Lion of the Blogosphere

Why do disbelievers in evolution read HBD blogs?

If you’re going to believe the fairytale that the God of the Book of Genesis created man, why not believe the good fairytale that He created the races to be equal? Why believe the racist fairytale that He created blacks to be inferior to whites?

It should also be noted that God chose a Middle-Eastern Jew to be his only Son, and not a white gentile European. (The white supremacist types who converted to Asatru at least have a religion that’s consistent with their racist beliefs.)

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

May 9, 2017 at 8:06 am

Posted in Biology, Religion

95 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Who are you referring to?

    IHTG

    May 9, 2017 at 8:13 am

  2. Because HBD is establishable/provable by tests and measurable human behavior today.
    Evolution is theoretical and postulated based on bones buried for millions of years.

    If you asked: why does someone believe in HBD, but not the big bang theory, you could make the same argument. And it would be more comprehensible (big bang theory may be wrong, may be right, but its pretty unquestionably not proven and really more of a postulate than an explanation).

    Evolution is the same thing, to a lesser degree*.

    I presume you know all this, and are just asking the question to snark.

    anon

    *I personally accept evolution without question, but I can admit its evidence is less airtight than HBD, or any theory that depends on repeated testing and proof.

    bingohead

    May 9, 2017 at 8:13 am

    • HBD means evolution is taking place. Evolution takes time. Negro, Asian and European races could not have possibly evolved, multiplied and populated the world during 4,000 years after the flood. Therefore, the narrative calls for a non-literal interpretation. From the ancient times allegorical and non-linear approach was taken by some commentators. I have to agree with Lion – one follows the other.

      Yakov

      May 9, 2017 at 8:37 am

    • Because HBD is establishable/provable by tests and measurable human behavior today.
      Evolution is theoretical and postulated based on bones buried for millions of years.

      Yes, and it’s even more than this. There’s no inconsistency in believing that Man was a special creation whose descendants followed divergent evolutionary paths. I personally believe that evolution (of the sort we observe today) makes sense if conceived as a deterioration of the genome since the beginning of time, and there’s no reason some subpopulations shouldn’t have mutated more than others.

      I also subscribe to the Journal of Creation, which I find to offer a pretty interesting perspective on these issues.

      S.J., Esquire

      May 9, 2017 at 10:28 am

    • Evolution is theoretical and postulated based on bones buried for millions of years.

      The fossil record is consistent with evolution being at least a ballpark estimate of how species emerge. It is true there are a number of gaps in the fossil record. But there are enough transitional fossils (even if not as many as Darwin originally assumed) that we should assume, until proven otherwise, that evolution is generally correct.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      May 9, 2017 at 5:53 pm

  3. True that! I used to beleive that any Jew who expresses disdain for other races was a heretic. I’d acted on my beleived and married an Iraqi-Syrian girl, one of my kids is married to a Tunisian another to a Libyan. I used to beleive that all the various Jewish communities should intermarriage to become a new-old nation, and the sooner the better. Talk about naive. HBD awareness changed all that, but it was a beautiful thing to beleive.

    Yakov

    May 9, 2017 at 8:17 am

    • How did your ideological change affect your family life? Or did it?

      Sid

      May 9, 2017 at 11:25 am

      • No it didn’t. I hadn’t converted to HBD until my fifties. So it was too late to do anything practical about it. My ex was a racist and even though not a Snow White herself, despised NAMs. Funny thing is that it used to infuriate me. Lol! One of my daughters, the prole one that had never read a book in her life, always hated NAMs and from an early age, after having gotten to know my Tunisian in-laws, would only marry an Ashkenazi. She is actually snow white with blue eyes and so are her husband and kids. Nothing really has changed in practical terms for me. I treat all people equally in my daily life, but having to do it again, I would only marry an Ashkenazi. My street-smart prole daughter was right. You live and learn. My youngest teaches in public school, so you’d better not talk to her about NAMs. She doesn’t know anything about HBD, but she is on board.

        Yakov

        May 9, 2017 at 11:57 pm

    • Recently reading bits and pieces of the Old Testament, I was astonished to realize how much the God of the Chosen People was a partisan God… For and of that Chosen People and their Progeny. It almost seemed that they had a more natural appreciation of the Facts of Life, that the Seed of Our Nature is contained and reproduced in our women’s and nation’s wombs. Indeed the very origin and meaning of the word Nation pertains to the shared “born” origin of a people.

