A Times guest contributer turns to Google Search data for insight into American parenting:
Google, Tell Me. Is My Son a Genius?
Seth Stephens-Davidowitz
MORE than a decade into the 21st century, we would like to think that American parents have similar standards and similar dreams for their sons and daughters. But my study of anonymous, aggregate data from Google searches suggests that contemporary American parents are far more likely to want their boys smart and their girls skinny.
Maybe. On to the data!
Start with intelligence. It’s hardly surprising that parents of young children are often excited at the thought that their child may be gifted. In fact, of all Google searches starting “Is my 2-year-old,” the most common next word is “gifted.” But this question is not asked equally about young boys and young girls. Parents are two and a half times more likely to ask “Is my son gifted?” than “Is my daughter gifted?” Parents show a similar bias when using other phrases related to intelligence that they may shy away from saying aloud, like, “Is my son a genius?”
First, a methodological quibble. WITH the hyphens, I can confirm his assertion about "two-year-old" and "gifted". Eliminate the hyphens, however, and the top suggestions are "autistic", "smart", "advanced", and "color-blind".
And as to what people are thinking as they type these questions, I don't know; the top suggested completion for "Does the sun rise" is "in the west", which I hope is not what most people believe.
As to children and intelligence, do keep in mind that boys show a higher variance in measured intelligence:
In fact, males and females appear equally intelligent, on average. But on standardized intelligence tests, more males than females get off-the-chart test scores—in both directions. The greater variance of males on intelligence tests is one of the best-established findings in psychometric literature. More males are mentally deficient, and more are freakishly brilliant. The difference in variation isn't huge, but it is large enough and consistent enough that a fair selection process should produce more boys than girls in a gifted and talented program.
So, a daughter who can sit still, pay attention in class and get good grades is less of a novelty than a similarly-capable boy. Consequently, perhaps such a daughter provokes fewer Google searches. However, the author manages a "Fox Butterfield, is that you" moment:
Are parents picking up on legitimate differences between young girls and boys? Perhaps young boys are more likely than young girls to use big words or otherwise show objective signs of giftedness? Nope. If anything, it’s the opposite. At young ages, when parents most often search about possible giftedness, girls have consistently been shown to have larger vocabularies and use more complex sentences. In American schools, girls are 11 percent more likely than boys to be in gifted programs. Despite all this, parents looking around the dinner table appear to see more gifted boys than girls.
And what about the other end of the scale?
Parents were more likely to ask about sons rather than daughters on every matter that I tested related to intelligence, including its absence. There are more searches for “is my son behind” or “stupid” than comparable searches for daughters. Searches with negative words like “stupid” and “behind,” however, are less skewed toward sons than searches with positive words.
Fine.
The author switches to appearance. I have no doubt that society, and hence parents, put greater emphasis on a woman's appearance, but I will quibble anyway.
What concerns do parents disproportionately have for their daughters? Primarily, anything related to appearance. Consider questions about a child’s weight. Parents Google “Is my daughter overweight?” roughly twice as frequently as they Google “Is my son overweight?” Just as with giftedness, this gender bias is not grounded in reality. About 30 percent of girls are overweight, while 33 percent of boys are. Even though scales measure more overweight boys than girls, parents see — or worry about — overweight girls much more often than overweight boys.
Hmm. I recall overhearing one high school lad telling another "I'm not overweight, I'm a lineman!". I have my doubts about high school football, but I also have my doubts about BMI measurements for athletes, especially male athletes. In any case, whatever the actual ratio of truly overweight boys to girls, I think the author's qualification is important (my emphasis):
...[P]arents see — or worry about — overweight girls much more often than overweight boys.
Is excessive use of hyphens the elitist form of twerking?
Is internet confirmation a child is gifted the preschool version of credentials?
The question not raised in the article: do parents keep searching until they get an answer that their child is gifted and skinny? How many clicks to confirm the rollypolly lead paint eating rug rat is headed for full Ivy status?
Posted by: henry | January 19, 2014 at 09:41 AM
Dana's parents
'Dear Google, will my son grow up to be a boring psuedo intellectual and internet troll?"
Posted by: windansea | January 19, 2014 at 09:53 AM
Well, I think there are variables in this that the study author didn't see.
