131 Comments
User's avatar
V. Dominique's avatar

Anyone who uses the word "denier" to describe people who may question an accepted narrative loses a few IQ points.

Expand full comment
Emil O. W. Kirkegaard's avatar

"holocaust deniers (or revisionists)". I am not going to write 2 terms every time. You can use that big brain of yours to do a mental swap.

Expand full comment
Inconvenient Truth's avatar

Emil, I am a fan of yours, but you really shouldn't lump denial and revisionism together. Is holocaust denial really on par with disbelieving that Jews were turned into soap? Is questioning the six million number the same as holocaust denial?

Expand full comment
Sectionalism Archive's avatar

Holocaust revisionism isn't necessarily founded on a conspiracy theory though, while Holocaust denial almost always is.

Expand full comment
Emil O. W. Kirkegaard's avatar

Usually it is.

Expand full comment
Helm's avatar

Doesn't people conspire though? It's not necesary for it to be some elite run effort. One can simply observe politics and clearly see that masses of people use information in conspiratorial manner twisting it to conform to their view every day, it's not like academics leaves that at the door, rather it's the opposite and their work is full of it.

Expand full comment
Zero Contradictions's avatar

What if I said "race denier" to refer to blank slatists or people who deny race realism?

Expand full comment
משכיל בינה's avatar

Your commenters suck so much it's unreal.

Expand full comment
Emil O. W. Kirkegaard's avatar

Yeah, it's embarrassing. I will ban the worst offenders (I'm pretty chill with moderation, but if a person's posts is just insulting people and schizoposting, then they can go do that somewhere else). Maybe this is how Hanania got to be so cringe is that his own retarded followers made him cringe and he over-corrected.

Expand full comment
Owatihsug's avatar

The political rage-bait will always attract Holocaust deniers. Since they don't have anything meaningful to say, they secretly love an opportunity to chimp out like on Twitter. I think it would be great if you continued posting high-quality statistical content while incorporating political elements in a more subtle, sophisticated manner—similar to Peter Frost, Razib Khan, and Slate Star Codex. This will almost certainly drive away the low-IQ edgelords, much like how playing classical music drives the homeless away from the metro. I think you’ve already mastered the hard part—the math-heavy content—which makes your work pretty substantial. and likely to attract a thoughtful audience like Slate Star Codex.

Expand full comment
Emil O. W. Kirkegaard's avatar

There's a lot of overlap with SSC. My top overlaps are:

Aporia 32%

SSC/ASC 23%

Cremieux 22%

Razib 21%

The Free Press 19%

Expand full comment
Roberto Artellini's avatar

Best politics to survive on online world. Digital Zionism is - unironically - the way. Exactly like immigration restrictionism is the way to keep a safe society IRL.

Expand full comment
DayByDay's avatar

And here we got a literal Jew. Who hates anybody who questions go figure.😂

Expand full comment
DayByDay's avatar

I got a IQ of 132. This study essentially cooks down that people who dont believe anything status quo is less intelligent. Because if you are smart you would conform regardless of validity. You dont just have to be smart you have to be dissagreeable etc. Same case as geniuses got the personality traits of criminals.

Expand full comment
Realist's avatar

"I got a(sis)IQ of 132. This study essentially cooks down that people who dont(sic) believe anything status quo is less intelligent. Because if you are smart you would conform regardless of validity. You dont(sic) just have to be smart you have to be dissagreeable(sic) etc. Same case as geniuses got the personality traits of criminals."

Your grammar sure does not reflect an IQ of 132.

Expand full comment
DayByDay's avatar

🤯 Lol it doesnt matter it isnt a formal text. Trying to get my point across. Just writing in a contracted way. You are acting like a English teacher with a IQ of 105.

Expand full comment
Realist's avatar

You got your point across OK!

Expand full comment
DayByDay's avatar

Good to hear

Expand full comment
Realist's avatar

What didn't come across well was an impression of your education or broad intelligence.

Expand full comment
DayByDay's avatar

For sake of argument how would someone with less intelligence be able to assess that?

Expand full comment
Commandant Rhodes's avatar

-criticises someone’s grammar

-can’t spell ‘sic’

lol lmao back to the funny farm with you

Expand full comment
Joe Boston's avatar

Perhaps the most intelligent holohoax deniers are aware of the potential dangers in revealing their political beliefs and would never submit to such a study?

Expand full comment
Monohedron's avatar

Highly emotional antisemitic comments proving you right.

Expand full comment
Ed Kretschmer's avatar

The measured IQ's of the Nazi Top military brass and Hitler himself were quite high. If the Jews in the concentration camps were used as slave labor to manufacture war essentials like munitions etc. why would the Germans spend the money and waste the time of the desperately needed manpower on the front lines in order to holocaust their slave workforce?

