The general method that scientists follow:

1) You identify a question.

2)You carefully study the existing literature and empirical facts regarding the question.

3)You formulate a hypothesis.

4)You conduct experiments and analyze data to determine if old and new empirical evidence supports or contradicts your hypothesis.

5) You publish papers and give seminars and talks to publicize your hypothesis and your research findings.

6) You attempt to gain funds from grant sources to buy research materials, help pay your salary, and fund grad students and postdoctoral fellows that are working on your project.

The hereditarians (Galtonians such as Jensen, Rushton, Lynn, Murray, Bouchard, Gottfredson, Harpending etc.) have formulated a hypothesis that the environmentalists (Boasians such as Montagu, Lewontin, Gould, Kamin, and virtually all PC social “scientists”) consider highly outrageous and immoral. The hereditarians claim that the reason that some ethnic groups (East Asians, Jews, Europeans etc.) always appear to be smarter than other ethnic groups (Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians etc.) is because the former groups actually ARE innately smarter. This is a very simple hypothesis but in science the simple explanations usually turn out to be the correct ones. Scientists refer to this curious power of parsimony as Occam’s Razor.

Question for Mr. Saletan-

So if certain scientists have latched on to the Jensenist hypothesis (the view that ethnic groups have innate differences in intelligence) that is anathema to nearly the whole political, academic, and scientific establishment, HOW THE HELL CAN THEY FUND THEIR WORK? Do they get a grant from the US Department of Education which is on record as claiming that No Child Left Behind means that all children can do advanced math and science--take Blacks with IQs in the 80s or Jews and Chinese with IQs in the mostly over 110 range and you must expect that all will show the same level of academic achievement because DAMN IT there are no innate ethnic differences in intelligence and to think otherwise is outrageous and simply anti-American!!! The federal granting agencies of course would never fund the hereditarians’ research, instead they would probably work behind the scene to try to get the hereditarian researchers fired or blackballed. Could the hereditarian scientists obtain funding from the Ford Foundation, the Brookings Institute or other mainstream (read staunchly Boasian) private funding sources? Of course not! Well now you can perhaps understand why many hereditarian scientists (including Jensen, Bouchard, Lynn, Rushton and Gottfredson) have accepted money from the Pioneer Fund. It is probably is the only granting source that will fund the hereditarian research paradigm that threatens the great Boasian Doctrine, the rotting edifice upon which most modern social science is based. Also with regard to the links to Am Ren and Jared Taylor’s paper on ethnic disparity in crime rates, did you actually find anything that was inaccurate? Are you actually disputing the link between low IQ and high crime rates? Do you actually believe that low IQ ethnic groups such as Hispanics and Blacks do NOT have a high propensity toward commission of violent crime?

Thanks for this reminder. I read Watson's lamenting the same fact in his DNA: The Secret of Life (2004). Can't find the book now on my shelf, but if someone does, maybe they can quote a paragraph from it regarding Pioneer Fund and the scientists' inability to obtain funding from other sources.

How do they fund their work? Same sources as the folks who fund their work proving the earth is flat and only 6,000 years old. From bigots and idiots. You know-- peers.

If you would calm down for just one moment, and look objectively at this you will see that:

1) It is not as if stupidity (by any measurement) is confined to one ethnicity. Look at this study that shows that nearly half of Australians lack basic reading skills. Like I said to E.Oneal, perhaps the Cubans should send some missionaries to Australia... they have 100% literacy rates. (* note I absolutely love Australians & Kiwis)

2) Nobody really thinks the "no child left behind" business is any good. Nearly every political candidate running has denounced it. It was foisted on the people by the neo-cons despite widespread outrage & dismay among actual teachers.

3) Conflating IQ & Race doesn't add to any of your arguments. Can a white kid with 80 IQ compete with a black kid who tops 140? Your logic is shaky. Nobody wants to pretend that everyone is equal. The question is why the rabid focus on a fuzzy concept like race? Why try so hard to prove that this is hereditary rather than environmental, when logic would say it is surely both. You act as if it is "either or." Is the world really in black & white for you? Besides the wild fluctuation of IQ's over the past century alone would suggest far more environmental significance than we at first would have thought. And, we are only talking about a vast collection of very different tests that have been correlated after the fact to extrapolate a number through statistical methods that are generally taboo in other forms of statistical analysis. g, a statistical myth

4) Surely you realize that the claims you make about race would only be heightened by focusing on the myriad clinal gradations, genetic clusters, and specific family lines. If there's anything to this question at all, it will be found in studying genomes of individuals. Race is simply not a scientific tool. It is a blunt instrument maintained to divide people who are infinitely more similar than not. Generally, this issue is only important to people who call themselves racialists. Do you think that may be why no one funds them?

