QueenMosquito @10flags

Fun fact, as a unique ethnicity, Black Americans rank 3rd in patents, only behind the British and Germans. They rank ahead of every unique Asian and Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, and all other European ethnicities.

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

@ER3NJ609 @1EntreProNegro 🎯much better than being pos’s racist Karens/Chads.

Sudan G€nocidal chain

Typical African @Joe__Bassey

3 days ago

UAE is looting Sudan’s resources while sponsoring the genocide that’s ongoing in the country via the RSF.

49 467 1K 41K 40

An essay I've just written for @nytimes on why Big Tech is the 21st Century’s equivalent of the East India Company: "What It Would Take to Dismantle the Most Powerful Companies in the World" nytimes.com/2026/08/28/opi…

Christopher Columbus and Leopold II are responsible for far more deaths than Adolf Hitler. It's not even close. Yet, listening to Europeans, you'd never guess. Aimé Césare explained why: “What [the European] cannot forgive Hitler for is not the crime in itself, the crime against man ... it is the crime against the White man, the humiliation of the White man, and the fact that he applied to Europe colonialist procedures which until then had been reserved exclusively for the Arabs of Algeria, the ‘c*olies’ of India, and the ‘n*ggers’ of Africa.”

This Black Breastfeeding Week, This week, we uplift every Black mama navigating breastfeeding, pumping, combination feeding, and everything that comes with the journey. 💜 #BlackBreastfeedingWeek #BBW2026 #BWHI #BlackMaternalHealth #BlackWomensHealth

The way Kenny Rogers’ whole face lights up the moment he hears Dolly Parton’s voice coming from offstage. I have always loved this performance so much.

If you make this the last thing you listen to tonight before you go to bed I promise you won’t regret it

Here’s a quietly wonderful thing I noticed: If you talk to someone who was in choir or band at a majority Black HS, you’ll eventually discuss those annoying fundraisers for uniforms, instruments, etc. & a SURPRISING number will casually say: “Oh, Dolly Parton paid for ours”

I love this song. RIP Dolly Parton 😢

nathan cofnas, the man who got jason arday killed, is an explicit white nationalist and race realist who has been cited endlessly in aporia, a propaganda network funded by the human diversity fund, rebranded from the pioneer fund started in the 1930s as an explicit nazi project

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

onion person @CantEverDie

a week ago

in this new episode: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ill…

2 8 126 62K 24

Incredible. The Eugenicists are back and winning as @NafeezAhmed explains in his book Alt-Reich

Stephen Unwin @RoseUnwin

a week ago

Professor Peter Singer - the first signator to the recent letter protesting Nathan Cofnas’ dismissal from Ghent - wrote in 1979 that “killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person. Very often it is not wrong at all.” Only connect.

28 200 589 70K 77

This is what happens when someone knows enough scientific vocabulary to make prejudice sound upholstered. Cofnas takes stereotypes about Jews being clever, “shrewd” and successful, runs them through psychometrics and evolutionary biology, and presents the result as though he has discovered a mechanism. He has not. He has written a just-so story with citations. “Jews are stereotyped as shrewd” is not a genetic finding. “Perhaps medieval occupational pressures selected for intelligence” is not a demonstrated evolutionary pathway. It is a hypothesis demanding evidence, not a spell that turns folklore into population genetics. Ashkenazi population history should make anyone serious about genetics more cautious. Over the last millennium, Ashkenazi communities experienced founder effects, population bottlenecks, endogamy, migration, drift and demographic expansion. Those processes leave measurable genetic signatures. They also help explain why certain recessive disorders, including Tay-Sachs, became unusually frequent in Ashkenazi populations. None of this means Ashkenazi Jews are genetically uniform. It means population history can produce striking frequency differences without every difference being an adaptation. That ought to be Population Genetics 101. Cofnas instead seems to have skipped straight to Population Genetics According to Your Grandfather’s Favourite Ethnic Joke. That is the fatal problem. If you claim medieval occupational pressures selected for higher general intelligence, identify the variants, demonstrate the selection signal, establish their relationship to the phenotype, distinguish selection from drift and founder effects, and show that the phenotype explains the social outcome. You do not get to point at Nobel prizes, accountants and a stereotype about clever merchants and announce that natural selection has entered the chat. Evolutionary explanations are not validated because they sound plausible after the fact. Almost any historical outcome can be reverse-engineered into an adaptive fairy tale if the standard is merely “you can imagine why this might have been useful.” The funniest part is that Cofnas accidentally demolishes cruder race-IQ reasoning. Here he suddenly recognises that identical IQ scores need not produce identical outcomes because culture, occupational history, education, personality, migration, social networks and institutions can matter. Correct. Now carry that insight five feet further. If a Korean-American with an IQ of 105 and a British person with an IQ of 105 can have different expected outcomes because their populations have different histories and environments, then a group difference in an IQ table does not magically tell you which genes caused it. He has rediscovered confounding variables while trying to explain why his preferred stereotypes are sophisticated. Strip away the italicised g, the evolutionary throat-clearing and the name-dropping of Stephen Jay Gould, and what remains? “Jews are shrewd, Asians are industrious, perhaps evolution made them that way.” That is not fearless forbidden science. It is ancient racial storytelling upgraded with jargon and a Springer link. The embarrassing thing is not that the argument is offensive. Offensive ideas can be correct. The embarrassing thing is how little work the science is doing. The conclusion arrives first, wearing a stereotype on its lapel, and the evolutionary story is hired afterwards to carry its bags.

