个纯粹的社会建构，或者至少不是编造的。我确实认为存在一些社会条件因素——喝昂贵葡萄酒的人可能会因为葡萄酒的声誉而更喜欢它。但他们定期进行盲品，而昂贵的葡萄酒往往会赢得他们的青睐。
当我这样做时，我发现这是真的。 Zippy 夫人和我确实会定期在葡萄酒上花费 50 至 250 美元，我们经常举办晚宴，提供食物并品尝多种葡萄酒。 （我们使用卡拉文装置，假设它使用天然软木塞，它允许人们在不打开葡萄酒的情况下“打开”它。）
我们把酒放在不透明的袋子里，所以食客不知道它们。晚餐结束后，我们将征求意见并揭晓葡萄酒。我经常会加入一系列葡萄酒——最近我用了一瓶 180 美元的葡萄酒、一瓶 60 美元的葡萄酒，以及来自 Trader Joe's 的 Charles Shaw，通常被称为“Two Buck Chuck”，尽管我认为现在它更接近 3 或 4 美元。
结果一致是，我的客人更喜欢更昂贵的葡萄酒。我用便宜的葡萄酒和一些好酒做过至少30次，但便宜的葡萄酒从来没有赢过。我所说的“便宜”是指 20 美元或以下。而且我已经让其他人把酒装进袋子里了，所以我是盲品者。我从来没有选择过 20 美元以下的东西。
现在，有时 50 美元的一瓶会打败 100 美元以上的一瓶。随着质量等级的提高，收益递减开始出现，差异变得更加微妙，个人品味开始发挥作用。所以我可能真的更喜欢 80 美元一瓶而不是 200 美元一瓶，但我不太可能只喜欢 Barefoot 或 Two Buck Chuck。我喝过一些非常昂贵的葡萄酒——一瓶超过 500 美元，甚至四位数。他们太棒了！但我喜欢的 500 美元一瓶和我也喜欢的 150 美元一瓶之间的区别是如此微妙，而且边际成本要高得多，以至于对我来说不值得额外花 350 美元。但我现在购买的 10 美元或 20 美元瓶装与 50 美元至 250 美元瓶装之间的差异是如此之大，以至于边际成本是值得的。
葡萄品种和陈酿也增加了额外的复杂性。
至少根据我的经验，在寻找低价红酒或浏览劣质酒单时，加州仙粉黛是一个不错的选择。无论出于什么原因，便宜的 Zins 都相当不错。
意大利基安蒂葡萄酒可能有点粗糙，尤其是便宜的一面，但搭配辛辣的番茄配方，它们确实很有效。关于葡萄酒和食物的搭配的说法确实是正确的。 （对于那些想粗略地了解这一原理的人来说，刷牙后立即喝一口橙汁。你吃的东西确实会影响你对葡萄酒的品味。）
对于昂贵的葡萄酒，我真诚地认为巴黎的判断是正确的，加州赤霞珠通常会胜过同等价格的波尔多葡萄酒。
我从来没有买过便宜的黑皮诺。黑皮诺非常娇嫩，很难种植。因为它需要非常小心的处理，所以便宜的黑皮诺很糟糕。此外，在美国，指定单一品种的葡萄酒标签仅意味着至少 75% 的葡萄酒是该品种 - 它可能是混合的。黑皮诺永远不应该混合，除非它被用来酿造起泡酒。与赤霞珠相反，赤霞珠通常混合得更好。对于便宜的美国黑皮诺来说，瓶子里装了其他东西是一个非常好的选择，因为其他东西几乎肯定会比黑皮诺更便宜、更容易种植。
相比之下，勃艮第红葡萄酒在法律上只能是黑皮诺。我个人势利的观点是，虽然俄勒冈州甚至加利福尼亚州也出产一些优质的黑皮诺，但没有什么比优质的勃艮第葡萄酒更好的了。很多人都同意我的观点，这就是勃艮第葡萄酒如此昂贵的原因。
另外，有些人就是不喜欢某些葡萄酒。例如，如果您不喜欢波特酒，您可能无法区分陈年五十年的优质波特酒和糟糕的波特酒。味道都像止咳糖浆！
衰老带来了另一种复杂性。有些葡萄酒不会随着陈酿而改善，有些会变得更糟。即使是最适合陈酿的葡萄酒也会在某个时候变质。那些拍卖出数十万美元的 19 世纪葡萄酒，如果有人愚蠢到打开一瓶喝下去，那可能会很糟糕。
但确实有些葡萄酒在气候控制室的架子上放置十年后会变得更好。有些酒在年轻时单宁含量很高，除非陈酿十年或在饮用前醒酒几个小时，否则味道会很糟糕。 （醒酒只是加速老化。）
我确实认为存在一些社会条件因素，就像在纸板盒中提供的相同食物可能不如在白色桌布餐厅优雅地摆盘时那么吸引人。但我认为大多数人都能分辨出一块真正好的牛排和一块真正糟糕的牛排，即使没有这些社交线索。
那么也许两者兼而有之？
我不在乎
什么时候吃晚饭？我会带一些自制的蜂蜜酒。
回复：@Buzz Mohawk，@ Buzz Mohawk
你的论点很好，我对我的另一个回复做一个补充：
We are talking about variations within 15% vs. variations within the other 85%. Let’s use the Derbyshire analogy of salt in stew. Salt is a tiny percentage of stew, hardly 1% even, but replace it with habanero pepper and see how you like the stew. Replace it with epoxy resin and see what happens. Replace it with arsenic…
取另外85%，把牛肉换成猪肉。还是炖的，可能很好吃。用胡萝卜代替洋葱；还好。把土豆换成萝卜；可能会很不错。
你可以做一道炖菜，其中 85% 不是牛肉、不是洋葱、不是土豆，但它仍然是一道很好的炖菜。但是把那一小部分盐变成邪恶的东西，你就没有任何你想吃的东西了。
BTW when I refer to “proles,” I do not mean to insult “the working class.” We are all working class now — employees of the global empire. A prole to me is just some abstract dimwit who is constantly deceived by the powers that be. No thinking person who bothers to think about it could possibly be fooled by this 85%/15% nonsense. Nobody. It exists solely to keep the masses believing in the religion. The priests cannot possibly believe it.
没有人，特别是无产阶级，相信这个教条。左派不断散布同样的误导性的卢旺廷宣传，不是为了说服人们，而是作为当前主流平等宗教的信奉者。那些质疑当前叙述的人将被绳之以法。在世界许多地方，你会因为表达相反的想法而被监禁。
Very off-topic, but Long Island’s version of Jackie Coakley has, as part of 认罪协议, gotten prison time for making a false rape accusation:
This needs to happen a lot more often.
OT: Affirmative Action for Air Traffic Controllers
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/06/affirmative_action_in_the_control_tower.html
因为我们就是这样。
“种族是一种社会建构”这一论点同样适用于狗的品种，这样说是否正确？ 如果您认为獒犬不适合帕丽斯·希尔顿 (Paris Hilton) 的钱包狗，那么您是在进行令人反感的刻板印象吗？ 我认为这是最容易说服公众的论据，让他们相信他们是有史以来最巨大的科学骗局的受害者。 毕竟，这种虚假理论是所有平权行动、不同影响和隐性偏见意识形态的基础。 还有哪一个庸医伪科学概念像这个概念一样具有重要意义？ 如果公众只能用他们能理解的语言向他们解释，机构的剧变将是巨大的。
As to the last bit of the post:
Black Men also have more than a few inches than white boys in another area (oh yeah-you know what I mean)
难怪白人女孩渴望黑人
Some facts about penis size by race.
https://medium.com/globalnewsasia/does-race-affect-penis-size-28a1e47e0748
You are nothing if not persistent. I hate to feed to the troll, but there's something I must know: do you have any real experience with the Black masses? No, not the top 5-10% that graduate from respectable colleges, but the other 90% of the bell curve.
I'm somewhat unique here and in the professional middle class in that I actually spent much of my childhood living on the border of a Black neighborhood and going to >50% Black schools. Unlike you, and even many posters here, I actually have over a decade of personal experience with the whole of the Black population/bell curve.
It was this extensive experience with Blacks that made me a scientific racist. Good social/behavioral science just confirms common sense. They really are quite different. Lower intelligence is the most cited difference but there are many others, from how they smell to average personality profile, et al.
你一定是：
1) a Black/Amerid minority yourself;
2) a leftist that knows Blacks like me but are so religious in your ideology that you are incapable of seeing the reality that smacks you in the face daily;
3) have never had any significant interaction with regular Blacks; or
4) are somewhere on the autistic/Aspergers spectrum.
I'd really like to know. I'm betting a mix of 3&4.
回复：@小鸭子
Well, for once I can’t argue with one of your claims, after all you’re the one with the personal experience.
Usually, I like to comment on items that I have some personal experience with. This isn't one of them.
I am a heterosexual White male.
I can honestly say I don't think I've ever seen a black man's penis in an erect state in the flesh. I have seen a few films of such things, but such movies are not representative of reality, because male porn stars are selected for having large and therefore visually prominent penises.
And I don't generally talk about such things with women, black or white. In fact any white woman with experience with black men sexually is pretty much off my radar completely, by choice. And out of respect for the black man, I don't mess with his women, just as Muhammad Ali didn't mess with mine. Plus which, they have no appeal for me.
That said, I have had discussions on this subject with a few people who did know a lot about it. Two of them were retired high class escort type call girls and a couple of others were homosexual males who admitted they were bottoms and not tops and made it obvious they were really, really knowledgeable about penises. Unlike the women, they knew all the scientific terms and the little details only someone with a penis themselves would think of, but which most of us don't, because other guys' equipment does not particularly interest us.
It interests me from an evolutionary and racial standpoint, as an example of being just one more example of how we are not all the same besides skin pigmentation. So I asked.
The call girls (then both in their late fifties, or about my own age now, in roughly the mid to late 1980s: I know that both of them are now deceased, one in her sixties, one made it to about 83 or 84) were in complete agreement amongst themselves and with the male homosexuals for the most part. The male homosexuals were both much younger and had experience mostly with American men, mostly black or white, whereas the CGs had worked in the US but had many European, Asian, and Middle Eastern clients as well as American corporate and showbiz types as well as other affluent Americans.
The bottom lines appeared to be:
1) Blacks tended to be "showers and not growers", that is, their erect length and thickness was much closer to the flaccid size than whites on average.
2) When fully erect, black penises tended to be less rigid and more compressible than white or Asian ones.
3) The women reported that blacks tended to be circumcised much less often then whites, particularly uncircumcised American whites were pretty rare. The gays didn't comment. I did not ask. My guess is that more white boys escape the snip today than in the years the men the women had experience with were born but that is speculation.
4) On average, white penises had the most variability in size when erect. Blacks had a variety of sizes too, and were on average slightly but not very much bigger than white ones. Being more flexible they were less painful to deal with if very large than huge white ones, the women said.
Koreans and Chinese were uniformly about the same as average white penises or a little bit, but not greatly smaller, but very small or very large ones were uncommon. Japanese men had smaller than average white ones, nearly universally, and did range in size from very small to slightly smaller than average. Asian penises were quite hard when erect.
5) Black men had ejaculate that was thicker, more copious, and a brighter white than others and it had a generally bitterer taste. Black men tended to have a more dramatic reaction to orgasm than others.
6) When encountering men with really large ones, such that sex became impossible or really challenging, they usually fell into two groups: blacks or mulattoes from island nations such as Haitians, Dominicans, Jamaicans and the like, or white men from Scandinvian countries. Arabs often had big ones but never of that extreme size. The girls reported that the escort agencies they worked for usually had one or two girls on staff who were able to deal with these customers more easily than the others and they'd get those dates.
回复：@Jim Don Bob
一盒 12 美元的葡萄酒和一瓶 120 美元的葡萄酒之间的区别仅仅是一种社会结构。
事实上，据我所知，这可能是真的。
但我没有太多的味觉或嗅觉，所以我愿意假设花 120 美元的人知道他们在说什么。
回复：@Ganderson、@Anonymous、@Zippy、@Alec Leamas、@Anonymous、@Paleo Liberal、@Olorin、@Anon87
我认为对侍酒师的盲目研究表明，他们无法通过预测每瓶 20.00 美元左右的成本（其中成本是质量的代表）来辨别质量。 同样有趣的是，相同的品酒师在不同的盲品中会对同一年份的同一款葡萄酒给出不同的评价。
这可能是解释 NBA 种族构成等问题的模型——像 NBA 这样的许多稀有事物都有低于它们的层级，就像筛子一样。 显然，精英白人高中篮球运动员比精英白人大学篮球运动员多，精英白人大学篮球运动员比精英白人 NBA 球员更多。 身体结构和能力上的微小差异使更多的白人球员在篮球的各个级别中失去资格。 因此，当你看到排名前几百名的篮球运动员时，他们绝大多数都是黑人，而世界上排名前 10,000 名左右的篮球运动员则要少得多。 这种微小的遗传变异在异常值的最远边缘最为明显。
我有点惊讶的是，截止价这么低，只有 20 美元。 我不是侍酒师，但即使根据我自己的不专业经验，也可以区分盒装葡萄酒、10 美元的葡萄酒和 40 美元的葡萄酒。 除此之外，你无法做出任何进一步的区分，而且 200 美元的实际上可能味道更差。 售价 1,000 美元的罗斯柴尔德波尔多葡萄酒适合那些想要表明自己可以购买 1,000 美元葡萄酒的人们。
大多数品酒笔记也不可靠。 “辛辣而明亮，带有樱桃、巧克力和肉桂的味道，光滑的鼻子散发着薰衣草和咖啡的香气，余韵悠长的烟熏味”。 如果你对品酒爱好者进行盲目测试，他们中没有两个人会想出相同的比喻，甚至在第二次测试同一种酒后也会重复这些比喻。 每当品酒爱好者让我品尝他们最新发现的葡萄酒时，我总是会回到那句老话：“一种天真的小酒，但我想你会被它的自负逗乐”。
在非常昂贵的名牌伏特加流行期间，我记得在盲品中，像斯米诺这样的廉价批量生产的伏特加总是名列前茅。 在这种情况下，产品基本上是纯酒精和水，很难击败工业化大规模生产的品牌。 严格控制的成分和低偏差的工艺产生了纯度极高、稳定的产品。
回复：@Intelligent Dasein
你对酒的看法是对的。 还有BS方面，包括无法通过盲测的鉴赏家，再加上 收益递减.
这不仅仅局限于葡萄酒。 爱好者们对微小的改进感到兴奋，这些改进大大增加了他们喜欢的东西的成本。 不幸的是，像葡萄酒这样被美国人视为“文化和优雅”的东西，这种观念被错误地传递给了公众，因为它是某种东西的成分和结果之间的线性关系。
如果你不能对一瓶 25 美元的葡萄酒感到满意，那么你就完蛋了。
回复：@Harry Baldwin
Both sides in this debate are making same the mistake, 看到。 they appeal to the genetic data as if it were authoritative (an approach which then devolves into arguing about the meaning of the data). What should be strikingly obvious is that the appeal is both improper and unnecessary. Ignore genes, race remains; that should be the focus here. Far from being scientific, the genetic arguments advanced by both sides are simply obscurantist.
Instead Lewontin's methodology should be attacked. (a) 15% is true for the very small set of genes he selected. If he selected other genes, for instance the ones responsible for skin color the same number would be significantly larger. In fact it is possible to make this number almost anything between 0% and 100% by selecting appropriate genes. (b) What is the point of using genes that are common between populations to argue the case that races do not exist? One could follow Lewontin's approach and show that genetic distance between apes and men is lower than 15% by selecting appropriate genes. (c). This is more complex objection. Lewontin treats frequencies of various genes as independent probabilities. Race as a trait is essentially polygenic where probability of occurring of genes A and B is not equal to the product of their frequencies: f(A)F(B)≠P(A and B). Let's suppose that we have four genes A,B,C,D and one race is defined by individuals who have genes [(A and B) or (C and D)] and the other race is defined by individuals having genes [(A and C) or (B and D)]. (Note that 'or' is exclusive in both cases.) These two races are two disjoint sets in terms of combinations of gene pairs. If the frequencies of genes are treated as independent probabilities these two races can be close in terms of genetic distance. Actually frequencies of genes in in both races could be the same and Lewontin would find zero genetic distance between them.
(2) I do not think that the metaphor of casino is good. It does not map on the structure of what was calculated by Lewontine. One has to get deeper to Lewontin's methodology to see it. Lewontin calculates relative distance between populations by means of the fixation index (F-statistics) where he defines population diversity as a function that has properties of variance but is not exactly variance. And from the difference between diversities he gets the distance between populations. The distance is implied not defined.
In case of two sets we can use variance to illustrate it. Let's A and B are two sets of numbers. Let's. Va, Vb and Ma, Mb are variances and means and V(A 'or' B) is a variance of composite sum of the two sets. Now let assume (Lewontin's also makes this assumption that all populations are the same size) A and B are of the same size. Then
The number 0.15 of Lewontin in this scenario isThis number allows us to express difference between means (without calculating them) as fraction of standard deviation SD=sqrt[V(A 'or' B)] of combined sum of two sets.The value of 15% or 0.15 means that Ma-Mb is 77% of the standard deviation SD.This seems a lot, so let's construct an example.We have two herds of dairy cows A and B. We calculate the fixation index for the yields of milk which comes to 15%. How much the average yield of milk of the herd A differ from the herd B. The answer is 77% of standard deviation of the milk yield of the combined herd A and B.
Would the example with cows sway anybody? Perhaps we could replace it with incomes of Jews and gentiles. The fixation index of 15% implies 77% difference between means. Jews would prefer to talk about only 15% but anti-semites would talk about 77%.
(3). So how the case could be argued?
Lewontin calculated the value of fixation index using few selected genes. Fixation is something that we do not need to know but it suppose to measure a distance between different statistical sets in terms of variance. For these genes his fixation index is 15%. If he used different genes the fixation index would be lower or significantly higher. Why Lewontin used these genes? This is what he had in 1972 but he did not use any genes responsible for external racial traits. If he used genes responsible for the color of the skin the fixation index would be much larger. Now the question whether 15% is a lot or not. He says it is very small and thus negligible. But we beg to differ. Let's see what fixation index of 15% means for the two herds of dairy cows. Go to the example in (2).
Replies: @res, @Inquiring Mind, @candid_observer, @reiner Tor
In my opinion the most devastating arguments are those which allow your opponent to frame the question and then refute him on his own terms. Ideally using his exact words.
You might want to look up “steel-manning”: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-highest-form-of-disagreement/531597/
Refusing to admit when your opponent has a valid point is just being childish.