      Perhaps it’s true like all the SJWs claim that we are all racists. But that doesn’t mean that the peoples and nations can’t live together peacefully. Just as I wish my neighbors prosperity and health and all good things, that doesn’t make me responsible for them nor they for me. Perhaps all of the other peoples that make up our diverse multicultural society that can’t agree on any real positive civic norms or values any more, except perhaps anti-racism, need to retreat into insular communities that make independent self-sufficient pillars comprising a divided greater society at large. Like the Jews have made their own worlds for themselves within their host societies at large, like the Amish and the Hütterites as well, we all might be able to coexist more peacefully if we subscribe to something like Rod Dreher’s notion of the Benedict Option.

      If there is no common denominator any more to our society’s constituent elements, let these elements indeed remain distinct and proud.

      Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta

      May 10, 2017 at 10:19 am

  4. Humans aren’t rational, except for Lion.

    JW Bell

    May 9, 2017 at 8:51 am

  5. The recognition that races are different and that traits are transmitted from parent to child are obvious and far older than Darwin. Similarly old is the notion of eugenics, at least as applied to plant and animal life.

    Darwin’s theory, while an interesting and probably true explanation for why things are how they are, seems to have relatively little value in explaining anything of practical significance. What important wisdom about how to manage our lives and society, or how to master nature, do we gain from that theory? Its most important contribution seems to be in aiding secularism, with at-best mixed benefits even for the atheist.

    HBD, meanwhile, foresees a path of accelerating social decay unless we correct rapidly. It also has implications for many aspects of running our lives, such as selecting a spouse, selecting where to live, and how to raise our children.

    HBD’s practicality is immense, and thus while somewhat related to Darwin’s theory, you should expect practical people to treat them very differently.

    Wency

    May 9, 2017 at 8:51 am

  6. The only reason some religious folks don’t believe in evolution is because it contradicts Biblical origin stories. If the Bible taught that there were no biological differences between the races other than skin color, religious fundamentalists would probably believe that too. Or alternatively, it could have the effect of making religion much less popular. The belief in creationism has no real cost. We are talking about an event that happened billions of years ago with no relevance to everyday life. Believing in a color blind world is going to get you mugged or killed. It is more akin to not believing in modern medicine, which you’ll note, far fewer religious people reject than do evolution.

    PerezHBD

    May 9, 2017 at 9:03 am

  7. Right, that’s the subtext of the (conspiracy version of) Khazar theory: “the Jews” of today are inherently evil because they are not really Jews at all, but the lowest of Turks. Jesus was a real ancient Jew, who were inherently good, but unfortunately the real Jews are long since extinct, moved to Britain, whatever.

    On the other hand, I once read an anti-Semite argue that passages like Matthew 12:34 and John 8:44 show Jesus was aware of a racial difference between himself and his Pharisaical rivals even at the time. Not sure exactly what his explanation was. Herod the Great was an Idumean. Maybe the argument could be that Israel had been overrun by Idumeans and that the Jews as we know them today are really Idumeans. But this approach lacks a lot of appeal because the Idumeans were a closely related people, so why would they be inherently bad?

    Greg Pandatshang

    May 9, 2017 at 9:32 am

    • We don’t need a Kazar theory to account for Christianity’s hostility to Judaism, Jesus himself was quite hostile to it’s practitioners, the Jews. On several occasions he chastised them for basically following Jewish law, for being Jews. Simply put, Christianity declares that Jesus is the New Covenant. The Old Covenant is defunct. All who accept Jesus as The Christ, the Savior, the Son of God are now the chosen people, whether Jew or Gentile. According to Christian dogma, Jews are no longer special or chosen.

      Daniel

      May 9, 2017 at 7:14 pm

      • By that standard all religions other than Judaism are “hostile” because obviously they won’t agree that Jews are special, chosen by God, etc. That’s an especially curious claim to make, given Christianity is the only major religion to agree the Jews are special+chosen, but with the caveat that, through Jesus’ sacrifice, gentiles could be saved, whereas previously only Jews could.

        Of course, small differences and all that.

        The relationship between Christianity and Jews/Judaism/Jewish law is the main topic of Paul’s epistle to the Romans, which is an interesting read as a historical document. I think the aptest metaphor is that early Christianity was to Judaism as Unitarian Universalism is to Christianity.