Wasn't it bad enough that the Jews (and Gypsies etc.) were imprisoned and forced to labor for the German war effort? Logically it seems undeniable that killing your workforce is a bad idea. The Nazi's may have been evil, but they weren't stupid.

Demonizing the enemy is standard procedure. It's not low IQ people who doubt the holocaust, it's the midwits who want to be socially acceptable who twist logic and common sense to believe that Hitler would holocaust 6 million slave laborers.

WW2 was an abomination for the whole western world. Both sides committed atrocities. Believing that Hitler is the ULTIMATE EVIL and was responsible for 6 million innocent deaths is not a very nuanced position to hold. Drawing any conclusions about the people who don't believe the holocaust happened is irresponsible. There are multiple ways to view any situation - how closely have you personally looked at the evidence? Knee jerk belief that it happened or that it didn't happen has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with emotion.

Expand full comment
Ferien's avatar

Cremeiux made a post on IQ of top Nazi leaders and concluded that even amongst those, there was negative correlation between IQ and antisemitism.

Germans also did some retarded things in war. Like using jet aircraft as bomber instead of fighter and putting effort into engineering giant tanks and extermely wide (2x) gauge railroad

Expand full comment
Dan's avatar

Fascinating how challenges to jewish power in civilisation that wasn't built by/for jews & doesn't belong to jews is constantly framed as low status & low IQ. It's almost like they seek to slander instead of actually addressing the claims & grievances because they know they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Just as jews wouldn't allow White nationalists to rule over Israel in an anti-jewish, pro-White manner & every single person would instantly understand the need for that from a jewish perspective if jews were to appeal to justice & sovereignty for their people. There would be no shouts of "low IQ" because it's obviously beneficial for a host people to not have hostile alien interests ruling over them.

I wonder if Cremeiux maybe had some sort of ethnic interest that compelled him to do that? Hmm...

Expand full comment
Ferien's avatar

I remember when I told my friend that IQ correlated positively with anorexia, and he said it cannot be, because anorexia is obviously bad. Do you agree with him?

Smoking is bad, but just 100 years ago smoking and IQ were positively correlated.

Expand full comment
Ben Koan's avatar

Nothing says "reasonable argument" like refusing to capitalize a proper noun out of spite.

Expand full comment
Realist's avatar

"Like using jet aircraft as bomber instead of fighter..."

The Germans had both. The fighter was the Me 262. Germany was the first to use both in combat.

Expand full comment
varactyl's avatar

And to state the obvious, many of the "high IQ" Nazis were just military men, and you would expect the generals in an institution like the Wehrmacht not to be imbeciles. Despite attracting some intelligent people (the Nazi party was popular with college students and doctors) the intellectual appeal of Nazism was always low, and plenty of non-Jews with brains emigrated before the war.

Expand full comment
Dan's avatar

Hitler was only "evil" if you put NS Germany in a vacuum, accept the narrative of the victors, & you don't know the first thing about Hitler's beliefs & personality. The allies were undeniably more evil just in WW2 war crimes alone.

Expand full comment
Eugine Nier's avatar

> The allies were undeniably more evil just in WW2 war crimes alone.

Stalin, yes. The Western allies, certainly not.

Expand full comment
Siberian Cat's avatar

The Western Allies bombed the hell out of German cities, and Churchill was the first to start it.

Let's add the nuclear bombs used on Japan, and Bengal famine.

Not evil enough for you?

Expand full comment
Eugine Nier's avatar

> The Western Allies bombed the hell out of German cities

Standard practice since WWI.

Expand full comment
Sean Lydon's avatar

Except the most prominent ‘denier’ believes the figure of 6m to be pretty much correct. What he disputes is AH’s direct culpability. He doesn’t at all deny the deliberate and systematic mass murder of millions of Jews. Plenty of detail and documentary evidence in his book Hitler’s War.

Expand full comment
M Kevin Cook's avatar

"most prominent" is an appeal to authority, which as far as i can tell is a common fallacy among high IQ folks.

Expand full comment
Sean Lydon's avatar

Historical arguments necessarily “appeal to authority” in so far as they depend on the opinion of historians who themselves cite documentary and/or direct testimony - in Irving’s case both - as a condition of *being* historians. Use of ‘fallacy’ here is a category error in that *historical* arguments couldn’t in principle be logically watertight.

Expand full comment
si vis pacem, para bellum's avatar

So first a COVID vaccine believer and now a Holocaust believer (and believer really is the right word)...

Man, instead of simply trying to analize whatever data wherever you find them you should maybe start researching a bit the validity of said data and in general the matter at hand.

Never forget the concept of GIGO.

I replied to your question about the vaccine but I was late and I don't know if you even read it so here I am giving you a "random" passable place where to start getting some knowledge about the Faux-locaust: https://waltking.substack.com/p/auschwitz-six-facts-and-seven-questions

What a disappointment you are turning out to be...

