Good Scientists Gone Bad -- Dr. Watson and Dr. Pauling

and Mobiogirl needs to address the logic and historical evidence which Buzsaw's message has addressed relative to caucasians and the rest of the world's cultures, nations and peoples as per definition of caucasian rather than responding with this evasive sedgeway relative to technical definitions.

Crashfrog writes:Buz, seriously, learn some stats. There's nothing supported about what CS is saying, statistically.

CF writes:This is just ignorant nonsense. It's only been in the 20th century that the prosperity and invention of the West has exceeded that of Europe; evey previous human invention - agriculture/irrigation, metallurgy, steelmaking, mathematics, science, sailing/navigation, animal domestication, writing, money, even the wheel were all invented in Asia, North Africa, and the Middle East centuries before they appeared in the West.

CF writes:We're the ones playing catch-up, Buz. Of course, in your ignorant, racist anglocentricity you're completely blind to that.

Well then, how about you providing some statistical evidence which directly refutes CS's cited statement other than obscuring it with a study about probabilities?

Yup, just like I told Catholic Scientist, regardless of the evidence any position nonsupportive to the modern imposition of equality upon all humans in every respect, including this IQ debate will be labeled racist, bigot, etc.

The Mismeasure of Man is a controversial 1981 book written by the Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002). The book is a history and critique of the methods and motivations underlying biological determinism, the belief that "the social and economic differences between human groups”primarily races, classes, and sexes”arise from inherited, inborn distinctions and that society, in this sense, is an accurate reflection of biology."[1]The book also attempts to critique the principal theme of biological determinism, that "worth can be assigned to individuals and groups by measuring intelligence as a single quantity." Gould discusses two prominent techniques used to measure such a quantity, craniometry and psychological testing. According to Gould these methods suffer from "two deep fallacies." The first fallacy is of reification, that is, "our tendency to convert abstract concepts into entities." These entities include IQ (the intelligence quotient) and g (the general intelligence factor), which have been the cornerstone of much intelligence research. The second fallacy is one of ranking, or our "propensity for ordering complex variation as a gradual ascending scale."The Mismeasure of Man skeptically investigates "the abstraction of intelligence as a single entity, its location within the brain, its quantification as one number for each individual, and the use of these numbers to rank people in a single series of worthiness, invariably to find that oppressed and disadvantaged groups”races, classes, or sexes”are innately inferior and deserve their status."[2]The book's second edition (1996) has been revised and challenges the arguments of Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray's The Bell Curve, which had generated much controversy.

You appear to make good logical and reasonable sense here, CS. Perhaps political correctness and the relatively modern imposement of equality upon society is what makes your statically substantiated position controversial.This debate has nothing to do with racism perse so long as there is a reasonable amount of evidence for a given position. However, considering the sensitivity of the topic, the ones who's evidence is nonsupportive to the equality factor relative to all humans will be labeled racist, feminist, bigoted etc.The historical record appears to lend support to your position. The races, geographically have been essentially uniform throughout known history until the industrial revolution and escalation of travel etc. Throughout recorded history until the industrial revolution and the effects of westernization upon the orientals, for some reason caucasian peoples have been the more prosperous, educated, civilized, industrious, dominating, expansive and productive on the planet from whose race all of the major world empires have emerged.The trend toward racial equality appears to have begun from the time of travel and the Industrial Revolution which effected inter-racial reproduction, westernization of non-caucasians, and geographical relocating individuals as well as various segments of the races.Merriam Webster Definition Of Caucasian:of, constituting, or characteristic of a race of humankind native to Europe, North Africa, and southwest Asia and classified according to physical features ”used especially in referring to persons of European descent having usually light skin pigmentation

I'm not the one who challenged CS's position. It behooves the ones challenging his position to counter with evidence or let it stand unchallenged. One needn't be a rocket scientist to be aware of the observable correctness of his statement. Likely statitionists, journalists and the majority in any field are reluctant to address the obvious in regard to this sensitive and touchy topic.

CS writes:You can take your silly little debate rules and cram them up your ass, cop.

Please provide support for your contention that there are "obvious morphological differences".

Well then, how about you providing some statistical evidence which directly refutes CS's cited statement other than obscuring it with a study about probabilities?

Since the US was established by Europeans, in broad sense of the term West, we are simply and extension of the Western cultures.

Yup, just like I told Catholic Scientist, regardless of the evidence any position nonsupportive to the modern imposition of equality upon all humans in every respect, including this IQ debate will be labeled racist, bigot, etc.

Of course, the real funny thing is that there are morphological differences.

It behooves the ones challenging his position to counter with evidence or let it stand unchallenged.

CS is required to support his own contentions; we're not required to do it for him.

There is no evidence, statistically or otherwise, that suggests an inherent difference of IQ between whites in the West and Africans in Africa. There's an abundance of evidence that there is an IQ difference as a result of various social problems, including neolithic levels of education and nutrition in Africa and the fact that the people writing all the tests are basically white people in Europe and America.

And the other 2 correlations between race and IQ are SES (socioeconomic status) and nutrition.

CS is using "morphological differences" as a stand in for "race".

CS is referring to skin color and facial features.

Do you think there is a biologically useful definition of race?