Lion of the Blogosphere

The future of HBD

Chinese researchers are experimenting with altering the genes of real human embryos, a scientific first.

People in the West are mostly worried about the “ethics” of doing this. I think that China will become the dominant world power after they perfect this technology and then start giving birth to genetically improved children.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

April 23, 2015 at 2:16 PM

Posted in Biology

86 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. China is a really interesting country, as far as HBD matters. Richard Lynn says they believe in eugenics. Yet according to Ron Unz

    “Certainly Chinese law does contain some minor eugenic elements, restricting individuals with severe genetic abnormalities from having children, but the numbers involved are utterly trivial. Meanwhile, the centerpiece of Miller’s argument—China’s longstanding one-child policy—is actually far more dysgenic in its likely consequences, given that it is only strictly enforced among the wealthier and more successful urban Chinese, and often interpreted with considerable flexibility among the rural peasants of the countryside. Furthermore, all of China’s minority groups are completely exempt, a major reason why their share of the national population has increased considerably over the last three decades.

    If the American government imposed an official one-child limit on whites, but permitted poorly-educated rural hillbillies to have two or three, while totally exempting blacks, Hispanics, and other non-white minorities from any restrictions whatsoever, I doubt that most rightwing white racialists with eugenic leanings would be pleased.”

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/china-chinese-eugenics/

    Hepp

    April 23, 2015 at 2:28 PM

    • That’s an interesting take on things, and I agree there’s some truth to it, but the implementation of the one-child policy is not quite that simple. Two only-children are permitted to have a second child with no penalty, although these days many choose not to. There is some debate about abolishing the policy altogether, though many doubt this would have much of an effect as peoples’ preferred family sizes were already shrinking before the policy and probably average below replacement level now anyway. Furthermore, wealthy Chinese were probably largely unaffected by the policy, since they could probably quite easily pay the penalties and/or bribe officials if needed in order to obtain Hukou (internal passports) for their additional children.

      Also, although it is true that China has many ethnic minorities, it is perhaps because they have so many (and that they make up less than 10% of the total population) that there situation is very different to truly multicultural societies like the U.S. The largest minority (Zhuang) make up less than 1.5% of the population, and the largest troublesome minority (Uyghur) make up less than 0.8% and are mostly confined to the far-western province of Xinjiang.

      amploid

      April 23, 2015 at 3:03 PM

      • They recently changed it so that even if only one parent is an only child, they can have two.

        It seems that unless you explicitly try to make it otherwise, population control methods always disproportionately affect the wealthy and better off. They’re probably more susceptible to moral appeals to limit their fertility and smart women are better able to take advantage of any economic opportunities and incentives that the government creates not to procreate.

        Hepp

        April 23, 2015 at 3:19 PM

      • It would be interesting if a childless woman in China who had gone through the change could sell her one-child slot to someone who already had a child. She could charge a million dollars or more.

        Dave

        April 23, 2015 at 4:11 PM

      • Wealthy people who care about preserving the concentration of wealth within their families, have an incentive to produce fewer children

        nebbish

        April 23, 2015 at 9:54 PM

    • “If the American government imposed an official one-child limit on whites, but permitted poorly-educated rural hillbillies to have two or three, while totally exempting blacks, Hispanics, and other non-white minorities from any restrictions whatsoever, I doubt that most rightwing white racialists with eugenic leanings would be pleased.”

      More China analysis packed into one sentence than you would see in 50 years of wall to wall mainstream media coverage on China.

      Such an interesting world and the media has chosen to check out on all topics that are interesting. They only think that global warming is the primary problem today because they are at the center of the intellectual black hole that they generate, where all other problems are outside the realm of what can be talked about.

      Dan

      April 23, 2015 at 4:12 PM

    • Comparing China’s minorities with ours is non-sequitur and irrelevant, given the fact that their minority groups share the same racial makeup/cognitive profile with the Chinese majority, where as HBD becomes a poignant topic in race discussion in America, since we have racial groups with undesirable traits such as lower IQs, lower future time orientation, high impulsiveness, racial characteristics that strongly deviate from the White majority.

