Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old August 2nd, 2012 #1
Thomas Atkins
Junior Member
 
Thomas Atkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 179
Default Just lost an argument

about Jews because I don't have an understanding of dna, genetics etc unlike my opponent. Ye, I was spot on on the history et al but science carries more prestige.

Anyone else encountered this? I guess I'll have to read up on the science. It's so boring though
 
Old August 2nd, 2012 #2
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Atkins View Post
about Jews because I don't have an understanding of dna, genetics etc unlike my opponent. Ye, I was spot on on the history et al but science carries more prestige.

Anyone else encountered this? I guess I'll have to read up on the science. It's so boring though
What was the point that you were trying to argue?

Surely not that stupid CI bullshit about Jews being descended from Khazars?

Jews all have Semitic DNA that ties them to the Levant and proves that they are related to other Afro-Asiatic Semitic tribes such as the Arabs and the Ethiopians.
 
Old August 2nd, 2012 #3
Thomas Atkins
Junior Member
 
Thomas Atkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven L. Akins View Post
What was the point that you were trying to argue?

Surely not that stupid CI bullshit about Jews being descended from Khazars?

Jews all have Semitic DNA that ties them to the Levant and proves that they are related to other Afro-Asiatic Semitic tribes such as the Arabs and the Ethiopians.
I must have claimed that Jews are the way they are due to biology. I somehow then got drawn into refuting his claim that it was "basic science" that DNA has no causal effect on behavior. Something about there being no causal connection between the DNA - RNA -Amino acid sequence and the information networks that get established in our brains. That it depends on too many other factors. That there is far less information in our DNA than in our neural networks; therefore, the DNA cannot control our behavior, because it lacks the information capacity for doing so

What else... Macdonald is a pseudoscientist since his background is in psychology and therefore he can't possibly verify his claims scientifically.

It's all Greek to me I'm afraid.

I haven't lost an argument in ages. It's a really sucky feeling lol.
 
Old August 2nd, 2012 #4
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Atkins View Post
I must have claimed that Jews are the way they are due to biology. I somehow then got drawn into refuting his claim that it was "basic science" that DNA has no causal effect on behavior. Something about there being no causal connection between the DNA - RNA -Amino acid sequence and the information networks that get established in our brains. That it depends on too many other factors. That there is far less information in our DNA than in our neural networks; therefore, the DNA cannot control our behavior, because it lacks the information capacity for doing so

What else... Macdonald is a pseudoscientist since his background is in psychology and therefore he can't possibly verify his claims scientifically.

It's all Greek to me I'm afraid.

I haven't lost an argument in ages. It's a really sucky feeling lol.
I have always assumed that Jewish behavior is a cultural trait - in much the same way that anything else tends to be, such as the belief in Christianity - that is absolutely a result of culture influencing a population. No one is genetically predisposed to believing in Christianity - it is taught to the by the culture that they are brought up in.

I think it would be safe to say that Jewish culture teaches Jews to act, believe, behave and think in certain ways that are characteristically Jewish.
 
Old August 2nd, 2012 #5
Thomas Atkins
Junior Member
 
Thomas Atkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven L. Akins View Post
I have always assumed that Jewish behavior is a cultural trait - in much the same way that anything else tends to be, such as the belief in Christianity - that is absolutely a result of culture influencing a population. No one is genetically predisposed to believing in Christianity - it is taught to the by the culture that they are brought up in.

I think it would be safe to say that Jewish culture teaches Jews to act, believe, behave and think in certain ways that are characteristically Jewish.
Something like that would have been more sensible. At least I'm not leaving myself to exposure that way. I was stupid to dive into something I know almost nothing about. I should have just said "Look, I'm not up to speed on the science behind it, but the rest of the data has been enough to convince me" and left it at that. The guy was so god damn smug tho I couldn't resist. I've been nursing an awful hang-over all day, which probably didn't help things.
 
Old August 2nd, 2012 #6
SmokyMtn
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 8,506
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Atkins View Post
I must have claimed that Jews are the way they are due to biology. I somehow then got drawn into refuting his claim that it was "basic science" that DNA has no causal effect on behavior. Something about there being no causal connection between the DNA - RNA -Amino acid sequence and the information networks that get established in our brains. That it depends on too many other factors. That there is far less information in our DNA than in our neural networks; therefore, the DNA cannot control our behavior, because it lacks the information capacity for doing so

What else... Macdonald is a pseudoscientist since his background is in psychology and therefore he can't possibly verify his claims scientifically.