Concern about wight with girls is tied to that of women, who obsess over weight far more than men. Who is doing the searching about these children? My bet is the mothers.
Posted by: Miss Marple | January 19, 2014 at 10:00 AM
I['m going to get Dr Oz to proclaim my miracle wrinkle lifting, instant orgasm and weight loss drug a modern miracle on his show and then we'll see google hits like crazy. You betcha
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 19, 2014 at 10:00 AM
How does one discover what searches are used with what frequency?
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2014 at 10:01 AM
DOT
google trends shows what people search for
Posted by: windansea | January 19, 2014 at 10:04 AM
google isn't working for me today and facebook and yahoo mail search are glitch..Sun spots or hackers?
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 19, 2014 at 10:06 AM
I should like to evaluate any Succubus arising from the unholy coupling of Perle and Feldman. The negative energy might produce a Wormhoile, and I would like to knnow what geography to avoid.
Posted by: donald pleasance | January 19, 2014 at 10:21 AM
The entire George Stephanopolus panel is going nuts because Mary Maitlin just said: "Barack Obama is Dick Cheney" when referring to the NSA stuff. They cannot talk about the subject - because that is the only subject. It's hysterical.
Posted by: Jane-Rebel Alliance1 | January 19, 2014 at 10:31 AM
That's painful category error, in so many ways.
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 10:36 AM
I often criticize Maitlin for her choice in a spouse and going full Bozo the Clown with makeup; but that's an industrial strength slatter comment.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | January 19, 2014 at 10:47 AM
Captain Hate, it.s sort of like Matalin tossed a hand grenade into a vipers nest.
I bet she has been planning to drop that little bomb for at least a week.
Ha!
Posted by: miss Marple | January 19, 2014 at 10:51 AM
Well it's a zinger, but Cheney well understood the why these programs were instituted. Obama still doesn't
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 10:52 AM
Juan Williams is going full retard protecting Rodham and Rice on Benghazi. Kim Strassell and Brit are firing back at him.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | January 19, 2014 at 10:53 AM
Yes narc, it's more glib than insightful; but as MM said, she understood what would happen if she lobbed it into the hive.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | January 19, 2014 at 10:56 AM
the murkowski partisan at the Horde, always pushes to Top Men or Top Gals.
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 10:59 AM
When I show my PhD 'big data' analytics wife links like this to the NYT, she briefly reads and says 'lies, damnable lies and stats' it's worthless stuff the NYT is pushing, quelle surprise.
Maitlin calls JEF 'cheney'? That's a big smear of Cheney IMO.
Posted by: NKonIPad | January 19, 2014 at 11:11 AM
Well yes, we know that, of course you to speak networkese, where the Law Giver, only determines justly,
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 11:15 AM
Is Perle really a separate entity? If Obama is Cheney, maybe Feldman is Perle as Feldwoman. She has the cash for change, but I can't picture the violate result.
Posted by: oops | January 19, 2014 at 11:17 AM
The current President has proven that "larger vocabularies and use more complex sentences" is NOT a sign of intelligence or giftedness.
Posted by: Bruce | January 19, 2014 at 11:26 AM
Even thirty years after his passing, Scoop Jackson is still the Emmanuel Goldstein, he was Lieberman with a network, the heart of the Anti Soviet impulse in the Democratic party,
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 11:26 AM
Bing, runs a narrower, but more neutral search parameters then google,
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 11:29 AM
Google lets a whole lot of squirrels, carry the dots away;
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/01/core_al_qaeda_nonsense_the_big_mac_problem.html
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 11:31 AM
(cross post)
A great report today at the end of Fox News Sunday's "Power Player of the Week" concerning 3-D printing in the medical field. (Last segment of FNS.)
In particular, the piece focused on reproducing organs (e.g. the heart) prior to performing any medical procedure (e.g stent emplacement). The docs say, being able to hold an accurate facsimile of the (damaged) heart in one's hand, before conducting the procedure is immensely helpful. So far, the 3-D printing of hearts has been done seven times.* The doc said that replacement hearts are not yet being printed, that doing so was a ways off, but now a case of being an eventuality rather than fiction.
*no insight re effect of ACA on this medical advance.
