'Anthrax Case Slowly Zeroed In On Scientist...'

by

R.E. Prindle

     The title was the headline in our daily paper.  The thing struck me in a number of different ways.  A new witch hunt, the belated religious reaction to the scientific challenge?  The thought of James Watson came to mind and then the manner in which this Knoxville church shooting has been managed.

     There is the vague implication that the 'scientist' is bad because he's a scientist.  This is what you can expect from scientists.  The title is used with the same implication that an anti-Semite uses to say the word Jew.  The intonation disturbs; it's caught by the mind.  James Watson was made to genuflect to the Liberal pederasts and apologize.  Then he lost his job and emoluments, being exiled to Lower Slobovia.

     In the anthrax case the scientist conveniently comitted suicide, or was he 'shot while trying to escape?'  As he is dead there is no one to contest the findings while the 'suicide' itself is a confession of guilt.

     One is inevitably reminded of the movie Wag The Dog.  If you haven't seen it, you should; if you have, watch it again, closely.  How are we to tell the difference between manufactured news, virtual news, and the News?  It's all done with mirrors and cameras.  Wolf Blitzer shows 'interviews' with a bunch of of White male 'bigots' in Copperheels, Tennessee or somewhere, anywhere, could be one of thousands of towns all across America he says.  It doesn't even matter if such a place as Copperheels exists, if it didn't we'd have to invent it, wouldn't we?  It's just that attitude.  There's that White bigot on camera up there on the screen intoning as though on cue:  'I don't believe Hussein Obama is a good Christin', that's all.'  Back in the studio Wolf Blitzer shakes his hoary head sadly and inscredulously intoning in his turn:  'Does anyone believe this can exist in America here in the twenty-first century?'  Poor Wolf.  His whole vision of Altruria is blasted.

     And then the UU church shooting.  What's behind that?  The opening roundup call for Hussein Obama dissenters?  All of a sudden this individual who may or may not have committed a real, rather than a virtual, crime, I have seen no evidence that it wasn't a staged virtual crime, represents a class of truly, reprehensible human beings who ought to be exterminated.  Pacifistic Liberals were calling for 'Conservative' hides.  It's the 'International Jewish Conspiracy' all over again, except with different villains.

     What does the UU care about anal sex anyway?  Put signs out on the front lawn promoting pederasty?  Say, what?  Maybe it's time the Protestant churches, Christian or post-Christian, stand back, take a look and adopt a more balanced approach. 

     Let  us hope that cooler heads prevail.  Where's a Louis Marshall when you need him?

Post Modern Liberal Insanity #2

by

R.E. Prindle

     The problem is the Liberals.  Most think Liberalism is just a political approach but it isn't.  Liberalism is a doctrine.  As a doctrine it is inherently anti-scientific. As science contradicts Liberal doctrine at all points it is the enemy to be suppressed or destroyed.  Thus Liberals are doctrinaires.  They do not like to be called doctrinaires as a doctrinaire is a narrow minded bigot.

     Although they don't like to acknowledge it they believe themselves superior to other Homo Sapiens species whether Black, Yellow, Red or Tan.  Hence as a superior people they believe these inferiors need their kind attention.  Nor are they unwilling to bestow it.  The worst people in the world are Whites who do not accept their superiority, which is to say, doctrine.

     Of all peoples who they think will most benefit from their guidance are the Africans.  This attitude goes back to the colonization of Africa.  They wish to 'raise' the Africans hence all aspects of the media are dedicated to the preferment of the Africans.

     The problem with the Africans is that most Whites believe in one form or another that the African is an earlier species of Homo Sapiens evolution hence less intellectually capable than other Homo Sapiens species.  This opinion runs counter to Liberal doctrine which believes that evolution ceased evolving when the Crown of Creation, Homo Sapiens, appeared.  One can't be certain that Liberals are Creationists but if not their notions of evolution appear skewed.

     As you know within the last decade or so terrific advances have been made in genetics.  These studies indicate as one might expect that the African or First Born is an anterior species of Homo Sapiens evolution.