      JS

      April 23, 2015 at 4:33 PM

      • One can’t be too sure about the cognitive profile of Tibetans and the Turkics, certainly the East Turkics are not of the same racial makeup as the Chinese.

        Cain

        April 23, 2015 at 6:38 PM

      • That’s not true. Chinese ethnic minorities are somewhat less intelligent than the Han majority.

        John Croome

        April 23, 2015 at 7:10 PM

      • How bad are the Tibetans and Uighurs, when you compared them to our black american and sub-saharan miscreants? You guys completely missed my point!

        JS

        April 23, 2015 at 11:18 PM

      • Not only are our racial minorities in America worse than those of China, we have White liberals who rub other Whites in the face, that these minorities must be treated with due respect, without earning them, where they try to undermine the dominant cultural underpinnings. Could you imagine something like this taking place in China?

        JS

        April 23, 2015 at 11:22 PM

      • No, they don’t.

        rob

        April 24, 2015 at 7:58 AM

      • Uighur, please!

        driveallnight

        April 26, 2015 at 1:31 PM

    • If you take a look at:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China

      the results are interesting. Han Chinese actually increased as a share from 1953 to 1964. Then have been decreasing since, from 94.22% to 91.60%. However, a large portion of that change happened from 1982 to 1990, which makes me think that perhaps some people were recategorized?

      In any case, the minorities are growing from a small base. While the percentage of Han decreased from 1964 to 2010, in raw numbers, nearly 600 million Han were added compared to 70 million non-Han.

      The non-Han minorities are almost certainly worse neighbors than the Han, having a large Muslim component (though as I understand it, the Hui are essentially Muslim Han). But if there is dysgenic breeding taking place, it must be largely intra-Han.

      Wency

      April 23, 2015 at 10:14 PM

  2. There’s a long way to go before the technique is perfected. In this experiment, 15 of 86 embryos didn’t survive. Of the surviving 71 embryos, only 28 showed evidence of successful splicing, and only some of those 28 embryos actually had replacement genetic material at the splice site. There were also unintended mutations. Not to say that most or all of these limitations won’t be overcome, but it’s going to take a while even for the Chinese.

    nebbish

    April 23, 2015 at 3:24 PM

    • “Even for the Chinese” might be a valid statement with respect to China’s speedy construction of hard infrastructure or knack for pirating American and Japanese technology, but it certainly does not apply to research. About 60% of quality science comes from the USA, 20% from the UK, and 20% from the rest of the world combined with China making a vanishingly small contribution. I’ve met Chinese lecturers in computational chemistry that do not realize atoms won’t move at 0 K and have never heard of a for loop.

      PoorGradStudent

      April 23, 2015 at 4:31 PM

      • International students cheating is out of control. So it doesn’t surprise me that foreign graduates don’t know even rudimentary things.

        Nathan Wartooth

        April 24, 2015 at 12:11 AM

      • For all the criticism, the US education system + semi-free enterprise blows everyone else out of the water.

        rob

        April 24, 2015 at 8:00 AM

      • Chinese learn in high school the math Americans learn in college. And in college, most American students party and don’t really learn anything. Nope, education is not the key to our world dominance.

        I think America’s economy is different than the rest of the developed world because Americans are more desperate to become rich because we worship money more and it sucks more to be poor compared to Europe or Japan. (In Japan, it sucks more to have a corporate job, where they expect you to work 100 hour weeks. No wonder why young Japanese are dropping out and becoming hikikomori).

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 24, 2015 at 8:13 AM

      • A huge portion of US grad students in STEM are from China, I doubt they’re the dolts you think they are.

