Link: Why are people so blind?

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/why-are-people-so-blind.html

  1. their religion is hedonism
  2. their understanding of good is false (it never existed)
  3. evil is a joke
  4. “hate the sin, love the sinner” – Satan
  5. punishment seems impossible when there are unprecedented rewards
  6. the odds of things catching up to them seem remote (they aren’t)
  7. having absolute standards (read: any standards) is un-cool
  8. most people are losers and without this sociosexual rebellion, they know they have nothing.

Similarly provocative

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/what-was-it-like-to-be-jesus.html

“he always knew exactly what to do: he knew and did the right thing.”

Prudence – now an insult.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/soulmates-love-and-sex.html

“The right partner in marriage is the best possible experience we can have of our unconscious and unrealised nature.”

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/my-xtmas-wish-for-you-please-please.html

please, Please, PLEASE don’t waste your time in pointing-out the inconsistencies of The Mainstream Left (i.e. our society), or trying to make sense of them…

They want attention, don’t feed the trolls.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/the-red-pill-must-indeed-be-pill.html

“Those who talk most about themselves having-been Red-Pilled are examples of ‘false-awakening’: still asleep but merely dreaming that they have awoken”

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/common-error-regression-to-mean-of.html

“In other words, to the extent that a high IQ individual comes from a genetically-relatively-intelligence-inbreeding caste or class; there is no regression to the mean.”

Galton never wrote it that way, the guy who invented both IQ (originally) and regression as a concept.

It was twisted that way but actually it doesn’t apply to high IQ, only to the slightly above-average IQ, with a standard deviation or two. The fully top-tier have a common cause – low genetic load, which must be inherited by the offspring since 1. it is recessive and 2. both parents have it. There is a similar heritability with true retardation but it isn’t PC to say so. Regression to the mean apply to normative groups, anything that deserves separate categories must be conforming to different assumptions and ‘rules’. e.g. we all live in the population but there is a select sample of us with green eyes, can we assume the global melanin levels (brown) apply to this sample?

Samples are not populations. I repeat, samples are not populations.
False reports of high IQ will regress to the mean, on the other hand. Scientism is full of false reports.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/which-sex-is-more-vulnerable-to-being.html

“The modern world depends on a spiritual-Christian awakening – both men and women are necessary; but it cannot happen without women.”

At the moment, the things he lists are not choices, they are options after men have made the choices (to settle down, marry, reproduce), they are largely male economic decisions e.g. to propose. The men I’ve asked are in the same position as the women, “I would like to, one day, but I can’t afford to (now)”.

We’ve been whipped, all of us, into productivity, and out of re-productivity.
Celebrating bachelors in the Baby Boomer Bond-era was the beginning of the end. How many of those eventually got married (by which I mean, stayed married, faithfully)? The rise of spinsters came after the playboy bachelor celebration, women followed men into anti-natal decisions.

https://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/is-albion-woman.html

Yes.

All male role models have been a let-down (degenerate) or defined by their women (Arthur).
America was healthy in the times its role model was Lady Liberty more than Uncle Sam.
Male role models appear to be the harbinger of Martian decision-making, reckless and stupid, an extreme of hasty but courageous.
The EU has Captain Euro. It’s a trend.
Britain’s glory days were presaged by Elizabeth I and Britannia.
Boats are female, nations are typically female too. It’s probably the rich soil Goddess versus fertile sky God dynamic. War heroes and industrialists are typically male. Beauties and artists skew feminine.
There is a pattern to the successful society, but what few know is that the prototypic female of plenty was Ceres. Sometimes, as in Britannia, the female also has traces of Athene. This is the only model of female power that worked, alongside possibly Merlin (a positive Saturn) or Jupiter. A young male role model or one with a single purpose (destructive, Uncle Sam) leads to disaster.
Role models of family-centred societies must be hearth-like and probably virginal, at least maternal. Classically a female domain, but I wouldn’t object to male variations e.g. like a male nurse, Apollo. Women seem to be more about preserving rights (to this day, but the wrong ‘rights’) whereas men are, as historically expected, the destructive, who charge in and take or destroy good systems rather than repairing them (handiwork, homework).
Alexander the Great was never a role model.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/who-what-is-antichrist-recognise-by.html

“No – what makes Antichrist, and what makes Antichrist detectable, is any kind of Christianity pursued with unChristian motivation.”

I can still be a Christian and fuck around doing XYZ people.