 

Primary fact.

   As this runs counter to Liberal doctrine they make very effort to suppress the scientific facts.  As the facts will come out the Liberal approach is to discredit and defame any scientist who is so 'unwise' as to voice the facts.                                          

Let's try Science.

As I see this blog, it's about science as it intersects with public life with a strong strand of history running through it, and occasional commentaries on the writing of science for the public as a sort of meta-coverage. Of late, politics more or less connected to science stories have dominated -- and that's likely to go on, given the season. But I don't want to lose sight of the other stuff, so this week I plan to write at least a few notices of recent popular science books worth noting. Here, I thought I'd offer a Sunday kind of retrospective on some of the old good stuff worth remembering. Hence, my turn to Boyce, my already-missed MIT colleague.

Boyce, for those of you who don''t have the privilege of his acquaintance, is the just-retired director of the Knight Science Journalism fellows program at MIT.

(For those of you who don't know about this program and are mid-career science writers, check it out. It offers one year at MIT, a decent stipend, and no requirements other than the twice weekly seminars during which leading researchers in the area come and talk to y'all for a couple of hours. In other words, it's a really, really good gig.)

Boyce has also taken on most of the available roles known to science writing: daily newspaper reporter and editor; magazine writer and editor; kids science tv writer; book author -- all before he became one of the leading educators of science writers through his work at the Knight Program.  (For a quick intro to what matters to him, read this.)

Along the way he came up with this: a list of the books that, in his humble opinion, every science writer should read.

I never take such lists all that seriously, and I would surely make a somewhat different selection if I were ever tempted to canonize. But leaving aside such quibbles, it is true that at least all the books on the list that I have read (most, but not all) have done me good.

All of this is preamble to the suggestion that occurred to me when I made a recent return to Boyce's list:

A really good read would put together Schroedinger's What is Life with Watson's The Double Helix. I'm not sure if the impact of Schroedinger's brief book is remembered all that much these days, but it was hugely influential -- Francis Crick, for one, credited his turn to biology to an encounter with it, and its worth reading because it demonstrated the power of disciplined thinking to define a problem. Schroedinger was, of course, a physicist who got interested in biology late in life; he focused on the question of inheritance with variation, as the chief outstanding issue biology had to solve next. Most impressive, with almost no data, he managed to anticipate several of the major developments in biology to come over the next couple of decades.

The most important of which, of course, was Watson and Crick's identification of the structure of DNA molecule. Watson's book doesn't need any introduction -- and, with my family connection to Rosalind Franklin, I can't say I think Watson's account of her can be taken as anything but his own more or less fictional creation.

But the juxtaposition of the Schroedinger and Watson account is great fun, and illustrative of two poles of science writing. Schroedinger's is formal, analytical -- and invitation to take part in the intellectual life of science. Watson, though he would probably hate to hear this description, takes a truly humanist approach to presenting the inner life of science to a lay audience. He spends an enormous amount of time on what it feels like to do science; while you certainly learn the basic story of DNA and the significance of its structure, his account of the making of modern biology is all about the people, most of all, of course, the man Peter Medawar called "Lucky Jim."

Put 'em back to back, and see what you think.

Image: Andreas Praefcke, "Basement shelves, Firestone Library, Princeton," 2007. Source Wikimedia Commons

Barry Obama And His Handlers 2

Hello New Boss, Worse Than The Old Boss

by

R.E. Prindle

     I hope you've noticed how slick the job has been to install Barry in the Presidency.  This has been smooth.  That dumb schmuck Mugabe in Zimbabwe actually goes and kneecaps the opposition.  Leave it to us to show him how to fix an election in first class, First World, Big Eight style.  Obama's handlers began to condition your minds long ago.  All those movies, TV shows, rap records for the young and young at heart.  Taught you have to sing as you went with the flow.  Now you'll be working on Maggie's Farm whether you like it or not.  Barry will have a 'mandate' to strip you of your freedoms.

     Thus an intellectual non-entity like McCain was set up as the opposition with instructions to roll over which he is doing.  Why roll over at 71.  He isn't going to live that much longer anyway.  Might as well be President if you have the chance.  Bill Clinton was a glitch in the plan who bid fair to overturn the plan but the Clintons were hacked out of there.  Close call though.  Then Hillary in her best high school White girl fashion stood real close to Barry with both her hands on his wrist and pledged eternal fidelity after November while Barry looked coldly down on her in rejection.  Why not, when you've got a Michele at home.

     A little while back Bush fired a couple Generals who undoubtedly would have been resisters to the plan.  More will undoubtedly follow when they realize what the plan is and don't wish to 'go with the flow.'

     Now just the other day Jesse Jackson was set aside and trashed.  He was set up with the old open mike ploy, prodded with a leading question and stepped into the trap.  Following Communist tradition his son, Jesse Jackson Jr. who owes dad more than somewhat publicly trashed the old Governor.

     Al Sharpton will undoubtedly be next which will give us all a warm feeling and make us think that everything is going our way.  Any other old Negro dinosaurs who have outlived their usefulness will follow, I'm sure.  On the White side, more Don Imuses.

     With the Army and police in their pocket obama and his handlers will have you in their pocket.  A neat police State exceeding that of Soviet Russia will be in place.   Billy Ayers will have trumped the whole political system.  A real Communist triumph.  And you said it couldn't happen here.

     After that comes the Great American Gulag System.  Off to the camps with those Generals, Jackson, Sharpton and all who will not accept the plan.  The Africans say they are going to riot if they don't get their way?  Listen, by inauguration time the economy will have collapsed, we will be in full Depression and there will be a lot more people than the Africans in the street.

Cone>Wright>Obama

by

R.E. Prindle

     Had they known that blacks were Jesus they would have relieved their suffering.

page 111

     If Jesus Christ is not black he is an oppressor and we must kill him.  The appearance of black theology means that the black community is now ready to do something about the white Jesus, so that he cannot get in the way of our revolution.

page 121

     Black empowerment is the black community in defiance, knowing that he who has become one of them is far more important than threats from white officials.  The black Christ is one who nourishes the rebellious impulse in blacks so that at the appointed time the black community can respond collectively to the white community as a corporate "bad nigger" lashing out at the enemy of human-mankind.

page 135

James H. Cone

A Black Theology Of Liberation

Twentieth Anniversay Edition  Orbis 1990, 18th Printing

  Dr. Cone speaks to the reality of African intentions.  His mind is very cloudy.  He repeatedly refers to White attempts to exterminate blacks.  He ignores the fact, if he even knows of it, that in 1800 there were approximately 150 million Africans in the world, today there are over a billion.

     The increase was brought about by the White suppression of disease, by the White increase in food supply, by the White suppression of inter-tribal genocide.

     In America the percentage of Africans  of 10% of the population was maintained in the face of enormous White immigration.  Today the percentage has risen to fifteen percent in the face of an even more enormous Mexican invasion.  The Black percentage of the population continues to advance steadily.  If Whites have been trying to exterminate Blacks they have been going about it bass ackwards.

     Dr. Cone is simply blinded by his sense of shame and degradation morphing into the most violent, one might even say insane, hatred of Whites.

     Trinity's minister, the Rev. Wright, is Dr. Cone's disciple who has taught Black Liberation Theology for decades.  For two of those decades Barry and Michele Obama sat in the pews sopping up this bile.  How can he and his wife Michele claim to be unaffected by it now?

     Dr. Cone states that now is the time, it is even now almost too late, to choose sides whether one is Black or White.  One must opt for Whiteness or African supremacy.  Barry has already chosen the latter; it is too late for him to deny it now.   Is his election to be 'the appointed time.' 

Prepare now to take the offense.

Obama, Cone And Black Liberation Theology

by

R.E. Prindle

     On page 6 of A Black Theology Of Liberation James H. Cone says:

If God is not involved in human history, then all theology is useless, and Christianity itself is a mockery, a hollow meaningless diversion.

     Mr. Cone at this point is in possession of the truth.  God is not involved in human history.  if Dr. Cone had substituted the word religion for Christianity, he would have been spot on.  The truth is too much for him and he rejects it.  He moves on to a laughable absurdity, same page:

     God is not color-blind in the black-white struggle, but has made an unqualified identification with blacks...

     This is so full of nonsense one doesn't know where to start laughing or when to stop.  'God is not color-blind...' To this point in human history no one has been so daring as to make such a claim.  Or was concerned with the question.  Dr. Cone doesn't explain how he knows God isn't color-blind but he goes further and applies it to the black-white struggle.

     In the black-white struggle he has made an unqualified identification with blacks says Dr. Cone.  In other words blacks have God on their side.

     Well, having God on your side is a claim that has been hooted down with derision by every Liberal who walked the boards for the last hundred years or so.  The last person I know of who publicly identified his cause with that of God was Kaiser Bill and look what happened to him.  While White Liberals have laughed at such a claim in others they applaud it from the mouth of Dr. Cone.  Consistency is the bugabear of small minds, isn't it?

     Now that Dr. Cone has come to the conclusion that God is on the side of himself and his fellow Africans there are logical consequences.  He explains those on page 9:

     In order to be Christian theology, a white theology must cease being white (his italics) theology and become black theology by denying whiteness as an acceptable form of human existence and affirming blackness as God's intention for humanity.

     One wonders why God created White people when he had gratified his intentions by creating Africans.  I'm definitely not going to argue theology with Dr. Cone.  It's impossible anyway because he doesn't intend for anyone to have an arguement.  How can one argue with God's intention as understood by Dr. Cone?  I would refer him instead to my earlier quote or part of it:  If God is not involved in human history, then all theology is useless...a meaningless diversion. 

     Having got it right the first time I see no reason for Dr. Cone to continue.  All the rest of his writing is as useless as his theology.

     The black-white struggle if it can be settled without open warfare at all has already been settled by the sciences of biology, genetics and evolution.

     The problem is to be settled there and not in some wishful theology.  If scientific  results are unacceptable to Africans then the next step is only too obvious.   They say they will riot if denied an African president at this time in history.  Well, let 'em.

Few days ago I had an idea to make Celebrity SEX weblog on wordpress because everyone was asking me and now this is finished!

You have to see it!!! I have found Miley Cyrus Nude Video in the Internet!

If this video not a Fake then I think it will be a real scandal!!

Emma Watson is the most beautiful girl on this planet and this video is a proof of that!

Emma Watson Nip Slip Video below! Her Breast is the best!

Attention! Adult content! only 18+!!!

Now I don't want to get into the long list of insane things that Watson has said in the past, which include statements about killing off all stupid people to remove them from the gene pool and that a women should be allowed to abort if she knew her child was going to be born a homosexual, I simply want to express my opinion that his current statement is not only important enough to be worth mentioning, but also completely pointless to be angry about.  

Most of the anger about Watson's point of view seems to stem from the simple fact that he is a scientist and therefore (I think anyway) assumes that when he comes to a conclusion, other people will look at his findings with an open mind and be at the very least intrigued.  However most people are far more prone to illogical and irrational reactions then to open debate of scientific study.  So by stating that African's are not as intelligent as other ethnic groups, which considering his past problems with social interactions, he more then likely also stated this information in a cold scientific way which came across as hateful bigotry.

He apologized for offending anyone unintentionally, though I still feel he has nothing to apologize for, so for a moment I'm going to hypothetically assume that what he stated is in fact 100 percent true.  

One of his points was that it is simply illogical to assume that various ethnic groups' intelligence would evolve in exactly the same way despite being geologically separated for long periods of history.  Our body structures differ greatly, so why wouldn't our brains also differ when compared to one another?  This being true would certainly make one think about everyone on earth being equal in a new light, but most people already know that the idea of everyone having an equal chance at excelling is a fairy tale.  Most of our future capability is decided at conception by the genetic code given to us by our parents, and nothing aside from genetic tinkering can change that.  

Another important thing that Watson stated was that while he found this to be the norm, there were still lots of African people that greatly excel in intelligence.  He was trying to talk about genetic predisposition, not make a sweeping statement that all Africans are the dumbest people on earth.  

My biggest complaint about being be made about this isn't even that they just simply shouldn't be made at a scientist for simply being a scientist and stating something that could be fact.  My complaint is that is statement, be it true or false, does not alter or change a single IQ of anyone on earth.  Finding out that a certain ethnic group might now be as gifted in the brain as another doesn't make any member of that group less intelligent then they were prior just as it doesn't make any other ethnic group more intelligent then they were previously.  

It's so petty to be angry at something that you have no control over and ultimately does not affect your life. I feel as though we should know everything we can about the human mind, about every humans mind.  We set up rules in society under the assumption that everyone basically understands and thinks on the same exact level when ultimately that might just be an oversized pipe dream.  

Hopefully one day we can get over ourselves and begin to accept and work with our various differences instead of bicker over them.

Obama, Wright And Liberation Theology

by

R.E. Prindle

     In his title Black Theology & Black Power of 1969 the originator of Black Liberation Theology, James H. Cone, quotes Abraham Lincoln on page 10:

     I will say that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races- that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, not of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.  And inasmuch they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

     And you think the South assassinated Abraham Lincoln? 

     There can be no equivocating that Mr. Cone, Mr. Wright and Mr. Obama believe the opposite.  I do not think they are wrong from their point of view, Mr. Cone reasons accurately and well, but neither I nor any thinking White person can accomodate BLT.  I stand with Abraham Lincoln and opposed to Barry Obama et al.  We have an irreconcilable difference.

     Lincoln also said that the nation could not exist half free (States) and half slave (States).  That irreconcilable difference could only be resolved by a long costly civil war however the elimination of the slave States was not the elimination of the black and white problem.  That was only exacerbated.

     In accordance with Lincoln's thought the US today cannot continue to exist half black and half white in equality.  One or the other must exercise superiority over the other.  This problem can no longer be avoided.  We are at end game as Black Liberation  Theology acknowledges..

     At present the war is being waged on the Stealth political level with Africans in collaboration with their Liberal allies and corrupt judges at all levels of courts who sneak riderss into bills disenfranchising Whites in favor of Blacks.  The corrupt Judges construe all laws to advance the Black agenda of superiority.  The leading edge of the disenfranchisement of the White male is the so-called anti-Hate laws and Affirmative Action.  Both give to the African that which they are not entitled by their abilities.

     Mr. Cone acknowledges that the sturggle is to the death.  In words echoing the program of the New Abolitionist Party Mr. Cone says that it is. All italics his.

     The same is true of the words "Black Power."  To what "object" does it point?  What does it mean when used by its advocates?  It means complete emancipation of black people from white oppression by whatever means black people deem necessary.

     And Black Liberation Theology deems the means to be the complete elimination of White people.  Mr. Obama sat for twenty years absorbing this Black Liberation Theology of Mr. Cone as understood by the Reverend Wright.  I care little that Mr. Wright said 'Goddamn America.'  I would expect him too. The logic of his position demands it.  I do feel his pain and even sympathize I hope he can feel mine and sympathize with it.  Mr. Obama cannot claim that he didn't know he was listening to Black Liberation Theology nor can Michele Obama.

     But, as Mr. Cone means that when the battle is over only one side will be left standing in his version of the latter day San Domingo Moment I see absolutely no reason to diagree with him.  I am one with Abraham Lincoln.  This nation cannot exist half slave and half free.  I do not intend to exchange places with the Africans.  I do not intend myself or mine to be the half that is slave.

Evolution, Melanin And Brain Power

by

R.E. Prindle

     There is a whole bunch of nonsense around on the topic of why some people have a lot of melanin and others have little.  Melanin is the chemical compound that makes for skin color.

     The most common argument is that melanin is somehow affected by heat producing more in the tropics and less in the temperate zones.  According to this argument Caucasians are Negroes who have lived in the North for a long time thus losing their melanin.  No attempt to offer a mechanism for the process is offered.

     The argument can then be used to say that mankind has evolved to a point some hundred fifty thousand years ago when Homo Sapiens severed connections with the Last Hominid Predecessor and no further.  A big bronx cheer for that notion.

     In fact evolution has been continuing unabated since the LHP.  Much of that evolution has been in the development of the capabilities of the brain.  Now, when some physical change to an organ takes place the matter for the change must come from the existing reservoir of matter.  It is impossible for new matter to be added to the reservoir to facilitate the change.

     Thus if some function is added to the brain then the matter to do so must come from somewhere else in the organism.  If one organ is increased or added then another must be diminished or eliminated.

     Now, if the continuing evolution takes place in one species of Homo Sapiens and not the others that must create a visible physical difference.  It has to be.

     I am going to suggest that the material for the evolution of the Caucasian brain was provided by the conversion of melanin to the changes in the Caucasian brain.  The use of the melanin left the Caucasian White or pale.  Thus without the evoltuion of the brain the Caucasian would still be Black while still standing at the intellectual capacity of the Black African.

     I don't need to quote the views of James Watson but there you have it.

     Thus the thermometer has nothing to do with skin color but the surfeit or lack of melanin probably has something to do with IQ.

     I have said it before and I see no reason as yet to change my opinion,  Blacks and Caucasians are two different species of Homo Sapiens or well on the way to being so.

"Color, Controversy and DNA" - The Root Editor-in-Chief Henry Louis Gates Jr. talks with DNA pioneer James Watson about his controversial statements about race and intelligence.  Be sure to read Gates' thoughts on the discussion, where he makes the important distinction that Watson is not racist, but he is a racialist.

As I drove away from Cold Spring Harbor, I realized that my conversation with Dr. Watson only confirmed something I already, with great trepidation, have come to believe: That the last great battle over racism will be fought not over access to a lunch counter, or a hotel room, or to the right to vote, or even the right to occupy the White House; it will be fought in a laboratory, in a test tube, under a microscope, in our genome, on the battleground of our DNA.  It is here where we, as a society, will rank and interpret our genetic difference.

Henry Louis Gates Jr. is editor-in-chief of The Root and is the Alphonse Fletcher University Professor at Harvard University.

Click for the full article - The Science of Racism - or here for the full interview with James Watson.

When asked if Watson is a racist, Gates answers:

I don't think James Watson is a racist. But I do think that he is a racialist—that is, he believes that certain observable traits or forms of behavior among groups of human beings might, indeed, have a biological basis in the code that scientists, eventually, may be able to ascertain, that the "gene" is some mythically neutral space and what it purportedly "measures" or "determines" is independent of environmental factors, variables and influences. The difference, the distinction, between being a racist and a racialist is crucial. . .

. . . Yet precisely because of the misuses of science and pseudoscience since the 18th century, which put into place fixed categories of  four or five "races" to justify an economic order dependent upon the exploitation of blacks (and other people of color) as cheap sources of labor, starting with slavery and continuing through Jim Crow and beyond, it has never been possible for a person of African descent to function in American society simply and purely as an "individual." And if the presidential candidacy of Barack Obama has taught him, and us, anything at all, it is that this perhaps ideal state of affairs—to function as an individual and to be judged on your individual merits—still remains a most elusive and somewhat naïve dream.

Watson's error is that he associates individual genetic differences (which, of course, do in fact exist) with ethnic variation (which is sociocultural and highly malleable). . .

Here's the part that caught my attention:

Watson's error is that he associates individual genetic differences (which, of course, do in fact exist) with ethnic variation (which is sociocultural and highly malleable). Character traits-abilities and behaviors, such as intelligence or basketball skills, that are popularly attributed to groups and are defined as "genetic"-will, in fact, continue to delimit the freedom of choice and expression of individuals who fall into those "racial" categories, regardless of our individual attainments and achievements. In the end, visions that are racialist may end up doing the same work of those that are racist. This is a lesson Watson has lived, and it is one from which we all might learn.