Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Not to worry, I won't be talking about West Siberians forever. Posts have been slow recently as I research more heavily into West Eurasian divergence, diversification and convergence.
The 4 main points of contention regarding West Eurasian racial purity is:
—West Siberians. (WSHG)
—Ancient North Eurasians. (ANE)
—Basal Eurasians.
—Neanderthals.
—WSHG is clearly just an offshoot of ANE, however ANE requires better proof of purity.
—ANE is being further researched, but not a lot of information than a plain "20% East Asian" claim from researchers which is rather baseless imho considering ANE were blonde, and we see none of that in Asia.
—Basal Eurasians are a hypothetical pre-Eurasian population, completely unproven, but claimed to exist as an explanation of why West Eurasians have less Neanderthal admixture than East Eurasians, of which many other reasons could explain, such as inconsistent Neanderthal admixture across Eurasians, or different genetic recombination efficiency. The premise is that Basal Eurasians have no Neanderthal ancestry as they split from Eurasians before they mix with Neanderthals, then they mix with West Eurasians.
This hypothetical Basal Eurasian is claimed to be about 50% of both Natufians and Early European Farmers, the latter of which is claimed to have "bleached" Europe of Neanderthal ancestry; however looking at the Linearbandkeramik (EEF) sample, there's approximately 1.9% Neanderthal introgression, which is consistent with standard West Eurasians, which debunks this Basal Eurasian nonsense. I'm reading into Natufians to further confirm this, being half Basal, half UWHG, they should be ≤1% Neanderthal to prove the Basal Eurasian hypothesis, if they're ~2% it disproves the hypothesis.
—Lastly, Neanderthal admixture doesn't make West Eurasians (Whites, Europeans) impure as the standard for racial purity is purity to the West Eurasian branch, of which I claim Adam started. Anything that occurs before this split is inconsequential and meaningless, such as the Neanderthal introgression, but can be useful to track populations by looking at the Neanderthal %.
A further study we could look into is the effect of Turkic admixture in the Balkan, such as how much Turkic ancestry is actually not West Eurasian, and how much this actually effected the region, but this is a difficult area to study that is likely to disappoint.
Longer follow-up than I expected, but glad to keep everyone here in the loop and informed. 😎👌🏻
The 4 main points of contention regarding West Eurasian racial purity is:
—West Siberians. (WSHG)
—Ancient North Eurasians. (ANE)
—Basal Eurasians.
—Neanderthals.
—WSHG is clearly just an offshoot of ANE, however ANE requires better proof of purity.
—ANE is being further researched, but not a lot of information than a plain "20% East Asian" claim from researchers which is rather baseless imho considering ANE were blonde, and we see none of that in Asia.
—Basal Eurasians are a hypothetical pre-Eurasian population, completely unproven, but claimed to exist as an explanation of why West Eurasians have less Neanderthal admixture than East Eurasians, of which many other reasons could explain, such as inconsistent Neanderthal admixture across Eurasians, or different genetic recombination efficiency. The premise is that Basal Eurasians have no Neanderthal ancestry as they split from Eurasians before they mix with Neanderthals, then they mix with West Eurasians.
This hypothetical Basal Eurasian is claimed to be about 50% of both Natufians and Early European Farmers, the latter of which is claimed to have "bleached" Europe of Neanderthal ancestry; however looking at the Linearbandkeramik (EEF) sample, there's approximately 1.9% Neanderthal introgression, which is consistent with standard West Eurasians, which debunks this Basal Eurasian nonsense. I'm reading into Natufians to further confirm this, being half Basal, half UWHG, they should be ≤1% Neanderthal to prove the Basal Eurasian hypothesis, if they're ~2% it disproves the hypothesis.
—Lastly, Neanderthal admixture doesn't make West Eurasians (Whites, Europeans) impure as the standard for racial purity is purity to the West Eurasian branch, of which I claim Adam started. Anything that occurs before this split is inconsequential and meaningless, such as the Neanderthal introgression, but can be useful to track populations by looking at the Neanderthal %.
A further study we could look into is the effect of Turkic admixture in the Balkan, such as how much Turkic ancestry is actually not West Eurasian, and how much this actually effected the region, but this is a difficult area to study that is likely to disappoint.
Longer follow-up than I expected, but glad to keep everyone here in the loop and informed. 😎👌🏻
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Basal Eurasians:
—are a hypothetical ancestor to NHG (Natufians) and EEF (Early European Farmers) at approximately 50% and 44%, respectively.
The hypothesis was developed to explain why WE (West Eurasians) have less Neanderthal admixture than EE (East Eurasians), as both only mixed with Neanderthals while as ancestral "Eurasians," by suggesting WE mixed with a Proto-Eurasian splinter group, Basal Eurasians, who had no Neanderthal admixture, through the mixed NHG and EEF, the latter of which mixed with all WE; this would make all Europeans race-mixed.
However a simple search of NHG and EEF samples show 2.06% and 1.9% Neanderthal admixture, respectively; which is not only within the normal range for WE (~1.8% ±0.4%), but is on the high end of the range; making Basal Eurasians rather baseless.
