I would like to thank everyone for the incredible reaction to my first dendrogram and a special thanks to the great James Thompson who tweeted it out to his thousands and thousands of twitter followers.
Although the vast majority of people enjoyed the dendrogram, there were a few people who were mocking it. Luckily I was tipped off by a quick thinking blogger. Not to namedrop but it was HBD Chick).
One of the critics asked why I had not calculated the cophentic correlation, because if I had, I would have known that human “races” don’t fit a tree like structure.
Alan R. Templeton writes:
The cophenetic correlation measures how well the observed genetic distances fit the predicted genetic distances from an evolutionary tree model and provides a heuristic goodness of fit to treeness… The cophenetic correlations for various data sets that have been used to portray human population trees vary from 0.45 to 0.79 (Templeton, 1998a). A tree-like structure of genetic differentiation requires a cophentic correlation greater than 0.9, and any value less than 0.8 is regarded as a poor fit (Rohlf, 1993)
Source: Biological races in Humans
So what’s the cophenetic correlation of my dendrogram?
0.99333828
Why did my dendrogram achieve such a cophenetic correlation when others failed to do so? There are several possible reasons.
- incompetence? perhaps I didn’t follow the correct procedures?
- luck. With only a 5 modern human populations, a high correlation may have occurred by chance.
- pure samples: perhaps the genomes in the data-set were less hybridized than previous data-sets which contained mixed groups like Southeast Asians
- genome thoroughness: perhaps my data being newer, sampled more of the genome than previous research and thus gave more accurate results.
Pumpkin Person 
very simple challenge for peepee.
post your liver enzymes day 1.
consume 5 oz per day pure EtOH for 6 months.
that’s…approximately…
1. 375 mL hard liquor per day.
2. 1 2/3 bottle of wine.
3. 8 1/3 beers.
post your liver enzymes day 183.
I understood from the interview that Carlson was Peterson student at Harvard.
After googling for it, it seems probable because while he was an associate professor there from 1993 to 1998 , she got her PhD in 2001, meaning she started probably before 1996. She had been a flight attendant with two kids when she started her PhD. And 18 years later, she is a lecturer.
So probably it’s safe to say she worked under Peterson guidance (and not the other way around). It’s cool that Peterson had the confidence to choose a non typical profile to work with.
Scott Barry works on the exact same field as
Carlson btw
Your admiration for meaterson is annoying. He is not a wise/philosopher, sorry!! If she discovered this association just because she was meaterson student don’t mean she no have any credit about it… In the end of day a correlation between distractibility and creativity seems known since a long time because it’s easy to detect, at3 least anecdoctally.
… the difference is that ”latent inhibition” is a new name to ”distractibility” or ”sensibility”
Maybe I should IM michael forman in work and ask him who bidens cabinet is going to be.
The cafeteria’s not allowed to IM the executive suite
So I follow Harvard Business School and linkedin and its interesting seeing how quotas and trust fund donations to college actually effect the profile of the classes. Between the trust fund babies and the worthless aa students, maybe 2/3 may actually be ‘qualified’ to be there.
The funny thing is, if Harvard actually made it completely about money and only about money and who could afford it, the prestige of Harvard would actually increase . In time, the school was basically be an elite finishing school. Some people say that it is now, but I mean in the way Eton is in England or Institute d’administration (or whatever its called) in France.
I honestly think MBAs are a waste of time and a serious waste of money. I 100% think you can get the job you want by networking or lateral moving within an organisation.
The funny thing is, when an MBA was something only elites could afford, it was basically a status signal to the hirer of the ‘pedigree’ of the person. As I said above, the prestige of the MBA was greater when only a small minority could afford it and there was no AA.
the MBA is only good for working in finance if that. in all other businesses they destroy value. why does a guy with an UG degree in econ and an MBA ever run a manufacturing company?
because the MBAs within a company are tribal and the MBAs on wall street influence the choice of executives.
the people at the top of american public companies overwhelmingly know absolutely nothing about the actual business. this is not the case in other countries.
A close relative got an mba. His company paid for it. He denies it’s just a useless credential. He learned a lot.
École nationale d’administration gives job for Life as ambassador, sort of local administration governor (Prefet), agencies and governments directors (administrateurs), judicial review judges (court of appeal up to the Supreme Court), members of IRS, Social Security, DOJ, Housing, Infrastrucutre etc
Then there is the possibility of revolving doors towards politics (few people but very prominent like Macron and his head of government) or Private sector (like Macron when he started as Partner for Rothschild after 5 years of Public service only).
And it’s 80 people a year, half of them older (around 35/40) who don’t intend to work outside of government. So basically the filed is open to a fraction of the other 40 (plenty of nerds who aren’t interested either) .
As for MBA, average GMAT went for top 10 WW, web from 650
(1 in 4) to 720 (1 in 20). So the level of the people in the 80ies and now has changed quite a lot. But it’s the same for JD who went from 1 in 20 (167) to 1 in 100 (173) for
Harvard and Yale.
https://digital.hbs.edu/artificial-intelligence-machine-learning/where-fairness-ends/
Good example of danish brainwashing that ‘high IQ’ people get in college.
Hahaha they literally got a guy off the street to fight hulk hogan in his first match.
in HBD news…a fat mexican, named andy ruiz, TKOed anthony joshua.
So, guys, litsen to this.
I watched the Pokémon movie, and…
It was pretty nice! It’s cute and kinda engaging. it wasn’t perfect, perhaps, but hey lets not be so prudent. It was worth my money at least. And also, its a little unique, and i think thats something that needs to be financially rewarded in our age of triple a titles and cash grabs, as well as it being a bit refreshing. It’s like a kids movie for adults. I really liked that the characters seemed sincere and somewhat realistic (ironic for a fantasy video game movie). Dont watch any spoilers (which includes trailers in our age), just let it all be new for you when watching, preferably in a cinema, because its an highly visual movie, a big screen and nice audio is recommended.
I recommend it. Around 7/10.
Sincere in that they weren’t action figures but relatable. Theres an real connect between the faces, facial expressions, voice and personality that is a little less cliche than what action movies have made me used too.
For the first time (since morpheus in the matrix) they managed to have non white characters fit, regardless if they are forced or not. The black lead looked softer than most black guys (biracial), in a way that fitted his character well.
I’m happy they didn’t have a cash grab through having Ash, which there already are movies for an is already sufficiently explored as characters.
There was some humour too. Cute movie.
When i said relatable i intended to say expressive. They might not be relatable for most people as most people.