Expand full comment
Emil O. W. Kirkegaard's avatar

Maybe you should leave and never come back.

Expand full comment
Realist's avatar

"Maybe you should leave and never come back."

Emil, that is below you. Don't start sounding like Razib Khan.

Expand full comment
M Kevin Cook's avatar

✌🏻

Expand full comment
swiley's avatar

I've gotten a 130 on a proctored IQ test and am a holocaust skeptic (maybe not complete denier but it's pretty obvious to me that the popular story of the holocaust is largely made up.) I'm not sure why you're assuming there's a normal distribution here. So much of this stuff has a multimodal distribution people even make memes about it.

Expand full comment
Eugine Nier's avatar

> I've gotten a 130 on a proctored IQ test

Yes, I'm sure you have.

Expand full comment
Matt's avatar

You freaks are pathetic 🤣🤣

Expand full comment
swiley's avatar

<insult> <insult> <emoji> <emoji>

Expand full comment
Sectionalism Archive's avatar

I assume most of the people who were upset were assuming you meant Holocaust deniers in the Western World. Saying "Holocaust denial is low IQ because it is popular in certain low IQ countries that coincidentally have an anti-Jewish agenda" is not very meaningful or productive. Lumping revisionists and deniers in with each other is ridiculous because technically even official Holocaust organizations are "revisionists" who deny a great deal of the testimony at Nuremburg relating to Dachau being a death-camp.

Expand full comment
Nico Bruin's avatar

Now, one might claim that holocaust denial is special and doesn't follow this general pattern. So let's look at the world map and see if that looks sensible."

Come on, you must acknowledge this is extremely flimsy.

Sub Saharan Africa is below north Africa as you mentioned. And holocaust denial in China is low.

How can you reasonably infer anything other than that specific cultural/religious factors in the Islamic world are the main cause of this?

There's no Jews in sub Saharan Africa and China. There are Jews in the middle east fighting a religious conflict with Islam.

The number you end up with is bs.

The question that people are interested in is whether or not Holocaust deniers are higher or lower IQ than their surrounding population, and by how much.

And there's simply no good research on that.

So why not just admit that?

Expand full comment
DayByDay's avatar

Next article: Humus makes you statistically low IQ bc Muslims eat it.

Expand full comment
Dan's avatar

On top of that, I wouldn't be surprised if you were to pick through actual holocaust "deniers" aka truth tellers in the Middle East, you would find that they're above average intelligence as well.

It's not like most of the Middle East are "deniers", it's not like it can just be tied to their average intelligence.

That's how flimsy this "estimate" is & it pretty much amounts to slander.

Expand full comment
UBERSOY's avatar

EHC posting 🧲🤓💯

Expand full comment
DayByDay's avatar

Harnaniapilled

Expand full comment
Carl McNulty's avatar

"I insinuated people were low IQ so they insulted me." Shocking.

To say Muslims who get killed by Jews don't believe in the Holocaust and are representative of the world's Holocaust deniers is blatantly unintelligent, if not dishonest. To say nothing of the countries where it is illegal to deny. You're also shooting an imaginary messenger since I doubt you're talking to Muslims and you certainly aren't engaging the argument. How are you going to argue anyone else is low IQ when your argument is this bad? You even used the ADL as a source.

Expand full comment
Matt's avatar

You freaks are also ugly!!

Expand full comment
CSFurious's avatar

"The Hoax of the 20th Century" was written by a professor of engineering named Arthur K. Butz. That book "redpilled" me about this issue. What is Professor's Butz's IQ? LOL!

Expand full comment
Ben Koan's avatar

It's true. Engineering professors write the best history books, just like history professors write the best engineering books.

Expand full comment
Jeremy Wickins's avatar

I feel dirty after reading so many anti-Jewish comments. What is wrong with these people?

Expand full comment
M Kevin Cook's avatar

If the truth is that less than half a million Jews died in ww2 Germany- how is it anti-jewish to acknowledge it? Is there some way in which that would hurt Jews? If so, how and why?

Expand full comment
Harold's avatar

Who is this article written to appease? It just seems pathetic. When you don’t have the data to smear white westerners who think the holocaust is bullshit, you just cobble together some data slop to fit your predetermined conclusion I guess. What an embarrassment.

Expand full comment
Matt's avatar

That’s why u people are becoming a minority!!😂

God is punishing u for your crimes!!

Expand full comment
True European's avatar

While the the Ottoman Empire carried out the Armenian genocide soldiers during ww1 Jews were still holding top posts in it and endured virtually no discrimination or harm. They don't want the Armenians to hold the title of the 1st victims of a 20th century European genocide.

Expand full comment