Racist DNA founder James Watson dead? Age 97

[Rick Fox at UNC]

"All our social policies are based on the fact that their (blacks) intelligence is the same as ours (whites) – whereas all the testing says not really ... people who have to deal with black employees find this not true."

Those are separate quotes, and they seem to be taken out of context or missing it at the very least.

And that's the problem. It's not that I agree with what he's saying, but I still need context.

 

[Rick Fox at UNC]

Are you trolling? He stated intelligence difference between blacks and whites is likely genetic, which is blatantly false. He also claimed higher melanin rates are tied to increased libido. He also claimed genetics explain social behaviors amongst all races, from Indian people being servile to Jews being intelligent.

I understand.

So, he made a claim. He made a number of claims. Fair enough.

Some of these claims are similar to claims I see on these forums. Black people are better athletes and musicians, got bigger dikks and all of that because of our genetics and so on. Indian people act like this, asians act like that, white people act like this, Jews act like that.

I'm not saying he's correct. But if someone asked you to explain differences in intelligence and behavior, how would you do so? It's easy to be critical of another claim. But how would you explain it?

 

[Piff Perkins]

Those are separate quotes, and they seem to be taken out of context or missing it at the very least.

And that's the problem. It's not that I agree with what he's saying, but I still need context.

Ah so you're just playing games. They aren't separate quotes. Here's the original article from 2007.

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", and I know that this "hot potato" is going to be difficult to address. His hope is that everyone is equal, but he counters that "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true". He says that you should not discriminate on the basis of colour, because "there are many people of colour who are very talented, but don't promote them when they haven't succeeded at the lower level". He writes that "there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so".

When asked how long it might take for the key genes in affecting differences in human intelligence to be found, his "back-of-the-envelope answer" is 15 years. However, he wonders if even 10 years will pass. In his mission to make children more DNA-literate, the geneticist explains that he has opened a DNA learning centre on the borders of Harlem in New York. He is also recruiting minorities at the lab and, he tells me, has just accepted a black girl "but," he comments, "there's no one to recruit."

The elementary DNA of Dr Watson

The names Watson and Crick, it has been said, have

www.thetimes.com

The original quoting mirrors the reporting in the New York Times and other sources in 2007 as well.

https://archive.ph/bSVZ#selection-497.36-497.55

 

[jwinfield]

Those are separate quotes, and they seem to be taken out of context or missing it at the very least.

And that's the problem. It's not that I agree with what he's saying, but I still need context.

 

[Rick Fox at UNC]

Ah so you're just playing games. They aren't separate quotes. Here's the original article from 2007.

The elementary DNA of Dr Watson

The names Watson and Crick, it has been said, have

www.thetimes.com

The original quoting mirrors the reporting in the New York Times and other sources in 2007 as well.

https://archive.ph/bSVZ#selection-497.36-497.55

Bro, where is the actual interview where this was stated? What was the context it was stated in?

It sounds like they are discussing how to address intelligence and achievement gaps, which, whether we want to admit it or not, will force people to have difficult conversations because, how could you not?

He wasn't sitting around saying, "yea, blacks ain't shyt." Sounds like he's being asked about a program he is spearheading to address or at least understand differences in intelligence.

And again, I ask you. How do you explain these differences in intelligence?

 

[Piff Perkins]

Bro, where is the actual interview where this was stated? What was the context it was stated in?

It sounds like they are discussing how to address intelligence and achievement gaps, which, whether we want to admit it or not, will force people to have difficult conversations because, how could you not?

He wasn't sitting around saying, "yea, blacks ain't shyt." Sounds like he's being asked about a program he is spearheading to address or at least understand differences in intelligence.

And again, I ask you. How do you explain these differences in intelligence?

I want everyone to take note of this because it's very obvious you're either stupid or trolling. That is literally the original article, written by one of his proteges who is quoting what he told her in conversation. And then he doubled down in his own book. But you didn't read any of that. Maybe you clicked the link, maybe not.

Intelligence is heavily influenced by social environment factors. Two parent households, reading skills, quality of schools, etc. There is no evidence that it is genetics based. And Watson's own comments contradict US test scores. Indians out pace white people across multiple academic fields yet Watson considered them soft intellectually compared to whites. His views are based entirely on standard racist stereotypes - Asians are sneaky, Jews are good with money, Indians are servants, blacks are violent, Hispanics are stupid, etc.

 

[King Static X]

Guys, just ignore that idiot "Rick Fox at UNC".

Anyway, fukk James Watson.

 

[Rick Fox at UNC]

I want everyone to take note of this because it's very obvious you're either stupid or trolling. That is literally the original article, written by one of his proteges who is quoting what he told her in conversation. And then he doubled down in his own book. But you didn't read any of that. Maybe you clicked the link, maybe not.

Intelligence is heavily influenced by social environment factors. Two parent households, reading skills, quality of schools, etc. There is no evidence that it is genetics based. And Watson's own comments contradict US test scores. Indians out pace white people across multiple academic fields yet Watson considered them soft intellectually compared to whites. His views are based entirely on standard racist stereotypes - Asians are sneaky, Jews are good with money, Indians are servants, blacks are violent, Hispanics are stupid, etc.

The original article isn't the same as the original interview where the quote was taken from.

You can take anything out of context. At this point, we're having a silly discussion. So there is no genetic component to intelligence? So is athleticism based on a number of social environment factors as well?

 

[Savvir]

oh shyt. Hes maga… now it all makes sense.

Resident shills looking for a way to spin this into Trump being racist.

Same. Another one of these lame ass Trump threads from an unhinged shill.

Pure loser shyt.

Update: Same just happened to me today, 5 figure raise and 5 figure bonus.

Trump and his racism strikes again!

Lot of black people like Trump, especially in the sports and entertainment community.

Lot of successful black people agree with republican ethos and talking points, especially when the alternative is a bunch of sissies and feminists.

 

[Piff Perkins]

The original article isn't the same as the original interview where the quote was taken from.

You can take anything out of context. At this point, we're having a silly discussion. So there is no genetic component to intelligence? So is athleticism based on a number of social environment factors as well?

You keep saying this without providing any evidence of it. The original source is The Times Of London. From his protege. Which I linked. There is no taking out of context, it's literally a full quote and he reiterated it multiple times in his life. I'm done with this conversation.

 

[Rekkapryde]

Trying to prove Black people as “sub-humans” will always be a projection because those weirdos are the real sub-humans.

With that being said, rest in piss bytch

When I found out in college that Thomas Jefferson used to do the same shyt

doing that kinda shyt and fukkin slaves is just

 

[Cladyclad]

Celebrating his death is like laughing at a team you hate not winning back 2 back championships

Dude live to 97 its best to just not give light

 

[Sterling Archer]

The first word in the title of the thread...

You know what, I see why dudes is such losers. This is mental midgetry trying to discuss anything with most of you. I feel myself becoming dumber every time I read these silly threads.

Best of luck out there.

Move around fukk nikka. Worst of luck to you.

 

[Rekkapryde]

Celebrating his death is like laughing at a team you hate not winning back 2 back championships

Dude live to 97 its best to just not give light

good point.

 

[Coco Loco]

A corpse died again. We love to see it!