DNA unraveller Watson claims Westerners are more intelligent than Africans
FinsburyParkCarrots
Seattle, WA Posts: 12,223
http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3067222.ece
I reckon it'll come out one day that he and Crick never spent any time in the Cavendish labs at all, and just made up a load of old bollocks over at The Eagle pub across the road, instead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eagle_Pub
I reckon it'll come out one day that he and Crick never spent any time in the Cavendish labs at all, and just made up a load of old bollocks over at The Eagle pub across the road, instead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eagle_Pub
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
He's been at this bollocks for years:
http://www.mindfully.org/GE/James-Watson-Racist-Sexist.htm
I kind of like my definition from a couple of months ago. Lol. It was just off the cuff, but it kind of makes sense.
Intelligence = Design - Design x 2
It means, life is in motion, ideas and creativity are key.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
interesting little article. but i do have to admit, i like the sound of this: "for suggesting that people with IQs under 100 be paid bonuses if they agreed to be sterilized."
Dude.
I have a 72 IQ.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I agree, I posted some other potential problems with the study of intelligence here: http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=4886424&postcount=4
100 is the mean, so we'd never stop sterilizing people. There will always be people above and below the mean.
I wasn't aware of this.
Hmmm.
I'm sorry.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I guess I should check the link first.
I just posted on it.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I think we should go back in time, if possible, and cut Voltaire off from his coffee intake.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Hehehehe...awesome!
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
want to make a little extra cash?
Not really.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
But I think these statements are a bit hasty and out of Watson's social bounds.
Anyway
Wikipedia suggests 2 criteria for racial intelligence
* that the social categories of race and ethnicity are concordant with genetic categories, such as biogeographic ancestry.
* that intelligence is quantitatively measurable (see psychometrics) by modern tests and is dominated by a unitary general cognitive ability.
(1) suggests two controversial ideas. Certainly there are genetic differences. Black people tend to have more fast-twitch muscle tissue, for example. Although our biogeographic ancestry is identical for the most part, there are some genetic differences. There are differences between any two humans. What would be required from evolution to increase the intelligence of everyone but black people? First of all, the environment would have to select for it, and several mutations would probably be necessary. The environment would probably select for it, because we've always favored intelligence in society, but would any or all of the mutations occur in such a small period of evolutionary time?
(2) has huge flaws in it. The whole concept of general cognitive ability can be argued into the ground. There are insufficient theories and evidence.
Likewise testing it is even more controversial.
I don't see it happening. Maybe some day we will know enough to say stuff like that. But right now we have no way of knowing that. I'm hesitant to even say that there really is a quantitative intelligence. I think he's hurtin' his legacy with this kind of stuff.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
5 points:
1. fuck you. haHA!
2.Highly intelligent people in developed countries breed less, if at all, thus making it far less likely that their genes will survive.
3.Aggressiveness, assertiveness, ambition, and social skills are perhaps equal or greater factors in determining finance or career success than extreme intelligence.
4.George W. Bush
5.I'm high right now
-C Addison
You fucker.
That was pretty good for a chuckle.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
I agree.
WTF.
all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
Somehow, based on your 9/11 beliefs, I kinda figured this was the case.
I KNEW IT!
that's a shame. isn't 70 considered legally/medically mentally retarded?
below 70 is "intellectually deficient"