[219 / 54 / ?]
Quoted By: >>13428825 >>13428829 >>13428834 >>13428879 >>13428960
Diversity or Science: You Can’t Have Both
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Q4SOanj8l8SS/
>I hope you know the name J. Philippe Rushton, who died in 2012. He did pioneering research on the nature and significance of racial differences, and his book, Race, Evolution, and Behavior is a classic. The race deniers have made it very hard to find, and they are now ganging up on the scientific journals that published his papers. Here is their latest triumph: a notice from the publication Psychological Reports, saying it has retracted three of his papers. And please note the reason at the bottom of the screen. “The research was unethical, scientifically flawed, and based on racist ideas and agenda.” Wow. A modern-day Doctor Mengele. The only specifics this notice gives is that Rushton was wrong “on the subject of intelligence and race.” Race differences in IQ are one of the most widely confirmed findings in the science of mental testing.
Here’s an article crowing about the retraction of “debunked anti-black race science.” Note the illustrations. They are a hodgepodge from a book published 164 years ago. All of these retracted papers were peer reviewed. Is the publisher going to name the scientists who reviewed Rushton’s methods, data, and conclusions, and say they had “racist ideas and agenda?” Why not?
>Here’s another lovely case. Last year, Dr. Norman Wang wrote a paper for the Journal of the American Heart Association on “Race and Ethnicity Considerations for the Cardiology Workforce.” He warned that race preferences for non-whites in medical school means that some poorly qualified people are trying to become doctors. He wrote: “Long-term academic solutions and excellence should not be sacrificed for short-term demographic optics.” He added that people who want to be doctors “must be assessed as individuals on the basis of their personal merits, not their racial and ethnic identities.”
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Q4SOanj8l8SS/
>I hope you know the name J. Philippe Rushton, who died in 2012. He did pioneering research on the nature and significance of racial differences, and his book, Race, Evolution, and Behavior is a classic. The race deniers have made it very hard to find, and they are now ganging up on the scientific journals that published his papers. Here is their latest triumph: a notice from the publication Psychological Reports, saying it has retracted three of his papers. And please note the reason at the bottom of the screen. “The research was unethical, scientifically flawed, and based on racist ideas and agenda.” Wow. A modern-day Doctor Mengele. The only specifics this notice gives is that Rushton was wrong “on the subject of intelligence and race.” Race differences in IQ are one of the most widely confirmed findings in the science of mental testing.
Here’s an article crowing about the retraction of “debunked anti-black race science.” Note the illustrations. They are a hodgepodge from a book published 164 years ago. All of these retracted papers were peer reviewed. Is the publisher going to name the scientists who reviewed Rushton’s methods, data, and conclusions, and say they had “racist ideas and agenda?” Why not?
>Here’s another lovely case. Last year, Dr. Norman Wang wrote a paper for the Journal of the American Heart Association on “Race and Ethnicity Considerations for the Cardiology Workforce.” He warned that race preferences for non-whites in medical school means that some poorly qualified people are trying to become doctors. He wrote: “Long-term academic solutions and excellence should not be sacrificed for short-term demographic optics.” He added that people who want to be doctors “must be assessed as individuals on the basis of their personal merits, not their racial and ethnic identities.”