My long comment was in earnest. I thought it would help to answer questions that Steve Sailer's asked:
Your reaction to my comment and your earlier inept steel-manning of Steve Sailer argument by taking the square root of 0.15 made me realize that I must be the only one who tries in earnest to destroy the Lewontin's meme.Did Steve Sailer really believe that his casino example could impact those 'intelligent people'? The casino example is inadequate; it does not deserve to be called an analogy. There is no discernible relation to the fixation index that Lewontin calculated. But there is a connection to race in the racist insinuation that American Indian and African-American croupiers are cheating or are inept. Did Steve Sailer thought that racists 'analogy' will influence those 'intelligent people'? Apparently Steve Sailer is not interested in influencing them. He is just playing to the chap seats bought by obsequious sycophants like yourself. He will be happy to keep 'trying' for another 18 years in front of so demanding audience.
Replies: @MEH 0910, @reiner Tor
I left a comment to utu directly above which may interest you.
https://www.unz.com/isteve/18-years-of-trying/#comment-2365551
回复：@res
It's funny here at work because all the black guys sit around watching the playoffs pretending thisnteamn or that 1 will win....
The GSW are the equivalent of what would have happened had Shaq and say Shawn Kemp joined the Jordan Bulls team. It would have been a super team and most broad based fans wouldve abansones the sport because wtf is the point of watching what is essentially Team USA at the Olympics beating some shit talking = college punks......whats the point watching the NBA when you already know who's going to win
回复：@stillCARealist
Because watching Kevin Durant sink turn around jumpers with 60%+ accuracy is a sight to behold.
Lebron James muscling through the lane for layups isn’t exciting to me. Stephen Curry jacking up prayers from half court is only fun when they go in. But Durant is unbelievably good at hitting whatever shot he wants whenever his team needs it, game after game. And he’s been that way his entire career.
Durant only joined the GSW because he wanted a ring or two before he aged out and he realized his team up with Westbrook wasn't doing shit in OKC.
he also smartly knew Silver and the other Jewish NBA bigwigs wouldn't allow BOTH HE AND LEBRON to join the GSW as it literally would destroy the NBA brand and figured once LEBRON gave Cleveland a title or 2 he's try out with GSW to get 1 to 3 more rings before he goes off into retirement at 40.....
It is hard to understand why Lewontin’s argument got so much traction given he seems to be a self-acknowledged Marxist. Maybe, no one knew back then?
I wonder what the scores would have been if the British Royal Navy had run the tests, or the US sub fleet. And there’s no word on testing the enlisted sailors.
Which might be a model to explain things like the racial composition of the NBA - lots of rarefied things like the NBA have tiers below them that act like sieves. Clearly there are more elite white High School Basketball Players than Elite white College Basketball players, and more elite white Collegiate players than elite white NBA players. Small differences in physical makeup and ability disqualify more white players at every successive level of Basketball. So when you arrive at the top few hundred Basketball players, they're overwhelmingly black, while the top 10,000 or so basketball players in the world would be much less so. That small genetic variation is most pronounced at the far edge of the outliers.
Replies: @Alfa158, @Buzz Mohawk
我有点惊讶的是，截止价这么低，只有 20 美元。 我不是侍酒师，但即使根据我自己的不专业经验，也可以区分盒装葡萄酒、10 美元的葡萄酒和 40 美元的葡萄酒。 除此之外，你无法做出任何进一步的区分，而且 200 美元的实际上可能味道更差。 售价 1,000 美元的罗斯柴尔德波尔多葡萄酒适合那些想要表明自己可以购买 1,000 美元葡萄酒的人们。
大多数品酒笔记也不可靠。 “辛辣而明亮，带有樱桃、巧克力和肉桂的味道，光滑的鼻子散发着薰衣草和咖啡的香气，余韵悠长的烟熏味”。 如果你对品酒爱好者进行盲目测试，他们中没有两个人会想出相同的比喻，甚至在第二次测试同一种酒后也会重复这些比喻。 每当品酒爱好者让我品尝他们最新发现的葡萄酒时，我总是会回到那句老话：“一种天真的小酒，但我想你会被它的自负逗乐”。
在非常昂贵的名牌伏特加流行期间，我记得在盲品中，像斯米诺这样的廉价批量生产的伏特加总是名列前茅。 在这种情况下，产品基本上是纯酒精和水，很难击败工业化大规模生产的品牌。 严格控制的成分和低偏差的工艺产生了纯度极高、稳定的产品。
This reminds me of a tangentially related topic that I've been meaning to bring up for a while, 看到。 the very different smell of gasoline now compared with 30 years ago. I remember when I was a kid in '80s, I used to 爱 the smell of gasoline. I would inhale ecstatically whenever we stopped at a gas station, and on cold winter mornings when the car was preheating, my parents would have to entreat me to stop standing in the exhaust stream breathing the fumes (yes, I've already anticipated the obvious jokes about my brain damage, so don't even bother making them).
The point is that back then gas had a deliciously rich and aromatic smell like ambergris. But nowadays when you stand next to a car with the engine running, more often than not it smells like a cabbage fart. That's a result of our "fracking miracle." The light, tight oil that gets blasted out of the shale beds is chemically very different from the older crude and functions more as a petroleum diluent than an actual petroleum source. It has to be blended with the premium stocks derived from conventional crude in order to produce usable gasoline. Most of this gets sold to supermarket fuel stations and other discount fuel retailers. I would advise against filling up there. You're better off paying for a name brand gasoline.
回复：@匿名，@杰克D
I believe you once mentioned that this holds true for Africans for a variety of common human traits. That is, they have fatter tails on either end. So, given a similar size population sample of the three continental-scale races (Africans, Asians, Europeans), the African group would tend to have a higher number of, say, short/tall, thin/fat people on the extreme ends than the other two population groups.
Or maybe I read that on another blog that you referenced. Either way, is that accurate?
“So maybe it’s not so much that white men can’t jump. White men just can’t reach high.”
Interesting. If memory serves, Jerry West had an enormous wingspan for a guy who was a tad short of 6’3″. This accounted for his defensive prowess (he was one of the greatest defensive guards of all time). He could dunk anytime he wanted to but chose not to do so (ditto for Oscar Robertson).
一盒 12 美元的葡萄酒和一瓶 120 美元的葡萄酒之间的区别仅仅是一种社会结构。
事实上，据我所知，这可能是真的。
但我没有太多的味觉或嗅觉，所以我愿意假设花 120 美元的人知道他们在说什么。
回复：@Ganderson、@Anonymous、@Zippy、@Alec Leamas、@Anonymous、@Paleo Liberal、@Olorin、@Anon87
有趣的是， 最先进的 people have an inability to smell one or more compounds. From (http://www.worldoffinewine.com/news/subjectivity-in-wine-4999933):
Avery Gilbert, What the Nose Knows: The Science of Scent in Everyday Life (Crown, New York; 2008), pp.233–34.
There have been studies showing the label affects critics’ rating of a wine; on the other hand, there is the infamous equation predicting a wine’s quality from it’s growing conditions.
Wait, are you implying something re the average black player in the NBA being a bit shorter than the average white playrt, but having a longer wing span? Like longer arms mean what? I remember racist jokes about blacks wearing platform shoes so as not to drag their knuckles on the ground. Please do not go there. That would be racist. Or something… I am surprised that Al Sharpton or Tiny Duck have not drug you through the mud yet.
一盒 12 美元的葡萄酒和一瓶 120 美元的葡萄酒之间的区别仅仅是一种社会结构。
事实上，据我所知，这可能是真的。
但我没有太多的味觉或嗅觉，所以我愿意假设花 120 美元的人知道他们在说什么。
回复：@Ganderson、@Anonymous、@Zippy、@Alec Leamas、@Anonymous、@Paleo Liberal、@Olorin、@Anon87
I’ve had the cheap stuff, and I’ve had the expensive stuff. I can’t tell the difference, so I go with Two Buck Chuck. (Actually up to $2.99 now).
Some tests have shown that most wine snobs can’t tell the difference between the expensive stuff and the cheap stuff. So if you have an empty bottle of the expensive stuff, and can find an approximate cheap wine, serve that at dinner and nobody will tell the difference.
You need to stay above $10-12 per 750ml bottle (depending on prices where you are, of course) and stick with good, "middle class" California selections from the big wineries. They have it down to a science (American) and they beat the inconsistent French, who are more old-fashioned in their methods.
At $20, you can serve your most perceptive guests anything from a wonderful variety of makers.
Save the really cheap stuff for beach parties where nobody cares, and for yourself out in the backyard this summer. Avoid boxes at all costs. There IS a bottom to all this.
PS: You can buy Trump wines between those two price points, if you want to have some fun serving the label to see the reactions. They are fine, especially for wines coming from the dreadful East Coast. I gave them as gifts last Christmas to, shall we say, like-minded people.
Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Anonymouse
Someone brought a bottle of Two-buck Chuck over to our house one time. It was raw and sour, barely fit to cook with.
回复：@stillCARealist
Which might be a model to explain things like the racial composition of the NBA - lots of rarefied things like the NBA have tiers below them that act like sieves. Clearly there are more elite white High School Basketball Players than Elite white College Basketball players, and more elite white Collegiate players than elite white NBA players. Small differences in physical makeup and ability disqualify more white players at every successive level of Basketball. So when you arrive at the top few hundred Basketball players, they're overwhelmingly black, while the top 10,000 or so basketball players in the world would be much less so. That small genetic variation is most pronounced at the far edge of the outliers.
Replies: @Alfa158, @Buzz Mohawk
You are right about the wine. There is the BS aspect, including connoisseurs who can’t pass a blind test, plus 收益递减.
This is not just confined to wines. Enthusiasts get all excited about minute improvements that add magnitudes to the cost of whatever it is they love. Unfortunately with things like wine that are perceived by Americans to be “cultural and classy,” this gets passed on inaccurately to the general public as a linear relationship between what goes into something and what comes out.
If you can’t be happy with a $25 bottle of wine, then you are full of sh*t.
As a commenter at this site observed awhile back, rich people enjoy overpaying for everything except labor. I think that's a good insight. To enjoy great wealth, there must be a difference between the things you can afford and the things that those who work for you can. Wouldn't it irritate a Bezos or a Zuckerberg to encounter one of his employees at an exclusive resort where he is vacationing? No, he wants to feel they can afford only lesser rewards. There must be a stark contrast.
In 1984, O'Brien asks Winston, "How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?'
Winston replies, "By making him suffer."
O'Brien says, "Exactly. By making him suffer. Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation."
Similarly, unless other people are barely scraping by, how can you be sure that your great wealth is meaningful? The joy of wealth is in rubbing other people's noses in their relative poverty. And that's why we need open borders, so America can be more like Mexico.
回复：@Stan d Mute
OT: feminists and presstitutes triggered that elderly billionaire uses colorful language to satirize a retarded feminist question
http://money.cnn.com/2018/06/07/news/companies/sam-zell-women/index.html
你的论点很好，我对我的另一个回复做一个补充：
我们讨论的是 15% 以内的变化与其他 85% 以内的变化。让我们用德比郡的炖菜中的盐来比喻。盐在炖菜中所占的比例很小，甚至不到 1%，但可以用哈瓦那辣椒代替，看看你喜欢这道炖菜。用环氧树脂替换它，看看会发生什么。换成砒霜...
取另外85%，把牛肉换成猪肉。还是炖的，可能很好吃。用胡萝卜代替洋葱；还好。把土豆换成萝卜；可能会很不错。
你可以做一道炖菜，其中 85% 不是牛肉、不是洋葱、不是土豆，但它仍然是一道很好的炖菜。但是把那一小部分盐变成邪恶的东西，你就没有任何你想吃的东西了。
顺便说一句，当我提到“无产者”时，我并不是要侮辱“工人阶级”。我们现在都是工人阶级——全球帝国的雇员。对我来说，无产者只是一些抽象的傻瓜，他们不断地被当权者欺骗。任何一个愿意费心思考的有思想的人都不可能被这 85%/15% 的废话所愚弄。没有人。它的存在只是为了让群众相信宗教。祭司们不可能相信。
回复：@Bernardo Pizzaro Cortez Del Castro
没有人，特别是无产阶级，相信这个教条。左派不断散布同样的误导性的卢旺廷宣传，不是为了说服人们，而是作为当前主流平等宗教的信奉者。那些质疑当前叙述的人将被绳之以法。在世界许多地方，你会因为表达相反的想法而被监禁。
I've had the cheap stuff, and I've had the expensive stuff. I can't tell the difference, so I go with Two Buck Chuck. (Actually up to $2.99 now).
Some tests have shown that most wine snobs can't tell the difference between the expensive stuff and the cheap stuff. So if you have an empty bottle of the expensive stuff, and can find an approximate cheap wine, serve that at dinner and nobody will tell the difference.
Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Anonymouse
You need to stay above $10-12 per 750ml bottle (depending on prices where you are, of course) and stick with good, “middle class” California selections from the big wineries. They have it down to a science (American) and they beat the inconsistent French, who are more old-fashioned in their methods.
At $20, you can serve your most perceptive guests anything from a wonderful variety of makers.
Save the really cheap stuff for beach parties where nobody cares, and for yourself out in the backyard this summer. Avoid boxes at all costs. There IS a bottom to all this.
PS: You can buy Trump wines between those two price points, if you want to have some fun serving the label to see the reactions. They are fine, especially for wines coming from the dreadful East Coast. I gave them as gifts last Christmas to, shall we say, like-minded people.
I'm tending towards Spanish Reds for value now - more balance between the fruit and tannins with some oak which is better for drinking with a nice steak or lamb chops, etc.
回复：@Captain Tripps
Buying and drinking California wines is an expensive hobby. I recommend you try the Louis Jadot label. Their Beaujolais-Village (red) and Macon-Village (white), $9 and $11 respectively, will beat the socks off any California wine under $20. Louis Jadot is available all over the country - you can buy it from Amazon. Louis Jadot is consistent year to year. They sell a Pouilly-Fuisse for $16 which my wife and I mean to try now that we've come into some money.
他的结论是，尽管 Lewontin 关于
人类遗传变异分布的总体绝对相似性是正确的，但他关于种族是统计人造物，因此是社会建构的结论是一个谬论。这是因为祖先并置人口（“种族”）之间的相对差异是系统聚集的。因此，如果您知道群体的一个样本具有特定的基因簇，您就可以更确定地预测它也会与其他基因簇一起出现。您识别出的簇越多，预测您正在研究的个体或样本的种族身份的信心就越大，如果您能够分析整个基因组的高质量样本，则信心将上升到 100%。于是就有了法医学。
当然，关于基因型的争论 数量 没有提及表型 气质，即基因型差异赋予不同种族的适应性优势。 我们知道，非常小的遗传变异可以引起深刻的表型差异。 因此，与我们关系最近的物种黑猩猩，98.5% 都是原始人类。 但正如罗纳德·里根在《博佐的睡前时光》中所证明的那样，这 1.5% 的差异在形态和行为上产生了巨大的差异。
勒万廷是一位才华横溢的技术生物学家，毫无疑问也是一位善意的人。但他的“种族不是真实的”论点是错误的。他一定在人生的某个阶段就知道这一点。
回复：@utu、@utu、@jb、@MEH 0910、@bomag、@C。范卡特
“善意”？他是一个撒谎的共产主义者：
https://www.unz.com/article/vignettes-of-famous-evolutionary-biologists-large-and-small/#p_4_9:1-43
(Hispanic ethnicity is fairly important, though, for predicting height, although some of that is not genetic and can change over the generations.)
Despite good nutrition, I don’t recall seeing many (if any) US born Latin-Americans of impressive height. Probably they are taller than their parents but still short.
Neither of their component populations (Iberian/Native American) is particularly tall so the hybrids aren’t tall either. Recently I visited Portugal and I was surprised to see that there was a subgroup of Portuguese men who had very very slight builds – they were built like Vietnamese guys (adult Vietnamese men in America sometimes have to shop in the boys dept. because they are too small for adult sizes) – they were of normal proportions but miniaturized so that they were maybe 5′-2″ and 110 lbs. Some of these guys were young men so I don’t think that it related to their own malnutrition growing up. I think you find this type of build in populations where food was not plentiful for a long time so that there was a survival advantage in being miniaturized so that you could get by on say a 1,000 calorie/day diet instead of 1,200. The average Portuguese (unlike the average Vietnamese) didn’t look like this but there were enough of these guys around to be a noticeable sub-type. There were also some extremely small women (and I noticed that a lot of the women wore platform shoes).
On the whole Mesoamericans seem to grow round with a surfeit of nutrition rather than tall or particularly broad. That probably means that they have some "thrifty gene" for fat storage, which is more advantageous to long term survival than growing large on excess calories as a child and then having a baseline of high caloric needs in an environment with rudimentary agricultural development. So you could take advantage of a bumper crop of corn and pack on a some extra fat in your belly and rear end, and then in a few months rely upon that when food is scarce for an extended period of time.
回复：@Logan
Despite good nutrition, I don't recall seeing many (if any) US born Latin-Americans of impressive height. Probably they are taller than their parents but still short.
Neither of their component populations (Iberian/Native American) is particularly tall so the hybrids aren't tall either. Recently I visited Portugal and I was surprised to see that there was a subgroup of Portuguese men who had very very slight builds - they were built like Vietnamese guys (adult Vietnamese men in America sometimes have to shop in the boys dept. because they are too small for adult sizes) - they were of normal proportions but miniaturized so that they were maybe 5'-2" and 110 lbs. Some of these guys were young men so I don't think that it related to their own malnutrition growing up. I think you find this type of build in populations where food was not plentiful for a long time so that there was a survival advantage in being miniaturized so that you could get by on say a 1,000 calorie/day diet instead of 1,200. The average Portuguese (unlike the average Vietnamese) didn't look like this but there were enough of these guys around to be a noticeable sub-type. There were also some extremely small women (and I noticed that a lot of the women wore platform shoes).
回复：@Alec Leamas（努力工作）
Tony Gonzalez is 6’5″ and Anthony Munoz is 6’6″ but I admit that’s a rarity.
On the whole Mesoamericans seem to grow round with a surfeit of nutrition rather than tall or particularly broad. That probably means that they have some “thrifty gene” for fat storage, which is more advantageous to long term survival than growing large on excess calories as a child and then having a baseline of high caloric needs in an environment with rudimentary agricultural development. So you could take advantage of a bumper crop of corn and pack on a some extra fat in your belly and rear end, and then in a few months rely upon that when food is scarce for an extended period of time.
This is all based on the notion that "natives" have an infinitely more recent history of starvation than "white people."
But that just isn't true. Food shortages and even starvation were quite common in Europe well into the 19th century. Half a dozen generations is simply not enough to make an evolutionary difference.
