正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

It’s worth noting that there is no evidence that Nathan Cofnas is either a eugenicist or a racist. Or at least I have not seen any evidence of it. Horizontal differentiation - acknowledging that differences exist - does not imply that any moral hierarchy should be imposed. This kind...

15,669 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

29 条评论

Melissa Chen 的头像
Melissa Chen1 个月前

In fact, I would even argue that Cofnas is kinda woke as he thinks that these group differences actually warrant distributive interventions such as racial quotas See him defend his views against @MrWinMarshall's on color-blindness:

Gigi Levangie 的头像
Gigi Levangie1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall They know and they don’t care - without DEI, their world collapses.

Fisk 的头像
Fisk1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall The same mainstream commenters AGREE with Cofnas. They all think abolishing affirmative action would lead to that.

Melissa Chen 的头像
Melissa Chen1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall Correct. They know that we will never get "equal representation" if the universities abolished affirmative action

Wanjiru Njoya 的头像
Wanjiru Njoya1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall I made a chart of what is meant by "racist". In this case they mean one of the fake critical race theory redefinitions. If your definition is something like category 2 (old meaning of racial hatred) then what you're looking for is not what they're alleging.

Master Alpaca 的头像
Master Alpaca1 个月前

It also appears that Cofnas may be autistic, or as they say on the spectrum. Which might explain his lack of social grace and inability to stay quiet about things people would really really rather he kept quiet about. Whilst gregarious and charming Arday was likely faking his autism claims. This feels like a satirical novel that is a bit on the nose,

Matthew Pope 的头像
Matthew Pope1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall Here's a thought for the day, Melissa. Every time a girl selects a smart, successful, broad-shouldered man as husband, that's 'eugenics'. Every time a man selects a pretty, healthy, long-legged woman, that's 'eugenics'. ALL life forms 'discriminate'. Its a matter of survival.

Richard H. Ebright 的头像
Richard H. Ebright1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall 100%

T-Rad 的头像
T-Rad1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall I listened to this episode and he comes across as VERY run of the mill not racist and even advocates FOR affirmative action.

Super Dad - Home Chef 的头像
Super Dad - Home Chef1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall Please comment on JKR's post saying she thinks Cofnas is racist, and compare this with John Cleese's long-standing TDS. Both of these great people have awakened to reality, but they still seem to be caught in the tentacles of the MSM of Britain to some extent.

Dom Scott 的头像
Dom Scott1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall When you change the meaning of words, you can create any narrative you want. Example Jason Ardays suicide being a lynching and assassination.

Maurice "Lil Moe" Williams 的头像
Maurice "Lil Moe" Williams1 个月前

There are racial differences in intelligence because of evolution. Humans have different size brains, cerebrums, cerebral cortexes, prefrontal lobes, prefrontal cortexes, parietal lobes, temporal lobes, occipital lobes, etc. East Asians (specifically Japanese, Chinese, and Koreans) are the most intelligent, followed by Northern Europeans, then mulattos, and lastly Sub-Saharan Africans In the United States of America, Koreans, Chinese, Indians, and Ashkenazi Jews average 1300 SAT and 27 ACT. Whites average 1100 SAT and 21 ACT. Hispanics average 950 SAT / 18.5 ACT. Native Americans, Blacks, and Pacific Islanders, average 900 / 16 ACT. “Asians” average 1250 / 24 ACT because Vietnamese (and other “Asians”) bring the “Asian” average down by scoring 1100 SAT / 21 ACT The difference in General Intelligence between White Americans and Black Americans is the same as the difference between White Americans and Jews, Indians, Chinese, and Koreans in America General Intelligence (USA) Native American 91 Black American 91 Pacific Islander 91 Hispanic American 94 White American 103 Asian American 111 Korean, Chinese, Indian 115 Ashkenazi Jew 115 Full Scale IQ (USA) Black American 85 Hispanic American 90 White American 100 East Asian 108 Ashkenazi Jew 108 Full Scale IQ (Worldwide) Aborigines 65 Bushmen 70 Sub-Saharan African 75 North African 80 Southwest Asian 80 Middle Eastern 85 Native American 85 African American 85 Pacific Islander 85 Latin American 85 Southeast European 90 Southeast Asian 90 Southwest European 95 North Eastern European 95 Northern European 100 East Asian 108 Ashkenazi Jew 108 4 Race Breakdown IQ (Worldwide) East Asian 105 European 95 Mulattos 85 Sub-Saharan 75

Lesedi Modisakeng 的头像
Lesedi Modisakeng1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall He admitted himself that he subscribes to it dear

onyxwolf 的头像
onyxwolf1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall ChatGPT thinks he's racist.