Posted by: Sandy Sunnydaze | January 19, 2014 at 11:31 AM
"Juan, you ignorant slut!"
I'm glad someone watches these shows because to me they have devolved into propaganda wars and for the most part poor ones.
I lost it the other night when Megyn Kelly had some communist AA Congressbitch on to retort on some BS Obama claim and the party line just spewed from said bitch's mouth.
One of the greatest takeaways from reading the reviews of Gates book and my own experiences is the complete removal from reality of most of Congress. It is really becoming Crazyville.
So we have the mouthpieces on TV and the little satraps in Congress and the Emperor with new clothes in the White House and there are no grown ups to be found.
The whole place has gone full retard.
Posted by: matt | January 19, 2014 at 11:39 AM
That is nothing shot of remarkable, sandy, Vinik, who wrote that period piece, on late 18th and early 19th century history 'the Great Upheaval,'detailed the backstory to the Soviet collapse, in 'On the Brink' recall in the early 80s, all the cognocenti, Galbraith Samuelson, et al, all insist the USSR was as dependable as a Swiss Watch andas cuddly as a kitten, the spectrum of acceptable democratic views on the subject was from A (Carter) to AA (Solon of Scranton, Lurch) to AAA (Lion of Camelot, Obama)
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM
True, matt, one of the lesser known details, which I'm sure the reviewers didn't get to, and probably couldn't understand, was this deal with benchmarks on Iraqi progress.
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 11:45 AM
Well I decided Christiana Figueres' foot-in-mouth comment of the past week was a good lead-in to the post I planned all along. The UN mindset. Let Al Gore, Christiana, and Maurice Strong decide what's good for the world. All altruism all the time.
http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/finale-of-the-dangerous-mindset-trilogy-spreading-the-contagion-to-fundamentally-alter-how-we-think-and-live/
And I truly hate discussions about 'giftedness' in children. I was bad and told my son when he was about 8 that people in the top 1% of intelligence still have plenty of company so it is no way to define yourself.
Red is quite thin and gets very upset with adults who feel the need to comment to a teenage age girl they do not know about "how nice it must be to be that thin." Of course she tells them 'thanks' and then rages at me at the mindsets being created.
Posted by: rse | January 19, 2014 at 11:47 AM
Google, "Is Barack Obama..." and suggestion number 7 is a lizard.
When the answer is so obvious.
Posted by: peter | January 19, 2014 at 11:50 AM
The fallacy is assuming that Google searches are representative of what (in this case) parents are curious about, rather than simply representative of what people searching on Google are interested in.
For example, you can't rightly assume that parents as a whole are less interested in whether their son is overweight. For all we know, parents of chubby boys already that they're chubby and thus don't need to ask. Or perhaps, they don't think or are worried that Junior is a bit on the chunky said and as a result also don't bother searching Google.
All this doesn't come as a surprise. Google has long sought to portray itself as being far more important and socially critical than it is. And the public, being the sheep that we are (proof: Obama winning two terms), readily accepts the fiction Google peddles.
Posted by: Steve | January 19, 2014 at 11:51 AM
The greater variance of males on intelligence tests is one of the best-established findings in psychometric literature. More males are...freakishly brilliant. The difference in variation isn't huge, but it is large enough and consistent enough that a fair selection process should produce more boys than girls in a gifted and talented program.
...
In American schools, girls are 11 percent more likely than boys to be in gifted programs.
That could be a story. Not in the NYT, of course. Perhaps an organization that preferred reporting to journalism (or -olism).
Posted by: bgates | January 19, 2014 at 11:51 AM
Clarice
More on the Sinaloa cartel.
Six years on: The mysterious crash of Cocaine2
http://www.madcowprod.com/2013/09/27/six-years-on-the-mysterious-crash-of-cocaine2/
Posted by: Truthbetold | January 19, 2014 at 11:52 AM
For NK,
Chelsea 2 ManU 0 at the half. Eto'o has both.
Posted by: Jack s Back! (From 10:00 Mass) | January 19, 2014 at 11:54 AM
Here's some breaking news: you can't be too thin or too rich.
I read it all in Ecclesiastes.
Posted by: MarkO | January 19, 2014 at 11:58 AM
Bing doesn't even suggest Barry is a lizard in its top 8, for what it's worth.
However its first suggestion is;
Is Barack Obama.....the antichrist. :)
I would add "gifted", "a genius" and "fat" are not in the top eight either.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 19, 2014 at 12:00 PM
The Dallas Morning News has the full story on Wendy Davis and her difficult early years. A mom who has to give full custody of her kids to her spouse in a divorce among other points to ponder. Her ex spouse says she filed for divorce the day after he made the last payment on her Harvard law degree. A golddigger who was able to convince a court by her behavior that she was not a fit caregiver to her children. This is who Democrats are offering up. Babykiller to boot. Toast.
Posted by: Gmax | January 19, 2014 at 12:01 PM
Reading Lifson's AT article at narc's 11:31 and I have this terrible feeling that the GOP will find a way to not make Hillary stand up to her incompetence that contributed to Benghazi.
No more Mitt's.
That should be a bumper sticker.
Posted by: Jack s Back! (From 10:00 Mass) | January 19, 2014 at 12:01 PM
And here are the top eight Bing suggestions for "is michelle obama...";
is michelle obama pregnant
is michelle obama a man
is michelle obama really pregnant
is michelle obama a transvestite
is michelle obama really a man
is michelle obama a muslim
is michelle obama a hermaphrodite
is michelle obama ugly
Hah!
Posted by: Ignatz | January 19, 2014 at 12:02 PM
He may be an Arquillian,
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 12:05 PM
Fat jokes about Christie are so dang mean !
Posted by: Sandy relief for my buds only. | January 19, 2014 at 12:10 PM
We're deep in the Bearded Spock universe;
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/01/obama-says-he-would-not-allow-his-imaginary-trayvon-looking-son-to-play-pro-football/
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 12:12 PM
Repeated several hundred times they can be.
Occasionally they are not, as I said at the time, since I had made them myself.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 19, 2014 at 12:13 PM
Stay Puft's other offenses are more numerous, as with this propensity;
http://weaselzippers.us/wapo-decides-ft-hood-not-a-terror-attack/
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 12:18 PM
Maitlin seems to have paid for facework by trading in Carville's balls.
Did her face crack today? Too bad they don't have brain-lift. That might be a good trade for two freaks of nature.
Posted by: Woof, woof. | January 19, 2014 at 12:20 PM
I watched James and Mary last night on Book TV. They are on a book tour. Mary's facework doesn't look good. I give her credit for being loyal during GHW Bush's 1992 campaign. She is pretty good with the zingers. I think she's at a point where she doesn't give a carp.
Posted by: Marlene | January 19, 2014 at 12:27 PM
But we can trust him on the NSA, right:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/01/good-grief-obama-lied-repeatedly-about-global-warming-too-video/
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 12:34 PM
Since every pro football player is at least 20 years old, I wonder how Obama would prevent the imaginary Trayvon from taking part.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2014 at 12:36 PM
Maybe Colin Powell was somehow involved;
http://weaselzippers.us/marylands-obamacare-website-sent-customers-to-seattle-pottery-store/
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 12:37 PM
As if he knew more there
http://news.yahoo.com/myth-reality-lone-survivor-114500674--politics.html
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 12:50 PM
I think mixed martial arts was his calling anyway, DoT.
Posted by: boatbuilder | January 19, 2014 at 12:52 PM
Not in context, NK. No slur, and absolutely hysterical.
Posted by: Jane on Ipad | January 19, 2014 at 12:57 PM
Matt,
To me, the most interesting thing about the Sunday shows is what they choose to talk about, not what they say. Today other than on Fox, Benghazi was no issue, but Chris Christie was. Oh and Guiliani was great on the subject of Christie.
And the NSA, which was all about nothing.
Posted by: Jane on Ipad | January 19, 2014 at 01:04 PM
the murkowski partisan at the Horde, always pushes to Top Men or Top Gals.