You need to stay above $10-12 per 750ml bottle (depending on prices where you are, of course) and stick with good, "middle class" California selections from the big wineries. They have it down to a science (American) and they beat the inconsistent French, who are more old-fashioned in their methods.
At $20, you can serve your most perceptive guests anything from a wonderful variety of makers.
Save the really cheap stuff for beach parties where nobody cares, and for yourself out in the backyard this summer. Avoid boxes at all costs. There IS a bottom to all this.
PS: You can buy Trump wines between those two price points, if you want to have some fun serving the label to see the reactions. They are fine, especially for wines coming from the dreadful East Coast. I gave them as gifts last Christmas to, shall we say, like-minded people.
Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Anonymouse
Everybody’s wine palette is different and evolves, but for quite some time I’ve found California Reds far too sweet/fruity/one note. There’s not much finesse or complexity in many of these $10-$12 California Reds and they compete with most food.
I’m tending towards Spanish Reds for value now – more balance between the fruit and tannins with some oak which is better for drinking with a nice steak or lamb chops, etc.
Agree on your assessment of California Reds. Although, living in the mid-Atlantic Region, I've found the emerging DelMarVa viticulture can produce some decent Reds as well, so I tend to go local when I find one. Although, they are somewhat coarser than the smoother Californias, as this local viticulture is still growing/improving. That said, a close friend turned me on to Italian Tuscan Reds about two decades ago, and I'll spring a decent amount for a rich, velvety-smooth Brunello di Montalcino when I really want to indulge my taste for a superb Red. Although, I understand that over the paste decade, the Brunellos that are maturing lately are less smooth and creamy than vintages produced in the mid-90's to the mid-00's.
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/06/06/troubling-us-navy-review-finds-widespread-shortfalls-in-basic-seamanship/
华盛顿——美国水面舰队高级领导人进行的为期三个月的内部审查发现，近 85% 的下级军官的船舶操纵技能存在一些或严重的问题，而且许多人在出现危险时难以做出果断反应，将自己的船只从危险中解救出来。根据《防务新闻》获得的内部消息，存在立即发生碰撞的风险。
在水面作战军官学校的领导下，一月至三月期间，在全船队的桥楼导航模拟器上随机挑选了具有 OOD 资格的一级军官（舰队中最新的军官），对甲板军官进行了能力检查。 在接受评估的 164 名警官中，只有 27 名“没有问题”通过。 根据海军最高水面战军官理查德·布朗中将发布的消息，另外 108 艘完成时存在“一些担忧”，29 艘则存在“严重担忧”。
领导太平洋海军水面部队的布朗称这一结果“发人深省”。
这些评估提出了令人苦恼的问题，即初级军官在到达第一个指挥部之前和到达时所接受的船舶操纵培训水平。 布朗周二在五角大楼接受《国防新闻》采访时表示，这些检查将用于为年轻军官的新培训提供信息，并且变化已经在进行中，这表明海军在事件发生后认真对待自我评估和改进。去年夏天，两次灾难夺去了 17 名水手的生命。
检查中发现的缺陷包括：
警官们在操作雷达和手头相关工具方面遇到了困难，这个问题是菲茨杰拉德事故发生后出现的。
军官们牢牢掌握了海上船舶航行的国际道路规则，但在值班期间，特别是在能见度较低的情况下，很难实际应用这些规则。
大多数军官能够避免在模拟器中与其他船只发生近距离接触，但那些发现自己处于极端情况的军官“往往没有能力立即采取行动避免碰撞”——这是造成人员伤亡的直接因素2017 年约翰·S·麦凯恩 (John S. McCain) 和菲茨杰拉德 (Fitzgerald) 相撞事故中。
布朗在给舰队的信息中表示，OOD 能力审查应该呼吁地面社区采取行动，纠正其缺点。
布朗在消息中表示：“虽然 OOD 能力检查是及时的快照，但我们必须现实地面对他们所揭示的初级合格人员核心能力方面的系统性缺陷。” “作为一个社区，我们可以而且必须解决我们的缺陷，并确保我们的资格证书背后有有意义的经验。”
消息中列出的令人担忧的领域让人想起 2017 年发生的令人不安的事故。 就麦凯恩号而言，尽管指挥官在场，但就在该船必须立即采取行动避免碰撞的那一刻，舰桥上却出现了混乱和犹豫不决的情况。
回复：@dr Kill、@Hank Archer、@Bill Jones
Perhaps the USN needs to just go with Left and Right instead of Port and Starboard. This is the 21st century, after all.
You are wrong. "Left and right" depend on which way you personally are facing. On a ship, you could be facing the stern (the rear end) and then your left and right would be opposite the ship's. Port and starboard are specific to the ship, which has a bow and stern, you see.
This is similar to actors' "stage right" and "stage left," which are specific to performing on that ship of stage. Stage right is the right side of the stage as it faces the audience, to the actor's right when he is facing the audience, etc... It is not the audience's right. Starboard on a ship is the ship's right of the bow, not the sailor's.
Starboard then, is "ship right," and port is "ship left." You could use those cumbersome constructions if you wanted to, but why not just use the simple, nautical words that have been in the English language for a long time?
These things matter when a director or a captain is giving directions or commands.
Our military is trying to be a welfare system, a social experiment lab, and sometimes a military. The answer is to resolve to be a military and reset all policies accordingly.
回复：@midtown
You need to stay above $10-12 per 750ml bottle (depending on prices where you are, of course) and stick with good, "middle class" California selections from the big wineries. They have it down to a science (American) and they beat the inconsistent French, who are more old-fashioned in their methods.
At $20, you can serve your most perceptive guests anything from a wonderful variety of makers.
Save the really cheap stuff for beach parties where nobody cares, and for yourself out in the backyard this summer. Avoid boxes at all costs. There IS a bottom to all this.
PS: You can buy Trump wines between those two price points, if you want to have some fun serving the label to see the reactions. They are fine, especially for wines coming from the dreadful East Coast. I gave them as gifts last Christmas to, shall we say, like-minded people.
Replies: @Alec Leamas (hard at work), @Anonymouse
Buying and drinking California wines is an expensive hobby. I recommend you try the Louis Jadot label. Their Beaujolais-Village (red) and Macon-Village (white), $9 and $11 respectively, will beat the socks off any California wine under $20. Louis Jadot is available all over the country – you can buy it from Amazon. Louis Jadot is consistent year to year. They sell a Pouilly-Fuisse for $16 which my wife and I mean to try now that we’ve come into some money.
I've had the cheap stuff, and I've had the expensive stuff. I can't tell the difference, so I go with Two Buck Chuck. (Actually up to $2.99 now).
Some tests have shown that most wine snobs can't tell the difference between the expensive stuff and the cheap stuff. So if you have an empty bottle of the expensive stuff, and can find an approximate cheap wine, serve that at dinner and nobody will tell the difference.
Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Anonymouse
Someone brought a bottle of Two-buck Chuck over to our house one time. It was raw and sour, barely fit to cook with.
It tastes really good if you drink it straight from the bottle, wrapped in a paper bag, while sitting on a log down by the river. Every swig will delight you even more than the last.
That does not mean what they seem to think it means. Or they Lewontin is engaged in a mathematical slight of hand. Innumerate or deceptive, the problem remains.
A more accurate (though still oversimplified) interpretation is that 85% of the variation is random but 15% is systematic by geographic region (race). That the random is a bigger number than the systematic is irrelevant. What is important is that 15% of the variation has has what process control would call a “special cause”, an identifiable source. That is a very clear signal of a controllable parameter.
The roulette wheel metaphor is close, but doesn’t quite work. Try recasting it as a manufacturing difference. Company A and B both make roulette wheels for which the sizes of each number slot on the wheel vary a somewhat, but randomly. For company A, the Red numbers tend to have more large slots than the black, company B, the black have more large sized slots than the red. Are all wheels the same because 85% of the variation is random while only 15% is systematic? Or is that 15% enough to tell you no only the origin, but how the wheels will play?
Does it matter which company you buy the wheels from? Does it matter if your customers know? What difference does knowing that small difference make in the long run?
Black Men also have more than a few inches than white boys in another area (oh yeah-you know what I mean)
难怪白人女孩渴望黑人
Replies: @Logan, @Anonymous Jew, @Alfa158, @Anonymous
Some facts about penis size by race.
https://medium.com/globalnewsasia/does-race-affect-penis-size-28a1e47e0748
The flaw in your argument is that you equate the 85% to random spins on a wheel.
But as you yourself have pointed out ,for example, in ‘Albion’s Seed’, there can be large differences within even close racial groups.
How racially different were the violent Borderlands English compared to the pacifist Midland Quakers? Not much.
Very few of th midlanders became Quakers.
On the whole Mesoamericans seem to grow round with a surfeit of nutrition rather than tall or particularly broad. That probably means that they have some "thrifty gene" for fat storage, which is more advantageous to long term survival than growing large on excess calories as a child and then having a baseline of high caloric needs in an environment with rudimentary agricultural development. So you could take advantage of a bumper crop of corn and pack on a some extra fat in your belly and rear end, and then in a few months rely upon that when food is scarce for an extended period of time.
回复：@Logan
This is all based on the notion that “natives” have an infinitely more recent history of starvation than “white people.”
But that just isn’t true. Food shortages and even starvation were quite common in Europe well into the 19th century. Half a dozen generations is simply not enough to make an evolutionary difference.
That's because so many of the white males you see on television are Jewish, and because many of the other white types now favored by media are "ethnic" and do not come from Northwestern European lineage.
Across the broad span of America, there are still a lot of tall, fair men. If you happen to be one of those men and you relocate to the media-centric NYC region, you find yourself sticking out above a sea of little, swarthy bastards from Ellis Island.
回复：@福布斯
Buzz–I’m tall in NYC. I can see over the crowd, but I’m only the third tallest out of the four boys in my family. And you be amazed at how tall many people guess me to be–if only because most average height (5’9″) guys claim to be two inches taller than actual.
一盒 12 美元的葡萄酒和一瓶 120 美元的葡萄酒之间的区别仅仅是一种社会结构。
事实上，据我所知，这可能是真的。
但我没有太多的味觉或嗅觉，所以我愿意假设花 120 美元的人知道他们在说什么。
回复：@Ganderson、@Anonymous、@Zippy、@Alec Leamas、@Anonymous、@Paleo Liberal、@Olorin、@Anon87
Winemakers, like fine art collectors, pay mainly for 出处.
Perhaps the USN needs to just go with Left and Right instead of Port and Starboard. This is the 21st century, after all.
Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @njguy73
You are wrong. “Left and right” depend on which way you personally are facing. On a ship, you could be facing the stern (the rear end) and then your left and right would be opposite the ship’s. Port and starboard are specific to the ship, which has a bow and stern, you see.
This is similar to actors’ “stage right” and “stage left,” which are specific to performing on that ship of stage. Stage right is the right side of the stage as it faces the audience, to the actor’s right when he is facing the audience, etc… It is not the audience’s right. Starboard on a ship is the ship’s right of the bow, not the sailor’s.
Starboard then, is “ship right,” and port is “ship left.” You could use those cumbersome constructions if you wanted to, but why not just use the simple, nautical words that have been in the English language for a long time?
These things matter when a director or a captain is giving directions or commands.
Black Men also have more than a few inches than white boys in another area (oh yeah-you know what I mean)
难怪白人女孩渴望黑人
Replies: @Logan, @Anonymous Jew, @Alfa158, @Anonymous
You are nothing if not persistent. I hate to feed to the troll, but there’s something I must know: do you have any real experience with the Black masses? No, not the top 5-10% that graduate from respectable colleges, but the other 90% of the bell curve.
I’m somewhat unique here and in the professional middle class in that I actually spent much of my childhood living on the border of a Black neighborhood and going to >50% Black schools. Unlike you, and even many posters here, I actually have over a decade of personal experience with the whole of the Black population/bell curve.
It was this extensive experience with Blacks that made me a scientific racist. Good social/behavioral science just confirms common sense. They really are quite different. Lower intelligence is the most cited difference but there are many others, from how they smell to average personality profile, et al.
你一定是：
1) a Black/Amerid minority yourself;
2) a leftist that knows Blacks like me but are so religious in your ideology that you are incapable of seeing the reality that smacks you in the face daily;
3) have never had any significant interaction with regular Blacks; or
4) are somewhere on the autistic/Aspergers spectrum.
I’d really like to know. I’m betting a mix of 3&4.
I have an internet conection
I can mae judgment based on the perfect information available to us
回复：@匿名犹太人，@匿名犹太人
You might want to look up "steel-manning": https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-highest-form-of-disagreement/531597/
Refusing to admit when your opponent has a valid point is just being childish.
Replies: @utu, @candid_observer
My long comment was in earnest. I thought it would help to answer questions that Steve Sailer’s asked:
Your reaction to my comment and your earlier inept steel-manning of Steve Sailer argument by taking the square root of 0.15 made me realize that I must be the only one who tries in earnest to destroy the Lewontin’s meme.
Did Steve Sailer really believe that his casino example could impact those ‘intelligent people’? The casino example is inadequate; it does not deserve to be called an analogy. There is no discernible relation to the fixation index that Lewontin calculated. But there is a connection to race in the racist insinuation that American Indian and African-American croupiers are cheating or are inept. Did Steve Sailer thought that racists ‘analogy’ will influence those ‘intelligent people’? Apparently Steve Sailer is not interested in influencing them. He is just playing to the chap seats bought by obsequious sycophants like yourself. He will be happy to keep ‘trying’ for another 18 years in front of so demanding audience.
I have used the croupier argument before, and it was very effective. My interlocutor got visibly disturbed, and had no way of countering it. So i disagree that it's a totally ineffective argument. There are many intelligent liberals who honestly believe that race has been debunked.
Arrests for illegal border crossings top 50,000 in May for a third month running despite Trump's much vaunted immigration crackdown
Border Patrol agents made 51,912 arrests in May for illegal crossings - more than triple the number of arrests made in April 2017
It's the third month in a row that illegal crossing arrests topped 50,000
Arrests come amid Trump's new 'zero tolerance' policy on immigration which includes the controversial move to allow agents to separate families
UK Daily Mail this morning
回复：@福布斯
I’d think a rise in arrests would indicate a crackdown, i.e. stricter enforcement policy, is working. A result of stricter enforcement usually means higher arrests. A number of factors effect the number of crossings. If those crossing illegally are merely put back across the border, there’s no disincentive to trying again. They’re buying what are effectively lottery tickets…
The NYT’s Fox Butterfield was regularly mocked for annually writing articles about the apparent conflict between a declining crime rate and higher levels of incarceration, unable to grasp the circularity present.
Mexican illegal border crossers are easy to send back by La Migra bus. Every other non- contiguous nation, it is a logistical nightmare to deport their border jumpers and visa over stayers for one simple reason. They are flown back. Think Peru, China, Bangladesh, Guatemala. So the tendency is to parole them into the US population for a court date 2 or more years in the future. 90% don't show. They also are paroled due to lack of jail space
https://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Great-Shame-of-Our/239148
Why so the awful terms and conditions?Isn't that 'strong incentive' similar to the 'strong incentive' which produced the California and Klondyke gold rushes?The author, Kevin Birmingham (who gave up tenure to write a book) lambasts US English departments for accepting more PhD students than can possibly be appointed to tenured positions.
I'm just wondering if English professors ever apply the logic of a labour surplus that depresses wages to the whole of the United States, which also controls its own labour market? I've not seen many adjunct English profs clamouring 'build the wall!".Replies: @kaganovitch, @Barnard, @Alden
If we could have adjunct deans of diversity and inclusion who would have to take 6 jobs a semester to survive, we would solve a sizable percentage of what ails the universities.
I'm tending towards Spanish Reds for value now - more balance between the fruit and tannins with some oak which is better for drinking with a nice steak or lamb chops, etc.
回复：@Captain Tripps
Agree on your assessment of California Reds. Although, living in the mid-Atlantic Region, I’ve found the emerging DelMarVa viticulture can produce some decent Reds as well, so I tend to go local when I find one. Although, they are somewhat coarser than the smoother Californias, as this local viticulture is still growing/improving. That said, a close friend turned me on to Italian Tuscan Reds about two decades ago, and I’ll spring a decent amount for a rich, velvety-smooth Brunello di Montalcino when I really want to indulge my taste for a superb Red. Although, I understand that over the paste decade, the Brunellos that are maturing lately are less smooth and creamy than vintages produced in the mid-90’s to the mid-00’s.
Thus, intelligent people will support even the dumbest cultural norms. In fact, being able to hold two or three contradictory concepts in your head is a sign of intelligence.
回复：@Harry Baldwin
In fact, being able to hold two or three contradictory concepts in your head is a sign of intelligence.
Maybe so, but a lot of stupid people are also able to hold a number of contradictory concepts in your head. They’re just simpler concepts.
Or they're unaware of the contradictions.
To unpack the cliche a bit, I understand it to specifically mean not schizophrenia but temporarily modelling in your head an ideology you hate so that you can derive good, non-straw-man predictions. Thus "La Raza will attempt to spin this event this way" not "La Raza are stupid and ugly and they will not be able to spin this event." Necessary for discourse but not much of a standard.
This cliche joins "the definition of insanity is expecting a different result from repeating the same action" (so in other words, all experimenting scientists are insane) as over-simplistic, currently in vogue, but also taking undeserved credibility from scientism.
https://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Great-Shame-of-Our/239148
Why so the awful terms and conditions?Isn't that 'strong incentive' similar to the 'strong incentive' which produced the California and Klondyke gold rushes?The author, Kevin Birmingham (who gave up tenure to write a book) lambasts US English departments for accepting more PhD students than can possibly be appointed to tenured positions.
I'm just wondering if English professors ever apply the logic of a labour surplus that depresses wages to the whole of the United States, which also controls its own labour market? I've not seen many adjunct English profs clamouring 'build the wall!".Replies: @kaganovitch, @Barnard, @Alden
Most of them never have and wouldn’t even consider doing it. There isn’t a strong relationship between being an English professor and being logical. I thought going after higher education would be low hanging fruit for Trump, but he has barely touched it. We all know Congressional Republicans won’t do anything punitive to this class of people who regularly call them Nazis.
In fact, being able to hold two or three contradictory concepts in your head is a sign of intelligence.
Maybe so, but a lot of stupid people are also able to hold a number of contradictory concepts in your head. They're just simpler concepts.
回复：@ J.Ross
Or they’re unaware of the contradictions.
To unpack the cliche a bit, I understand it to specifically mean not schizophrenia but temporarily modelling in your head an ideology you hate so that you can derive good, non-straw-man predictions. Thus “La Raza will attempt to spin this event this way” not “La Raza are stupid and ugly and they will not be able to spin this event.” Necessary for discourse but not much of a standard.
