Dienekes Pontikos has developed a computer program that identifies the racial origins of mixed populations, such as Turkey. Although they are Muslim and speak Turkish, the people are overwhelmingly Europeans and the racial intrusion of Asian Turkish genes is under 10%. Well, I dont believe it.
The Turkish government has initiated a program of milk distribution in schools and the result is that hundreds of students around Turkey have been poisoned by the milk. 300 students in the southeastern province of Diyarbakırand more than 500 students in Sivas province were poisoned by the milk and subsequently taken to hospitals. A number of students were also affected by milk poisoning in the Kırıkkale, Sakarya, Antalya, Adana, Edirne and Samsun provinces. Paramedics were immediately dispatched to the schools where students were reportedly suffering from stomach ache after drinking distributed milk.
(Official reaction: "Education Minister Ömer Dinçer denied the alleged links between distrubuted milk and sickness of students.")
Obviously, large numbers of children lack the lactase enzime and are unable to digest fresh milk. That proves that a sizeable proportion of the population is of Asian and not European origin. Contra-Dienekes, the Ionian Greeks that populated the area have been reduced to a mixed minority. It doesnt make me happy but we should not live in an phantasy movie of Olympic heroes.
33 comments:
It also gives you an idea of how poor and backward these eastern provinces are that a government food distribution program is the 1st time that these children were exposed to milk. I also assume that the further east you go, the more Asiatic the population becomes.
K
Very high prevalence of lactase persistence is only in northern Europe and a couple other places. As you go south, even within Europe, there is more lactose intolerance. You still haven't proven anything. AFRICANS are what will end civilization. And EAST Asians may be a threat at least to the West.
I think that it is more likely that the milk was contaminated.
Turks have a diet high in dairy products, as do all the Central Asian peoples. Most of those products are fermented.
The eastern provinces and especially Diyarabakir are heavily Kurdish. Kurds are an Indoeuropean people, just like the Persians, and should be as lactose tolerant as the Greeks.
I am not sure why the thought of Greek admixture in Turks being low makes you unhappy. I've never met the ancient Greeks, but 80% of the modern ones I've met struck me as slimy bastards. The Turks I met (and remember, I bicycled across Turkey to get to Israel in 2010) were good people, though not as good as their Central Asian cousins.
What Anonymous said. Ask some Mizrahi Jews (or even your own people) what they think about drinking pure milk, you may be surprised.
I tolerate milk just fine (I have reddish hair also, so I must have some N. Euro admixture) but my wife and children cannot take it unless they take the lactase enzyme first.
Fermentation (such as in yogurt, kefir, etc.) converts some of the lactose to lactic acid and makes it better tolerated. Fresh milk is probably not part of the eastern Turks usual diet because of lack of refrigeration until recently, but I thought that by now aseptic milk had made it pretty much everywhere.
K
It's already been said, but I'll pile on. Assuming that this health crisis was not due to spoilage (which it may very well be), high prevalence of lactose intolerance does not preclude Europoid or even European ancestry. The Turks plot out close to Southern European populations, among whom lactose intolerance is common.
What the crisis proves is that the Turkish Ministry of Education is uneducated in some basic HBD facts.
BTW, Ancient Greeks - Aristoteles, Platon, etc. - were not of Nordic race?
"I am not sure why the thought of Greek admixture in Turks being low makes you unhappy. I've never met the ancient Greeks, but 80% of the modern ones I've met struck me as slimy bastards. The Turks I met (and remember, I bicycled across Turkey to get to Israel in 2010) were good people, though not as good as their Central Asian cousins."
Don't know about their asiatic cousins. But about the greeks and turks I worked with I have the same impression. Good people but not very smart and had a sort of aversion towards reading.
That is why :
"What the crisis proves is that the Turkish Ministry of Education is uneducated in some basic HBD facts."
I don't believe that Turkey can become again a big power. It will hit a ceiling. They DON'T LEARN.
It's as if books bite or something. Their ability to advance in the industrial/technological age has limits they can not cross.
The only solution - I would not bet on it - would be to import the cadres from Europe the way the Empire did.
The greeks I worked with or met had identical intelectual interests with their turkish cousins. Meaning hmmm none.
Distributing milk in schools certainly means they have a decent if stupid government.
American public schools distribute milk as well.
Hey, speaking of Greece, check out these guys: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17904103
David Goldman, who is hardly averse to facts or research, points out that the top graduates from Turkish universities are much more impressive that the top grads from many other middle-income countries. One wonders as well just how much the Mizrachi Jews and Haredim "like to read" anything other than religious texts.