        Hepp

        April 24, 2015 at 1:43 PM

      • There are loads of brilliant Chinese graduate students and professors. The thing they have in common is graduate education in the US or Europe. The dolts I’m talking about are visiting lecturers and professors that actually got their PhD from Chinese universities. Loads of them visit US universities for 6-12 months on sabbatical – they are welcomed here because they are paid by their home institutions.

        Chinese secondary education is much more rigorous than American secondary education, but this is not true of their universities. Plenty of Chinese students (from Chinese undergrads) in my program fail our written qualifying exam, which is primarily based on undergraduate level coursework. You have to compare the best schools in China such as Tsinghua University to MIT or Stanford, where it certainly isn’t true that “most students party and don’t really learn anything”. Almost all Chinese students who make it to decent US graduate programs come from one of China’s best universities. China has plenty of crappy universities that are even worse than schools like the University of Central Florida.

        PoorGradStudent

        April 24, 2015 at 4:42 PM

      • “China has plenty of crappy universities that are even worse than schools like the University of Central Florida.”

        UCF has a world class robotics program.

        signed, a UCF graduate

        Mike Street Station

        April 26, 2015 at 7:00 PM

    • Okay, but I thought that the natural survival rate of human embryos is only 10%. If that is correct, then the survival rate of these embryos is almost 100% better than the natural rate.

      not too late

      April 25, 2015 at 9:59 AM

      • The researchers only allowed the embryos to grow to 8 cells each, i.e. extremely early stage . That 10% survival figure is over months of gestation.

        nebbish

        April 25, 2015 at 1:34 PM

  3. Genetically modified mammalian embryos tend to have a bunch of random defects and are less vigorous than normal ones. Putting in so many good genes to make up for this might end up nearly impossible, or at least decades away.

    Lot

    April 23, 2015 at 4:17 PM

  4. The Chinese are terrible at science: (rank by H factor)

    http://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php?area=0&category=0&region=all&year=all&order=h&min=0&min_type=it

    But, as some smart person once said, quantity has a quality all its own. If the West doesn’t get it’s act together, I agree the future is going to be Chinese.

    jjbees

    April 23, 2015 at 4:38 PM

    • My relatives who were in Korea for a long vacation back in the 50’s would agree.

      Kimchi

      April 23, 2015 at 10:01 PM

  5. I wonder what the Catholic Church’s stance will be on this.

    Shabba_Ranks

    April 23, 2015 at 5:02 PM

    • We know what will be in their best interests!

      Cain

      April 23, 2015 at 6:38 PM

    • The Catholic Church has gone all gay, all the time, like the rest of western culture. They will be against it until the media is for it, then they will be for it. The Church doesn’t matter anymore in places that aren’t Sub Saharan Africa or South America, where the majority of new recruits are. It’s proleifying as fast as possible.

      jjbees

      April 23, 2015 at 8:54 PM

      • Ditto. A century ago eugenics was not condemned by the church. One of the most prominent members of the British Eugenics Society was a bishop.

        Thomas

        April 25, 2015 at 3:44 AM

      • The Catholic Church has gone all gay, all the time, like the rest of western culture. They will be against it until the media is for it, then they will be for it.

        Not where it comes to sex. On that subject, the Church today is as conservative as it was during the Medieval Ages. Pretty impressive they haven’t budged an inch (still no ordination of women priests, for example) while most of the rest of the Christian world left those mores behind.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 26, 2015 at 9:34 PM

      • Of course no matter what the Church rules on genetic engineering, most people will ignore it should the science become viable.

        One of the most prominent members of the British Eugenics Society was a bishop.

        Was this Bishop Anglican or Catholic?

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 26, 2015 at 9:38 PM

    • The Catholic Church will condemn it, as it should.

      Daniel

      April 23, 2015 at 9:41 PM

    • The Church has already drawn the line at in vitro fertilization.

      If scientists ever manage to do this in vivo, I imagine the Church would leave it up to the parents’ judgement as for any other prenatal care.