This cliche joins “the definition of insanity is expecting a different result from repeating the same action” (so in other words, all experimenting scientists are insane) as over-simplistic, currently in vogue, but also taking undeserved credibility from scientism.
Perhaps the USN needs to just go with Left and Right instead of Port and Starboard. This is the 21st century, after all.
Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @njguy73
Our military is trying to be a welfare system, a social experiment lab, and sometimes a military. The answer is to resolve to be a military and reset all policies accordingly.
同意。
mass immigration of cheap labor creates a demand for mass ultra-cheap prostitution which is generally filled by forcing children - whether it's trafficked hispanic girls to service hispanic cheap labor in the USA or clan-raped native European girls to service muslim cheap labor in Europe.
回复：@ J.Ross
It creates that demand (as well as a normality of domestic abuse) but it also meets a separate, already-existing demand.
It really is the worse devils of our nature given free reign and disguised as compassion.
if group A and group B are competing and group A can persuade group B to breed with a lower IQ population group C then group B's average IQ would decrease and group A wins - even if it takes a century or two.
回复：@ J.Ross
Okay, that’s big picture what they’re doing to us. What are they doing for the idiots churning out thought-leading columns?
I don't understand to whom your question is referring. What are you perplexed about?
回复：@ J.Ross
Individuals who state the inappropriate facts will lose their job, source of income , status and be ostracized from mainstream society. Recent examples include noted actors, scientists, college administrators, computer programmers etc. While in Europe perpetrators will be incarcerated for expressing unorthodox opinions, they even jail 80 year-old grandmothers and noted historians for stating their opinions.
Anyone who acknowledges the differences between men and women will be quickly fired from any position they hold at any Fortune 500 firm. Anyone who notices the disparity between racial groups will be swiftly labeled a "racist" and face the consequences. SJWs have millions of informants who have infiltrated most companies, churches, schools and playgrounds across America. Social media is policed by thousands of enforcers looking for any indication of non-compliance. Violators are quickly reported to the authorities and banned from Twitter, Facebook, Youtube and their Google accounts will be shutdown.
回复：@ J.Ross，@ bomag
That’s Europe, where for the most part they’ve never had any concept of rights or freedom (Europeans think that rights are privileges dispensed under license from a God-state), and everything you’re describing falls short of motivation. It’d keep my mouth shut but it wouldn’t bring the sewer overflow of propaganda that less and less people read in the legacy media.
Simple thought experiment, am I taller than my wife? Was my father taller than my mother? Grandfathers taller than grandmothers and so on. I have records and pictures going back into the 1800s. One great great great grandfather was born when Napoleon was a going concern. So it’s a fairly long string. Were their wives shorter than them?
Some of those men were more than a foot shorter than others but were they taller than their wives? With that many people involved surely some of them were shorter than their wives. Or were they?
Instead Lewontin's methodology should be attacked. (a) 15% is true for the very small set of genes he selected. If he selected other genes, for instance the ones responsible for skin color the same number would be significantly larger. In fact it is possible to make this number almost anything between 0% and 100% by selecting appropriate genes. (b) What is the point of using genes that are common between populations to argue the case that races do not exist? One could follow Lewontin's approach and show that genetic distance between apes and men is lower than 15% by selecting appropriate genes. (c). This is more complex objection. Lewontin treats frequencies of various genes as independent probabilities. Race as a trait is essentially polygenic where probability of occurring of genes A and B is not equal to the product of their frequencies: f(A)F(B)≠P(A and B). Let's suppose that we have four genes A,B,C,D and one race is defined by individuals who have genes [(A and B) or (C and D)] and the other race is defined by individuals having genes [(A and C) or (B and D)]. (Note that 'or' is exclusive in both cases.) These two races are two disjoint sets in terms of combinations of gene pairs. If the frequencies of genes are treated as independent probabilities these two races can be close in terms of genetic distance. Actually frequencies of genes in in both races could be the same and Lewontin would find zero genetic distance between them.
(2) I do not think that the metaphor of casino is good. It does not map on the structure of what was calculated by Lewontine. One has to get deeper to Lewontin's methodology to see it. Lewontin calculates relative distance between populations by means of the fixation index (F-statistics) where he defines population diversity as a function that has properties of variance but is not exactly variance. And from the difference between diversities he gets the distance between populations. The distance is implied not defined.
In case of two sets we can use variance to illustrate it. Let's A and B are two sets of numbers. Let's. Va, Vb and Ma, Mb are variances and means and V(A 'or' B) is a variance of composite sum of the two sets. Now let assume (Lewontin's also makes this assumption that all populations are the same size) A and B are of the same size. Then
The number 0.15 of Lewontin in this scenario isThis number allows us to express difference between means (without calculating them) as fraction of standard deviation SD=sqrt[V(A 'or' B)] of combined sum of two sets.The value of 15% or 0.15 means that Ma-Mb is 77% of the standard deviation SD.This seems a lot, so let's construct an example.We have two herds of dairy cows A and B. We calculate the fixation index for the yields of milk which comes to 15%. How much the average yield of milk of the herd A differ from the herd B. The answer is 77% of standard deviation of the milk yield of the combined herd A and B.
Would the example with cows sway anybody? Perhaps we could replace it with incomes of Jews and gentiles. The fixation index of 15% implies 77% difference between means. Jews would prefer to talk about only 15% but anti-semites would talk about 77%.
(3). So how the case could be argued?
Lewontin calculated the value of fixation index using few selected genes. Fixation is something that we do not need to know but it suppose to measure a distance between different statistical sets in terms of variance. For these genes his fixation index is 15%. If he used different genes the fixation index would be lower or significantly higher. Why Lewontin used these genes? This is what he had in 1972 but he did not use any genes responsible for external racial traits. If he used genes responsible for the color of the skin the fixation index would be much larger. Now the question whether 15% is a lot or not. He says it is very small and thus negligible. But we beg to differ. Let's see what fixation index of 15% means for the two herds of dairy cows. Go to the example in (2).
Replies: @res, @Inquiring Mind, @candid_observer, @reiner Tor
Let’s try this reasoning.
Basketball aptitude has an underlying metric called “b” that follows from analysis finding a common mathematical factor underlying various tests of how well an individual plays the game . The distribution of “b” in any population follows a bell curve.
85 percent of the variation in “b” occurs within any so-called racial group but 15 percent is between these groups. That means that the bell curves for different groups overlap by quite a bit, and that people in the middle from almost any of the groups of concern can play against each other without it being lopsided.
But small shifts between bell curves for any pair of groups results in large changes in the number of persons in “the tails” of the bell curve. NBA players are the result of a long winnowing process from the cement outdoor hoops to high school to college to the pros skimming the cream of the cream, so they represent the extreme right tail of “b” where there are very large group differences.
I think I understand your point but I do not think it is an optimal argument to be used to demolish Lewontin meme. When you start talking about the overlap of bell curves you give up on a possibility of delineation between races, i.e., definition of race. Overlapping bell curves suggest that where they overlap there is no difference. Definition of race must be effective in the sense that each individual can have race signed with high accuracy. If you use bell curves and basketball then Larry Bird would give you a false assignment.
回复：@Harry Baldwin
This needs to happen a lot more often.
OT SWEDEN NO
Trying to find a good link now but I’m hearing that the polling firm Norwegian Sentio has placed the Sweden Democrats (the closest thing Sweden has to a serious anti-rapefugee party) at the top, and state propaganda SVT has them as number two. This is not an election but a measure of popular sentiment.
God Bless Sweden,
Except for that snub-nosed Swedish bastard Gretchen Carlson and all the evil Swedes who are pushing mass immigration and multiculturalism.
Swedes in New Hampshire and New Jersey and Minnesota and Sweden are pushing mass immigration and multiculturalism.
Pernille Vermund in Denmark and Swedish Patriots who want to protect and defend Sweden!
https://twitter.com/Matytsyn/status/1003430150787272710
Someone brought a bottle of Two-buck Chuck over to our house one time. It was raw and sour, barely fit to cook with.
回复：@stillCARealist
It tastes really good if you drink it straight from the bottle, wrapped in a paper bag, while sitting on a log down by the river. Every swig will delight you even more than the last.
我见过的最容易理解的对勒万廷谬误的反驳是形象化的：
这真是太好了。即使使用显示一种特征的折线图，您也可以做同样的事情。
Trying to find a good link now but I'm hearing that the polling firm Norwegian Sentio has placed the Sweden Democrats (the closest thing Sweden has to a serious anti-rapefugee party) at the top, and state propaganda SVT has them as number two. This is not an election but a measure of popular sentiment.
回复：@Charles Pewitt
God Bless Sweden,
Except for that snub-nosed Swedish bastard Gretchen Carlson and all the evil Swedes who are pushing mass immigration and multiculturalism.
Swedes in New Hampshire and New Jersey and Minnesota and Sweden are pushing mass immigration and multiculturalism.
Pernille Vermund in Denmark and Swedish Patriots who want to protect and defend Sweden!
回复：@fitzGetty
……是的，确实……当管理层决定停止所有即时评论而不是缓和它们时，Taki 失去了很多活力……但仍然是一流的阅读……
你对酒的看法是对的。 还有BS方面，包括无法通过盲测的鉴赏家，再加上 收益递减.
这不仅仅局限于葡萄酒。 爱好者们对微小的改进感到兴奋，这些改进大大增加了他们喜欢的东西的成本。 不幸的是，像葡萄酒这样被美国人视为“文化和优雅”的东西，这种观念被错误地传递给了公众，因为它是某种东西的成分和结果之间的线性关系。
如果你不能对一瓶 25 美元的葡萄酒感到满意，那么你就完蛋了。
回复：@Harry Baldwin
As a commenter at this site observed awhile back, rich people enjoy overpaying for everything except labor. I think that’s a good insight. To enjoy great wealth, there must be a difference between the things you can afford and the things that those who work for you can. Wouldn’t it irritate a Bezos or a Zuckerberg to encounter one of his employees at an exclusive resort where he is vacationing? No, he wants to feel they can afford only lesser rewards. There must be a stark contrast.
In 1984, O’Brien asks Winston, “How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?’
Winston replies, “By making him suffer.”
O’Brien says, “Exactly. By making him suffer. Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation.”
Similarly, unless other people are barely scraping by, how can you be sure that your great wealth is meaningful? The joy of wealth is in rubbing other people’s noses in their relative poverty. And that’s why we need open borders, so America can be more like Mexico.
Astute post. There’s a piece in the Atlantic that goes toward this I believe and it also goes toward Murray’s points in Coming Apart. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-birth-of-a-new-american-aristocracy/559130/
Swedish Patriots Say No To Mass Immigration
Swedish Patriots Say YES To Sweden For The Swedes!
God Bless Sweden!
https://twitter.com/WindhorstESPN/status/496418849613697026
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BuO9hiPIEAEYGfZ.jpg
回复：@ Rod1963
我见过那些停止服用药物的“榨汁者”，他们的身体像破裂的气球一样萎缩。他们失去如此多的肌肉质量如此之快，真是令人惊讶。事实是，在服用兴奋剂期间，他们体内的睾丸激素产量趋于平稳，当他们停止“果汁”时，他们的系统崩溃了。
至于回归“重振旗鼓”，PED 会做到这一点。
Let's try this reasoning.
Basketball aptitude has an underlying metric called "b" that follows from analysis finding a common mathematical factor underlying various tests of how well an individual plays the game . The distribution of "b" in any population follows a bell curve.
85 percent of the variation in "b" occurs within any so-called racial group but 15 percent is between these groups. That means that the bell curves for different groups overlap by quite a bit, and that people in the middle from almost any of the groups of concern can play against each other without it being lopsided.
But small shifts between bell curves for any pair of groups results in large changes in the number of persons in "the tails" of the bell curve. NBA players are the result of a long winnowing process from the cement outdoor hoops to high school to college to the pros skimming the cream of the cream, so they represent the extreme right tail of "b" where there are very large group differences.
回复：@utu
I think I understand your point but I do not think it is an optimal argument to be used to demolish Lewontin meme. When you start talking about the overlap of bell curves you give up on a possibility of delineation between races, i.e., definition of race. Overlapping bell curves suggest that where they overlap there is no difference. Definition of race must be effective in the sense that each individual can have race signed with high accuracy. If you use bell curves and basketball then Larry Bird would give you a false assignment.
Black Men also have more than a few inches than white boys in another area (oh yeah-you know what I mean)
难怪白人女孩渴望黑人
Replies: @Logan, @Anonymous Jew, @Alfa158, @Anonymous
Well, for once I can’t argue with one of your claims, after all you’re the one with the personal experience.
Individuals who state the inappropriate facts will lose their job, source of income , status and be ostracized from mainstream society. Recent examples include noted actors, scientists, college administrators, computer programmers etc. While in Europe perpetrators will be incarcerated for expressing unorthodox opinions, they even jail 80 year-old grandmothers and noted historians for stating their opinions.
Anyone who acknowledges the differences between men and women will be quickly fired from any position they hold at any Fortune 500 firm. Anyone who notices the disparity between racial groups will be swiftly labeled a "racist" and face the consequences. SJWs have millions of informants who have infiltrated most companies, churches, schools and playgrounds across America. Social media is policed by thousands of enforcers looking for any indication of non-compliance. Violators are quickly reported to the authorities and banned from Twitter, Facebook, Youtube and their Google accounts will be shutdown.
回复：@ J.Ross，@ bomag
It’s been said that communism didn’t work because the practitioners weren’t earnest enough.
但现在…
https://i.imgur.com/4SvretI.png
回复：@Lot
这真是太好了。即使使用显示一种特征的折线图，您也可以做同样的事情。
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/06/06/troubling-us-navy-review-finds-widespread-shortfalls-in-basic-seamanship/
华盛顿——美国水面舰队高级领导人进行的为期三个月的内部审查发现，近 85% 的下级军官的船舶操纵技能存在一些或严重的问题，而且许多人在出现危险时难以做出果断反应，将自己的船只从危险中解救出来。根据《防务新闻》获得的内部消息，存在立即发生碰撞的风险。
在水面作战军官学校的领导下，一月至三月期间，在全船队的桥楼导航模拟器上随机挑选了具有 OOD 资格的一级军官（舰队中最新的军官），对甲板军官进行了能力检查。 在接受评估的 164 名警官中，只有 27 名“没有问题”通过。 根据海军最高水面战军官理查德·布朗中将发布的消息，另外 108 艘完成时存在“一些担忧”，29 艘则存在“严重担忧”。
领导太平洋海军水面部队的布朗称这一结果“发人深省”。
这些评估提出了令人苦恼的问题，即初级军官在到达第一个指挥部之前和到达时所接受的船舶操纵培训水平。 布朗周二在五角大楼接受《国防新闻》采访时表示，这些检查将用于为年轻军官的新培训提供信息，并且变化已经在进行中，这表明海军在事件发生后认真对待自我评估和改进。去年夏天，两次灾难夺去了 17 名水手的生命。
检查中发现的缺陷包括：
警官们在操作雷达和手头相关工具方面遇到了困难，这个问题是菲茨杰拉德事故发生后出现的。
军官们牢牢掌握了海上船舶航行的国际道路规则，但在值班期间，特别是在能见度较低的情况下，很难实际应用这些规则。
大多数军官能够避免在模拟器中与其他船只发生近距离接触，但那些发现自己处于极端情况的军官“往往没有能力立即采取行动避免碰撞”——这是造成人员伤亡的直接因素2017 年约翰·S·麦凯恩 (John S. McCain) 和菲茨杰拉德 (Fitzgerald) 相撞事故中。
布朗在给舰队的信息中表示，OOD 能力审查应该呼吁地面社区采取行动，纠正其缺点。
布朗在消息中表示：“虽然 OOD 能力检查是及时的快照，但我们必须现实地面对他们所揭示的初级合格人员核心能力方面的系统性缺陷。” “作为一个社区，我们可以而且必须解决我们的缺陷，并确保我们的资格证书背后有有意义的经验。”
消息中列出的令人担忧的领域让人想起 2017 年发生的令人不安的事故。 就麦凯恩号而言，尽管指挥官在场，但就在该船必须立即采取行动避免碰撞的那一刻，舰桥上却出现了混乱和犹豫不决的情况。
回复：@dr Kill、@Hank Archer、@Bill Jones
海岸警卫队也未能幸免。 它没有后备军官训练队计划。 他们有一个叫做“大学生预调试计划”的项目。
https://www.gocoastguard.com/active-duty-careers/officer-opportunities/programs/college-student-pre-commissioning-initiative
这似乎是一个很好的计划，并且有人可能会感兴趣，直到发现只有来自非常有限数量的大学的学生才有资格参加。
Education:
是在指定为少数族裔服务的认可学院或大学的全日制学士学位课程中注册、接受注册或待接受（如果接受，必须在开始 CSPI 之前提交接受信）的大二或大三本科生研究所（MSI）。
历史上的黑人学院和大学
主要是黑人机构
西班牙裔服务机构
亚裔美国人和美洲原住民太平洋岛民服务机构
美国印第安部落控制的学院和大学
阿拉斯加 [& 夏威夷] 本土服务机构
美洲原住民服务，非部落机构
少数民族学生人数平均至少占总学生人数的 50% 的大学
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority-serving_institution
美国大约有 5,300 所学院和大学。
历史上的黑人学院和大学
关于106
主要是黑人机构
不明
西班牙裔服务机构
关于250
亚裔美国人和美洲原住民太平洋岛民服务机构
关于132
美国印第安部落控制的学院和大学
关于32
阿拉斯加 [& 夏威夷] 本土服务机构
关于4
美洲原住民服务，非部落机构
不明
少数民族学生人数平均至少占总学生人数的 50% 的大学
不明
我不相信学生可以参加这个 CG 项目的大学总数能超过美国所有大学的 25%，而且几乎所有这些都将在美国南部三分之一的地方。
As a commenter at this site observed awhile back, rich people enjoy overpaying for everything except labor. I think that's a good insight. To enjoy great wealth, there must be a difference between the things you can afford and the things that those who work for you can. Wouldn't it irritate a Bezos or a Zuckerberg to encounter one of his employees at an exclusive resort where he is vacationing? No, he wants to feel they can afford only lesser rewards. There must be a stark contrast.
In 1984, O'Brien asks Winston, "How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?'
Winston replies, "By making him suffer."
O'Brien says, "Exactly. By making him suffer. Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation."
Similarly, unless other people are barely scraping by, how can you be sure that your great wealth is meaningful? The joy of wealth is in rubbing other people's noses in their relative poverty. And that's why we need open borders, so America can be more like Mexico.
