Reply With Quote
I actually agree with this fool...............there are ALOT less schools in Africa. The schools that are there, are definitely inferior. With equal education and schooling, there is no difference in intelligence period.
So says a former Nobel Prize winner:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science...ace/index.html
************************************************** ********
LONDON, England (CNN) -- A British museum has canceled a lecture by Dr. James Watson, co-founder of the DNA double helix, after he claimed black people are less intelligent than whites in a recent newspaper interview.
James Watson won the 1962 Nobel prize for discovering the structure of DNA.
Watson, who won the 1962 Nobel prize for his part in discovering the structure of DNA, provoked a storm of criticism after his comments were published in the Sunday Times.
The eminent biologist told the British newspaper he was "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."
Watson, 79, had been due to give a lecture at London's Science Museum on Friday but the museum canceled his appearance, saying his comments had "gone beyond the point of acceptable debate".
The American professor's words have been roundly condemned as "racist," with fellow scientists dismissing his claims as "genetic nonsense".
"He should recognize that statements of this sort have racist functions and are to be deeply, deeply regretted," said Professor Steven Rose of the British Open University.
Watson is credited with discovering the double helix along with Maurice Wilkins and Francis Crick in 1962.
In the newspaper interview, he said there was no reason to think that races which had grown up in separate geographical locations should have evolved identically. He went on to say that although he hoped everyone was equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true".
The British government's skills minister, David Lammy, who is black, called the comments "deeply offensive" and said Watson would only succeed in providing oxygen for extremist political groups.
"It is a shame that a man with a record of scientific distinction should see his work overshadowed by his own irrational prejudices," Lammy told CNN.
Watson is not the first scientist to show sympathy for the theory of a racial basis for intellectual difference. In March of last year Dr. Frank Ellis from Leeds University provoked anger in Britain after he admitted he found evidence that racial groups perform differently "extremely convincing."
I actually agree with this fool...............there are ALOT less schools in Africa. The schools that are there, are definitely inferior. With equal education and schooling, there is no difference in intelligence period.
White ppl got head start of hunders of years. that scientist is pretty dumb to not know that
not to mention white ppl got lot of knowledge from other races like asians, indians, etc
there's a difference between intelligence and education. apparently Mr. Genius Scientist can't figure that out.
With his first comment, I thought he might be referring the inherent inequalities produced by inferior educational opportunities and other effects produced by subpar quality of life.
His later comments clearly indicate a racial bias. How sad that such a scientifically brilliant man is such an idiot.
That artical is rediculous.
Ugh. =( Awful.
I see what you did there.
quote:
"It's difficult to get most scientists even to say the word race when referring to people. That's because in traditional scientific language, races are synonymous with subspecies—organisms in the same species that can interbreed but nevertheless are distinctive genetically.
Many species split into subspecies after being separated geographically for an extended amount of time. During generations of genetic mixing within but not between the isolated groups, some of each group's genes develop slightly different versions, or alleles. Scientists often use a rule called Wright's F statistic to judge whether separate groups are actually subspecies. If 25 percent or more of one group's alleles are different from another's, then by F-statistic standards, the two groups are considered subspecies. A difference of 100 percent would separate them into distinct species.
Subspecies, or races, exist for many animals—for example, the alleles in some populations of grey wolves score up to 70 percent on the F-statistic scale. However, the groups of people considered to be of different races have allelic differences of at most 15 percent, too little to cons ute subspecies.
To the nonscientist, however, race clearly is a meaningful term, says Vivian Ota Wang of the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications Research Program at the National Human Genome Research Ins ute (NHGRI) in Bethesda, Md. The concept seems to depend on a collection of physical features, "like a checklist," she says, "so that people can categorize each other into groups." Items on the list might include skin tone, hair texture, and the shapes of eyes, noses, or lips.
Most people don't carry a conscious perception of the checklist. Wang says that race has a lot in common with Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's famous definition of pornography: We know it when we see it. "
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20050409/bob9.asp
why is this head going against the grain???
Timvp you misspelled article and ridiculous.
i think he did it on purpose to be funny, but it just wasn't funny.....
That's what I was getting at. LMAO
sorry I was a little slow on that one....
fale x2
All that needs to be said....
I felt dumber just from reading this article.
Last edited by ShoogarBear; 10-18-2007 at 05:13 PM.
Oh, wait, but that's the point, isn't it?
Watson has always been a bit of a loon. There are stories about how he used to wear his Nobel Prize medal around his neck and go into bars to try to pick up chicks.
He's unquestionably a smart guy, but it's misleading to put him and Crick on the same status with other Nobel Prize winners.
They won the Prize for winning the race to discover the structure of DNA, i.e., if they hadn't done it first, somebody else would have done it within a matter of months.
The overwhelming majority of Prizes are awarded for discovering something that nobody else was probably going to in any reasonable amount of time.
I've been saying it for years.
Perhaps it is senility
if people would stop going to church and watching reality on tv they would be much smarter. people without boobs are naturally smarter too.
Nobel laureate biologist Jim Watson apologized "unreservedly" Thursday for stating that black people were not as intelligent as whites, saying he was "mortified" by the comments attributed to him.
"I cannot understand how I could have said what I am quoted as having said," Watson said during an appearance at the Royal Society in London.
"I can certainly understand why people, reading those words, have reacted in the ways that they have."
"To all those who have drawn the inference from my words that Africa, as a continent, is somehow genetically inferior, I can only apologize unreservedly. That is not what I meant. More importantly from my point of view, there is no scientific basis for such a belief," he said.
Watson, 79, an American who won the 1962 Nobel prize for his role in the discovery of the double-helix structure of DNA, told the Sunday Times he was "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."
Watson also asserted there was no reason to believe different races separated by geography should have evolved identically, and he said that while he hoped everyone was equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true."
His comments were met with an avalanche of criticism, and London's Science Museum canceled Watson's planned Friday appearance, saying his remarks had "gone beyond the point of acceptable debate."
The British government's skills minister, David Lammy, who is black, called the comments "deeply offensive."
"It is a shame that a man with a record of scientific distinction should see his work overshadowed by his own irrational prejudices," Lammy said.
Watson's remarks to the Sunday Times were the latest in a number of controversial comments from the eminent biologist.
In 1997, Britain's Sunday Telegraph quoted Watson as saying that if a gene for sexuality were isolated, women who find that their unborn child has the gene should be allowed to have an abortion.
During a lecture tour in 2000, he suggested there might be links between a person's weight and their level of ambition and between skin color and sexual prowess.
"That's why you have Latin lovers," he said, according to The Associated Press, which cited people who attended the lecture. "You've never heard of an English lover. Only an English patient."
And in a British TV do entary that aired in 2003, Watson suggested stupidity was a genetic disease that should be treated.
That would be a dream come true.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