      Laura

      April 24, 2015 at 1:22 AM

  6. At the risk of sounding Pollyanna-ish, genetically modifying human embryos might be humanity’s only chance to counteract dysgenic breeding. It will be a race to see whether biological scientists can achieve the necessary breakthroughs before the great mass of humanity sinks into imbecility.

    Mark Caplan

    April 23, 2015 at 5:23 PM

    • Fewer high-IQ fetishists is not dysgenic. Instead, the opposite.

      One

      April 23, 2015 at 10:45 PM

  7. Wouldn’t it be more efficient (and humane) to eugenically select from the population and create embryos without modifying them? If it works for race horses it should work for humans

    slithy toves

    April 23, 2015 at 6:18 PM

    • I somewhat agree. . .it’d be nice if the USA did not powerfully subsidize dysgenics at the expense of eugenic and average people. If that weren’t the case, things would be much brighter.

      But I can see the appeal of modified embryos. Nobody is perfect and wouldn’t it be nice to spare your child a hereditary heart condition? Or anxiety disorders? Or simply ensure they are good looking? In other words, makes your children the BEST they can be instead of being hampered by problems that have haunted your family for generations?

      James Watson: “People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would be great.”

      “The lower 10 per cent who really have difficulty, even in elementary school, what’s the cause of it? A lot of people would like to say, ‘Well, poverty, things like that.’ It probably isn’t. So I’d like to get rid of that, to help the lower 10 per cent.”

      fakeemail

      April 23, 2015 at 11:06 PM

    • People want to have children that are theirs. Genetic engineering would give people children that are identifiable theirs but with positive traits that would have been very unlikely to occur as a result of natural conception.

      Lloyd Llewellyn

      April 23, 2015 at 11:27 PM

    • “Wouldn’t it be more efficient (and humane) to eugenically select from the population and create embryos without modifying them? If it works for race horses it should work for humans”

      That does happen now, and apparently without any of the official “ethical” issues that seem to surround genetically modifying embryos. Parents with known single gene disease issues can get IVF, then have the embryos tested for the disease. They keep the ones that are free of the disease, and toss the rest.

      Mike Street Station

      April 26, 2015 at 7:05 PM

  8. Population hierarchy dynamics will make the final result the same.

    One

    April 23, 2015 at 10:47 PM

  9. This is interesting, but silly. Perfecting this technology will still be a long time off.

    The real puzzle to solve is how to fertilize ~100 eggs and then pick the “best” one and implant that. While this has its own problems, it seems much more economical and beneficial in the short term.

    Nathan Wartooth

    April 24, 2015 at 12:14 AM

  10. The sheer amount of opportunities the West pisses away because of its moral fetishes is staggering. At least someone has been reading the “Discipline and Breeding” sections of The Will to Power.

    BS Inc.

    April 24, 2015 at 12:46 AM

  11. Twenty five years ago people were talking in similar terms about Japan. Now they talk about China. China is still hundred, maybe three hundred years behind when you talk about science and other similar things. They do write papers and patents, but they all 100% crap. Very different culture. Do not expect anything spectacular any time soon.

    MyTwoCents

    April 24, 2015 at 3:45 AM

    • The record of the Japanese in the twentieth century in producing first rate mathematicians is comparable to European countries. There have also been excellent Chinese mathematicians although admittedly not as many as one might expect from their large popualtion.

      Jim

      April 24, 2015 at 8:31 AM

    • ” They do write papers and patents, but they all 100% crap”

      Not true. I see lots of fine papers coming from Chinese universities (and far more coming from Chinese students in American universities).

      How would you even know that the papers are crap? Did you do the analysis yourself? If not, do you have a source? Can you look at statistics like #citations or even #best paper awards to get a clearer perspective on this?

      Alex

      April 24, 2015 at 6:45 PM

      • I am in business of reviewing papers and patents.

        MyTwoCents

        April 28, 2015 at 8:56 PM

  12. Some guy made Lion’s observation a long time ago.

    A state which, in this age of racial poisoning, dedicates itself to the care of its best racial elements must some day become lord of the earth.

    selecao

    April 24, 2015 at 3:59 AM

    • Martin Luther King, Jr.?