回复：@Stan d Mute
Astute post. There’s a piece in the Atlantic that goes toward this I believe and it also goes toward Murray’s points in Coming Apart. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/06/the-birth-of-a-new-american-aristocracy/559130/
@史蒂夫·塞勒
On the $12.00 versus $120 wine issue, I don't think it's a pure social construct, or at least it's not made up. I do think there is some element of social conditioning -- people who drink expensive wine may be more inclined to like it because of the reputation of the wine. But they do blind tastings on a regular basis, and the expensive wines tend to win them.
I've found this to be true when I do it. Mrs. Zippy and I do spend between $50 and $250 on wine on a regular basis, and we often hold dinner parties where we will serve foods and sample multiple wines. (We use the Coravin device, which allows one to "open" wine without opening it, assuming it uses a natural cork.)
We put the wines in opaque bags, so they are unknown to the diners. When dinner is over, we will ask for opinions and unveil the wines. I will often include a range of wines -- I recently did it with a $180 bottle, a $60 bottle, and Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's, often known as "Two Buck Chuck," though I think it's closer to $3 or $4 these days.
The result is uniformly that my guests like the more expensive wines more. I've done this with cheapo wines and some nice wines at least 30 times, and the cheapo wine has never, ever won. By cheapo I mean $20 or under. And I've had other people put the wines in the bags, so I am the one who is blind-tasting. And I've never picked the sub $20 stuff.
Now, sometimes the $50 bottle will beat the $100 plus bottle. As you go up the quality scale, diminishing returns sets in, and the differences become more subtle and individual tastes come into play. So I might genuinely like an $80 bottle more than a $200 bottle, but I'm very unlikely to just love Barefoot or Two Buck Chuck as much as either. I have had some very expensive wines -- more than $500 a bottle, or even four figures. They were great! But the difference between the $500 bottle that I love and the $150 bottle that I also love is so subtle and the marginal cost is so much higher that it's not worth the additional $350 to me. But the difference between the $10 or $20 and the $50 - $250 bottles I now buy is so significant that the marginal cost is worth it.
葡萄品种和陈酿也增加了额外的复杂性。
至少根据我的经验，在寻找低价红酒或浏览劣质酒单时，加州仙粉黛是一个不错的选择。无论出于什么原因，便宜的 Zins 都相当不错。
意大利基安蒂葡萄酒可能有点粗糙，尤其是便宜的一面，但搭配辛辣的番茄配方，它们确实很有效。关于葡萄酒和食物的搭配的说法确实是正确的。 （对于那些想粗略地了解这一原理的人来说，刷牙后立即喝一口橙汁。你吃的东西确实会影响你对葡萄酒的品味。）
对于昂贵的葡萄酒，我真诚地认为巴黎的判断是正确的，加州赤霞珠通常会胜过同等价格的波尔多葡萄酒。
I never, ever buy cheap pinot noir. Pinot noir is really delicate and very hard to grow. Because it requires very careful handling, cheapo pinot noir is just bad. Also, in the United States, a wine label that specifies a single variety only means that at least 75% of the wine is that variety -- it might be blended. Pinot noir should never be blended, unless it's being used to make sparkling wine. As opposed to cabernet sauvignon, which is usually better blended. For cheap American pinot noir, it's a darn good bet there there is something else thrown into the bottle, because that something else will almost certainly be cheaper and easier to grow than pinot noir.
相比之下，勃艮第红葡萄酒在法律上只能是黑皮诺。我个人势利的观点是，虽然俄勒冈州甚至加利福尼亚州也出产一些优质的黑皮诺，但没有什么比优质的勃艮第葡萄酒更好的了。很多人都同意我的观点，这就是勃艮第葡萄酒如此昂贵的原因。
Also, some people just plain don't like certain wines. If you don't like Port, for example, you probably won't be able to tell the difference between an awesome Port aged fifty years and a terrible one. It all tastes like cough syrup!
衰老带来了另一种复杂性。有些葡萄酒不会随着陈酿而改善，有些会变得更糟。即使是最适合陈酿的葡萄酒也会在某个时候变质。那些拍卖出数十万美元的 19 世纪葡萄酒，如果有人愚蠢到打开一瓶喝下去，那可能会很糟糕。
但确实有些葡萄酒在气候控制室的架子上放置十年后会变得更好。有些酒在年轻时单宁含量很高，除非陈酿十年或在饮用前醒酒几个小时，否则味道会很糟糕。 （醒酒只是加速老化。）
我确实认为存在一些社会条件因素，就像在纸板盒中提供的相同食物可能不如在白色桌布餐厅优雅地摆盘时那么吸引人。但我认为大多数人都能分辨出一块真正好的牛排和一块真正糟糕的牛排，即使没有这些社交线索。
So maybe it's, well, some of both?
回复：@anonymous，@Jim Don Bob
我不在乎
Black Men also have more than a few inches than white boys in another area (oh yeah-you know what I mean)
难怪白人女孩渴望黑人
Replies: @Logan, @Anonymous Jew, @Alfa158, @Anonymous
Usually, I like to comment on items that I have some personal experience with. This isn’t one of them.
I am a heterosexual White male.
I can honestly say I don’t think I’ve ever seen a black man’s penis in an erect state in the flesh. I have seen a few films of such things, but such movies are not representative of reality, because male porn stars are selected for having large and therefore visually prominent penises.
And I don’t generally talk about such things with women, black or white. In fact any white woman with experience with black men sexually is pretty much off my radar completely, by choice. And out of respect for the black man, I don’t mess with his women, just as Muhammad Ali didn’t mess with mine. Plus which, they have no appeal for me.
That said, I have had discussions on this subject with a few people who did know a lot about it. Two of them were retired high class escort type call girls and a couple of others were homosexual males who admitted they were bottoms and not tops and made it obvious they were really, really knowledgeable about penises. Unlike the women, they knew all the scientific terms and the little details only someone with a penis themselves would think of, but which most of us don’t, because other guys’ equipment does not particularly interest us.
It interests me from an evolutionary and racial standpoint, as an example of being just one more example of how we are not all the same besides skin pigmentation. So I asked.
The call girls (then both in their late fifties, or about my own age now, in roughly the mid to late 1980s: I know that both of them are now deceased, one in her sixties, one made it to about 83 or 84) were in complete agreement amongst themselves and with the male homosexuals for the most part. The male homosexuals were both much younger and had experience mostly with American men, mostly black or white, whereas the CGs had worked in the US but had many European, Asian, and Middle Eastern clients as well as American corporate and showbiz types as well as other affluent Americans.
The bottom lines appeared to be:
1) Blacks tended to be “showers and not growers”, that is, their erect length and thickness was much closer to the flaccid size than whites on average.
2) When fully erect, black penises tended to be less rigid and more compressible than white or Asian ones.
3) The women reported that blacks tended to be circumcised much less often then whites, particularly uncircumcised American whites were pretty rare. The gays didn’t comment. I did not ask. My guess is that more white boys escape the snip today than in the years the men the women had experience with were born but that is speculation.
4) On average, white penises had the most variability in size when erect. Blacks had a variety of sizes too, and were on average slightly but not very much bigger than white ones. Being more flexible they were less painful to deal with if very large than huge white ones, the women said.
Koreans and Chinese were uniformly about the same as average white penises or a little bit, but not greatly smaller, but very small or very large ones were uncommon. Japanese men had smaller than average white ones, nearly universally, and did range in size from very small to slightly smaller than average. Asian penises were quite hard when erect.
5) Black men had ejaculate that was thicker, more copious, and a brighter white than others and it had a generally bitterer taste. Black men tended to have a more dramatic reaction to orgasm than others.
6) When encountering men with really large ones, such that sex became impossible or really challenging, they usually fell into two groups: blacks or mulattoes from island nations such as Haitians, Dominicans, Jamaicans and the like, or white men from Scandinvian countries. Arabs often had big ones but never of that extreme size. The girls reported that the escort agencies they worked for usually had one or two girls on staff who were able to deal with these customers more easily than the others and they’d get those dates.
The things I learn by coming here . . .
Because watching Kevin Durant sink turn around jumpers with 60%+ accuracy is a sight to behold.
Lebron James muscling through the lane for layups isn't exciting to me. Stephen Curry jacking up prayers from half court is only fun when they go in. But Durant is unbelievably good at hitting whatever shot he wants whenever his team needs it, game after game. And he's been that way his entire career.
回复：@Neoconned
Durant only joined the GSW because he wanted a ring or two before he aged out and he realized his team up with Westbrook wasn’t doing shit in OKC.
he also smartly knew Silver and the other Jewish NBA bigwigs wouldn’t allow BOTH HE AND LEBRON to join the GSW as it literally would destroy the NBA brand and figured once LEBRON gave Cleveland a title or 2 he’s try out with GSW to get 1 to 3 more rings before he goes off into retirement at 40…..
Okay, that's big picture what they're doing to us. What are they doing for the idiots churning out thought-leading columns?
回复：@Anonymous
I don’t understand to whom your question is referring. What are you perplexed about?
If I were to pay you right now to verbosely and frequently claim that globalism isn't rife with obvious existentially threatening problems, what would that set me back? Like, set a scale from "Hitler did nothing wrong" to your current sincere opinions that you voluntarily express gratis.
I thought I was, if anything, being too obvious, but I'll spell it out: should we happen to discover that they all love the taste of Cinnamon Toast Crunch, we could then attack General Mills stock.
我有点惊讶的是，截止价这么低，只有 20 美元。 我不是侍酒师，但即使根据我自己的不专业经验，也可以区分盒装葡萄酒、10 美元的葡萄酒和 40 美元的葡萄酒。 除此之外，你无法做出任何进一步的区分，而且 200 美元的实际上可能味道更差。 售价 1,000 美元的罗斯柴尔德波尔多葡萄酒适合那些想要表明自己可以购买 1,000 美元葡萄酒的人们。
大多数品酒笔记也不可靠。 “辛辣而明亮，带有樱桃、巧克力和肉桂的味道，光滑的鼻子散发着薰衣草和咖啡的香气，余韵悠长的烟熏味”。 如果你对品酒爱好者进行盲目测试，他们中没有两个人会想出相同的比喻，甚至在第二次测试同一种酒后也会重复这些比喻。 每当品酒爱好者让我品尝他们最新发现的葡萄酒时，我总是会回到那句老话：“一种天真的小酒，但我想你会被它的自负逗乐”。
在非常昂贵的名牌伏特加流行期间，我记得在盲品中，像斯米诺这样的廉价批量生产的伏特加总是名列前茅。 在这种情况下，产品基本上是纯酒精和水，很难击败工业化大规模生产的品牌。 严格控制的成分和低偏差的工艺产生了纯度极高、稳定的产品。
回复：@Intelligent Dasein
I have to point out here that they actually tested this one on the 流言终结者 show. They enlisted the services of a professional vodka taster to do the comparison. The specific myth under consideration was “Can you make a premium vodka by running the cheap stuff through a charcoal water filter?” There were eight vodka samples for the taster to judge: one was a bottle of the rotgut, another was the high-end premium, and the other six were prepared by running the rotgut through the water filter from one to six times. Not only did the taster identify the premium and the cheap booze, but he also ranked the filtered vodkas exactly according to the number of times they were filtered. He didn’t misjudge a single sample—he nailed every last one.
This reminds me of a tangentially related topic that I’ve been meaning to bring up for a while, 看到。 the very different smell of gasoline now compared with 30 years ago. I remember when I was a kid in ’80s, I used to 爱 the smell of gasoline. I would inhale ecstatically whenever we stopped at a gas station, and on cold winter mornings when the car was preheating, my parents would have to entreat me to stop standing in the exhaust stream breathing the fumes (yes, I’ve already anticipated the obvious jokes about my brain damage, so don’t even bother making them).
The point is that back then gas had a deliciously rich and aromatic smell like ambergris. But nowadays when you stand next to a car with the engine running, more often than not it smells like a cabbage fart. That’s a result of our “fracking miracle.” The light, tight oil that gets blasted out of the shale beds is chemically very different from the older crude and functions more as a petroleum diluent than an actual petroleum source. It has to be blended with the premium stocks derived from conventional crude in order to produce usable gasoline. Most of this gets sold to supermarket fuel stations and other discount fuel retailers. I would advise against filling up there. You’re better off paying for a name brand gasoline.
Gasolines and kerosenes are not one chemical but complex engineered mixtures of many different petrochemicals. A 2018 car engine would not run on 1969 gasoline, at least not for long. And vice versa, without modifications.
My Gravely lawn tractor with its T head engine will run on modern pump gas, but gets very hot, and the carb has to be rebuilt every season. On 100LL avgas it has gone since 2012 with nothing but an oil change and a new plug every year.
回复：@res
Modern gas is at least 10% alcohol so that accounts for part of the smell.
As far as name brand vs. generic gas, your local Indian gas station does not cook the stuff up in the back (they would if they could, but they can't). Gasoline is a commodity that is made only in enormous refineries. Even if you go to a (for example) Exxon station, the gas didn't necessarily come from an Exxon refinery. Gas is expensive to transport so it usually comes from the nearest refinery (the refiners trade with each other). The only difference is that at the time it is put in the tanker truck for delivery, each brand adds its own additive package. All of these packages meet minimum standards but it is worth looking for gas that is labeled "Top Tier" which is a superior additive package. It's also a good idea to put a bottle of "Techron" in your tank once in a while.
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-maintenance/study-shows-top-tier-gasoline-worth-extra-price/
Top Tier gas is found not only at name brand stations but places like Costco.
BTW, unless your engine requires high octane in the owner's manual, it's a complete waste of money to buy it.
回复：@Anonymous
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/06/06/troubling-us-navy-review-finds-widespread-shortfalls-in-basic-seamanship/
华盛顿——美国水面舰队高级领导人进行的为期三个月的内部审查发现，近 85% 的下级军官的船舶操纵技能存在一些或严重的问题，而且许多人在出现危险时难以做出果断反应，将自己的船只从危险中解救出来。根据《防务新闻》获得的内部消息，存在立即发生碰撞的风险。
在水面作战军官学校的领导下，一月至三月期间，在全船队的桥楼导航模拟器上随机挑选了具有 OOD 资格的一级军官（舰队中最新的军官），对甲板军官进行了能力检查。 在接受评估的 164 名警官中，只有 27 名“没有问题”通过。 根据海军最高水面战军官理查德·布朗中将发布的消息，另外 108 艘完成时存在“一些担忧”，29 艘则存在“严重担忧”。
领导太平洋海军水面部队的布朗称这一结果“发人深省”。
这些评估提出了令人苦恼的问题，即初级军官在到达第一个指挥部之前和到达时所接受的船舶操纵培训水平。 布朗周二在五角大楼接受《国防新闻》采访时表示，这些检查将用于为年轻军官的新培训提供信息，并且变化已经在进行中，这表明海军在事件发生后认真对待自我评估和改进。去年夏天，两次灾难夺去了 17 名水手的生命。
检查中发现的缺陷包括：
警官们在操作雷达和手头相关工具方面遇到了困难，这个问题是菲茨杰拉德事故发生后出现的。
军官们牢牢掌握了海上船舶航行的国际道路规则，但在值班期间，特别是在能见度较低的情况下，很难实际应用这些规则。
大多数军官能够避免在模拟器中与其他船只发生近距离接触，但那些发现自己处于极端情况的军官“往往没有能力立即采取行动避免碰撞”——这是造成人员伤亡的直接因素2017 年约翰·S·麦凯恩 (John S. McCain) 和菲茨杰拉德 (Fitzgerald) 相撞事故中。
布朗在给舰队的信息中表示，OOD 能力审查应该呼吁地面社区采取行动，纠正其缺点。
布朗在消息中表示：“虽然 OOD 能力检查是及时的快照，但我们必须现实地面对他们所揭示的初级合格人员核心能力方面的系统性缺陷。” “作为一个社区，我们可以而且必须解决我们的缺陷，并确保我们的资格证书背后有有意义的经验。”
消息中列出的令人担忧的领域让人想起 2017 年发生的令人不安的事故。 就麦凯恩号而言，尽管指挥官在场，但就在该船必须立即采取行动避免碰撞的那一刻，舰桥上却出现了混乱和犹豫不决的情况。
回复：@dr Kill、@Hank Archer、@Bill Jones
What do you expect if you call a ship McCain?
Our military is trying to be a welfare system, a social experiment lab, and sometimes a military. The answer is to resolve to be a military and reset all policies accordingly.
回复：@midtown
同意。
In blind taste tests, modestly priced wines almost always beat very expensive ones both amongst the general public and wine enthusiasts.
Similarly, in double blind listening tests, people prefer the sound of simple two way small box speakers over very expensive audiophile ones, whether the subject listeners are audiophiles, recording engineers or musicians, so long as material without deep bass content is used. When it is, small two way box speakers with external actively powered subwoofers and wide range big systems like Altec VOTTs or Klipschorns are equally preferred.
And of course, modestly priced (by comparison, e.g, $10 to 50K) new violins are indistinguishable from seven or eight figure Old Cremona violins by violinists and classical music listeners.
None of which matters in the least to purveyors or customers in the carriage trades.
Replies: @dieter kief, @EdwardM
Interesting. Didn’t know that it’s true for speakers, too.
A friend of mine once developed engines at Mecedes and found that the 2 liter VW engine was considerably better than the Mecedes one. In many aspects. They made a wide range of tests.
That makes sense: a VW customer can't be commuting to the auto shop and the Merc customer probably has another car.
You are nothing if not persistent. I hate to feed to the troll, but there's something I must know: do you have any real experience with the Black masses? No, not the top 5-10% that graduate from respectable colleges, but the other 90% of the bell curve.
I'm somewhat unique here and in the professional middle class in that I actually spent much of my childhood living on the border of a Black neighborhood and going to >50% Black schools. Unlike you, and even many posters here, I actually have over a decade of personal experience with the whole of the Black population/bell curve.
It was this extensive experience with Blacks that made me a scientific racist. Good social/behavioral science just confirms common sense. They really are quite different. Lower intelligence is the most cited difference but there are many others, from how they smell to average personality profile, et al.
你一定是：
1) a Black/Amerid minority yourself;
2) a leftist that knows Blacks like me but are so religious in your ideology that you are incapable of seeing the reality that smacks you in the face daily;
3) have never had any significant interaction with regular Blacks; or
4) are somewhere on the autistic/Aspergers spectrum.
I'd really like to know. I'm betting a mix of 3&4.
回复：@小鸭子
I have an internet conection
I can mae judgment based on the perfect information available to us
So number 3 it is!
It's also really a shame you can't smell them through your Internet connection, but I digress...