It's all Greek to me I'm afraid.

I haven't lost an argument in ages. It's a really sucky feeling lol.

Happens to the best of us. What you need to do is go over that debate and re-argue it in your head so that the next time you find yourself in a debate on this topic, your reply will come out naturally and timely.

When debating a know-it-all intellectual, it is best to be the one asking questions, not trying to answer his questions on his terms. Start throwing him some curve balls, such as....

Am I correct that the issue is whether or not the behavior of Jews is genetic or not?

Do we breed dogs to improve not only their looks, but also for their behavioral qualities?

Are humans any different than other life forms, in nature, in that their DNA has no effect on their (race) breed's typical behaviors?

You do not need to be an expert in any field, just have enough common sense to start asking the right questions that will lead your intellectual into your argument.
 
Old August 2nd, 2012 #7
SmokyMtn
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 8,506
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Atkins View Post
Something like that would have been more sensible. At least I'm not leaving myself to exposure that way. I was stupid to dive into something I know almost nothing about. I should have just said "Look, I'm not up to speed on the science behind it, but the rest of the data has been enough to convince me" and left it at that. The guy was so god damn smug tho I couldn't resist. I've been nursing an awful hang-over all day, which probably didn't help things.
Ignore Steven L. Akins. If you really want to do better in debates, first, don't get drunk, and two, start reading and listening to Dr. William Pierce.

Seeing the Forest
by Dr. William Pierce

....And so I don't want you just to take my word for this very important conclusion about the nature of the Jews as a uniquely hostile and dangerous group. I want you to study the facts. I want you to think about the evidence and reach your own conclusion. But I don't want you to stop short of a conclusion because of fear, because of brainwashing. I want you to overcome your fear and examine the evidence objectively.


I will make a few more observations about this conclusion and its implications now, however. Let me tell you, it really is the key to understanding many other things: the history of the Jews in Europe -- and elsewhere -- for example. Why were the Jews always picked on and persecuted far more than any other group? Why did everyone else always hate them? Why have they been kicked out of virtually every country in Europe during the past thousand years: out of England and Spain and Portugal and France and Sweden and Germany and a dozen other countries and told never to come back, only to sneak back in and then be kicked out again? The Jews will tell you that it was Christian bigotry. But Christian bigotry cannot explain why the Egyptians threw them out of Egypt more than a thousand years before Christ, and it cannot explain why the pagan Greeks and Romans hated them. I used to wonder about these things. And even after I began to suspect that the socially and racially destructive activities of the Jews were planned and deliberate, I didn't know why. It didn't make sense to me that the Jews would deliberately seek to destroy a society in which they were riding high -- that they would deliberately drill holes in the bottom of a boat in which they were passengers. I couldn't figure it out -- until I understood the nature of the Jews.

And that nature really is unique. At some time far back in the prehistoric period, certainly more than 3,000 years ago, the Jews developed a unique mode of survival as predators and parasites. Whereas other races, other tribes, sought either to live alone among their own kind -- or to conquer other tribes militarily and take their land or require them to pay tribute -- the Jews sought to invade the territory of other races by stealth and then to subvert them, to undermine their morale, to break down the order and structure in their societies as a concomitant to controlling them and exploiting them.

In the beginning, thousands of years ago, this may have been only a novel plan for gaining control of a particular neighbor, but eventually it developed into a way of life. It became part of their religion, and eventually it got into their genes. I believe that today they really can't help themselves. And as I said before, you do need to think carefully about this. You need to study the facts. It's difficult for many people to understand the Jews because they really are different from every other ethnic group.

One aspect of the Jewish problem which adds to the difficulty many people have in coming to grips with it is that the Jews are not just a scheming and sinister kehillah of adult male media bosses. They are a complete community, with women and children and many members on the fringes: part-Jews, dissidents, and so on -- even a few anti-Jewish Jews. There are approximately six million Jews in the United States, by their own count, and they can't all be film studio owners or newspaper publishers or promoters of "rap" music or Hollywood scriptwriters. Most of them live and work in a way which gives them relatively little personal opportunity for damaging our society. They are simply teachers and businessmen and merchants and lawyers and doctors, earning a living more or less like everyone else -- but not quite.

