Africasgateway.com
Hip Hop Forums => General Discussion => Topic started by: DaT NiGGa P-DuB on October 18, 2007, 09:27:14 AM
-
ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS IS DAMN!!!!!
Fury at DNA pioneer's theory: Africans are less intelligent than Westerners
Celebrated scientist attacked for race comments: "All our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really"
By Cahal Milmo
Published: 17 October 2007
One of the world's most eminent scientists was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he claimed that black people were less intelligent than white people and the idea that "equal powers of reason" were shared across racial groups was a delusion.
James Watson, a Nobel Prize winner for his part in the unravelling of DNA who now runs one of America 's leading scientific research institutions, drew widespread condemnation for comments he made ahead of his arrival in Britain today for a speaking tour at venues including the Science Museum in London .
The 79-year-old geneticist reopened the explosive debate about race and science in a newspaper interview in which he said Western policies towards African countries were wrongly based on an a**umption that black people were as clever as their white counterparts when "testing" suggested the contrary. He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.
The newly formed Equality and Human Rights Commission, successor to the Commission for Racial Equality, said it was studying Dr Watson's remarks " in full". Dr Watson told The Sunday Times that 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". He said there was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true"..
His views are also reflected in a book published next week, in which he writes: "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.."
The furore echoes the controversy created in the 1990s by The Bell Curve, a book co-authored by the American political scientist Charles Murray, which suggested differences in IQ were genetic and discussed the implications of a racial divide in intelligence. The work was heavily criticised across the world, in particular by leading scientists who described it as a work of " scientific racism".
Dr Watson arrives in Britain today for a speaking tour to publicise his latest book, Avoid Boring People: Lessons from a Life in Science. Among his first engagements is a speech to an audience at the Science Museum organised by the Dana Centre, which held a discussion last night on the history of scientific racism.
Critics of Dr Watson said there should be a robust response to his views across the spheres of politics and science. Keith Vaz, the Labour chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said: "It is sad to see a scientist of such achievement making such baseless, unscientific and extremely offensive comments. I am sure the scientific community will roundly reject what appear to be Dr Watson's personal prejudices.
"These comments serve as a reminder of the attitudes which can still exists at the highest professional levels."
The American scientist earned a place in the history of great scientific breakthroughs of the 20th century when he worked at the University of Cambridge in the 1950s and 1960s and formed part of the team which discovered the structure of DNA. He shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for medicine with his British colleague Francis Crick and New Zealand-born Maurice Wilkins.
But despite serving for 50 years as a director of the Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory on Long Island , considered a world leader in research into cancer and genetics, Dr Watson has frequently courted controversy with some of his views on politics, sexuality and race. The respected journal Science wrote in 1990: "To many in the scientific community, Watson has long been something of a wild man, and his colleagues tend to hold their collective breath whenever he veers from the script."
In 1997, he told a British newspaper that a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be homosexual. He later insisted he was talking about a "hypothetical" choice which could never be applied. He has also suggested a link between skin colour and sex drive, positing the theory that black people have higher libidos, and argued in favour of genetic screening and engineering on the basis that " stupidity" could one day be cured. He has claimed that beauty could be genetically manufactured, saying: "People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would great."
The Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory said yesterday that Dr Watson could not be contacted to comment on his remarks.
Steven Rose, a professor of biological sciences at the Open University and a founder member of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science, said: " This is Watson at his most scandalous. He has said similar things about women before but I have never heard him get into this racist terrain. If he knew the literature in the subject he would know he was out of his depth scientifically, quite apart from socially and politically."
Anti-racism campaigners called for Dr Watson's remarks to be looked at in the context of racial hatred laws. A spokesman for the 1990 Trust, a black human rights group, said: "It is astonishing that a man of such distinction should make comments that seem to perpetuate racism in this way. It amounts to fuelling bigotry and we would like it to be looked at for grounds of legal complaint."
-
Published 2007 - what is this the effects of opium-cocaine cocktails... ja ne
-
ja ne for sure!!! this bali is straight on that CRACCCKKKKK!!!!
-
I'd like to read the guy's hypothesis and make up my own mind.
-
Link/ Reference please?