Luke French 的头像
Luke French1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall Leftists are like infants trying to draw: squiggly lines all over the place that bear no relation to what they are attempting to portray; no room for shade, definition or nuance. Tell them their painting is crap and they have a tantrum and start throwing things

Coban Brundo 的头像
Coban Brundo1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall Analyzing "racist” data is enough to get you labeled a racist.

Caius Cosades 的头像
Caius Cosades1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall What’s wrong with being a eugenicist?

John 2.1 的头像
John 2.11 个月前

@MrWinMarshall He puts whites third for IQ ...and on aggregate, he is correct Worst white supremacist ever

Mark Alias 的头像
Mark Alias1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall Every person who prefers to marry into their own race is a racist. Is there anything wrong with this? Almost everyone on earth is a racist by that definition. The word should simply lose its power.

supersimple 的头像
supersimple1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall These are thoughts and ideas of people with little to no experience living among different people. I have lived with people from different parts of the world for long periods of time. What is measured as IQ largely depends on culture and environment.

Tá Tuairimí ag Seamus 的头像
Tá Tuairimí ag Seamus1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall How do we know you weren't hired by woke and DEI?

albedo 的头像
albedo1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall Eugenics actually good. We use it all the time actually to check fetus and recommend abortion in case of severe abnormalities.

Charlie13b 的头像
Charlie13b1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall They have to spin it or face reality.

Jerome Powell's Uncut Interest Rates 的头像
Jerome Powell's Uncut Interest Rates1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall You're right, but expecting you'll convince a broader public of that is a losing game. That's why it's a shame that Cofnas has become the public face of the good guys in this Jason Arday story.

Daoshan Sun 的头像
Daoshan Sun1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall When liberals chose Obama over Hilary as the president, were they treating Hilary immortally? When Cambridge hired and promoted Jason Arday over other black scholars, was it treating other black scholars immortally?

Be Thinkful 的头像
Be Thinkful1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall You seem to think they are operating in good faith.

nairobi.ashtanga 的头像
nairobi.ashtanga1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall Invoking Lee Kuan Yew is revealing, why do you present hereditarianism as neutral science when its proponents are openly discussing how society should be organised around presumed biological differences between populations? That’s the debate.

Chris Keller 的头像
Chris Keller1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall Over the last few years I’ve noticed a lot of people REALLY struggle with is/ought distinctions

Avner 的头像
Avner1 个月前

@MrWinMarshall Nathan is the hero of this story.

相关视频

No one witnessed Tyler Robinson. No video or any witness testimony of him, a gun, or any forensic evidence at all. Except dna on a rifle he owned that wasn’t tested for residue and did not alert any of the dogs. The footage never shows a gun or a clear shot of his face. It appears to be multiple people or he changes outfits. There is no evidence matching any bullet to the gun they claim was used. The only “evidence” they have are text messages that don’t sound real that have not been made available to the defense to analyze. Text messages can be sent by anyone. That isn’t evidence. And a confession that doesn’t exist and a claim his mother recognized him from the footage that we now can all see. That statement has not been made available and probably doesn’t exist, and it doesn’t matter. The video doesn’t show any crime and it’s not clear enough for any positive ID. There are mountains of circumstantial evidence that turning point USA conspired to either kill Charlie Kirk or cover up his murder. There is an end times cult that is convinced that in order to bring back Jesus they need the US to lose to Iran and the world to turn on Israel and burn. That’s a fact btw. That’s what Ben Shapiro and Trump and kushner and the “pastors” surrounding Charlie believe. They are claiming anyone that is NOT in their world destroying death cult is in fact in Candace Owens cult. People who don’t think Tyler Robinson killed Charlie Kirk and Erika is a crazy bitch. Everything I just said is obviously accurate. It never ends well for death cults. This is not the first and it’s not the last. I recommend staying far far away as they destroy themselves

