Scientific American Fires Thought Criminals

Science makes us sad. It has an ugly habit of uncovering truths that are both impossible to deny and contrary to the delusional marxist worldview that now dominates the West. As we know, the truth is no defense, especially when the jew and their ugly cult of hatred and death is insulted. We must believe what the synagogue tells us to believe and double-think away the constant unpleasant realities that expose ideas like "equality" and "genetics plays a limited role" for the modern day flat earth theories that they are. When heretics question our state religion of sodomy, materialism, worship of the other, decline and rot they must be swiftly punished. The pursuit of knowledge is a crime.

Throughout its 169-year history, Scientific American has been an august and sober chronicler of the advance of human knowledge, from chemistry to physics to anthropology.

During the disastrous jewish century science became politicized, a tool to promote Right Think. If you want a career in a scientific field you better learn early to bite your tongue and keep your hate facts to yourself.

Lately, however, things have become kind of a mess.

And by "lately" we mean the last fifty years or so.

A series of blog posts on the magazine’s Web site over the past few months has unleashed waves of criticism and claims that the publication was promoting racism, sexism and “genetic determinism.”

"Make the hate reality go away! This is not cool! Wow, just wow!"

In other words they were promoting what every educated, sane individual knew to be true over a hundred years ago.

The trouble started in April when a guest blogger, a doctoral student named Chris Martin, wrote about Lawrence H. Summers’ assertions when he was president of Harvard University about the paucity of women in some scientific fields. While acknowledging that discrimination played a role in holding back women, Martin also concluded, “the latest research suggests that discrimination has a weaker impact than people might think, and that innate sex differences explain quite a lot.”

But, but...what about all those womyn doctors and scientists who don't need a man (and certainly no White children!) on the Telavivision? That's real life, isn't it?

The post drew a sharp pushback, particularly on social media, from readers who questioned Martin’s scientific and cultural bona fides. “This slovenly article above is so full of outdated information it is painful,” wrote one commenter.

"This article is sloppy and wrong and it's 2014." No evidence is provided, none of the arguments refuted, but I've got the State Religion on my side. This is how a generation that has been rendered unable to think logically by communist indoctrination discusses the merits of research. This is jewish mind-rape.

Outdated information!

The second land mine was a post in May by Ashutosh Jogalekar, which favorably reviewed a controversial book by Nicholas Wade, “A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History.” Jogalekar praised the book, saying it confirms the need to “recognize a strong genetic component to [social and cognitive] differences” among racial groups.

In other words when you look at Detroit your eyes are not lying to you. These statements are about as controversial as "The Earth revolves around the Sun!" and will be punished the same way that finding was.

Must be caused by "environment!"

In early July, the reaction led the publication’s blog editor, Curtis Brainard, to post a note that read in part, “While we believe that [the racism and sexism] charges are excessive, we share readers’ concerns. Although we expect our bloggers to cover controversial topics from time to time, we also recognize that sensitive issues require extra care, and that did not happen here.”

"We apologize for offending Mother Church. The guilty parties are currently being tortured and will be burnt at the stake very soon. We share your fears about heresy, witchcraft and false conversions and are cooperating with the Inquisition and the Witch Finder General to insure this never happens again."

Scientific American may be extra sensitive to allegations of sexism because of an unrelated episode last year. Its previous blog editor, Bora Zivkovic, was publicly accused of sexual harassment by two freelance writers. Zivkovic apologized to both of his accusers on Twitter and subsequently left the magazine.

"Um, maybe you'd like, uh, to have coffee sometime?" Sexual harassment!!! Put him in jail!!! Stinking straight!!!

One lesson he said he learned: “Scientific American writes about some controversial topics, like climate change and [genetically modified organisms], and evolution. Race and sex are much more sensitive than GMO or climate change.”

Pseudoscience that offends our enemies = good. Real science that disproves cultural marxism = bad.

Full Story.

Only lies need this sort of protection.


Popular posts from this blog

Sweden's New Normal

Crystal Methodism

Two White Girls Sacrificed on the Altar of Equality