-
@vexer
you hav to be as f***ed up as watson himself to even think that he might be correct,let alone actually come up with some experimental evidence.
on the real thou its really said for someone of his stature to say shit lyk that but i guess from all the other comments he allegedly made prior to this,about women nd what not, it shudn't really be surprising,this is the ultimate.
(http://osulibrary.orst.edu/specialcollections/coll/pauling/dna/pictures/portrait-watson.jpg)
look at this guy nd tell me his not racist
-
@vexer
you hav to be as f***ed up as watson himself to even think that he might be correct
OUCH!
-
@vexer
you hav to be as f***ed up as watson himself to even think that he might be correct,let alone actually come up with some experimental evidence.
on the real thou its really said for someone of his stature to say shit lyk that but i guess from all the other comments he allegedly made prior to this,about women nd what not, it shudn't really be surprising,this is the ultimate.
(http://osulibrary.orst.edu/specialcollections/coll/pauling/dna/pictures/portrait-watson.jpg)
look at this guy nd tell me his not racist
Now, now play nice - cant judge a book by its cover - i think i kinda likes what he's saying because it just proves to me, again, that the credibility of science is not as sacred as it's usually treated.
-
@vexer
you hav to be as f***ed up as watson himself to even think that he might be correct,let alone actually come up with some experimental evidence./quote]
As Brick would say, no need to get your knickers in a knot.
As much as I may not like it, there's nothing wrong in actually reading and trying to understand his basis for saying what he's saying.
I don't want to be dismissive until I actually understand where he's coming from.
What's wrong with trying to understand something even if it might be adverse to you. All I want to do is to come up with an informed opinion of my own afta considering both facets of the argument.
How do you actually know that what he's saying isn't true or could be possibly true without actually considering the basis of his hypothesis?
-
@ tate...here is the link to the website from the Independent Newspaper in the Uk, and for all those interested this guy was supposed to be having talks in England and most have been cancelled....
http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3067222.ece
-
@crus-ou
that was just a joke-the guy's face actually looks like he's on some shit
@vexer
point got-nd i wasn't gettin at you.what i was tryin to stress is that science cannot be used to validate such remarks,considering that this is the same guy that made "hypothetical" statements such as "women can choose to abort their babies if they're homosexuals".clearly this cat has a lot of "hate" for people that are not of his kind in some way,nd whats sad about it is that he uses his credibility as scientist to propagate this "hate" to the rest of the world.
so for someone to actually think that he might be on point,it would either be very ignorant of them or they might share similar sentiments, nd that is really f***ed. up
-
stupidity" could one day be cured.
:lol: :lol: :lol: *falls off chair*
This guy is on sumthing............
But like Vexter i would also like to read his hypothesis
-
stupidity" could one day be cured.
AG would be a crashing bore
-
stupidity" could one day be cured.
AG would be a crashing bore
laugh from the navel - heheeehehehehehe
-
I told you not to listen to them
(http://crackersunited.com/blog/wp-content/cracker_a**_cracker.jpg)
-
who gives a f*** if white people are more intelligent? we got bigger dicks
-
who gives a f*** if white people are more intelligent? we got bigger dicks
Point proven.
This and some black people's ignorance as well as the fact that some us like fiddy could actually make me support this cat.
I'm an exception though, cos I make the smartest white folk look like retards.
-
who gives a f*** if white people are more intelligent? we got bigger dicks
*shakes head*
nc nc nc
-
who gives a f*** if white people are more intelligent? we got bigger dicks
*shakes head*
nc nc nc
co-nc nc nc
-
dude cud speakin some truff.... too many dumb niggaz around this earth...
haha
-
i wonder how this scientist explains all the white people in the audience of your average jerry springer show?