NHG, EEF and subsequent Europeans do not have Basal ancestry, they are White.
More detail in image.
—are a hypothetical ancestor to NHG (Natufians) and EEF (Early European Farmers) at approximately 50% and 44%, respectively.
The hypothesis was developed to explain why WE (West Eurasians) have less Neanderthal admixture than EE (East Eurasians), as both only mixed with Neanderthals while as ancestral "Eurasians," by suggesting WE mixed with a Proto-Eurasian splinter group, Basal Eurasians, who had no Neanderthal admixture, through the mixed NHG and EEF, the latter of which mixed with all WE; this would make all Europeans race-mixed.
However a simple search of NHG and EEF samples show 2.06% and 1.9% Neanderthal admixture, respectively; which is not only within the normal range for WE (~1.8% ±0.4%), but is on the high end of the range; making Basal Eurasians rather baseless.
NHG, EEF and subsequent Europeans do not have Basal ancestry, they are White.
More detail in image.
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Ancient North Eurasians:
—(ANE) is a West Eurasian (WE) group that diverged from WHG approximately 24,000 years ago, unrelated to East Eurasians (EE).
"ANE is considered to have been "basal to modern day WE" but not related to East Asians, and suggested to have perhaps originally lived in Europe or Western Asia. According to Lazaridis et al. 2014, the common ancestor of ANE and WHG separated from EE around 40kBC, and ANE split from WHG around 22kBC."
While often claimed that ANE aren't WE and have approximately 20% EE admixture, there is very little evidence to support admixing, and the former is just semantics, as ANE are from the same branch that diverged from EE as the rest of WEs.
A few ANE samples may share some alleles with EE implying admixture, but that's likely owing to retained alleles from the recent WE/EE split, or that these particular samples were admixed; as we don't see evidence of EE in subsequent ANE populations such as EHG, SHG and WSH.
ANE and subsequent Europeans are White.
—(ANE) is a West Eurasian (WE) group that diverged from WHG approximately 24,000 years ago, unrelated to East Eurasians (EE).
"ANE is considered to have been "basal to modern day WE" but not related to East Asians, and suggested to have perhaps originally lived in Europe or Western Asia. According to Lazaridis et al. 2014, the common ancestor of ANE and WHG separated from EE around 40kBC, and ANE split from WHG around 22kBC."
While often claimed that ANE aren't WE and have approximately 20% EE admixture, there is very little evidence to support admixing, and the former is just semantics, as ANE are from the same branch that diverged from EE as the rest of WEs.
A few ANE samples may share some alleles with EE implying admixture, but that's likely owing to retained alleles from the recent WE/EE split, or that these particular samples were admixed; as we don't see evidence of EE in subsequent ANE populations such as EHG, SHG and WSH.
ANE and subsequent Europeans are White.
❤3🔥1
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
20220922_West_Eurasian.jpg
409.6 KB
White Ethnogenesis:
I've done significant research the past month delineating the origin and descent of West Eurasians, and put together a very thorough infographic detailing this information.
A common accusation from critics of "one drop" racial purity standards is that "we're already mixed" however I've put research that demonstrates Whites are genuinely racially isolated to West Eurasians.
Previous posts:
—General ¹
—Basal ¹
—WSHG ¹ ² ³
—ANE ¹
Note: I'll edit the infographic sometime over the next few days for extra details and higher resolution.
Final Footnote: If in the future we are to find this is all inaccurate and Europeans are genuinely mixed in their pre-history to other races, this should not concern us in the slightest.
Christ, the Apostles, the Disciples and Paul all preached exclusively to Whites throughout Europe, West Asia and North Africa, not to a single Non race and then said it was done. Whatever we were at that point, God was satisfied with, and we descend purely from those people.
I've done significant research the past month delineating the origin and descent of West Eurasians, and put together a very thorough infographic detailing this information.
A common accusation from critics of "one drop" racial purity standards is that "we're already mixed" however I've put research that demonstrates Whites are genuinely racially isolated to West Eurasians.
Previous posts:
—General ¹
—Basal ¹
—WSHG ¹ ² ³
—ANE ¹
Note: I'll edit the infographic sometime over the next few days for extra details and higher resolution.
Final Footnote: If in the future we are to find this is all inaccurate and Europeans are genuinely mixed in their pre-history to other races, this should not concern us in the slightest.
Christ, the Apostles, the Disciples and Paul all preached exclusively to Whites throughout Europe, West Asia and North Africa, not to a single Non race and then said it was done. Whatever we were at that point, God was satisfied with, and we descend purely from those people.
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Philippians 2:15
¹⁵ Vt sitis sine qverella, et simplices filii Dei, sine reprehensione in medio nationis pravae, et perversae: inter qvos lvcetis sicvt lvminaria in mvndo,
¹⁵ So may you be without complaint, unmixed sons of God, without reproof in the midst of a nation depraved, and perverse: among whom you shine like lights in the world,
John 1:13
¹³ Qvi non ex sangvinibvs, neqve ex volvntate carnis, neqve ex volvntate viri, sed ex Deo nati svnt.
