Scientists Measure the Accuracy of a Racism Claim

Nicholas Wade, New York Times, June 13, 2011

{snip}

In a 1981 book, “The Mismeasure of Man,” the paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould asserted that Morton, believing that brain size was a measure of intelligence, had subconsciously manipulated the brain volumes of European, Asian and African skulls to favor his bias that Europeans had larger brains and Africans smaller ones.

But now physical anthropologists at the University of Pennsylvania, which owns Morton’s collection, have remeasured the skulls, and in an article that does little to burnish Dr. Gould’s reputation as a scholar, they conclude that almost every detail of his analysis is wrong.

{snip}

But Dr. Gould himself omitted subgroups in his own reanalysis, and made various errors in his calculations. When these are corrected, the differences between the racial categories recognized by Morton are as he assigned them. “Ironically, Gould’s own analysis of Morton is likely the stronger example of a bias influencing results,” the Pennsylvania team writes.

{snip}

But Ralph L. Holloway, an expert on human evolution at Columbia and a co-author of the new study, was less willing to give Dr. Gould benefit of the doubt.

“I just didn’t trust Gould,” he said. “I had the feeling that his ideological stance was supreme. When the 1996 version of ‘The Mismeasure of Man’ came and he never even bothered to mention Michael’s study, I just felt he was a charlatan.”

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Check the Facts Often

    Gould (who died in 2002), like all egalitarians, is either self decieved or lying to support his ideology.

    I suspect the latter.

    It is strange to see the New York Times print such a “racist” truth.

    It becomes impossible to support the lie of equality when everyone knows which races possess the greater brain power.

    Type these words into google or other search engine: brain size correlation with intelligence. Select a study from the list.

    (Look for a discussion of the methodology i.e. how the researchers concluded that the size of the brain positively correlates with intelligence.)

  • Wayne Engle

    Of course he was a charlatan. His “research” was of the “Ah-Ha! Just as I suspected!” variety. In other words, he found what he wanted to find. Gould was one of the leftist-oriented people in his field who want desperately to believe that there is “no such thing as race,” that we are “all alike under the skin,” and other such sophomoric piffle.

    Someday we’ll finally get these people to acknowledge that Dr. Shockley, J. Philippe Rushton, the authors of “The Bell Curve,” and the like, were right all along. But I fear that the United States will have to slide all the way down into the Slough of Miscegenation before they admit it. And by then, it will be too late. Sad, sad.

  • Anonymous

    An interesting aspect of this matter is how long it takes merited criticisms of a PC dream book like MISMEASURE to reach into undergraduate classrooms, if at all. Long after the attacks of Leon Kamin upon mental testing had been undermined by scientific developments, they continued to be set forth in

    classrooms as the prevailing viewpoint. The intial accusations against Sir Cyril Burt of fraud spread with the speed of light. Subsequent scholarship establishing that such accusations were “not proven” gained cognizance over time in undergraduate classrooms at about the speed of tree growth.

  • Anonymous

    In the same vein, Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs and Steel is the next heavily promoted and popularized book that will be discredited as “scientific” cultural Marxism.

  • Hirsch

    The New York Times, America’ paper of record, occassionally does lapse into common sense and reality. But when you consider the alternative media online, it will be perhapse too little, too late. Your dwindling readership couldn’t happen to a more worthy group of people. Perhaps when some of the PC commissars at the Times lose their jobs, they can fully embrace diversity and use their comparative literature degrees to to teach in the inner city.

  • John Engelman

    Most people are unable to evaluate arguments rationally. They believe what they want to believe, unless a trusted source tells them otherwise. The fact that The New York Times is exposing the lies of Stephen Jay Gould will make it more difficult for liberals to keep saying that Professor Gould “decisively refuted” The Bell Curve.

  • Ben

    I’m still waiting for someone to tell how a man can merge Marxism and Evolution together without lying to himself or herself?

    It is like saying “Christian Evolutionist.”

    The two ways of thinking are so incompatible it isn’t even funny. One would have to give in to the other.

    Or maybe he didn’t really care about evolution at all, but rather the original goal was to poison the scientific community with what he wanted everyone to believe.

    Good for you Mr. Holloway for being as objective as possible (neither for or against the notions).

  • Madison Grant

    Wow, even the p.c. New York Times runs a critical piece on the “charlatan” Gould.

    Soon Stephen Jay Gould will have as much credibilty as Anthony Weiner.

  • Old White Jim

    Very good news.

    For many years liberals have used Gould’s “Mismeasure Of Man” as the cornerstone for their argument that any scientific findings that are not flattering to Blacks are as racist and flawed as Morton’s observations of racial differences of cranial capacity.

    Now that Morton’s hate facts have been vindicated on the pages of the New York Times they will have to be viewed by liberals as what they have been all along: Just facts.

    This is a good start.

  • Anonymous

    7 — Ben wrote at 11:44 PM on June 14:

    “I’m still waiting for someone to tell how a man can merge Marxism and Evolution together without lying to himself or herself?

    It is like saying “Christian Evolutionist.”

    The two ways of thinking are so incompatible it isn’t even funny. One would have to give in to the other.

    Or maybe he didn’t really care about evolution at all, but rather the original goal was to poison the scientific community with what he wanted everyone to believe.

    Good for you Mr. Holloway for being as objective as possible (neither for or against the notions).”

    Wowee there Ben!

    I had heard Christian leaders in my church talk about how evolution could merely represent the hand of God in his own time, and those “Six Days” of creation could have stretched over eons of time. It was also written about extensively, especially since WW2. But our earliest scientists sought to investigate “God’s Work,” not contravene it. That also, is well known.

    As for evolution and Marxism, one is about politics and the other science. However, any good philosopher can see how the human advances to higher technology would have caused – as it did, The Industrial Evolution and rationally reason that a new sort of political arrangement designed for the new and large class of industrial workers would be required to prevent them from being used as disposable slaves. In that sense, evolution made Marxism inevitable.

    Being able to think beyond your nose is what IQ is all about.

  • Anonymous

    With respect to #06 above. A common thread, for example, runs

    through incidents like the “witchcraft” charges ( pseudoscientist, racist , etc. ) as in the incidents of Linda Gottfredson, Phil Rushton, Chris Brand…(the current Kanazawa matter?), that gain lurid MSM “man bites dog” sensationalism but when the accused are adequately and robustly defended by competent scientists,such exonerating developments are either ignored or given faint and inadequate back page mention. Thus, the enduring lack of full coverage and the failure to treat each incident with regard to relevant features of early incidents–all congeal to give a kind of cultrual amnesia” effect . I respectfully submit the problem is larger than mere individual apathy or thought-hedonism.

  • Ben

    @ 10 Anon

    Well done. I was thinking of devil advocate response myself.

    Yes I’m not denying that someone could merge totally different ideologies together but certain things have to be ignored pathologically.

    The bible states that woman came from man’s rib. This is not true and we know that Y chromosome is a mutation of the X chromosome. The same can be for geology and the study of the earth (bible says it is 4000) years ago. Some something has to give.

    Marxism stems for egalitarianism (from what I understand) through social class. However, it is well that evolution brings about certain natural advantages and disadvantages making egalitarianism impossible. This advantages give an edge in survival and reproduction. Equality is nonexistent.

    Those disposable slaves are trying to ensure their survival by grouping themselves against the bourgeoisie; however, the ultimate goal is to “level” the playing field which ironically gave rise in the first place due to advantages and disadvantage within genetic structure.