Scientist Suspended for Race Remarks Also Discussed 'Defective' Children

Cybercast News ^ | 10-19-07 | Patrick Goodenough

[yankeesdoodle]

Noting that some abnormalities are not discovered until after birth, he suggested that a baby should not be considered legally alive immediately on being born.

"If a child were not declared alive until three days after birth, then all parents could be allowed the choice that only a few are given under the present system," he said. "The doctor could allow the child to die if the parents so chose and save a lot of misery and suffering."

[peggybac]

What is the name of the college professor who said the same thing, that babies could be “murdered” after they were born? IIRC, he’s still teaching.

[happinesswithoutpeace]

See post # 8.

[Condor51]

• the 79-year-old geneticist was quoted ... 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." ... "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true,"

• he reportedly has made ... remarks that people with darker skin have a stronger sex drive...

• and that fat people lack ambition.

This guy needs a Cable Show - or a padded cell.

(then again he's got a point about fat people)

[FReepapalooza]

Unfortunately, they already have that figured out.

Terri Schiavo.

[syriacus]

What is the name of the college professor

Peter Singer...he's at Princeton.

[peggybac]

Thanks!

[peggybac]

Thanks - I totally read right through that.

[happinesswithoutpeace]

np :)

[LongTimeMILurker]

Didn’t Margaret Sanger, who founded Planned Parenthood, hold the same views about race and abortion as Watson has expressed? Why are people still supporting her work?

It’s all about some so called “smart” person deciding who lives and dies, who is allowed to procreate, etc. Social programs have resulted in high taxation which discourages people who are successful and pay more taxes from having more children. So isn’t this contradictory to Sanger’s intent? If you are going to support what Margaret Sanger believed, then LOWER TAXES, don’t raise them to support liberal programs like Planned Parenthood.

[Ro_Thunder]

Amazingly, I heard some guy on the local Houston radio (950, I think) discussing this.

We humans talk about how smart a golden retriever is, or how dumb a cocker spaniel is, or how high-strung a chihuahua, or pomeranian is.

They are all dogs. With 99.whatever % of the same DNA.

We’re all humans. With 99.whatever % of the same DNA.

Why can’t we be different like them?

We say the same thing about birds, cats, TREES, GRASS, etc. Why can’t we SAY the same thing that’s TRUE either way?

Now, I’m not saying that Africans are not as smart as Europeans. What I’m saying is, it’s not wrong to say what you BELIEVE.

Now, I’m not saying what he’s said isn’t offensive, but then again, I’m part of the HUMAN race, and we tend to get offended from time to time. (Despite the fact that some want to outlaw that).

[yankeesdoodle]

exactly. Only let the geniuses live. Right. I watch that show— Dirty Jobs, on the Discovery channel, and it’s funny— about 99% of the jobs out there that keep the world humming along don’t take doctorates. If we went out into space, and wanted to terraform a planet, would we send college professors? No. You’d need plumbers, construction workers, steel workers, farmers, forklift operators, etc. Look at who started this country. Hard-working people with strong backs.

[freespirited]

His views are the logical conclusion of evolutionists; just that he is willing to say it out loud.

His views are completely contrary to evolutionary theory. Under evolutionary theory, natural selection is the decider. He is advocating that man be the decider. That's not consistent with the theory or Darwin's personal views. In fact, it would turn natural selection on its head.

[RachelFaith]

One day before birth, 3 days after? Really, is there any difference? I suppose if some states want to allow 3 day later abortions, that would be OK under the new definition of Federalism, huh?

//bitter sarcasm, because it is going to become all too real one day soon...

= (

[Surtur]

Why not 30? Yeah, I like that.

How very Logan's Run and Carousel.

[LongTimeMILurker]

They only support evolutionary theory because it places doubt on the existence of God, who threatens the authority of the Stalinists who seek sole power over the human mind.

Otherwise, they want us to devolve and result in less intelligent people who they can fool politically.

[sobieski]

How so? A more ‘fit’ person decides that a ‘less fit’ will no longer receive societal resources. That’s the very definistion of Evolutionist Fundamentalism: Those who can out compete. Those who can’t, die.

[bill1952]

>How very Logan's Run and Carousel

Nah.. In those cases you had to die at 30.

I'm just widening the parameters of his proposal.

[VOA]

This guy is just a treasure trove of offensive one-liners.
He should get a cable show.

This current episode is sort of suprising.

In a previous life when I was in graduate school, a couple of my
profs had met Watson at various functions.

They said he was pretty loud in mouthing off with lurid comments
on the ladies.

I figured he'd brought down by a sex-discrimination lawsuit,
not a racial-IQ comment.

[freespirited]

How so? A more ‘fit’ person decides that a ‘less fit’ will no longer receive societal resources. That’s the very definistion of Evolutionist Fundamentalism:

No it isn't. Under evolutionary theory, man decides nothing. Mother Nature decides everything. A process driven by man is artifical; contrary to nature. It is the opposite of natural selection--it is unnatural selection.

Those who can out compete. Those who can’t, die.

True, the ability to compete is part of what drives selection. But it is not the only factor. It is more useful to think in terms of suitability for a particular environment. For example, imagine a person who is a great competitor. But if he has a condition that makes him unable to tolerate weather conditions during part of the year where he is living, he will not be well suited to that environment, and unless he can migrate, he is at high risk of being selected out. By nature. Not by man. That's natural selection.

[Janusz]

Some years ago there was an Ontario scientist (I think London University) who conducted extensive studies on racial intelligence. His conclusions were yellow race had slightly higher average IQ then white race and then black race a little lower again.

He also was crucified based on hysteria without any factual discussion.

This is not the way to deal with controversial subjects. It does not inspire confidence with a rational thinking person that the truth is upheld.