Nobel prize winner James Watson stripped of titles after suggesting genes make black people less intelligent

Cunth

Fingerlickin' Good!
May 22, 2018
4,979
14,130
825
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-14/nobel-prize-winner-james-watson-stripped-title-race-comments/10712588

In an interview aired on US television earlier this month, James Watson — who won the Nobel in 1962 for his role in discovering DNA's double helix structure — said genes were responsible for a difference between black and white people on IQ tests.
That is the title of that article, not my own. The article is pretty low on detail so I'm not sure if he was suggesting that on average black people have lower IQs or that all black people have lower intelligence. I'm also not sure about the real statistics, but if it is a true statement, should people not be saying it because it is such a sensitive issue, or do facts always trump feelings?
 

ssolitare

Manbaby: The Member
Jan 12, 2009
17,167
2,041
1,180
Watson had previously told Britain's Sunday Times newspaper in 2007 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."

The scientist added that while he hoped everyone was equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true."

Those comments led CSHL to relieve him of his administrative duties, but he retained his honorary titles until now.

While Watson apologized for the comments in 2007, he said in the PBS documentary "American Masters: Decoding Watson," which aired on 2 January, that his views had not changed.

The remarks are the latest in a series of racist and homophobic statements that have tainted Watson's career.

In 1997, Britain's Sunday Telegraph quoted him as saying that women should be allowed to abort a child for any reason, such as if a gene for homosexuality were found in the fetus.

During a lecture tour in 2000, he suggested there might be links between a person's weight and their level of ambition and between skin color and sexual prowess.

"That's why you have Latin lovers," he said, according to The Associated Press, which cited people who attended the lecture. "You've never heard of an English lover. Only an English patient."

And in a British TV documentary that aired in 2003, Watson suggested stupidity was a genetic disease that should be treated.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/01/13/health/james-watson-honors-stripped-intl/index.html
 
May 22, 2018
5,399
4,856
595
Watson had previously told Britain's Sunday Times newspaper in 2007 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."

The scientist added that while he hoped everyone was equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true."

Those comments led CSHL to relieve him of his administrative duties, but he retained his honorary titles until now.

While Watson apologized for the comments in 2007, he said in the PBS documentary "American Masters: Decoding Watson," which aired on 2 January, that his views had not changed.

The remarks are the latest in a series of racist and homophobic statements that have tainted Watson's career.

In 1997, Britain's Sunday Telegraph quoted him as saying that women should be allowed to abort a child for any reason, such as if a gene for homosexuality were found in the fetus.

During a lecture tour in 2000, he suggested there might be links between a person's weight and their level of ambition and between skin color and sexual prowess.

"That's why you have Latin lovers," he said, according to The Associated Press, which cited people who attended the lecture. "You've never heard of an English lover. Only an English patient."

And in a British TV documentary that aired in 2003, Watson suggested stupidity was a genetic disease that should be treated.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/01/13/health/james-watson-honors-stripped-intl/index.html
Jesus Christ. Glad they did what they did then. You can't have shit like that being spewed without consequences. It sounds like it should have been done a long time ago though judging by some of those statements.
 
Last edited:

weltalldx

Member
Feb 25, 2017
384
478
230
And so begins the intellectual decline of the western world. In the future when Asia will lead in scientific advancement/discoveries, historians can clearly look back and answer the question of "what went wrong?" with "intersectionality".
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
6,551
7,253
880
Seems like he is a run of the mill racist.

Sounds familiar to stuff people said in the late 19th and early 20th century.

Unless he has recipts for these claims sounds like old man repeating old racist BS.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
14,161
26,545
1,260
USA
dunpachi.com
Hey, they gave Obama -- a warmonger -- the Peace Prize not long ago. I think this says more about the Nobel institution than anything else.

Old things pass away.
 

LegendOfKage

Member
Mar 6, 2018
2,565
3,557
670
That is the title of that article, not my own. The article is pretty low on detail so I'm not sure if he was suggesting that on average black people have lower IQs or that all black people have lower intelligence. I'm also not sure about the real statistics, but if it is a true statement, should people not be saying it because it is such a sensitive issue, or do facts always trump feelings?
At this point I was giving him the benefit of doubt. Perhaps he is thinking averages, perhaps there are statistics that can back him up, perhaps he wouldn't judge individuals based on averages. And, if people are scoring poorly on IQ tests, there's also the concern that it has nothing to do with innate intelligence, and much more to do with education opportunities, or cultural biases. I was willing to not be quick to judge.

