Scott itself makes a point of the study being debated. It's not. It's not debated. It's pseudo science,or "science" made with so many questionable points that i

Scott itself makes a point of the study being debated. It's not. It's not debated. It's pseudo science,or "science" made with so many questionable points that it's hard to call it "science". He links to a magazine article written by a researcher that has been fired, not surprisingly, for his pseudo scientific stances on racism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Carl https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Carl Saying in 2025 that the study is still debated is not only racist, but dishonest as well. It's not debated, it's junk