Fury as DNA pioneer claims black people are less intelligent than whites

[cali]

One of the world's most eminent scientists is at the centre of a row after claiming black people are less intelligent than whites.

James Watson, who won the Nobel Prize for his part in discovering the structure of DNA, has drawn condemnation for comments made ahead of his arrival in Britain tomorrow for a speaking tour.

Dr Watson, who now runs one of America's leading scientific research institutions, made the controversial remarks in an interview in The Sunday Times.

The 79-year-old geneticist said 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".

He said he hoped that everyone was equal, but countered that "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true".

<snip>


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=488026&in_page_id=1770

Flaming racist asshole. I've known for a while what a jerk Watson is, but this really makes me furious.

[jgraz]

1. Watson was always an asswipe. Mean, sexist, classist and, now, racist.

Fuck him. This is going to be his legacy now, remembered long after his scientific work has been surpassed.

[physioex]

3. Watson did not discover DNA....

There was a female geneticist that actually discovered it, and this asswipe took all the credit and Nobel Prize. Fuck him!!

On Edit: Africa was one of the most richest cultures in history. The Europeans plundered all its wealth.

[cali]

8. You're thinking of Rosalind

Franklin and her work with crystals, but I don't think she was a geneticist, and Crick and Watson did build on her work, but she hardly discovered DNA.

[physioex]

12. Wrong....

Watch the NOVA program. She had the double helix. He stole her idea and gave her no credit.

[cali]

25. Well, I'll try and get hold of the NOVA

program, and according to SA, he did build on her research and didn't credit her, but Watson and Crick did do a lot of the work that won them the Nobel, at least according to articles in SA.

[physioex]

26. Sure here is the link

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/photo51/elkin.html

[incapsulated]

62. He threw her under the bus

And took all the credit for a collaborative effort.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

50. No, she wasn't a geneticist, she was an x-ray crystallographist.

Her work essential for figuring out the double helical structure, but she didn't figure it out herself and she didn't recognize the significance. They didn't steal her work, and they did give her credit, it's right there in Watson and Crick's original paper.

Try reading the original paper.

[UndertheOcean]

56. Demanding someone "read" something rather than having it spoonfed ? great concept!

n/t

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

57. She might want to re-watch the Nova program too.

And pay more attention this time.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

63. is that permitted? reading for one's self?

who wudda thunk it?

[undeterred]

90. She should have gotten a lot more credit, many people feel.

[geek_sabre]

24. If she hadn't been dead

She would have shared the Nobel as well. They don't give prizes to corpses.

[Tesha]

30. Don't you know better than to mess up a good rant with *FACTS*? ;-) (NT)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

51. DNA was discovered in 1869 by a guy named Miescher.

Watson and Crick, with help from Franklin and Wilkins, figured out the structure.

[cali]

4. Good. I think you're right

this will be his legacy, and I hope he gets creamed with these comments. I also hope he gets booted from his job as Director at Cold Spring Harbor Lab.

[qdemn7]

5. No it won't

Watson scientific achievements will long outlast his peccadillos.

[physioex]

7. And what exactly was his achievement? EOM

[qdemn7]

16. Little thing call the Nobel Prize

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_D._Watson

James Dewey Watson (born April 6, 1928) is an American molecular biologist, best known as one of the co-discoverers of the structure of DNA. Watson, Francis Crick, and Maurice Wilkins were awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material".

[physioex]

17. Come again.....

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/photo51/elkin.html

[Solomon]

100. How Does He Explain the Existence of Stupid White People?

[cynatnite]

14. Plus he's not as famous as Don Imus n/t

[lazer47]

31. This is the old Shockley theroy that came out of the '60s,,Ignorance

just seems to go on forever

[Swamp Rat]

2. Holy shit!

:wow:

[charlie]

6. Again?

Every time he opens his mouth, some weird Mengele-style nuttery falls out.

[Swamp Rat]

13. Way'at charlie!

:hi:

That's the first "person" who came to my mind too.

[charlie]

22. Hola Swampie!

Crick's got a head fulla loose beans too. Their one shining moment and the subsequent Nobel is the only thing that's kept those two from getting popped in the mouth every 5 minutes :hi:

[Junkdrawer]

34. Watson is a big eugenetics fan....

...