The Greeks seemed pretty good at reading and writing before the Turkish conquest. Perhaps 400 years of Turkish occupation damaged their nerves to the point that they can no longer manage their former intellectual pursuits.
-s.n.
BTW, Ancient Greeks - Aristoteles, Platon, etc. - were not of Nordic race?
Dienekes is right. You are just tickling Nordicist kooks.
Yes, but the Greeks of the Classic Era were lacto-tolerant as are all certified Nordics?
You are right that Nordicist imbecilities tickle me.
Notwithstanding that, I loved Brad Pitt in "Troya".
I liked Charlton Heston as Moses. Edward G. Robinson, an emmese Yid, plays a Jew but an evil scheming one.
K
Turkey is a multiethnic country beyond imagination. Just for an example, the numerically tiny descendants of the Sabbatean Donmeh conversos (of whom Ataturk may have been one) form an invisible intellectual elite. The top graduates are not, I would imagine, a random selection from across all strata of the population, as they are not here.
The Greeks who were pretty good at reading petered out around the beginning of the Byzantine empire (whose elite was, again, a multiethnic conglomerate,) long before the Turks showed up.
Your imaginings about the intellectual incuriosity of the Haredim are just that.
Indeed, B, as long as their curiosity doesn't extend to issues such as evolution or the Documetary Hypothesis, the haredim are allowed to be curious.
B,
"The Greeks who were pretty good at reading petered out around the beginning of the Byzantine empire (whose elite was, again, a multiethnic conglomerate,) long before the Turks showed up."
Several half-truths. The Byzantine Empire was the most technologically and economically developed state in Europe for most of its existence. Its culture may not have been your cup fo tea, but denying its existence is just petty. Also, the fact that it was a "multi-ethnic conglomerate" is irrelevant: its melting pot of races produced the modern Greeks, so if the modern Greeks have a lower cultural level than their ancestors, that invites an explanation.
"Your imaginings about the intellectual incuriosity of the Haredim are just that."
I freely admit that I don't personally know any Haredim -- how would I? Talking to me would be unkosher -- and am thus forced to rely on reports such as those on this blog to form my views of them, insofar as I have any. On the other hand, I do have several Modern Orthodox friends, and one in particular has shared with me his sense that he has rather cramped cultural horizons because his yeshivish education was weak in secular subjects. I think, myself, that his perspective is somewhat incomplete because secular American educations also tend to be stunted. (European educations are also stunted, but in different ways.)
But leaving all this wrangling aside, the point is that secular Jews engage much more with secular culture than highly frum Jews do -- hardly a controversial claim, I'm sure. As a result, the vast majority of well-known Jews are not very observant. The occasional Gelernter or Reshevsky is all well and good, but can hardly equal the galaxy of stars that secular Jews have produced across so many domains.
I also remark on a cruel assymetry: I am not allowed to remark on this fact, but you are allowed to expound at length on the incurious and bestial nature of the goy, who wants nothing other than beer, TV, and tits on the internet...
-s.n.
SN-
The Byzantines were riding the momentum of the Roman Empire proper, but that's neither here nor there. My point was that their elite was not Greek per se but a mishmash of Syrians, Armenians and G-d knows what else. I am in full agreement with you that the ancient Greeks went out of existence due to assimilation.
I am unaware of any Haredi ban on conversations with goyim. Have you tried getting to know some, just as an anthropological experiment? I know they take converts as the result of a lengthy and involved process-how they communicate during the conversion, which takes years, if speaking to goyim is unkosher, is a mystery.
I am in full agreement that education in the average yeshiva is stunted as much as it is in the average public school but in the opposite direction. However, there are yeshivot which do not suffer this handicap. I am sure that the future leaders of any significant movement in the Torah world will come from the latter or at least share their values.
Yes, secular Jews engage more with secular culture. They gain a short-term benefit (achievement) at the cost of extinction in the long run. I hope that in the future, there will be a movement in Torah Judaism which will combine the benefits of the two approaches.
I feel your pain re: the cruel asymmetry. If it assuages you at all, not only are there plenty of blogs out there where you can express highly uncomplimentary opinions of Jews, but this may be one of them (I can't speak for our host.) If that still doesn't soothe your hurt feelings, let me point out that I've gotten banned from Mangan's for political incorrectness. And if all that doesn't make you feel any better, maybe the fact that I've had some actual repercussions for expressing dangerously insensitive right-wing opinions IRL. Feel better?
