http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science...ace/index.html

I am not racist and I don't get a kick whenever science discovers evidence suggesting greater evolutionary advancement in a specific race. Nor do I get sore when such evidence is found. I do believe in equal rights, but also condemn affirmative action. I believe this is how most people feel but as you can see there is a certain minority of zealots who are so worked up over stopping racism that they in turn resort to racism. While I believe this minority population it is easy to see how they get so far: The play the racist card!

This isn't about equal rights or trying to elevate one race to a status of superiority over the rest. It's about freedom of speech and (of all things) science. I'm not saying that one race is smarter than the other; the old geezer has yet to bring forth his evidence. But let's just hypothetically say that Whites were marginally smarter than Blacks (!!!!!!!!). Are we so blindly obsessed with forcing equality that we would actually try and contradict scientific evidence just to keep everyone on the same plane, an aspect of the plane that has nothing to do with equal rights?

If evolution is a fact and we can all agree that we are smarter than our ancestors why can't this be possible. Sorry to say but evolution doesn't stop for equality. And I don't care what you have to say about adding fuel to the White supremists tyraids. Ignore them like you always have; it'll make no difference.

First, Dr. Watson is one of the REALLY great scientists of the 20th century, and does not deserve to called an "old geezer" - that's offensive and stupid.

As for discussions of race and intelligence - who knows, maybe an investigation would show that blacks are more intelligent than whites, but we'll never know, at least not until the PC regime which prevails in this country fades away, and scientists can go back to their life's work - the discovery of the truth. The race card PC anti-science luddites of this era have substituted polical correctness for truth.

And don't expect to get any response from the Pee See contingent here except shouts of racist.

I welcom PC zealots. Call it a boost to my ego.

And loosen up kid; do you relly think I mean any harm by calling someone a geezer?

Nobody has anything to say about this? Not even to come in for a "Howdy-Howdy go F*** yourself, sane-one"?

... I win.

I said my piece in the other thread on this topic -

Let's see, it basically came down to, "so what"?

First of all, I doubt the guy's "evidence", all those testing methods are [U}highly[/u] suspect, and any good sociologist could run rings around any argument to the contrary -

And then secondly, even if it turns out to be true, there should be [U}no[/u] linkage between that discovery, and social policy.

And thirdly, even Nobel Prize winners get kooky in their old age sometimes -

I mean, of all the possible things the guy could be studying, why is he interested in this? It's like, who cares, right?

sounds to me like a guy who has developed tunnel vision from working in one discipline for too many decades. Its the,"if you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail" syndrome. For example, studies have shown that an infant girl twin who shares the womb with a boy will probably grow up slightly more masculine, less likely to have children than the statistical average for other females. Why? Is there a genetic explanation? Actually no- hormones are critical and the fact that the female fetus is exposed to an excess of testosterone in the womb leads to subtle changes.

In any case, its very unprofessional (and stupid! talk about I.Q.) for him to make public such highly speculative, inflammatory statements.

You guys are missing the point. I'm not asking if such evidence should make any difference; I already said it shoulding It's merely a hypothetical question of of our obssession with equality. And no it shouldn't just be discarded because if it's true then we are purposefully trying to nullify science for the advancement of one minority, narrow-minded view. Hmmm sounds familiar (and this coming from a Christian).

"Watson also asserted there was no reason to believe different races separated by geography should have evolved identically, and he said that while he hoped everyone was equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true."

Well, the first part of the statement is O.K. as far as it goes which is not very far. The second part of the statement indicates that Watson is an ignorant racist. Opinion, not science, appears to be the basis for his statements and as a respected scientist he should know better than to spout baseless opinions.

Scientific questions of high importance go uninvestigated because the political establishment stops them??? Yaaaaaaaaaaaa so what.

You haven't SEEN his evidence, he hasn't invetigated a hypothesis, he got stopped dead at the Pee See red light. As for the typical sociologist, a lameo lib in a non-science running rings around a nobel winner in the hard sciences???? Duhhhhh yaaaaa surrrrre, and you can beat up Mike Tyson.

Yaaaaaaa and if it turns out aerodynamic equations are wrong, it should have no linkage to aircraft design.

Cowardly defamation.

This is certainly the stupidist post you've made.

Is it EVER possible for libs to drop the defamation and argue the issue?