The scientist added that while he hoped everyone was equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true."
And then I read that. If he actually said that, it completely destroys any claim of statistical data. That is judgement of an individual based on the perceptions of a group, and those are the words of a racist.
 

Relativ9

Member
Nov 18, 2012
1,698
348
495
Narvik, Norway
Guy is clearly a racist...but, does that change the accomplishment that won him the award originally? The guy still helped discover the double Helix, are we saying that isn't the type of discovery that deserves an award?

I'd never want him to sit on any comitty or publish any new works of his, especially in relation to genetics or race, but surely past accomplishments are still valid right?

Seems he has the misfortune of still being alive to have his antiquated views punished, if Einstein had similar opinions I doubt we'd be up in arms about it today, or wirhdraw his awards.

Don't get me wrong, I get that people want to make an example out of him, but this just seems like a similar case as people unable to separate the artist from the art.
 
Last edited:
Aug 22, 2018
392
432
360
Watson could have cited studies that demonstrate something close to what he's suggesting, but instead he uses goofy, useless annecdotes and conjecture.
said genes were responsible for a difference between black and white people on IQ tests.
Twin and Trans-Racial Adoption Studies have provided predictively-valid heritability estimates for intelligence, the variance in Intelligence attributable to non-environmental factors is estimated to be around 76%(50-80% is usually the range) in Adulthood. More recently GWAS have given us an idea of gene correlations both positive and negative with intelligence(g) whereby no matter how you divide up humans into groups we find unequal distribution of genes. An appeal to the mountain of evidence that's out there which somewhat supports a few of his claims would have been a much stronger position than the quicksand he built his proverbial home on.

Don't say silly things, even if it's understood what you meant, any politically or ideologically opposed person will frame your words in as poor a light as you've allowed them. When speaking about these ideas, you're talking about large groups of people. So you would use this information only when it concerns large groups of people.
 
Jun 10, 2018
283
249
295
Isn’t this the same guy who tried to auction off his Nobel prize because he was broke? He was unable to kept financially solvent due to his crazy, racists outbursts and views.
 

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
4,532
5,204
820
The dude is older than Methuselah. Yeah a 90 year old dude is going to have backwards ideas, so what?
 

King of Foxes

Member
Jan 9, 2018
1,310
2,086
600
Latvia
Nobel Prize-winning DNA scientist James Watson has been stripped of several honorary titles by the laboratory he once headed over his views about intelligence and race. The 90-year-old geneticist - one of three who discovered the DNA double helix - had lost his job at the New York laboratory in 2007 for expressing racist views.
He had told a magazine in 2007 he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" as "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - where all the testing says not really".
Science is now racist.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/13/james-watson-scientist-honors-stripped-reprehensible-race-comments

https://news.sky.com/story/dna-pioneer-james-watson-stripped-of-honours-after-reckless-race-remarks-11606108

 
Last edited:

Super Mario

Member
Nov 12, 2016
1,224
1,398
415
The truth is there is no definitive answer on this. The party of science will debate every other topic to death, but to question differences is races MUST be wrong. It's not like there already many known physical attribute differences between different people. Right? Asians aren't smaller, Polynesians aren't bigger. So something like IQ that isn't a black and white measurement (pun not intended) must mean it's the same!

One theory is those who reproduced with Neanderthals had higher IQs. Ironic as modern mockery paints Neanderthals as idiots. Apparently they haven't mated with those of African descent. There are a few other studies out there, but not enough conclusive data. I doubt anyone would ever attempt to really dive into the subject as it is taboo. Not that even studying or finding out would even help anything. No one needs to prove how anyone is "better" at anything than anyone. Let's be real with ourselves though. Everyone on this earth is not the same person, as much as the narrative wants us to believe. There are so many differences in health, body composition, appearance, and yes, there are mental pieces too. It doesn't make anyone better or worse. It makes everyone unique. Respect the unique differences.
 