-
I've always blamed institutions on this one. Okay, look at it this way, the dude has brain problems I mean it, look at that pic, dude is crazy. However, since he has a long history in research his institution may never concider taking him out of the picture. Even if they discover "scientifically" that he has gone crazy, they'll never take him out, especially with a noble prize. The result is, the same crazy ma fo is going to continue and conduct research applying both rationality and crazyness. At the stage of his research proposal, he may sound rational, but along the way rationality may be dominated by crazyness. His authorities or sponsers may still think he's stuff is worthy of being published because of his history in research (nobel prize winner mind you). Accordding to my thinking, this is what is going on here. I even have my own example of some old guy back at varsity. Dude was in Zoology or something, and he was concidered as one of the greatest researchers on compus, the reason being his historicaly record. However, one thing strange about the dude, he stayed on compus, 365 days a year (I mean it 24/7, Jan to Dec, even on holidays). He was taking his bath there. Dude was paranoid. Scared of people (okay, since you may get it twisted, even whites as well, dude couldn't talk to anyone on campus grounds). He took his bath at the dept/faculty. He ate there. He always wore the same kakkie short pents and shirt. Big facial hair, and all that stuf. He was just crazy, you could tell and everybody knew him. He was just a crazy dude. However, the varsity kept him based on his research record. Dude, is probably still doing research even today.
So for me, I'm not gonna even take this serious cos this is crazyness. And it sad to see that some of the post above are from people who actually doubting themselves. Come on now people. And most of you guys have been to multis and tertairy and all that, and you know how you were dominating some of them cla**es back then, even still excelling at work today. So come on now, let the crazy dude and those who published that shit (which I'm certain that they are racist ma fos, who use this crazy dude twisted work to manipulate how we think- i.e. since he's a noble price winner- " them stupid suckers are gonna beliegve him"- am sure that what they said even befor publishing that crap. Hahaha) drown in his crazyness
Black Pride still lives and forever will
-
Black Pride still lives and forever will
Funny how black pride does not make the headlines, or sitcoms or music videos or magazines or billboards or cla** rooms. BLack pride the ghost of lecture halls.
-
...maybe black people do have a secret desire to be white, blacks feed the myth!!!! - and if that's anything to go by. then maybe black people are stupid -
we've sacrificed our roots, worked super hard on being whiter than white folk, more primal than the animals. mistaking embracing for substitution.
who opposes - rappin in 'venac' - i friggin hate that word - because that's not hip hop and opposed teaching in indegenous languages, women empowerment (unda g!), development in rural areas using local models
who is always going on about their f***en genitalia like its a precious calling!!!!
who's used managed to sum up every irritating human flaw into a 'black thing'??? and all of this SHIt is based on myths that created and mxim propegated by ..........
i'm going to have a beer and choke on black pride
-
I'm really lost, what is yo point? crus-ou
-
who gives a f*** if white people are more intelligent? we got bigger dicks
*shakes head*
nc nc nc
i know that wasn't an "intelligent" response, but some pale swine decided to look for "scientific" evidence that whites are more intelligent than blacks. i dont blame him, it's not his fault. his older brother and his father are probably the same person. now we could validate his existence by giving intelligent responses like we give a shit what he thinks of our iq, or we could just shake it off and say "ag, shem".
-
ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS IS DAMN!!!!!
Fury at DNA pioneer's theory: Africans are less intelligent than Westerners
Celebrated scientist attacked for race comments: "All our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours - whereas all the testing says not really"
By Cahal Milmo
Published: 17 October 2007
One of the world's most eminent scientists was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he claimed that black people were less intelligent than white people and the idea that "equal powers of reason" were shared across racial groups was a delusion.
James Watson, a Nobel Prize winner for his part in the unravelling of DNA who now runs one of America 's leading scientific research institutions, drew widespread condemnation for comments he made ahead of his arrival in Britain today for a speaking tour at venues including the Science Museum in London .
The 79-year-old geneticist reopened the explosive debate about race and science in a newspaper interview in which he said Western policies towards African countries were wrongly based on an a**umption that black people were as clever as their white counterparts when "testing" suggested the contrary. He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.
The newly formed Equality and Human Rights Commission, successor to the Commission for Racial Equality, said it was studying Dr Watson's remarks " in full". Dr Watson told The Sunday Times that 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". He said there was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true"..
His views are also reflected in a book published next week, in which he writes: "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.."
The furore echoes the controversy created in the 1990s by The Bell Curve, a book co-authored by the American political scientist Charles Murray, which suggested differences in IQ were genetic and discussed the implications of a racial divide in intelligence. The work was heavily criticised across the world, in particular by leading scientists who described it as a work of " scientific racism".
