Thanks, ever so much, to you and Mark of Akismet for your efforts.

The last comment — to my amazement — went directly through.

GEM of TKI

Of particular interest is this paragraph [and the immediately following ones]:

There was unintended irony in the post-9/11 liberal caricature of Bush and Cheney as politicians who had haplessly allowed their administration’s policies to be hijacked by a few spookily effective intellectuals—this, less than a year after having been such master manipulators as to have allegedly stolen away the presidency from Al Gore. But this was not the only grotesque charge leveled at the President. Another was that the “neoconservatives” in question were in reality a group of Jews who were attempting to divert U.S. policy in the interests of Israel. This particular bit of slander ignored, among other things, the fact that the neoconservative position on the Middle East conflict was exactly congruous with the neoconservative position on conflicts everywhere else in the world, including places where neither Jews nor Israeli interests could be found—not to mention the fact that non-Jewish neoconservatives took the same stands on all of the issues as did their Jewish confrères.2

I’d say, so much for the self-chosen appellation, “brights.”

(Or, perhaps, more accurately, we should not confuse academic achievement or [worse!] mere IQ numbers with wisdom, good-will, fair-mindedness, a high value on truth [which inter alia restrains one from making ill-founded and bigoted offhand remarks], respect for others with whom one may differ on issues, and common sense.)

Are we sure that we want this sort of “Materialist Ideology” to seize its declared intended monopolistic power over Science and the other the critical institutional and public spaces of our civilisation? [Cf. here the "banned in Sweden" issue.]

For that alone, the ID movement is worthy of our respect, and if one finds the main arguments persuasive — as I have [cf. my always linked] — outright support.

I communicated with Akismet and they very kindly responded just this morning:

We work very hard to prevent people both calling unwanted comments as spam and also people who try to target commenters. I think it’s fair to say we do catch virtually all of them.

In this case though it was not malicious, it was an error by us. I am hopeful I have corrected it, but you can check by leaving a comment at [XXXXX] Should it not get through it will give me additional information.

Sorry!

On trying the test, the comment there went through.

This is a test here in effect.

Thanks for the efforts on my behalf.

GEM of TKI

Appreciated; even though a bit frustrating.

GEM of TKI

http://akismet.com/faq/

Help! Akismet is catching a regular comment as spam!

Don’t worry, if you see a regular comment on your Akismet page, just click the “Not Spam” checkbox and submit and the comment will be sent back to Akismet as a mistake. The system will learn from your submission, though it may take a day or so in some cases. False positives, as they’re called, are extremely rare and we watch them closely.

It’s getting false positives all the time. Good thing the explanatory filter is not like akismet…anyway, I just emailed the akismet people about this problem.

I note that the effect of your repeating of points on a rabbit trail is to divert the thread from its focus, a focus that has been well supported by the recent Crystal Clear Atheism event. 46 provides key evidence, onlookers.

I also suggest: Re-read the report, especially on the Y Chromosome side, which indisputably comes from the male side. Indeed, the discussion of the Y Chromosome side comes BEFORE the Mitochondrial side:

The earlier study, led by Dr. Michael Hammer of University of Arizona, showed from an analysis of the male, or Y chromosome, that Jewish men from seven communities were related to one another and to present-day Palestinian and Syrian populations, but not to the men of their host communities.

The finding suggested that Jewish men who founded the communities traced their lineage back to the ancestral Mideastern population of 4,000 years ago from which Arabs, Jews and other people are descended. It pointed to the genetic unity of widespread Jewish populations and took issue with ideas that most Jewish communities were relatively recent converts like the Khazars, a medieval Turkish tribe that embraced Judaism.

After this, it discussed the second study, and observed as a likely best explanation that:

Dr. Goldstein said it was up to historians to interpret the genetic evidence. His own speculation, he said, is that most Jewish communities were formed by unions between Jewish men and local women, though he notes that the women’s origins cannot be genetically determined.

”The men came from the Near East, perhaps as traders,” he said. ”They established local populations, probably with local women. But once the community was founded, the barriers had to go up, because otherwise mitochondrial diversity would be increased.”

As to the points you wish to make on mitochondrial DNA, I simply note that even Wiki acknowledges:

Unlike nuclear DNA, which is inherited from both parents and in which genes are rearranged in the process of recombination, there is usually no change in mtDNA from parent to offspring. Although mtDNA also recombines, it does so with copies of itself within the same mitochondrion. Because of this and because the mutation rate of animal mtDNA is higher than that of nuclear DNA[2], mtDNA is a powerful tool for tracking ancestry through females (matrilineage) and has been used in this role to track the ancestry of many species back hundreds of generations.

BarryA has made his point, and relevant to that point your attempts to argue that Jews do not constitute a race in the usual sense of that term, repeatedly fall to the ground.

Mr Dawkins was WAAAAAAY out of line, and should apologise. (But then, sadly, this is just the latest outrage from this gentleman.)

GEM of TKI

PS: I have for some weeks now been on permanent mod without explanation other than a remark that the spam filter somehow likes me.

Maybe you’re right, though, on the main point that Dawkins has a special hatred for Jews (though I really just can’t believe he hates them more than Christians and Christianity). I have no stock in defending his good name. It’s just that, if you replace “Jewish” with “pro-interventionism-in-favor-of-Israel” in that one statement, it is not an entirely unjustified statement. I was just giving him the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps more than he deserves, but I guess I’m just a generous guy.

Kindly review my remarks in 11 and 20 supra, then compare BarryA’s remarks in 33, 35 and 36. (I think you need to read a little more of what is being discussed in a thread before commenting, or at least, to acknowledge even en passant what has been said before.)

You will first see therein a plain set of statements that show the broad-spectrum contempt that seems to be Mr Dawkins’ forte, especially for those who are by his lights “religious.” Second, you will see therein, sufficient to clearly identify that Mr Dawkins has specified the Jews in a way that identifies them as a specific object of ill-informed contempt and bigotry.

All of this goes seriously to his character and the supercilious and utterly superficial and inferior quality of his thought; never mind his conceit that atheists are the “brights.”

In that context, he clearly buys into the all-too-common — and easy to confute, if one will but seriously check the facts — propagandistic slander that the Jews [especially of course religious ones] monopolise American Foreign policy. No-one who has a modicum of knowledge of the history of spiteful deceptive propaganda and resulting pogroms against Jews [ESPECIALLY in Europe, but also in for instance the Arab world; cf here Peters' summary and the links between the infamous Mufti Hussein of Jerusalem and the Nazis] will fail to realise that such casual bigotry is telling, sadly and sickeningly telling.

And I say that as a member of the no 2 perennial target-group of racism, oppression and exploitation in the world.

THEN, to top all of this off, he sets out to say that he wishes to emulate such perceived monopolistic dominance, for his own pressure group, those ever-so-”bright” and well-informed, morally exemplary atheists!

Worse, he pretends in so doing that atheists constitute a “downtrodden” minority in the USA, and expresses his horror that of all shocking things, in a nation set up under the declaration that God has given us liberties which Governments are to acknowledge and secure and so has in its Constitution inter alia a declaration of intent that it is designed to secure “the BLESSINGS of liberty,” those who acknowledge God have a significant voice in the public square. (Cf. my compilation and discussion of too-often overlooked, or even hotly denied and suppressed evidence here.)

All I can say to such, is that to be forewarned should be to be forearmed. But, there is none so blind as s/he who refuses to see what is “an inconvenient truth.”

GEM of TKI

PS: Here is a NYT report on relevant genetic studies on the ancestry patterns of Jewish populations. A similar, later study has shown a very close genetic relationship with the Kurds (who oddly just happen to be located just about where the Northern tribes were taken into exile circa 722 BC by the Assyrians).

Enough has already long since been said (e.g. 40, 46) to show the defects in your latest. You have, sadly, simply chosen to ignore inconvenient facts and factors.

Astute readers can look those facts and factors up for themselves.

Not to mention, your latest is a repeat — and already answered — red herring relative to the main issues at stake in the thread and indeed the blog; on which Barry A is abundantly vindicated, especially as at the citations in 46.

GEM of TKI