What If He's Right?

| | Comments (63) | TrackBacks (0)

79-year-old Nobel Prize winner James Watson, who received the award for his part in discovering the structure of DNA, has a tenancy to dip his toes into very troubled waters. In his most recent book, he has remarked that, "There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so."

Dr Watson told The Sunday Times that he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really". He said there was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true".
http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3067222.ece

What if Watson is right, and the genes responsible for differences in human intelligence are found?

Oddly enough, it may move us closer to the Martin Luther King, Jr.'s ideal of a society in which one is not judged by the color of his skin. Racial quotas will be abandoned as useless, so no-one will think someone got into college, or got a job, because of his race.

On the other hand, many racists will see this as vindication, and assume that, since the average Black is less intelligent than the average White, it would be OK to discriminate against Blacks in hiring, college admissions, etc. This would, of course, be wrong and foolish, as medians and standard deviations tell us nothing about individuals. One of the reasons for the "lies, damned lies, and statistics" line is that, when papers give us statistical summaries, such as means, standard deviations, covariances, etc., they do not release the data from which those numbers were derived, and much information is lost. So it will be if it can be proven that Whites are, on average, more intelligent than Blacks. Of course, it may also be shown that Asians are more intelligent, on average, than Whites, too, and the the Ashkenazim are, for genetic reasons, the smartest of all. That would really cheese off the KKK crowd!

Recognizing that only a fool would judge an individual by his race alone, and moving to the tratment of groups, how might such a finding affect our policies toward Africa and, more importantly, to our own Black communities? Would be get even more patronizing than we already are, or would we give them up as a lost cause?

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: What If He's Right?.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://novatownhall.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1409

63 Comments

Loudoun Conservative said:

If he's right, then we should encourage inter-racial marriage so as to improve the gene pool of all of humanity.

Jack said:

I thought diversity was supposed to be a good thing.

Ed Flinn said:

I don't think ethnic groups represent stable populations over centuries since people migrate and interbreed. I could buy stability for Australian aborigines before the 17th Century, but not after, and on any other large landmass people bred like rabbits and wiped clean any previous genetic differences.

Laura Valle said:

"Recognizing that only a fool would judge an individual by his race alone, and moving to the treatment of groups, how might such a finding affect our policies toward Africa and, more importantly, to our own Black communities?"

Can you please give me an example of one of "our policies to our own black communities." Before doing so could you define who the "our" refers to.

Jack said:

Certainly. OUR refers to the United States.

Those policies include Head Start, which, while including children of other races, is primarily used by Blacks; various gun-control laws, which again primarily affect Blacks, who are more than four times as likely to be murdered than Whites are, and who primarily live in areas with strict gun control laws; and various school admissions policies that give points based on the race of the applicant.

Joe said:

Personally, I'm glad James is finally being shown in the negative light he deserves. At a recent interview at the Salk Institute in La Jolla, CA, I had to sit through an hour of his rambling with repeated comments about how much he hates Germans. So it's not just a black-white thing with him. He's an arrogant old man that got lucky, ONCE, in science. And for the record, he didn't actually do any of the work that led to the discovery of the double helix. He simply interpreted someone else's work more quickly.

Torewan said:

If he bases on scientific research and concluded his comment, then opposite one should prove he was wrong with same attitude. The Society is tolerence all ethnic groups, but it does not mean your color take all kind of advantage.
Only god true god love can cover all, however, American you lose your faith.

augie said:

This presupposes that there are only two races: black and white. Can he take his proposition to include the red, the brown, and the yellow?

What is the order of intelligence by race?

Brad said:

Watson will be tarred and feathered for this. We live in a society that promotes "what should be" at the expense of dealing with "what is." (Normative versus positive)The greatest burden of this pc view is heaped upon the heads of those it intends to protect. Are blacks better off because of the great society programs? I believe most want an equal and free society. My family is better off if your family is better off. The gap between rich and poor, white and black, is growing; maybe it is time to try something new. If a nobel prize winner who is directly responsible for many of the medical breakthroughs cant speak his mind, then who can?

Tom said:

Watson lost his marbles years ago. He really shouldn't be allowed out without a carer.

Leaving Comment said:

If he has done truly scientific tests which PROVE his statements, and there are no data proving otherwise, then this should be interpreted as fact. Just because we desire all humankind to be equal does not make it so. Agree, this doctor's findings are emotionally hurtful to the black race, but emotions should never be a part of scientific research. Fact is fact, and speculation is speculation. Until some other scientist presents superior research proving otherwise, Dr. Watson's research should be taken as fact, regardless of how someone "feels" about his research. Is it racist to say another race is less intelligent because scientific research proves it so? No- it's merely stating a fact. Emotional pain needs to take a back seat to scientific fact for once. Also I think Dr. Watson was speaking in generalizations and averages- you must keep in mind that there are anomalies in all facets of science.