Dr Watson arrives in Britain today for a speaking tour to publicise his latest book, Avoid Boring People: Lessons from a Life in Science. Among his first engagements is a speech to an audience at the Science Museum organised by the Dana Centre, which held a discussion last night on the history of scientific racism.
Critics of Dr Watson said there should be a robust response to his views across the spheres of politics and science. Keith Vaz, the Labour chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said: "It is sad to see a scientist of such achievement making such baseless, unscientific and extremely offensive comments. I am sure the scientific community will roundly reject what appear to be Dr Watson's personal prejudices.
"These comments serve as a reminder of the attitudes which can still exists at the highest professional levels."
The American scientist earned a place in the history of great scientific breakthroughs of the 20th century when he worked at the University of Cambridge in the 1950s and 1960s and formed part of the team which discovered the structure of DNA. He shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for medicine with his British colleague Francis Crick and New Zealand-born Maurice Wilkins.
But despite serving for 50 years as a director of the Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory on Long Island , considered a world leader in research into cancer and genetics, Dr Watson has frequently courted controversy with some of his views on politics, sexuality and race. The respected journal Science wrote in 1990: "To many in the scientific community, Watson has long been something of a wild man, and his colleagues tend to hold their collective breath whenever he veers from the script."
In 1997, he told a British newspaper that a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be homosexual. He later insisted he was talking about a "hypothetical" choice which could never be applied. He has also suggested a link between skin colour and sex drive, positing the theory that black people have higher libidos, and argued in favour of genetic screening and engineering on the basis that " stupidity" could one day be cured. He has claimed that beauty could be genetically manufactured, saying: "People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would great."
The Cold Spring Harbour Laboratory said yesterday that Dr Watson could not be contacted to comment on his remarks.
Steven Rose, a professor of biological sciences at the Open University and a founder member of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science, said: " This is Watson at his most scandalous. He has said similar things about women before but I have never heard him get into this racist terrain. If he knew the literature in the subject he would know he was out of his depth scientifically, quite apart from socially and politically."
Anti-racism campaigners called for Dr Watson's remarks to be looked at in the context of racial hatred laws. A spokesman for the 1990 Trust, a black human rights group, said: "It is astonishing that a man of such distinction should make comments that seem to perpetuate racism in this way. It amounts to fuelling bigotry and we would like it to be looked at for grounds of legal complaint."
somebody came back from the de4ad just to say
(http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/childakapoet/AG/SaddamHussein.jpg)
-
As much as I may not like it, there's nothing wrong in actually reading and trying to understand his basis for saying what he's saying.
cosign...maybe we'll find out he's just an old timer
tryna go out wid a big bang (c'mon the man is 79, and the last
nobel prize was in 1969 :lol: ) but still would be interesting to
analyze the reasoning behind his claims
-
you're just about to do a tour of the uk to promote your new book.
you make a baseless, inflammatory and racist statement about black people.
all your speaking appointments get cancelled.
now tell me who's stupid.
-
who gives a f*** if white people are more intelligent? we got bigger dicks
I'm sure you would be immune to Dr Watson's cure for stupidity....
-
id like to see how he went about testing,
Q1. who was the 1st president of the USA
Q2. In second season of friends who did Joey date
:roll:
-
who gives a f*** if white people are more intelligent? we got bigger dicks
I'm sure you would be immune to Dr Watson's cure for stupidity....
of course you are. or you could read my other post, and see where i'm coming from (no homo). and when it's all said and done, i still dont give a f*** if white people are more intelligent, cos i still got a bigger dick!
-
Ain't it better 2 have a bigger brain?..... Plus white folk nowadays got bigger dicks too, thanx to "science",
-
or you could read my other post, and see where i'm coming from (no homo).
8O geez wat is up wid that stupid phrase!! dat shi honestly
"more homo" than u think..like niga says "where i'm comin from"
nobody's even thinkin it but why u gotta highlight it...and
the fact that u so openly obsessed bout ya (apparently) big
toolbox is even mo disturbing :x ...danm, get a new hobby cat really
..or start a thread 4 ya dick i dunno, whateva u missin the point
anyway (this proly where i'm meanta put the 'no homo' lol)