The technique Atkinson used is analogous to that used by molecular biologists. Diversity of base pair variation is greatest in sub-Saharan Africa, strongly suggestive of an older population group there. But I wonder about the statistical strength of Atkinson's inter-population calculations using variations amongst 100 phonemes, as compared with genome-based calculations using variations amongst a bit over 3 billion base pairs.
The anti-Mubarek forces should offer a compromise to test the interim government's intention, and ability, to open up the system. The anti-Mubarek forces should demand that they be given 1 hour/day of uncensored TV time, and 2 pages/day in Al Ahram. After one month of unhampered reporting, the anti-gov't forces would agree to exit the square. Even given the constraints that a screwed-up American Middle East policy has set, the Obama gov't would probably support such a compromise, which at least has the ability to reach millions of Egyptians with scant knowledge of the uprising and its causes. Such a compromise would test the resolve of both sides to move toward a peaceful and thoughtful resolution of a crisis that's been stewing for more than a decade.
By Williams' logic, all of the Fox News personalities should get the same treatment he got.
In this whole fiasco the thing about his statement that is most egregious has been glossed over. I heard many non-racist people shortly after 9/11 say that Muslims, or even Arab-looking persons, on airplanes scared them. But this is 10 years later. But here's the worst part of his statement: Juan appears to think that anyone who wears clothing we associate with Muslims is identifying "first and foremost" as a Muslim. This is an elementary error. Juan cannot have had any accurate sense of where the scary people he referred to originated. People simply wear the garb of the society in which they are embedded. They go along to get along. Hence, people in other countries can spot Americans easily because of our recognizable dress code. Thus, the claim that everyone expresses a religious (or nationalist) identification as the primary reason for adopting local dress codes is ludicrous. And this type of false pigeonholing is bigoted.
The technique Atkinson used is analogous to that used by molecular biologists. Diversity of base pair variation is greatest in sub-Saharan Africa, strongly suggestive of an older population group there. But I wonder about the statistical strength of Atkinson's inter-population calculations using variations amongst 100 phonemes, as compared with genome-based calculations using variations amongst a bit over 3 billion base pairs.
The anti-Mubarek forces should offer a compromise to test the interim government's intention, and ability, to open up the system. The anti-Mubarek forces should demand that they be given 1 hour/day of uncensored TV time, and 2 pages/day in Al Ahram. After one month of unhampered reporting, the anti-gov't forces would agree to exit the square. Even given the constraints that a screwed-up American Middle East policy has set, the Obama gov't would probably support such a compromise, which at least has the ability to reach millions of Egyptians with scant knowledge of the uprising and its causes. Such a compromise would test the resolve of both sides to move toward a peaceful and thoughtful resolution of a crisis that's been stewing for more than a decade.
Nice parallels pointed to here. But one minor point, Guadalcanal is in the Solomon Islands.
By Williams' logic, all of the Fox News personalities should get the same treatment he got.
In this whole fiasco the thing about his statement that is most egregious has been glossed over. I heard many non-racist people shortly after 9/11 say that Muslims, or even Arab-looking persons, on airplanes scared them. But this is 10 years later. But here's the worst part of his statement: Juan appears to think that anyone who wears clothing we associate with Muslims is identifying "first and foremost" as a Muslim. This is an elementary error. Juan cannot have had any accurate sense of where the scary people he referred to originated. People simply wear the garb of the society in which they are embedded. They go along to get along. Hence, people in other countries can spot Americans easily because of our recognizable dress code. Thus, the claim that everyone expresses a religious (or nationalist) identification as the primary reason for adopting local dress codes is ludicrous. And this type of false pigeonholing is bigoted.