        (Disclaimer: No agenda — in my assessment, all religious doctrines mentioned in this post are total BS).

        snorlaxwp

        May 9, 2017 at 11:08 pm

    • Jesus castigated his fellow Jews and called them sons of the Devil. He was overflowing with hatred for scribes and Pharisees. He publicly violated the Law and ridiculed it. We are the living Pharisees and the Law has only expanded from his times. This makes the Khazar explanation irrelevant. What is relevant is that Jesus was a false prophet and a heretic from the perspective of the Jewish religion, his claims of divinity, royalty and messianism are heresy punishable by execution under the Jewish Law. This is very simple, the laws are on the books and the books are accesable. It’s a tough situation for Christian theologians and for Jews living in Christian countries and an open discussion of this subject is better avoided, even on this blog, but on rare occasions the truth can be said.

      Yakov

      May 10, 2017 at 6:59 am

      • Thanks for the clarity of this explanation.

        This Thin-Skinned (and perhaps dim-witted) Beta-Class Heathen appreciates enlightenment by patient teachers like Yakov.

        Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta

        May 10, 2017 at 10:23 am

  8. Because they’ve accumulated different types of karma in accordance with their past activities, just like animals, plants, and other forms of life.

    Fact Checker

    May 9, 2017 at 9:36 am

  9. Because to reject Christianity is to reject Western civilization.

    If Christianity falls, it is not replaced by some secular utopia. It is replaced by Islam. Atheism, with its extremely low birthrates, its penchant for destructive leftist ideologies such as Communism and its utter weakness in the face of existential threats, is unfortunately not a building block of healthy societies.

    Dan

    May 9, 2017 at 9:39 am

  10. I believe in evolution but HBD blogs are full of what amounts to nonsense about genetics and DNA. It amuses me that the same people who will see global warming as a hoax dressed up with bullshit mathematical models will also go on at length in support of even more convoluted genomics models.

    bobbybobbob

    May 9, 2017 at 9:58 am

  11. Because beliefs are like clothing. Sometimes they are chosen for functional purposes; sometimes for signalling purposes.

    fortaleza84

    May 9, 2017 at 10:05 am

  12. Contrarians aren’t famous for the coherency of their belief systems. Every dissident blog is going to have a subset of people who are regulars mainly because they’re temperamentally opposed to established thinking.

    Richard

    May 9, 2017 at 10:08 am

  13. The Bible and the Qur’an are as credible as the Iliad.

    JS

    May 9, 2017 at 10:42 am

  14. Evolution (ie. change over time) and neo-darwinian synthesis are two different things. The former is observable with mechanism(s) and dynamics as yet unknown. The latter is just a theory that has literally no evidence to support it. Only a just so story.

    Andrew E.

    May 9, 2017 at 10:44 am

  15. Equal in the eyes of G-od, or equal under the law, is not the same thing as biologically identical.

    (note, I’m neither a “disbeliever in evolution”, nor a “believer in fairy tales”, so I am only pointing out your straw man, not speaking from a place of expertise)

    Anonymous Funk

    May 9, 2017 at 11:39 am

  16. “Why do disbelievers in evolution read HBD blogs?”

    Because they understand selection.

    Selection is where adaptive traits continue and maladaptive do not.

    Lots of young earth earth creationists are farmers and definitely understand things like breeding, hybridizing, disease resistance, etc.

    They also know the same applies to people.

    not too late

    May 9, 2017 at 12:19 pm

  17. Lion has apparently internalized the far left talking point that Jesus was a swarthy Middle Easterner, a straw man argument meant to stick it those awful, white racist Republican evangelicals. Since Jesus was, according to the Bible, created by god, then he could have looked like anyone, even a white European gentile.

    JOHN BECK

    May 9, 2017 at 12:55 pm

    • In that case, Jesus could have been black. Or Japanese. Something to think about.

      • Ben Carson, and many blacks, believe Jesus was black.

        But, interestingly, Asian Christians are fine worshipping a white Jesus. I guess if an Asian child asks his pastor why Jesus was white, the pastor could say that the whites needed him more at the time.

        Dave Pinsen

        May 9, 2017 at 6:53 pm

      • Jesus looks however the congregants do. There are depictions from Chinese and Indian and Ethiopian churches from before very much of Europe was Christianized. Unsurprisingly, Jesus looks Chinese, etc.

        bobbybobbob

        May 9, 2017 at 8:56 pm

      • the pastor could say that the whites needed him more at the time.

        Perfectly plausible, reasonable hypothesis! It reminds me of the advice I heard once: to remember that the Jews were “chosen” for SERVICE to the world, and not necessarily because God loved everyone else so much less.

