throwaway4666 (u/throwaway4666)

throwaway4666 commented on Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins razib.substack.com/p/yo-m... · Posted by u/rsj_hn

Leary · 4 years ago

I didn't know claiming a genetic component in explaining differences in racial averages for IQ is scientific racism.

throwaway4666 · 4 years ago

You will find that 'some races just have the dumb SNPs, you know' is indeed a fringe and unserious position often posited by Pioneer Fund recipients (you know, the organization founded in the 30s for the 'purpose of race betterment' that literally inspired Hitler) to justify that we abandon all welfare and remedial programs toward the poorer demographics. If that's not scientific racism, I wonder what's your definition of it.

throwaway4666 commented on Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins razib.substack.com/p/yo-m... · Posted by u/rsj_hn

traject_ · 4 years ago

> The science is constantly evolving to this very day on the supposedly 'trace levels' of Neanderthal DNA in Africans (especially as we gather a more diverse range of cohorts) so I'll leave it at that.

No, the trace levels of Neanderthal DNA in Africans is very unlikely to change by gathering more diverse range of cohorts. It is a matter of identifying major strands of ancestry within Africans (by admixture over thousands of years to now be in various African populations) which all are distinguished by a lack of Neanderthal DNA outside of West Eurasian admixture.

And for the last point, I did not condone scientific racism. To repeat, interest in human populations and such phenotypic differences does not imply scientific racism once you realize the basic scientific principle that humans are animals and consider how animals exist in populations with phenotypic differences.

throwaway4666 · 4 years ago

Seeing how African populations are extremely diverse and we're just seeing the extent of it I would refrain from making such definitive statements.

>To repeat, interest in human populations and such phenotypic differences does not imply scientific racism once you realize the basic scientific principle that humans are animals and consider how animals exist in populations with phenotypic differences.

That's a needlessly stilted PR-like statement that basically hides the meat of the whole 'controversy': behavioral and IQ differences between populations and their genetic origins. Khan has a position, mainstream scientists another. Oftentimes fallacious arguments are invoked involving 'but look at domestic animal breeds' (not unlike your repeated admonition that 'humans are animals' which I will assume is just a boring triviality on your part for the sake of charity).

throwaway4666 commented on Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins razib.substack.com/p/yo-m... · Posted by u/rsj_hn

sjtindell · 4 years ago

No. A scientific racist is a racist (someone who thinks one race is inferior to another) who uses science to back up their claim. Not sure this person is one.

throwaway4666 · 4 years ago

Scientific racists don't use such crass words like 'inferior', they'd rather say 'have a lower mean IQ and impulse control due to genetic differences'

throwaway4666 commented on Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins razib.substack.com/p/yo-m... · Posted by u/rsj_hn

AlotOfReading · 4 years ago

I didn't get the vibe that this particular article was rejecting OoA, but simply pointing out that the modern approach is OoA + "it's complicated".

The HBD stuff is troublesome and it's certainly worth regarding the author more critically, but I found the bones of what was linked fairly pedestrian and uncontroversial. I suspect that will not be true of the follow-up article about origin models within Africa though.

throwaway4666 · 4 years ago

Yeah I'm not saying literally everything in the article is trash, my thought process basically went as follows:

"Wait this is an elementary mistake. Also he's not really up to date on the science. Who wrote this again? That name rings a bell...oh dear..."

throwaway4666 commented on Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins razib.substack.com/p/yo-m... · Posted by u/rsj_hn

traject_ · 4 years ago

>Africans do have Neanderthal DNA, up to 0.3%.

That ancestry comes from later interactions with West Eurasians and is at trace levels compared to the substantial 2-3% in non-Africans. This does not change the point that non-Africans received input from Neanderthals just before expansion outwards.

>The post tries very hard to make it look like 'Out of Africa' is wrong and not the mainstream accepted by the majority of scientists. Admixture doesn't change that.

You've misread the article if you believe that. The point is that the total replacement model of out of Africa imagining a small band of hunter gatherers expanding out of an East Africa giving rise to all of humanity popular in the 2000s was proven wrong. The point was that single locus markers like mtDNA and Y-DNA can create biases that allowed for such a consensus that was changed by the whole genome of the Neanderthal. The ancient DNA we have now suggests a multi-regional model for modern human evolution within Africa.

The remainder of the post (other than the first nitpick) is non-substantive ideological claims that appears to be largely because Razib's politics lean conservative. Interest in human populations and such phenotypic differences does not imply scientific racism once you realize the basic scientific principle that humans are animals and consider how animals exist in populations with phenotypic differences.

throwaway4666 · 4 years ago

The science is constantly evolving to this very day on the supposedly 'trace levels' of Neanderthal DNA in Africans (especially as we gather a more diverse range of cohorts) so I'll leave it at that.