      CamelCaseRob

      April 24, 2015 at 9:05 AM

  13. I’m glad the Chinese are pushing through with this completely legitimate, important and ultimately most humane type of science. Suffering would be greatly diminished, to the point of irrelevance; happiness would be greatly increased.

    If we’d also manage to decelerate and end ageing, our descendants might actually live long, healthy and much better lives. All this while AI & robots will do all the work, and create a world of abundance.

    Ah, a man can dream…

    Maciano

    April 24, 2015 at 7:13 AM

    • If happiness is just a genetic trait, then they can insert happy genes into the embryo.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      April 24, 2015 at 7:29 AM

      • Happiness is a product of status. Can they insert status genes.

        All test tube babies will be equally happy. But some more equally happy than others.

        jjbees

        April 24, 2015 at 9:41 AM

      • Actually, yes, why can’t we change the genes that make humans desire status?

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM

    • AI might not be content to do all the work. Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk are quite worried about the threat that strong AI could pose to humanity..

      nebbish

      April 24, 2015 at 10:36 AM

    • A world full of pollyannas? Count me out. What’s so great about Europe — and to a degree the US and Japan — is that it had great thinkers and writers with a pessmistic outlook, a « Grundstimmung » that was not optimistic. Huge geniuses like Schopenhauer had status (he was a professor), but while he lead a rather pleasant life, he was also one of the deepest thinkers the world has seen, and this mostly stems from his deeply pessimistic outlook on life. It’s a shame that modern Hindus and Buddhist are so superficial and optimistic, the wisdom of the Upanishad’s and the Four Noble Truths seems to have been lost to a world full of little children who display awe at the sight of current culture — which is crap. As Davila wrote: The stupidity/imbecility of a person is proportional to the enthusiasm a machine can arouse in him. Alteuropa — I want you back!

      Alteuropa

      April 26, 2015 at 11:57 PM

  14. The Chinese already have a way to create genetically improved children. Chinese women come to America and marry Jewish men. The subsequent baby wave is still mostly too young to have had an impact, but keep your eyes open over the next decade for the rise of the Chinese-Jewish Tiger Cubs.

    peterike

    April 24, 2015 at 10:22 AM

    • The girls will do very well, but the boys will be considered loser betas.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      April 24, 2015 at 10:57 AM

      • Half Jew/Asiatic men probably do much better than a pure breed East Asian guy in the American dating game, whose last name is Eisenberg or Rothman as opposed to Kim or Wang. Don’t you think?

        JS

        April 24, 2015 at 1:07 PM

      • Elliot Rodger had an American name.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 24, 2015 at 1:09 PM

      • “the boys will be considered loser betas.”

        I guess that’s a risk. Certainly, there is a strain of the nebbishy Jewish guy, which mixed with beta Asian could be an uber-beta. But there are also quite a lot of brash, aggressive Type A Jewish guys, which could be precisely the necessary ingredient. Jewish verbal skills and aggressiveness plus Asian math skills and crazy work ethic — watch out, Ivy League!

        peterike

        April 24, 2015 at 2:40 PM

      • Are there many Jewish men marrying Asian women? Watching TV you get the impression Jewish men go either for corn-fed Midwest blonds or else African-American women.

        CamelCaseRob

        April 24, 2015 at 6:05 PM

      • Half-jewish, half-asians are already very common in elite society, not so much in the general population.

        Alex

        April 24, 2015 at 6:47 PM

      • Too many asian men? Have a war.

        Harbin Harry

        April 24, 2015 at 10:53 PM

      • peterike –

        Both verbal intelligence and spatial intelligence contribute to mathematical ability. The Ashkenazi Jewish intelligence profile is weighted towards verbal ability, but that has not prevented there being many noted ethnically Ashkenazi mathematicians (e.g. C.G.J. Jacobi, John von Neumann, Felix Hausdorff, Paul Erdos, and more recently Grigori Perelman). The late Alexander Grothendieck was half-Ashkenazi.

        nebbish

        April 25, 2015 at 1:48 PM

      • this

        jesus

        April 26, 2015 at 10:30 AM

      • never name your kid wang

        jesus

        April 26, 2015 at 10:32 AM

      • Only in America.