---
你一定是：
1) a Black/Amerid minority yourself;
2) a leftist that knows Blacks like [I do] but are so religious in your ideology that you are incapable of seeing the reality that smacks you in the face daily;
3) have never had any significant interaction with regular Blacks; or
4) are somewhere on the autistic/Aspergers spectrum.
Does this come through your Internet connection?
https://www.youtube.com/user/necrom666
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=blacks+behaving+badly
Perhaps the USN needs to just go with Left and Right instead of Port and Starboard. This is the 21st century, after all.
Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @J.Ross, @njguy73
“Izquierda” y “Derecho”
I have an internet conection
I can mae judgment based on the perfect information available to us
回复：@匿名犹太人，@匿名犹太人
So number 3 it is!
It’s also really a shame you can’t smell them through your Internet connection, but I digress…
-
你一定是：
1) a Black/Amerid minority yourself;
2) a leftist that knows Blacks like [I do] but are so religious in your ideology that you are incapable of seeing the reality that smacks you in the face daily;
3) have never had any significant interaction with regular Blacks; or
4) are somewhere on the autistic/Aspergers spectrum.
I have an internet conection
I can mae judgment based on the perfect information available to us
回复：@匿名犹太人，@匿名犹太人
Does this come through your Internet connection?
https://www.youtube.com/user/necrom666
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=blacks+behaving+badly
This reminds me of a tangentially related topic that I've been meaning to bring up for a while, 看到。 the very different smell of gasoline now compared with 30 years ago. I remember when I was a kid in '80s, I used to 爱 the smell of gasoline. I would inhale ecstatically whenever we stopped at a gas station, and on cold winter mornings when the car was preheating, my parents would have to entreat me to stop standing in the exhaust stream breathing the fumes (yes, I've already anticipated the obvious jokes about my brain damage, so don't even bother making them).
The point is that back then gas had a deliciously rich and aromatic smell like ambergris. But nowadays when you stand next to a car with the engine running, more often than not it smells like a cabbage fart. That's a result of our "fracking miracle." The light, tight oil that gets blasted out of the shale beds is chemically very different from the older crude and functions more as a petroleum diluent than an actual petroleum source. It has to be blended with the premium stocks derived from conventional crude in order to produce usable gasoline. Most of this gets sold to supermarket fuel stations and other discount fuel retailers. I would advise against filling up there. You're better off paying for a name brand gasoline.
回复：@匿名，@杰克D
Gasolines and kerosenes are not one chemical but complex engineered mixtures of many different petrochemicals. A 2018 car engine would not run on 1969 gasoline, at least not for long. And vice versa, without modifications.
My Gravely lawn tractor with its T head engine will run on modern pump gas, but gets very hot, and the carb has to be rebuilt every season. On 100LL avgas it has gone since 2012 with nothing but an oil change and a new plug every year.
The big issues I am aware of with different vintages of gasoline are:
- Octane rating
- Lead both for the octane boost and lubrication: http://www.39olds.com/lubrication.htm
- Ethanol causing both worse shelf life (water attraction) and increased deterioration of rubber seals, hoses, etc. https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/the-truth-about-ethanol-in-your-gas/
Are you referring to something different or just a mix of those?
It looks like current avgas is mostly low (but not very low or unleaded) lead: https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=14754
That's the LL in 100LL avgas, right?
Not sure if/how any of this relates to the smell comment. Here is some discussion of the change in smell: https://community.cartalk.com/t/gasoline-doesnt-smell-good-like-it-used-to-anyone-know-why/88729/29
Benzene sounds like a plausible explanation to me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene#Component_of_gasoline
There is a reason for the term "aromatic ring."
回复：@Anonymous
I don't understand to whom your question is referring. What are you perplexed about?
回复：@ J.Ross
If I were to pay you right now to verbosely and frequently claim that globalism isn’t rife with obvious existentially threatening problems, what would that set me back? Like, set a scale from “Hitler did nothing wrong” to your current sincere opinions that you voluntarily express gratis.
I thought I was, if anything, being too obvious, but I’ll spell it out: should we happen to discover that they all love the taste of Cinnamon Toast Crunch, we could then attack General Mills stock.
Interesting. Didn't know that it's true for speakers, too.
A friend of mine once developed engines at Mecedes and found that the 2 liter VW engine was considerably better than the Mecedes one. In many aspects. They made a wide range of tests.
回复：@ J.Ross
That makes sense: a VW customer can’t be commuting to the auto shop and the Merc customer probably has another car.
In blind taste tests, modestly priced wines almost always beat very expensive ones both amongst the general public and wine enthusiasts.
Similarly, in double blind listening tests, people prefer the sound of simple two way small box speakers over very expensive audiophile ones, whether the subject listeners are audiophiles, recording engineers or musicians, so long as material without deep bass content is used. When it is, small two way box speakers with external actively powered subwoofers and wide range big systems like Altec VOTTs or Klipschorns are equally preferred.
And of course, modestly priced (by comparison, e.g, $10 to 50K) new violins are indistinguishable from seven or eight figure Old Cremona violins by violinists and classical music listeners.
None of which matters in the least to purveyors or customers in the carriage trades.
Replies: @dieter kief, @EdwardM
Do you have a citation for this? I find it hard to believe. My own opinion, based on enjoyment of wine but not expertise, is that the average $100 bottle is better than the average $15 bottle. Of course there are some $15 bottles better than some $100 bottles.
Hype, marketing, and snobbery create some distortions, but over time doesn’t the market adjust the valuation on different wines?
Instead Lewontin's methodology should be attacked. (a) 15% is true for the very small set of genes he selected. If he selected other genes, for instance the ones responsible for skin color the same number would be significantly larger. In fact it is possible to make this number almost anything between 0% and 100% by selecting appropriate genes. (b) What is the point of using genes that are common between populations to argue the case that races do not exist? One could follow Lewontin's approach and show that genetic distance between apes and men is lower than 15% by selecting appropriate genes. (c). This is more complex objection. Lewontin treats frequencies of various genes as independent probabilities. Race as a trait is essentially polygenic where probability of occurring of genes A and B is not equal to the product of their frequencies: f(A)F(B)≠P(A and B). Let's suppose that we have four genes A,B,C,D and one race is defined by individuals who have genes [(A and B) or (C and D)] and the other race is defined by individuals having genes [(A and C) or (B and D)]. (Note that 'or' is exclusive in both cases.) These two races are two disjoint sets in terms of combinations of gene pairs. If the frequencies of genes are treated as independent probabilities these two races can be close in terms of genetic distance. Actually frequencies of genes in in both races could be the same and Lewontin would find zero genetic distance between them.
(2) I do not think that the metaphor of casino is good. It does not map on the structure of what was calculated by Lewontine. One has to get deeper to Lewontin's methodology to see it. Lewontin calculates relative distance between populations by means of the fixation index (F-statistics) where he defines population diversity as a function that has properties of variance but is not exactly variance. And from the difference between diversities he gets the distance between populations. The distance is implied not defined.
In case of two sets we can use variance to illustrate it. Let's A and B are two sets of numbers. Let's. Va, Vb and Ma, Mb are variances and means and V(A 'or' B) is a variance of composite sum of the two sets. Now let assume (Lewontin's also makes this assumption that all populations are the same size) A and B are of the same size. Then
The number 0.15 of Lewontin in this scenario isThis number allows us to express difference between means (without calculating them) as fraction of standard deviation SD=sqrt[V(A 'or' B)] of combined sum of two sets.The value of 15% or 0.15 means that Ma-Mb is 77% of the standard deviation SD.This seems a lot, so let's construct an example.We have two herds of dairy cows A and B. We calculate the fixation index for the yields of milk which comes to 15%. How much the average yield of milk of the herd A differ from the herd B. The answer is 77% of standard deviation of the milk yield of the combined herd A and B.
Would the example with cows sway anybody? Perhaps we could replace it with incomes of Jews and gentiles. The fixation index of 15% implies 77% difference between means. Jews would prefer to talk about only 15% but anti-semites would talk about 77%.
(3). So how the case could be argued?
Lewontin calculated the value of fixation index using few selected genes. Fixation is something that we do not need to know but it suppose to measure a distance between different statistical sets in terms of variance. For these genes his fixation index is 15%. If he used different genes the fixation index would be lower or significantly higher. Why Lewontin used these genes? This is what he had in 1972 but he did not use any genes responsible for external racial traits. If he used genes responsible for the color of the skin the fixation index would be much larger. Now the question whether 15% is a lot or not. He says it is very small and thus negligible. But we beg to differ. Let's see what fixation index of 15% means for the two herds of dairy cows. Go to the example in (2).
Replies: @res, @Inquiring Mind, @candid_observer, @reiner Tor
The formula you use for calculating the difference in means between two groups based on proportion of variation explained by between variation isn’t correct:
It pretty much couldn’t be the correct formula. The difference in the means would be only 2 SD if the variation explained by between variation was 1, instead of .15 as in your formula. Obviously the diff in means should go to infinity as the proportion of total variation explained by between variation approaches 1.
I’m pretty sure the correct formula (making various assumptions, including that the SDs in question are of the two groups, not the combined group, and are equal) is this:
Let D be the difference in means between the two groups, in terms of the SD of the two groups. Let B be the proportion of the overall variation in the combined group explained by the between group variation.
然后
D = 2*SQRT(B/(1-B))
and, if desired to go the other way round,
B = D^2/(4+D^2)
Under these assumptions, if B is .15 (as per Lewontin’s suggestion), then D, the difference in the means, is .84 SD (not .77 as your formula provides).
The formula also predicts the result res presented, in which he found
Plugging 1.75 into the second equation gives .434.
As a sanity check, I also did some simulations at my end of various differences in the means, which worked out as they should: E.g., if D is 1, then B is .2 in the formula, and very close to that in simulation.
The result that .15 — as per Lewontin — should predict a difference in means of .84 SD seems pretty remarkable. It shores up Steve’s argument that it’s a pretty significant amount. It may actually capture quite well the difference between blacks and whites on IQ, assuming the proportion of that 1 SD difference due to genes is about 80%, not 100%. If it were 100%, the between population proportion of variation should be .2, rather than .15.
Very interesting. Thanks! I was wondering if there was a good way to relate Cohen's d to the within/between proportions of variance.
In particular, notice how they interpret Fst:So if I interpret this correctly we can use Fst as a direct estimate of Lewontin's 15% number. So revisiting this earlier comment of mine: https://www.unz.com/isteve/scientists-to-grow-mini-brains-using-neanderthal-dna/?highlight=fst#comment-2326929For the record, the exact (well, I think rounded by R) numbers I saw were d = 1.776 and R^2 = 0.442
Your equation gives 0.440886 for that d.
Your B/W IQ analysis is very interesting as well. Those numbers sound plausible all the way around.
Armed with your comment I went looking around. Here is your equation (where B is r^2): https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Effect_size#equation_Eq._1
And I think Lewontin's 15% is best described as an example of Eta-squared: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Effect_size#(Partial)_Eta-squared_vs._Cohen's_d
This paper looks useful for thinking about all of this: A General Model of the Relationship between the Apportionment of Human Genetic Diversity and the Apportionment of Human Phenotypic Diversity
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1e6e/db3d6b53c2b92986221ed6050775b94177b9.pdf
摘要：
we see a Fst matrix for 1000 Genomes populations is available in Supplementary Figure 6 of https://media.nature.com/original/nature-assets/ng/journal/v48/n9/extref/ng.3592-S1.pdf
and I gave examples of: the YRI-GBR Fst is about 0.18. For comparison, YRI-JPT = 0.212 and JPT-GBR = 0.118. Where YRI – Yoruba in Ibadan, Nigeria; JPT – Japanese in Tokyo, Japan; GBR – British from England and Scotland
Detailed discussion of the distribution of Fst for human SNPS: Empirical Distributions of FST from Large-Scale Human Polymorphism Data
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0049837
No, what I did was correct. I applied the formula
你可以在这里找到：https://www.emathzone.com/tutorials/basic-statistics/combined-variance.html
It is easy to prove.
The fixation index is defined as ratio of variance between different subpopulations (Vs) by variance of the total population (Vt): Fst=Vs/Vt
The problem is that the variance Vs can't be directly calculated, so it must be estimated. It is estimated as the difference between Vt and the average of variances of individual subpopulations. This leads to the following formula for n subpopulationswhere V(∑Pi)=Vt is variance of the total population.
This formula was used by Lewontin.
Fst is an index, i.e., it is uniteless as it is normalized by variance. As you can see it is normalized by variance Vt of total population.
What you seem to be doing is assuming that normalization was not by total but by the part 0.85=1-0.15 as your formula B/(1-B) indicate. This is not correct.
Then you talk about variance explained and predicting. You are mixing analogies and metaphors. Nothing is being predicted here or explained. This is just a partition of variances into two variances of different origins using fixation index.
Sentences like thisgot you in to trouble. First of all as I have stated this variance is not explained. Looks like regression is your thing. You like 'explaining', right? But we are not dealing with regression here. This variance Vs between groups is postulated here. We can't calculate it directly so the fixation index is used to give its value implicitly.
This is what Levontin did.
好吧，那很有趣。
But utu does have a point that we also need to assert that each individual can easily be assigned a race (except for mixed race people or people belonging to admixed populations, though even in those cases it's easy to tell which admixed population or which races they descend from). This is actually true.
My response was not yet published for whatever reason.
No, what I did was correct. I applied the formula
你可以在这里找到：https://www.emathzone.com/tutorials/basic-statistics/combined-variance.html
It is easy to prove.
The fixation index is defined as ratio of variance between different subpopulations (Vs) by variance of the total population (Vt): Fst=Vs/Vt
The problem is that the variance Vs can’t be directly calculated, so it must be estimated. It is estimated as the difference between Vt and the average of variances of individual subpopulations. This leads to the following formula for n subpopulationswhere V(∑Pi)=Vt is variance of the total population.
This formula was used by Lewontin.
Fst is an index, i.e., it is uniteless as it is normalized by variance. As you can see it is normalized by variance Vt of total population.
What you seem to be doing is assuming that normalization was not by total but by the part 0.85=1-0.15 as your formula B/(1-B) indicate. This is not correct.
Then you talk about variance explained and predicting. You are mixing analogies and metaphors. Nothing is being predicted here or explained. This is just a partition of variances into two variances of different origins using fixation index.
Sentences like thisgot you in to trouble. First of all as I have stated this variance is not explained. Looks like regression is your thing. You like ‘explaining’, right? But we are not dealing with regression here. This variance Vs between groups is postulated here. We can’t calculate it directly so the fixation index is used to give its value implicitly.
This is what Levontin did.
@史蒂夫·塞勒
On the $12.00 versus $120 wine issue, I don't think it's a pure social construct, or at least it's not made up. I do think there is some element of social conditioning -- people who drink expensive wine may be more inclined to like it because of the reputation of the wine. But they do blind tastings on a regular basis, and the expensive wines tend to win them.
I've found this to be true when I do it. Mrs. Zippy and I do spend between $50 and $250 on wine on a regular basis, and we often hold dinner parties where we will serve foods and sample multiple wines. (We use the Coravin device, which allows one to "open" wine without opening it, assuming it uses a natural cork.)
We put the wines in opaque bags, so they are unknown to the diners. When dinner is over, we will ask for opinions and unveil the wines. I will often include a range of wines -- I recently did it with a $180 bottle, a $60 bottle, and Charles Shaw from Trader Joe's, often known as "Two Buck Chuck," though I think it's closer to $3 or $4 these days.
The result is uniformly that my guests like the more expensive wines more. I've done this with cheapo wines and some nice wines at least 30 times, and the cheapo wine has never, ever won. By cheapo I mean $20 or under. And I've had other people put the wines in the bags, so I am the one who is blind-tasting. And I've never picked the sub $20 stuff.
Now, sometimes the $50 bottle will beat the $100 plus bottle. As you go up the quality scale, diminishing returns sets in, and the differences become more subtle and individual tastes come into play. So I might genuinely like an $80 bottle more than a $200 bottle, but I'm very unlikely to just love Barefoot or Two Buck Chuck as much as either. I have had some very expensive wines -- more than $500 a bottle, or even four figures. They were great! But the difference between the $500 bottle that I love and the $150 bottle that I also love is so subtle and the marginal cost is so much higher that it's not worth the additional $350 to me. But the difference between the $10 or $20 and the $50 - $250 bottles I now buy is so significant that the marginal cost is worth it.
葡萄品种和陈酿也增加了额外的复杂性。
至少根据我的经验，在寻找低价红酒或浏览劣质酒单时，加州仙粉黛是一个不错的选择。无论出于什么原因，便宜的 Zins 都相当不错。
意大利基安蒂葡萄酒可能有点粗糙，尤其是便宜的一面，但搭配辛辣的番茄配方，它们确实很有效。关于葡萄酒和食物的搭配的说法确实是正确的。 （对于那些想粗略地了解这一原理的人来说，刷牙后立即喝一口橙汁。你吃的东西确实会影响你对葡萄酒的品味。）
对于昂贵的葡萄酒，我真诚地认为巴黎的判断是正确的，加州赤霞珠通常会胜过同等价格的波尔多葡萄酒。
I never, ever buy cheap pinot noir. Pinot noir is really delicate and very hard to grow. Because it requires very careful handling, cheapo pinot noir is just bad. Also, in the United States, a wine label that specifies a single variety only means that at least 75% of the wine is that variety -- it might be blended. Pinot noir should never be blended, unless it's being used to make sparkling wine. As opposed to cabernet sauvignon, which is usually better blended. For cheap American pinot noir, it's a darn good bet there there is something else thrown into the bottle, because that something else will almost certainly be cheaper and easier to grow than pinot noir.
相比之下，勃艮第红葡萄酒在法律上只能是黑皮诺。我个人势利的观点是，虽然俄勒冈州甚至加利福尼亚州也出产一些优质的黑皮诺，但没有什么比优质的勃艮第葡萄酒更好的了。很多人都同意我的观点，这就是勃艮第葡萄酒如此昂贵的原因。
Also, some people just plain don't like certain wines. If you don't like Port, for example, you probably won't be able to tell the difference between an awesome Port aged fifty years and a terrible one. It all tastes like cough syrup!
衰老带来了另一种复杂性。有些葡萄酒不会随着陈酿而改善，有些会变得更糟。即使是最适合陈酿的葡萄酒也会在某个时候变质。那些拍卖出数十万美元的 19 世纪葡萄酒，如果有人愚蠢到打开一瓶喝下去，那可能会很糟糕。
但确实有些葡萄酒在气候控制室的架子上放置十年后会变得更好。有些酒在年轻时单宁含量很高，除非陈酿十年或在饮用前醒酒几个小时，否则味道会很糟糕。 （醒酒只是加速老化。）
我确实认为存在一些社会条件因素，就像在纸板盒中提供的相同食物可能不如在白色桌布餐厅优雅地摆盘时那么吸引人。但我认为大多数人都能分辨出一块真正好的牛排和一块真正糟糕的牛排，即使没有这些社交线索。
So maybe it's, well, some of both?