Gail said:

Of course Blacks perform differently than whites in intelligence testing. As a group, they have been programmed to believe that they are inferior and should get handouts, for the last 40 years! If we just expected EVERYONE to perform at peak, regardless of race, color or national origin, this would be a moot point.

I grew up in a black neighborhood before "affirmative action" and the black kids I went to school with were expected to perform as well as I did (I am white) and they DID!

Maybe we should just stop telling people that they ARE inferior and stop giving people breaks because of race or economics!

Life is NOT fair and if you have obstacles..JUMP OVER THEM!!

A brain has no color and it is time to stop differentiating between races!

Ben said:

Doesn't anyone watch PBS anymore? According to documentaries on that channel, this guy didn't really completely discover the double-helix with Crick. They ripped research off of a woman and then claimed all the glory. If they are right, then it figures this is what this guy is like.

Ben said:

I don't think anyone would have a problem if I said black people tend to be more "athletic" but the second you say anthing about their intelligence you are labeled a racist. I would concede that if what the Dr. says is true that the same could be said for Asians, only that they are genetically more intelligent then whites. I don't look at that as a threat I look at that as a challenge. A challenge to work harder and study harder.
I am so sick of the racism card being dropped anytime something negative is said about a black person. By claming racism all the time they are creating a backlash of people that are sick of hearing that. If I ever heard Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton come out and actually say "This is not a case of racism." I would tend to believe them more. But it is always racism with them. I mean how am I suppose to stop looking at the color of peoples skin when I am constantly reminded about it. I do believe there is racism but I believe it is not as rampant as many claim.

Leaving comment 2 said:

Leaving comment one, you're a fool. This is not an issue of people want what is true to be true, or the PC community attempting to stifle a brillant scientist. This is an old man who happens to be a nobel prize winner's sad, crazy opinion, and has nothing to do with actual studies. We can start talking about truth and stifling it when there's a truth to stifle. Until then, there is really nothing to talk about other than this guys racists leanings.

Erika said:

A woman by the name of Rosalind Elsie Franklin discovered the Double Helix. Stop giving Watson a voice. It is obviously as ignorant now as he was then!

The problem that I have always had with Watson and Crick is that they did not achieve anything so great that was not borne on the backs of others. His assumptions are just that, because he lacks the scientific skill to even have the ability to do the things for which he has been commended.

If you are really interested in knowing who discoved the double helix. Look up Rosalind Elsie Franklin. Watson and Crick belittled her in their book, because she was (contrary to their sexist and racist ideologies) the real genius behind the discovery of DNA.

We need to acknowledge those who accomplished great things and stop given credence to old white men with nothing useful to say.

CITATION: During the 1950s, while working in a research lab in England, Rosalind uses x-ray techniques she learned in Paris and discovers the double-helix pattern of the DNA molecule. Her data is shared with other biochemists who take this information, add it to their own, and publish the material. Four years after Rosalind’s death, Wilkins, Watson, and Crick receive the Nobel Prize for their work on DNA. To this day the debate continues on how much credit should have gone to this instrumental scientist.

Jack said:

"I don't think anyone would have a problem if I said black people tend to be more 'athletic'...."

I have a problem with it. I think it is not genetics at work there, but the perceived "way out." Back when the "Help Wanted" signed were subtexted, "No Irish Need Apply," we had a preponderance of Irish in sports, particularly boxing. It was their way out.

Trinity said:

There is NO such thing called racial superiority.

All are equal.

Any one, irrespective of his origin if given a positive environment to grow, that includes not only proper diet, access to education & dignity...then over a generation or so that individual or his offsprings would definately improve by leaps & bounds. And hence would be at par with the best.

By the way the opposite also holds true. If some nasty people systematically break a VERY "intelligent" person by taking away his respect, his right to live & evolve, then over a generation or so...then this person or his progeny would appear ..."less intelligent"

Trinity.

Jim said:

He is right, period.

Jack said:

Your statement is just as unprovable (currently) as Watson's. Long before European colonialism, the West and China had developed sophisticated philosophical systems, had built roads and aquaducts. The Romans had central heating systems. Meanwhile, the Britons, Germans, Celts, Africans, and American Indians were stone-age barbarians.

Josh said:

Here we go again.... Since the 1980s, truth has been sacrificed on the alter of political correctness. Developmental and cognative psychologists have known for years that Blacks, as a group (NOT the individual) have lower IQs than other races. Other geneticists have studied this, looking for a possible reason and agree that there appears to be a genetic component to account, at least in part, for this. Yet they can't publish or even talk openly about it without being called racist. It's absurd. Just because a specific ethnic group has a lower intellect than an other does not mean that they are not just as entitled to the same respect and consideration given to all.