        Negro of the Bongosphere

        April 26, 2015 at 5:33 PM

      • Asian genes likely put children with gentile white or Jewish ancestry at a disadvantage.

        The history of Japanese Americans indicates Asians are most successful in their first and second generations. By third and later generations they slack off and underperform. Anecdotally I can’t think of many half-Asians in my own life who I found intellectually impressive or otherwise stood as talented.

        Nor can I can’t think of many prominent half gentile white or half Jewish Asian Americans while there are scores of elite Jews, half-gentile white Jews and gentiles.

        On the other hand, there’s evidence gentile white-Jewish offspring have synergistic advantages. Arguably the greatest Jewish mathematician and greatest Jewish chess player of all time, Grothendieck and Kasparov, were/are half-German and half-Armenian respectively. 6 of the 20 wealthiest Jewish billionaires are half gentile white, including the wealthiest Jew of all, the half-Italian Larry Ellison. Many excellent actors have been half-Jews (Harrison Ford, Paul Newman, Michael Douglas, probably Jack Nicholson).

        The odds are that half-Asians are at a genetic disadvantage and won’t achieve much of note. Whites are best advised to avoid marrying them (unless you want to use a white egg donor to create fully white offspring).

        And to be frank, mixed race people aren’t as attractive as full whites. I’ll take a young Jennifer Connelly, or Alison Brie over Olivia Munn any day.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 26, 2015 at 10:10 PM

      • Keanu Reeves. Bruno Mars. Eddie Van Halen.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 26, 2015 at 11:05 PM

      • Italian ancestry is the best bet if you’re looking for children with A-Type personalities. Larry Ellison is both the richest Jew on earth and had an Italian American WWII fighter ace for a father.

        Those guys produced the Roman Empire for a reason.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 26, 2015 at 10:14 PM

      • Keanu Reeves. Bruno Mars. Eddie Van Halen.

        Reeves and Van Halen are more or less 75% European. Bruno Mars will be forgotten long before Van Halen.

        With so little notable talent coming from white-Asian offspring I think we can conclude the case is weak for there being any advantage in mixing white and Asian genes.

        However there is evidence in favor of psychological, health, and beauty advantages resulting from mixing different white ethnicities.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 26, 2015 at 11:31 PM

      • With so little notable talent coming from white-Asian offspring I think we can conclude the case is weak for there being any advantage in mixing white and Asian genes.

        Correct, Steve Jobs was part Middle Eastern and German, and Middle Easterners are capable of doing a lot more than Asiatics.

        The cognitive profile of East Asians are that of a bureaucrat, manager; someone who maintains at best, not lead or innovate.

        JS

        April 27, 2015 at 10:07 AM

      • I never understood why Lion keeps propagating the fact that Keanu Reeves is Asian, when only a small part of his ancestry is, which hardly makes a dent in his overall physical appearance. He blends in a lot more better in a White crowd than with a group of Asians.

        JS

        April 27, 2015 at 10:12 AM

      • How many Asian women are deemed really attractive? There aren’t any. Ever encounter a large group of Asians, not any of them come across as strikingly attractive!

        JS

        April 27, 2015 at 10:22 AM

      • Phoebe Cates (when she was younger)

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 27, 2015 at 12:28 PM

      • TUJ might be wrong that Italian Americans are a great people, because of the Roman Empire. Granted IAs are successful in their own right (independent of Anglo American Elitism), they hardly dominate as a people who are influential and intelligent. One thing that no other group has surpassed IAs, is their artistic and culinary talents, and that is it (and maybe their attractive half breed women)!