King of Foxes

Member
Jan 9, 2018
1,310
2,086
600
Latvia
Already posted in Politics and this OP most definitely has an agenda to push.
Whoops didnt see the other thread.

I saw this while having my morning coffee, googled to make sure it wasn't bs and then posted here as i dont think its political because its not about Trump.

My agenda? I dont have some grand theme in mind other than pointing out how stupid offense culture is.
 

RedVIper

Member
Jun 13, 2017
1,641
1,981
420
The truth is there is no definitive answer on this. The party of science will debate every other topic to death, but to question differences is races MUST be wrong. It's not like there already many known physical attribute differences between different people. Right? Asians aren't smaller, Polynesians aren't bigger. So something like IQ that isn't a black and white measurement (pun not intended) must mean it's the same!

One theory is those who reproduced with Neanderthals had higher IQs. Ironic as modern mockery paints Neanderthals as idiots. Apparently they haven't mated with those of African descent. There are a few other studies out there, but not enough conclusive data. I doubt anyone would ever attempt to really dive into the subject as it is taboo. Not that even studying or finding out would even help anything. No one needs to prove how anyone is "better" at anything than anyone. Let's be real with ourselves though. Everyone on this earth is not the same person, as much as the narrative wants us to believe. There are so many differences in health, body composition, appearance, and yes, there are mental pieces too. It doesn't make anyone better or worse. It makes everyone unique. Respect the unique differences.
If you wanted to do a study like this you can do with comparing asians and europeans, that way it won't be regarded as racist. It might not help right now but it could be helpful in the future, decentivizing research because it's politically incorrect is pretty stupid.

In 1997, Britain's Sunday Telegraph quoted him as saying that women should be allowed to abort a child for any reason, such as if a gene for homosexuality were found in the fetus.

And in a British TV documentary that aired in 2003, Watson suggested stupidity was a genetic disease that should be treated.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/01/13/health/james-watson-honors-stripped-intl/index.html
"The biologist Richard Dawkins wrote a letter to The Independent claiming that Watson's position was misrepresented by The Sunday Telegraph article, and that Watson would equally consider the possibility of having a heterosexual child to be just as valid as any other reason for abortion."

Some of his wish for genetics has to do with his son who suffers from schizophrenia.

He also sold the medal for 4.1 million $ and then the guy who bought it returned it to him.

You can hate the dude all you want, but if you're going to strip everyone who has contributed to science of their awards because of "wrong" beliefs you're going to be going after a lot of people.
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
18,439
5,223
830
Brampton, Ontario
One theory is those who reproduced with Neanderthals had higher IQs. Ironic as modern mockery paints Neanderthals as idiots. Apparently they haven't mated with those of African descent. There are a few other studies out there, but not enough conclusive data. I doubt anyone would ever attempt to really dive into the subject as it is taboo. Not that even studying or finding out would even help anything. No one needs to prove how anyone is "better" at anything than anyone. Let's be real with ourselves though. Everyone on this earth is not the same person, as much as the narrative wants us to believe. There are so many differences in health, body composition, appearance, and yes, there are mental pieces too. It doesn't make anyone better or worse. It makes everyone unique. Respect the unique differences.
High IQ came from weather and survival.

Africa is hot all year round. There are no winters. Food is everywhere. The best attributes would have been physical strength as a means against predators.

Europe has unpredictable winter weather. Food is much more harder to come by. To adapt to this environment, Humans needed to be able to plan for the cold weather or they would have froze/starve to death.

Repeat this for hundreds of thousands of years on different continents, and humans started to evolve different brains. Neanderthals in fact have the largest cranium of Homo Sapiens and lived outside of Africa.

I agree we should respect the differences, just as how we respect differences in Men and Women. No one is called sexist for saying women are biologically different from Men, so why is it racist or taboo to point out that each Race have their own average IQ?
 
Last edited:

bitbydeath

Member
Nov 25, 2015
8,229
6,118
905
Genes doesn't make sense as the answer and it looks like he was just guessing based on the results but it could just as easily be upbringing related which I would find to be much more likely.