PhD student said:

I am NOT a racist, but he is obviously right. How else could we possibly explain the lower performance of blacks in almost all areas of intellectual achievement, despite the large scale government programs designed to get equality??
Blacks form a large percentage of humanity, including a significant percentage in the US and some European countries. In some sports, athletics etc, black dominance is unquestionable. I myself admire black athletes who compete for this country.
But how many black Nobel prize winners in the sciences are there? What percentage of highly cited scientific research was written by blacks? How many black PhD graduates in the sciences do top US unversities produce? And really, is this all the result of discrimination? If your answer is yes, how come so many top scientists come from dirt-poor families in Russia, China and India? (much poorer than most black families in the US, by the way). Are all these Chinese, Indian and other third-world countries professors (for those that don't know, these are often the majority of academic staff in hard sciences in the US) prejudiced against blacks?
The answer is a clear one, but nobody dares to say it. Watson did. He is 80, has a Nobel prize and has nothing to loose. I sincerely admire his courage.

Rain said:

Let's look at Africa, still destroying their own societies. Killing eachother for the most mundane of reasons.
Oh, and don't forget the Middle East. After a couple of thousand years you think these people would have moved forward, impoved their lives in the desert, formed a fuctioning social structure that doesn't hinge on how you worship. But no. 21st century and they're still stoning people in the name of an imaginary friend in the sky.
I don't know if it's a lack of intelligence, but it's certainly a lack of reason and rational.

Sick and Disgusted said:

One commenter stated "Fact is fact, and speculation is speculation. Until some other scientist presents superior research proving otherwise, Dr. Watson's research should be taken as fact, regardless of how someone "feels" about his research."

Sir, if this was was fact there should be other independent research to back up this stupid claim. Nothing in the scientific world is considered a "fact" until the results can be replicated, again and again. Where is the research to back up this racist claim. Kind Sir, if you believe this to be fact, I bet you also believe that whitey coming to this country was "Manifest Destiny", don't ya!

Lastly, if things were so simplistic as stated by the "Dr?", then I could make the statement that white people are inherently cold, unemotional, thieves (just ask the American Indian).

Having said that, I taught my daughter that while racism is alive and well in this country, that the best revenge is to beat whitey at his own game and don't be a victim.

Ademola said:

That Phd student above must be really stupid for his comments. The Nobel winner is foolish for making such a statement and should probably be jailed.

Jack said:

The Middle East is a very sad case. That was the pinnacle of science and mathematics a millenium ago. The very word "algorithm" comes from the name of one of their mathematicians. Most of the stars, Betelgeuse, Deneb, Aldebaran, Alcor, Mizar, have Arabic names.

Very sad indeed.

Rain said:

Sick and Disgusted, I think you just proved Dr. Watsons point. Manifest Destiny was the slogan used to promote the US spreading from coast to coast. I had nothing to do with 'whitey' coming to the US. Stupid.
And obviously racism is alive in your house, how nice of you to teach your daughter the term 'whitey' in derogitory mannor.
Oh, wait, I forgot. It's acceptable for blacks to be racist, just not whites. Right?
You do your people proud.

JIM said:

Ben, you better believe racism is rampant. In fact, if you think you're supposed to be color blind, you are part of the problem. You need to be color sensitive, to understand that your experience and perceptions as a white man, despite what you may believe, is completely different from the experience and perceptions of a black man. In other words, you have no idea how you would react to racist drivel such as Watson's with a potential ancestral history of subjugation and poverty ingrained in your psyche.

Why would you say that blacks tend to be more atheletic? Is that really true? Blacks seem to excel at 3 American sports: football, basketball, and baseball. What about skiing and snowboarding? Golf and Tennis? Soccer? Swimming, Diving, Cricket? Yes, they have great athletes across the board, but so what? So does every race. Mr Watson is not presenting scientific evidence, he is offering his opinion based upon highly controversial scientific evidence.

Paul McGlade said:

It never ceases to amaze me how ignorant people are when it comes to science and statistics.

So some form of *average* rating of a culturally-specific group in a culturally- and sociologically-defined set of tests is *proof* of one group's inferiority to another?

What was the spread of results? What was the sample set? What were the controls in place?

Just because women are, on average, shorter than men doesn't mean that I (a man) am taller than all women.

And height is a pretty straightforward thing to measure.

How do you define "intelligence", exactly? I've met plenty of academics who struggle to make conversation or boil an egg, and plenty of people running market stalls who can run rings round you in an argument.

If it's merely genetic, how do you explain the differences in test results in people from different backgrounds, places and ages?

It's very easy to observe a phenomenon and attribute it to what is essentially pre-determined by birth/genes/divine intervention. A lot harder to prove it, but also pretty hard to disprove. They don't allow the sort of testing on humans you would need to do to get proper evidence.

Kevin said:

One has to wonder if the individuals that have replied in support of James Watson have actually read any study supporting his claim.