You must back off a bit in order to see the forest rather than just the trees. The essential thing about the forest is that it is destroying our world. It is a parasitic forest. It is injecting spiritual and cultural poison into our civilization and into the life of our people and sucking up nutrients to enrich itself and grow even more destructive. Perhaps only 10 per cent of the trees in this Jewish forest have roots deep enough to inject their poison into us, and the other 90 per cent play only supporting roles of one sort or another. It is still the whole forest which is our problem. If the forest were not here we would not have had to endure the curse of Bolshevism. If the forest were not here America would not be growing darker and more degenerate by the year. It is the whole forest, not just a few of the most poisonous trees in it, which must be uprooted and removed from our soil if we are to become healthy again.

The essential point again is this: not every Jew has a leading role in promoting the evils which are destroying us, and not every person is a Jew who is collaborating with the leading Jews who are promoting evil, but it is only because the Jews as a whole are among us that the evils they always promote are overwhelming us. If the Jews were not present we could overcome the evil men of our own race. The evil men of our own race may seek their own profit at the expense of the rest of us, but they do not seek to destroy our race. Only the Jews seek that.
 
Old August 3rd, 2012 #8
Thomas Atkins
Junior Member
 
Thomas Atkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokyMtn View Post
Happens to the best of us. What you need to do is go over that debate and re-argue it in your head so that the next time you find yourself in a debate on this topic, your reply will come out naturally and timely.

When debating a know-it-all intellectual, it is best to be the one asking questions, not trying to answer his questions on his terms. Start throwing him some curve balls, such as....

Am I correct that the issue is whether or not the behavior of Jews is genetic or not?

Do we breed dogs to improve not only their looks, but also for their behavioral qualities?

Are humans any different than other life forms, in nature, in that their DNA has no effect on their (race) breed's typical behaviors?

You do not need to be an expert in any field, just have enough common sense to start asking the right questions that will lead your intellectual into your argument.
See, I knew what he was saying didn't make sense but at the time I couldn't quite manage to apply the dog breed analogy (as I normally would) maybe because I was a bit dazzled by the science he was throwing at me (and me being a bit out of sorts). Another problem is he was using language so technical that he could have been lying about the whole thing yet observers would have been none the wiser (this also applies to me to a lesser extent), they're so impressed by the scientific language.

If I could go back I'd simply direct him to Libertarian Realist's debates with Evogen. It's a little bit of a concession but one I can easily live with. I don't (usually) pretend that I know everything but in this instance I was simply on bad form. I think he also took me by surprise because until he unleashed the science on me he was doing terribly.
 
Old August 3rd, 2012 #9
OTPTT
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,896
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven L. Akins View Post
Surely not that stupid CI bullshit about Jews being descended from Khazars?
[I wouldn't put any weight in anything this fraud known as Akins has to say or write. Archeologists have proven the Khazar\Jew connection about three years ago.]

Ancient lost capital of the Jewish Khazar kingdom found

Capital of the Khazars, a Turkic people who converted to Judaism, was thought washed away by Caspian Sea.

Russian archaeologists said Wednesday they had found the long-lost capital of the Khazar kingdom in southern Russia, a breakthrough for research on the ancient Jewish state.
"This is a hugely important discovery," expedition organiser Dmitry Vasilyev told AFP by telephone from Astrakhan State University after returning from excavations near the village of Samosdelka, just north of the Caspian Sea.

"We can now shed light on one of the most intriguing mysteries of that period -- how the Khazars actually lived. We know very little about the Khazars -- about their traditions, their funerary rites, their culture," he said.

The city was the capital of the Khazars, a semi-nomadic Turkic peoples who adopted Judaism as a state religion, from between the 8th and the 10th centuries, when it was captured and sacked by the rulers of ancient Russia.

At its height, the Khazar state and its tributaries controlled much of what is now southern Russia, western Kazakhstan, eastern Ukraine, Azerbaijan and large parts of Russia's North Caucasus region.



The capital is referred to as Itil in Arab chronicles but Vasilyev said the word may actually have been used to refer to the Volga River on which the city was founded or to the surrounding river delta region.

Itil was said to be a multi-ethnic place with houses of worship and judges for Christians, Jews, Muslims and pagans. Its remains have until now never been identified and were said to have been washed away by the Caspian Sea.

Archaeologists have been excavating in the area if Samosdelka for the past nine years but have only now collected enough material evidence to back their thesis, including the remains of an ancient brick fortress, he added.

"Within the fortress, we have found huts similar to yurts, which are characteristics of Khazar cities.... The fortress had a triangular shape and was made with bricks. It's another argument that this was no ordinary city."

Around 10 university archaeologists and some 50 students took part in excavations in the region this summer, which are partly financed by the Jewish University in Moscow and the Russian Jewish Congress.

Last edited by OTPTT; August 3rd, 2012 at 07:08 AM.
 
Old August 3rd, 2012 #10
Thomas Atkins
Junior Member
 
Thomas Atkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokyMtn View Post
Ignore Steven L. Akins. If you really want to do better in debates, first, don't get drunk, and two, start reading and listening to Dr. William Pierce.

Seeing the Forest
by Dr. William Pierce

....And so I don't want you just to take my word for this very important conclusion about the nature of the Jews as a uniquely hostile and dangerous group. I want you to study the facts. I want you to think about the evidence and reach your own conclusion. But I don't want you to stop short of a conclusion because of fear, because of brainwashing. I want you to overcome your fear and examine the evidence objectively.


I will make a few more observations about this conclusion and its implications now, however. Let me tell you, it really is the key to understanding many other things: the history of the Jews in Europe -- and elsewhere -- for example. Why were the Jews always picked on and persecuted far more than any other group? Why did everyone else always hate them? Why have they been kicked out of virtually every country in Europe during the past thousand years: out of England and Spain and Portugal and France and Sweden and Germany and a dozen other countries and told never to come back, only to sneak back in and then be kicked out again? The Jews will tell you that it was Christian bigotry. But Christian bigotry cannot explain why the Egyptians threw them out of Egypt more than a thousand years before Christ, and it cannot explain why the pagan Greeks and Romans hated them. I used to wonder about these things. And even after I began to suspect that the socially and racially destructive activities of the Jews were planned and deliberate, I didn't know why. It didn't make sense to me that the Jews would deliberately seek to destroy a society in which they were riding high -- that they would deliberately drill holes in the bottom of a boat in which they were passengers. I couldn't figure it out -- until I understood the nature of the Jews.

And that nature really is unique. At some time far back in the prehistoric period, certainly more than 3,000 years ago, the Jews developed a unique mode of survival as predators and parasites. Whereas other races, other tribes, sought either to live alone among their own kind -- or to conquer other tribes militarily and take their land or require them to pay tribute -- the Jews sought to invade the territory of other races by stealth and then to subvert them, to undermine their morale, to break down the order and structure in their societies as a concomitant to controlling them and exploiting them.

In the beginning, thousands of years ago, this may have been only a novel plan for gaining control of a particular neighbor, but eventually it developed into a way of life. It became part of their religion, and eventually it got into their genes. I believe that today they really can't help themselves. And as I said before, you do need to think carefully about this. You need to study the facts. It's difficult for many people to understand the Jews because they really are different from every other ethnic group.

One aspect of the Jewish problem which adds to the difficulty many people have in coming to grips with it is that the Jews are not just a scheming and sinister kehillah of adult male media bosses. They are a complete community, with women and children and many members on the fringes: part-Jews, dissidents, and so on -- even a few anti-Jewish Jews. There are approximately six million Jews in the United States, by their own count, and they can't all be film studio owners or newspaper publishers or promoters of "rap" music or Hollywood scriptwriters. Most of them live and work in a way which gives them relatively little personal opportunity for damaging our society. They are simply teachers and businessmen and merchants and lawyers and doctors, earning a living more or less like everyone else -- but not quite.

You must back off a bit in order to see the forest rather than just the trees. The essential thing about the forest is that it is destroying our world. It is a parasitic forest. It is injecting spiritual and cultural poison into our civilization and into the life of our people and sucking up nutrients to enrich itself and grow even more destructive. Perhaps only 10 per cent of the trees in this Jewish forest have roots deep enough to inject their poison into us, and the other 90 per cent play only supporting roles of one sort or another. It is still the whole forest which is our problem. If the forest were not here we would not have had to endure the curse of Bolshevism. If the forest were not here America would not be growing darker and more degenerate by the year. It is the whole forest, not just a few of the most poisonous trees in it, which must be uprooted and removed from our soil if we are to become healthy again.