5) The very vitrol and emotional response you have to this shows that you are not considering this as objectively as you claim. You really wanna stand up here and defend Jared Taylor and the American Renaissance? You do realize that half of the people who go to that convention are proud neo-nazis and klansmen, right? searchlight expose

Out of all the possible (and pressing) fields of study, one has to ask why is this race thing so important to some people... who happen to be friendly with David Duke? Take a chill pill amigo. If you want to hold on to the idea that the Japanese should rule the world, controlled by a Jewish cabal of hyper-braniacs with G*D on their side... be my guest.

I really don't want to sound snide or offensive. Although, I can see that what I have said could be construed that way. Look carefully at your questions. Do you not see the logical fallacy in your Dicto Simpliciter conclusions? You need to recognize that there are literally thousands of factors at work, and simply saying that "blacks get convicted of more crimes, blacks have scored poorly on our standardized IQ tests, therefore low IQ = criminal" is a ridiculously poor argument. Especially in light of racial profiling, ability to afford a good lawyer, public defender collusion, the fact that poor people of every race commit more crime, and an overwhelming abundance of evidence that shows that white people do more drugs, 92% of meth labs are run by white people, nearly all serial killers are white... need I go on?

Why is race so important to you? Were you raised to think about race? Seriously, I'm curious. Were your parents concerned about the race issue? Were they involved with white citizen's councils back in the civil rights era? I'm not taunting. Really. I find that most people who feel strongly about this issue were raised to believe in the inferiority of other people. I imagine that it would be hard to overcome such indoctrination. Perhaps you have come more recently into the "race realist" fold. If so, I ask why? What brought you to believe that this was a proper use of your time and brainpower? (as opposed to say coming up with a safe renewable fuel source or finding Jesus)

Re AmRen and Taylor:

Taylor is a perfect illustration of racist abuse of science. He takes bits of data and weaves them together with completely unscientific inferences to suit his segregationist ideology. In doing so, he does tremendous harm to both science and society.

If you run a research fund, you have a responsibility not to subsidize that kind of crap. Period.

JahSun asked me-

"Why is race so important to you? Were you raised to think about race? Seriously, I'm curious. Were your parents concerned about the race issue? Were they involved with white citizen's councils back in the civil rights era? I'm not taunting. Really. I find that most people who feel strongly about this issue were raised to believe in the inferiority of other people. I imagine that it would be hard to overcome such indoctrination. Perhaps you have come more recently into the "race realist" fold. If so, I ask why? What brought you to believe that this was a proper use of your time and brainpower?"

I enjoy understanding things at the most fundamental level. I like truth. I despise falseness and conceit, especially when it is practiced by educated intelligent non-ignorant people. I agree with the modern bright movement (Harris, Dawkins, Hitchens, Pinker, etc.) that is boldly exposing the ridiculousness and dangerousness of belief in nonreality (i.e. usually religion-related supernatural beliefs). My parents were upper middleclass liberals, Unitarians, supporters of Senators McCarthy (Eugene not Joseph!) and McGovern, long time card carrying members of the ACLU and overall ardent believers in the Boasian doctrine of racial equality which prevailed in intellectual circles during the fifties, sixties and seventies. My parents instilled in me respect for truth and disrespect for false bullshit even if it emanates from supposedly authoritative sources. After careful consideration of much evidence, I firmly believe that the Boasian Doctrine of racial/ethnic equality in intelligence is basically false bullshit; it is a quasi-religious doctrine that everyone is expected to profess fervent belief in--even though most astute people secretly realize it is totally false. During the next few years, molecular research in cognitive neuroscience and comparative homo sapiens genomics (remember that the Neanderthal genome sequence will come online within the next year!) will no doubt determine with great certainty the DNA sequence variations that underlie common human variation in intelligence. All the racial differences in genomic DNA sequence have all ready been catalogued (they are detailed in the publically accessible HapMap and Perlegen and NCBI-SNP human genomic databases). In a few short years, perhaps even in the next year or two, we will have incontrovertible evidence that Jim Watson was totally correct in his surmise that Blacks tend to have lower intelligence largely due to genomic allelic differences.

“But we are not here concerned with hopes or fears, only with the truth as far as our reason permits us to discover it” –Charles Darwin (The Descent of Man 1871)

To Mr. Saletan-

So essentially you accept the fact that Jared Taylor’s data on race and crime are factually accurate, but you object to his segregationist stance. Yeah, I can agree with you on that. I am no segregationist, I appreciate Black people even though I am cognizant of the fact that Blacks (as a group) are innately less intelligent and more crime-prone. Most of my favorite music was composed and performed by Blacks and Hispanics.