Being a Nobel Prize recipient (for work for which he was disproportionately credited), doesn't make his word absolute truth.

RyanB said:

Rain: Just to quickly address your "Africa tearing itself apart" comment -

I'm quite positive that you know little to nothing about African history (which isn't entirely your fault, seeing as African history is barely taught in World History classes), but the first country to win its independence was Ghana in 1957. 50 years ago. In what shape was America fifty years after gaining independence from Britain? We hadn't yet fought the Civil War.

African countries are essentially new and weren't even originally established by their citizens, but rather by the colonial powers. Different groups were lumped together - the continent was sliced up like pie.

It's an interesting, albeit sad story. Maybe you should pick up a history book sometime. Might do you some good.

Jack said:

"Being a Nobel Prize recipient (for work for which he was disproportionately credited), doesn't make his word absolute truth."

Just look at Al Gore. He got a Nobel Prize for a pack of lies.

Rain said:

Being a new countries?! That explains the genocide of Tutsi by the Hutu? I've read enough about 'tribal' differences to know it makes me sick to my stomach.
I say again, lack of reason and rational.

Doug said:

Oh, he's right! I don't see why this is comes as a shock to so many people. Look at any predominately black society in the WORLD; and you can't help but see they lag far behind every other non black society. Add to that, the black populations superior performance in US professional sports, which has been scientifically correlated to be due to differences in muscle structure, especially the leg strength; look at the phenotypically obvious differences between blacks and other races, such as the nose structure, the lip shapes, the big (hmmm...) butts; etc; is it any wonder that with all these differences, there cannot also be a difference in less obvious phenotypic differences, such as intelligence? And even that: intelligence, can and has been studying for years, and the tests have been so scrutinized to eliminate for ANY cultural bias whatsoever, and the results keep showing up the same; black intelligence is one stand deviation lower than that of the average person. Oh, sure, there's a lot of intelligent black people, the scientific studies predict that too; of course some are going to be just, if not more, intelligent than others; that's how a bell curve works.
People, don't be surprised. What Dr. Watson says is true, based on fact, and real. And the sooner everybody looks at this scientifically, they too will probably agree. The problem is they don't; they'd rather use "social engineering", to try to solve the problem, or use "politically correct" answers to explain the differences. But science is based on FACT, and the fact is, Dr. Watson is RIGHT.

RyanB said:

Yes, Rain.

Africa has been pillaged, raped, torn apart, and smashed back together again. So sadly, "being a new countries" explains everything.

SM said:

Doug, Rain, you're ignorant. As is our senile Nobel Prize winner who just flushed his legacy down the toilet.

Every developing nation is tearing itself apart, and every developED nation tore itself apart while it was developing.

The Middle East is tearing itself apart, but are we saying that Arabs and Jews are less intelligent? Quite the contrary.

Much of Southeast Asia is in strife itself apart and has been for the last decade.

Latin America, Central Asia...

Where was Europe 60 years ago?

I know that Doug, Rain, and others are thrilled. You now have a scientist who has joined you and is allowing you to admit (virtually, because YOU KNOW YOU'D NEVER SAY ANYTHING LIKE THIS IN PUBLIC), that its okay to be bigots.

Well, its not.

PEACE


Fallon said:

These characters are really funny. They just ignore the fact that Europeans have produced absolutely none of the breakthroughs in human kind, and all civilization rests upon African science and civilization.

Just think, all religion is from Africa, medicine and even the medical symbols are from Africa, political systems and law are from Africa, mathematics comes from Africa. The Atomic Bomb came from African theory by Einstein(Jews are African), the Jet Airplane, and thus the space rockets emanate from Chinese science(Chinese are racially African).

Europeans were primitive until a racially African group(Romans/Italians) went there to civilize them, and that's just recent history.

Western contributions are mainly taking these breakthroughs and extending them. In essence the achievement is building a strong infrastructure.

While this is important work, let's not confuse it with the intelligence to invent the stuff in the first place.

If he knew ANYTHING about DNA, he would know that ONLY Africans can produce the next evolution in the human race. Caucasians lack the genetic diversity to produce anything other than themselves.

mikey said:

Not speculating which race is smarter. But why would humans all have the same intelligence? We have divergently evolved enough to look different. Why would everything else remain the same? Is it so wrong to say that all humans may not be the same? Some people call it racism or ignorance, but would it not be ignorant to ignore the facts and assume that we are all exactly the same? We see such patterns in the animal kingdom. Not all breeds of animals have the same intelligence. A border collie is smarter than other dogs due in part to selective breeding (which mimics divergent evolution but over a much shorter period of time). We breed those dogs to be smarter, much like mother nature forced us to breed that way in order to survive in harsher conditions.

Bernard said:

If blacks can claim that they are better athletes in certain areas(NBA, running backs, sprinters), and are supposedly better "endowed" physically than other races, why can't they accept that as a race they aren't as intelligent as other races.

People are too easily offended. The Orientals can claim a lot on the academic side of humanity, the blacks can claim more physical prowess. They just lag behind in the intelligence factor. What's wrong with that?

We live in a day and age where the truth cannot be spoken.

Louis Kuhelj said:

As a Christian, I disagree with the statement made by Dr. Watson. However, I also disagree with the actions taken against him by London's Science Museum. The intolerance shown by the Museum shows them to be in no position to claim the moral high-ground or in any way feel superior to Dr. Watson.

zimzo said:

I love how people here can write "I am NOT a racist" and then go on to say that they believe blacks are inferior to whites.

Thanks, Jack. You really brought them out of the woodwork with this one.

My captcha contains the letters "kkk." Conincidence?

mark said:

mikey,

Your analogy has no scientific basis. Biologists have determined in countless peer-reviewed studies that there is no division of race among humans. However, there certainly is racism.

Fallon said:

Trust me, Caucasians won't stick to the facts, the facts are that of all the people on this planet, Caucasians ARE THE LEAST HUMAN.

Caucasians, defined as people from Europe, are mixed with human(African) and Neanderthal man. EVERYBODY else is human. The French are more human than most Euro's because the killed most of the Neanderthal's before mating with them.

Africans have been not only been civilized longer than anybody else, they have been civilized longer than everybody else combined.

Imagine what will happen when Caucasians discover that not only are Africans physically superior, but mentally superior as well.

If anybody believes that these inferior clowns can MEASURE INTELLIGENCE, I have a bridge to sell you. Intelligence isn't as simple as the simpleton tests they give.

Jack said:

While I appreciate your point, zimzo, I think one can believe that, ON AVERAGE, Blacks are less intelligent than Whites, and still not be a racist. It could be we just differ on the definition of "racist."

"Racist," to me, implies PREJUDICE. Thus, "He is {insert race here}, therefore he must be {fill in the blank}." That is different from looking at test results and making conclusions about racial averages.

To me, the evidence is not conclusive at all, either for or against the hypothesis. The discussion I had hoped to start was not about the merits of Watson's assertion, but how we might change our policies if it were to be proven true.

Fallon said:

Equating Europeans with civilization automatically removes you from being intelligent.

If you can't pick up a real world history textbook and see how feeble the Caucasian contribution is, you're probably, well, Caucasian.

Sonny In Jacksonville,Fl said:

Where do I begin?

First let me acknowledge that in the spirit of free speech,Watson is entitled to his opinion(s).His opinions may be facts,lies,fair, biased,inspiring or hurtful but he has the right to speak his mind.If there is any study, research, or publications out there that proves that Whites are more intelligent than blacks or that any race for that matter is more intelligent than another, please, please post a link or information to where I can find this study. I have an idea on how we can solve this matter.Lets have a gameshow / reality show similar to Jeopardy.The title of the show is called "The Intelligent Race".The show would randomly select college students from all around the world to represent their race in an intellectual battle. The students would be quizzed on everything from basic knowledge questions to solving complex equations, physics,anatomy,biology,engineering, and dammit even a spelling bee.The competition would be grueling and difficult and in the end,whichever race wins would be crowned most intelligent for that year.The competition would be held every year for the next 10 years.In the end, whichever race has the most wins,would be crowned most intelligent forever and ever.Case closed.
As Jocose and Jejune as my idea sounds, I have a feeling someone might steal it and try to sell it overseas or maybe to Dave Chappelle(if you do steal it, just give me a cut).I say overseas because this idea would not work in America; we would be too outraged at the thought of something like this.We love being outraged.
Wake up America. Love each other but learn to respect & cherish our differences.

Jack said:

Fallon, I will first mention that the scientific evidence indicates that Neanderthals and homo sapiens did not interbreed, and there was little opportunity to do so, as the Neanderthals had generally died out in the areas of Europe homo sapiens moved into: http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050223/news_1c23neander.html

Second, I must question your definition of "civilized" if stone-age Africa (up to Eupoean colonization) qualifies.

kevin said:

I dont know if this is true or not, im no scientist. I will say that it is statistical evidence that says blacks have lower SAT scores and graduation rates. Now people like to look at statistics and come to conclusions but a statistic is all it is. My opinion is that are many intelligent blacks out there. All genetics equal, I think the problem is the culture. Whereas in white/asian/indian community the goal is to go to college and be successful. In black community it seems being a "thug" is the thing to do. I wont say rap music is the only thing because I listen to rap along with everything else and I still have a steady career. It just seems their culture is to be an outcast in society and how well can you do when you dont want to play with everyone else?