The essential point again is this: not every Jew has a leading role in promoting the evils which are destroying us, and not every person is a Jew who is collaborating with the leading Jews who are promoting evil, but it is only because the Jews as a whole are among us that the evils they always promote are overwhelming us. If the Jews were not present we could overcome the evil men of our own race. The evil men of our own race may seek their own profit at the expense of the rest of us, but they do not seek to destroy our race. Only the Jews seek that.
I'm quite familiar with Pierce. In this instance though I don't think he could have helped me. You're right about the drinking. I used to have sign on the wall... Time to put it back up.

Did you check out my thread 'Jews, Eugenics and Dune?'

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=144383

Quote:
Recently scientists have shown that it is remarkably simple to rapidly evolve (through genetic mutation and environmental selection) multicellular organisms from single-celled ancestor colonies. The trick is several generations of growth in conditions that favor survival of cooperative versus selfish cells.
Talmudic Judaism is a social organism (with Jews as “cells”) that evolved in ancient Babylon through just such a process (except genetic and cultural evolution occurred in tandem). It is the human equivalent of a colony of naked mole rats, burrowing in diaspora into the host population, with the Kohanim and other Orthodox Jewish groups corresponding to the fertile, insulated breeding pairs, and less observant Jewish groups or secular Jews corresponding to the workers, defending the breeding pairs from enemies.
No other human group has adopted an evolutionary strategy based on ingroup eugenics, outgroup dysgenics, and permanent cultural warfare.
Quite similar to what Pierce said, don't you think? Linder's own theory is quite similar if I recollect. I think one of the few consolations for being a modern-day heretic is that this taboo of all taboos subject is so bloody fascinating!
 
Old August 3rd, 2012 #11
OTPTT
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,896
Default

[Archeology is a science is it not?]

Found: Ancient Capital of 'Jewish' Khazar Kingdom


The capital of the legendary "Jewish kingdom" has been found, says a team of Russian archeologists. If verified, the find is a major breakthrough.

A team of archaeologists claims to have discovered remnants of the legendary Khazar kingdom in southern Russia, according to a recent report. If the excavation site proves to be indeed the long-lost capital of the ancient 'Jewish Kingdom', the discovery would represent a major breakthrough for archaeologists and historians.

"This is a hugely important discovery," said the leader of the Russian expedition, Dmitry Vasilyev, in a report by the French agency AFP.

Vasilyev, from Astrakhan State University, made the comments after returning from the excavation site, located near the Russian village of Samosdelka just north of the Caspian Sea. The location of the site corresponds roughly to the area in which historians believe the empire may have existed.

"We can now shed light on one of the most intriguing mysteries of that period - how the Khazars actually lived,” he added. “We know very little about the Khazars - about their traditions, their funerary rites, their culture.”

The Jewish University in Moscow and the Russian Jewish Congress helped finance the excavations, which took place during the summer in various locations throughout the region in which the discovery was made. The project, overseen by a number of university professors, included some 50 students who assisted in the digs.

The Khazars were known to be a semi-nomadic Turkic people who dominated the Pontic steppe and the North Caucasus regions from the 7th-10th centuries CE. The origin of the Khazars and their apparent conversion to Judaism is the subject of major dispute among modern historians.

In the 7th century CE, the Khazars founded an independent khaganate, or kingdom, in the Northern Caucasus along the Caspian Sea. It is believed that during the 8th or 9th century, around the height of their kingdom, the state religion became Judaism at the order of the king. At this point, the Khazar khaganate and its tributaries controlled much of what is today southern Russia, western Kazakhstan, eastern Ukraine, Azerbaijan, large portions of the Caucasus (including Circassia, Dagestan, Chechnya, and parts of Georgia), and the Crimea.



The first Jewish Khazar king was named Bulan, which means "elk", though some sources give him the Hebrew name Sabriel. A later king, Obadiah, strengthened Judaism, inviting rabbis into the kingdom and building synagogues.

References to a Jewish kingdom of Khazars are numerous in rabbinic literature from the Middle Ages and later. Among them is the famous tale by Rabbi Yehuda HaLevy, related in his celebrated 12th-century work The Kuzari. The book recounts a lengthy conversation between a certain Khazar king and an unnamed Jewish "wise man", where the latter's brilliant exposition on the essence of Torah compels the king to join the Jewish people.

Among other Jewish sources supporting the Jewish identity of the Khazars is a letter written by the medieval Jewish writer Avraham ibn Daud, who reported meeting rabbinical students from Khazar in Toledo, Spain in the mid-12th century. The well-renowned Schechter Letter recounts a different version of the conversion of the Khazar king, and mentions Benjamin ben Menachem as a Khazar king. Saadia Gaon, considered by many to be the greatest rabbi of his generation in the 10th century, also spoke favorably of the Khazars in his writings.

References to a Jewish Khazar kingdom appears in non-Jewish literature as well. Classical Muslim sources describing such a kingdom are often cited by modern Muslim scholars in their attempts to prove that the historical homeland of the Jews is not in present-day Israel.

The Khazar city that Prof. Vasileyev believes to have found was referred to as "Itil" in Arab chronicles. The archeologist said the name may actually be an Arabic reference to the Volga River, the great waterway on which the city was founded, to to the river's delta region.

Various sources describe Itil as a city of unusual ethnic and religious tolerance and diversity. Travelers to the city noted that there were separate houses of worship and judges for Christians, Jews, Muslims and pagans.

Until now, however, remains of the city had never been identified, and many believed that in the intervening millennium since the demise of the Khazar empire in the 10th century, all signs of the city were washed away into the Caspian Sea.

Although archaeologists have been excavating in the area of Samosdelka for the past nine years, only now has Vasileyev’s team been able to claim findings conclusive enough to identify the site of the capital. Among the discoveries his team has unearthed are the remains of an ancient brick fortress.

"Within the fortress, we have found huts similar to yurts, which are characteristics of Khazar cities,” said the researcher. “The fortress had a triangular shape and was made with bricks. It's another argument that this was no ordinary city."

Last edited by OTPTT; August 3rd, 2012 at 07:09 AM.
 
Old August 5th, 2012 #12
SmokyMtn
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 8,506
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Atkins View Post
See, I knew what he was saying didn't make sense but at the time I couldn't quite manage to apply the dog breed analogy (as I normally would) maybe because I was a bit dazzled by the science he was throwing at me (and me being a bit out of sorts). Another problem is he was using language so technical that he could have been lying about the whole thing yet observers would have been none the wiser (this also applies to me to a lesser extent), they're so impressed by the scientific language.
There is an old saying, "If you cannot impress them with substance, dazzle them with bullshit." In your case, your opponent was using the latter. Next time you find yourself in that situation, slow them down with a few sincere, but intelligent, questions, and go from there.
 
Old August 5th, 2012 #13
Sam Reeves
Happy Bigot
 
Sam Reeves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,085
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven L. Akins View Post
What was the point that you were trying to argue?

Surely not that stupid CI bullshit about Jews being descended from Khazars?

Jews all have Semitic DNA that ties them to the Levant and proves that they are related to other Afro-Asiatic Semitic tribes such as the Arabs and the Ethiopians.
Actually, I've read somewhere that it is estimated that something like only 67% of todays Jews have the Cohen marker.
 
Old August 6th, 2012 #14
Karl Radl
The Epitome of Evil
 
Karl Radl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Unseen University of New York
Posts: 3,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Reeves View Post
Actually, I've read somewhere that it is estimated that something like only 67% of todays Jews have the Cohen marker.
Yes, but the CMH is; as I understand it, derived from the Kohanim quite specifically and all the lack of it in part of the jewish population proves; without other evidence, is that the jews didn't segregate their own caste groups quite so well from each other as some of their stricter halakhic proponents would have liked (i.e. Kohanim breeding with Israelite and so forth).

There is a hypothesized LMT (Levi Modal Haplotype) but I haven't seen anything on that other than theory yet. As to the Khazars well the theory has no serious academic proponent (Shlomo Sand claims it is so in 'The Invention of the Jewish People' as does Gilad Atzmon in 'The Wandering Who' but they cite little to no actual evidence let alone any of the literature on the Khazars) and even sympathizers of a Khazar origin of the Ashkenazim like Brook ('The Jews of Khazaria') only think it accounts for a small proportion of the Ashkenazim.

I should add that conventional theory has it that the Ashkenazim are basically Sephardim who moved East, which can be traced from the known communities and mentions of jewish households (i.e. up from France/Italy up into Germany then across into Poland and then into Russia).
__________________
 
Old January 29th, 2013 #15
mark pete
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1
Default Stay with what can be proved

I find that their own books convict them.How can they argue against their talmud?Do some study on that and watch them scurry.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:12 PM.
Page generated in 0.21064 seconds.