        S.J., Esquire

        May 9, 2017 at 9:35 pm

      • This makes compelling reason that many faiths proscribe visual depictions of G*d.
        Our imagination and expression of artistic skill can’t do the divine justice.

        Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta

        May 10, 2017 at 10:27 am

  18. It’s the same inconsistency as believing in a transcendent, universal religion which denies all differences (“there is neither Jew nor Greek…male nor female in the eyes of God”) and believing that there are differences.

    gothamette

    May 9, 2017 at 12:58 pm

    • It’s the same inconsistency as believing in a transcendent, universal religion which denies all differences

      If you think there’s some inconsistency here, you’ve Missed The Point about what Paul is saying.

      S.J., Esquire

      May 9, 2017 at 9:43 pm

      • School me. What did he mean by that neither Jew nor Greek thing? Male nor female?

        gothamette

        May 10, 2017 at 12:24 pm

  19. HBD is consistent with genetics.

    Evolution is not.

    map

    May 9, 2017 at 1:27 pm

  20. The Bible offers a lot of support for race realism, starting with the idea that the Jews are God’s chosen people. In Deuteronomy Ch. 7 God tells the Israelites that there are other ethnic groups living in the promised land, and that they (the Israelites) should “smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them nor shew mercy unto them. Neither shalt thou make marriages with them.”

    In Genesis, Canaan is cursed with black skin and slavery; old-time Bible preachers taught that this was the origin of the black race, and that it was their destiny to be enslaved.

    There’s a lot of support for HBD in the Bible, but modern theologians have explained it all away, so you won’t hear it preached in any mainstream church anymore.

    Nonayuh Bidness

    May 9, 2017 at 2:23 pm

    • “jews are God’s chosen people”

      According to made up stories. The bible is fictional. God gave Jews hooked noses because he’s a comedian.

      Good old boy

      May 9, 2017 at 9:25 pm

      • It should be pointed out that ‘chosen’ in this context means responsibility and obligations, not privilege. All nations are rewarded for their good deeds, but only one was given the Law. Talmud has a discussion if there is anything in the world that’s forbidden to a Gentile, but allowed to a Jew. It comes up with, if I recollect correctly, two things.

        Yakov

        May 10, 2017 at 7:08 am

  21. I was raised as an Evangelical creationist, yet I found no contradiction between these beliefs and believing that races were different (although to be honest I was not looking very deeply). And looking back, plenty of other Christians I met had what would now be considered racist views too. Seeing as the history of the West includes slavery, imperialism and colonialism, clearly most Christians of the past found no contradiction either. It is only very recently that Christians have decided that Equality is a fundamental dogma of the Christian faith. In the past people were much more comfortable with the idea that God had not made people equal. The Genesis story, for example, shows how and why God made men and women different and unequal. People also used the Bible to explain the seeming differences they found between people, such as the idea that black people were the cursed descendents of Ham. There were also British Israelites who believed that the British were the lost tribe of Israel, presumably to explain why Britain was so awesome, and the Mormons ran with similar ideas transposed onto a North American setting. And of course the Old Testament is all about God favouring one tribe over all others. I imagine HBD Christians prefer the OT over the NT, because Jesus can sometimes be a bit of a fag.

    The idea that all Christians would want to believe in a ‘good fairytale’ shows less than a full appreciation of the full spectrum of Christian belief anyway. Calvinists are far from being the kind of people who would want or need their faith to be all ‘raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens’. If you can believe in predestination–that God has created most people to go to Hell, then why not believe he also created some cleverer than others?

    prolier than thou

    May 9, 2017 at 3:16 pm

  22. That’s one of the weirdest questions I’ve ever heard. And it betrays a provincialism one wouldn’t expect from a New Yorker. I bet most people started reading HBD blogs to find respite from the oppression of BRA. I don’t know a
    single bible verse and havent been in church in 40 years, yet for me evolution has no explanatory power. That makes me a deist who detests blacks.

    Marty

    May 9, 2017 at 3:52 pm

  23. The “There by but the Grace of God” take away of evolution states … The only specialness of whites comes from battles with a more hostile and demanding environment.

    So whites are awesome ( read the Fred Reed piece), but whites are not transcendental above whatever… We like everything else are shaped by the environment. A complete foundation of sand to build a tower of self worshipping supremacy on.

    Anonymous

    May 9, 2017 at 4:04 pm

  24. I think the more pertinent question is: why do *believers* in evolution disdain HDB? Why is the former “science” and the latter “pseudoscience”?

