DNA pioneer stripped of honours

[Kittens Are Jerks]

3 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

His honours where granted because of his work in molecular science, not in moral phillosophy. I think they are WRONG to retract them !

As for his comments on Africans and intelligence; these are highly unpopular opinions. But are they wrong ? 

The lab had every right to revoke whatever honourary titles they had awarded Watson during his tenure there and to disassociate themselves from him. Watson is a prime example of how science can be misused to support prejudice and racist views. As for his beliefs regarding race and intelligence, they are intellectually and scientifically unsupportable.

[RoofGardener]

14 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

The lab had every right to revoke whatever honourary titles they had awarded Watson during his tenure there and to disassociate themselves from him. Watson is a prime example of how science can be misused to support prejudice and racist views. As for his beliefs regarding race and intelligence, they are intellectually and scientifically unsupportable.

Well, I still think they where wrong to do this. The honours reflected a historic breakthrough in science. It reflected something that HAPPENED. It is unscientific and bizzarre to attempt to "re-write history" and "airbrush" this person out of existence. I can perhaps understand why the Insititute might want to do this politically , but it is wrong scientifically .

As for beliefs... I don't know. HAVE they been disproved ? I read the Wikipedia article on Race and IQ, and it seems VERY confusing, and somewhat ambivalent. 

Edited January 14, 2019 by RoofGardener

[Kittens Are Jerks]

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Well, I still think they where wrong to do this. The honours reflected a historic breakthrough in science. It reflected something that HAPPENED. It is unscientific and bizzarre to attempt to "re-write history" and "airbrush" this person out of existence. I can perhaps understand why the Insititute might want to do this politically , but it is wrong scientifically

As for beliefs... I don't know. HAVE they been disproved ? I read the Wikipedia article on Race and IQ, and it seems VERY confusing, and somewhat ambivalent. 

Chancellor Emeritus, Oliver R. Grace Professor Emeritus and Honorary Trustee. Stripping Watson of those honourary titles is hardly a re-write of history.

As for his beliefs, the rules of evolution render them implausible. Intelligence is influenced by environmental factors, not genetics/race.

[+OverSword]

18 minutes ago, seanjo said:

As has been pointed out there are cultural differences that could explain any "gap". Intelligence is not just being able to do Maths or orientate shapes, You may be the greatest physicist on the planet but if you get stuck in the Amazon your knowledge is meaningless and you will be the thicky compared to the Natives.

Regardless, IQ testing is the most accurate way to measure base intelligence yet developed and the results are clear and consistent.  Cultural differences are not a very large factor when all the test subjects of different races are born and raised int the United States.  Please note the average person of any race have similar scores but the smartest of the smart tend to be Asian or Ashkenazi Jews and the other end of the spectrum is dominated by "you know who".  That does not mean if you are black you are dumber than everyone else, because most of the people, even the Asians and the Ashkenazi Jews all measure about the same.  It's a shame when legitimate scientific measurements are questioned based on not wanting to offend someone.  It makes you kind of like a climate change denier.

 

Sorry I don't mean you specifically Seanjo.

Edited January 14, 2019 by OverSword

[RoofGardener]

11 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Chancellor Emeritus, Oliver R. Grace Professor Emeritus and Honorary Trustee. Stripping Watson of those honourary titles is hardly a re-write of history.

As for his beliefs, the rules of evolution render them implausible. Intelligence is influenced by environmental factors, not genetics/race.

Yes, Kittens, it IS a re-write of history. 

As for intelligence being influenced by environmental factors, that is certainly true. But it IS also influenced by race, and by genetics, though the relationship is complex. 

[RoofGardener]

19 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Regardless, IQ testing is the most accurate way to measure base intelligence yet developed and the results are clear and consistent.  Cultural differences are not a very large factor when all the test subjects of different races are born and raised int the United States. ......

Umm... I don't believe that is correct ? There is a large difference between Blacks, Whites, and Asians ? 

[Kittens Are Jerks]

39 minutes ago, seanjo said:

He's 90 + and his mind is going.

That may be the case, but he's behaving no different than he was 50+ years ago. 

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

I remember well when O J Simpson was thought to have killed his ex wife and another man.  The NFL wanted to strip him of his football awards, like MVP and rushing records.