Sure. It doesn’t count, to you. I can be a vegan and eat eggs on weekends.
See points up-top.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/q-are-psychological-biological-group.html

“So, from this experience, I learned the futility of arguing about evidence when it comes to matters of fundamental assumptions – of metaphysics. If you assume that group differences are plausible – there is ample, high quality of evidence consistent with such assumptions. But if you assume that there are no such differences – then it is an easy matter to explain-away any and every piece of apparent evidence, and to dismiss the arguments of those who oppose you.”

Science v. Scientism.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/the-disaster-of-increased-funding-new.html

“The New Left cannot be ‘fought’, nor organised-against – rather we must opt-out from it.”

Anything you can do to decrease their funding.

Fun IQ list

https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country

They never account for racial purity, so naturally that will alter the average if the natives are also lumped in with new citizens.

I say it’s fun because

Comparing countries is finer grain than race. Asians v. Nords.
Naturally, the widespread Asian academic fraud previously covered makes the uppermost numbers suspect.

Observe

some familiar names.

Can the superiority complex, America.

Wait, wait, wait.

Hang on.

Still going.

Maybe the high-IQ Asian waifu plan isn’t so smart.

You marry hookers, they’ll take all your money.
reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/3iqtob/for_those_who_think_going_to_the_philippines_for/

Why did you ever think this was a good plan?
All you need is ONE picture.

Now, tell me:

Which continent has the higher average IQ, Europe or Asia?

In American;

Which continent has less yellow in it?

American is simpler than English because –

e t e r n a l   a n g l o, huh?

Spain, my current location, is as smart as you. Diego are not renowned for being brainy.
You’d be helping the deported by sending them to Spain, from the US.

China and public defecation

https://www.orlandoweekly.com/Blogs/archives/2016/05/09/chinese-visitors-welcome-disneyland-to-town-by-defecating-in-the-bushes

As bad as India.
We would’ve already known by the r-selected population size.
The Louvre has signs to go INTO the bathrooms, in Mandarin.
Picture it, not in Arabic.
Not in Hindu.
Only in Mandarin.

The SJWs at Kotaku admit this. Cultural relativism strikes again.

http://kotaku.com/5987786/why-kids-keep-crapping-in-public-in-china

Same people who keep scratching our ancient monuments with no punishment.
So civilized, right?
They are corrupt, low trust and have no civic instinct, like India.
Neither can control their own population levels and infrastructure sucks.

Here’s the best excuse they can come up with.

“However, we did talk about this theory that humans have a natural relationship with things. For example, if you have trash in your hand, and you see a bicycle with a basket, you might pitch it in the bicycle’s basket. This is littering and isn’t socially acceptable, but that bicycle basket does resemble a waste paper basket, and instinctively you might use it for that. Going to the bathroom in public place, perhaps, works on a similar rationale—especially since a Guangzhou subway bin does resemble a toilet. Somewhat.”

While we’re all over here laughing at Africans for going on the street or Arabs who wipe with their hands…

“Eventually, these social views will continue to filter through society. Norms will continue to change, just as the country continues to change, and these public toilet displays will gradually fade away.”

Sure, sure it will. Sure Jan.

I’m sure when they have all the shekels, they won’t just revert and tell us to accept it.

https://wtdevflnt.wordpress.com/2010/12/24/great-insight-into-why-chinese-shit-in-public/
Such deep reasons, huh?

This isn’t a hard topic to find information on.
Americans don’t read much.

http://shanghaiist.com/2015/10/05/chinese_tourist_burberry_bicester_village.php

“After one shopper snapped the photo and posted it on twitter, Brits reacted with a mix of disgust and confusion – public toilets are only a few meters away and free of charge.

This is why we colonized people. But you can’t improve a shit sandwich.

Our toilets are all heavily signposted FYI, for about 50 yards before you get to them.

THAILAND thinks they’re backward.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-2958432/Don-t-defecate-public-places-don-t-touch-paintings-Thailand-releases-behaviour-guide-Chinese-tourists.html

The reason paintings need glass now is because Asians won’t stop touching them.
Also applies to Indians. WTF.
They think everything is fake or they can just put their mitts over other people’s property.
I’ve witnessed it.

“The manual, written in Mandarin, advises against using public property as lavatories and contains general instructions on how to responsibly tour the country.”

Do high-IQ adults really need to be told not to shit anywhere like a dog?
This should go on my list of Asian Questions.