    Gilbert Ratchet

    May 9, 2017 at 4:25 pm

    • HBD isn’t pseudoscience, it’s just politely ignored due to PC and skirting too close to the moral ‘ought’ rather than the scientific ‘is.’

      Panther of the Blogocube

      May 10, 2017 at 12:50 am

  25. How is HBD working out for the intelligent Westerners who don’t reproduce and therefore are going to die in one or two generations? The belief in HBD reminds me of the beginning of Isaiah Berlin’s The Hedgehog and the Fox: “There is a line among the fragments of the Greek poet Archilochus which says ‘the fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing’.” Just like the Marxists, you want to believe in the one final explanation of everything (or at least of biology, sociology, anthropology and history). There is no such thing. Religious Jews are having five and more children and liberal Jews are having none, so please explain to me why this isn’t important going forward. Since this situation mimics that of all Westerners, I could ask the same question about practically any group in the West, but I chose to follow Lion’s post.

    vdorta

    May 9, 2017 at 4:54 pm

  26. If you’re going to believe the fairytale that life sprang from non-life without intelligent design and believe the fairytale that one species of animal can give birth to a different species of animal, and that in fact this has happened millions of times over Earth’s history though it’s never been observed by a human (not even once), why believe the Leftist fairytale that all races are equal?

    Evolution isn’t science. Neither abiogenesis nor peciation have ever been observed: they are merely an endless chain of inferences built atop an unsubstantiated assumption. Pure fantasy.

    So, when given a choice between two faiths, one that promises me everlasting life in a perfect environment and one that promises me an eternal dirt nap, I know which one I’m choosing.

    hard9bf

    May 9, 2017 at 4:57 pm

    • One species does not give birth to another, just as one race does not give birth to another. That is not how evolution works nor how races split apart. Evolution works on very slight changes over very large time scales.

      DataExplorer

      May 9, 2017 at 8:52 pm

      • Evolution is an explanation for the Origin of Species: how does a new species come into existence. That’s the key…new…not how an existing species would change over time, no matter how small or incremental.

        It is absurd.

        According to the logic of evolution, at some point, a man and a woman would give birth to a child that is a completely different species from the parents…ie, not able to reproduce with the existing human population. Not only would this miracle have to occur as a one-off, but it would have to occur among millions of couples just so the new species have other members of the same species with which to breed.

        The components of evolution,

        1) Simplicity to complexity…
        2) Caused by natural selection…
        3) leading to so much complexity that new species appear,

        is so ridiculous that, if true, Bigfoot would exist.

        That’s right…if Evolution was true, then Bigfoot, by the logic of Evolution, would exist.

        map

        May 10, 2017 at 12:26 am

      • Besides, Liberals don’t believe in evolution either. They think evolution stopped at the neck 50,000 years ago.

        A Steve Sailer put it, Creationists worry about where we evolved from and Liberals worry about where we evolve to.

        map

        May 10, 2017 at 12:28 am

      • “According to the logic of evolution, at some point, a man and a woman would give birth to a child that is a completely different species from the parents…ie, not able to reproduce with the existing human population.”

        No that is not what happens at all in evolution, you have totally misunderstood how evolution works. A parent does not give birth to a totally new species, rather genetic drift occurs so that over many generations the species would no longer be able to breed with their own ancestors over many millenia.

        We can see how evolution works spatially as well as temporaly, because sub species that are in close proximity to each other are more similar and more likely to be able to breed with each other than sub species that are far apart. So lets say there is a lizard in California that can breed with a similar species of lizard from the same genus in Nevada, tgeb there is a third species in Utah that can succesfully breed with the species in Nevada but not the one in California. All three species have a common ancestor but they are seperated by genetic drift and different environments have put different selective pressures on them. Now lets say that the environment changes rapidly in Nevada, to fast fot the Nevada lizard to adapt and it goes extinct. The species in California and Utah now have no intermediate species that they can breed with.

        DataExplorer

        May 10, 2017 at 8:31 pm

      • DataExplorer,

        “A parent does not give birth to a totally new species, rather genetic drift occurs so that over many generations the species would no longer be able to breed with their own ancestors over many millenia.”

        Did you bother to read what you wrote? A species cannot breed with its own ancestors because those ancestors are either past their peak reproductive years or are otherwise dead. There is, therefore, no way to test for this “genetic drift” effect on speciation because you cannot mate contemporary examples with their ancestors. You cannot, therefore, “temporally” observe this speciation at all. Besides, breeding with an ancestor is in-breeding and it produces lethal homozygotes.