So much for responding to that idiot. Let's not hold anybody responsible for their performance and make excuses for him or her. Manhattan Project? Unpossible.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 19, 2014 at 01:07 PM
Wendy Davis article:
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/headlines/20140118-as-wendy-davis-touts-life-story-in-race-for-governor-key-facts-blurred.ece
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2014 at 01:09 PM
Yes, I figure that's likely;
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/01/19/rep-mike-mccaul-snowden-was-cultivated-by-a-foreign-power/
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 01:17 PM
There are people who still go to the Obamacare web site?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/01/computer-security-expert-obamacare-website-security-much-worse-off-today-video/
-----------------------------------------------
Obama lied articles can be about any subject.
No need to just limit it to a few of them.
Posted by: pagar | January 19, 2014 at 01:18 PM
[email protected]:01,
If the article is accurate, one of the kids who Abortion Barbie (D-TX) gave up to her ex wasn't even his.Posted by: Dave (in MA) | January 19, 2014 at 01:22 PM
I call her Gosnell's girl friday, of course you have to know who Gosnell his.
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 01:23 PM
Might be something anyone who wanted to point out "What difference it made" could use>
http://weaselzippers.us/judge-jeanine-skewers-hillary-for-her-failures-in-benghazi-you-knew-it/
Posted by: pagar | January 19, 2014 at 01:24 PM
For those who don't have time to read David Remnick's piece on Obama in the New Yorker, here are selected quotations:
That morning, while playing basketball at F.B.I. headquarters, Obama went up for a rebound and came down empty-handed....This had happened before. In 2010, after taking a self-described “shellacking” in the midterm elections, Obama caught an elbow in the mouth while playing ball at Fort McNair.
...
Obama was sitting at his desk watching the Miami Dolphins–Carolina Panthers game.
...
Obama chewed furtively on a piece of Nicorette.
...
‘I’m gonna get up at seven and write this chapter—and at nine we’ll play golf.’
...
“How many we got out there?”
“Five hundred. Five-fifty.”
“Five-fifty?” Obama said, walking toward the wings of the stage. “What are we talking about? Politics? Can’t we talk about something else? Sports?”
...
He and the President toss a football around, they shoot baskets, they shoot the shit. In his twenties, Nicholson was living in Boston and working as a bartender and as a clerk in a windsurfing-equipment shop, where he met John Kerry. He moved to Nantucket and worked as a caddie. He carried the Senator’s clubs and Kerry invited him to come to D.C. Since taking the job with Obama, in 2009, Nicholson has played golf with the President well over a hundred times.
-that's all I can stomach. He's a horrible, horrible person, and he's having a delightful time playing as he destroys the world.
Posted by: bgates | January 19, 2014 at 01:30 PM
"The current President has proven that "larger vocabularies and use more complex sentences" is NOT a sign of intelligence or giftedness."
Bruce,
If the fellas who developed the concept of verbal intelligence had been gifted in pattern recognition and logic they would never have given equal weight to verbal IQ. Prolixity in furtherance of obscuring intent and creating opacity does not denote a capacity to solve a problem, let alone accurately assess likely long term consequences of poor decisions.
Two year old African Gray parrots can possess the vocabulary of four year old humans. The weight of verbal IQ in SAT testing just provides more gullible victims for the Professor Featherpasser Thieves Guild to rob at good old Whackadoodle U. They may wind up penniless for life but they have all the words to the Whackadoodle U. Coexistence Chant memorized to the letter.
Posted by: Account Deleted | January 19, 2014 at 01:30 PM
"I wonder how Obama would prevent the imaginary Trayvon from taking part."
Executive Order? IRS harassment? Hold his breath?
He has some surprises coming.
Posted by: MarkO | January 19, 2014 at 01:34 PM
--Prolixity in furtherance of obscuring intent and creating opacity does not denote a capacity to solve a problem--
Sorry, Rick, but that phrase, particularly coming from you, has me ROFLing. ;)
Posted by: AliceH | January 19, 2014 at 01:37 PM
Darnok when the wall fell, that Next Generation episode makes as much if not more sense then current policy. so the hunt for the Stay Puft
was the great subject of the day,
Posted by: narciso | January 19, 2014 at 01:40 PM
The only time I get frustrated is when folks act like it’s not complicated and there aren’t some real tough decisions, and are sanctimonious, as if somehow these aren’t complicated questions.
Barack F'ing Obama on national security. The real enemy is sanctimony.
Posted by: bgates | January 19, 2014 at 01:46 PM
Fascinating, Clarice. Many thanks.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2014 at 01:50 PM
There go those damn "folks". Acting up again. Time for a nicorette break and a few hoops with Reggie.
Posted by: Jim Rhoads f/k/a vnjagvet | January 19, 2014 at 02:15 PM
Isn't Sanctimony when you marry but don't have sex?
Posted by: Jack s Back! (From 10:00 Mass) | January 19, 2014 at 02:16 PM
narciso, right you are about Scoop and the bien pensants.
You're entirely welcome, DoT.
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 19, 2014 at 02:22 PM
Legal Insurrection has a quote from a Wendy Davis supporter.
“Wendy is tremendously ambitious,” he said, speaking only on condition of anonymity in order to give what he called an honest assessment. “She’s not going to let family or raising children or anything else get in her way.”
As they say, I don't think that word means what you think it means...
What would someone who is not a supporter say of her? Sheesh.
Posted by: Gmax | January 19, 2014 at 02:25 PM
Just a darned minute, Rick B. If it weren't for verbal intelligence portions of tests, I'd still be in second grade.
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 19, 2014 at 02:26 PM
Does the article you linked give any insight into the identity of the jeenyuses who hatched the Sinaloa plot, Clarice?
Posted by: Jim Rhoads f/k/a vnjagvet | January 19, 2014 at 02:28 PM
Wendy Davis says,"My language should be tighter."
LOL
Posted by: Gmax | January 19, 2014 at 02:33 PM
afternoon all.
Posted by: [email protected] | January 19, 2014 at 02:39 PM
trying to catch up. did I miss anything?
Posted by: [email protected] | January 19, 2014 at 02:40 PM
Jim R, I have no idea. My guess is that some jerks --perhaps on the take or not--took a small, basically intel op and turned it into an M & M corporation type boondoggle.
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 19, 2014 at 02:48 PM
4. Annie Jacobsen
Clarice Feldman,
You sound as silly and partisan as the guy over at KOS — trying to turn Sibel Edmonds’ story into something about political axe grinding when really it’s about the sale of nuclear secrets by government bureaucrats. Presidents come and go, bureaucrats remain entrenched. That is a core issue here, and a terrifying one in this case.
I write: “In her role as translator, Edmonds listened in on, or translated, hundreds of secretly intercepted conversations between State Department officials and foreign nationals from 1996 to 2002.”
Which means, you must realize, both administrations — Clinton’s and Bush’s — are culpable here. In fact, it was President Clinton who named Marc Grossman as Director General of the Foreign Service in March of 2000.
Annie Jacobsen
January 31, 2008 - 10:12 am Link to this Comment | Reply
Posted by: Truthbetold | January 19, 2014 at 02:57 PM
Get lost TBT, you haven't added one thing here since your arrival and at best you can be called a bore. Go somewhere where people will jump up and down over your brand of BS.
Go PATS!
Posted by: Jane-Rebel Alliance1 | January 19, 2014 at 03:04 PM
not much, I guess.
Posted by: [email protected] | January 19, 2014 at 03:05 PM
Jim-
Univision has been making the allegations (and pretty sure some Mexican papers have also been looking into it). Maybe get narciso to translate.
Posted by: [email protected] | January 19, 2014 at 03:07 PM
Other work by Annie Jacobsen: Until now, theories ranging from alien spacecraft to weather balloon to anti-Soviet Union spy program have been bandied about.
But Jacobsen adds a blockbuster new dimension to the whole picture: Was the Roswell UFO really a Soviet-built circular craft that contained a "crew" of Nazi-based, surgically-altered youngsters built for the purpose of causing hysteria in America?
An unnamed source told Jacobsen the story of how ex-Soviet leader Josef Stalin recruited ex-Nazi Josef Mengele to be part of a scheme where a "UFO with aliens" was created to scare Americans.
According to the tale, Mengele -- the infamous Nazi "angel of death" who experimented on children at concentration camps -- surgically altered a group of youngsters to look like aliens.
When the remote-controlled Soviet-built craft -- and its pseudo ET crew -- crashed in New Mexico, the legend of Roswell was born. The "alien spaceship" and its otherworldly occupants eventually found their way to Area 51 in Nevada for examination. Jacobsen's unnamed source -- an engineer who worked for defense contractor EG&G -- says he examined the Roswell craft and body remains when they arrived at Area 51 in 1951.
Posted by: clarice feldman | January 19, 2014 at 03:09 PM
So is tbt saying she is Annie Jacobsen or is tbt merely quoting her?
Kind of hard to tell from the construction of that comment, no citation of where the comment is from or what the quote marks denote.
Posted by: Ignatz | January 19, 2014 at 03:11 PM
the truth is out there...
Posted by: [email protected] | January 19, 2014 at 03:11 PM
Other work by Clarice Feldman:
Oh, the delicious irony!
On a supreme irony, Patrick Fitzgerald who came to our attention when he turned the Bush administration upside down pretending to trace a leak whose source he already knew, has been named by reporters as the man who leaked information to the press in the case he prosecuted against then governor Blagojevich. From Illinois Pay to Play":
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/oh_the_delicious_irony.html
Posted by: Truthbetold | January 19, 2014 at 03:14 PM
I wonder if Sibel knows ValJar? Six degrees of separation and all that.
Posted by: Jack s Back! (From 10:00 Mass) | January 19, 2014 at 03:15 PM
6 years?
believe
Posted by: [email protected] | January 19, 2014 at 03:16 PM
I thought Mengele went to Argentina. And now we are back to Hitler escaping plus aliens!
Coast to Coast AM stuff!
Posted by: miss Marple | January 19, 2014 at 03:16 PM
this is too goofy even for Coast to Coast. at least the previous host called that whole "polar vortex" thing.
it is a nice day think I'll do something else.
Posted by: [email protected] | January 19, 2014 at 03:19 PM
tbt is Thomas Tamm the mole hired by the chinless one when he was at DOJ under el renyo ( lovely image :) )
In the W administration he leaked the TSP to the NYT . The traitor was labeled a whistle blower by Michael Isikoff. Guess who refused to prosecute the leaker when he became AG ?
tbt , Are you still trying to cover your tracks by using your sons' laptop ?
Posted by: BB Key | January 19, 2014 at 03:42 PM
Yes, if it weren't for those disruptive Tea Partiers... http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2014/01/fls-brian-ballard-top-romney-fundraiser-dumps-on-horrific-chris-christie-before-fl-visit.html
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 19, 2014 at 03:43 PM
Annie Jacobsen? I think it was J. Fred Muggs, last night, who said TBT wrote like a woman.
Posted by: Jack s Back! (From 10:00 Mass) | January 19, 2014 at 03:44 PM
BB Key
Why did the New York Times sit on the warrantless wiretap story?
Posted by: Truthbetold | January 19, 2014 at 03:54 PM
Miss Bardahl entertains the trained seals, mentions nothing about how unpopular she was at the end of her term: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mary-matalin-battles-granholm-on-maher-you-think-only-women-know-how-to-fix-this-country/
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 19, 2014 at 03:58 PM
Do not know. Call up friends at the NYT and ask them , tell them you will meet them at Union Station just for old times sake
Posted by: BB Key | January 19, 2014 at 04:01 PM
That's not Clarice.
And TBT is a dirtbag.
Posted by: Jane-Rebel Alliance1 | January 19, 2014 at 04:14 PM
BTW Obama postponed another part of Obamacare but fiat today.
How long are we going to put up with this?
Posted by: Jane-Rebel Alliance1 | January 19, 2014 at 04:15 PM
BB Key
They sat on the story because Bush asked them to.
Posted by: Truthbetold | January 19, 2014 at 04:16 PM
Good Morning!
I've got the playoff game live on a Japanese channel.
No advertisements at all, so during the breaks they'll show replays and crowd shots of the stadium. Its surprising to me how in a stadium of 80,000 you can hear Manning's calls at the line of scrimmage so clear
Posted by: daddy | January 19, 2014 at 04:20 PM
daddy,
Good morning.
BTW, Thomas Tamm writes like a girl.
Posted by: Jack s Back! (From 10:00 Mass) | January 19, 2014 at 04:25 PM
"So is tbt saying she is Annie Jacobsen or is tbt merely quoting her?"
What difference, at this point, does it make?
Posted by: Danube on iPad | January 19, 2014 at 04:27 PM