> I wonder why you think that the professors surveyed being "mostly white" discredits the book. That wasn't what I said. What I said was: > then tried to conc

> I wonder why you think that the professors surveyed being "mostly white" discredits the book. That wasn't what I said. What I said was: > then tried to conclude fact about different race's intelligence as a result of those questionnaires They surveyed one demographic and asked them to draw conclusions about another demographic without considering the innate biases of doing so. I called the book "fluff" which I stand behind. It doesn't provide any new scientific data, even the selection of questions, who they selected to send them to, and other actions by the researches introduced a ton of biasing issues. Their whole goal was to discrete what they viewed as "liberal academia."