I just want to comment on this: opposing 'scientific racism' is an ideological claim now?! The dude has a pretty large record making claims about race and IQ and 'human biodiversity', works in an industry that's banking heavily on grifting money out of rich people with PGSes, and mainstream scientists debunking it are the ones being ideological? I feel like I'm dreaming here, imagine a Philip Morris lobbyist accusing you of being 'ideological' when you point out flaws in their 'actually cigarettes are pretty good for you' studies. (Wait, that actually happened)

throwaway4666 commented on Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins razib.substack.com/p/yo-m... · Posted by u/rsj_hn

Zigurd · 4 years ago

Here is his page on the takimag site: https://www.takimag.com/contributor/razibkhan/130/

Decide for yourself if he is a "scientific racist." Takimag is not shy about stuff like that.

throwaway4666 · 4 years ago

Ah, he also believes in "Ashkenazi IQ" stuff. And is best friends with Greg Cochran who thinks homosexuality is caught by germs. Very instructive stuff

throwaway4666 commented on Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins razib.substack.com/p/yo-m... · Posted by u/rsj_hn

Mary-Jane · 4 years ago

Science, indeed any intellectual thought, won't progress without contrarian views challenging the/your status quo.

throwaway4666 · 4 years ago

Yes, this is the usual precanned retort when faced with the fact that one's fringe viewpoint isn't in line with the mainstram science. It's not an argument though, in that it doesn't tilt the balance of probabilities (from a Bayesian point of view) away from the initial prior (i.e. the fringe is likely wrong and experts are likely right - note that I said likely, not 100%, like a good Bayesian). If anything, his elementary mistake about Crick, his failure to stay up to date with recent findings about African DNA, and motivated agenda with roots in scientific racism are tilting in the opposite direction.

throwaway4666 commented on Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins razib.substack.com/p/yo-m... · Posted by u/rsj_hn

throwaway4666 · 4 years ago

Multiple inaccuracies there.

Crick and Watson certainly didn't discover DNA as the substrate for Mendelian inheritance, that was known long before. They (in collaboration with Rosalind "don't talk to me about this woman" Franklin) discovered its 3D structure.

Africans do have Neanderthal DNA, up to 0.3%.

The post tries very hard to make it look like 'Out of Africa' is wrong and not the mainstream accepted by the majority of scientists. Admixture doesn't change that.

Also, isn't Razib Khan a "scientific racist"? (Protip: when someone's wiki page has a 'Controversies' tab it doesn't look good) I remember him being huge into 'HBD' despite not being credentialed in any way beyond dropping out of his PhD program to get in on the 'consumer genomics' grift. Not a good look imo.

If you want a real overview of current population genetics check out Graham Coop's lectures, he's a prominent professor in the field and his teaching materials were inspirational for many people. Alas, he does not have a substack, neither does he make contrarian takes for a living (probably due to having a real job)

throwaway4666 commented on Crispr gene editing in human embryos wreaks chromosomal mayhem nature.com/articles/d4158... · Posted by u/YeGoblynQueenne

Melting_Harps · 6 years ago

> I think the covid crisis aptly showed that the 'plucky outsider that defies a reactionary authority' archetype doesn't actually exist in real life.

How so? I think if anything it shows the many flaws of the Nation-State model, and its inability to curtail the hygienic issues (wet markets) from rapid Industrialization in China in the best case scenario, and at worst that this is in fact a weaponized form of the COVID strain created by the CCP.

The CCP has been guilty of many crimes against Humanity, you need only look at Tibet, Xianjing, and Hong Kong to affirm that; moreover the CCP actively tried to spread this into Hong Kong when they were lying to the World about its ability to be transmitted between Humans and then forcing HK to keep its borders open to mainlanders to use a vectors despite HK medical professionals stance (who had to deal with SARS before this) and were dissapearing journalists and punishing physicians who spoke out in the Mainland.

I fail to see what you are seeing, its not like random injections led to this outcome, this is solely a result of malfeasance and corruption of the CCP, which in my view should see them be tried for Crimes Against Humanity.

> And biohacking itself is largely a grift.

I would take this statement more seriously if you didn't do it behind a throwaway so I can see what background you have to substantiate this, so I will just use this opportunity to elucidate some notable Biohackers: Gregor Mendel (the father of Modern Genetics) was a Biohacker with no formal education in Biology; Charles Darwin was the son of generational physicians in England, but detested school and completed a degree in what could best be described as 'general studies.' He dropped out of medical training but remained interested in Botany and Insects, this then turned into him developing his theory of Natural Selection when he took the trips to Galapagos, again Biohacking his way into a theory that quite honestly couldn't hold up without the work of the aforementioned biohacker: Gregor Mendel.