Owen Benjamin 🐻

72,329 次观看 • 2 个月前

Bret Weinstein sat down with Nathan Cofnas (a philosopher of biology and self-described race realist) on DarkHorse to discuss race, evolution, and what explains differences in intelligence. WEINSTEIN: "Let me sum this up so that the audience knows what the hell we're disagreeing over. I am not arguing that differences in capability in a language don't exist at an individual level. They're profound. I'm not saying that intelligence doesn't differ between individuals. They are profound differences. What we disagree over is what the likely explanation is for how those differences came about. And my point would be we see profound distinctions in facility and language, for example, that are clearly the result of developmental differences. I mean, the most obvious of them is that you don't grow up in China and find yourself speaking Swedish. Your facility in Chinese has everything to do with the fact that Chinese is what's in the air around you. And my point is that we are underrating — because we can measure genes and because they seem very powerful to us — we are underrating the largely still mysterious mechanisms of cultural evolution that shape the way we think, the way we communicate, the way we partner in thinking. All of those patterns are staring us in the face. They are profoundly important and likely explanatory of many of the differences that I hear you attributing to genes. And so that's where the question goes. What is the causal explanation for the distinctions you're pointing to, not whether the distinctions are real?"

The DarkHorse Podcast

77,680 次观看 • 1 个月前

J.K. Rowling vs Nathan Cofnas: race realism is a taboo too far for some brave, truth-telling gender realists. Nathan Cofnas is the race realist academic who was instrumental in exposing Jason Arday as a non-realist academic. J.K. Rowling just called him "racist" on Twitter. I'm a big fan of J.K. Rowling. She's resolute in her resistance to gender ideology even though it hurts her financially, subjects her to vitriol and puts her at risk. You might think J.K. Rowling would have some solidarity with another person who's been hauled over the coals for promoting scientific realism over cultural norms, but no. He's t̶r̶a̶n̶s̶p̶h̶o̶b̶i̶c̶ "racist". This exposes her blind spot. Gender ideology is where her realism stops. When it comes to race realism, she turns into Owen Jones. Which is a shame. I've seen other TERFs stand up for, if not race realism, then at least nationalism. There are parallels between the way that men are allowed to "identify" as women and the way that Rwandan men are allowed to identify as Welsh choirboys. But when it comes to Cofnas, many TERFs are saying that human sex is dimorphic, whereas race is nebulous and hard to define. Nebulous? Maybe. But if I'm walking around London, half the time I can't tell if a person is a man or a woman. But I immediately know if I'm at Wimbledon or if I'm at the Notting Hill Carnival. If a big bunch of black "yoot" gets on my train carriage, I can tell with my eyes shut. If I drive through a Muslim area, there are usually a few tell-tale signs (written in Urdu). The ratio of males to females is pretty constant around the world, but there are huge discrepancies in what those areas are like. Calcutta and Lagos are not like Durham or Bergen. I suspect there may be factors other than masculinity and femininity guiding behaviour at the population level. I understand that it's a taboo with the potential to destroy careers, and I also understand that there are easy get-outs. In-group variance is greater than inter-group variance. Any differences at the group level don't mean that an individual will have any particular traits. I firmly believe that a man from the Horn of Africa can be intelligent and civilised, and I look forward to science proving me correct by one day finding one who is. But the weakness of the attacks on Nathan Cofnas is revealing. Nick Ferrari could only accuse him of "causing distress to a black student". This, in itself, was seen as reason enough to shut down anything that Nathan Cofnas might say. But if we're going to end all academic work that might cause distress, why not scrap the theory of evolution? It distresses creationists. Perhaps the cardinals were correct to condemn Galileo for presenting a heliocentric model, because the heliocentric model had distressed them? Academia's credibility has taken a beating over the last couple of months, but as the taboos around race realism evaporate, Cofnas may end up resurrecting it - and finally be appointed "Head of Eugenics & Race Science at Harvard".

Leo Kearse - see me on tour! Links in bio

44,378 次观看 • 29 天前

Bret Weinstein cuts straight to the chase: "We are going to have an endless battle in which those of us who see what we believe is clear evidence of some kind of election rigging or fraud are faced with indignation from a vast array of people portraying themselves as more rigorous and careful who say, 'Where is your evidence? Where exactly is your evidence that there was something wrong with this election?' And we are gonna be caught in the following predicament. No piece of evidence is sufficient to establish that case. And the sum total of all of the evidence contains true things and false things. So it is also no good. So the question is, can you logically deduce that something has gone wrong? I believe you can easily. Can you prove it? No. And not being able to prove it means that the election will proceed. It will be validated by all of the structures, including the courts. And that means that those who take on the power that derives from these elections will be the result of whatever process we just went through, whether it was an election that happened to be anomalous through organic means, or it was the result of some kind of fraud or election rigging. That is not an accident. That is not an accident. And the point that I wanna make primarily is the primary evidence against elections that look like this being organic is not actually in the trickle of evidence that we are actually able to see, the moment by moment vote count that does something strange during the night when some large tranche of ballots is suddenly counted or something like that. The evidence is in the structure of how the elections are actually carried out. These elections are designed to allow fraud that cannot be detected and will not be prosecuted. And that's really the thing that we must focus on." Bret Weinstein

The DarkHorse Podcast

697,051 次观看 • 3 个月前

Rick Rubin tells Andrew Huberman how he deals with creative or writer’s block. He treats his work like a diary entry (and doesn’t worry about internal or external judgment): ➡️ “What's the cause of the block? The block is usually something that's either personal ("I'm not good enough") or it can be a confidence issue ("I don't have anything to say") or it could be...thinking about someone else ("nobody's going to like what I make"). Do you know what I'm saying? So, it's either fear of self-judgment or external judgment. If you're making something with a freedom of "this is something I'm making for myself for now", that is all [you have to do]. It is a diary entry. Everything I make is a diary entry. The beauty of a diary entry is that I can write my diary entry and you can't tell me that my diary entry wasn't good enough. Or that [the diary entry] is not what I experienced. Of course it's what I experienced: I'm writing a personal diary for myself and no one else can judge if it is my experience of my life. Everything we make can be that: a personal reflection of who we are in that moment of time. It doesn't have to be the greatest you could ever do. It doesn't have to have any expectation that it's going to change the world. It doesn't have to sell a certain number of copies for any reason. It doesn't have any of those things at all. It is "I'm making this thing for me and I want to do it to the best of my ability and to where I feel good about it". [The work] is honest of where I'm at and if you're living in this world of just being honest to where you're at, there's nothing blocking you. There are no blocks. The blocks are all based on dealing with a different force or a different perception that is made up.” ⬅️

Trung Phan

1,652,308 次观看 • 2 年前

your agent reviewing its own work is not a check. it is a second opinion from the same source. this is the most common gap in agent systems and it hides in plain sight, because the step exists. there is a review. it just cannot do the thing you think it does. here is the mechanism. the model produced an output from a context. you then ask the same model, holding the same context, whether that output is correct. it answers fluently, because that is what it does. and the answer is drawn from the same distribution that produced the thing being judged. same weights, same window, same blind spots. if the reason the output is wrong is something the model does not know, the review does not know it either. if the reason is something the context does not contain, the review has the same context. the failure mode and the detector share a cause. > why it feels like it works because most of the time the output is fine, and the review says fine. agreement is not evidence of detection. a reviewer that says pass on everything agrees with reality most of the time too. what you actually want to measure is what happens on the cases that are wrong. that is the only place a check earns its name, and it is exactly the place where a self-review is weakest. there is research on this. Huang and colleagues at DeepMind showed at ICLR 2024 that intrinsic self-correction, revising without external grounding, does not reliably help and often makes things worse. > what to actually do move the check outside the model. a test that runs, a schema that validates, a file that exists or does not, an exit code from something you did not write. these are not smarter than the model. they are just not correlated with it, and that is the entire value. when the judgement genuinely needs a model, at minimum use a different family. same family means shared blind spots, and frontier judges measurably inflate scores for outputs that look like their own. and split the work by kind. anything objectively checkable goes to code. only the genuinely semantic calls go to a judge, and those get a rubric written as one line. a review inside the loop tells you the model is confident. a check outside it tells you whether the work is done. save this - then read the eval setup below

Hanako

14,325 次观看 • 1 个月前