        JS

        April 27, 2015 at 2:06 PM

      • However there is evidence in favor of psychological, health, and beauty advantages resulting from mixing different white ethnicities.

        TUJ – Half breed Jews are better looking than pure breeds, but mixed ancestry White gentiles are a lot more better looking. Further, most Jewish women (similar to black women) are unattractive and have terrible personalities, which means intermarriage for them is close to being irrelevant. The out-marriage rates for Jewish men exceeds that of Jewish women by a long shot. Also, many Jewish men are more likely to marry non-Whites, than White gentiles (as one can see observe with the glut of Jewish men/Asian women couples).

        JS

        April 27, 2015 at 2:13 PM

      • Scarlett Johansson is Jewish and beautiful.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 27, 2015 at 4:02 PM

      • One very attractive half breed Jewess who looks more like a White Shiksa than a Yenta would be Carrie Fisher during her prime, who made her stardom as Princess Leia in Star Wars. However, she now looks terrible for her age.

        JS

        April 28, 2015 at 3:35 PM

      • She’s no Scarlett Johansson. Although it’s morally wrong to judge women based on their physical appearance.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 28, 2015 at 3:45 PM

    • Almost 20% of my MBA program at the University of FL in the late ’90s was comprised of attractive female Chinese students (plus two from Taiwan). I’m not Jewish, but I had short, fun flings with two of them. The both ended up marrying European bankers.

      E. Rekshun

      April 25, 2015 at 4:38 PM

    • Les Moonves, the CEO of CBS, is Jewish and married to attractive US-born Asian Julie Chen. Ms. Chen has been a long-time CBS news anchor, producer, and host of “Big Brother.”

      E. Rekshun

      April 25, 2015 at 4:43 PM

  15. The technology is still very far off. CRIPSR is an important step in the right direction, but only one of the many that will be necessary.

    Important phenotypical traits (height, IQ, beauty) are related individually to thousands of genes. Identifying them all, testing different combinations, etc will prove a very long-haul endeavor.

    Wake me up no sooner than 2040 for real designer babies, and when the possibility becomes actual the West will soon abandon all “ethical” scruples to be at the forefront of the revolution. Christian ethics will clash with utilitarian ethics and military/economic necessities. It is doubtful Christianity will win this fight when it has lost every single one for decades.

    Until 2040 we will get only correction of genetic diseases, which is already a very good thing.

    Thomas

    April 26, 2015 at 4:33 AM

  16. Morally wrong to judge a girl on appearance? Show your moral system to a mechanic. There might be something wrong with it.

    MyTwoCents

    April 28, 2015 at 9:00 PM

  17. TUJ might be wrong that Italian Americans are a great people, because of the Roman Empire. Granted IAs are successful in their own right (independent of Anglo American Elitism), they hardly dominate as a people who are influential and intelligent.

    Wrong. Italians score no better or worse on intelligence tests than other white Americans and are slightly more likely to earn an advanced degree.

    One thing that no other group has surpassed IAs, is their artistic and culinary talents, and that is it (and maybe their attractive half breed women)!

    Wrong. Full blooded Italian women are attractive. Search for Laetitia Costa and Linda Evangelista.

    TUJ – Half breed Jews are better looking than pure breeds, but mixed ancestry White gentiles are a lot more better looking.

    Wrong. Half-Jewish girls are very attractive. They often age well, have large breasts, cute faces, and wide hips.

    Further, most Jewish women (similar to black women) are unattractive and have terrible personalities, which means intermarriage for them is close to being irrelevant. The out-marriage rates for Jewish men exceeds that of Jewish women by a long shot.

    Wrong. Jewish women are roughly as likely to outmarry as Jewish men.

    Also, many Jewish men are more likely to marry non-Whites, than White gentiles (as one can see observe with the glut of Jewish men/Asian women couples).

    I haven’t noticed Jewish men are more likely to intermarry with Asians than other white men.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    April 30, 2015 at 10:43 PM


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: