State Of Oregon Department Of Human Services Dr. Bruce: Fill & Download for Free

“Within a 5-meter radius of that fire pit, they uncovered a dozen more spear tips -- sophisticated Clovis points, all of them -- the gnawed bones of several seemingly domestic sheep, a shredded remnant of what appeared to be a leather drinking sack (a bota), and a human skull.By summer's end, Dr. Riggs had circumstantial evidence that early humans had migrated to this hemisphere from the Iberian Peninsula. But most astounding was the level at which this body of evidence had been found. The geological strata in which the items lay dated from a very narrow (and little understood) time frame known as the Proto-Paleolithic, indicating that human beings had put their footprint on the New World 40,000 years before anyone had previously believed possible.”CONTINUED AT THE BOTTOM!A Recent Discovery, Although "Politically Incorrect", Proves SOLUTREANS Were The First Americans(CNN) -- It's a discovery that could rewrite the story of southeastern United States. Stone tools and mastodon bones found at the bottom of a Florida river point to humans living in the region 14,550 years ago. That's more than 1,500 years earlier than previously believed, scientists say."This is a big deal," said Jessi Halligan, one of the study's authors and an assistant professor of anthropology at Florida State University."It's pretty exciting. We thought we knew the answers to how and when we got here, but now the story is changing." The discovery on the Aucilla River was reported Friday by the journal Science Advances. Here are some of the details:Butchered bones, knivesThe four-year study included sending divers to the Page-Ladson site, a deep hole 30 feet underwater in the Aucilla River, researchers said. There, divers excavated artifacts such as butchered bones of extinct animals, a mastodon tusk and a biface, which is a knife fragment with sharp edges. Divers excavated bones and tools from the Page-Ladson, which is 30 feet underwater in the Aucilla River. "At Page-Ladson, hunter-gatherers, possibly accompanied by dogs, butchered or scavenged a mastodon carcass at the sinkhole's edge next to a small pond at around 14,550 years ago," the authors said in Science Advances.What was once a pond was buried beneath the murky waters for a series of reasons, including centuries of civilization, rising sea levels and layers of sediment. "These people had successfully adapted to their environment; they knew where to find freshwater, game, plants, raw materials for making tools, and other critical resources for survival." The scientists used radiocarbon dating techniques to find out how old the artifacts are.Aaaah! What about the Clovis?Until that point, researchers had believed the Clovis people were among the first inhabitants of the Americas about 13,000 years ago, according to the study. Page-Ladson is the first pre-Clovis site documented in the southeastern part of North America, it said. "The new discoveries at Page-Ladson show that people were living in the Gulf Coast area much earlier than believed," said Michael R. Waters, director of Texas A&M's center for the study of the first Americans. Waters was one of the study's lead authors.In the 1980s, other researchers had retrieved several stone tools and a mastodon tusk from the site, but their discovery did not make much news. Halligan and her colleagues returned to the site in 2012 and expanded on the previous research and archaeological finds. In one of the instances, a mastodon tusk recovered earlier had deep grooves. They concluded the grooves were made by humans during the tusk's extraction.Now... more discoveries that have been suppressed because of politicizing the "Native Americans came from Asia" theory. Enter -- the European SOLUTREANS!Scallop fishermen net historic artifactsTasty deep-sea scallops like to burrow deep in the ocean floor. Fishermen plow and trawl the sea bottom far off shore, pulling up thousands of scallops at a time in their nets. Sometimes they also find other things.In 1971 a scallop boat, the Cinmar, was fishing 60 miles east of the Virginia cape, in 240 feet of water when they pulled up part of the jaw from an ancient mastodon -- a large extinct elephant from the last ice age. Along with this catch they also found a curious stone spear point that resembled the famous Clovis points from 13,000 years ago.The area where these artefacts were found was once dry land. During the last ice age the oceans of the world were much lower. Much of their water was locked up in huge glaciers that covered the Northern latitudes. The bones and spear were likely remnants of pre-historic hunting by some of the earliest inhabitants of North America. But there were even more surprises to come.Carbon dating of the mastodon bone indicated it was 22,760 years old. Researchers also scrutinized the blade. It had not been smoothed by wave action or tumbling. They concluded the blade had not been pushed out to sea but had been buried where the Cinmar found it."My guess is the blade was used to butcher the mastodon... I'm almost positive... Its makers probably paddled from Europe and arrived in America thousands of years ahead of the western migration, making them the first Americans."Dennis J. Stanford, co-author of Across Atlantic Ice: The Origin of America's Clovis Culture and Smithsonian Institution anthropoligist.Chemical analysis of the spear point showed that it originated from flint in an area that is now France! Analysis of the way it was made showed that it was not a Clovis point at all, but a hand crafted point made by European humans known as the Solutreans.The first humans entered North America from Western Europe -- not Asia[Above:] The coastline of the continents was very different at the height of the last ice age. It was then that mysterious Stone Age European people known as the Solutreans paddled along an ice cap jutting into the North Atlantic. They lived like Inuits, harvesting seals and seabirds.Most archaeological evidence of the Solutreans indicates they originated in what is now Spain, Portugal and southern France [A] beginning about 25,000 years ago. No skeletons have been found, so no DNA is available to study.The Solutreans had a distinctive way of making their stone blades and this same skill and technology has been found in numerous archaeological sites along the East coast of North America [B and C].Stone tools recovered from two other mid-Atlantic sites -- Cactus Hills, Va., 45 miles south of Richmond, and Meadowcroft Rockshelter, in southern Pennsylvania -- date to at least 16,000 years ago. Those tools also strongly resemble Solutrean blades found in Europe.The Solutreans eventually spread across North America, carrying their distinctive blades with them and giving birth to the later Clovis culture, which emerged some 13,000 years ago. Clovis gets its name from Clovis, New Mexico, where the first such blade was discovered.Old Paradigms Die SlowlyUntil very recently the dominant theory of human migration to North America had Asians crossing the Bering Straits [F] to Alaska and coming through a narrow ice free corridor [E] that allowed access to the Central Plains. This was supposed to have happened around 15,000 years ago. A major archaeological site used to support the Asian "first" migration was the Dyuktai culture in Ushki, Siberia; however this site has recently been re-dated to a much younger 10,000 years old. Despite the much older dates of the Solutreans in eastern North America, many anthropologists continue to cling to the Beringia idea.It is inevitable that these old ideas will give way to the Solutrean hypothesis. I'll give some of the reasons in this article, including some new discoveries in Nevada [D] and also:Evidence of knapping (stone tool making) techniquesEvidence of DNA markersEvidence of ice flow dataEvidence of cultural dataI think you will see that it is time to rewrite history and give credit to the Solutreans, not only for the Clovis Culture, but for the paleo-Indians of North America.Evidence of stone tool techniquesDespite the best efforts of archaeologists and other researchers, the Siberian archaeological record has yet to yield compelling evidence to link the first American settlers with Siberia. One of the ways to establish such a link would be to find evidence in Siberia of the Clovis points that are found at most early American sites.Excavation at the Dyuktai Cave site in north eastern Siberia revealed an assemblage that included stone spear points similar to Clovis points [A], as well as small stone tools known as microblades [D], and the remains of large mammoth and musk-ox. A series of similar sites were later found in the region, and some archaeologists have suggested that it was the people of the Dyuktai culture who crossed the Bering Land Bridge and settled the Americas.Another difference in Asian v. European blades in that both Solutrean and Clovis are bi-facial, meaning that each side was completely flaked. In Asian blades the flute (i.e. a flaked or thinned zone at the base to accommodate fastening to a shaft) is absent and usually flaked more on one side than the other. Although the flute is dramatic on Clovis points, Solutrean points have a more subtle thinning at the base.Although both the Dyuktai and Clovis sites exhibit evidence of big-game hunting, there are significant differences between them. For example, the Dyuktai points do not display the characteristic Clovis "flute" [B] . In addition, the microblade tools (i.e. several sharp pieces of stone were placed in grooved bone) which are common at the Dyuktai sites are not found at early archaeological sites in the Americas. Also, as we stated earlier, the Dyuktai site is much younger than Clovis.Like cutting diamondsStone tools may seem primitive in today's world but, before the invention of metallurgy and electricity, these artifacts were the hi-tech of their time. Using these sharp instruments for hunting and cutting was vital to human survival. The designs had to evolve to be reliable and highly efficient. Once a particular design or production technique was perfected it was duplicated by the artisans and tool makers of that particular culture.Archaeologists and anthropologists have spent years examining the stone knives and spear points of various ancient cultures. They have looked at every detail -- every step -- involved in shaping a rough stone to a streamlined spear point. Many, like Dennis Stanford and Bruce Bradley [1], have even attempted to duplicate the production of stone points from sites around the globe.Finding the right type of stone is critical. Flint, quartz and jasper were prized for their strength and flaking abilities. Various techniques were used to remove flakes and shape the stones. Sometimes the stone was struck with another stone and other times the technique called for a softer implement such as an antler bone and just the right pressure to carefully crack and remove flakes from the surface or edge of a stone point."'Clovis' is the name given to the distinctive tools made by people starting around 13,000 years ago. The Clovis people invented the 'Clovis point', a spear-shaped weapon made of stone that is found in Texas and the rest of the United States and northern Mexico. These weapons were used to hunt animals, including mammoths and mastodons, from 13,000 to 12,700 years ago.--Michael Waters, director of the Center for the Study of the First Americans in the Department of Anthropology at Texas A&M [source]By understanding the various techniques used by different cultures they determined that the Clovis and older Solutreans had developed something special -- called "over flaking" -- where a large flake was removed laterally across the point instead of many smaller flakes. This was a dangerous technique if not done with a high degree of skill. One wrong move, or too much pressure, and the knife or spear point would be ruined.It is this skill that they saw exhibited by the Solutreans, and later the Clovis culture, that convinced them of an ancestral link. No such technique appears in stone points from Siberia.Once you make the connection between Clovis artifacts and the Solutreans, the distribution of Clovis in the East makes perfect sense. The origin of earliest inhabitants of North america did not come from the Northwest -- they came from Europe by way of the North Atlantic ice sheet and moved West across the continent.The map [above] also suggests that they preferred to live near rivers, perhaps the preferential habitation of game. The map also suggests that the Clovis migration took them North through the ice-free corridor, although only a few artifacts have been found there.Some die-hard archaeologists have denied the eastern origins of Clovis, claiming that they originated in the West, migrated South to Central America where they crossed over to the East coast and moved North. This complicated migration is used to explain the multitude of Clovis artifacts found in the East. Their evidence for this is a recent find of Clovis points in Alaska. But critics point out that the dates of these points are about 12,000 years ago -- well after the arrival of Clovis in the western continent. [source]It is important to remember that the proponents of the Clovis/Solutrean hypothesis do not deny that a prior substantial migration to the Americas from Asia took place. It is possible that the continent was inhabited by humans tens of thousands of years before either group was in North America. What we are discussing here is the migration of a culture with historic traits such as tool making, hunting patterns and presumably a common language and social organization. We can only discover this kind of unique population if consistent evidence of these cultural traits is found.Most certainly, migrations from Asia did eventually overcome those of the Solutreans and subsequent Clovis culture. Stone tool development changed as mastodons were replaced by smaller game. Rival tribes may have annihilated each other, as we have seen such violence in the Kennewick Man's remains. [source]Intentionally buried time capsulesMost of the finds involving caches of Clovis artifacts were intentionally buried with the blades carefully stacked together and placed in a vertical alignment to avoid being crushed. The reason for these burials is unclear but may have been for safe keeping and re-use by hunters when their supply of blades or the stones to make them became scarce.Also, archaeologists have found giant Clovis blades that are too big for hunting and appear more ornamental than utilitarian. Were these enlarged teaching tools to help future artisans? Or perhaps they had some religious or totem significance? We just do not know.Besides stone blades, hooks and sewing needles made from bone have been found at some sites. It is thought that the Solutreans and later Clovis cultures must have been adept at making warm and durable clothing from animal skins to survive the cold climates.This introduces another interesting hypothesis. The Inuit in alaska make sea worthy boats from animal skins. It is certainly possible that the Solutreans, having mastered the sewing of animal skins, could have done the same thousands of years earlier.Remembering Kennewick ManThe human skeletal remains that have come to be referred to as the "Kennewick Man", or the "Ancient One", were found in July, 1996 below the surface of Lake Wallula, a section of the Columbia River pooled behind McNary Dam in Kennewick, Washington. Almost immediately controversy developed regarding who was responsible for determining what would be done with the remains. Claims were made by Indian tribes, local officials, and some members of the scientific community. The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), the agency responsible for the land where the remains were recovered took possession, but its actions, following the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), to resolve the situation were challenged in Federal court.In March, 1998, the Department of the Interior and National Park Service agreed to assist the COE in resolving some of the issues related to the Federal case.Between 1998 and 2000, the Department of the Interior and National Park Service, in cooperation with the Corps of Engineers, the federal agency responsible for the Kennewick remains, conducted a series of scientific examinations of the remains. No fewer than eighteen nationally and internationally recognized scientists and scholars conducted this variety of historical and scientific examinations, analyses, tests, and studies.Radio Carbon-14 TestsPrior to the detailed examination of the Kennewick human remains in February, 1999, reported by Powell and Rose (1999) there were questions concerning whether the skeletal elements collected during July and August, 1996, were from a single individual. Powell and Rose demonstrated that the remains obtained from the original collector by the Corps of Engineers and curated since September, 1996, by them indeed were from a single individual. Also arguing for these bones being from the same individual is the fact that three independent radiocarbon dates consistently show the bones to date between about 8000 and 8500 BP.Age and SexAll morphological traits of the skull and pelvis scored in the male category. With the exception of the midlambdoid and anterior median palatine sutures, all others listed in the Standards volume (Buikstra and Ubelaker, 1994) were closed. The internal aspects of the sutures could not be viewed because the calvarium was filled with matrix. The sutures suggest an old age-at-death. The pubic symphysis and auricular surface morphology suggest an age of 45-50 years.Height & StatureBased on the more complete arm elements, the stature of the Kennewick individual is best approximated by humeral dimensions regressed on modern Mongoloids (Table 5). This produced stature estimates ranging from 173.9 to 177.3 cm (5' 9" inches to 5' 10"). Arm estimates have a standard error of 4.25 to 4.66 cm (1.6" to 1.8"). Stature estimates based on fragmentary elements of the leg are presented in Table 6. Mean stature estimates, across all reference samples (Table 6) provide a range of 172.70 cm to 178.36 cm (5' 8" to 5' 10").DNA AnalysisDNA was not able to be analyzed due to degradation over time. Anthropologist Joseph Powell of the University of New Mexico was allowed to examine the remains. Powell used craniometric data obtained by anthropologist William White Howells of Harvard University and anthropologist Tsunehiko Hanihara of Saga University that had the advantage of including data drawn from Asian and North American populations. Powell said that Kennewick Man was not European but most resembled the Ainu and Polynesians. Powell said that the Ainu descend from the Jomon people who are an East Asian population with "closest biological affinity with south-east Asians rather than western Eurasian peoples". Furthermore, Powell said that dental analysis showed the skull had a 94 percent chance of being a Sundadont group like the Ainu and Polynesians and only a 48 percent chance of being a Sinodont group like that of North Asia. Powell said analysis of the skull showed it to be "unlike American Indians and Europeans". Powell concluded that Kennewick man "is clearly not a Caucasoid unless Ainu and Polynesians are considered Caucasoid."Embedded Spear in HipAnalysis found that bone had partially grown around a 79 mm (3.1 in) stone projectile lodged in the ilium, part of the pelvic bone. On x-ray, nothing appeared. Analysis put the bone through a CT scan, and it was discovered the projectile was made from a siliceous gray stone that was found to have igneous (intrusive volcanic) origins. The projectile was leaf-shaped, long, broad and had serrated edges, all fitting the definition of a Cascade point. This type of point is a feature of the Cascade phase, which occurred roughly 7,500 to 12,000 years ago and post-dates the Clovis Culture.The Nampap Figure: Shattering Traditional HistoryLittle did Domingo "Buzzy" Ybargoitia know that by drilling a well to bring water to his sheep, he would change the way we view the history of humans in the New World."My girls need to drink, that's all I was thinking about. It gets mighty dry around here come late summer anymore. I don't know what's going on, but I do know my granpoppa never had any trouble keeping his flock watered, and my pop didn't either. But I've had to truck it in from Marsing when it gets really hot."Ybargoitia manages his family's sheep operation in Idaho's lonely Owyhee Mountains, an hour's drive over rough roads from the tiny Oregon village of Jordan Valley. Two years ago this coming April, he brought a drilling contractor from Nampa to install a dependable well. It was tough drilling until they got through the dense lime deposits, or caliche, that underlies so much of this remote southwest corner of Idaho."A couple of times, I was afraid those boys were going to give up," says Ybargoitia. "They'd pull their bit out of the shaft and just shake their heads when they saw how chunked up it was getting."On the second morning of drilling, they unearthed an astonishing surprise. The hole was below the caliche, down to about 26 feet, when Ted Burquart of the drill crew pulled what looked to be a child's doll from the mud and sand accumulating next to the hole."At first, I just thought it was just one of those Troll dolls you see hanging from rearview mirrors," explained Burquart. "I wiped the crud off and took a better look at it. It was whittled out of rock, I could tell that much. And what I thought was crazy Troll hair all flattened out was really a funny little cap. Like a beret, maybe."Ybargoitia knew immediately what it was. As a youth, he had spent too many years with the Oinkari folk dancers of Boise to not recognize a traditional Basque txapela, even if it was small enough to top a five-inch figure. He stopped the drilling and sifted through the pilings with his fingers, wondering what else might have been brought up. Within minutes, he had found several blades, chipped to a razor's edge on both sides, ranging from 9 to 20 centimeters long. Each one had a notch into which a spear shaft could be set. He also found a small, partially eaten and mummified sheep thigh, impaled on a nearly petrified willow skewer."Back then, I didn't know a Clovis point from a Buck knife, but I sure as heck know a lamb kebab when I see one."He was also relatively certain that all of these items -- particularly the primitive figurine -- were highly unusual coming from so far below the surface. Ybargoitia sent the drill crew home, gathered up everything he'd found into his lunch box, and called the Treasure Valley Community College in Ontario, Oregon. He was referred to the Cultural Anthropology Department."When Buzzy showed me those things, I about fell out of my chair," said Dr. Benton Schrall, the department head. "North American artifacts aren't exactly my field. Still, I recognized immediately that he had stumbled onto something very significant."That afternoon, Dr. Schrall e-mailed a colleague at Washington State University in Pullman, who put him in touch with Dr. Lawrence Riggs, the chairman of WSU's Archaeology Department. Said Dr. Schrall, "When I described to Larry what I had, right there on my desk, the first thing out of his mouth was, 'Whatever you do, don't tell any Indians about it!' I guess he got burned pretty bad on that Kennewick Man deal."With two of his brightest grad students in tow, Dr. Riggs drove to Ontario the next day. As soon as he saw the artifacts, he knew exactly what he would be doing for the next several summers. "Clovis points in Idaho? And from 7 meters down! That alone is an archaeologist's dream, without even considering the totem figure."Fearful of letting that figurine out of his sight, Dr. Riggs shaved a thin specimen from the bottom of one tiny foot and sent it to Le Duchamp Laboratoire in Lyons, France, a world leader in intra-spectral comparative analysis. He then spent the next six weeks organizing what would become the largest -- and most covert -- archaeological dig in Idaho's history. Even Ybargoitia was sworn to secrecy."Larry Riggs had me sign a paper that said as long as I didn't tell anyone else about what I'd found, his university would foot the bill for another well. He came down on spring break, along with a nine-seater van full of students, and they set up a cyclone fence around that spot and put a tent over the hole. It about killed me that I couldn't tell anybody. It was like getting to be in a movie or something, only I couldn't even let my friends know I was in it."The excavation proper began after the semester ended on May 21, 2005, and by Labor Day of that year, Dr. Riggs had confirmed what his instincts had been telling him since he first saw the figurine. Le Duchamp lab sent him their analysis of the sample in early July. They had tested the specimen three times, and for further confirmation, they had sent a portion to another independent laboratory in Quebec to verify their findings. There could be no mistake: The sample was from a unique soapstone found only in a region of northern Spain, on the southern slopes of the Pyrenees Mountains.It took 10 weeks of excruciatingly detailed soil removal for the team to get down as far as the drill bit had reached, but at a depth of just under 8 meters -- the investigators came across a strata of soot and charcoal, indicating the remains of an ancient campfire. Within a 5-meter radius of that fire pit, they uncovered a dozen more spear tips -- sophisticated Clovis points, all of them -- the gnawed bones of several seemingly domestic sheep, a shredded remnant of what appeared to be a leather drinking sack (a bota), and a human skull.By summer's end, Dr. Riggs had circumstantial evidence that early humans had migrated to this hemisphere from the Iberian Peninsula. But most astounding was the level at which this body of evidence had been found. The geological strata in which the items lay dated from a very narrow (and little understood) time frame known as the Proto-Paleolithic, indicating that human beings had put their footprint on the New World 40,000 years before anyone had previously believed possible.Even more momentous were the "associative implicatory collateral traces," as they are called in the field of paleoanthropology, which implied that wherever these people came from, they brought their sheep with them.The First Ancient Settlers in North America

The only “fact" that contradicts Jared Taylor is the childish accusation that he's a “racist.” That's all the left has to offer in the way of arguments.I’ve decided to post a more comprehensive explanation of my opinions:Why I believe in race-realismWhy do I believe in non-superficial racial differences?I don’t claim to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that such differences exist. Mr. Stevens writes, in adifferent article:There is a possibility that someday, someone will gather enough detailed data and perform a complex enough analysis, that they will be able to demonstrate, beyond a reasonable doubt, with no apparent flaws in experimental design or methodology, that there is some difference between two groups of people that we really wish, for political reasons, we hadn’t found.To illustrate this, I’m suggesting the hypothetical example where a group of people with genetic marker X (which is present more in white people) performs spatial rotation tasks on average 1.3 times faster than people with genetic marker Y (which is present more in black people).In a perfect world, scientists could go about their research unhindered – and without fear of asking the “wrong” questions. In our world, however, there are grave consequences for any scientist who dares broach the topic of racial differences.James Watson, Michael Levin and Philippe Rushton are a few examples of academics who suffered for their racial research. Other scientists, such as Armand LeRoi and Steven Pinker avoided this fate by (mostly) speaking in hints and being extremely diplomatic. In 2006, Bruce Lahn claimed to have made a breakthrough in evolutionary science. According to The Wall Street Journal (the article can now be found at American Renaissance):CHICAGO—Last September, Bruce Lahn, a professor of human genetics at the University of Chicago, stood before a packed lecture hall and reported the results of a new DNA analysis: He had found signs of recent evolution in the brains of some people, but not of others.It was a triumphant moment for the young scientist. He was up for tenure and his research was being featured in back-to-back articles in the country’s most prestigious science journal. Yet today, Dr. Lahn says he is moving away from the research. “It’s getting too controversial,” he says.Dr. Lahn had touched a raw nerve in science: race and intelligence.What Dr. Lahn told his audience was that genetic changes over the past several thousand years might be linked to brain size and intelligence. He flashed maps that showed the changes had taken hold and spread widely in Europe, Asia and the Americas, but weren’t common in sub-Saharan Africa.Professor Lahn, originally from China, did not understand that such research is not welcome in the West.Mr. Stevens admits that we would not wish to find such differences – for “political reasons.” Stevens’ desire to not find such differences is the default position of our government at all levels, of our media at all levels, of our educational system at all levels, of every single one of our corporations – and of practically every individual in the West with any substantial clout or influence. The ENTIRE EDIFICE of Western civilization is bent on NOT finding such differences.If they don’t want to find them, they certainly are not going to look for them. As an iconoclast (years ago, as I was forming my opinions), this made me question the motivations of all these powerful forces. It caste a shadow of doubt over their claims and made me want to investigate further.Who makes the rules? Who sets the expectations and mores of society? It’s those with money and influence who do so. They own the media, they run the government and schools, and they control the corporations. More intelligent people tend to rise to the top. This is true regardless of race. Consequentially, those who pull the strings have little intimate contact with average people. The blacks they know in their personal lives are among the talented tenth. With the exception of their outward appearance, these blacks differ little from elite whites. Thus, when a newspaper editor thinks of blacks, it’s the well-spoken one on his staff that comes to mind. When the corporate executive reads about claims of lower black I.Q., he thinks, “How ridiculous. I play golf with a black man and he’s very intelligent!” These powerful people are not forced to use public transportation with the hoi polloi. They do not live in the inner cities, and their children do not attend ghetto schools. Therefore, it’s easy to see why the ruling class feels revulsion at the concepts people like myself advance; it conflicts with their own life experience – and everything they see in the media.What do we mean by “intelligence?” I’ll quote “The Affirmative Action Hoax” (first edition) by Steven Farron (Appendix IV):The reason why the scores on all these tests correlate closely with each other is that they all require analyzing, synthesizing, and manipulation information; distinguishing relevant from irrelevant information; and other types of abilities that are commonly called “intelligent.” For the same reason, they have a low correlation with scores on tests of spelling or simple arithmetic computation…Assumptions can be very expensive. The assumption that all races are equal in average intellect has cost the United States many billions of dollars, and untold ruined lives. If we assume, as the government/corporations/media/educational system does, that there are no innate differences in intelligence between the races, then the consistent disparities we observe MUST be the result of systematic discrimination – or the legacy of slavery/Jim Crow. This assumption forces us to caste whites in a negative light. It taints us all with some sort of original sin. A sin we are forever obliged to atone for. It means, ultimately, that public schools will not teach white children to be proud of their heritage as whites; in contrast to the way those schools teach blacks to be proud of their heritage as blacks.When various populations obviously vary in average height, hair texture, skull shape, muscle type, bone density, disease resistance and overall bodily strength, why should we assume that these populations, having evolved in vastly different environments, would miraculously end up with exactly the same mental capabilities. Such a belief, in my opinion, requires faith in a god who would perform such a wondrous feat. I’ll quote James Watson:“A priori, there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so.”On the face of it, the burden of proof lies with race-denialists. They are the ones whose position is at odds with science. The default position should be that of race-realists – and public policy should be determined accordingly: That each individual should be judged on his own merit, and let the chips fall where they may – and that our right of freedom of association be honored. If there are no black physicists, and only a handful of female engineers, then so be it. If neighborhoods and schools end up being racially, religiously, or gender, segregated, then so be it.But enough beating around the bush. Here are the reasons I believe in innate racial differences:Race realists/hereditarians do not ignore the impact of environment. Most of us claim that our genes account for some 50% of our mental capabilities, with environmental factors (such as nutrition, cultural upbringing and health making up the rest). But race-denialists ignore/deny the importance of genetics on intelligence (however we define it). They accept the “blank slate” (tabula rasa) dogma, which claims that our mental capabilities are shaped entirely by environment. Though the concept of tabula rasa had existed long before the genetics of race became a contentious issue, race-denialists have forced themselves into ascribing to this archaic and discredited notion. They have locked themselves into a sinking ship.While it’s true that race CAN BE a social construct, as Stevens points out, when race-realists speak of “race,” we’re referring to one’s actual genetic/geographical origins. A person who chooses to call himself “Native American” because his great great grandmother was pure-blooded whatever, is NOT a Native American. If the rest of his ancestry is European, then he’s “white”. Most of us don’t give much credence to “pure races.”Geographical origins correspond closely with what we call “race” for the simple reason that humans have, until recently, bred almost exclusively with those from the same area. As long as we accept that genes play a role in intelligence, which is all but undeniable (considering numerous twin/adoption studies), then it’s reasonable to assume that different regions will produce people of different aptitudes. These difference may be small, or they may be large; without research, no assumptions should be made.2) I.Q. tests, though they may have been culturally biased early on, are no longer so. The fact that Asians consistently score higher than whites, even in tests that were devised by whites, should tell us as much.There have been numerous claims of modern police/fire department entrance tests (proxies for I.Q. tests) being “racist,” nobody has been able to identify specific questions, within those tests, that are culturally biased. Were we so inclined, we could use this phenomenon to help us define “intelligence.” Intelligence would then be “the talent required for any academic task where blacks perform worse than whites.” At any rate, this makes about as much sense as claiming that all black deficiencies are the result of bias.Has anybody come up with an academic test where blacks consistently score higher than whites? Where whites score higher than Asians? If there were such a test, we would never hear the end of it. The news would be splashed all over the front pages of newspapers, television shows would feature the story at prime time for months on end, and billboards would announce it for all to see. If it’s cultural bias that’s behind low black scores, then it should be easy to devise a test that favors blacks – and the political will is certainly there. Yet this has not been done. In light of this fact, any unbiased person would conclude that lower black scores are the result of lower innate mental capabilities.There is another, often overlooked, aspect to this matter: Blacks do not all share a single culture. There are thousands of cultures in Africa, the Caribbean and the Americas that blacks belong to. Culture is NOT a common denominator among blacks. Neither is religion or socio-economic status. The only trait that unites all blacks is that their ancestors came from sub-Saharan Africa. If we filter out the more intelligent ones (through selective migration, wealth or attendance at exclusive schools), then naturally we’ll see higher scores. This same trick can be done with with any other group. Controlling for S.E. status is thus not a valid counter-argument – unless we do the same with other races when we compare them. In this case, the gap would persist and nothing would be gained.On average, blacks have smaller brains than whites and whites have smaller brains than Asians (taking into account body mass). While it’s true that brain-size is only moderately correlated with intelligence, the correlation is still there and should be taken into account. Here I’ll quote myself, from my critique of Samuel Graves’ “The Emperor’s New Clothes”:Graves can’t quite make up his mind in the matter of brain size. He repeatedly references (pg. 3, 46 and 86) Stephen Jay Gould’s research, which supposedly exposed Samuel Morton’s research (which showed negro skulls to be, on average, of lower capacity than Caucasian and Asian ones). He writes:Many assertions and assumptions about race and racial relations that were taken for granted during the Enlightenment have subsequently been proven false (such as the incorrect assertion that Negroes’ brains are smaller than those of white Europeans) (pg. 3).But he also writes:However, when unbiased measurements of human brains were made, there was no evidence for differences in brain size. In 1838, Friedrich Tiedemann… measured the brains from fifty cadavars (both Negro and European) and found no weight differences…The twentieth-century anthropologist Ashley Montagu concluded that the average cranial capacity difference between blacks and whites was about 50 cubic centimeters (pg. 87 and bold mine).Surely that last study, by Montagu, warrants further study – but Graves does not seem interested in such a study. Does he believe that 50 cubic centimeters is not meaningful – even when taken together with other evidence? How many neurons can fit into 50 cubic centimeters? In any event, how unfortunate for Graves that it was Gould’s study that proved to be fraudulent, not Morton’s. From Science Fair of June, 2011:The late scientific icon, Stephen Jay Gould, botched and perhaps faked his critique of a racist 19th-Century scientist’s skull collection, suggests a second look at his efforts. In a 1978 Science paper, Gould (1941 – 2002) , reported that the Samuel George Morton (1799-1851), “a prominent Philadelphia physician,” had mis-measured the cranial capacities of his 1,000-skull “American Golgotha” collection gathered from around the world, to suit his racist beliefs. The finding led to one of Gould’s best-known books, The Mismeasure of Man, a critique of scientific racism. Overall, they find, Morton did make mistakes in measuring skull capacity (he first stuffed them with seeds, and later lead shot to measure their brain size). But the mistakes were random. The random mistakes didn’t favor any racial theory of larger brain sizes for white people over others…Morton neither manipulated his skull samples, unfairly selected which data to report, skewed results by gender, or ignored his mistakes to favor racist interpretations of his skulls, the PLoS Biology study authors conclude — all charges made by Gould against the long-dead physician.What’s more, the researchers found Gould made some mistakes in his re-analysis of Morton. “Our analysis of Gould’s claims reveals that most of Gould’s criticisms are poorly supported or falsified,” they conclude: Samuel George Morton, in the hands of Stephen Jay Gould, has served for 30 years as a textbook example of scientific misconduct. The Morton case was used by Gould as the main support for his contention that ”unconscious or dimly perceived finagling is probably endemic in science, since scientists are human beings rooted in cultural contexts, not automatons directed toward external truth”. This view has since achieved substantial popularity in ”science studies”. But our results falsify Gould’s hypothesis that Morton manipulated his data to conform with his a priori views. The data on cranial capacity gathered by Morton are generally reliable, and he reported them fully. Overall, we find that Morton’s initial reputation as the objectivist of his era was well-deserved.4) If we read the aforementioned article in Science Fair, we’ll see that the author, Dan Vergano, dismisses any serious implications of this brain-size disparity with these words:Today, researchers know that larger average skull size is largely a function of cold weather…How convenient. Even if larger skulls, and the brains within them, are a result of colder weather – how, exactly, would this preclude any impact on overall intelligence? No explanation is given.Many have pointed out that it takes more intelligence, foresight and future time-orientation to survive the cold winters of the North than it does to survive in the tropics. Game is plentiful in tropical Africa. Yes, it takes cunning and planning to capture a wildebeest – but these clearly are not part of the same mental tool-kit that is required to survive the winter in Europe. I’ll quote Brian Fagan, from his book “Cro Magnon – How the ice age gave birth to the first modern humans” (pg. 170. Read my review here):Infinite patience and persistence were also qualities common to tropical and cold-climate hunters alike. Everywhere, mental attitudes were important, but they were particularly central to survival in environments where strong winds and the bitter cold of subzero temperatures for days on end sapped human energy. Successful hunting and survival depended on deeply ingrained attitudes of self-assurance and competence, on mental attitudes that were part of the Cro-Magnon personality.The natives of Europe had to store up food during the warm months so that they’d have something to eat during the winter. This was not necessary in Africa. Today, black Americans don’t save nearly as much of their earnings as white Americans. Are we to believe that these phenomena are not related in any way? If we do note the parallels, are we to be condemned as “racists” for doing so? The worn-out “legacy of slavery” excuse doesn’t hold much water when we consider that black Africans are in even worse shape than black Americans economically.Some scientists claim that, even though certain advantageous traits developed in specific areas, they gradually dispersed throughout human populations. This might make sense for higher intelligence if we assume that it is, indeed, an advantage throughout the world. But this is not the case. Higher intelligence is often an evolutionary disadvantage. For example, it’s an evolutionary disadvantage in modern Western society; more intelligent people tend to have fewer children. Furthermore, the brain is an expensive organ.The higher a black’s proportion of white ancestry, the more intelligent he tends to be. The late Philippe Rushton, in his seminal work “Race, Evolution and Behavior” writes (pg. 30,31):Trans-racial Adoption StudiesThe best evidence for the genetic basis of race-IQ differences comes from trans-racial adoption studies of Oriental children, Black children, and Mixed- race children. All these children have been adopted by White parents at an early age and have grown up in middle-class White homes.One well known trans-racial adoption study is Sandra Scarr’s Minnesota project. The adopted children were either White, Black, or Mixed- race (Black-White) babies. The children took IQ tests when they were seven years old and again when they were 17.In their initial report, the authors thought that their study proved that a good home could raise the IQs of Black children. At age 7, their IQ was 97, well above the Black average of 85 and almost equal to the White average of 100. However, when the children were retested at age 17, the results told another story (reported in the 1992 issue of Intelligence).At age seven, Black, Mixed- race, and White adopted children all had higher IQ scores than average for their group. Growing up in a good home helped all the children. Even so, the racial pattern was exactly as predicted by genetic theory, not by culture theory. Black children reared in these good homes had an average IQ of 97, but the Mixed- race children averaged an IQ of 109, and the White children an IQ of 112.The evidence for genetic theory got stronger as the children grew older. By age 17, the IQs of the adopted children moved closer to the expected average for their race. At age 17 adopted White children had an IQ of about 106, Mixed- race adoptees an IQ of about 99, and adopted Blacks had an IQ of about 89. IQ scores are not the only evidence in this study. School grades, class ranks, and aptitude tests show the same pattern.Similarly, if we examine lists of famous black inventors and statesmen, we find that most of them are of largely white ancestry. Radishmag has a good article on this that he calls “Mulatto History Month.” Here’s a segment:What do almost all successful “black” Americans have in common? Below, from left to right: the first “black” president; the first “black” attorney general; the first “black” secretary of state; the first “black” female secretary of state; and the first “black” cabinet member.The first “black” Supreme Court justice; the first “black” elected congressman; the first “black” governor; Booker T. Washington, the famous “black” writer; and W.E.B. Du Bois, another famous “black” writer:Charles Drew, the famous “black” surgeon; Daniel Hale Williams, the first “black” cardiologist; the first “black” man to earn a B.A.; the first “black” man to earn a Ph.D.; and the first “black” general:If ever there was a case of “socially-constructed race,” it would be the list of notable black statesmen and scholars.6) All races have some archaic features. Caucasians have large brow-ridges and hairy bodies. Many Asians have noticeable prognathism and sloped foreheads. Morphologically speaking, the most archaic living human population is Australian Aborigines. Is it coincidence that they also happen to score among the lowest in I.Q. tests? Here’s an illustration from the above article in Radishmag:Can we point to specific individuals, who happen to sport archaic features, and conclude that they must be stupid? Obviously not. My contention is that there seems to be a correlation between a preponderance of archaic features in a population and that same population’s average I.Q. Blacks have many more archaic features than whites. Asians have less than whites. Is it coincidence that we find the same hierarchy in I.Q. scores?7) I was raised to believe that we all have our strengths and weaknesses. I was taught in school that there is no “superior race.” Imagine that! But what if one race turned out to be stronger and faster than other races – but just as intelligent and creative? Wouldn’t that make the race in question “superior?” I’m speaking, of course, of blacks. They dominate most contact sports and we’re told that they’re highly spiritual and moral. After all, it was whites who enslaved blacks and persecuted them through lynching and Jim Crow. As a young man I had a check list:a) Morally superior… Check!b) Physically more imposing and better at all sports that mattered… Check!c) Inventive and intellectually accomplished… Check!Voila! We have found the superior race – and he’s black. Specifically black male. “But wait a minute”, I said. “Surely the black man must have a weakness.” White people must be better at SOMETHING! Perhaps, had I lived in Canada, I’d have satisfied myself with hockey. But I wasn’t Canadian. Hockey was not enough, so I re-examined my list – and found that only “b” could be argued with any credibility. Leaving morality aside for the moment, I satisfied myself with the notion that blacks are physically superior while whites and Asians are mentally superior. That way, I reasoned, there is no “superior race.” I had some pretty good teachers in school, and some of them were black. They had been vindicated after all.Studying history, I noticed that there were few black African civilizations that were not either a) relatively late or b) spawned by other, non-black, civilizations. Ethiopia is only partly black, and has been in contact with its Semitic cousins in the Middle East since ancient times. This relative void of civilization, and lack of technology, made Africans easy prey for Arab and European colonizers and slave traders. Neither writing nor the wheel were discovered by blacks, and this backwardness persists to our own era. No significant architectural monuments dot the sub-Saharan African landscape; the “Great Zimbabwe” is of uncertain origin, and is not very old. It could be said that the tropical heat, and isolation of that region conspired to stunt the growth of civilization – yet Meso-America faired much better, and even saw the invention of writing. With the exception of small island nations, chaos and a lack of intellectual life seem to follow blacks wherever they go. Witness Haiti and Detroit for example – and now even Africa’s newest nation, South Sudan, is plagued by violence and corruption, despite billions of dollars in foreign aid and advisers.Regarding Jared Diamond’s theories, see my critique of his book “Guns, Germs and Steel.”Can the reader think of any city or neighborhood where the quality of life went up since blacks became a majority? When we witness this phenomenon, it should be perfectly reasonable to link it with low I.Q. scores. This should not be controversial at all.Speaking of cities and neighborhoods, I have personally witnessed what happens when a neighborhood becomes majority black. I don’t claim that this is always the case. In general, however, we see an increase in graffiti, violent crime, neglected houses and yards, “troubled youths,” social vice and joblessness. All of these are linked to lower I.Q.I have seen, with my own eyes, how corporations set lower standards so that they can count blacks among their (especially higher-paid) employees. They do this to avoid lawsuits. Blacks are wildly over-represented in government jobs such as DMV’s, IRS call-centers and the Postal Service. Less so in government jobs that still require written tests (see above). It’s not for want of employers’ willingness to hire blacks that their unemployment rates are so high; it’s because so many of them have criminal records or are unmotivated. Both are correlated with lower I.Q.10) My own life-experiences have led me to believe in racial differences. It’s true that I’ve known some very intelligent people of all races – and some not-so-intelligent ones of all races as well. But I would have been deceiving myself had I not noticed the racial patterns that kept asserting themselves. As a child, I attended three different high schools: One in the ghetto of Inglewood, California, another in redneck territory in central Oregon, and the last in a racially mixed area of Seattle. I was considered a “genius” in the ghetto, “pretty smart” among the rednecks – but just average among the Asians and fellow Jews of Seattle. The first time I felt stupid, compared to those around me, was in a yeshiva (rabbinical school) in Israel.It’s hard to swallow the dogma of racial egalitarianism with so much evidence, and life experience, stacked against it. If nothing else, all the above should at least merit objective discourse – and not be shrugged off as “pseudo-science” or “scientific racism.” Such name-calling is only evidence of the narrow-mindedness of the accuser. Outside of that, it’s no different than calling somebody a “heretic” or a “blasphemer.”