Though I don't know you, I've enjoyed reading some of your articles. May you beat life's odds and find happiness. And remember life is a trip-travel light.

I mostly just lurk here, but wanted to express kudos to Sahotra on this article. I'd also like to let other Jewcy readers know that if they are interested in reading some really informed scientific debate on evolution and natural selection, you should check out the forum devoted solely to this topic at the Richard Dawkins website. (link below) Dr. Dawkins is author of The Selfish Gene, (a seminal work in the field and where the 'meme' concept originated), and more recently The God Delusion.

http://richarddawkins.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=4]

PS. This reminds me why I hardly ever post here any more. Craig, when are you ever going to get this site in line code-wise with everywhere else on the net? With all the great articles on this site it's a real travesty there isn't more discussion, and the format is the major reason, IMO. 

 

Never thought I'd see the day that Daniel and Eli both got ass kicked in a debate here. But if any who have read the exchanges with David above come to a different conclusion, I'd like to read your deconstruction. Here's mine, in summary.

There were countless ad-homs by all, but who first initiated them? Now add the direct questions never answered, appeals to authority, off topic responses, and circular arguments. Having done this, it appears to me David comes out on top using less than a fourth the number of words. I can't take the time to post all the quotes now, but if challenged I will. The irony is I actually agree with Daniel on the central issue raised, which got lost in the shuffle until David brought it back. "The more salient question is whether you have a problem with the Clintons actively blocking such vetting"

I'm a long time Hillary fan David. If I had to pick between her and Obama for president, I would have to give the matter substantially more thought than I do which democrat I'd choose to run for the office in November. Hillary is about the only thing I can see on the horizon that could possibly unite the Republicans right now. Also, Senator Obama has an insurmountable lead in delegates. If they do a mail ballot in Florida and Michigan, I'll bet he wins both states handily. If Hillary is able to manipulate the process instead, or to make back room deals with super delegates and win despite Obama’s clear majority in the popular vote, it will be a disaster.

Now to the key issue at hand: you may not have a problem with Hillary avoiding the release of her taxes and other papers, and ‘actively blocking vetting,’ but for me this was my first big red flag about her campaign. Whatever her reasons for not revealing everything now, that information is part of the Hillary ‘package,’ and she’ll have to run on it in the general election. I can think of no rational defense for her position.

To say its just politics won’t cut it David. I was leaning toward her before this issue emerged. If it looks very problematic to a supporter, imagine what those on the fence must think? I assume her campaign did polls, and that I’m not alone in my reaction. This suggests some of what is hidden in the details might be pretty damaging. If so, McCain’s camp will have a field day in the fall. If not, one can but seriously wonder about Hillary and her team’s judgment. You haven’t made a case on this that I find convincing, David, yet in reading your blogs I almost always agree with you. Back to my lurk default.

P S-great job on the formatting problem Craig!!!

I think I grok what you're trying to say in your last reply, Izzy, but it needs further explanation. I made a long comment way back about how I believe 'Menachem's Seed' travels well and seems to prevail biologically in mixed offspring. (also title of great book on reproduction from another jenius, Carl Djerassi) This does not mean that over time inter-marriage won't weaken the only DNA largely shaped by it's own myths, however. And unfortunately the fact that the gene pool will be diluted in future seems inevitable.

Personally I would like to see more discussion on core issues concerning Jewish evolution and it's future rather than focus on one small aspect of the larger issue; the impact of gene diffusion on an ethnicity that remained united throughout centuries of diaspora, bonded primarily by blood and ancient tales. That paradigm clearly won't fly in today's world, and Jewcy has the potential to provide an updated, scientific interpretation of The Torah instead of the ramifications of one small aspect of the Jewish gestalt.

For what it's worth, I think J-date is a good thing, and would like to see more sites like it. Just because a DNA 'diaspora' is certain, that doesn't mean trying to maintain these unbelievably successful chains of unique genetic construction where ever possible and for as long as possible isn't a worthwhile endeavor.