¹³ Who is not of bloods*, nor of the will of flesh, nor of the will of man, but from God they were born.
*Note the plural.
Protect your God given racial purity until the last drop, we are surrounded by the masses of dark hordes, but we will prevail, as unmixed sons of God.
¹⁵ Vt sitis sine qverella, et simplices filii Dei, sine reprehensione in medio nationis pravae, et perversae: inter qvos lvcetis sicvt lvminaria in mvndo,
¹⁵ So may you be without complaint, unmixed sons of God, without reproof in the midst of a nation depraved, and perverse: among whom you shine like lights in the world,
John 1:13
¹³ Qvi non ex sangvinibvs, neqve ex volvntate carnis, neqve ex volvntate viri, sed ex Deo nati svnt.
¹³ Who is not of bloods*, nor of the will of flesh, nor of the will of man, but from God they were born.
*Note the plural.
Protect your God given racial purity until the last drop, we are surrounded by the masses of dark hordes, but we will prevail, as unmixed sons of God.
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
No One Is Coming To Save Us:
Fantasies of spaceage Nazis from the moon/ Antarctica, divine intervention and even "the collapse", that will save the White race, is Q-tier "Trust The Plan" nonsense. None of it will ever happen.
Not to disparage God, but there will never be divine intervention to save us from ourselves: refer to doctrines of Cessationism and Preterism; since Christ, God hasn't and never will again intervene on earth. We must save ourselves, guided by God's word.
We don't save ourselves by sitting around waiting for it to blow over, inaction is racial suicide; our enemies don't take the same stance. Hiding innawoods isn't an option, there's nowhere left to run on earth, and nothing will be fixed in our absence.
We save our race by usurping the vehicles of power: institutions, corporations, political offices, media, influencers, military, agencies, financing, etc.
White men must be smart, powerful, influential and charismatic; if we ever hope for the White race to survive and prosper.
Fantasies of spaceage Nazis from the moon/ Antarctica, divine intervention and even "the collapse", that will save the White race, is Q-tier "Trust The Plan" nonsense. None of it will ever happen.
Not to disparage God, but there will never be divine intervention to save us from ourselves: refer to doctrines of Cessationism and Preterism; since Christ, God hasn't and never will again intervene on earth. We must save ourselves, guided by God's word.
We don't save ourselves by sitting around waiting for it to blow over, inaction is racial suicide; our enemies don't take the same stance. Hiding innawoods isn't an option, there's nowhere left to run on earth, and nothing will be fixed in our absence.
We save our race by usurping the vehicles of power: institutions, corporations, political offices, media, influencers, military, agencies, financing, etc.
White men must be smart, powerful, influential and charismatic; if we ever hope for the White race to survive and prosper.
💯1
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
How Can I Be Certain Of My Racial Purity?
A very common and fair question that should be explored.
"You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorns nor figs from thistles, are they?
In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the corrupt tree bears bad fruit.
A good tree is not able to bear bad fruit, nor a bad tree to bear good fruit.
So then, you will recognize them by their fruit."
—The Tree and its Fruits [Matthew 7:15-20; Luke 6:43-45]
In the absence of obvious signs of foreign admixture, such as Non phenotypical traits, or known Non ancestry, you should try not to be so overly convoluted and just fallback on the duck test, of which this passage effectively describes.
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."
If it looks White, acts White, and sounds White, then it's probably White; and you should have very little concern about the possibility for the presence of any hidden ancient foreign microadmixture.
There is an obvious concern of Non admixture in our pre-history, which we discussed the plausibility of Whites remaining pure through and that if however it were found that we did mix during this pre-history period, not only would the admixed value be low and insignificant, it theologically would be inconsequential.
This is due to Christ, Apostles, Disciples and Paul all preaching exclusively to Whites throughout Europe, West Asia and North Africa, not to a single Non race and then said it was done.
This demonstrates two things:
1- Whatever Whites were genetically composed of at this point, was acceptable.
2- Whatever Nons were genetically composed of at this point, was unacceptable.
Assuming there is Non admixture during pre-history (we disagree there is) then by whatever reason, justification or mechanism that would allow only Whites to retain souls, we just simply don't understand yet, but should take sollice in the fact we only need to check purity to the last 2000 years.
To summarise: to be certain of your racial purity, you simply need: the absence of any known Non ancestry in the past 2000 years, the absence of any Non phenotypical traits, to appear White and to act White.
You will recognise a good tree (White) by it's fruits (character).
A very common and fair question that should be explored.
"You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorns nor figs from thistles, are they?
In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the corrupt tree bears bad fruit.
A good tree is not able to bear bad fruit, nor a bad tree to bear good fruit.
So then, you will recognize them by their fruit."
—The Tree and its Fruits [Matthew 7:15-20; Luke 6:43-45]
In the absence of obvious signs of foreign admixture, such as Non phenotypical traits, or known Non ancestry, you should try not to be so overly convoluted and just fallback on the duck test, of which this passage effectively describes.
"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."