Some observers reflexively dismiss Watson's genetic prescriptions as the idiosyncratic ideas of a crank; wasn't that, they ask, the fellow who suggested a genetic linkage between skin color and sex drive? Or else ascribe them to Watson's desire to keep genetic research at the cutting edge. Yet while both of these hypotheses could be true, they miss the more important point: James Watson genuinely believes in a renewed eugenics, now scientifically accurate and technically powerful, and has laid out a logical, strategic framework for moving science and society in that direction.

...

http://www.alternet.org/story/16026/

[cali]

9. More from the article:

He has courted controversy in the past, reportedly saying that a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be homosexual.

He has suggested a link between skin colour and sex drive, proposing a theory that black people have higher libidos.

He also claimed that beauty could be genetically manufactured, saying: "People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would be great."

Steven Rose, a professor of biological sciences at the Open University, told the Independent: "This is Watson at his most scandalous. He has said similar things about women before but I have never heard him get into this racist terrain.

"If he knew the literature in the subject he would know he was out of his depth scientifically, quite apart from socially and politically

[qdemn7]

20. So what?

He has courted controversy in the past, reportedly saying that a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be homosexual.

If you accept a woman's right to choose, then it's her decision to abort for ANY reason SHE sees fit.

Either homosexuals are born or made. If they're made, which no reputable scientist accepts, then they must be born. Which means there is a genetic or in utero hormonal component. Which means there will probably be a genetic test to determine a fetuses sexual "polarity". Which means the woman can choose to abort. Just like gender selection is already occurring.

[Bluebear]

33. 'If you accept a woman's right to choose, then it's her decision to abort for ANY reason...'

Is that some kind of new rule you came up with? You think ethically it's OK to abort based on sexual orientation?

[qdemn7]

39. Ethics are irrelevant

Some people (not me) think abortion is unethical. Should ethics be allowed to circumvent a woman's right to choose? No, they most certainly should not. It's absolutely no one's business but the woman, and if she chooses, her partner.

[Milo_Bloom]

59. You don't have to agree with the "ethics" to support the choice..

Just like you don't have to agree with the specific speech to defend someone's right to say something.

If someone can abort because having a child is happening at an inconvenient time in their life, they can abort for sexual orientation or because they don't like the gender the baby will be. I don't have to like any of those reasons, but if I am for CHOICE, I have to be FOR CHOICE under all circumstances and not only the ones I create in my mind as "okay".

[incapsulated]

60. In other words, he is an bigoted asshole on every level

Check.

[shanti]

70. maybe he's becoming senile?

:shrug:

[krispos42]

10. Yeah, well, so what?

Even if he's right (which I doubt he is... I've heard he's an ass), how does this change anything? It's not going to bring back slavery or segregation or Jim Crow.

[cali]

18. Here's what.

It helps nothing and has the postential to cause harm. They're hurtful words to many, many people and they're uttered by a man who's supposedly an expert.

[krispos42]

42. I know that, but the guy's not an authority people listen to

discovering the shape of DNA is a hell of a lot different than understanding the physiological implications.

However, I do wish the guy would shut up and go away.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

66. You wouldn't think people would consider Bill Cosby an authority either.

But they do, and like with him, I'll bet people will be using Watson as free license to spout their racist bullshit.

[cuke]

68. You wouldn't think that Penn and Teller were authorities on science

but some DUer's seem to think so

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

69. They've done some Amazing Kreskin style debunking.

Which can be helpful. Is there a specific issue you have in mind?

[cuke]

74. No

but thanks for proving my point

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

76. What was your point?

And how did you prove it?

[cuke]

77. "some DUer's seem to think so"

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

78. I didn't say they're authorities in science.

I said they're celebrity debunkers.

Do you disagree?

[cuke]

79. Yes, I disagree

They're entertainers.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

80. Yes, and what do they do for entertainment?

Debunkment.

You do know who Penn and Teller are, right?

[cuke]

81. They do magic and tell jokes

It's called comedy. They claim to have debunked stuff. Doesn't make it true

But if you think they are an authority on the subjects they speak of, more power to ya

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

82. Bullshit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit%21

I haven't seen the show, mind you, but they do appear to be in the debunking business.

[cuke]

83. "appear to be" is the important phrase

* "appears to be" The Decider

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

84. And you appear to be equivocating.

Do Penn and Teller debunk, or do they not?

[cuke]

89. Asked and answered

post #89

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

92. Then you better edit the wikipedia article.

"Many episodes aim to debunk what the hosts see as pseudoscientific ideas, supernatural beliefs, popular fads and misconceptions"

[cuke]

93. The important words are "aim to debunk"

they fail

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

94. Oh, you've seen them?

What, in particular, do you find lacking?

[cuke]

95. Yes.

Logic, reason, facts

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

96. And specifically...?

[cuke]

97. And specifically??

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

98. Yeah, and specifically.

Which of their logic, reason, and facts do you take issue with?

Or is it that they debunked something you're partial too? Astrology maybe?

Or did you just want to get in an argument with me and found yourself painted into a corner?

[cuke]

101. I take issue with their absence

And I see you have a problem with logic, so here's a clue

I never said they were debunkers, so I don't have to prove it true.
You said they were debunkers. Now prove it's true

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

91. delete

dupe

[krispos42]

104. Bill Cosby is an enourmously well-loved cultural icon

This guys major acomplishment was a half-century ago.

[shanti]

71. i've always wondered

why it is that when SOME people are of a certain age, they feel that they can talk s*** about anything and get away with it? this gives him a pass?? or is he just senile?

[NOLALady]

52. I think the problem with this kind of foolishness is

there are those who will use it as an excuse to discriminate.

"I know it seems that Dr Jamal may be qualified for the promotion but we have it on good authority that he's really better qualified for janitorial work."

[AuntPatsy]

53. You doubt? Is there even any doubt in such a ludicrous statement?

[incapsulated]

61. No, and this sort of story brings out the "doubters"

I broke up with a guy who, faced with a similar hypothesis said to me, "well, I hope it isn't true".

Here is the kicker, I'm half black.

[lvx35]

11. It flies in the face of science.

The simple fact is, Africans have spend the exact same amount of time evolving as whites or asians or anybody. They are not more primitive, they are not from some other time, they are modern humans just like whites and the rest and have gone through all the same trials and tribulations. Now if you want to say that african intelligence evolved in a slightly different manner than that of northern peoples, I might give you an ear. But when you say it evolved "less" or is inferior, you may as well shut the hell up. If it were worse it wouldn't be selected by nature, it wouldn't be there, that's the law of evolution. This guy needs some biology 101 it what is sounds like.

[donheld]

15. George W Bush

Seems to me his example should have put to rest any thought of White superiority.

[azurnoir]

19. He is truely an antique in his thinking

not to mention racist, sexist, and a number of other ists. and his own theory could be turned around on him, if he were to do a comparison of Whites and Asians using his thinking I suspect Whites would not come out as the "superior race".

I guess he peaked early and never progressed from there

[sandnsea]

21. Dumb employees come in all colors

Although I do think there are a lot more of them than anybody ever wants to admit, and that they simply can't be educated into prosperity. Everybody isn't equal, but it's got nothing to do with skin color.

[Solomon]

27. You said it. Anybody who has to interview or manage employees

knows the truth. I've had to interview hundreds of people and I can tell you, intelligence has absolutely nothing to do with skin color. It's a process I wish everyone could experience so they can see the truth. The first time I experienced it I was really struck by this fact. Or perhaps Watson thinks that all the stupid white people are only stupid because they are lazy and not because of genetics.

[Devlzown]

23. He can spend his evenings with Ann Coulter,

trying to figure out ways to perfect black people while she's busy perfecting the Jews. Sounds like those two certainly deserve each other.

[B Calm]

28. Well this should make Bill Cosby happy...

[Warren Stupidity]

29. Watson is a nutcase.

He can't actually define what a 'black person' is in scientific terms, but he is sure they are 'less intelligent' than that other undefinable group: 'white people'. What is unfortunate is that he is a brilliant geneticist.

[Snarkturian Clone]

32. Does he have actual data to back this up?

Or is he just talking out his ass? He reminds me of some other scientists who would come up with crackpot theories in their old age. I would say who but I don't have links or anything to back it up right now.

[soothsayer]

35. Africa is going to be the chessboard for the powers-that-be. We need their

resources, we just don't need the people there, so genocide will be allowed to go on, as will disease, starvation. Why did the US set up an African command?

[BoneDaddy]

36. Proof?

I find it hard to believe you can prove this. Eugenics all over again.

[cali]

37. Of course he doesn't have proof. He's just a bigoted old creep. n/t

[BoneDaddy]

38. It was a rhetorical question mostly

but I am dying to hear how he came to this conclusion.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ismnotwasm]

40. Oh for God's sakes

Let's bring back that disgusting, debunked "Bell Curve" while we're at it

Racist pukes come popping up every time you think you might get a breather, and start repeating the same old lies based on the same old lies. Toss out a couple of idiotic "studies" to back themselves up. None of it holds water, or decent scientific scrutiny-- and I don't care if he discovered fire, he's still a racist asshole who's full of shit.

[NorthernSpy]

41. just like anyone who's dealt with white men knows they can't be trusted around children...

(Watson) said he hoped that everyone was equal, but countered that "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true".

He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.

He includes his views in a new book, published this week, in which he writes that "there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically".

"Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so," he says.

Me, I would hope that all people, regardless of race, are equally respectful of the sexual innocence of pre-pubescent children, but as anyone who has glanced at the faces of your typical kiddie porn bust knows, this just isn't true.

The genes responsible for these differences in human sexuality could be found within a decade.

Sadly, there is no firm reason to anticipate that the level of inherent sexual pathology of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically.

Our wanting to reserve equal freedom from child-harming sexual pathology as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so.



:eyes:

[Bassic]

43. Shut up you old fart. nt

[yardwork]

44. Watson has said things like this before. He's a jerk.

Since when did their stupid standardized tests ever count as intelligence tests?

[Monk06]

45. During the middle ages the city of Grand Zaire was a more architecturally

advanced and a safer city to live in than London
England. How does he explain that?

[Annces]

46. That is amazing he would say that

I bet he is one closed-minded person.

[Elspeth]

47. There are many people who like to claim that they are more intelligent than others

Lots of attitude and an educated veneer.

[Dorian Gray]

48. Wow........

Just wow! I'm speechless.

[AngryAmish]

54. I find this topic extremely interesting

One of the things I have been fascinated with for a long time is human genetics and human migration.

Humans did evolve. Humans are evolving.

However a blanket statement like Watson's is nonsense.

First, what portion of intelligence is heritable? The twin studies state that there is a large portion of G (general intelligence - approx. I'm not a scientist in this area) is genetic. There is a problem with twin studies. When twins are separated, they tend to go to similar environments, be it within families or through adoption. Adoptive parents on average are much smarter and wealthier than average folks. Poor dumb folks don't do much adopting (because they can't support the extra mouths). Bottom line - we may not know how much of G is heritable and what portion has to do with a nurturing environment at home.

So much more study is needed.

[UndertheOcean]

55. Hopefully , a MUCH more intelligent species from outer space will land soon

and wipe us buggers out , the earth deserves better than us.

[Richard Steele]

99. I, for one, WELCOME our new ant overlords!

[Cetacea]

58. I wish Linus Pauling had beaten him to the DNA discovery.

He knew Pauling was close. Too bad in retrospect. Pauling would have wound up with three Nobels!

[rucky]

64. Is this the Bell Curve guy?

or a different pseudo-scientific bigot?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

67. It's a different pseudo-scientific bigot.

[1monster]

65. The fact of the matter is that the races are so intermixed anymore, that it is not easy to find

any one of a "pure" ethnic background.

And that isn't a reacent phenomenon. People of different ethnic heritages have been intermixing since the beginning of different ethnic heritages...

There are some folks at age 80 who are still sharper than fresh razor blades.

And there are some who are not.

Then there are some who are no longer as sharp as butter knives.

Perhaps the latter is true for Dr. Watson.

[joshcryer]

72. Intelligence is directly proportional to wealth.

If you live in a dirt poor country that has been plundered to death, of course the data will reflect that. However, this has no bearing on the genetic or psyological makeup of any given culture or society. There simply isn't enough information to go by.

But failing to recognize this known disproportion of intellect, neglects the socioeconomic aspects of these dirt poor countries. Being blind to this is not a good thing in my mind.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

73. That's why George Bush is so smart.

[ProfessorGAC]

75. But The Opportunity To Learn Did Exist

He just wasted those opportunities and skated through life because of the silverspoon in his mouth.

But, people in dirt poor countries never even have those chances to waste.

The Professor

BTW: Funny stuff.

[ecstatic]

85. I know from personal experience that this isn't true

I went to a very technical, Top 5 engineering university and I watched, time and time again, as students DIRECTLY from Africa outperformed almost everyone in the class. Not to mention, my personal experience with being in the top 5 to 10% on just about every standard achievement test I've ever taken, including the SAT. I don't put much stock in standardized tests, by the way. It should be obvious, especially to all liberals, that educational opportunities combined with natural abilities play a huge role in how well a student will do on any test. BOTH factors must be present--a gifted child who is never taught anything will not do well on the test, period.

[KatyaR]

86. I swear to god, I've decided that all the progress we made on human rights

in the past was just an illusion. Now that we have the internets and have so much more access to news, all we hear is this kind of crap--people haven't changed at all, in fact, I think they're worse than ever.

Martin Luther King would be so depressed right now . . . .

[Octafish]

87. In certain circles, apart from World War II, Eugenics never goes out of fashion.

Lots of famous people have dabbled in the subject, including those named Bush, Harriman, Rockefeller and Hitler.

Eugenics and the Nazis: The California Connection

by Edwin Black
San Francisco Chronicle
Sunday, November 9, 2003

Hitler and his henchmen victimized an entire continent and exterminated millions in his quest for a so-called Master Race.

But the concept of a white, blond-haired, blue-eyed master Nordic race didn't originate with Hitler. The idea was created in the United States, and cultivated in California, decades before Hitler came to power. California eugenicists played an important, although little-known, role in the American eugenics movement's campaign for ethnic cleansing.

Eugenics was the pseudoscience aimed at "improving" the human race. In its extreme, racist form, this meant wiping away all human beings deemed "unfit," preserving only those who conformed to a Nordic stereotype. Elements of the philosophy were enshrined as national policy by forced sterilization and segregation laws, as well as marriage restrictions, enacted in 27 states. In 1909, California became the third state to adopt such laws. Ultimately, eugenics practitioners coercively sterilized some 60,000 Americans, barred the marriage of thousands, forcibly segregated thousands in "colonies," and persecuted untold numbers in ways we are just learning. Before World War II, nearly half of coercive sterilizations were done in California, and even after the war, the state accounted for a third of all such surgeries.

California was considered an epicenter of the American eugenics movement. During the 20th century's first decades, California's eugenicists included potent but little-known race scientists, such as Army venereal disease specialist Dr. Paul Popenoe, citrus magnate Paul Gosney, Sacramento banker Charles Goethe, as well as members of the California state Board of Charities and Corrections and the University of California Board of Regents.

Eugenics would have been so much bizarre parlor talk had it not been for extensive financing by corporate philanthropies, specifically the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune. They were all in league with some of America's most respected scientists from such prestigious universities as Stanford, Yale, Harvard and Princeton. These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics' racist aims.

Stanford President David Starr Jordan originated the notion of "race and blood" in his 1902 racial epistle "Blood of a Nation," in which the university scholar declared that human qualities and conditions such as talent and poverty were passed through the blood.

In 1904, the Carnegie Institution established a laboratory complex at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island that stockpiled millions of index cards on ordinary Americans, as researchers carefully plotted the removal of families, bloodlines and whole peoples. From Cold Spring Harbor, eugenics advocates agitated in the legislatures of America, as well as the nation's social service agencies and associations.

The Harriman railroad fortune paid local charities, such as the New York Bureau of Industries and Immigration, to seek out Jewish, Italian and other immigrants in New York and other crowded cities and subject them to deportation, confinement or forced sterilization.

CONTINUED..

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2003/11/09/ING9C2QSKB1.DTL

Gee. What could make one man believe himself to be superior to another?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

88. I'm Not An Expert But When It Comes To DNA Blacks And Whites Are Very Similar

In fact humans and apes are fairly similar too...

Put me strictly in the "nurture" camp...

[joshcryer]

103. Humans are one of the most 'similar' species on the planet, genetically speaking.

The divergance between human societies and cultures is amazingly, absolutley amazingly small. This is one reason we are thought to descend from a very small pool of genetic lineage.

Obviously the genetic argument in this regard is completely flawed.

[flvegan]

102. "a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be (gay)"

Fuck this decrepit old fool.

Dumb bastard.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

105. Are you saying she should be prohibited from doing so by law?

I believe that in the first two trimesters, a woman should be able to choose to have an abortion for any reason, or for no reason at all.

I agree that "it might be gay" is not a good reason to abort a foetus. However, until such time as the foetus is self-aware (around about 24 weeks, I believe), if the mother chooses to abort it then there's no justification for you, me or the state intervening.

Women already abort not infrequently because they want a boy/girl. Are you saying that should be illegal to?

If to, how do you prove that a woman who says she wants an abortion on a whim isn't actually having it to prevent homosexuality?

If you want to oppose prenatal screening for homosexuality, you might be on stronger ground. But I do not think you can justify the state forbidding a woman having an abortion in the first two trimesters for any reason she chooses.

[Beelzebud]

106. DNA pioneer proves even highly educated people can be nasty hate-filled bigots!

[mvd]

107. Racist, sexist, homophobic

And I'm sure his prejudices don't end there!