Thomas Jefferson also appreciated Black people-

“Comparing them [Blacks] by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason [18th century-speak for IQ-type intelligence] much inferior, as I think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous. It would be unfair to follow them to Africa for this investigation. We will consider them here, on the same stage with the whites, and where the facts are not apocryphal on which a judgment is to be formed. It will be right to make great allowances for the difference of condition, of education, of conversation, of the sphere in which they move. Many millions of them have been brought to, and born in America. Most of them indeed have been confined to tillage, to their own homes, and their own society: yet many have been so situated, that they might have availed themselves of the conversation of their masters; many have been brought up to the handicraft arts, and from that circumstance have always been associated with the whites. Some have been liberally educated, and all have lived in countries where the arts and sciences are cultivated to a considerable degree, and have had before their eyes samples of the best works from abroad. … But never yet could I find that a black had uttered a thought above the level of plain narration; never saw even an elementary trait of painting or sculpture. In music they are more generally gifted than the whites with accurate ears for tune and time…” –Thomas Jefferson (Notes on the State of Virginia, 1792)

galtonian, I like your reply to JahSun, but I wonder how you are so omniscient that you know the results of future scientific research. You may well be right, but shouldn't we wait to see.

I question your use of the word "innate" in your reply to Saletan. Even Murray, et al., believe that there is a significant environmental factor in g. The Jefferson quote is interesting, but you must remember he was talking about slaves and freed slaves. I wonder what a contemporaneous description of the many white slaves in North Africa would be like. The Romans probably thought their slaves were a dull group, as well.

Dear O'Neal,

I'm commenting on a single sentence of your post only:

Re: The Romans probably thought their slaves were a dull group, as well.

The Romans assigned different roles to different groups of slaves. For example, Greek slaves were not thought of as dull at all and were employed widely as scribes and majordomos.

There are other evidence for their differential use of slaves. "

Roman law required dealers to disclose the ethnic origin (natio) of slaves: that some groups were considered more desirable than others hints at the presence of racialist attitudes within an otherwise indiscriminately voracious regime of slaving" (from <link>

You're right. After I posted it I realized I should have said, "except for the Greeks".

The Romans assigned different roles to different groups of slaves. For example, Greek slaves were not thought of as dull at all and were employed widely as scribes and majordomos.

Is this really relevant?

It comes as no surprise that the Romans would not think of the Greeks as dull. The Romans loved Greek culture - technology, literature, art, music - such that it became an integral part of Roman culture.

There has been a recently released Norwegian study that showed that first born children on average have an IQ score 3-4 points greater than that of the third born child.

If birth order alone, a small environmental factor, can induce a 3-4 point difference what effect would would racism have on black American IQ scores? 5-10 points?

What about all the other environmental factors that minorities suffer from such as lead poisoning, malnutrition, poverty propogated poor parenting practices, poor public policy, decrepit education infrastructure, mediocre teachers, and others.

You do realize that a single study has completely undermined this pseudo-science and exposed it for what it is? Powerless in determining that genetics are at the root of large racial disparities in terms of IQ scores on the order of a WHOLE STANDARD OF DEVIATION.

You are intellectually honest enough to admit this aren't you? You have claimed to be. Explain yourself in light of this new information.

so Gal,

You were raised liberal and egalitarian and decided to devote yourself to this field out of an altruistic need to find "truth in science." Wait you actually said out of a disrespect for false bullshit. And of all the false bullshit in this world you chose to focus on the towering myth of black equality...

Interesting, but you are obviously leaving something out. Were you mugged at some point by an African-American? What is it about blacks that got your panties in a twist. Quoting a slave owner about his conception of his slaves as a definitive statement about the capacity of modern blacks in the US is something we saw from Confederate leaders back in the Civil War... Besides, Jefferson was enamored enough of his slaves to have sex with them, even setting one up as a mistress of sorts.

If false bullshit bothers you so, and not race... then would you classify yourself as being this upset over recent revelations that Scott McClellan has admitted that the President had him lie to exonerate Scooter Libby?

"There was one problem. It was not true. I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest-ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice-president, the president's chief of staff and the president himself."

Perhaps this isn't as "scientifically sound" as measuring heads, penises, and distance of ejaculation like what good old Rushton does. I don't buy it.

We are literally awash in bullshit from every angle in this modern world, and somehow all you guys seem to find this quest to prove prejudice to be the most important issue of our times... despite being unable to point to a single ethical use for the research. Hmmmm.

Sadly they'll ignore you. They are to a man intellectual (and probably physical) cowards. Not one proponent of IQ will volunteer their own IQ in good faith.

OK spiker, I'll tell you my IQ. I got all the answers right, and they said my IQ was "infinite".

It is telling that people wont' volunteer their IQ and yet are willing to put so much stock into it when it comes to large racial groupings. Actually it is funny, very funny.