If it looks White, acts White, and sounds White, then it's probably White; and you should have very little concern about the possibility for the presence of any hidden ancient foreign microadmixture.
There is an obvious concern of Non admixture in our pre-history, which we discussed the plausibility of Whites remaining pure through and that if however it were found that we did mix during this pre-history period, not only would the admixed value be low and insignificant, it theologically would be inconsequential.
This is due to Christ, Apostles, Disciples and Paul all preaching exclusively to Whites throughout Europe, West Asia and North Africa, not to a single Non race and then said it was done.
This demonstrates two things:
1- Whatever Whites were genetically composed of at this point, was acceptable.
2- Whatever Nons were genetically composed of at this point, was unacceptable.
Assuming there is Non admixture during pre-history (we disagree there is) then by whatever reason, justification or mechanism that would allow only Whites to retain souls, we just simply don't understand yet, but should take sollice in the fact we only need to check purity to the last 2000 years.
To summarise: to be certain of your racial purity, you simply need: the absence of any known Non ancestry in the past 2000 years, the absence of any Non phenotypical traits, to appear White and to act White.
You will recognise a good tree (White) by it's fruits (character).
❤2
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Nativism:
The term "native" today is deeply misunderstood, which is derivative of nation.
Native: a person born in a specified place.
Nativism: the policy of protecting the interests of native-born against immigrants.
Often the term native is conflated with indigenous, which is actually a term denoting where a creature developed.
A native American is not a red-Indian and throughout US history only ever meant a White person born in America, only changing in very recent history.
Above is an early American White supremacist flag (Know Nothing Party) which not only opposed nons coming to the US, but also foreign born Whites (non-native).
While not used as commonly historically, this applies to the rest of the world as well:
—A native Australian is a White person born in Australia.
—A native European is a White person born in Europe.
As much as it'll trigger some, these aren't interchangeable, an American is not European; these are demonyms, while White is the ethnonym.
Only Whites are Native American.
The term "native" today is deeply misunderstood, which is derivative of nation.
Native: a person born in a specified place.
Nativism: the policy of protecting the interests of native-born against immigrants.
Often the term native is conflated with indigenous, which is actually a term denoting where a creature developed.
A native American is not a red-Indian and throughout US history only ever meant a White person born in America, only changing in very recent history.
Above is an early American White supremacist flag (Know Nothing Party) which not only opposed nons coming to the US, but also foreign born Whites (non-native).
While not used as commonly historically, this applies to the rest of the world as well:
—A native Australian is a White person born in Australia.
—A native European is a White person born in Europe.
As much as it'll trigger some, these aren't interchangeable, an American is not European; these are demonyms, while White is the ethnonym.
Only Whites are Native American.
👍1
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Eye of Providence:
Despite kooky conspiracies attributed to the symbol, the symbol is actually entirely Christian, first appearing in the early 16th century AD, in Protestant and Renaissance Europe, as a symbol for the Triune God (Trinity).
The symbol is characterised by:
- an enclosed eye, representing the omnipresence of God: the all-seeing eye.
— an enclosing triangle, representing the Christian trinity.
— often a circle and rays emitting from the triangle; the former artistic, the latter representing the emitting of divine providence and sunlight.
Despite claims of Freemasonry, it only ever features once in Freemasonry:
— Thomas Smith Webb's: The Freemason's Monitor, 1797.
Allegedly after this publication Freemasons would use it commonly. This is however centuries after the common Western European Christian usage.
However EOP features extremely frequently throughout the United States and Europe:
— Great Seal of the United States, 1782.
— State Seal: Colorado.
— City Seal: Kenosha, Wisconsin.
— DARPA's Information Awareness Office.
— United States $1 bill.
— Vermont Copper, 1785.
— Nova Constellatio patterns/ coppers, 1783, 1785.
— Serbian Constitution, 1835.
— French: Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, 1789.
— Coat of Arms: Confederation of the Equator, 1824.
— Coat of Arms: Brasłaŭ, Belarus.
— Coat of Arms: Wilamowice, Poland.
— 5 Lithuanian Coat of Arms: Alovė, Baisogala, Kalvarija, Plungė, Šiauliai.
— 2 Lithuanian flags: Plungė, Šiauliai.
— Estonian 50 krooni note.
— Ukrainian 500 hryvnia (old) note.
— UK Guards Division insignia, 1915.
While above is all government usage, the earliest known usage of the EOP is:
— Pontormo's Supper at Emmaus, 1525.
Since then it has been featured on numerous Eastern Orthodox, Latter-day Saint, Catholic and Protestant churches and buildings.
The EOP is still used in church architecture and Christian art today to symbolize the Trinity and God's omnipresence and divine providence.
Despite kooky conspiracies attributed to the symbol, the symbol is actually entirely Christian, first appearing in the early 16th century AD, in Protestant and Renaissance Europe, as a symbol for the Triune God (Trinity).
The symbol is characterised by:
- an enclosed eye, representing the omnipresence of God: the all-seeing eye.
— an enclosing triangle, representing the Christian trinity.