So, you see, Biohackers have come to define Biology and make some of the most notable breakthroughs in the Life Sciences and are hardly a 'grift' if you actually know what you're talking about. Robert Hooke, the man who would invent microscopy and Cell Theory, was a polymath and architect with a deep fascination of Natural Philosophy that too led him to Biohack his way into Scientific prominence.

In a more modern view of Biohackers: Josiah Zayner, a PhD and former NASA researcher at AIMS involved in the terraforming of Martian soil was one of the first to introduce the idea of fecal transplants from patient to patient to alter his gut biome, an notion that had previously been thought to be absurd and has now become mainstream. Not only did he do so successfully, but he was lauded for his efforts by the very same Media that subjected him to a great deal of scrutiny and ridicule, and is what he is best known for, not his PhD in Bio-physics nor his time at NASA. Also worth noting, he came from a rural part of Illinois where he was deeply fascinated with Nature and got see and interact with it from a very young age, and like most of us fell in love with it. He is honestly one of my favorite Humans ever.

He now runs the Odin, and runs a convention called Biohack the Planet.

I can tell you this, many Life Scientists I've known often go into a deep depression sometime around our junior year when we realize that what was sold to us in University was a total farce. I personally had a deep interest, bordeline obsession, with Vitamin D (particularly in inducing apoptosis via P53 in certain Cancer cell lines) and was constantly told by my professors that while it had merit it wouldn't warrant further research because it couldn't be monetized and that it would be in my interest to forget it entirely and move on to a career in Lab benchwork if I didn't want to continue my studies to the MS/PhD level.

Flash forward to today where we see a DIRECT CORRELATION of Vitamin D deficiencies and severe COVID symptoms that require hospitalization and often lead to death.

I was never after fame or recognition, and I knew money was not going to be the deciding factor in pursuing this as I just wanted to contribute and be a part of the study of Biology that I was so enamored of. But the fact that studies like these were never explored is why I detested my time in University the most after all the negative things that took place: that's what hurt the most as I know I will never be as driven as I was back then.

I've done some crazy things before and after, like walking into one of my lab practicals and midterm exams with pieces of glass in my arms as I replaced my tire on the side of the freeway on my way to school after work. I was literally picking some of it out when I was waiting in line to drop off my exam. I've done crazy things before and after, but I wish I still had that kind of drive in my 30s, especially because by then I had already accepted University had let me down and could still some how justify doing that anyway.

Brilliant, young minds get their wings clipped at a time when they are most able and inclined to want to radically change the World, only to be told that what awaits you is the dreary, pathetic World of 'publish or die' mantra of academia that ends up pushing papers that no one reads, much less ever re-creates [1] before you ever get close to being able to receive grants and a lab to do it.

I'd say the World needs Biohackers now more than ever, and I hope we can make that happen as I would absolutely love to be able to teach anyone who wants to listen about Plant, Food and Agriculture Science as I have had a presence in all of those fields despite my background as an Educated and Trained Cellular and Molecular Biologist.

As I said, in terms of the Sciences: Biologists are as punk as it gets and many of us are proud of our motley crew and adventurous history.

1: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

throwaway4666 · 6 years ago

You have put a lot of thought in your post and I actually agree with most of it but I just want to interject about a few things:

-Darwin, Mendel etc. are seen as foundational because we as humans need plucky heroes in our narrative of history. But they are anything but. Natural selection did not spontaneously arise as an idea when Darwin put it into written words. Early farmers, herders and semi-nomadic gatherers knew all about artificial selection (which is just natural selection speeded up and driven by humans) and have been doing it for thousands of years, so the knowledge was definitely out there. There are also quite a few ancient texts conjecturing that "man came from apes and the more primitive lifeforms" etc. Of course this is not proper wording for a modern educated scientist, but again, the ideas were there. Only, Darwin was the first person with a name (and what's more, a Western and English name) to notice it, and so he became a legend. Anonymous accounts don't.

-Likewise, there's absolutely no way the Odin guy was the first to come up with the idea of fecal transplants. He's just the first public figure that you've heard of who did, because he's flashy and fancy and trendy and lives in a fancy and trendy place where all the fancy and trendy people congregate. Even excluding the studies suggesting it prior to his stunts, people knew for a while that farm kids eating soil (dirt) from time to time turned out to be suspiciously healthy for their gut.

So I maintain my previous assumption, that biohacking is largely a grift that attempts to repackage previously obtained knowledge from more obscure and less widely acknowledged (read: non-American, non-Western, etc.) sources and fashion it into a cool-looking product to swindle rich people out of their money.

The scientific world doesn't need biohackers, stunt-pullers and other grifters, it needs to acknowledge the humble and the lesser-known and the anonymous common knowledge.