Ah, s.n. has come to hate Yidden again. We love fortunate to have your anger. Rage, rage!
its melting pot of races produced the modern Greeks, so if the modern Greeks have a lower cultural level than their ancestors, that invites an explanation.
Dienekes: The modern Greeks are the unmixed product of Ancient Greeks.
What alternative explanation do you have?
I also remark on a cruel assymetry: I am not allowed to remark on this fact,
You're remarks are not important enough to concern Jews. Nor the Greeks.
the ancient Greeks went out of existence due to assimilation.
White nationalist lies. Modern Greeks are the unmixed descendents of the Ancients.
Dienekes has refuted these lies. Damn you.
"They gain a short-term benefit (achievement) at the cost of extinction in the long run. I hope that in the future, there will be a movement in Torah Judaism which will combine the benefits of the two approaches."
Secular Jews are not headed for true genetic or cultural extinction. On the cultural front, some of their descendants do/will continue to identify as Jews. On the genetic front, though they have fewer children than the haredim, they do have some children. From the perspective of non-believer, why should they care if some of those children are only partially Jewish? They are still descendants. That is just to say that they don't share your concerns and aren't required to.
For the past half-century, the trend among the leadership in "Torah Judaism" has been towards more extremism in religious practice and opposition to things secular. There were, in the not so distant past, several blogs run by "frum skeptics" in the Orthodox community that lamented this trend. One of the most prominent bloggers of this genre ran multiple blogs in succession making use of the name "gadol hador" and variants. The extremist, oppositional trend in Orthodoxy is so strong that I think it is delusional on your part to think it likely that the more worldly and secularly educated Orthodox will somehow triumph. I know we can't ever come to agreement on this issue from past sparring, but if I admit my bias against the haredim, can you please admit that you might be wearing rose-colored glasses when you consider them?
>The extremist, oppositional trend in Orthodoxy is so strong that I think it is delusional on your part to think it likely that the more worldly and secularly educated Orthodox will somehow triumph
There is a saying, chai vekayam. Meaning, roughly, "alive and well," said by a man on his deathbed. The Austrohungarian empire was at the height of its splendor in 1913, the USSR in 1985.
You see the sordid reality of Orthodoxy. I agree-it is sordid. But I see the potential. Speak to the young people who stay in despite being smart enough to make it on the outside and brave enough to see through the bullshit. There are more and more. It's like hydrogen, building up. At some moment, there is a spark, and...
On the other hand, I see no potential in secular/conservative/reform. Sorry.
Anonymous:
"Ah, s.n. has come to hate Yidden again. We love fortunate to have your anger. Rage, rage!"
You sound mad. Why are you mad?
B:
"The Byzantines were riding the momentum of the Roman Empire proper, but that's neither here nor there."
1000 years, that's quite a ride!
"I am unaware of any Haredi ban on conversations with goyim. Have you tried getting to know some, just as an anthropological experiment?"
Perhaps we are failing to communicate. I know a number of Orthodox Jews because I'm a lawyer. I don't know any Haredim because they don't become lawyers (at least in "biglaw" - probably biglaw is incompatible with any normal lifestyle) and I spend most of my time at work. "Un-kosher" is a joke, of course. The point behind the joke is that any kind of extremely introverted religious group is going to undergo segregation and self-segregation.
"Yes, secular Jews engage more with secular culture. They gain a short-term benefit (achievement) at the cost of extinction in the long run. I hope that in the future, there will be a movement in Torah Judaism which will combine the benefits of the two approaches."
We're drifting from the point, I think. In the previous thread, you asserted that what made Jews special, in part, was their curiosity. I pointed out that the most curious and most special Jews were largely not religious and certainly never part of the cloistered religious communities. While it is fine to hope that highly frum Jews will come to match or surpass the achievements of secular Jews, as of yet, there is no sign of this. This is problematic -- does it mean that most of the time, Jewish "specialness" remains encysted and unexpressed?
"If it assuages you at all, not only are there plenty of blogs out there where you can express highly uncomplimentary opinions of Jews, but this may be one of them..."
Have you stopped beating your wife yet, etc. A ridiculous statement. I am no anti-Semite, of course, and it's insulting to our host, who has been personally in danger for most of his life merely for being Jewish, to suggest that he would tolerate an anti-Semite befouling his blog. Sadly, American Jews -- I have never seen this among Israelis -- sometimes seem unable, even in safe, anonymous forums like this one, to distinguish between dispassionate interest in Jews and Judaism and anti-Semitism.