RyanB said:

Kevin -
"how well can you do when you DON'T want to play with everyone else"... Are you kidding me? That's the biggest laugh I've heard all day.

How about when "everyone else" brought you over in chains, dehumanized you, shunned you, made fun of you, and still to this day thinks you are inferior (exemplified by the comments seen on this blog!)? "Everyone else" sounds like a pretty crappy playmate to me.

zimzo said:

The problem with this whole discussion is that both "race" and "intelligence" are imprecise, amorphous and arbitrary terms.

Race is a term that was created for social and political reasons and is practically meaningless in genetic terms as Watson well knows. There are a large number of mixed race people on the planet and there is a large genetic variance within races.

There are only two reasons to categorize people by race: 1) to discriminate against them and 2) to protect them against discrimination. Race, of course, is just an arbitrary means of categorizing people for the purposes of discrimination and as the Hutus and Tutsis showed us it is not the only one.

There is no way to separate race from social, economic and cultural factors and there are no intelligence tests that filter out these factors.

"Intelligence" itself is an arbitrary term. There are plenty of people who seem very intelligent in one area and very stupid in another. For example, didn't you say, Jack, that you have a high mathematics degree or something? See what I mean? (Just kidding.) Watson is another perfect example of someone who is very intelligent and very stupid.

The only real purpose of this exercise is to bring out the prejudices of people like some of the commenters here and for that I suppose this discussion is useful.

Jack said:

And yet so many Blacks do very well, despite their "playmates." In fact, African immigrants have the highest average income of any immigrant group.

Jack said:

Fallon, you're a riot! The Chinese are Black, the semites are Black, even Einstein was Black!

Fallon said:

Hi folks,

I guess a lot of what I say may sound wierd to you if you don't know DNA, but all humans are derivations black/brown Africans.

The Chinese thought they were from a seperate group of humans, but after they did the DNA, they trace right back to Africa.

If you don't believe Jews are African, you simply missed history and the Bible. Need I remind you that Egypt is in Africa.

Further more, DNA test confirmed that Jews are directly related to a tribe in Africa, and they support that tribe today.

Caucasians want to believe that they are not mixed with Neanderthal, but just look at the physical evidence. Neanderthal man was hairy(like Caucasians), most humans are not. They were also big meat eaters(like traditional Caucasians), most humans are not. They were not very athletic, most humans are, and they had big heads and large brains, most humans do not.

There was a time when it was thought that Caucasians were superior becuase their brains were bigger. Unfortunately, once it became clear that the size wasn't the source of intellect, but the pattern, we stopped seeing future men with giant heads.

As for civilization. Guess what! Every other major group had vast civilizations that spanned thousand of years. Caucasians were the last group to have a civilization of any size.

Africans had the Nubians, the Egyptians, and other ancient kingdoms. Most with technology superior to what exists today. Caucasians have everything backwards. It took years for them to figure out the true direction of current flow, most copiers don't get it right the first time.

Caucasians needed telescopes and computers to figure out the precession of the equnoxes, but Egyptions knew about it in 10,500 BC.

Caucasians can't even produce buildings with the accuracy of the great pyramid, or explain how the Egyptians created something as simple as a vase in the British museum.

All this occurred when Eurpoeans were in CAVES! That's the genesis of civilization as passed to my people, the Greeks. Where were Europenns in 5000 BC... right.

jacob said:

zimzo,
"The problem with this whole discussion is that both "race" and "intelligence" are imprecise, amorphous and arbitrary terms."
I am forced to agree with you on this. I feel that tests like SAT's are not so much a measure of intelligence as a mark of having been taught. In short the SAT is not an intelligence test but an ignorance seive. It filters out those who have not been taught.

Jack,
Does 'culture' transend intelligence?

jacob said:

fallon,
the term african at this point in time denotes those whose anticedants stayed in Africa and speak one of the may "Hamite" languages. Are you on the same page as the rest of us now?

Fallon said:

jacob,

I know that's how you WANT to frame the argument, and I have no problem with that. I'm just giving you the picture from 30,000 feet. You know, to keep things in perspective.

All the arguments relate, since Caucasians are not claiming superiority based on individual accomplishments, but group accomplishments.

As far as I can see, nobody likes to compete these days, they would rather cheat. Either by being born in the right family, or knowing somebody(see George Bush).

However, it matters little. The same thing that destroyed, first the Nubian Civilization, and later the Egyptian Civilization, is about the destroy Western Civilization.

It's called climate change. It's natural and related to the precession of the euinoxes, controlling polution won't stop it. Bombs have no effect on the planet earth, so we're defensless.

Humans will survive, but the trappings of what we now consider comfortable, will be gone.

Climate change, coming to a city near you starting in 2012, and in full bloom by 2060.

Fallon said:

This would be a moot question if Caucasians would only compete without cheating.

How do I know it's not fair? Well, how else do you explain the US?