回复：@anonymous，@Jim Don Bob
When’s dinner? I will bring some homemade mead.
You might want to look up "steel-manning": https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/the-highest-form-of-disagreement/531597/
Refusing to admit when your opponent has a valid point is just being childish.
Replies: @utu, @candid_observer
I left a comment to utu directly above which may interest you.
https://www.unz.com/isteve/18-years-of-trying/#comment-2365551
Indeed it did. Thanks! I wrote my preceding comment before seeing this comment of yours.
This reminds me of a tangentially related topic that I've been meaning to bring up for a while, 看到。 the very different smell of gasoline now compared with 30 years ago. I remember when I was a kid in '80s, I used to 爱 the smell of gasoline. I would inhale ecstatically whenever we stopped at a gas station, and on cold winter mornings when the car was preheating, my parents would have to entreat me to stop standing in the exhaust stream breathing the fumes (yes, I've already anticipated the obvious jokes about my brain damage, so don't even bother making them).
The point is that back then gas had a deliciously rich and aromatic smell like ambergris. But nowadays when you stand next to a car with the engine running, more often than not it smells like a cabbage fart. That's a result of our "fracking miracle." The light, tight oil that gets blasted out of the shale beds is chemically very different from the older crude and functions more as a petroleum diluent than an actual petroleum source. It has to be blended with the premium stocks derived from conventional crude in order to produce usable gasoline. Most of this gets sold to supermarket fuel stations and other discount fuel retailers. I would advise against filling up there. You're better off paying for a name brand gasoline.
回复：@匿名，@杰克D
Modern gas is at least 10% alcohol so that accounts for part of the smell.
As far as name brand vs. generic gas, your local Indian gas station does not cook the stuff up in the back (they would if they could, but they can’t). Gasoline is a commodity that is made only in enormous refineries. Even if you go to a (for example) Exxon station, the gas didn’t necessarily come from an Exxon refinery. Gas is expensive to transport so it usually comes from the nearest refinery (the refiners trade with each other). The only difference is that at the time it is put in the tanker truck for delivery, each brand adds its own additive package. All of these packages meet minimum standards but it is worth looking for gas that is labeled “Top Tier” which is a superior additive package. It’s also a good idea to put a bottle of “Techron” in your tank once in a while.
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-maintenance/study-shows-top-tier-gasoline-worth-extra-price/
Top Tier gas is found not only at name brand stations but places like Costco.
BTW, unless your engine requires high octane in the owner’s manual, it’s a complete waste of money to buy it.
Gasolines and kerosenes are not one chemical but complex engineered mixtures of many different petrochemicals. A 2018 car engine would not run on 1969 gasoline, at least not for long. And vice versa, without modifications.
My Gravely lawn tractor with its T head engine will run on modern pump gas, but gets very hot, and the carb has to be rebuilt every season. On 100LL avgas it has gone since 2012 with nothing but an oil change and a new plug every year.
回复：@res
The big issues I am aware of with different vintages of gasoline are:
– Octane rating
– Lead both for the octane boost and lubrication: http://www.39olds.com/lubrication.htm
– Ethanol causing both worse shelf life (water attraction) and increased deterioration of rubber seals, hoses, etc. https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/the-truth-about-ethanol-in-your-gas/
Are you referring to something different or just a mix of those?
It looks like current avgas is mostly low (but not very low or unleaded) lead: https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=14754
That’s the LL in 100LL avgas, right?
Not sure if/how any of this relates to the smell comment. Here is some discussion of the change in smell: https://community.cartalk.com/t/gasoline-doesnt-smell-good-like-it-used-to-anyone-know-why/88729/29
Benzene sounds like a plausible explanation to me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene#Component_of_gasoline
There is a reason for the term “aromatic ring.”
All grades of aviation gasoline are the same except for the amount of tetraethyl lead in the fuel. This amount is much, much higher than was ever used in automobile gasoline. 100LL (blue) has less than the old green 100/130 but more than the old red 80/87. Because the volume of avgas sales have dropped and because avgas is no longer pipelineable due to TEL they mostly only supply the one grade.
Buying avgas can be a pain in the ass. Idiot FBOs will tell you that the FAA does not allow its sale to non-aircraft-owners (bullshit) or that the EPA does not allow it to be sold to non aircraft owners (also bullshit). Out here they have a self service pump that you can park outside the fence and walk in with a jerry can. The only thing that is actually verboten is putting it in a road going vehicle. You can put it in cans or barrels and do what you want with it off premises.
回复：@res，@Jack D
The formula you use for calculating the difference in means between two groups based on proportion of variation explained by between variation isn't correct:
It pretty much couldn't be the correct formula. The difference in the means would be only 2 SD if the variation explained by between variation was 1, instead of .15 as in your formula. Obviously the diff in means should go to infinity as the proportion of total variation explained by between variation approaches 1.I'm pretty sure the correct formula (making various assumptions, including that the SDs in question are of the two groups, not the combined group, and are equal) is this:
Let D be the difference in means between the two groups, in terms of the SD of the two groups. Let B be the proportion of the overall variation in the combined group explained by the between group variation.
然后
D = 2*SQRT(B/(1-B))
and, if desired to go the other way round,
B = D^2/(4+D^2)
Under these assumptions, if B is .15 (as per Lewontin's suggestion), then D, the difference in the means, is .84 SD (not .77 as your formula provides).
The formula also predicts the result res presented, in which he found
Plugging 1.75 into the second equation gives .434.As a sanity check, I also did some simulations at my end of various differences in the means, which worked out as they should: E.g., if D is 1, then B is .2 in the formula, and very close to that in simulation.
The result that .15 -- as per Lewontin -- should predict a difference in means of .84 SD seems pretty remarkable. It shores up Steve's argument that it's a pretty significant amount. It may actually capture quite well the difference between blacks and whites on IQ, assuming the proportion of that 1 SD difference due to genes is about 80%, not 100%. If it were 100%, the between population proportion of variation should be .2, rather than .15.
Replies: @res, @utu, @reiner Tor, @utu, @utu
Very interesting. Thanks! I was wondering if there was a good way to relate Cohen’s d to the within/between proportions of variance.
For the record, the exact (well, I think rounded by R) numbers I saw were d = 1.776 and R^2 = 0.442
Your equation gives 0.440886 for that d.
Your B/W IQ analysis is very interesting as well. Those numbers sound plausible all the way around.
Armed with your comment I went looking around. Here is your equation (where B is r^2): https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Effect_size#equation_Eq._1
And I think Lewontin’s 15% is best described as an example of Eta-squared: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Effect_size#(Partial)_Eta-squared_vs._Cohen’s_d
This paper looks useful for thinking about all of this: A General Model of the Relationship between the Apportionment of Human Genetic Diversity and the Apportionment of Human Phenotypic Diversity
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1e6e/db3d6b53c2b92986221ed6050775b94177b9.pdf
摘要：
In particular, notice how they interpret Fst:
So if I interpret this correctly we can use Fst as a direct estimate of Lewontin’s 15% number. So revisiting this earlier comment of mine: https://www.unz.com/isteve/scientists-to-grow-mini-brains-using-neanderthal-dna/?highlight=fst#comment-2326929
我们在补充图 1000 中看到了 6 个基因组群体的 Fst 矩阵 https://media.nature.com/original/nature-assets/ng/journal/v48/n9/extref/ng.3592-S1.pdf
and I gave examples of: the YRI-GBR Fst is about 0.18. For comparison, YRI-JPT = 0.212 and JPT-GBR = 0.118. Where YRI – Yoruba in Ibadan, Nigeria; JPT – Japanese in Tokyo, Japan; GBR – British from England and Scotland
Detailed discussion of the distribution of Fst for human SNPS: Empirical Distributions of FST from Large-Scale Human Polymorphism Data
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0049837
I left a comment to utu directly above which may interest you.
https://www.unz.com/isteve/18-years-of-trying/#comment-2365551
回复：@res
Indeed it did. Thanks! I wrote my preceding comment before seeing this comment of yours.
https://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Great-Shame-of-Our/239148
Why so the awful terms and conditions?Isn't that 'strong incentive' similar to the 'strong incentive' which produced the California and Klondyke gold rushes?The author, Kevin Birmingham (who gave up tenure to write a book) lambasts US English departments for accepting more PhD students than can possibly be appointed to tenured positions.
I'm just wondering if English professors ever apply the logic of a labour surplus that depresses wages to the whole of the United States, which also controls its own labour market? I've not seen many adjunct English profs clamouring 'build the wall!".Replies: @kaganovitch, @Barnard, @Alden
They call themselves freeway flyers Considering the hatred they spew out against Whites I hope everyone of them ends up homeless without even a car to live in.
I remember an article a long time ago about the job prospects for sociology PHDs. 760 sociology PHDs that year. Only 3 tenure positions offered in the entire country.
But as you yourself have pointed out ,for example, in 'Albion's Seed', there can be large differences within even close racial groups.
How racially different were the violent Borderlands English compared to the pacifist Midland Quakers? Not much.
回复：@Alden
Very few of th midlanders became Quakers.
The big issues I am aware of with different vintages of gasoline are:
- Octane rating
- Lead both for the octane boost and lubrication: http://www.39olds.com/lubrication.htm
- Ethanol causing both worse shelf life (water attraction) and increased deterioration of rubber seals, hoses, etc. https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/the-truth-about-ethanol-in-your-gas/
Are you referring to something different or just a mix of those?
It looks like current avgas is mostly low (but not very low or unleaded) lead: https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=14754
That's the LL in 100LL avgas, right?
Not sure if/how any of this relates to the smell comment. Here is some discussion of the change in smell: https://community.cartalk.com/t/gasoline-doesnt-smell-good-like-it-used-to-anyone-know-why/88729/29
Benzene sounds like a plausible explanation to me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene#Component_of_gasoline
There is a reason for the term "aromatic ring."
回复：@Anonymous
All grades of aviation gasoline are the same except for the amount of tetraethyl lead in the fuel. This amount is much, much higher than was ever used in automobile gasoline. 100LL (blue) has less than the old green 100/130 but more than the old red 80/87. Because the volume of avgas sales have dropped and because avgas is no longer pipelineable due to TEL they mostly only supply the one grade.
Buying avgas can be a pain in the ass. Idiot FBOs will tell you that the FAA does not allow its sale to non-aircraft-owners (bullshit) or that the EPA does not allow it to be sold to non aircraft owners (also bullshit). Out here they have a self service pump that you can park outside the fence and walk in with a jerry can. The only thing that is actually verboten is putting it in a road going vehicle. You can put it in cans or barrels and do what you want with it off premises.
谢谢！
If your vehicle has a catalytic converter then lead will ruin it.
回复：@Anonymous
All grades of aviation gasoline are the same except for the amount of tetraethyl lead in the fuel. This amount is much, much higher than was ever used in automobile gasoline. 100LL (blue) has less than the old green 100/130 but more than the old red 80/87. Because the volume of avgas sales have dropped and because avgas is no longer pipelineable due to TEL they mostly only supply the one grade.
Buying avgas can be a pain in the ass. Idiot FBOs will tell you that the FAA does not allow its sale to non-aircraft-owners (bullshit) or that the EPA does not allow it to be sold to non aircraft owners (also bullshit). Out here they have a self service pump that you can park outside the fence and walk in with a jerry can. The only thing that is actually verboten is putting it in a road going vehicle. You can put it in cans or barrels and do what you want with it off premises.
回复：@res，@Jack D
谢谢！
All grades of aviation gasoline are the same except for the amount of tetraethyl lead in the fuel. This amount is much, much higher than was ever used in automobile gasoline. 100LL (blue) has less than the old green 100/130 but more than the old red 80/87. Because the volume of avgas sales have dropped and because avgas is no longer pipelineable due to TEL they mostly only supply the one grade.
Buying avgas can be a pain in the ass. Idiot FBOs will tell you that the FAA does not allow its sale to non-aircraft-owners (bullshit) or that the EPA does not allow it to be sold to non aircraft owners (also bullshit). Out here they have a self service pump that you can park outside the fence and walk in with a jerry can. The only thing that is actually verboten is putting it in a road going vehicle. You can put it in cans or barrels and do what you want with it off premises.
回复：@res，@Jack D
If your vehicle has a catalytic converter then lead will ruin it.
TEL is destructive both to catalytic converters and to the oxygen sensors almost all "modern" engines use for closed loop fuel mixture control. Outside of racing and aircraft engines the only "new" engines that will burn leaded fuel in stock form are some small engines with neither catalysts nor oxygen sensors.
People running antique cars often use avgas as a fuel supplement both for valve seat lubrication and as an octane booster. It works great for that. Running car engines on straight avgas is a bad idea not only because the lead will foul the plugs but because 100LL avgas is actually not 100 automotive octane. When tested using the R+M/2 method usually it comes in at about 92 to 94 octane. Premium unleaded car gas is usually higher than that. A lot of boat guys ran avgas because under heavy load, such as in marine use, car type engines were fine with it and the modern additives in car gas are pretty harsh on integral fuel tanks in fiberglass hulls.
The specifications for avgas were drawn up in the era where supercharged radial engine aircraft with 100+ cubic inch cylinders were operated at high altitude. That era is mostly over. Much of the GA fleet is auto fuel compatible today, although it's said that 70% of avgas volume goes to the 25% that isn't.
回复：@Jim Don Bob
The formula you use for calculating the difference in means between two groups based on proportion of variation explained by between variation isn't correct:
It pretty much couldn't be the correct formula. The difference in the means would be only 2 SD if the variation explained by between variation was 1, instead of .15 as in your formula. Obviously the diff in means should go to infinity as the proportion of total variation explained by between variation approaches 1.I'm pretty sure the correct formula (making various assumptions, including that the SDs in question are of the two groups, not the combined group, and are equal) is this:
Let D be the difference in means between the two groups, in terms of the SD of the two groups. Let B be the proportion of the overall variation in the combined group explained by the between group variation.
然后
D = 2*SQRT(B/(1-B))
and, if desired to go the other way round,
B = D^2/(4+D^2)
Under these assumptions, if B is .15 (as per Lewontin's suggestion), then D, the difference in the means, is .84 SD (not .77 as your formula provides).
The formula also predicts the result res presented, in which he found
Plugging 1.75 into the second equation gives .434.As a sanity check, I also did some simulations at my end of various differences in the means, which worked out as they should: E.g., if D is 1, then B is .2 in the formula, and very close to that in simulation.
The result that .15 -- as per Lewontin -- should predict a difference in means of .84 SD seems pretty remarkable. It shores up Steve's argument that it's a pretty significant amount. It may actually capture quite well the difference between blacks and whites on IQ, assuming the proportion of that 1 SD difference due to genes is about 80%, not 100%. If it were 100%, the between population proportion of variation should be .2, rather than .15.
Replies: @res, @utu, @reiner Tor, @utu, @utu
No, what I did was correct. I applied the formula
你可以在这里找到：
https://www.emathzone.com/tutorials/basic-statistics/combined-variance.html
It is easy to prove.
The fixation index is defined as ratio of variance between different subpopulations (Vs) by variance of the total population (Vt): Fst=Vs/Vt
The problem is that the variance Vs can’t be directly calculated, so it must be estimated. It is estimated as the difference between Vt and the average of variances of individual subpopulations. This leads to the following formula for n subpopulations
where V(∑Pi)=Vt is variance of the total population.
This formula was used by Lewontin.
Fst is an index, i.e., it is uniteless as it is normalized by variance. As you can see it is normalized by variance Vt of total population.
What you seem to be doing is assuming that normalization was not by total but by the part 0.85=1-0.15 as your formula B/(1-B) indicate. This is not correct.
Then you talk about variance explained and predicting. You are mixing analogies and metaphors. Nothing is being predicted here or explained. This is just a partition of variances into two variances of different origins using fixation index.
Sentences like this
got you in to trouble. First of all as I have stated this variance is not explained. Looks like regression is your thing. You like ‘explaining’, right? But we are not dealing with regression here. This variance Vs between groups is postulated here. We can’t calculate it directly so the fixation index is used to give its value implicitly.
This is what Levontin did.
I'd think a rise in arrests would indicate a crackdown, i.e. stricter enforcement policy, is working. A result of stricter enforcement usually means higher arrests. A number of factors effect the number of crossings. If those crossing illegally are merely put back across the border, there's no disincentive to trying again. They're buying what are effectively lottery tickets...
The NYT's Fox Butterfield was regularly mocked for annually writing articles about the apparent conflict between a declining crime rate and higher levels of incarceration, unable to grasp the circularity present.
回复：@Clyde
Mexican illegal border crossers are easy to send back by La Migra bus. Every other non- contiguous nation, it is a logistical nightmare to deport their border jumpers and visa over stayers for one simple reason. They are flown back. Think Peru, China, Bangladesh, Guatemala. So the tendency is to parole them into the US population for a court date 2 or more years in the future. 90% don’t show. They also are paroled due to lack of jail space
My long comment was in earnest. I thought it would help to answer questions that Steve Sailer's asked:
Your reaction to my comment and your earlier inept steel-manning of Steve Sailer argument by taking the square root of 0.15 made me realize that I must be the only one who tries in earnest to destroy the Lewontin's meme.Did Steve Sailer really believe that his casino example could impact those 'intelligent people'? The casino example is inadequate; it does not deserve to be called an analogy. There is no discernible relation to the fixation index that Lewontin calculated. But there is a connection to race in the racist insinuation that American Indian and African-American croupiers are cheating or are inept. Did Steve Sailer thought that racists 'analogy' will influence those 'intelligent people'? Apparently Steve Sailer is not interested in influencing them. He is just playing to the chap seats bought by obsequious sycophants like yourself. He will be happy to keep 'trying' for another 18 years in front of so demanding audience.
Replies: @MEH 0910, @reiner Tor
Steve isn’t implying that the croupiers are cheating or inept. The bias just happens automatically for the sake of the analogy, like loaded dice. There is no conscious effort implied. The croupier is just a black box (or red box, as the case may be) in service of the analogy.
一盒 12 美元的葡萄酒和一瓶 120 美元的葡萄酒之间的区别仅仅是一种社会结构。
事实上，据我所知，这可能是真的。
但我没有太多的味觉或嗅觉，所以我愿意假设花 120 美元的人知道他们在说什么。
回复：@Ganderson、@Anonymous、@Zippy、@Alec Leamas、@Anonymous、@Paleo Liberal、@Olorin、@Anon87
Not sure about wine, but you can tell with Scotch. Drink a decent single malt, then try something like J&B. To some they might both taste like gasoline, but you can tell a quality difference. Now maybe an $80 bottle and $125, not so much? Not a bourbon fan, but compare your commodity Jack with one of the endless small batch local distilleries popping up across the counrry. Confirms Jack is junk, at least to me.
