Re: Moorad's comment is sound

From: Rich Blinne <>
Date: Thu Jun 23 2005 - 15:41:35 EDT

On 6/23/05, <> wrote:
> I really don't understand your cryptic comment. NYU's Biomolecular
> Institute is doing work on the Ashkenazi gene pool but the rejection of
> Harpending's paper is not substantive; only as Pinker said - it is not PC.
 If Jews have been practicing eugenics (as the paper suggests) and that has
> enabled them to rise to positions of power and influence over other peoples
> throughout history what motive exists for the Jewish Forward to agree with
> Harpenindg and disseminate the Jewish secret to success? None. Use some
> critical thought in your choice of references.
  Sorry. I won't use any quotes from Montgomery Slatkin. He was only the
primary reference and was personally acknowledged in Cochran's paper for
population genetic simulations. He obviously knows
the genetic history of sphingolipid disorders.

 Of course this is debated, but is it bad science? No, nor have you
> demonstrated how it is bad science.
  No original data. An untested hypothesis. No working model on how this
works genetically. This is good science?

 Would you like a copy of the original paper rather than the critique from
> the Jewish Forward?
 Last December you said:
> "Ineffable" is the very word rabbinical Judaism uses to describe God. Now,
> I know that my willingness to invoke Jewish theology may be considered a
> faux pas in Christian company but let me give you an example of just how
> enlightening such invocations can be.

  If you can invoke Jewish theology why can't I quote a Jewish newspaper?
Received on Thu Jun 23 15:43:45 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jun 23 2005 - 15:43:48 EDT