“But the holidaymakers have become the target of numerous complaints, with locals accusing them of defecating in public places, causing traffic accidents with reckless driving and defacing tourist attractions.
..Following complaints from Chinese tourists the ban was lifted on the understanding that tour guides are clean toilets if their clients make a mess.”

Our intellectual superiors, being cleaned up after like naughty toddlers.
Don’t trust the vulgarians.

The Louvre thing is well known and reported btw.
I’m only posting this because a lot of Americans read my page, we in Europe have known what they are for ages.
http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/the-louvre-had-to-put-up-signs-asking-chinese-tourists-not-to-poop-on-the-grounds.454473308/
from
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/are-chinese-tourists-the-worst-tourists-in-the-world

There are TED talks discussing public defecation, I’ll spare you the links, but they acknowledge it as worst in India AND China, with some parts of Africa coming up behind.
Yes, that’s correct, they’re literally more socially and culturally backward in their bathroom habits than the majority of Africans.

“What amuses me is that these are the Chinese that are affluent enough to travel and presumably be educated, and they still rank more uncouth than our homegrown thugs and rednecks.”

And the HBD crowd goes wild!
There are plenty of photos online that rival India, potentially worse since they’re surrounded by shiny technology they stole.

Bear in mind, the public health risk of a country’s filth is worse, the worse its diet.
What do Indian and Chinese food do?

Link: Is the Japanese IQ advantage based on diet?

http://roguehealthandfitness.com/is-the-japanese-iq-advantage-due-to-nutrition/

It would be Omega 3, not 6.

I vaguely recollect reading about a study I can’t find, that said when children have higher omega 3, their IQ is boosted but if the ratio is tilted to higher omega 6, it depresses IQ. I think it was a study on breast milk?

One of the many reasons maternal IQ is so important.

A father’s health is important prior to and at conception.

I’d like a follow-up study on white diets because ours is almost wholly omega 6.

Omega 3 is naturally found in breast milk. More important than saving for college.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/surety-bond-breast-feeding/
I understand that some mothers can’t breastfeed but they should try.
Breastfeeding and Other Early Influencers on Children’s IQ
I believe the study was about one of these?
“Was it the breast milk? Some studies are starting to focus on the nutrients, such as the fatty acids docosahexaenoicacid (DHA) and arachidonic acid (ARA), present in breast milk, but there’s no solid evidence that these are responsible for enhancing neural connections or promoting development of cognitive regions of the brain.”

There’s no solid evidence that smoking one cigarette causes lung cancer, either.

Link: Inferiority: the opposite of genius

http://paulcooijmans.com/genius/inferior.html

I don’t expect those who pretend to care about the IQ dearth to read around.
I post these things for the intellectually honest.

Hating women

It may seem strange to include this specific form of hatred with the list, but a fact is that many inferiors have a deep hatred of women, which makes it a characteristic of inferiority.

If we’re examining personality traits of inferiors, it is completely valid as a behavioural marker.

Just as with geniuses, most inferiors are men. The ultimate in this are feats like the burning of widows, or demanding women to spend their lives indoors or walk six metres behind their husband, covered from head to toe with their genitals cut up beyond all repair.

In addition, rape is standard behaviour of inferiors, typically resulting in the conception of multiple children with many different women. Relevant in this respect is that imprisoned males in Western countries conceive more children than do males on average, mirroring the phenomenon that in primitive hunter-gatherer societies the males with the most offspring – as confirmed by modern D.N.A. studies – are those who have made the greatest number of kills in tribal warfare.

Uncivilized breeders who can’t cooperate to literally save their lives, sound like any type of selection we know?

Don’t hate me cos you ain’t me.
https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2015/11/07/estrogen-boosts-brainpower-actually/
“We feel more stress, but we cope better. This explains how we put up with stupid men.”

It’s useful to define a thing by NOT, in computing as in people.

It’s logical that if they didn’t hate, they couldn’t rape. It’s selected for, but let’s not go naturalistic fallacy and pretend a First World society can stand for it.

Intelligent people are capable of working with those they dislike without wanting to brain them and drag them back to the cave. Something about not being a monster.

The ‘trick’ to redpill is to accept things you don’t like because reality won’t change.

The world owes white people

Actually.

The list would be so long, and so what?

White people literally invented science itself.

You can’t top that.

http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9781441974877-c1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1032441-p174029978

The Scientific Method?
1600s Europe, at the earliest.
Truly, the Scientific Enlightenment primarily in France, some England, a little Germany, formalized it. All those subjects and branches and divisions you now know? Taught in the universities. Nobody else even knew what these were, so they can’t claim it and they certainly didn’t teach it either.
All NW Europeans, mostly upper class men, a smattering of a few women.

Previously we had ‘natural science’ (the term for this is German, which should give you a clue), mucking about with plants mostly. Labeling and drawing, not really an experimental manipulation, is it?
I guess it’s like saying we had ancient ‘doctors’ – who didn’t see a disease they didn’t wanna stick a leech on.

Except… that isn’t the meaning of the term as we use it in modernity, is it?

Don’t be intellectually dishonest.

Fun fact: leech still means doctor, it’s a synonym.

It’s like trying to claim evaporation cooling was Muslim when at the latest it was Egyptian but probably stolen from more ancient civilizations, there are examples at Pompeii.
Islam mostly murdered its tall poppies because they questioned the religion. That isn’t whitey’s fault.
They had a few good philosophers – not scientists. There was the occasional competent mathematician, but if that’s how low your standard… not to mention, they only built upon Greek and Hindu developments.
I haven’t seen an Islamic Antikythera mechanism. If they had such an advanced knowledge, there’d be proof and they’d use it in battle. Compare with Greek fire, a variant of which was referenced in Game of Thrones. The knowledge of Greek fire was probably lost because of the Muslim conquests going on at the same time. Thanks, Mohammed. 

A little chemistry was developed during the Renaissance but kept quiet by something called a guild.
See Venice and mirrors.

You look at the root of anything STEM and I guarantee you there’s a racial European at the heart of it. I’ve yet to find a single exception.

However, the Egyptians did some fine, pioneering medicinal work in the field of surgery, which isn’t technically a science. These findings were stolen by Muslims.

Along with the country and its women. Look at the modern racial composition.

The eldest surgical examples I’ve seen are European, see trepanning.
Those damn Frenchies, inventing neurosurgery! (As English, we hate giving the French credit for anything except losing). It’s painful for me to admit that, viscerally painful. 

Are men smarter than women?

If you wanna play the IQ game.

Ignoring the loaded question…

https://web.archive.org/web/20081024213354/http://www.parade.com/articles/editions/2005/edition_07-17-2005/featured_0

“Just a glance at these bright high-achievers—men and women who have made their mark in an array of fields—tells us that intelligence is complex and multi-dimensional. Comparing one to the other is like comparing apples and oranges.”

And five points or whatever else group-level is nothing in statistics.
Literally, no-thing, especially when you’re trying to apply it to individuals.

How do they teach you social science stats theory in America?
Crayons?
There’s a list of things you can’t do with every construct.
Like how you can’t apply the current tests to historical figures. It just doesn’t work. They try but the margin of error is larger.

It’s like saying which tree is better, an oak or a palm?
Cats or dogs?
Red or blue?
Old flag or new flag?

It’s a matter of taste and you know either side debating tends to want a reason to feel superior without actually doing anything. This merits disdain.

The ignorance of many supposedly educated white American men denying historical female achievement against all odds (legal bans, witch convictions etc.) makes it worse for people who learnt history under a decent education system. This isn’t anything to do with non-IQ ‘genius’ – real world accomplishment, creativity. The IQ test doesn’t measure creativity but there’s a little correlation. Any more and Asians wouldn’t score a little higher. The worst mislabelling is ‘genius’ on an IQ sheet – it’s even below gifted! That isn’t the cultural use at all! But academics want to posture so they stole the term that retains its original and ancient meanings. There’s a measurement error when it becomes academic dick-measuring.
https://listsurge.com/top-10-women-with-highest-iq-in-the-world/
After about 170, it becomes blurry for adults and you must rely on IRL achievements.

It’s a deviation from the mean, from about 130 (2SD), it practically means an exponential curve that nobody is quite sure how to distinguish. There are specialist tests but experts differ on whether that measures ‘g’, the same, or if it’s something entirely different.

The only valid, Binet test wasn’t oriented to find ‘genius’ so the fact it cannot isn’t a weakness.

It was designed to find 1. retardation 2. in children to 3. help them 4. at school 5. to cope 6. with the work.

Applying it elsewhere is a major form of credentialism. Like knowing pi to X digits or collecting masters degrees.

Who cares?

If you could use it, you would.

This is Marilyn at her peak, btw.

Reminds me of Jennifer Connolly here.

Remember how I mentioned looks correlate to real intelligence?

Genetic load, QED, imho.

Anyone who can parse the data would know racial differences are huge, sex differences in this arena are minor and trivial, if you just sum the area under the curve… women win.
Does it matter? Still no.

If your brains are in your penis, you need to read a book.

inb4 the Guinness World Records people are ruthless on anything numbers, they have higher standards than any University, so her record was nothing to sneer at.

menwhatwomenwant

“Women are crazy” pushers – perhaps you’re too dumb to understand us? Nor take two minutes to listen.

Academia, society excludes highest IQ

Deep down, I think we all knew. Why else get superficial half-solutions that make things worse? Among those who can do maths, no less?

I might’ve posted this before, don’t think so. I see something new each time so it hardly matters.

http://polymatharchives.blogspot.ca/2015/01/the-inappropriately-excluded.html
h/t http://voxday.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/the-excluded.html

The biggest divas and bitches you’ll ever meet are in the 120s and 130s. You can sense them as you enter a room if your power level is high enough.
Their huge ego is invested in being smart, the smartest person in the room. They mistake that gift with being obnoxious to anyone who demonstrates intelligence because it feels like an attack. Being told they’re The Best from childhood, their parents pressure to always work hardest, they can’t let go.
They’re miserable, so they attack your happiness as proof of stupidity.

Balance is a foreign word to them. Not everything is a Spelling Bee, you can just sip your drink and enjoy the experience of talking to other human beings, we are not aliens. Disagreement is rarely shitty or personal. Only an insecure person couldn’t laugh at themselves.

“I’ve been pointing this out for years, if you recall. But because I don’t think like the less intelligent, I am regularly labeled everything from stupid to racist. In my experience, the 150 IQ individual does not resent the individual with the 160 or the 175 IQ, and this may be because being above 145, we all tend to engage in similar thought processes, albeit with different capabilities. The 135 IQ individual dislikes and fears the 150+ individuals, while the 115 IQ individual either doesn’t believe the 150+ individuals exist or blithely insists that they are crazy.

Pathologizing intelligence, thy name is High Functioning Autism.
Meanwhile, Rain Man had schizophrenia.

That’s why I despise midwits. You simply can’t talk to them. They don’t even try to understand you, but instead move to disqualify you as fast as they can. I have much more sensible conversations with people in the 75 to 100 range than I do with most in the 105 to 120 range. The 125 to 140 crowd is okay as long as they don’t have an inferiority complex, but when they do, they’re the biggest annoyances of all.”

We need more high IQ posts online, lumping them all into one group triggers me. Like sure, from a distance we all look the same especially if you lump our existence in with fairies.
It’s like saying there’s no such thing as personality, because spectrum. Muh Holy Spectrum, where everyone is equal on a line.

A sounder knowledge of fallacies, cherry-picking and confirmation bias is often found in the average, we call this bundle common sense. They just dunno the terms.

It’s like talking to small children, where they challenge you to a fight and like a cartoon you just hold their head at arm’s length. Hilarious when it isn’t sad. Naturally, you’re seen as the bad guy. You can’t teach a retard the rules of grammar, they can’t process it, it’s too much. It’s kinda like that.

Genius is not a score on a paper either. Academia lied. It’s defined as an original contribution, lasting after your death i.e. not a trend.

Asian Immigrants and What No One Mentions Aloud

“often fail to embody the sterling academic credentials they include with their applications, and do not live up to the expectations these universities have for top tier students.
Less delicately put: They cheat.”

We know. We all know. They can’t speak full English, FFS. They can’t reason and inspire the way their personal statement does.

you, an intellectual, might ask: how is this fair to non-Asians?

It isn’t.

educationrealist

To continue my thoughts on college admissions and Asians:

Many people, reading of the clear discrimination against Asians, become all righteous, thinking of those poor, hardworking Asians. Come to America, work hard, and look how the system screws them.

But that reaction ignores the stereotype.

The stereotype, delicately put: first and second generation Chinese, Korean, and Indian Americans often fail to embody the sterling academic credentials they include with their applications, and do not live up to the expectations these universities have for top tier students.

Less delicately put: They cheat. And when they don’t cheat, they game tests in a way utterly incomprehensible to the Western mind, leading to test scores with absolutely zero link to underlying ability. Or both. Or maybe it’s all cheating, and we just don’t know it. Either way, the resumes are functional fraud.

Is it true for every single recent Chinese, Korean, or Indian…

View original post 3,424 more words