Well, gene sequencing is doing this as I type these words. Even liberals like Steven Pinker are starting to concede REALITY bit by bit: "The year 2005 saw several public appearances of what will I predict will become the dangerous idea of the next decade: that groups of people may differ geneticallyin their average talents and temperaments. In January, Harvard president Larry Summers caused a firestorm when he cited research showing that women and men have non-identical statistical distributionsof cognitiveabilitiesand life priorities. In March, developmental biologistArmand Leroi published an op-ed in the New York Times rebutting the conventional wisdom that race does not exist. (The conventional wisdom is coming to be known as Lewontin's Fallacy: that because most genes may be found in all human groups, the groups don't differatall. Butpatternsof correlation among genes do differbetween groups,and different clusters of correlated genes correspond well to the major races labeledby common sense. ) In June, the Times reported a forthcoming study by physicist Greg Cochran, anthropologist Jason Hardy, and population geneticist Henry Harpending proposing that Ashkenazi Jews have been biologically selected for high intelligence,and that their well-documented genetic diseases are a by-product of this evolutionary history. In September, political scientist Charles Murray published an article in Commentary reiterating his argument from The Bell Curve that average racial differences in intelligence are intractable and partly genetic." http://www.edge.org/q2006/q06_3.html There is going to be a MASSIVE amount of egg on Marxists' faces and the faces of the rank-and-file followers of their faith, and the non-liberal public is never going to let people forget this multi-decade campaign of outright lies and intellectual bullying. It is going to be extremely interesting watching the liberal reaction to the fallout.
Excellent. However, I searched for Mr. Murray's article in Commentary and I was unable to find it. But was his book, The Bell Curve, not dismissed as poor science? Making claims that the data did not support? It would appear some scientists were rather critical of his work. http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/bellcurve.shtml
That book was dismissed as poor science in the same way that young earth creationists dismiss evolution as poor science, LMAO. In any case, highly respected liberal scientist Steven Pinker cited Charles Murray as a credible source on this topic ten years after The Bell Curve was published in the above quote, so obviously the reality surrounding Herrnstein and Murray and their book is not as you're making it out to be.
I am, sorry, but let's focus in your claims in your OP, shall we? Not turn this into some sort of partisan nonsense. I am unable to locate the article that your link claims exists. Whilst I have no doubt it does, perhaps you would be so kind as to share it with me, as I am certain you have reviewed it prior to starting this thread. Additionally, it is by an author who can best be described as controversial, and at worst be described as a scientific fraud.
Really? This is surprising? This only goes to show how ideologically brainwashed the world of academia is. In their quest to promote "equality" they have attempted to make everyone believe there is no difference between genders or races, other than the obvious physical ones of course.
everyone is unique... but yes some of our "us" is in out genes, natural selection over the years has played a role in who we are as a species today
