3 ms·

> No, that is an overgeneralization of a very lazy mischaracterization of what I said. I didn't characterize what you said, I asked whether I had understood yo

> No, that is an overgeneralization of a very lazy mischaracterization of what I said. I didn't characterize what you said, I asked whether I had understood your properly. Now that you have clarified, I have another question. Do you actually believe that what he said was a controversial yet fundamentally scientific opinion? The man himself has acknowledged that there is not actually any genetic difference in intelligence, as far as we can tell. It might be different if the data actually backed up what he said, but as far as I can tell, it was simple racist ranting. Nobody was punished for shirtgate. A guy apologized for doing something wrong. Everyone forgave him. The end.

pervycreeper 12y ago
>Do you actually believe that what he said was a controversial yet fundamentally scientific opinion? well, using this quote as a source (can't find the original): >He says that he is “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” This is more of an off-the-cuff, vague, and poorly considered comment. So, no. However, it has attracted a disproportionate amount of scrutiny (compared to the stupid and incorrect things said all the time by other scientists), most often from people who are equally unqualified to comment. Also notable is the assumption on the part of critics who assumed he stated the basis for the difference is genetic, which he did not in fact say. >Nobody was punished for shirtgate He was bullied to tears by a giant internet hate mob telling him he was a bad person on one of the most significant days in his career, all for his choice of apparel. The same people, I might add, who advocate internet censorship in order to curb "harassment".

pervycreeper 12y ago

>Do you actually believe that what he said was a controversial yet fundamentally scientific opinion? well, using this quote as a source (can't find the original): >He says that he is “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” This is more of an off-the-cuff, vague, and poorly considered comment. So, no. However, it has attracted a disproportionate amount of scrutiny (compared to the stupid and incorrect things said all the time by other scientists), most often from people who are equally unqualified to comment. Also notable is the assumption on the part of critics who assumed he stated the basis for the difference is genetic, which he did not in fact say. >Nobody was punished for shirtgate He was bullied to tears by a giant internet hate mob telling him he was a bad person on one of the most significant days in his career, all for his choice of apparel. The same people, I might add, who advocate internet censorship in order to curb "harassment".