Ridiculous! Can't we separate?  What he did on the football field can't be denied no matter how much people hate him. It's like trying to deny from History that Hitler existed. Same type of situation. We know Hitler lived, we know what he did and we deal with it. Why deny it?

[+OverSword]

22 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Umm... I don't believe that is correct ? There is a large difference between Blacks, Whites, and Asians ? 

My point is that the societal difference between races in the USA is not as large as a white person from Finland compared to an Asian person from Cambodia or a Black person from Zimbabwe.  And regardless of that my overall point is that IQ is the most accurate way of describing intelligence that has yet been developed and shouldn't be dismissed because some results offend people.

The statements made by the man stripped of his honors are completely out of line with results that have been determined by IQ testing.

Edited January 14, 2019 by OverSword

[Kittens Are Jerks]

9 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Yes, Kittens, it IS a re-write of history. 

As for intelligence being influenced by environmental factors, that is certainly true. But it IS also influenced by race, and by genetics, though the relationship is complex. 

Um no, it's not a re-write. Taking away his ill-gotten Nobel would be a re-write. He is still recognised for his scientific contribution.

I know what you mean about the complexity of factors influencing intelligence, but that goes beyond the scope of 'race science'. What's at issue here is whether or not certain races are inherently more intelligent than others. The answer, by the way, is no, certain races are not inherently more intelligent than others.

Here's a good (but long) article on race science if you're interested: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/02/the-unwelcome-revival-of-race-science

[aztek]

and when you look around, and notice the difference between Europe and Africa. how it was 1000-500-300-100 years ago, the answer is clear as day.  we are genetically\physiologically different, any doctor will tell you that. however i'm not sure IQ has much to do with it.

Edited January 14, 2019 by aztek

[Myles]

2 hours ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Um no, it's not a re-write. Taking away his ill-gotten Nobel would be a re-write. He is still recognised for his scientific contribution.

 

 

This is it seems to be rewriting history:

"require the severing of any remaining vestiges of his involvement"

[Eldorado]

8 hours ago, Myles said:

This is troubling to me.   Take his name off of some trophies if warranted, but don't delete any of his involvement.  That is altering history.

I belive that sentence merely means they have cut all ties and want nothing more to do with him. Officially disassociating themselves.

The full statement: https://www.cshl.edu/statement-by-cold-spring-harbor-laboratory-addressing-remarks-by-dr-james-d-watson-in-american-masters-decoding-watson/

[Kittens Are Jerks]

27 minutes ago, Myles said:

This is it seems to be rewriting history:

"require the severing of any remaining vestiges of his involvement"

Watson's five minutes of fame happened decades ago, he's had no significant achievements since. He became problematic when he started misusing science to advance his unscientific and prejudiced views. Surely you can understand why that would be problematic for a scientific institute. They just wanted to distance themselves from him. Firing Watson and removing his honourary titles is their way of doing it. They've done nothing to rewrite the history of his greatest achievement.

[Farmer77]

17 hours ago, Michelle said:

This has come to mind a lot lately...

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Holy hell I cant believe someone actually quoted First They Came to defend racism....WOW

 

[RoofGardener]

16 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Holy hell I cant believe someone actually quoted First They Came to defend racism....WOW

That's not what she is doing, and you know it full well Farmer77. Stop throwing around the accusation of racism. 

Now, stand in the corner of the room with your nose pressed against the wall until the end of class !

[Farmer77]

1 minute ago, RoofGardener said:

That's not what she is doing, and you know it full well Farmer77.

Sell that snake oil somewhere else amigo. ......Soo that poem was tossed into a thread about a racist why?

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Stop throwing around the accusation of racism. 

I didnt do any such thing. This thread is about racism. False accusations are not appreciated Roofy

3 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Now, stand in the corner of the room with your nose pressed against the wall until the end of class !

Dude this night shift is freaking killing me, i just might go do that to try and freaking stay awake

[RoofGardener]

9 hours ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Watson's five minutes of fame happened decades ago, he's had no significant achievements since. He became problematic when he started misusing science to advance his unscientific and prejudiced views. Surely you can understand why that would be problematic for a scientific institute. They just wanted to distance themselves from him. Firing Watson and removing his honourary titles is their way of doing it. They've done nothing to rewrite the history of his greatest achievement.

Yeah.. that's.. kinda the problem. ARE his views unscientific ? Prejudiced perhaps....but unscientific ? And in precisely WHAT ways has he "mis-used science" ? 

The whole issue of race and IQ is a hypersensitive one. Any modern-day researcher knows they would get burnt if they tried to research it, so the issue remains predominantly informed by research done between 1950 and the 1990's. Even then, those older authors knew it was a sensitive issue, and tend to back down from drawing conclusions. 

We may want to remember that before we "Rush to judgement" of THIS chap. 

[Farmer77]

4 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Yeah.. that's.. kinda the problem. ARE his views unscientific ? Prejudiced perhaps....but unscientific ? And in precisely WHAT ways has he "mis-used science" ? 

The whole issue of race and IQ is a hypersensitive one. Any modern-day researcher knows they would get burnt if they tried to research it, so the issue remains predominantly informed by research done between 1950 and the 1990's. Even then, those older authors knew it was a sensitive issue, and tend to back down from drawing conclusions. 

We may want to remember that before we "Rush to judgement" of THIS chap. 

Nah man thats a cop out. If he had stopped at science you may have had a point but he didnt :

Quote

While Dr Watson also said he hoped everyone was equal, he added: "People who have to deal with black employees find this is not true."

 

I've looked but I havent seen where he showed his citations on that point.

Edited January 15, 2019 by Farmer77

[RoofGardener]

1 minute ago, Farmer77 said:

Nah man thats a cop out. If he had stopped at science you may have had a point but he didnt :

 

I've looked but I havent seen where he showed his citations on that point.

Those where his STATEMENTS in an interview. Do YOU always supply citations during a verbal interview ? . We don't know what rationale he has for holding those beliefs. 

 Anyway, I'm not here to defend him, merely to point out that his disestablishment by the Institute seems plain wrong to me, and an exercise in 'virtue signalling' .

that is MY opinion. Now sit down and stop mumbling into the wall ! 

[Farmer77]

7 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Those where his STATEMENTS in an interview. Do YOU always supply citations during a verbal interview ?

LOL the citations comment was just talking trash

7 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Anyway, I'm not here to defend him, merely to point out that his disestablishment by the Institute seems plain wrong to me, and an exercise in 'virtue signalling' .

that is MY opinion. Now sit down and stop mumbling into the wall ! 

I think im gonna move onto jumping jacks to get the blood flowing!  

IDK why but I'm rarely shocked by people doing or saying racist things but I am always shocked by those who leap to defend, justify or wave away the things that were said.  Anyways my take on the whole thing really is summed up perfectly well in the last paragraph of the NYT article on the subject.

Quote

“It is not news when a ninety year old man who has lost cognitive inhibition, and has drifted that way for decades as he aged, speaks from his present mind,” Dr. Wigler wrote in an email. “It is not a moment for reflection. It is merely a peek into a corner of this nation’s subconscious, and a strong whiff of its not-well-shrouded past secrets.”

 

Edited January 15, 2019 by Farmer77

[RoofGardener]

12 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

....IDK why but I'm rarely shocked by people doing or saying racist things but I am always shocked by those who leap to defend, justify or wave away the things that were said.  Anyways my take on the whole thing really is summed up perfectly well in the last paragraph of the NYT article on the subject.

“It is not news when a ninety year old man who has lost cognitive inhibition, and has drifted that way for decades as he aged, speaks from his present mind,” Dr. Wigler wrote in an email. “It is not a moment for reflection. It is merely a peek into a corner of this nation’s subconscious, and a strong whiff of its not-well-shrouded past secrets.”

Hmm.. what an intriguing comment. Well spotted. 

[Michelle]

6 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

That's not what she is doing, and you know it full well Farmer77. Stop throwing around the accusation of racism. 

Fist they came for the racists and I didn't speak out - for I am not a racist.

Then they came for the Republicans, because we all know they are deplorable racists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Republican.

Then they came for the Christians, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Christian.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

[Farmer77]

Yep using first they came to defend racism WOW thats a new level of disgusting