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.

 

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

So lets play Devil's Advocate here. Lets say his statement is based on a study he conducted or read and the results are verified by peers in that line of study. Does that still make his comments (besides the black employee thing) offensive?

 

Studies have proven that various genetic traits like eye color, height, and hair are common in some races more than in others. What makes anyone think something like intelligence cannot vary like that from race to race?

So lets play Devil's Advocate here. Lets say his statement is based on a study he conducted or read and the results are verified by peers in that line of study. Does that still make his comments (besides the black employee thing) offensive?

 

Studies have proven that various genetic traits like eye color, height, and hair are common in some races more than in others. What makes anyone think something like intelligence cannot vary like that from race to race?

:|

 

I believe that if you put 10 babies of different races, from 10 healthy mothers, in a controlled environment for their entire lives; the intelligence would not vary at all between the 10.

 

As for this guy, simply, f*** him.

I believe that if you put 10 babies of different races, from 10 healthy mothers, in a controlled environment for their entire lives; the intelligence would not vary at all between the 10.

It's not based on race, but this is a completely false statement.

I believe that if you put 10 babies of different races, from 10 healthy mothers, in a controlled environment for their entire lives; the intelligence would not vary at all between the 10.

It's not based on race, but this is a completely false statement.

 

I agree. People's intelligence varies.

 

I think what he meant was... if you statistically control for everything, the average intelligence of any given group will not be significantly (or at all) different than for other groups.

 

I agree with that statement.

So lets play Devil's Advocate here. Lets say his statement is based on a study he conducted or read and the results are verified by peers in that line of study. Does that still make his comments (besides the black employee thing) offensive?

 

Studies have proven that various genetic traits like eye color, height, and hair are common in some races more than in others. What makes anyone think something like intelligence cannot vary like that from race to race?

George Washington Carver

I believe that if you put 10 babies of different races, from 10 healthy mothers, in a controlled environment for their entire lives; the intelligence would not vary at all between the 10.

It's not based on race, but this is a completely false statement.

Explain that to me then.

 

If everything is controlled, race will have absolutely nothing to do with a person's intelligence.

 

I don't believe a person's intellectual ceilling varies much at all. Person A may have to work harder than Person B. But they can both reach the same plateau.

I believe that if you put 10 babies of different races, from 10 healthy mothers, in a controlled environment for their entire lives; the intelligence would not vary at all between the 10.

It's not based on race, but this is a completely false statement.

Explain that to me then.

 

If everything is controlled, race will have absolutely nothing to do with a person's intelligence.

 

Why would intelligence not vary from race to race if other traits do tend to vary?

The guy codiscovered the double helix, he is obviously smarter than any of you. He's totally right.

 

Also, Jews have horns. Fact.

While I can not answer that exact question, I can point out that such a thought is absurd. Just look at the wide variance of scores among the same minority groups but seperated by geographic locations. Sub saharan blacks on average are close to legally retartded in the United States. This number then goes way up within the US and then higher in Western European countries that have better education centers located in Black neighborhoods.

 

A good example is Asia. Asia consistently kicks ass on all IQ test scores, and other gauges of intelligence... because they test the ones who get an education, an education that is far more rigourous than the average american education. Now if they actually tested your average slum dweller in Beijing or New Dehli and that number goes down considerably.

 

It's all enviroment, otherwise their would be at least the slightest bit of consistency in scores about the same race classes but their isn't, they can vary wildly too the point where they're far too many outliers to make a somewhat accurate statistical arguement to that train of thought.

The guy codiscovered the double helix, he is obviously smarter than any of you. He's totally right.

 

Also, Jews have horns. Fact.

 

 

 

:lol :lol :lol

 

 

end of thread

I believe that if you put 10 babies of different races, from 10 healthy mothers, in a controlled environment for their entire lives; the intelligence would not vary at all between the 10.

It's not based on race, but this is a completely false statement.

Explain that to me then.

 

If everything is controlled, race will have absolutely nothing to do with a person's intelligence.

 

I don't believe a person's intellectual ceilling varies much at all. Person A may have to work harder than Person B. But they can both reach the same plateau.

No, you take 10,000 people from race A and 10,000 from race B and they will have identical intelligences on average, however, 10 people living in the same environment will not have the same intelligence because intelligence isn't based on upbringing alone.

 

However, if you take 10,000 men and 10,000 women, the intelligence of the men will be greater because our brains are 3 times bigger. It's science.

I think Festa's point was missed, but yeah obviously the guy's an a-hole, and I'm sure the testing he refers to is laughable.

 

 

But if purely hypothetically he'd conducted tests/experiments that led him to believe that were true, and his testing/methodology/etc was verified by many of his peers, would it be offensive to state what these particular conclusions were? If you present them in an idiotic racist way then certainly, but just relaying the data...

I believe that if you put 10 babies of different races, from 10 healthy mothers, in a controlled environment for their entire lives; the intelligence would not vary at all between the 10.

It's not based on race, but this is a completely false statement.

Explain that to me then.

 

If everything is controlled, race will have absolutely nothing to do with a person's intelligence.

 

Why would intelligence not vary from race to race if other traits do tend to vary?

It could very from person to person but I absolutely do not believe races are less smart then other races automatically from birth.

 

I concur with Rune. Its all environment.

I highly doubt there is a genetic implication. I place little credence in "nature" when it comes to issues such as this and homosexuality.

+1

 

Totally agree.

I highly doubt there is a genetic implication. I place little credence in "nature" when it comes to issues such as this and homosexuality.

 

 

Culture influences our character in manners that transcend our level of thinking.

So you believe you would've discovered relativity if you Einstein's upbringing? And I assume Gauss was smarter than all of us put together by the age of 4 because of his environment?

Technically we don't even know what "intelligence" means in a genetic sense, thus it cannot be traced.

 

Agreed.

I highly doubt there is a genetic implication. I place little credence in "nature" when it comes to issues such as this and homosexuality.

 

 

Culture influences our character in manners that transcend our level of thinking.

So you believe you would've discovered relativity if you Einstein's upbringing? And I assume Gauss was smarter than all of us put together by the age of 4 because of his environment?

He only represents one person, not the group as a whole which you have to look at if you are to make a fair assesment. I just used Carver as an example of Black's being fully capable of great intelligence. Its not a fair indicator of the race but looking at the examples of blacks across the world is and it verifies the fact that intelligence is more enviromental than natural.

You are taking too simplistic definitions of both "intelligence" and "nurture."

 

I agree. Intelligence cannot be defined strictly the way, say, hair can. Hair can be black, straight, blonde, curly, etc.

I'm glad this was FINALLY proven. Now I can tell all my black friends that I am actually scientifically smarter than them. Thank you, Dr. Watson!

I highly doubt there is a genetic implication. I place little credence in "nature" when it comes to issues such as this and homosexuality.

 

 

Culture influences our character in manners that transcend our level of thinking.

So you believe you would've discovered relativity if you Einstein's upbringing? And I assume Gauss was smarter than all of us put together by the age of 4 because of his environment?

Who here said that intelligence was strictly based on environment? No one. but it is definitely a big factor.

If this is based on scientific study rather than anecdotal/racist tendencies, then there's no reason to cancel his speech.

 

Then again, I wouldn't have been a cancellation fan in the first place. But if he's speaking from his professional expertise then he should at least be listened to.

That went out the window with this, Juanky:

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".

well the first sentence is at least debatable. The second one needs no comment.

Asians are smarter than whites

 

 

Who cares really, we all have as much potential as anyone else.