 

" We're taking into account all of this, for the record." And the record will then be filed in the Jewcy archives, Craig? One flush is all it takes, eh? :-)

I don't notice much that's very different, but do miss the Jewciest comments. Still don't understand why I can't view all posts by other users on their profile, as I can with my own posts and on every other open forum I've ever visited. Was also hoping to see the new posts arranged by title and moved up with each comment. Haven't you folks noticed there are very few comments made here and no real discussions? There's a reason for that; the way they are structured here.

Vitro, your pic could be the nightmare poster for millions of skinny white kids. "This is your new cell mate, Dwayne. Vitro. Vitro Testosterone." The look is perfect. You should market it. And thanks again for a chess players perspective. Good writing. Naftali: Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I am but an observer of the sciences, not a player. But peptide chains have much to reveal, for certain. An old friend did his post-doc work studying them at Scripts back in the seventies. I didn't want to border on threadjacking so I didn't present links to studies ongoing. An exploding field. And I'm quite aware how self deprecating most Jews are, contrary to some stereotypes. To a man/woman ALL my Jewish friends find my views embarrassing at best. I read all of the Torah long ago. I see it all as myth, which is now detracting from our progress as it did for so many years in the last 2 centuries. This said, in the case of the Jews the myths provided cover of a strange sort, and kept the gene pool from being diffused via marriage with outsiders. I suspect faith has very little hold on the youth today, which this site in many ways reflects. Have you seen the "Hot Rabbis" video? Blasphemy!!!! They ain't gonna buy it-thank god. Heheeheh. It just goes to prove my point about intelligence. Nearly every Jew I know is an atheist. Of course there are many very bright believers also-especially among the Rabbis. But I'd bet theres a higher percentage of Jews who don't buy the dogma-even in Israel-than among Christians. Not surprising, at least to me. Perhaps YOU need to read the Torah again Naftali. Spare the claw and spoil the 32 childen? A 'loving' god? Move to the next dimension and observe the 3 that create the shadows on the cave's wall. The myths once served a purpose. Now they hold us back. Look to the very pinnacle of achievement within your ethnic group, and you will see an impressive line up from Einstein on down that discarded the false faith of religion for the quantifiable hope of science. Shalom.

"Everybody knows that the dice are loaded; everybody throws with their fingers crossed." Amen on Mellencamp, and when will Jon Anderson from Yes get inducted. Now I cant turn off italics. It's all YOUR FAULT Craig!!! :-) (and where are the emoticons??)

"If we were to intervene in Pakistan --- assuming for the sake of argument we had the spare personnel, which we don't --- on whose side, precisely, would we intervene? To achieve what objective?"

Daniel: Why wouldn't it be the traditional objective; whatever best supports our foreign policy goals d'jour? And haven't we long propped up Pervez Musharraf's dictatorial rule with massive amounts of military aid? Do you think he could have gotten this far without our backing?

The middle east is replete with with corrupt governments-from the House of Saud to the warlords in Afghanistan and Iraq and going back to the Shah of Iran-that bend to our will and keep the fundamentalist within their borders in an uneasy check. At this point do you really think we have any choice but to continue dancing with them that brung us? Could an unstable, nuclear armed Pakistan be allowed to be ruled by popular vote if, as in Algiers, those representing radical Islam were in a majority?

I'd be curious to know if you would agree/disagree that the vast majority of the governments the U.S. has supported-going back to Teddy Roosevelt-have in fact been established and supported by us to sell out their own people's resources to our advantage. Does it not continue today?

You've convinced me Dr. Pangloss!! To think I listened to all those evil scientists instead of YOU. Sunrise in America time! I have been transfused with your optimism. Job well done. No need to reply. I get it, and envy your faith in our future; I truly do!

"The future is fair. The future is FUN! We may already be there.
They already have won! Men, women, children, all; are up against the wall,

of SCIENCE! "

Kind of disappointed there hasn't been more discussion here as 'the big guns' have promised many changes coming with the new year. But after seeing JC's picture change last week I'm beginning to wonder which calendar they are going by.

Hope the effort to re-design the camel back into a horse is going well, Craig. Look forward to being able to quickly read all my favorite bloggers when you're done. Is it still on track for January?