        “We can see how evolution works spatially as well as temporally, because sub species that are in close proximity to each other are more similar and more likely to be able to breed with each other than sub species that are far apart.”

        And how does any of this actually address my objection? The species in California and Utah do not need an “intermediate” species to breed with because they have their own populations of California and Utah specie within which to reproduce. A “sub-species” that is far apart is, of course, going to be “less likely” to breed with…but it also means that this “sub-species” is really just the same species at the genetic level.

        Besides, it is simply nonsense to argue that Species California and Species Utah can reproduce with Species Nevada, but Species California and Species Utah cannot reproduce with each other. Genetics does not work like this.

        The point I am making is that I’d like to know when Species California manages to create an offspring that is entirely a new species, one that is unable to breed with either California, Nevada or Utah. That is the essence of “new species” that I am trying to bring up.

        Look, the problem here is very simple. Darwin did not have DNA, so he assumes that speciation was built on phenotypes. He would observe the “infinite varieties” of, say, Galapagos finches, a proclaim these dazzling array of species of finches.

        Well, it turns out that this phenotypic analysis is wrong. Dominant and recessive traits and how they are expressed have nothing to do speciation at the genetic level. Those finches are all genetically the same, therefore, they are the same species.

        This is the essence of the bait and switch that Evolutionists are trying to pull. How an existing species changes over time and how the environment effects the phenotypic expressions of said existing species has nothing to do with the creation of new species. To assume that it does merely promotes a “just so” story. This is the type of junk science that biologists have been promoting for the last 150 years.

        Science is not some kind of magic that you have to keep believing in or else it stops working. Science is basically understanding. It’s clear that you really don’t understand this evolution business.

        map

        May 14, 2017 at 3:34 am

    • I’ve heard this argument used quite often. It never made sense to me. To worship G-d in prayer and observance just in case it’s true? Thus is the bottom of the barrel. True piety is to serve the Almighty out of love and intellectual understanding, not in hope of receiving any material or spiritual reward.

      Yakov

      May 9, 2017 at 11:13 pm

  27. i was happier before coming across hbd blogs (via roissy’s comment section).

    i supported liberal immigration because hey, just keeping out the terrorists/criminals is the only relevant thing wrt immigration. i thought the welfare state should be scrapped because poor people just need to pull themselves up by the boot straps. i thought the gop and dnc were very different.

    lol!

  28. I don’t see a problem with Juedeo/Christian belief in a God that created everything and also with Evolution. The author(s) of Genesis didn’t have the language that we have to describe how God created things. Why couldn’t God use evolution to create humans (among other living things)? I don’t see a contradiction. Science, to me, is to learn God’s methods in creation in this physical Universe.
    I also don’t see why it’s problematic that my ancestors aren’t the greatest thing ever. I’m not a great person, all things considered, but I don’t resent those that are smarter, more talented, stronger, etc. I’ll admit that South East Asians tend to be smarter than people who share my ancestry. It doesn’t mean that I should hate them. I should just prepare my children so that they can find some way to prosper with them.

    Half Canadian

    May 9, 2017 at 5:10 pm

    • God supposedly told Moses what to write down, surely God could have presented reality to Moses.

      • Moses was a prophet, today we don’t understand how prophecy works. Moses understood Divine messages through prophetic visions and communicated them in a form that was relevant to his time. The ideas are what is important, not the literal text of Creation or the Deluge.

        Yakov

        May 9, 2017 at 11:32 pm

      • What reality, string theory?

        I really don’t get the point of atheism. It’s not as if science’s explanations of reality at its most fundamental level make more sense than religions’. Either way, you end up with bizarre, incomprehensible dead-ends.

        Given that, why not put your kippah on, join a shul, and enjoy the fellowship of your landsmen?

        Dave Pinsen

        May 9, 2017 at 11:41 pm

  29. why not believe the good fairytale that He created the races to be equal? Why believe the racist fairytale that He created blacks to be inferior to whites?

    The Bible never promises equality in the worldly abilities across individuals or races.

    It promises only that God will fairly judge each individual.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    May 9, 2017 at 5:48 pm

  30. Evolution is not necessarily incompatible with Genesis if its events are taken as metaphors for creation instead of a textbook record of paleontology and geology.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    May 9, 2017 at 5:50 pm

  31. ” why not believe the good fairytale that He created the races to be equal?”

    Sloppy logic.

    Inequality of any particular trait, intelligence or speed, doesnt imply an inequality of value as a person or in God’s eye. If God thought a person’s merit depended on their having 180 IQ he would have made them that way.

    Lion o' the Turambar

    May 9, 2017 at 5:54 pm

  32. Your fans want a reviews of Lost Highway and Mulholland Drive.

    You also owe us the review of Brotherhood that you promised us.

    Otis the Sweaty

    May 9, 2017 at 6:06 pm

  33. I feel compelled to point out that on my status enhancing iPhone pictures of three bloggers, two if whom are quite clearly young females, approved this post. This follows you moving into the former apt of a model. The two things must be related.

    Curle

    May 9, 2017 at 6:08 pm

  34. The position of Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation just opened up.

    The job is Lion’s to fill if he’s prepared to give up his current $90/hour job.

    Of course the Senate confirmation hearings will be arduous, extremely controversial, and violent. Nonetheless I am prepared to testify on your behalf for an egregious fee AKA bribe.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    May 9, 2017 at 6:42 pm

    • The value of the job is not the salary, but how much money you can make doing “Lobbying” after the next President fires you.

    • The value of the job is not the salary, but how much money you can make doing “Lobbying” after the next President fires you.

      Trump knows how to play ball.

      I suggest you play, IF you cut me on the profit$$$.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      May 9, 2017 at 7:24 pm

  35. This post exemplifies the problem with pseudonymous blogging. I can’t think of anyone commenting about HBD under their own name who has said that blacks are inferior to whites.

    Dave Pinsen

    May 9, 2017 at 6:48 pm

    • It is rather a problem with freedom of speech than the problem with pseudonymous blogging.

      My Two Cents

      May 9, 2017 at 8:56 pm

      • No. Pseudonymous blogging and commenting invariably becomes mean-spirited, because people act worse when they aren’t writing under their own name.

        Dave Pinsen

        May 9, 2017 at 11:44 pm

    • The taboos about race make even honest fair minded inquiry impossible.

      I really don’t think it’s essential to make a value judgement about the races as superior or inferior.
      It’s almost irrelevant to consider sensible social or policy ideas.

      If one race or the other were superior at taking written imperial exams or competitive rhetorical analytical consideration of philosophical and theological matters or at music or dance or any other human pursuit of excellence… Who’s to say that one of these pursuits is nobler than another? Is a horse better than a duck because it walks and runs more ably?

      I’m not even convinced that the actual mean racial differences between these groups of individuals is nearly as great as differences in their collective identities and loyalties might indicate. But the differences in these collective identities and attitudes are pretty great… perhaps irreconcilable.

      To be sure my weariness about the racial strife is pessimistic. But polite society would not look kindly on me if I asked questions under my real identity such as whether the races might be better off apart. You don’t need to take sides in a bitter unhappy marriage and you don’t need to place blame to ask the question, “Might the two of you be better off considering a divorce?

      Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta

      May 10, 2017 at 8:28 pm

      • No one is arguing that black people are less intelligent than white people. What they are arguing is that black outcomes are not the result of anything whites did or did not do.

        map

        May 14, 2017 at 3:55 am

    • “… I can’t think of anyone commenting about HBD under their own name who has said that blacks are inferior to whites.”

      Are you drawing some fine distinction between saying blacks are less intelligent than whites and saying blacks are inferior to whites?

      James Shearer

      May 13, 2017 at 1:18 am

  36. There was a time in high school that I seriously began believing in HBD while still reading the Bible and going to church regularly.

    GondwanaMan

    May 9, 2017 at 7:09 pm

  37. Because HBD is readily observable in everyday life, anyone who has been in a multicultural school or workplace can observe that blacks tend to struggle with some pretty basic tasks. Plus HBD affects us all, you do not need to be some super curious scientist or Atheist philosopher to take an interest in things that affect your everyday life (ie who gets a promotion at work, or who the muggers in your neighborhood tend to be) Pattern recognition is part of himan nature, fascination about the origins of life is less so.

    DataExplorer

    May 9, 2017 at 8:25 pm

    • Or why East Asians are at the other spectrum of HBD, and Whites create the best societies, both morally and culturally, despite their tendencies to degenerate from hedonism. It’s call too much of a good thing!

      JS

      May 9, 2017 at 9:30 pm

      • It would seem that whites are the modern Ancient Jew.

        DaddyFrank

        May 9, 2017 at 11:07 pm

    • HBD says that the differences between groups are genetic not just that they exist. HBD can’t be confirmed by everyday observation

      Magnavox

      May 10, 2017 at 12:07 am

      • Move to the ghetto and say that.

        Curle

        May 10, 2017 at 8:23 pm

      • I bet I’ve spent way more time in the ghetto than you have as though that’s even relevant. And I’m from Philadelphia where we have really awful white ghettos as well as even worse black ones. Many of those white ghettos were Irish, where up until very recently when Ireland was a shithole you might have made some kind of connection and think it’s innate. And then looked really foolish when Ireland ended up developing very rapidly and having a higher average standard of living than the US.

        Magnavox

        May 11, 2017 at 5:05 pm

    • Liberals specialize in not noticing anything that might contradict their worldview. And if you ever do succeed in forcing them to acknowledge certain unpleasant facts, you can rest assured that they’ll come up with a thoroughly implausible explanation.

      Lewis Medlock

      May 10, 2017 at 2:46 pm

  38. race creationism

    Lol

    Good old boy

    May 9, 2017 at 9:16 pm

  39. The Parable of Talents is one way a Christian who disbelieves in evolution but reads HBD could reconcile.

    DaddyFrank

    May 9, 2017 at 10:56 pm

  40. Same reason we all come around to HBD eventually. We don’t like Black people, gays, or the Jew.

    Few people know this but everyone says it.

    GManifesto

    May 10, 2017 at 7:23 am

  41. There are many religions and they all cannot be correct. Thus, the defenders of any given religion are forced into the position of having to explain how their particular religion is correct and all of the others are wrong. Since religion, by definition, is not based on empirical observation of reality, any one of the many religions of the world can make such a claim, and there is no objective method to ascertain or refute such a claim. Hence, the logical conclusion is that they all must be wrong.

    Abelard Lindsey

    May 10, 2017 at 10:57 am

  42. As JW Bell said above, most humans aren’t rational.

    How many people use smartphones and computers, but “disbelieve” the physics (quantum and classical) without which integrated circuit design would be impossible?

    Hardly anybody. That’s not because rejection of the “theories” of physics would be irrational and inconsistent with a sensible view of the world (though it would be). There are other reasons:

    1. People know that they don’t understand the physics of electronics. But no problem, theories and facts can be true even if *I* don’t comprehend them.

    2. The existence of electron tunneling (etc.) doesn’t get people’s dander up or challenge their place in the cosmos. Instead, it’s “whatever.”

    Surprisingly many people who haven’t studied the Modern Synthesis (and know nothing of genomics) think that they’re qualified to judge evolution. I don’t believe it, therefore it’s false, or an unproven theory at best.

    If they were to decide to reject the fundamental theories of electronics, their iPhones would continue to function. In that sense, no harm done.

    amac78

    May 10, 2017 at 11:07 am

    • You can change the degree of your own rationality by taking psychoactive medication. I have seen non-religious people becoming very religious christians after few days on neuroleptic with access to the bible. The neuroleptic supresses the rational part of the brain. It is reversible, so the same people become non-religious once taken off medication. It is very educational in demystifying religion.

      My Two Cents

      May 11, 2017 at 1:06 am

      • That sounds interesting, are any of these drugs available OTC?

      • No, they are not OTC, but most of them are not on the list of illegals drugs. If you have any bipolar or schizophrenic friends or relatives, you can ask them. The drugs are used in crisis to make them manageable/self-manageable, not religious of course. However, in my experience, the average religious people do seem easier to control and take advantage of.

        My Two Cents

        May 11, 2017 at 1:31 pm

      • Doors of Perception and Heaven and Hell by Aldous Huxley are about the connection between psychotropic drugs and traditional religious experiences. Very interesting books.

        Magnavox

        May 11, 2017 at 5:06 pm

    • amac78,

      So…let me see if I understand this correctly: Biologists must be right because physicists get such remarkable results.

      map

      May 14, 2017 at 4:02 am

  43. HBDism isn’t necessarily inconsistent with creationism. The devil is in the details. A creationist who believes in “micro-evolution” (and many do), they can believe that humanity has evolved into separate races without accepting that the original humans evolved from non-human apes.

    Peregrino Nuzkwamia

    May 10, 2017 at 12:45 pm

  44. Because they ain’t disbelievers.

    .Vincent

    May 11, 2017 at 1:25 am


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: