Tags
genetic distance, Graping Calculator 3D, minitab, phylogenetic tree, principal component analysis, race
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is a mathematical technique by which many data points get reduced to a smaller number of more manageable data points.
Cavali-Sforza lumped humans into nine major populations. The following shows his phylogenetic tree of these nine populations followed by a matrix showing the genetic distance between them:
Because I wanted to see if these nine populations could be objectively reduced to a smaller number, I made all the distances negative and then entered the genetic distance matrix into a minitab spread sheet.
The reason I made the distances negative is because PC analysis is usually done on correlation matrices where the higher the value, the more similar. In a genetic distance matrix, it’s the opposite, hence the negative signs I added.
The principal component analysis gave the following result.
To determine how many principal components to retain, mathematicians use what’s called the eigenvalue > 1 rule, which in this case means only three components.
The first component explains 54% of genetic variation and since Northeast Asians have the highest loading on this component (0.432), it can be thought of as a measure of Northeast Asianness. Africans are the only group to load negatively on Northeast Asianness (-0.376).
The second component explains 26% of the variation and since Europeans have the highest loading on this (0.526), it can be considered a measure of whiteness.
The third component explains 12% of the variation and since Native Americans have the highest score on this (0.527) it can perhaps be considered a measure of “New Worldliness”.
Now when I plot each of the nine populations in three-dimensional space (x axis = Northeast Asianness, y axis = whiteness, z axis = New Worldliness) with their loadings multiplied by 10 to make differences visible, we find all of the nine populations fit into three major clusters.
These three clusters are extremely similar to the three major races of physical anthropology: Mongoloids on the back wall, Negroids on the side wall, and Caucasoids on the floor.
No disrespect to Caucasoids (I’m 100% pure Caucasoid myself). The graph can be reoriented so any group is on the floor.
One anomaly is that New Guineans & Australian aboriginals cluster with Mongoloids, even though they are morphologically closest to Negroid. Of course such anomolies are not uncommon in taxonomy. Birds for example genetically cluster with reptiles, even though they’re not reptiles. Humans cluster with apes, even though we’re not apes.
Such anomalies occur because most of our DNA is junk, so it groups us based on how recently we share common ancestors, not by how much of that common ancestor we shared.
Pumpkin Person 
Hehe, did anyone else assume Pumpkin was black based on all his talk about black celebrities? 🙂
I think you need some better pictures of us though, giant smiley indian and tiny cropped white guy? 🙂
How hard would a 120 IQ kid work to get a B in an average High School class?
Btw this guy is another person with a lot of power. Hes a gentile though. But I’m pretty sure hes really powerful.
Commerce secretaries tend to be pretty powerful people. Pritzker was obamas one and the pritzker family are very powerful in chicago politics, asides from being one of obamas main donors/handlers.
No surprise puppy put white people on the bottom in a smudged out grainy photo and made Mobutu very prominent. What an idiot.
Such anomalies occur because most of our DNA is junk, so it groups us based on how recently we share common ancestors, not by how much of that common ancestor we shared.
[redacted by pp, 2019-06-12]
the ONLY way they can’t be EXACTLY the same thing is if there is much more change in junk than in genes.
is that possible?
give me an example.
do you know that it’s never changes in the coding regions that’re used to assess age of most recent ancestor?
no. you don’t.
similarity in appearance != similarity in genes.
do you know that it’s never changes in the coding regions that’re used to assess age of most recent ancestor?
Yes I know all about dating common ancestry. I’ll elaborate later
the ONLY way they can’t be EXACTLY the same thing is if there is much more change in junk than in genes.
Or vice versa
is that possible?
Of course!
give me an example.
Living fossils
do you know that it’s never changes in the coding regions that’re used to assess age of most recent ancestor?
no. you don’t.
Anything you could say I’ve thought of it twice.
Scientists use neutral DNA because it mutates at a random & thus predictable rate, thus serving as a molecular clock (i.e. one mutation per 10,000 years)
similarity in appearance != similarity in genes.
Similarity in appearance & behavior inherited from a common ancestor = similarity in non-junk DNA
what is the actual evidence that “junk DNA” is junk?
regulation of transcription is one function of introns.
there’s a test. delete lots of non-coding regions in some experimental organism and see what happens.
has this been done?
my guess is such an organism, like a mouse, would have serious issues. it might even become a black lesbian.
“most of our DNA is junk”
This is a myth.
Junk DNA is not junk.
It is used for self-regulation.
Metabolism requires this regulation so this DNA is not really junk.
ep·i·ge·net·ics
the study of changes in organisms caused by modification of gene expression rather than alteration of the genetic code itself.
Epigenetics look like a different way to say ”adaptative path”.
I’m an example of a people with high levels of social anxiety that cannot be explained only by my life-experiences. Because i always know i’m different than most people here, not just about sexuality, but also because skin sensibility [rosy face] and stuttering i developed protective responsive behaviors. BUT, if these was absolute factors to explain myself, so why so many gays are very extroverted* Or why so many ugly people in Brazil and in many other places are just ok in social confortability* Even stutters, it’s not all of them who are shy because stuttering. Yes, the personality factor matter too, and often is very impactating. I’m very introspective and this may lead me to be less social than average.
an example of how the environment includes other genes (the whole genome complement of the given gene) is the murine (mouse) model of hd.
in mice 50 CAG repeats results in longer life expectancy and increased fertility.
whereas a human with 50 is going to be dead by 55 90+% of the time. and is going to show cognitive decline and psychiatric symptoms a decade before motor symptoms…is gonna get sick at 35 at most.
On the contrary, R6/2_50 mice appear to benefit from carrying the mutation. They have extended lifespans compared to wildtype (WT) mice, and male mice show enhanced fecundity.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6328633/
very good.
Please design a three component identifier for each person, to place them uniquely in three dimensional genetic space.
How many digits would we need per factor? Would 7 suffice?
Best
James
Excellent idea
Probably need more recent genetic data to make it worthwhile
Wow. Dr. James Thompson must read this blog daily. Good article Pumpkin. Wish I had time to brush up on my math chops before starting law school (finally).
Don’t know about daily, but it’s a great honor to have such quality in the readership.
As for math chops, the computer does all the heavy lifting. You just need a basic conceptual overview.
Good luck at law school!
Are you wise to work with the justice*
Dumb question I’m about to ask, but can we somehow rewire our junk DNA (sometime in the future), to provide ourselves with extra functions. I’m assuming that we can live without that junk DNA? My knowledge on Genetics is very limited, need to watch some documentaries.
Wait a minute- this is the fucking point of genetic engineering. Why the fuck do I always seem to answer my own questions?
By the way, how come aboriginals are most closely related to Northeast Asians?
It doesn’t look like it in the linkage tree?
Sure seems like an error to the untrained eye.
I don’t think I made an error.
If you look at the genetic distance matrix right below the linkage tree, you’ll see Northeast Asians are genetically closer to Australoids than are any other Mongoloid group.
Why this should be is a mystery.
Have you seen such genetic distance data in any other source?
It doesn’t match this 2D map at least: http://i.imgur.com/ktl75lN.jpg
Different data-sets give different results:
Thanks for going the extra mile to satisfy the skeptics, Pumpkinator 🙂
Aboriginals closer to Koreans and Japanese than to South Chinese, curious!
I mean im FIlipino. We’re australoid and mongoloid. clearly there was less isolation throughout history
Why disorders which at3 priori don’t confer any advantage at all persists among inhumans??
The paradox of variably disadvantageous traits among given species possibly solved
Schizophrenia, for example, is present in all human pops. What it suggest?
This disorder appeared early on foundational human pops. So no matter how harsh or reduced fertility it is, because it’s a phenotype that is variably fixed. Most ancient the phenotype more largely distributed among derived pops.
Basically, when homo sapiens appeared, schizophrenia/psychosis phenotype appeared too.
In the case of schizophrenia or psyxhotic spectrum “we” know there are large % of people who have ar least some of this features. The ignorance of fantasy is a bless.
About lgbt diversity, well, humans have selected to paraphilic sexual behaviors so it’s expected some diversification in this direction but not significant at all because selection for higher sexual dimorphism.
Bliss
“humans have selected to paraphilic sexual behaviors”
Why is this so? Ive always thought it had to do with neoteny and subsequent neural plasticity but I got no clue really. Are you sure it’s this way? Would you say whites are more perverted than blacks then?
When it comes to fetishes amongst the races it appears that whites are the most diverse, while Asians more clustered around bending and magnifying power dynamics, and blacks more about narcicism.
Japaneses have a lot of fetishism too . I don’t if “whites ” have more paraphilic impetus than “blacks:.
Humans no have the instinct to reproduce, it’s mean we can decide if we want or not to procreate. Seems, less inteligent people is more likely to have reminiscent this reprodutive impetus resulting in early pregnancy and subsequent economic insecurity. Diversity of sexual behaviors often mirror diversity on psychological and cognitive type combinations.
Santoculto,
“Japaneses have a lot of fetishism too”
I dissagre, their fetishes can all be cogged down to “bending and magnifying power dynamics”(this would include gender based sexuality), cultural symbols, and not much more. Meanwhile whites go to the most extreme imaginative lenghts and variations.
“Seems, less inteligent people is more likely to have reminiscent this reprodutive impetus resulting in early pregnancy and subsequent economic insecurity.”
Their intention is not to get children so its just them and their environment failing them, theres no pro child instinct.
“Diversity of sexual behaviors often mirror diversity on psychological and cognitive type combinations.”
This is what im getting at. Why do you think this is? I think its bercuase personality and sexuality are the same things, or atleast extremely correlative. Their both reflections of motivations and inlearned ideas, mediated through ones genes. What about people that have similar sexualities but have different personalities, and vise versa? I dont know if they exist, and if people report their sexualities being the same despite being different in personlitiy it just seems like they dont understand themselves. You would notive my descriptions of different peoples sexuality followed stereotypes.
I would guess high iq people have more complex and contextual.
“Under the influence of alcohol, low IQ Rapists displayed greater arousal regardless of the stimulus, while high IQ Rapists showed no change,”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3214828
My view reminds me of Satoshi Kanazawa. But they dont seem identical.
”I dissagre, their fetishes can all be cogged down to “bending and magnifying power dynamics”(this would include gender based sexuality), cultural symbols, and not much more. Meanwhile whites go to the most extreme imaginative lenghts and variations.”
Fetish is fetish, Kanazawa is fetishist.
”Their intention is not to get children so its just them and their environment failing them, theres no pro child instinct.”
I don’t understand. They have kids earlier without think about future consequences, just like another animals.
Libido is, indirectly, a ”pro child instinct”. Nonhuman animals, all them, seems, no have the capacity to choice if they want or not to have kids.
”What about people that have similar sexualities but have different personalities, and vise versa?”
Diversity is what is important here and not absolute match between personality and sexuality, even, in the mismatch, for example, very masculine homo guy who are passive seems an exception.
Higher long term memory seems [again] a good way to control impulses, when you have a lot of internalized and relevant informations to avoid take risks at least before of thinking.
“Fetish is fetish”
I dissagre becuase of the reasons named before. Their fetishes are uncreative and simple.
“Kanazawa is fetishist.”
haha that seems likely.
“I don’t understand. They have kids earlier without think about future consequences, just like another animals.”
Many animals think about the future before coupulating, but others dont, so it depends on how you view it.
“Libido is, indirectly, a ”pro child instinct”. Nonhuman animals, all them, seems, no have the capacity to choice if they want or not to have kids.”
Ok i see what you mean. But as i said many teenage pregnancies are unwanted and solvable, they have a choice and with environmental support it gets easier to actualize ones choices. You also need to take their lack of other activites to do, like after being young what else is there to do but get a family for low iq people?
“Diversity is what is important here and not absolute match between personality and sexuality, even, in the mismatch, for example, very masculine homo guy who are passive seems an exception.”
I dont understand. The relationship doesnt have to be obvious, but could be counter intuitive like someone being manly on the outside (meaning outside of the bedroom) as a way of being submissive on the inside (serving others by following laws of conduct). We cant read someones motivations based on their behaviour in the open. Perhaps a motivation=sexuality relationship is better than personality=sexuality relationship.
The mismatches could give us great information into how it works though, if thats what you are trying to say.
Pumpkin, for people who can get 8 digit spans, would most of them be able to get 7 digits properly, if they were completely focused? Also, if you gave someone who normally would have the potential to get 7 digits, but instead of doing the 6 digits and 5 digits, you go directly to the 7 digits, would the guy most likely get them correct or wrong, or 1 correct and 1 wrong?
Pumpkin, would anxiety during the digit span test underestimate your score by at least one scaled score point?
when morton’s skulls were measured again a few years ago it was found that:
1. gould was a fraud.
2. europeans had the largest cranial capacity. second was ne asians. last was black africans.
hat tip to unz for this.
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071#s4
Gould was right about Morton.
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002444
Click to access KAPGOM.pdf
Click to access remeasuring-man.pdf
shut your lying turk mouth.
hahahaha.
notice rr repeats my own citation which proves gould was WRONG.
turks can’t read.
sad.
all off rr’s (((citations))) are from 2016 or earlier.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2018/10/31/morton-skulls-brain-size-controversy/#.XQM18sZ7neQ
RULE #1 OF PEEPEE CLUB: MUGABE IS ALWAYS RIGHT.
So fake socialist…
”notice rr repeats”
as you, but you’re monkey, no self awareness to notice it in yourself.
Haha what. I said “Gould was right about Morton”. Lewis et al didn’t demonstrate that Gould was wrong.
1. do NOT quote mongolianpedia.
2. give sources which use seeds or buck shot or whatever else, but NOT external measurements of the skull.
MOST ADVANCED MONGOLOIDS = JAPANESE = ITALIAN SIZED BRAINS = FLUSHTONISM LOSES AGAIN.
“little people” all have yuge heads relative to their bodies.
who doesn’t know this?
flushton LIES AGAIN.
FLUSHTON IS THE S J GOULD OF HBDers…AS IS PROFESSOR SHOE…BUT NOT AS EXTREME.
the northern “han” are a lot taller and beef-i-er than the southern “han” on average.
so let’s not group small brained turks like rr with large brained icelanders and then compare this group to manchus and mongols already.
Caoscasians are, on very avg, so bright, they created conditions for multiple demographic explosions in the planet…
Now there are just in chaina 1,4 billion mongs… thanks, whitey!!1
I actually don’t disagree with Pill at all, I think the world used to be a better place. Why are we always “progressing” forward? I mean, according to people like RR, the human race itself is arbitrary and we should only direct our attentions to promoting the utility of our species. That means we should abandon equality and other failed notions of appeasing the masses.
Actually, human utility only increases when we stop caring about race. It’s not a social construct, but it does box everyone in. It defies uniqueness and a need for individualism. I think peak humanity happened when we focused on religiously-based prescriptions.
Dividing people into groups is actually very primitive. In an advanced species, we would group people based on genetic clusters. That would give them a sense of pride and focus. Though I do understand the need for race, as grouping people by genetic similarity allows certain people to compete against one another, thus driving evolution.
You’d think evolution and self-actualization go hand-in-hand but actually its the opposite. Damn, I always knew I’d be a genius.
This is sad because you’d think that people would want to self-actualize, but they don’t. They want to feed into the status quo. I mean, look at race for example. There’s no ability to differentiate people of the same race. They’re almost identical to one another. They behave identically. There’s a false hope for humanity if that continues to happen.