PDA

View Full Version : Oh Shit!



Sitarro
10-17-2007, 12:46 AM
This should get a few neck hairs to stand on end.....:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3067222.ece


Africans are less intelligent than Westerners, says DNA pioneer
Fury at James Watson's theory: "All our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really"

By Cahal Milmo
Published: 17 October 2007
One of the world's most eminent scientists was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he claimed that black people were less intelligent than white people and the idea that "equal powers of reason" were shared across racial groups was a delusion.

James Watson, a Nobel Prize winner for his part in the unravelling of DNA who now runs one of America's leading scientific research institutions, drew widespread condemnation for comments he made ahead of his arrival in Britain today for a speaking tour at venues including the Science Museum in London.

The 79-year-old geneticist reopened the explosive debate about race and science in a newspaper interview in which he said Western policies towards African countries were wrongly based on an assumption that black people were as clever as their white counterparts when "testing" suggested the contrary. He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.

The newly formed Equality and Human Rights Commission, successor to the Commission for Racial Equality, saidit was studying Dr Watson's remarks "in full". 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".

His views are also reflected in a book published next week, in which he writes: "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."

The furore echoes the controversy created in the 1990s by The Bell Curve, a book co-authored by the American political scientist Charles Murray, which suggested differences in IQ were genetic and discussed the implications of a racial divide in intelligence. The work was heavily criticised across the world, in particular by leading scientists who described it as a work of "scientific racism".

Dr Watson arrives in Britain today for a speaking tour to publicise his latest book, Avoid Boring People: Lessons from a Life in Science. Among his first engagements is a speech to an audience at the Science Museum organised by the Dana Centre, which held a discussion last night on the history of scientific racism.

Critics of Dr Watson said there should be a robust response to his views across the spheres of politics and science. Keith Vaz, the Labour chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said: "It is sad to see a scientist of such achievement making such baseless, unscientific and extremely offensive comments. I am sure the scientific community will roundly reject what appear to be Dr Watson's personal prejudices.

"These comments serve as a reminder of the attitudes which can still exists at the highestprofessional levels."

The American scientist earned a place in the history of great scientific breakthroughs of the 20th century when he worked at the University of Cambridge in the 1950s and 1960s and formed part of the team which discovered the structure of DNA. He shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for medicine with his British colleague Francis Crick and New Zealand-born Maurice Wilkins.

But despite serving for 50 years as a director of the Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory on Long Island, considered a world leader in research into cancer and genetics, Dr Watson has frequently courted controversy with some of his views on politics, sexuality and race. The respected journal Science wrote in 1990: "To many in the scientific community, Watson has long been something of a wild man, and his colleagues tend to hold their collective breath whenever he veers from the script."

In 1997, he told a British newspaper that a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be homosexual. He later insisted he was talking about a "hypothetical" choice which could never be applied. He has also suggested a link between skin colour and sex drive, positing the theory that black people have higher libidos, and argued in favour of genetic screening and engineering on the basis that "stupidity" could one day be cured. He has claimed that beauty could be genetically manufactured, saying: "People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would great."

The Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory said yesterday that Dr Watson could not be contacted to comment on his remarks.

continued at link............

diuretic
10-17-2007, 02:54 AM
Interesting. The sad thing is that the validity of his remarks (in other words his evidence for his claim) won't be seriously tested. Instead he will be pelted with contrary opinions, not evidence, just opinions based on ideology. Watson could cast himself in the role of Galileo and his objectors in the role of the Vatican. There's no difference.

Gaffer
10-17-2007, 10:50 AM
There needs to be some testing done of his theories. It won't happen because too many people are afraid to do such testing. They would be labeled as racists. Would be interesting to see if there are any differences between other races as well. Does diet or other factors play a part in intelligence? I think a lot of people would be afraid of what such a study might unearth.

diuretic
10-17-2007, 04:11 PM
Agreed. And there's more to it. We might get a better idea about the nature of human intelligence....but, nope, it will all be suppressed.

5stringJeff
10-17-2007, 07:36 PM
Actually, there's a decent amount of research regarding IQs among races. The "news" Watson is delivering is not new at all. Researchers believe the average IQ of sub-saharan blacks to be in the 67-70 range, as opposed to 96-98 for Europeans and 102-105 for Asians.

However, there is also evidence that nutrition could be a factor, and that with proper nutrition, the average sub-saharan African IQ could rise to ~80.

Moreover, this doesn't mean that there are no intelligent blacks. It only means that the average IQ of blacks is lower than the average IQ of whites, which is in turn lower than the average IQ of Asians.

diuretic
10-17-2007, 08:19 PM
Good to see the forum NOT breaking out into rioting :D

Interesting points there Jeff.

glockmail
10-17-2007, 08:23 PM
Actually, there's a decent amount of research regarding IQs among races. The "news" Watson is delivering is not new at all. Researchers believe the average IQ of sub-saharan blacks to be in the 67-70 range, as opposed to 96-98 for Europeans and 102-105 for Asians.

However, there is also evidence that nutrition could be a factor, and that with proper nutrition, the average sub-saharan African IQ could rise to ~80.

Moreover, this doesn't mean that there are no intelligent blacks. It only means that the average IQ of blacks is lower than the average IQ of whites, which is in turn lower than the average IQ of Asians. You racist. Hitler.

chesswarsnow
10-17-2007, 08:48 PM
Sorry bout that,

1. What is IQ anyway?
2. I was tested once, and I tested out at 129.
3. I have met some rather shallow blacks before, met one the other day.
4. I was working on a job, and this black guy comes up, kinda waving his hands and all, saying something like, "I'm not a bum".
5. As he gets closer I wondering if I am going to have to defend myself, but I allowed him to walk up and say his peace.
6. So he says, "Man I am stuck here in this area and can't get to my car, so I can get back to Houston, Texas, can you give me a ride to my car and help me out?"
7. I told him "No", I'm busy on a job, and have to finish it.
8. The location was in a industrial area, with nothing there but a black neighborhood.
9. Always I get this same old dumb story, from these types of people, I am sure if I had given him a ride, I would of had to kick his ass real bad.
10. He may have had a knife, and I would of been forced to defend myself.
11. He finally asked if I could give him a "dollar or two", which I did.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Psychoblues
10-18-2007, 11:01 PM
Your incontinence is already well documented, zorro. Must we hear about each of your wet farts?

5stringJeff
10-19-2007, 07:34 AM
What is IQ anyway?

Here are some links to read on the subject:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_reference_chart
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_intelligence_factor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_IQ_society

darin
10-19-2007, 08:38 AM
I support EQ over IQ - mostly cuz it's higher for me.

:D

5stringJeff
10-20-2007, 09:24 AM
I support EQ over IQ - mostly cuz it's higher for me.

:D

It's not an either/or proposition, it's both/and. :)

Kathianne
10-20-2007, 09:29 AM
Actually, there's a decent amount of research regarding IQs among races. The "news" Watson is delivering is not new at all. Researchers believe the average IQ of sub-saharan blacks to be in the 67-70 range, as opposed to 96-98 for Europeans and 102-105 for Asians.

However, there is also evidence that nutrition could be a factor, and that with proper nutrition, the average sub-saharan African IQ could rise to ~80.

Moreover, this doesn't mean that there are no intelligent blacks. It only means that the average IQ of blacks is lower than the average IQ of whites, which is in turn lower than the average IQ of Asians.

I agree with the nutrition as a possible variable. It's also been noted that whatever the group, those wealthier tend to have higher IQ's, also related to the 'sub-Saharan', European, and Asians, in a wealth-based order. Then there are the educational and 'enrichment' factors, also wealth related.

I'm not saying the Watson remarks were 'off' just that other variables certainly would need to be accounted for, between and within groups.

avatar4321
10-20-2007, 09:49 AM
His views are also reflected in a book published next week, in which he writes: "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."

I think he has a point here. If Evolution is true than there is no reason to expec the intellectual capacities of people geographically separated to be identical.

In fact, its only a belief in God and the heritage of all men as His Children that presupposes that we are all created equal.