Instead Lewontin's methodology should be attacked. (a) 15% is true for the very small set of genes he selected. If he selected other genes, for instance the ones responsible for skin color the same number would be significantly larger. In fact it is possible to make this number almost anything between 0% and 100% by selecting appropriate genes. (b) What is the point of using genes that are common between populations to argue the case that races do not exist? One could follow Lewontin's approach and show that genetic distance between apes and men is lower than 15% by selecting appropriate genes. (c). This is more complex objection. Lewontin treats frequencies of various genes as independent probabilities. Race as a trait is essentially polygenic where probability of occurring of genes A and B is not equal to the product of their frequencies: f(A)F(B)≠P(A and B). Let's suppose that we have four genes A,B,C,D and one race is defined by individuals who have genes [(A and B) or (C and D)] and the other race is defined by individuals having genes [(A and C) or (B and D)]. (Note that 'or' is exclusive in both cases.) These two races are two disjoint sets in terms of combinations of gene pairs. If the frequencies of genes are treated as independent probabilities these two races can be close in terms of genetic distance. Actually frequencies of genes in in both races could be the same and Lewontin would find zero genetic distance between them.
(2) I do not think that the metaphor of casino is good. It does not map on the structure of what was calculated by Lewontine. One has to get deeper to Lewontin's methodology to see it. Lewontin calculates relative distance between populations by means of the fixation index (F-statistics) where he defines population diversity as a function that has properties of variance but is not exactly variance. And from the difference between diversities he gets the distance between populations. The distance is implied not defined.
In case of two sets we can use variance to illustrate it. Let's A and B are two sets of numbers. Let's. Va, Vb and Ma, Mb are variances and means and V(A 'or' B) is a variance of composite sum of the two sets. Now let assume (Lewontin's also makes this assumption that all populations are the same size) A and B are of the same size. Then
The number 0.15 of Lewontin in this scenario isThis number allows us to express difference between means (without calculating them) as fraction of standard deviation SD=sqrt[V(A 'or' B)] of combined sum of two sets.The value of 15% or 0.15 means that Ma-Mb is 77% of the standard deviation SD.This seems a lot, so let's construct an example.We have two herds of dairy cows A and B. We calculate the fixation index for the yields of milk which comes to 15%. How much the average yield of milk of the herd A differ from the herd B. The answer is 77% of standard deviation of the milk yield of the combined herd A and B.
Would the example with cows sway anybody? Perhaps we could replace it with incomes of Jews and gentiles. The fixation index of 15% implies 77% difference between means. Jews would prefer to talk about only 15% but anti-semites would talk about 77%.
(3). So how the case could be argued?
Lewontin calculated the value of fixation index using few selected genes. Fixation is something that we do not need to know but it suppose to measure a distance between different statistical sets in terms of variance. For these genes his fixation index is 15%. If he used different genes the fixation index would be lower or significantly higher. Why Lewontin used these genes? This is what he had in 1972 but he did not use any genes responsible for external racial traits. If he used genes responsible for the color of the skin the fixation index would be much larger. Now the question whether 15% is a lot or not. He says it is very small and thus negligible. But we beg to differ. Let's see what fixation index of 15% means for the two herds of dairy cows. Go to the example in (2).
Replies: @res, @Inquiring Mind, @candid_observer, @reiner Tor
很棒的评论。
My long comment was in earnest. I thought it would help to answer questions that Steve Sailer's asked:
Your reaction to my comment and your earlier inept steel-manning of Steve Sailer argument by taking the square root of 0.15 made me realize that I must be the only one who tries in earnest to destroy the Lewontin's meme.Did Steve Sailer really believe that his casino example could impact those 'intelligent people'? The casino example is inadequate; it does not deserve to be called an analogy. There is no discernible relation to the fixation index that Lewontin calculated. But there is a connection to race in the racist insinuation that American Indian and African-American croupiers are cheating or are inept. Did Steve Sailer thought that racists 'analogy' will influence those 'intelligent people'? Apparently Steve Sailer is not interested in influencing them. He is just playing to the chap seats bought by obsequious sycophants like yourself. He will be happy to keep 'trying' for another 18 years in front of so demanding audience.
Replies: @MEH 0910, @reiner Tor
I have used the croupier argument before, and it was very effective. My interlocutor got visibly disturbed, and had no way of countering it. So i disagree that it’s a totally ineffective argument. There are many intelligent liberals who honestly believe that race has been debunked.
The formula you use for calculating the difference in means between two groups based on proportion of variation explained by between variation isn't correct:
It pretty much couldn't be the correct formula. The difference in the means would be only 2 SD if the variation explained by between variation was 1, instead of .15 as in your formula. Obviously the diff in means should go to infinity as the proportion of total variation explained by between variation approaches 1.I'm pretty sure the correct formula (making various assumptions, including that the SDs in question are of the two groups, not the combined group, and are equal) is this:
Let D be the difference in means between the two groups, in terms of the SD of the two groups. Let B be the proportion of the overall variation in the combined group explained by the between group variation.
然后
D = 2*SQRT(B/(1-B))
and, if desired to go the other way round,
B = D^2/(4+D^2)
Under these assumptions, if B is .15 (as per Lewontin's suggestion), then D, the difference in the means, is .84 SD (not .77 as your formula provides).
The formula also predicts the result res presented, in which he found
Plugging 1.75 into the second equation gives .434.As a sanity check, I also did some simulations at my end of various differences in the means, which worked out as they should: E.g., if D is 1, then B is .2 in the formula, and very close to that in simulation.
The result that .15 -- as per Lewontin -- should predict a difference in means of .84 SD seems pretty remarkable. It shores up Steve's argument that it's a pretty significant amount. It may actually capture quite well the difference between blacks and whites on IQ, assuming the proportion of that 1 SD difference due to genes is about 80%, not 100%. If it were 100%, the between population proportion of variation should be .2, rather than .15.
Replies: @res, @utu, @reiner Tor, @utu, @utu
好吧，那很有趣。
But utu does have a point that we also need to assert that each individual can easily be assigned a race (except for mixed race people or people belonging to admixed populations, though even in those cases it’s easy to tell which admixed population or which races they descend from). This is actually true.
Every single athlete lies about their height. If they don’t their team does. If they can get away with it they lie about weight, age, etc.
Any stats from sports except raw achievements I take with a block of salt.
Usually, I like to comment on items that I have some personal experience with. This isn't one of them.
I am a heterosexual White male.
I can honestly say I don't think I've ever seen a black man's penis in an erect state in the flesh. I have seen a few films of such things, but such movies are not representative of reality, because male porn stars are selected for having large and therefore visually prominent penises.
And I don't generally talk about such things with women, black or white. In fact any white woman with experience with black men sexually is pretty much off my radar completely, by choice. And out of respect for the black man, I don't mess with his women, just as Muhammad Ali didn't mess with mine. Plus which, they have no appeal for me.
That said, I have had discussions on this subject with a few people who did know a lot about it. Two of them were retired high class escort type call girls and a couple of others were homosexual males who admitted they were bottoms and not tops and made it obvious they were really, really knowledgeable about penises. Unlike the women, they knew all the scientific terms and the little details only someone with a penis themselves would think of, but which most of us don't, because other guys' equipment does not particularly interest us.
It interests me from an evolutionary and racial standpoint, as an example of being just one more example of how we are not all the same besides skin pigmentation. So I asked.
The call girls (then both in their late fifties, or about my own age now, in roughly the mid to late 1980s: I know that both of them are now deceased, one in her sixties, one made it to about 83 or 84) were in complete agreement amongst themselves and with the male homosexuals for the most part. The male homosexuals were both much younger and had experience mostly with American men, mostly black or white, whereas the CGs had worked in the US but had many European, Asian, and Middle Eastern clients as well as American corporate and showbiz types as well as other affluent Americans.
The bottom lines appeared to be:
1) Blacks tended to be "showers and not growers", that is, their erect length and thickness was much closer to the flaccid size than whites on average.
2) When fully erect, black penises tended to be less rigid and more compressible than white or Asian ones.
3) The women reported that blacks tended to be circumcised much less often then whites, particularly uncircumcised American whites were pretty rare. The gays didn't comment. I did not ask. My guess is that more white boys escape the snip today than in the years the men the women had experience with were born but that is speculation.
4) On average, white penises had the most variability in size when erect. Blacks had a variety of sizes too, and were on average slightly but not very much bigger than white ones. Being more flexible they were less painful to deal with if very large than huge white ones, the women said.
Koreans and Chinese were uniformly about the same as average white penises or a little bit, but not greatly smaller, but very small or very large ones were uncommon. Japanese men had smaller than average white ones, nearly universally, and did range in size from very small to slightly smaller than average. Asian penises were quite hard when erect.
5) Black men had ejaculate that was thicker, more copious, and a brighter white than others and it had a generally bitterer taste. Black men tended to have a more dramatic reaction to orgasm than others.
6) When encountering men with really large ones, such that sex became impossible or really challenging, they usually fell into two groups: blacks or mulattoes from island nations such as Haitians, Dominicans, Jamaicans and the like, or white men from Scandinvian countries. Arabs often had big ones but never of that extreme size. The girls reported that the escort agencies they worked for usually had one or two girls on staff who were able to deal with these customers more easily than the others and they'd get those dates.
回复：@Jim Don Bob
The things I learn by coming here . . .
The formula you use for calculating the difference in means between two groups based on proportion of variation explained by between variation isn't correct:
It pretty much couldn't be the correct formula. The difference in the means would be only 2 SD if the variation explained by between variation was 1, instead of .15 as in your formula. Obviously the diff in means should go to infinity as the proportion of total variation explained by between variation approaches 1.I'm pretty sure the correct formula (making various assumptions, including that the SDs in question are of the two groups, not the combined group, and are equal) is this:
Let D be the difference in means between the two groups, in terms of the SD of the two groups. Let B be the proportion of the overall variation in the combined group explained by the between group variation.
然后
D = 2*SQRT(B/(1-B))
and, if desired to go the other way round,
B = D^2/(4+D^2)
Under these assumptions, if B is .15 (as per Lewontin's suggestion), then D, the difference in the means, is .84 SD (not .77 as your formula provides).
The formula also predicts the result res presented, in which he found
Plugging 1.75 into the second equation gives .434.As a sanity check, I also did some simulations at my end of various differences in the means, which worked out as they should: E.g., if D is 1, then B is .2 in the formula, and very close to that in simulation.
The result that .15 -- as per Lewontin -- should predict a difference in means of .84 SD seems pretty remarkable. It shores up Steve's argument that it's a pretty significant amount. It may actually capture quite well the difference between blacks and whites on IQ, assuming the proportion of that 1 SD difference due to genes is about 80%, not 100%. If it were 100%, the between population proportion of variation should be .2, rather than .15.
Replies: @res, @utu, @reiner Tor, @utu, @utu
My response was not yet published for whatever reason.
The formula you use for calculating the difference in means between two groups based on proportion of variation explained by between variation isn't correct:
It pretty much couldn't be the correct formula. The difference in the means would be only 2 SD if the variation explained by between variation was 1, instead of .15 as in your formula. Obviously the diff in means should go to infinity as the proportion of total variation explained by between variation approaches 1.I'm pretty sure the correct formula (making various assumptions, including that the SDs in question are of the two groups, not the combined group, and are equal) is this:
Let D be the difference in means between the two groups, in terms of the SD of the two groups. Let B be the proportion of the overall variation in the combined group explained by the between group variation.
然后
D = 2*SQRT(B/(1-B))
and, if desired to go the other way round,
B = D^2/(4+D^2)
Under these assumptions, if B is .15 (as per Lewontin's suggestion), then D, the difference in the means, is .84 SD (not .77 as your formula provides).
The formula also predicts the result res presented, in which he found
Plugging 1.75 into the second equation gives .434.As a sanity check, I also did some simulations at my end of various differences in the means, which worked out as they should: E.g., if D is 1, then B is .2 in the formula, and very close to that in simulation.
The result that .15 -- as per Lewontin -- should predict a difference in means of .84 SD seems pretty remarkable. It shores up Steve's argument that it's a pretty significant amount. It may actually capture quite well the difference between blacks and whites on IQ, assuming the proportion of that 1 SD difference due to genes is about 80%, not 100%. If it were 100%, the between population proportion of variation should be .2, rather than .15.
Replies: @res, @utu, @reiner Tor, @utu, @utu
No, what I did was correct. I applied the formula
你可以在这里找到：
https://www.emathzone.com/tutorials/basic-statistics/combined-variance.html
It is easy to prove.
The fixation index is defined as ratio of variance between different subpopulations (Vs) by variance of the total population (Vt): Fst=Vs/Vt
The problem is that the variance Vs can’t be directly calculated, so it must be estimated. It is estimated as the difference between Vt and the average of variances of individual subpopulations. This leads to the following formula for n subpopulations
where V(∑Pi)=Vt is variance of the total population.
This formula was used by Lewontin.
Fst is an index, i.e., it is uniteless as it is normalized by variance. As you can see it is normalized by variance Vt of total population.
What you seem to be doing is assuming that normalization was not by total but by the part 0.85=1-0.15 as your formula B/(1-B) indicate. This is not correct.
Then you talk about variance explained and predicting. You are mixing analogies and metaphors. Nothing is being predicted here or explained. This is just a partition of variances into two variances of different origins using fixation index.
Sentences like this
got you in to trouble. First of all as I have stated this variance is not explained. Looks like regression is your thing. You like ‘explaining’, right? But we are not dealing with regression here. This variance Vs between groups is postulated here. We can’t calculate it directly so the fixation index is used to give its value implicitly.
This is what Levontin did.
If your vehicle has a catalytic converter then lead will ruin it.
回复：@Anonymous
TEL is destructive both to catalytic converters and to the oxygen sensors almost all “modern” engines use for closed loop fuel mixture control. Outside of racing and aircraft engines the only “new” engines that will burn leaded fuel in stock form are some small engines with neither catalysts nor oxygen sensors.
People running antique cars often use avgas as a fuel supplement both for valve seat lubrication and as an octane booster. It works great for that. Running car engines on straight avgas is a bad idea not only because the lead will foul the plugs but because 100LL avgas is actually not 100 automotive octane. When tested using the R+M/2 method usually it comes in at about 92 to 94 octane. Premium unleaded car gas is usually higher than that. A lot of boat guys ran avgas because under heavy load, such as in marine use, car type engines were fine with it and the modern additives in car gas are pretty harsh on integral fuel tanks in fiberglass hulls.
The specifications for avgas were drawn up in the era where supercharged radial engine aircraft with 100+ cubic inch cylinders were operated at high altitude. That era is mostly over. Much of the GA fleet is auto fuel compatible today, although it’s said that 70% of avgas volume goes to the 25% that isn’t.
Getting rid of lead in gas was a Really Good Idea.
回复：@Anonymous
Modern gas is at least 10% alcohol so that accounts for part of the smell.
As far as name brand vs. generic gas, your local Indian gas station does not cook the stuff up in the back (they would if they could, but they can't). Gasoline is a commodity that is made only in enormous refineries. Even if you go to a (for example) Exxon station, the gas didn't necessarily come from an Exxon refinery. Gas is expensive to transport so it usually comes from the nearest refinery (the refiners trade with each other). The only difference is that at the time it is put in the tanker truck for delivery, each brand adds its own additive package. All of these packages meet minimum standards but it is worth looking for gas that is labeled "Top Tier" which is a superior additive package. It's also a good idea to put a bottle of "Techron" in your tank once in a while.
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-maintenance/study-shows-top-tier-gasoline-worth-extra-price/
Top Tier gas is found not only at name brand stations but places like Costco.
BTW, unless your engine requires high octane in the owner's manual, it's a complete waste of money to buy it.
回复：@Anonymous
As compared to gasoline-any gasoline-denatured ethanol has virtually no smell.
Right, octane rating is a measure of resistance to detonation, and paying more for a higher rating than needed doesn’t benefit anyone.
TEL is destructive both to catalytic converters and to the oxygen sensors almost all "modern" engines use for closed loop fuel mixture control. Outside of racing and aircraft engines the only "new" engines that will burn leaded fuel in stock form are some small engines with neither catalysts nor oxygen sensors.
People running antique cars often use avgas as a fuel supplement both for valve seat lubrication and as an octane booster. It works great for that. Running car engines on straight avgas is a bad idea not only because the lead will foul the plugs but because 100LL avgas is actually not 100 automotive octane. When tested using the R+M/2 method usually it comes in at about 92 to 94 octane. Premium unleaded car gas is usually higher than that. A lot of boat guys ran avgas because under heavy load, such as in marine use, car type engines were fine with it and the modern additives in car gas are pretty harsh on integral fuel tanks in fiberglass hulls.
The specifications for avgas were drawn up in the era where supercharged radial engine aircraft with 100+ cubic inch cylinders were operated at high altitude. That era is mostly over. Much of the GA fleet is auto fuel compatible today, although it's said that 70% of avgas volume goes to the 25% that isn't.
回复：@Jim Don Bob
Getting rid of lead in gas was a Really Good Idea.
Most old cars can be fitted with hardened valve seats and tougher exhaust valves and will run fine on unleaded fuel. There are exceptions, like the nailhead Buick V8 and certain exotic racing engines, where that is not feasible.
Given the miniscule number of these things, I doubt anyone really objects to people putting a gallon of avgas in with every tank to keep them going, but if the EPA gets really Nazi about it, or if the last supplies of TEL finally go away, the vehicles will have to be repowered or junked.
Getting rid of lead in gas was a Really Good Idea.
回复：@Anonymous
From a public health standpoint yes, but not as much as people assume. TEL is still allowed in avgas and in certain racing gasolines. Getting rid of TEL in avgas will probably mean the end of the cabin class twin charter and island hopping business if turbines are not economic in these positions and the end of operating Allison and Merlin powered warbirds as well as B-29, B-24 and Connie airshow appearances.
Most old cars can be fitted with hardened valve seats and tougher exhaust valves and will run fine on unleaded fuel. There are exceptions, like the nailhead Buick V8 and certain exotic racing engines, where that is not feasible.
Given the miniscule number of these things, I doubt anyone really objects to people putting a gallon of avgas in with every tank to keep them going, but if the EPA gets really Nazi about it, or if the last supplies of TEL finally go away, the vehicles will have to be repowered or junked.