Nathan Cofnas @nathancofnas

3 years ago

Ashkenazi IQ is around 110-112 (sorry, J IQ truthers), but Jewish success goes far beyond what can be explained by IQ alone. It does not follow that Jewish intellectual accomplishment is an illusion or due to nepotism. This is an important point that race realists need to

424 126 1K 608K 1K

Those such as myself who pointed out a power network behind Cofnas were ridiculed as conspiracy theorists. Now the big, stupid US state at the centre of the network wades in like Biff Tannen to threaten a Belgian university wanting rid of a postdoc 'race scientist'. Dark times.

U.S. Ambassador to Belgium Bill White @USAmbToBelgium

2 weeks ago

The United States Mission to Belgium condemns, in the strongest terms, Ghent University’s retaliation against an American scholar following his accurate whistleblower reporting on academic fraud. The United States government regularly funds and supports research, academic

2K 7K 50K 4.3M 3K

AAANd I knew the whole hounding of Arday and these vile eugenicists was gonna come back to the TESCREAL bundle in some way shape or form.

college hill || rachel adjogah @thecollegehill

2 weeks ago

this is burying the lede the wild part about this is that it's directly tying longtermism (a subset of effective altruism) with eugenics

3 29 127 31K 23

We really let these low knowledge pastors take this away from us. They've destroyed everything with lies.

@

57 years ago

0 0 0 0 0

Except it wasn't plagiarism. This really does need hammering into people's skulls until the furniture starts moving. Arday's thesis contained citation and attribution errors. They were investigated. The plagiarism allegation was not upheld. The university concluded they were consistent with honest and reasonable error. You are allowed to think the errors were serious. You are allowed to think the investigation was too forgiving. You can even spend the rest of your natural life squinting furiously at footnotes if that brings you spiritual fulfilment. What you cannot do is take an allegation that was investigated and rejected, strap a rocket to it, and announce that Arday was responsible for "objectively one of the most extraordinary cases of academic fraud ever." Academic fraud. Ever. Good God. We're now apparently placing some disputed citations in a 400-page doctoral thesis somewhere between Piltdown Man and fabricating an entire research programme. This isn't scepticism. It's not even cosplay prosecution. The story has mutated through repetition from "there are citation problems here" into "historic fraud scandal", because a certain section of the internet has decided that saying something with increasing confidence eventually makes it true. It doesn't. You don't get to replace the findings of an actual misconduct investigation with whatever lurid version of events has been fermenting in your group chat. Get a grip.

Sturgeon's Law @Sturgeons_Law

2 weeks ago

When you go beyond saying the coverage was wildly disproportionate & partly motivated by racism & politics, & start saying "the story should never have been Arday" (objectively among the more extraordinary cases of academic fraud ever), you just hand the racists an easy win.

38 21 344 140K 32

I don’t want technology to “evolve” another bloody inch. I hate that everything demands an app or QR code. I hate supermarket self-checkouts that scold you for “unexpected items” as if you have committed a hate crime with a packet of biscuits. I hate ringing a company and suddenly you’re trapped in a doom loop of an endless conversation with a robot before being left on hold long enough to waste an entire afternoon. I hate how local bank branches are closing and customer service is no longer communication with a bank manager but with an AI bot. I hate websites that force you to prove you’re human by enforcing a dystopian farce quiz to spot 3 sets of traffic lights in a fog of pixelated misery. I hate digital app passwords, verification codes and subscriptions. I hate how town centre car parks often no longer accept cash payments and the only way to park is by registering to another bloody app. I hate receiving unsolicited phone calls from an AI automated robot. And I really hate how the whole digital circus excludes half of the country’s pensioners simply because they never signed up to live inside a smartphone.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ Rant over.

Dear AI hype crowd who think "AI will cure all diseases in 5-10 years!"... When challenged about the bottleneck of clinical trials, you can't just say "AI will speed up clinical trials!" - that is not a coherent argument. You need to state how you expect AI to speed it up. Currently, clinical trials on human patients and healthy volunteers are deeply necessary for understanding long-term safety and efficacy in live human bodies. Yes, these studies carry a huge time and cost burden. No, we cannot simply scrap them. Animal studies, in-vitro assays, microfluidics, AI, and biosimulation are only weakly indicative for humans. They improve the odds at best. Drug success rates in human trials, even after extensive preclinical work, remain extremely poor. AI and biosimulation face their own severe bottlenecks - biological data coverage and quality, deep mechanistic unknowns, modelling feasibility - that are far beyond the scope of 5-10 years to solve. This is why they are mainly used as early-stage high-throughput screening tools. Without clinical trials, the risk to patients is unacceptably high. There is no credible alternative. These studies last 7+ years and require full-time medical staff, specialised facilities, vast planning, recruitment of hundreds to thousands of volunteers, extensive background checks, continuous monitoring, and adherence to extremely tight regulatory guidelines. So if you claim clinical trials will be dramatically sped up, which part of this process do you expect AI to accelerate? And how exactly does that enable us to "cure every disease in 5-10 years"? The core bottleneck is that we actually need to observe human patients - in different cohorts, under controlled conditions, and with tight medical supervision - for several years. We need the long-term human data. Without it, you are left with a high-risk mystery drug. AI does not magically let us have the cake and eat it.

@aashiq @EricTopol Came here to say same, but for meditation practices. You overcome physical pain of sitting by concentrating on the pain, then processing it as another sensation.