Posted on 01/12/2019 5:23:13 AM PST by reaganaut1
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory revoked the honorary titles held by its longtime leader James D. Watson on Friday, describing as “unsubstantiated and reckless” his recent remarks about genetic differences in intelligence among racial groups.
Dr. Watson, one of the most influential scientists of the 20th century, had apologized after making similar comments to a British newspaper in 2007. At the time, he was forced to retire from his job as chancellor at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island, but he has retained his office there, as well as the titles of chancellor emeritus, Oliver R. Grace professor emeritus and honorary trustee. The graduate school of biological sciences at the research center is named for Dr. Watson, and the laboratory held a 90th birthday party for him last spring.
For the past decade the laboratory, like much of the scientific community, has engaged in a delicate balancing act with regard to Dr. Watson: holding him at arm’s length for reinforcing unfounded racial stereotypes, while still honoring him for his contributions to science. Dr. Watson, with Francis Crick and Rosalind Franklin, helped discover the double-helix structure of DNA in 1953, and he went on to help to shape the subsequent revolution in molecular biology.
But his recent comments “effectively reverse the written apology and retraction Dr. Watson made in 2007,” and “require the severing of any remaining vestiges of his involvement,” Cold Spring Harbor’s chief executive, Bruce Stillman, and its board of trustees chairwoman, Marilyn Simons, said in a statement.
[...] In the film, Dr. Watson references a view that average I.Q. differences between blacks and whites reflect underlying genetic differences shaped by natural selection.
But leading geneticists say that even modern DNA studies are currently unable to validate such hypotheses about differences between human populations.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Yes, but on average your IQ would be higher.
What does Dr. Lysenko have to say on this matter?
Legacies and big donors always had affirmative action. Where else did the idea come from?
I have.
I got sick of the freaks and extreamists that were obvious in their agenda.
Whenever I encounter yet another one that speaks in couched language, I know I’ve found yet another one.
But they don’t fit the definition of affirmative action.
An affirmative action admit is one that has been discriminated against.
Ping
You miss the point. Before the government made it a legal category, the common sense definition was ‘being awarded something without regard to whether it was achieved or deserved’.
Affirmative Action | Definition of Affirmative Action by Merriam-Webster
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/affirmative%20action
Definition of affirmative action. : an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women sought to achieve a multicultural staff through affirmative action also : a similar effort to promote the rights or progress of other disadvantaged persons.
That is what is has come to mean legally. No one before the ‘60s would have understood it thus.
The woman I was dating wasn't...don't know about her classmate.
Seriously, about 30% of the class might be legacy admissions and big donor family admissions.
Yup,I know that that's quite common at the more prestigious schools.But IMO all such admissions represent a form of "affirmative action".I can't say whether her classmate had the same attitude when revealing Harvard's "inner workings".
There are blacks who are intellectually superior to the vast majority of white people. Clarence Thomas and Thomas Sowell come to mind.
However, the gap between AVERAGE group scores for whites and blacks, in things like IQ tests, SAT tests, and many other tests of intellectual performance, is well documented.
This becomes very relevant when people declare any statistical difference in outcome between races, to be evidence of discrimination. Except when, as in athletics, it favors minorities.
Keep in mind that the self selected group of people who CHOOSE to immigrate is not likely to be a random sampling of the people from where they come from.
In some cases, they will be people who could not make it, and desire to sponge off our welfare system. In other cases, they will be people of high ability who want an opportunity to succeed.
An intelligent Westerner, put through Army survival school training, would have a better chance of surviving the Serengeti plains, than a resident of the Serengeti would have in being a successful member of the US middle class, unless he was brought over to play athlete.
If white people are so bad, then why are all the nonwhites going to the white countries?
Why not stay in your own country and fix it up?
Different races have different strengths and weaknesses.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Thats so true. But the real problem is that these superior aspects and inferior aspects of gene related specificity are not evenly distributed throughout any defined racial group.
Therefore stereotyping any quality in a defined group is a huge mistake made by almost everyone.I am Caucasion. My family will likely never have sickle cell anemia, instead we are likely to have haemachromitosis.
But not all Caucasions have the hemachromitosis gene, just as Black people do not all carry the sickle cell gene. Both are not evenly distributed in those populations. So why stereotype? Its ludicrous. I use these examples to show how ludicrous sterotyping for political correctness really is.
I am from a multi-racial family, my son married inter- racially, and so the topic has been exercised between us.They want to have liberty and freedom.
I am actually quite tired of the stereotyping upon which political correctness itself depends. Why do so many fall for such absolute foolishness? We should simply be kind and love one another , get along civilly as Americans who can be genuinely free.We have so much in common, the pursuit of happiness. With political correctness, stereotyping and dehumanizing each other, as the leftists promote, ruling our society, we can never be free. Has anybody NOTICED THAT?
Caucasion = Caucasian
I have the bad spelling gene./s
In 2007, Watson said, "I turned against the left wing because they don't like genetics, because genetics implies that sometimes in life we fail because we have bad genes. They want all failure in life to be due to the evil system." [Wiki article]
I had him and his wife to myself for all of ten minutes, so it wasn't any long acquaintance, but I will say without fear of contradiction that he doesn't give a rip what people think.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.