The Fraud Perpetrated in The Field of Genetics


From William Bradford Shockley’s book on the subject of Eugenics And Race, written by Roger Pearson, document 16, “Anthropological Taboos About Determinations of Racial Mixes”, p. 223, we read in part:

Most anthropologists are intellectually irresponsible about the problems of race and intelligence. A world-wide tragedy may grow because national leaders will be misled by trusting erroneous anthropological views. Of all the scientific disciplines, anthropology is most responsible for science about the biological basis for humanity’s social structures – including the effects of racial differences. But many anthropologists assert that the concept of race is a ‘myth’ and urge taboos against related research.”

In my essay William Bradford Shockley (1910-89)on “Eugenics & Race” #1, I wrote on him in part:

Critical Review of E. Raymond Capt’s “Israel Judah and Jew”, Part 2


In analyzing Capt’s essay on three different entities, it appears his teachings are skewed because he identified only (1) “Israel”, (2) “Judah”, (3) and “Jew”! Because the term “jew” is so extraordinarily misleading, it might be better to distinguish Judean, Judaism and Kenite-Edomite-Canaanite-jew. By doing so, it would send a strong signal that might startle the reader or hearer into inquiring what such terms could mean. The best thing to do with the term “jew” is to avoid it like the plague. But if one cannot avoid it, at least use it in a definitive way, which Capt failed to do!

I will now return to where I left off in part #1 of this topic quoting from E. Raymond Capt’s 4-book series Biblical Antiquities, book 2, chapter 4, pp. 37-48:

Abraham and Isaac were Hebrews, but they were neither Israelites nor Jews. The twelve sons of Jacob were Hebrews and Israelites, but they were not Jews. The same may be said of Moses and Aaron, the people of the Northern Kingdom, and Elijah and Elisha. To avoid confusion over the expression ‘Israel,’ it is necessary to determine in which sense it is used in any particular passage, whether it means (1) the whole of the twelve tribes, (2) the House of Judah alone as being part of the twelve tribes, or (3) the Ten-Tribed Kingdom.

Critical Review of E. Raymond Capt’s “Israel Judah and Jew”, Part 1


While I have a lot of respect for the research and teachings of E. Raymond Capt, here is a topic where he failed to cover the implications completely. I will be quoting from his 4-book series Biblical Antiquities, book 2, chapter 4, pp. 37-48:

Israel, Judah and Jew.

Today, there is much teaching on the subject of Bible prophecy by theologians, and it is important that there should be. It is very important for every student of the Bible to understand Biblical prophecies. However, there is one area of prophecy which is vital for us to understand fully, an area which theologians have either overlooked or failed to study adequately. This concerns the prophecies God made with His people Israel, and the distinction the Bible makes between the two houses, Israel and Judah, and their relationship with the Jews. Until this distinction is clearly understood, a great portion of the Biblewill remain a closed book.


Subscribe to RSS - Miscellany