That said stripping him of everything comes off as a bit childish.
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
18,439
5,223
830
Brampton, Ontario
Would people be so up in arms if he confirmed that Asians and Ashkenazi Jews had on average higher IQ?

Somehow i doubt it
They do.

There are already statistics that show which Race are the most successful.
So if you said "Asians make the most money on average" or "Asians dominate University scores". That would be fine.

But if you say "This must mean Asians are more intelligent to make the most money or do best in school" that would be called racist!



 

Halo is Dead

Member
May 20, 2018
1,901
2,582
540
I don't really see that as overtly racists. However, I question his "conclusion" and these so called test. If it really is the truth, well I don't know what to say.
 

juliotendo

Member
Jan 5, 2019
1,093
1,967
535
Mexico
It’s hard to have a serious discussion about these kind of things because we live in a society now where everyone gets their feelings hurt every 15 seconds. We can’t have a serious discussion about anything.

I don’t know if Watson is a racist, but he did make several controversial comments about genetics and intelligence in humans.
 

olimariOA

Member
Nov 28, 2018
270
455
315
Texas
Of course there are intelligence differences when you compare the collectives.
How can we study evolution and biology and not acknowledge this in humans like we do with every other animal?

The truth is that there's an incredible amount of overlap between the races which means you can't make a snap judgement about anybody based on how they look. And even if you could, what purpose would it serve? We all have to live and work together if we want to improve as a species.

RE: Watson
If his methodology is good leave him alone.
If he's operating backwards from a conclusion dump him, but don't steal his past achievements.
 

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,413
554
305
So... Africans are dumb ... Ok.
Not all, he's likely talking about averages. Like average height, average height varies between genders and between ethnicities for example. Doesn't mean there aren't tall women or short men for example.

The rumors I've heard:

- I've heard, even testing top university students, the results which tend to be a standard deviation above the rest of the population validate the hypothesis of low average standard population scores in a good chunk of africa.

-Blacks in the U.S. are mixed race and have notably higher iq than africans

-Could be in part due to the neanderthal genes, some populations interbred with neanderthal and are part neanderthal others did not have significant interbreeding with neanderthals but other hominids.
 
Last edited:

olimariOA

Member
Nov 28, 2018
270
455
315
Texas
How does one accurately measure intelligence anyway?
This is the rub for sure.

The best IQ tests are administered and control for things like inability to take a test. They are built around abstract thinking, spatial reasoning, and pattern recognition among others.

Now, are large enough swaths off the different populations taking The same high quality IQ test? I doubt it. And it's certainly taboo to the point of career suicide to study it. It seems like the data is cobbled together from a bunch of sources.

I'd say the findings are probably in the ballpark given that several earnest researchers have produced similar results.
 

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,413
554
305
And, if people are scoring poorly on IQ tests, there's also the concern that it has nothing to do with innate intelligence, and much more to do with education opportunities, or cultural biases. I was willing to not be quick to judge.
education has nothing to do with iq, iq budges at most by like 5 points, it can be tested early on prior to higher education, and as said no amount of education or training results in meaningful gains, you're stuck with it for life. IT is innate capability, can be brought significantly down through physical injury, toxins or malnutrition but not above innate potential, potential can only be maximized.

But that said nutrition as well as environmental complexity has been rapidly going up maximizing that potential across the board.

Soon it will not matter, as the smartest of us are now working on gaining access to the algorithms of true intelligence and implementing them on machines a 1000 fold greater than a human cranium's capacity. It will be like a runner going up against a Tesla, there is no room for competition.

Once our machines do all the work, we need regulate reproduction as resources are finite, even solar system scale resources are finite. Besides, barring genetic engineering the current trends of the highest iq barely breeding while the lowest iq rapidly breed will ridiculously damage democracy and the species. With the soon arriving cure for aging we need lower birth rate close to zero as death rate close approaches zero.
 
Last edited:

Relativ9

Member
Nov 18, 2012
1,698
348
495
Narvik, Norway
They do.

There are already statistics that show which Race are the most successful.
So if you said "Asians make the most money on average" or "Asians dominate University scores". That would be fine.

But if you say "This must mean Asians are more intelligent to make the most money or do best in school" that would be called racist!