Jews are the smallest and most cohesive race ever to have achieved world-historical importance. Some gentiles react with hatred; more recently, out of shame at the earlier reaction, some affect an exaggerated and somewhat creepy Judeophilia. But neither of these approaches is satisfactory; the first, for obvious reasons, the second, because if not malign, it still degrades both parties and represents a certain unwillingness to pursue trains of thought prejudged to be dangerous.
At any rate, saying "I'm not allowed" was not intended to be a complaint about real life. Rather, it was meant to point out special pleading. When ultra-religious Jews are (as far as I can tell) rather inert and incurious, saying so is taken as an attack on Jews, when the whole point is that those Jews haven't achieved anything comparable to the astonishing achievements of their secular cousins. But you are unhappy that I say this, even as you expect everyone to sit back and accept that goyim just want beer, tv, and tits on the internet.
From my POV, this is an absurd statement, since without gentiles' culture, there would never have been any secular Jews or any of the achievements of the secular Jews, which, monumental as they are, rest on foundation of gentile literature, science, math, and art. You were quick to accept my remark that there would be no Christianity without Judaism; will you accept equally quickly that there would be no Jewish science without Christian science?
-s.n.
Hey, there's a reason it was called the Dark Ages. The Byzantines did not come up with any significant achievements or innovations post-Wester Roman collapse that I can think of.
I do not think the Haredim are less curious than secular Jews by nature, but their curiosity is channeled in other ways. I think that curiosity and intellectual restlessness are part of a set of Jewish traits, but do not think that the degree to which they are expressed are reflective of the bearer's inherent value. As far as the fact that the Jewish community has been in a state of crysis for quite some time-this is indisputable.
I have lost track-what is this asymmetry you're complaining about? Is it that you feel somehow restricted from a dispassionate analysis of The Jew?
Your remark about no Jewish science without Christian science is myopic. For instance, Maimonides owed nothing to Christian science. You could, I guess, plead that there would be no Jewish science without Greek science.
Anyway, the relationship vis-a-vis what rests on whose foundation is murky. The first person to assume that the universe is run by laws of nature that I know of was Maimonides. The explosion of science in Northern Europe in the 17th century was heavily influenced by Puritans such as Isaac Newton, who were a) religiously motivated, b) possessed of a mindset which owed much to Judaism.
B,
"I have lost track-what is this asymmetry you're complaining about? Is it that you feel somehow restricted from a dispassionate analysis of The Jew?"
No, I'm drawing your attention, or at least that of more level-headed readers, to an unattractive chauvinism that insists on denigrating gentiles in order to praise Jews. If Jews are superior in curiosity and imagination, these posts show little evidence of it.
You're not even consistent. If the Byzantine empire maintains high civilization for 1000 years during an age of barbarity, that's nothing. If ultra-Orthodox Jews devote their entire lives to numerology and casuistry while remaining ignorant of art and science, that's creativity and intellectual vigor. Apparently, in your view, questions of human accomplishment can be entirely settled by inspection of the foreskin.
"Your remark about no Jewish science without Christian science is myopic. For instance, Maimonides owed nothing to Christian science. You could, I guess, plead that there would be no Jewish science without Greek science."
Maimonides was, of course, a very great man. To call him a "scientist" stretches the term - if we grant it to him, we must also grant it to other natural philosophers in the Aristotelian tradition. But granting it for the sake of argument, it is beside the point. Gentiles built the edifice of modern science on the foundation of mathematical physics, the emulation of which brought forth the other exact physical sciences. Jews got involved with this enterprise later (and made brilliant contributions.) Really, it is just silly to say otherwise. You must recognize this at some level, hence your claim that Newton had a "mindset which owed much to Judaism" - since, in your view, everything creative is Jewish, every creative figure must be connected to Judaism by some contrivance. I suppose Pascal, Lavoisier, and Leibniz also "owed much to Judaism." Where does it end? Was Bach a marrano, Morphy a converso, did Arrhenius have an inexplicable six-pointed birthmark?
"Anyway, the relationship vis-a-vis what rests on whose foundation is murky. The first person to assume that the universe is run by laws of nature that I know of was Maimonides..."
Atomism predates Maimonides. It's hard to have a materialistic philosophy without a concept of natural laws.
I'm happy for you that you're proud of your people. It's a shame that you can't seem to tolerate the idea that other peoples also had impressive achievements; indeed, some your people did not, from time to time. Based on our discussion, it seems that we blind pigs cannot be allowed to find so much as a single truffle - but then, the truffle mustn't be allowed to become trayf...