— often a circle and rays emitting from the triangle; the former artistic, the latter representing the emitting of divine providence and sunlight.
Despite claims of Freemasonry, it only ever features once in Freemasonry:
— Thomas Smith Webb's: The Freemason's Monitor, 1797.
Allegedly after this publication Freemasons would use it commonly. This is however centuries after the common Western European Christian usage.
However EOP features extremely frequently throughout the United States and Europe:
— Great Seal of the United States, 1782.
— State Seal: Colorado.
— City Seal: Kenosha, Wisconsin.
— DARPA's Information Awareness Office.
— United States $1 bill.
— Vermont Copper, 1785.
— Nova Constellatio patterns/ coppers, 1783, 1785.
— Serbian Constitution, 1835.
— French: Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, 1789.
— Coat of Arms: Confederation of the Equator, 1824.
— Coat of Arms: Brasłaŭ, Belarus.
— Coat of Arms: Wilamowice, Poland.
— 5 Lithuanian Coat of Arms: Alovė, Baisogala, Kalvarija, Plungė, Šiauliai.
— 2 Lithuanian flags: Plungė, Šiauliai.
— Estonian 50 krooni note.
— Ukrainian 500 hryvnia (old) note.
— UK Guards Division insignia, 1915.
While above is all government usage, the earliest known usage of the EOP is:
— Pontormo's Supper at Emmaus, 1525.
Since then it has been featured on numerous Eastern Orthodox, Latter-day Saint, Catholic and Protestant churches and buildings.
The EOP is still used in church architecture and Christian art today to symbolize the Trinity and God's omnipresence and divine providence.
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Clarification: nativism only applies to Whites, Nons are fauna.
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Should White Christians celebrate Halloween?
All versions listed are Christian, but should we? Comment your choices and how it should be celebrated.
All versions listed are Christian, but should we? Comment your choices and how it should be celebrated.
Anonymous Poll
37%
—No
24%
Yes, as Halloween.
26%
Yes, as All Saint's Day.
5%
Yes, as Reformation Day.
8%
Yes, as a secular holiday.
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
IQ+.pdf
4.2 MB
"IQ" vs. Standardized Tests (2007) — Father's Manifesto.
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Some interesting graphs on IQ by race, religion and region. (pdf)
According to which:
By race and specific-religion, White Anglicans have the highest average IQ at 113. (2009)
By race and region, DC Whites have the highest average IQ at approximately 135. White Protestant boys slightly exceed this, and assumingly DC White boys score even higher. (2007)
What's interesting is the ~70 iq gap between blacks and Whites in DC. Whites in DC (135) have an average IQ that is double that of blacks in DC (68).
According to which:
By race and specific-religion, White Anglicans have the highest average IQ at 113. (2009)
By race and region, DC Whites have the highest average IQ at approximately 135. White Protestant boys slightly exceed this, and assumingly DC White boys score even higher. (2007)
What's interesting is the ~70 iq gap between blacks and Whites in DC. Whites in DC (135) have an average IQ that is double that of blacks in DC (68).
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
"IQ" vs. Standardized Tests: Preamble. (2007)
"When Wechsler was developing his IQ test, he found that out of 105 tests assessing skills in solving maze-puzzles, involving the most heterogeneous populations throughout the world, 99 showed an incontrovertible male superiority.
(Wechsler resolved this type of problem by eliminating all those tests that resulted in findings of significant sex differences.)"
So the IQs of men and women were "equalized" by throwing out 94% of the test? How important is this?
Worldwide, with rare exceptions, annual incomes increase an average of $2,000 for each one point increase in IQ, with Japanese men at the top (with an IQ greater than 110 and annual income greater than $110,200) and black women in Africa at the bottom (with an IQ less than 55 and annual income less than $200).
The IQ gap between Asian men and Asian women when correlated with GRE scores is 19 points, when correlated with SAT math scores is 14 points, TIMSS physics scores is 17 points, PISA math scores at 15 years old is 10 points, ACT math scores is 19 points, IAEP math scores is 12 points, and NAEP 12th grade math scores is 10 points.
The IQ gap between sexes for all other races is similar, and by comparison the IQ gap between the US (at 98) and Mexico (at 87) is only 11 points which represents an annual income gap of $22,000 ($4,870 in Mexico, $26,870 in the US)
"Psychiatrists and psychologists are likely to use the definition contained in the DSM-IV-TR, the manual used to make diagnostic judgments. Here mental retardation is defined as 1) an IQ of approximately 70 or below, 2) concurrent deficits or impairments in present adaptive functioning in two areas (communication, self-care, home-living, social/interpersonal skills, the use of community resources, self-direction, functional academic skills, work, leisure, health, and safety), 3) onset before age 18."
By this definition, HALF of African Blacks, and perhaps three quarters of American Blacks, are Retarded.
(definition of mental retardation iq below 70, lowered from 85)
There are 5,940,000 female and 4,861,000 male students in our undergraduate schools, and if the math skills of these girls follows the pattern of the Howard Wainer study, then 2,678,940 girls have math skills equivalent to boys who flunk out of math, 1,799,820 have math skills equivalent to boys who get D's, and 1,455,300 have math skills equivalent to boys who get C's.
None of them have math skills which would qualify them to follow a career in STEMS, while more than half of the 5,940,000 boys who were rejected (or 2,970,000 of them) to make room for these girl students, WOULD have benefited from a career in STEMS.
Why would we as a society do this at a time when high tech careers are so valuable, and so profitable? It's like cutting our nose off to spite our face. If you ever wondered why we can't make our own shoes, much less our own semiconductors and electronics, and instead must go all the way to China to have them made for us, then now you know why.
Math tests simply present mathematical facts to students to measure how well they can solve problems, and cannot be designed to "discriminate against" women, Blacks, Hispanics, nor Asians (particularly Asian men who score higher than the so-called privileged White men). The fact that 51% of college boys can solve
problems ( and thus get A's and B's in college math) which no girls can solve, not even those who get A's in college math, means just that--no American girl can solve problems that at least half of American boys have proven on SAT math tests that they CAN solve. All math problems are representative of how well a citizen can solve problems at school, at work, in science, in politics, and in life.
If all of the 5,940,000 boys who had been denied admission to make room for this many girls, had instead been accepted, we would now have 10,801,000 boys in college, and at least half of them, or 5,400,500 boys who CAN solve math problems, would be in our undergraduate schools where they CAN benefit from an undergraduate education.
"When Wechsler was developing his IQ test, he found that out of 105 tests assessing skills in solving maze-puzzles, involving the most heterogeneous populations throughout the world, 99 showed an incontrovertible male superiority.
(Wechsler resolved this type of problem by eliminating all those tests that resulted in findings of significant sex differences.)"
So the IQs of men and women were "equalized" by throwing out 94% of the test? How important is this?
Worldwide, with rare exceptions, annual incomes increase an average of $2,000 for each one point increase in IQ, with Japanese men at the top (with an IQ greater than 110 and annual income greater than $110,200) and black women in Africa at the bottom (with an IQ less than 55 and annual income less than $200).
The IQ gap between Asian men and Asian women when correlated with GRE scores is 19 points, when correlated with SAT math scores is 14 points, TIMSS physics scores is 17 points, PISA math scores at 15 years old is 10 points, ACT math scores is 19 points, IAEP math scores is 12 points, and NAEP 12th grade math scores is 10 points.
The IQ gap between sexes for all other races is similar, and by comparison the IQ gap between the US (at 98) and Mexico (at 87) is only 11 points which represents an annual income gap of $22,000 ($4,870 in Mexico, $26,870 in the US)
"Psychiatrists and psychologists are likely to use the definition contained in the DSM-IV-TR, the manual used to make diagnostic judgments. Here mental retardation is defined as 1) an IQ of approximately 70 or below, 2) concurrent deficits or impairments in present adaptive functioning in two areas (communication, self-care, home-living, social/interpersonal skills, the use of community resources, self-direction, functional academic skills, work, leisure, health, and safety), 3) onset before age 18."
By this definition, HALF of African Blacks, and perhaps three quarters of American Blacks, are Retarded.
(definition of mental retardation iq below 70, lowered from 85)
There are 5,940,000 female and 4,861,000 male students in our undergraduate schools, and if the math skills of these girls follows the pattern of the Howard Wainer study, then 2,678,940 girls have math skills equivalent to boys who flunk out of math, 1,799,820 have math skills equivalent to boys who get D's, and 1,455,300 have math skills equivalent to boys who get C's.
None of them have math skills which would qualify them to follow a career in STEMS, while more than half of the 5,940,000 boys who were rejected (or 2,970,000 of them) to make room for these girl students, WOULD have benefited from a career in STEMS.
Why would we as a society do this at a time when high tech careers are so valuable, and so profitable? It's like cutting our nose off to spite our face. If you ever wondered why we can't make our own shoes, much less our own semiconductors and electronics, and instead must go all the way to China to have them made for us, then now you know why.
Math tests simply present mathematical facts to students to measure how well they can solve problems, and cannot be designed to "discriminate against" women, Blacks, Hispanics, nor Asians (particularly Asian men who score higher than the so-called privileged White men). The fact that 51% of college boys can solve
problems ( and thus get A's and B's in college math) which no girls can solve, not even those who get A's in college math, means just that--no American girl can solve problems that at least half of American boys have proven on SAT math tests that they CAN solve. All math problems are representative of how well a citizen can solve problems at school, at work, in science, in politics, and in life.
If all of the 5,940,000 boys who had been denied admission to make room for this many girls, had instead been accepted, we would now have 10,801,000 boys in college, and at least half of them, or 5,400,500 boys who CAN solve math problems, would be in our undergraduate schools where they CAN benefit from an undergraduate education.
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
angels_can_be_human_messengers.pdf
781.2 KB
Angels can be Human Messengers. (2019) by Bible House of Grace.
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Angels Can Be Human Messengers:
Something noticed by many early Church fathers is that "angel" in both the Old and New Testament are words meaning "messenger" and not a celestial being. However this isn't to say angels aren't real, as these celestial beings may just be called messengers.
But could they have just been men?
The following are 65 explicit uses of angel for men who were messengers:
malak (מֲלְאָךְ): a messenger
Genesis 32:3; Numbers 20:14. 21:21; Joshua 7:22, 24; Judges 11:12, 17; 1 Samuel 16:19. 19:11. 23:27; 2 Samuel 2:5. 3:12. 5:11. 11:18-19, 22-23, 25. 12:27; 1 Kings 19:2. 22:12-13; 2 Kings 5:10. 6:32-33. 9:18. 10:7-8. 14:8. 16:7. 19:23; 1 Chronicles 14:1; 2 Chronicles 18:12. 36:15; Job 1:13-14. 33:22-24; Proverbs 13:17. 16:14. 17:11; Isaiah 14:32. 42:18-19. 44:24-25; Ezekiel 23:40. 30:9; Nahum 2:13; Haggai 1:13; Malachi 2:7. 3:1.
aggelos (ἄγγελος): a messenger
Matthew 11:9-11; Mark 1:1-3; Luke 7:24, 27. 9:51-52; 2 Corinthians 8:23. 12:7; James 2:25.
Something noticed by many early Church fathers is that "angel" in both the Old and New Testament are words meaning "messenger" and not a celestial being. However this isn't to say angels aren't real, as these celestial beings may just be called messengers.
But could they have just been men?
The following are 65 explicit uses of angel for men who were messengers:
malak (מֲלְאָךְ): a messenger
Genesis 32:3; Numbers 20:14. 21:21; Joshua 7:22, 24; Judges 11:12, 17; 1 Samuel 16:19. 19:11. 23:27; 2 Samuel 2:5. 3:12. 5:11. 11:18-19, 22-23, 25. 12:27; 1 Kings 19:2. 22:12-13; 2 Kings 5:10. 6:32-33. 9:18. 10:7-8. 14:8. 16:7. 19:23; 1 Chronicles 14:1; 2 Chronicles 18:12. 36:15; Job 1:13-14. 33:22-24; Proverbs 13:17. 16:14. 17:11; Isaiah 14:32. 42:18-19. 44:24-25; Ezekiel 23:40. 30:9; Nahum 2:13; Haggai 1:13; Malachi 2:7. 3:1.
aggelos (ἄγγελος): a messenger
Matthew 11:9-11; Mark 1:1-3; Luke 7:24, 27. 9:51-52; 2 Corinthians 8:23. 12:7; James 2:25.
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Psalms Of Solomon 17:7 [LXX]
⁷ καὶ σύ ὁ θεός καταβαλεῖς αὐτοὺς καὶ ἀρεῖς τὸ σπέρμα αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἐν τῷ ἐπαναστῆναι αὐτοῖς ἄνθρωπον ἀλλότριον γένους ἡμῶν
⁷ But you, O God, will overthrow them and will remove their offspring from the earth, when there rises up against them a person that is foreign to our race.
⁷ καὶ σύ ὁ θεός καταβαλεῖς αὐτοὺς καὶ ἀρεῖς τὸ σπέρμα αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἐν τῷ ἐπαναστῆναι αὐτοῖς ἄνθρωπον ἀλλότριον γένους ἡμῶν
⁷ But you, O God, will overthrow them and will remove their offspring from the earth, when there rises up against them a person that is foreign to our race.
❤1
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Preterism, an inherently racist and anti-semitic doctrine to it's core:
Preterism* is the view that all predictions, prophecies, etc were 100% completed by ᴬᴰ70; everything is fulfilled.
*full orthodox Preterism
Anti-Semitic:
The Second Coming of Christ was a set of events where Jesus came back and aided the Romans in butchering millions of Jews in the Roman-Jewish wars.
Racist:
Impossible for Nons to be saved as the prophecy of "all being evangelized to" only made it to Whites in Europe, North Africa and West Asia, when the prophecy was completed. Solidifying the fact only Whites are Adamic (human).
Preterism* is the view that all predictions, prophecies, etc were 100% completed by ᴬᴰ70; everything is fulfilled.
*full orthodox Preterism
Anti-Semitic:
The Second Coming of Christ was a set of events where Jesus came back and aided the Romans in butchering millions of Jews in the Roman-Jewish wars.
Racist:
Impossible for Nons to be saved as the prophecy of "all being evangelized to" only made it to Whites in Europe, North Africa and West Asia, when the prophecy was completed. Solidifying the fact only Whites are Adamic (human).
❤2
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Cherubim and Seraphim Explained - Cherubs and Sera.pdf
90.2 KB
Cherubim and Seraphim Explained —Cherubs and Seraphs in the Bible, by Ron Graham.
"The passages we have studied in these notes are not about angelology. They do not inform us about angels, but about the wisdom, power, glory, mercy, righteousness, and grace of God. He wants his children to believe and obey his word so that he can grant them eternal blessings from his presence. He will punish rebellion, but it is his wish to provide atonement and have his children come welcome into his house."
"The passages we have studied in these notes are not about angelology. They do not inform us about angels, but about the wisdom, power, glory, mercy, righteousness, and grace of God. He wants his children to believe and obey his word so that he can grant them eternal blessings from his presence. He will punish rebellion, but it is his wish to provide atonement and have his children come welcome into his house."
Forwarded from Restored Puritanism — Fides et Gens, Inseperable.
Angel Variations?
Many different types of Angels have been suggested over the past 2000 years by many great theologians.
For this post, I'll be looking at the most influential Christian angelic hierarchy: De Coelesti Hierarchia (On the Celestial Hierarchy) written between the 5th and 6th century AD by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite.
While this is the most influential, most Christians today are extremely critical of the list, for reasons you'll quickly understand.
Dionysius described nine classes of celestial beings:
—Seraph (שָׂרָף saráf) fiery serpent.
—Cherub (כְּרוּב k'rúv) cherub, griffin.
—Throne (θρόνος thrónos) throne, seat.
—Dominion (κῡρῐος kūrios) baron, lord.
—Virtue (virtūs): virtues.
—Power (ἐξουσῐᾱ exousíā) authority.
—Principality (αρχή archí): government administration.
—Archangel (ἀρχᾰγγελος arkhángelos): chief-messenger.
—Angel (ἄγγελος ángelos): messenger.
From a glance and a curious read of verses mentioning the above, you'll quickly find that Thrones, Dominions, Powers and Principalities, aren't angel classes and don't allude to such in scripture: they're governmental bodies and qualities.
Virtues is also a quality, and is only mentioned in the Latin Vulgate.
Seraphim, for such a popularly known Angel, is curiously mentioned only 7 times [Numbers 21:6, 8; Deuteronomy 8:15; Isaiah 6:2,6. 14:29] 5 of which is translated "fiery serpent", only being translated "Seraphim" in Isaiah 6:2,6.
This chapter describes singing flying serpents, which is clearly just poetic language.
Archangel and Angel, translate as chief messenger (primary) and messenger; however they do allude to being a celestial being.
Cherubs are the most commonly mentioned of above, but are never claimed as being either an angel nor alluded to it; they are simply mentioned with itself: "cherub", and are mostly quoted as decorations of an Akkadian mythological creature (aside from Ezekiels vision).
I'm just scratching the surface on these topics to keep it short, but if you want an in-depth analysis on Seraphs and Cherubs, I recommend this article.
In conclusion: Seraphs, Cherubs, Thrones, Dominions, Virtues, Powers and Principalities, are not classes of Angels; and the only two classes of Angels are "Archangels" and "Angels", the former of which is just a head/ chief Angel.
As a last thought, were Angels actually celestial beings, or were they just men who were messengers of God?
Many different types of Angels have been suggested over the past 2000 years by many great theologians.
For this post, I'll be looking at the most influential Christian angelic hierarchy: De Coelesti Hierarchia (On the Celestial Hierarchy) written between the 5th and 6th century AD by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite.
While this is the most influential, most Christians today are extremely critical of the list, for reasons you'll quickly understand.
Dionysius described nine classes of celestial beings:
—Seraph (שָׂרָף saráf) fiery serpent.
—Cherub (כְּרוּב k'rúv) cherub, griffin.
—Throne (θρόνος thrónos) throne, seat.
—Dominion (κῡρῐος kūrios) baron, lord.
—Virtue (virtūs): virtues.
—Power (ἐξουσῐᾱ exousíā) authority.
—Principality (αρχή archí): government administration.
—Archangel (ἀρχᾰγγελος arkhángelos): chief-messenger.
—Angel (ἄγγελος ángelos): messenger.
From a glance and a curious read of verses mentioning the above, you'll quickly find that Thrones, Dominions, Powers and Principalities, aren't angel classes and don't allude to such in scripture: they're governmental bodies and qualities.
Virtues is also a quality, and is only mentioned in the Latin Vulgate.
Seraphim, for such a popularly known Angel, is curiously mentioned only 7 times [Numbers 21:6, 8; Deuteronomy 8:15; Isaiah 6:2,6. 14:29] 5 of which is translated "fiery serpent", only being translated "Seraphim" in Isaiah 6:2,6.
This chapter describes singing flying serpents, which is clearly just poetic language.
Archangel and Angel, translate as chief messenger (primary) and messenger; however they do allude to being a celestial being.
Cherubs are the most commonly mentioned of above, but are never claimed as being either an angel nor alluded to it; they are simply mentioned with itself: "cherub", and are mostly quoted as decorations of an Akkadian mythological creature (aside from Ezekiels vision).
I'm just scratching the surface on these topics to keep it short, but if you want an in-depth analysis on Seraphs and Cherubs, I recommend this article.
In conclusion: Seraphs, Cherubs, Thrones, Dominions, Virtues, Powers and Principalities, are not classes of Angels; and the only two classes of Angels are "Archangels" and "Angels", the former of which is just a head/ chief Angel.
As a last thought, were Angels actually celestial beings, or were they just men who were messengers of God?