One absolutely crucial thing to mention when looking at comparable intelligence between races as it relates to their median income; is the effect socioeconomic status has on the development of intelligence from infancy. All studies point to this having a pretty massive effect, with higher income families being able to feed their kids better (healthier) and the expose their children to more intellectual stimuli. If you're a single mom working two jobs, chances are the TV is a very good babysitter, this can cause irreparable damage to the intellectual development of your child. There are other factors too, but this is one of the biggest and most obvious ones that points to the fact that it's not the actual genetics of the race itself that causes lower average IQ, but instead the socioeconomic circumstances that race finds themselves in. It's an evil circle, higher intelligence cause families to have a higher income, families who have a higher income produce smarter children...and so the circle spins. Intelligence is one of the few places where leftists have a point when they complain about historical oppression still playing a large role in black America.
 
Last edited:

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,413
554
305
One absolutely crucial thing to mention when looking at comparable intelligence between races as it relates to their median income; is the effect socioeconomic status has on the development of intelligence from infancy. All studies point to this having a pretty massive effect, with higher income families being able to feed their kids better (healthier) and the expose their children to more intellectual stimuli. If you're a single mom working two jobs, chances are the TV is a very good babysitter, this can cause irreparable damage to the intellectual development of your child. There are other factors too, but this is one of the biggest and most obvious ones that points to the fact that it's not the actual genetics of the race itself that causes lower average IQ, but instead the socioeconomic circumstances that race finds themselves in. It's an evil circle, higher intelligence cause families to have a higher income, families who have a higher income produce smarter children...and so the circle spins. Intelligence is one of the few places where leftists have a point when they complain about historical oppression still playing a large role in black America.
Innate capability surpasses even that, I was able to learn languages even from the tv alone. Intelligence is what allows one from a poor background to become a neurosurgeon.

Barring lead exposure or other toxins or physical insults, even the poorest households can easily afford a low cost multivitamin as well as adequate minimum nutrition. Have heard poor kids, of kids on fast food diets, no multivitamin diets testing as high as 160IQ.

As said education or training won't significantly budge IQ, the meaningful environment is physical insults, toxins, and nutrition, barring complete neglect being thrown with animals or never spoken to, a child will learn perfect language even from improperly speaking migrants who don't properly know the native tongue, he will learn to correct them, even from a young age, even if they are his primary source of exposure to a native tongue.
 
Last edited:

Relativ9

Member
Nov 18, 2012
1,698
348
495
Narvik, Norway
Innate capability surpasses even that, I was able to learn languages even from the tv alone. Intelligence is what allows one from a poor background to become a neurosurgeon.

Barring lead exposure or other toxins or physical insults, even the poorest households can easily afford a low cost multivitamin as well as adequate minimum nutrition. Have heard poor kids, of kids on fast food diets, no multivitamin diets testing as high as 160IQ.
True, but those are outline cases, we're talking about averages here. And on average studies find again and again that the family income has a bigger role to play in the IQ testing of children than anything else, take this study for example that found an average 6-point difference between sample groups of twins where one grew up in a low-income family and the other in a high-income family: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4641149/

And as for your argument that even low-income families can afford multivitamin and adequate minimum nutrition, that's true, but also not the point. The point is that a low-income family might not know/or care to provide those things even if they can afford it.
 

Dunki

Member
Oct 24, 2017
7,465
7,313
690
Personally I think IQ is just like BMI just a measurement but it does not really portray the actual intelligence. So do I believe that people would have a worse I in Africa? Yeah mostly because of their culture and them being behind our times for quite a bit. IT has also a lot to do with cultural differences. As for DNA. It can be an influence too since people evolved based on their environment. For example the hunt instincts should be much better with people i Africa then in Europe. People evolve and requite abilities depending on the situation they are living.
 

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,413
554
305
True, but those are outline cases, we're talking about averages here. And on average studies find again and again that the family income has a bigger role to play in the IQ testing of children than anything else, take this study for example that found an average 6-point difference between sample groups of twins where one grew up in a low-income family and the other in a high-income family: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4641149/

And as for your argument that even low-income families can afford multivitamin and adequate minimum nutrition, that's true, but also not the point. The point is that a low-income family might not know/or care to provide those things even if they can afford it.
I think that speaks more about the abilities of the parents than anything else. I've learned more from free online sources than any university or school education.

Right now they've access to the greatest resource in existence the internet. Even children. If rather than study or grow they only chat with each other about local rumors 24 7, too bad they lacked aspergers.
 

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
18,439
5,223
830
Brampton, Ontario
It's an evil circle, higher intelligence cause families to have a higher income, families who have a higher income produce smarter children...and so the circle spins. Intelligence is one of the few places where leftists have a point when they complain about historical oppression still playing a large role in black America.
Actually, regression to the means says both rich and poor are more likely to have offspring with IQ's matching their race's average than the parent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ#Heritability_and_caveats
Contrary to popular[citation needed] belief, two parents of higher IQ will not necessarily produce offspring of equal or higher intelligence. In fact, according to the concept of regression toward the mean, parents whose IQ is at either extreme are more likely to produce offspring with IQ closer to the mean (or average).[16][17]
IQ Tests have been done for 100 years, and there has never been an overlap between different races.





Even 50 years ago, Japan posted the highest IQ scores on earth (122). Their IQ scores have actually dropped since then (105 to 110 in 2019).



But the IQ gap between both Blacks and Whites have never changed. Going as far back as WW1, there was always a 1 standard deviation difference where Blacks scored 15 points worse than White test takers.

 
Last edited:
May 15, 2018
2,614
1,804
495
there can be every difference in the world with size weight different body types skin color perhaps emotional but i think people want to believe that the potential for intelligence is like inherent in everyone or every race. but realistically is that true or not. if there is such a vast difference between certain races in lets say a physical level why wouldnt it effect lets say a country where there isnt much diversity not only in like genes but in cultural and other things. in the end no one wants to be called stupid and no one wants to call other people stupid. just like in how there is more potential in people physically there has to be others mentally to say there cant be a difference in that way is almost crazy. but im an idiot what do i know
 

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
18,439
5,223
830
Brampton, Ontario
How does one accurately measure intelligence anyway?
Inventions.

Ask yourself, where did Democracy come from? Where did modern medicine come from? Where did the first automobile come from?

If you associate all these things with requiring intelligence, create a tally organizing which regions of the world where responsible for their creation. When you identify those regions with the most inventions, look into which group of people occupied them.

That is what IQ Tests have done a good job measuring. The regions that score on average 100 or more, are the same regions responsible for creating most technology we see in the world today.
 
Last edited:

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,413
554
305
Inventions.

Ask yourself, where did Democracy come from? Where did modern medicine come from? Where did the first automobile come from?

If you associate all these things with requiring intelligence, create a tally organizing which regions of the world where responsible for their creation. When you identify those regions with the most inventions, look into which group of people occupied them.

That is what IQ Tests have done a good job measuring. The regions that score on average 100 or more, are the same regions responsible for creating most technology we see in the world today.
yeah but invention is not strict measure, because there is something called the body of crystal intelligence, which will soon be a living crystal once endowed with the algorithms of general intelligence from the living eternal mathematical truth discovered by evolution and placed within the human brain, we will finally exceed transfer of genes or memes, and start the actual transfer of our very essence.

Even a few extremely high iq people can basically boil down a field into simple explanations and equations that open the door for those who gain this knowledge to easily expand or grow that particular field, even if they are of far lesser capacity. Especially as knowledge accumulates and becomes more accessible over the eons those places with better access, or even a few super experts, can easily see the knowledge as well as the experts contributions magnified a 1000 fold.

Right now would be a good time though, internet access is nearly universal, and basically all books, journals, etc are free to access. We can see when most have access to the full body of man's knowledge as well as free online education from top experts, we can see who succeeds and who doesn't.

Also will say things like self-made multimillionaire and self-made billionaire are also a good showing of ability, given reaching multimillionaire is quite easy even from a poor background, just takes a bit of time and investment.
 

hariseldon

Gold Member
Aug 22, 2018
3,202
5,093
655
I think we can generally acknowledge that old people are a bit more racist than young people, a product of their time. I'd say his work on DNA probably trumps the racism, so how about we leave the poor old fucker alone?
 

JordanN

Junior Member
Apr 21, 2012
18,439
5,223
830
Brampton, Ontario
yeah but invention is not strict measure, because there is something called the body of crystal intelligence, which will soon be a living crystal once endowed with the algorithms of general intelligence from the living eternal mathematical truth discovered by evolution and placed within the human brain, we will finally exceed transfer of genes or memes, and start the actual transfer of our very essence.

Even a few extremely high iq people can basically boil down a field into simple explanations and equations that open the door for those who gain this knowledge to easily expand or grow that particular field, even if they are of far lesser capacity. Especially as knowledge accumulates and becomes more accessible over the eons those places with better access, or even a few super experts, can easily see the knowledge as well as the experts contributions magnified a 1000 fold.

Right now would be a good time though, internet access is nearly universal, and basically all books, journals, etc are free to access. We can see when most have access to the full body of man's knowledge as well as free online education from top experts, we can see who succeeds and who doesn't.

Also will say things like self-made multimillionaire and self-made billionaire are also a good showing of ability, given reaching multimillionaire is quite easy even from a poor background, just takes a bit of time and investment.
I wouldn't really quantify knowledge as being intelligent.

Think of the brain as a CPU and knowledge is the Hard Drive. You could fill your Hard Drive up with all sorts of books and literature that cover world history, but if the actual CPU is very slow and weak, it's going to take a lot longer to utilize this knowledge than somone whose brain is much more faster at decision making.
 
Last edited:

OSC

Member
Jun 16, 2018
1,413
554
305
I wouldn't really quantify knowledge as being intelligent.

Think of the brain as a CPU and knowledge is the Hard Drive. You could fill your Hard Drive up with all sorts of books and literature that cover world history, but if the actual CPU is very slow and weak, it's going to take a lot longer to utilize this knowledge then somone's whose brain is much more faster at decision making.
I don't know, Einstein in a previous hunter gatherer tribe having to invent every single thing from the ground up is not the same as someone given advanced mathematics, calculus, linear algebra, computational theory, physics, chemistry, biology.

All that knowledge and how-to, can be viewed akin to our algorithms of artificial intelligence called narrow intelligence. They are not true general intelligence, but can drive cars and do highly complex procedures. The right algorithm or technique, like the mental abacus memorization can allow you to be faster even than someone with a calculator at highly complex arithmetic. I think it is this growing body of shared knowledge altering society by increasing complexity that was in large part responsible for the observed flynn effect increasing IQ across the board for decades.

It is also what is behind the law of accelerating returns and the path towards the technological singularity, like a pyramid being built the knowledge of one era lays the ground work for the revolutions of the next.
 
Last edited:

Greedings

Member
May 23, 2016
1,796
1,210
440
I just want to point out the this guy is a crank. He's not been a scientist for a long time.
 

MrTickles

Member
Feb 22, 2018
3,205
4,163
660
I agree with Watson 100% on every one of his conclusions that are drawn from his work on genetics as pertaining to the broader trends witnessed. It all checks out scientifically and in tandem statistically with masses of data collected over the last 50 years. His comments about specific race related workplace topology are still relevant to the broader data as it does reflect the broader findings in terms of composition, performance and ongoing trends, evidenced so clearly in reactionary attempts to equalize the playing field. Entire state-enforced regimes exist to categorically punish white/asian tertiary and workplace recruits; and give unfair-advantages to other races on the basis of their under-representation but more importantly, their consistent poor performance. This is proof to his credit. Ironically, an openly racist, racially discriminatory system has been put into place in order to fight the conclusions of the 'racists'. :messenger_tears_of_joy:

Whether he is a Walt Disney-esque/Henry Ford-esque hardcore racist/homophone, irrelevant given the context. He has provided some concrete science and for that his work stands on its own even when applied generally.

His personal politics are beside the point. Recognition in a scientific community should reflect his lifetime achievements in genetics and the educated conclusions that can be drawn from them; not what his views are on abortion or workplace composition.

The post-modernist scientific community is ideological, ethically bankrupt, and no longer paying homage to or reflecting the paramount importance of the scientific method on its own. It is now more important to have the 'politically correct' results and conclusions, than to present something closer to reality.
 
Last edited: