3 ms·

All of your concerns and questions are addressed in the website, which I recommend that you explore more in depth. The site is not purely from a cultural anthro

All of your concerns and questions are addressed in the website, which I recommend that you explore more in depth. The site is not purely from a cultural anthropology point of view, but physical anthropology, as well. As such, it addresses genetics and health issues.

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
I am mildly amused that you decided to skip over the questions and refer me back to the website, which I already indicated am not perceiving as an authority on the matter. Still, as a show of good faith, I did just that. Needless to say, I was not impressed, but I would be more than happy to discuss my contentions. Separately, I also allowed myself to dig deeper under ESI-0307843 that funded this project and one of the first things that came up was an evaluation of the website. You will note that under 'expectations not fulfilled' some complaints do stand out(1): -"There are no clear definitions of terms or comparisons of biological race v. social race, ethnicity, etc" -"I expected to find more scientific studies about races, at least as a complement." -"Maybe some more information about the concept of ethnicity and 'clear' definitions" -"I expected a professional explanation given to a public audience as happens with so many effective professionals associated with museums, freshman teaching or public programs in the social sciences and humanities." -"Everything was about self-reflection and self-confirmation about American conceptions and categorization. I expected a step beyond that." -"I expected to find a mention of R. Lynn's Race Differences in Intelligence (Washington Summit Publishers, 2006) for an important exposition." (1)https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/RaceWebsiteSummative.final_.pdf https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/RaceWebs... Can you show me the same good faith and engage in a frank and honest intellectual debate?

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago

I am mildly amused that you decided to skip over the questions and refer me back to the website, which I already indicated am not perceiving as an authority on the matter. Still, as a show of good faith, I did just that. Needless to say, I was not impressed, but I would be more than happy to discuss my contentions. Separately, I also allowed myself to dig deeper under ESI-0307843 that funded this project and one of the first things that came up was an evaluation of the website. You will note that under 'expectations not fulfilled' some complaints do stand out(1): -"There are no clear definitions of terms or comparisons of biological race v. social race, ethnicity, etc" -"I expected to find more scientific studies about races, at least as a complement." -"Maybe some more information about the concept of ethnicity and 'clear' definitions" -"I expected a professional explanation given to a public audience as happens with so many effective professionals associated with museums, freshman teaching or public programs in the social sciences and humanities." -"Everything was about self-reflection and self-confirmation about American conceptions and categorization. I expected a step beyond that." -"I expected to find a mention of R. Lynn's Race Differences in Intelligence (Washington Summit Publishers, 2006) for an important exposition." (1)https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/RaceWebsiteSummative.final_.pdf https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/RaceWebs... Can you show me the same good faith and engage in a frank and honest intellectual debate?