If what many here think, why don't Asians and East Indians run most of the companies here? I'm Greek, and percieved as Caucasian, but I know first hand that racisim is used to deny them high positions.

In schools Asians have a reverse quota on them, and White Boys benefit from Affirmative Action because White girls out perform them.

I believe that a true competition would serve everyone, but I'm not holding my breath.

With that fellas and ladies, I'm out.

Luke said:

Ahhh...A 2012 doomsday sayer are we Fallon?

Here's possibly refreshing look on the "intelligence" debate: perhaps the different "races", who do have genetic differences, have intelligences that are better suited for interpreting different types of knowledge. That is: there is a gene for math, a gene for reading, etc. Then, since we have by no means discovered or learned all that there is to learn, how can we say which race or combination of genes will be best suited to interpret the information available to us 50, 100, or 10,000 years down the line?

Jack said:

You're hilarious, Fallon. Hairy? Right. ("God is my barber." -- G. Gordon Liddy)

Yes, homo sapiens came out of Africa many thousands of years ago. The racial distinctions came later, as individual groups adapted to their environment. Dark skin is not a great benefit up North, and so it Caucasian skin has paled.

"If he knew ANYTHING about DNA, he would know that ONLY Africans can produce the next evolution in the human race. Caucasians lack the genetic diversity to produce anything other than themselves."

How silly. Caucasians developed various eye and hair colors. Blacks, Asians, Americans, and Semites did not.

"As far as I can see, nobody likes to compete these days, they would rather cheat. Either by being born in the right family, or knowing somebody(see George Bush)."

Right. Al Gore, Jr., of course, was himself the son of a Senator, and John Kerry's mother is from the Forbes family.

Having studied a bit of Astrophysics myself, I can assure you that the precession of the equinoxes has nothing to do with global warming. Evidence of warming can now be seen Mars and assorted Jovian moons. We are, however, seeing an increase in sunspot activity, and the Little Ice Age corresponds to a nearly complete lack of sunspot activity.

You are correct that Asians face reverse discrimination. I find it disgusting and appalling. Although, as you say, girls are outperforming boys, boys, and particularly White boys, are still being subject to "reverse discrimination" in such things as admission to magnet schools.

"I believe that a true competition would serve everyone, but I'm not holding my breath."

On this we can agree.

"With that fellas and ladies, I'm out."

WAY out.

Kevin said:

"Scientist apologizes for hurtful remarks

By MALCOLM RITTER, AP Science Writer 2 hours, 12 minutes ago

NEW YORK - James Watson, the 79-year-old scientific icon made famous by his work in DNA, has set off an international furor with comments to a London newspaper about intelligence levels among blacks.
ADVERTISEMENT

Watson, who's chancellor of the renowned Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, has a history of provocative statements about social implications of science. But several friends said Thursday he's no racist. And Watson, who won a Nobel Prize in 1962 for co-discovering the structure of DNA, apologized and says he's "mortified."

A profile of Watson in the Sunday Times Magazine of London quoted him as saying that he's "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours — whereas all the testing says not really."

While he hopes everyone is equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true," Watson is quoted as saying. He also said people should not be discriminated against on the basis of color, because "there are many people of color who are very talented."

The comments, reprinted Wednesday in a front-page article in another British newspaper, The Independent, provoked a sharp reaction.

London's Science Museum canceled a sold-out lecture he was to give there Friday. The mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, said his comments "represent racist propaganda masquerading as scientific fact.... That a man of such academic distinction could make such ignorant comments, which are utterly offensive and incorrect and give succor to the most backward in our society, demonstrates why racism still has to be fought."

In the United States, the Federation of American Scientists said it was outraged that Watson "chose to use his unique stature to promote personal prejudices that are racist, vicious and unsupported by science."

And Watson's employer said he wasn't speaking for the Cold Spring Harbor research facility, where the board and administration "vehemently disagree with these statements and are bewildered and saddened if he indeed made such comments."

Watson is in Britain to promote his new book, "Avoid Boring People," and a publicist for his British publisher provided this statement Thursday to The Associated Press:

"I am mortified about what has happened," Watson said. "More importantly, I cannot understand how I could have said what I am quoted as having said.

"I can certainly understand why people, reading those words, have reacted in the ways they have. To all those who have drawn the inference from my words that Africa, as a continent, is somehow genetically inferior, I can only apologize unreservedly. That is not what I meant. More importantly from my point of view, there is no scientific basis for such a belief."

Watson's publicist, Kate Farquhar-Thomson, would not address whether Watson was suggesting he was misquoted. "You have the statement. That's it, I'm afraid," she said.

A spokesman for The Sunday Times said that the interview with Watson was recorded and that the newspaper stood by the story.

Watson's new book also touches on possible racial differences in IQ, though it doesn't go as far as the newspaper interview.

In the book, Watson raises the prospect of discovering genes that significantly affect a person's intelligence.

"...There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically," Watson wrote. "Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so."

Watson is no stranger to making waves with his scientific views. In 2000, in a speech at the University of California, Berkeley, he suggested that sex drive is related to skin color. "That's why you have Latin lovers," he said, according to people who attended. "You've never heard of an English lover. Only an English patient."

Some years earlier he was quoted in a newspaper as saying, "If you could find the gene which determines sexuality and a woman decides she doesn't want a homosexual child, well, let her."

"Jim has a penchant for making outrageous comments that are basically poking society in the eye," Dr. Francis Collins, director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, said Thursday.

Collins, who has known Watson for a long time, said his latest comments "really ... carried it this time to a much more hurtful level."

In a brief telephone interview, Collins told The AP that Watson's statements are "the wildest form of speculation in a field where such speculation ought not to be engaged in." Genetic factors for intelligence show no difference from one part of the world to another, he said.

Several longtime friends of Watson insisted he's not a racist.

"It's hard for me to buy the label `racist' for him," said Victor McElheny, the author of a 2003 biography of Watson, whom he's known for 45 years. "This is someone who has encouraged so many people from so many backgrounds."

So why does he say things that can sound racist? "I really don't know the answer to that," McElheny said.

Biologist and Nobel laureate Phil Sharp at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who's known Watson since 1971, said, "I've never considered Jim a racist. However, Jim likes to use statistics and observations to provoke people, and it is possible that he is provoking people by these comments."

Calling Watson "one of the great historical scientific figures of our time," Sharp said, "I don't understand why he takes it upon himself to make these statements."

Mike Botchan, co-chair of the molecular and cell biology department at the University of California, Berkeley, who's known Watson since 1970, said the Nobelist's personal beliefs are less important than the impact of what he says.

"Is he someone who's going to prejudge a person in front of him on the basis of his skin color? I would have to say, no. Is he someone, though, that has these beliefs? I don't know any more. And the important thing is I don't really care," Botchan said.

"I think Jim Watson is now essentially a disgrace to his own legacy. And it's very sad for me to say this, because he's one of the great figures of 20th century biology."

___

Associated Press writers Thomas Wagner in London and Seth Borenstein in Washington contributed to this story."

Anonymous said:

We know there are genetic differences that manifest themselves physically such as disease risks. What if there are mental differences separated by race or geographic development? I am always bothered that we can't discuss these possibilities. As someone before me said, we have created a world where we are only allowed to discuss what should be, not what is.

I'm a teacher and I notice differences that often follow certain patterns. This helps me as I know going in that a certain person may be more likely to be strong in one area but weak in another. If I find I am wrong, I can quickly readjust my training for that person but when I am right (and at this point, that happens with almost every student) I save time and help the student feel better from day one.

For example, my female students tend to have a harder time with mechanical. I personally believe it's caused my nurture, not nature, but the cause doesn't matter. How I bring them up to speed does. My male students have a harder time multitasking, which in the environment where I teach (a cockpit), multitasking is critical to safety. You can see that I teach each one different from the start and it usually helps.

I've noticed racial differences. My indian students are EXCELLENT in the book / ground portion. They often have poor hand / eye coordination as they tend to focus more on education than physical activities. Because I know this going in, I can change the time spent on each and they get a better education from me.

My young white boys can fly the snot out of an airplane - as long as it all goes as planned. Emergencies get them though as the book study isn't something they like to focus on.

Is it racist when it is based on fact and years of study and experience? Is it still racist when it is reality? Does it always have to be a negative thing? As long as we understand that these things we find are averages and can be used as a starting point but nothing more, we'll be ok.

If group A survived as long as group B but is found to be less intelligent (as measured by some tool), what does it mean and how does that help us? Not how does it hurt group A.

Erika,

Just for the record, a citation is not you copying something, or writing something from your own head, it is a reference for material that you used to get the knowledge that you are saying is true. You cited no other source, but only stated something over again. There is debate in the scientific community about how much credit should go to those that "discover" anything, as it is always built on the backs of many other researchers.
I'm not saying what you believe is false, but your argument is weakened in the extreme when you state that you are giving a citation, but then cite no externally verifiable information. In fact, your "citation" would be considered plagiarisms at my school (you mention facts that are not generally known, and do not attribute them.)

Louis Kuhelj said:

The outcry of those who are against the statement made by Dr. Watson clearly show how little value they place on a human being. Since when has the intelligence or the lack thereof been the sole determination of value of a human being or a particular racial group? It seems to me that even if he is right, it in no way diminishes the value of both the black community and the individuals comprising it anywhere in the world. They are as valuable as any white counterpart because we are all made in the image of Him who created us.

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Old Dominion Blog Alliance

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

ECOSYSTEM