21–30 of 41 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Razib Khan is a shit source
Can you elaborate? What I've read from him seems fairly reasonable, but I am open to updating my model.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2015/03/...
Every couple of months, we find new fossil evidence that "rewrites" the history of our species. At what point is the theory just wrong?
Having to adjust the parameters of the model and having to change the fundamental aspects (e.g. humans came from Africa) are different things.
Every couple of months, we find new fossil evidence that "rewrites" the history of our species. At what point is the theory just wrong?
As far as I can tell, the entire "Out of Africa" model taken for granted within the MSM is being treated with increasing skepticism/nuance by scientists actually studying the facts on the ground, leading to these odd & increasingly ancient "first modern out of Africa" stories which may be confusing the public more than they're illuminating the history of human populations. Razib Khan had a good short primer on this t…
Every time I see someone talk about "the MSM" as a pejorative like this, I laugh, mostly at you, because the alternative is literally conspiracy theorists and, of course, the far right. And, indeed, a quick search for Razib Khan brings up this: https://undark.org/article/race-science-razib-khan-racism/
As far as I can tell, the entire "Out of Africa" model taken for granted within the MSM is being treated with increasing skepticism/nuance by scientists actually studying the facts on the ground, leading to these odd & increasingly ancient "first modern out of Africa" stories which may be confusing the public more than they're illuminating the history of human populations. Razib Khan had a good short primer on this t…
This happened "after the Holocene"? Aren't we in the Holocene epoch?
As far as I can tell, the entire "Out of Africa" model taken for granted within the MSM is being treated with increasing skepticism/nuance by scientists actually studying the facts on the ground, leading to these odd & increasingly ancient "first modern out of Africa" stories which may be confusing the public more than they're illuminating the history of human populations. Razib Khan had a good short primer on this t…
> Additionally, after the Holocene some of these non-African groups also experienced huge population growth due to intensive agricultural practice. This happened "after the Holocene"? Aren't we in the Holocene epoch?
As far as I can tell, the entire "Out of Africa" model taken for granted within the MSM is being treated with increasing skepticism/nuance by scientists actually studying the facts on the ground, leading to these odd & increasingly ancient "first modern out of Africa" stories which may be confusing the public more than they're illuminating the history of human populations. Razib Khan had a good short primer on this t…
Can you recommend a good primer on what we know about evolution and the history of our species, and the supporting evidence? I thought The Selfish Gene would be this, but it seemed primarily focused on more abstract/philosophical questions, like group selection vs. gene selection. I'm more interested in concrete information about what our DNA and the fossil record can credibly establish. I want to know what facts are…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGiQaabX3_o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czgOWmtGVGs
His stuff is well sourced and generally reliable.
As far as I can tell, the entire "Out of Africa" model taken for granted within the MSM is being treated with increasing skepticism/nuance by scientists actually studying the facts on the ground, leading to these odd & increasingly ancient "first modern out of Africa" stories which may be confusing the public more than they're illuminating the history of human populations. Razib Khan had a good short primer on this t…
Every time I see someone talk about "the MSM" as a pejorative like this, I laugh, mostly at you, because the alternative is literally conspiracy theorists and, of course, the far right. And, indeed, a quick search for Razib Khan brings up this: https://undark.org/article/race-science-razib-khan-racism/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every time I see someone talk about "the MSM" as a pejorative like this, I laugh, mostly at you, because the alternative is literally conspiracy theorists and, of course, the far right. And, indeed, a quick search for Razib Khan brings up this: https://undark.org/article/race-science-razib-khan-racism/
Why can't the alternative just be a media establishment that doesn't lie all day every day.
(1) "lie" has intent. You can't prove intent on the scale you accuse.
(2) "The media" is amorphous. Ask any two people and they won't identify the exact same group. Ironically, this is the same problem with the concept of "race", "species", and a few other similar concepts of population.
(3) The suffix "establishment" in this context is ridiculously vague to the point of being a No True Scotsman fallacy.
IMHO people complaining about "the mainstream media" have no historical anchor. Things were an order of magnitude worse when Hearst was actively running his "yellow journalism" outlets and when governments had monopolies on media coverage.
Media literacy is hard now because there is more than one choice for news. I choose not to get my news from the impulse isle or from {TMZ, E! Television, Fox News, MSNBC, local television affiliates}. There are still thousands if not millions of media outlets that don't "lie all day every day", the only difference is now there is more onus on the reader to be able to distinguish journalism from opinion from sponsored stories from entertainment from outright fraudulent stories.