That inheritance trouble again

Jared Diamond cannot stop from taking L's. In lieu of WestHunter telling everyone he (and Harpending - and Nicholas Wade) told us so, David Reich's lab is telling us so: northwest European genes are under selection for IQ (summary).

But his heart's in the right place. This is a thesis in need of testing. Diamond's published output aligns with the goals of a globalist slaver caste. See also Yuval Harari. I do not think Diamond is on the level. Also not on the level is Scientific American... since 1995.

The paper fingers the Neolithic, best it can (it goes only as far as 7000 BC - more on that below). I expect similar to be found for east Asia, and for central Asia up to our Middle Ages. Add also: Mesoamerica, and the Andes - and Iron Age Africa. Maybe also for New Guinea but the farming may be so much easier there that the selection-pressure plateaued early.

Also here is negative-selection for schizophrenia, which @MuseZack Stentz is relating to Julian Jaymes' "bicameral mind". Vridar would pipe-in that Prophets lingered in farm-society although, yeah, they didn't breed (for one who did marry, read Hosea).

GK Chesterton's Orthodoxy delivers an array of assertions, which overlap here. I still haven't read through all of it. Chesterton considers madness a form of autism, the mathematician's need for certainty. Epistemic closure, as an earlier meme went. On this much his instinct might be right. Neander genes trend these ways - we observe, even their settled enclaves never entered the Neolithic.

Less happily, Chesterton sneers at "Evolutionists" and "Darwinists", on account evolution doesn't have a direction. He also sneers at "Progress", on account their direction never ends. To that: we find here that Europeans have intelligently-designed themselves. Most meritocrats would have seen this and argued for this in the 1900s. Chesterton has a point with Progress(iv)ism; but his "Evolutionism" is straw. Overall Chesterton was a 34 year old sophist.

As to the arxiv preprint, we're hearing from @jonatanpallesen that Reich is ungenerous. That uncited paper by Piffer and Kirkegaard digs earlier than 7000 BC. Having read Who We Are And How We Got Here, on Watson; I share that doubt that Reich will be citing Piffer-Kirkegaard - unless Reich be shamed into it.