-s.n.
I suppose that if I point out that blacks are, on average, all other things being equal, faster sprinters than whites, this would be denigrating to whites?
The Byzantine empire and the Jews are apples and oranges. We were originally discussing whether the Greeks and the Byzantines are the same thing.
>To call him a "scientist" stretches the term
Maimonides referred to himself as a scientist-I am adding nothing here.
>since, in your view, everything creative is Jewish
I am getting the feeling increasingly that you are not speaking to me but rather to some voices in your head.
>hence your claim that Newton had a "mindset which owed much to Judaism"
It is indisputable that Newton came from a Puritan background, and that he was a mystic (which point of view inspired much of his science.) It is also indisputable that the Puritans had a deep ideological connection to Judaism. Pardon me for seeing a connection.
>It's a shame that you can't seem to tolerate the idea that other peoples also had impressive achievements;
Again, this isn't me you're speaking to but those voices. I am perfectly happy to admit that Newton was, in fact, not Jewish, and that the builders of the Angkor Wat and the Ziggurats were goyim.
>Based on our discussion, it seems that we blind pigs cannot be allowed to find so much as a single truffle - but then, the truffle mustn't be allowed to become trayf...
The voices, again?
B,
As the kids say, "NO U," possibly with a funny picture.
This is progress: you now grudgingly admit that some random accomplishments -- perhaps some big old buildings -- were built by the gentiles. And you exclaim in disgust that I'd claimed you'd called Newton Jewish. Why, the very idea! He was merely profoundly *influenced* by Judaism (which is why he was a genius.) That special mission is quite a thing: build a temple in 500 BC, cause the invention of calculus is a country largely without Jews 2000 years later. And of course, the relationship must be causal, not merely influential, or where's the sacred mission from Providence?
There are exactly four reasons that anyone who's not Jewish cares about the Jews. Those are (1) Christianity, (2) Islam, (3) Jewish accomplishments since 1850, and (4) horror and guilt over the destruction of the European Jews. Those taken together are the world-historical impact of Jews. (3) is quite a thing - as far as I know, no other people on earth has done so much, so fast, and so well. This is probably why East Asians are fascinated by Jews; you may have heard some Koreans have gone so far as to begin studying the Talmud, no doubt drawing the most amazing conclusions along the way. Every so often, books on Jews have fad success in China and Japan, often with unsettling content. Well, that's the price of success.
I am very interested in how this came about. It's clear you're a very bright and well-informed guy and I would enjoy learning from you in a calmer environment. But I'm afraid that in this thread you've proven (at least to my satisfaction) that you really do have a certain animus against us lesser breeds without the law. So, I will allow you the last word, and goodbye.
-s.n.
I don't have any animus against goyim. I have an animus against the willfully obtuse.
>He was merely profoundly *influenced* by Judaism (which is why he was a genius.)
If I had two hundred bucks, I'd buy this book on the matter: http://tinyurl.com/bnm7zc9
>That special mission is quite a thing: build a temple in 500 BC, cause the invention of calculus is a country largely without Jews 2000 years later. And of course, the relationship must be causal, not merely influential, or where's the sacred mission from Providence?
Yes, what possible link could some temple from before they had lawyers have with Newton's math? Oh, wait. http://tinyurl.com/bovtdag
Of course, Newton also had an unmathematical interest in Jews. http://tinyurl.com/7p9t72n
Of course, even Leibniz wasn't proof against our pernicious influence, apparently: http://tinyurl.com/7q8w9kx
Now, tell me. Which of your four reasons motivated these men to delve into serious Judaic studies?
s.n.,
Please do understand that not all Jews share B's chauvinism. By background, I am Ashkenazi and have some training in the natural sciences. I cannot but concede that the foundations of science are not due to Jews. Physics goes back in time further than Newton, who admitted that he also stood on the shoulders of giants. Almost all of the great mathematicians and physicists who preceded Newton were gentiles - e.g. Galileo, Napier, Kepler, Euclid, Archimedes etc. Newton's contemporary scientists of note were also gentiles. Jewish accomplishment in science and worldly things is relatively recent, and this fact cannot be avoided. That it is a fact is, moreover proof, that the gentiles are not limited in their curiosity and drive. To claim that is hubris which does not serve us well.
The sad thing about the relative recentness of the Jewish contribution to wider culture is that it might have started much earlier if the religious authorities had been less fanatical. It was not only persecution from outside that limited Jewish aspirations.
Post a Comment