Geneticists Decry Book on Race and Evolution

Michael Balter, Science Mag, August 8, 2014

A best-seller by former New York Times science writer Nicholas Wade about recent human evolution and its potential effects on human cultures has drawn critical reviews since its spring publication. Now, nearly 140 senior human population geneticists around the world, many of whose work was cited in the book, have signed a letter to The New York Times Book Review stating that Wade has misinterpreted their work. The letter criticizes “Wade’s misappropriation of research from our field to support arguments about differences among human societies,” and is slated to appear in the 10 August issue of the Book Review. It’s available online today.

The book, A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History, contends that human races are a biological reality and that recent human evolution has led to racial differences in economic and social behavior. In the book, Wade suggests that such genetic differences may help explain why some people live in tribal societies and some in advanced civilizations, why African-Americans are allegedly more violent than whites, and why the Chinese may be good at business.

{snip} Now, geneticists have crafted a joint response, concluding that “there is no support from the field of population genetics for Wade’s conjectures.” The list of signatories reads like a who’s who of researchers in the field and includes such well-known geneticists as Evan Eichler of the University of Washington, Seattle; David Goldstein of Duke University; and Michael Hammer of the University of Arizona.

The letter was spearheaded by five population geneticists who had informally discussed the book at conferences, says co-organizer Rasmus Nielsen of the University of California, Berkeley. “There was a feeling that our research had been hijacked by Wade to promote his ideological agenda,” Nielsen says. “The outrage . . . was palpable.” Molly Przeworski of Columbia University, another organizer, says the group “tried to contact population geneticists whose work had been cited by Wade.” They had no trouble getting signatures, racking up 100 within the first week, she says.

The letter organizers and the editors of the Book Review kept the letter under embargo until its publication today and declined to make it available to Wade for an immediate response. {snip}

{snip}

*Update, 9 August, 6:05 a.m.: Nicholas Wade has issued a statement in response to the letter. He writes:

This letter is driven by politics, not science. I am confident that most of the signatories have not read my book and are responding to a slanted summary devised by the organizers.

As no reader of the letter could possibly guess, A Troublesome Inheritance argues that opposition to racism should be based on principle, not on the anti-evolutionary myth that there is no biological basis to race.

Unfortunately many social scientists have long denied that there is a biological basis to race. This creed, prominent throughout the academic world, increasingly impedes research. Biologists risk damaging their careers if they write explicitly about race. Needless to say, this makes it hard to explore the different evolutionary paths that human populations have taken through history since the dispersal from the African homeland 50,000 years ago.

A Troublesome Inheritance seeks to explain how race can be understood without racism. . . . I hope that readers will see through the lack of specifics in their charges and judge my book for themselves.

Perhaps I could point out an error in one of the few specific statements in their letter. They charge me with saying that ‘recent natural selection has led to worldwide differences in I.Q. test results.’ I say no such thing. What I do say (p. 193) is that ‘It may be hazardous to compare the IQ scores of different races if allowance is not made for differences in wealth, nutrition and other factors that influence IQ.’ . . .

I would urge all the geneticists who signed the letter, several of whom I count as friends, to now read my book and judge to what extent, if any, their condemnation was justified.

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.
  • MekongDelta69

    “Science Mag” should be renamed to “PC Non-Science Mag”.

  • John Smith

    Two of the geneticists are named Goldstein and Eichler…hmmm.

    I guess they are (just coincidentally of course) part of the Boaz, Montague and Gould fan club.

    What is it with this certain tribe when it comes to denying a biological/genetic basis to race?…except when it applies to, oh say, Israel’s policies and behavior?

    • Oil Can Harry

      Since race doesn’t exist they should let tens of millions of Arabs and blacks move to Israel.

      After all, ethnic groups are 100% identical. Only a bigot would disagree.

      • Franklin_Ryckaert

        Well, Israel has built a concentration camp in the Negev desert where those black “infiltrators” (official Israeli term) are kept until their expulsion. Netanyahu called them a danger to the Jewish identity of Israel. We only have to explain to the Israeli government that race doesn’t really exist. Perhaps those scientists who signed a letter criticizing Wade’s book could write one to the Israeli government too.

        Mr. Goldstein, Eichler and Hammer are you hearing me?

        • NoMosqueHere

          Jews are not a race. Jews range from blonde haired to black african, just like christians and atheists.

          • Bill Moore

            Hello NoMosqueHere,

            I worked in the television business for forty years.

            If Jews are not a “race”, why could I spot a Jew almost instantly. And, sure enough, a Jew behaves like a Jew.

            If it walks like a Jew, talks like a Jew, looks like a Jew, and acts like at Jew, it’s probably a Jew.

            Maybe you mean that there is Judiasm (a religion), and Jewish (a race)? Of course, a member of Judiasm (the religion) are from various races.

            I think you’re confused,
            Bill Moore

            .

          • anony

            They’re in the television industry??

          • Bill Moore

            Hello Anony,

            Jews run the television industry. And work at many jobs within the television industry.

            They’re especially good as producers/directors of shows such as documentaries, drama, and so forth where one person has the entire finished product in their head before starting work on a production. Then, each scene is shot with that finished product “in mind”.

            Since scenes are not shot in the order in which the they appear in the finished product, this is no easy task, and most of the people on the crew have to depend on that one person to be able to put it all together.

            I’ve worked with producers/directors who just shoot a lot of material and then try to fit it together. In one case, we filled up a room with video tapes full of material, and after several years of work, there never was a finished product. The stuff just didn’t fit together.

            I’m 75 years old, and I’ve have worked with many ethnic groups (races?), in a war zone, on construction sites, in the broadcasting industry, and on and on. Each ethnic group (race?) has their inherent characteristics. As long as we recognize the differences, we can probably get along.

            Thank you for letting me rant,
            Bill Moore

          • anony

            I guess my sarcasm didn’t come through. Good rant, though.

          • Bill Moore

            Hello anony,

            I didn’t know whether to take you seriously or not.

            Many people are completely oblivious – you are apparently well informed.

            Thank you,
            Bill Moore

          • John Smith

            Actually, one cannot raise the “jewish angle” during discussions on this forum without certain people getting uptight about it – especially when the comments about the “jewish angle” are spot on.

            Jews are not a race, huh? Yea sure.

          • David Ashton

            Depends on definitions. Lynn’s “Chosen People” divides the Jews into four main different groups. They do not constitute a “race” in the classical taxonomic sense, but do to large extent constitute a “people” of related but varied genetic ancestry. Their standpoint relative to the points made on this thread is that they are motivated by anti-Nazism, which impels them both to question the existence of marked genetic differences between human populations in general but also to refute the claim that they are intellectually inferior. Jews feel more comfortable in culturally mixed societies than in culturally distinct nations, and even more comfortable if they have an influence in them.

          • John Smith

            At least you word twisters and hair splitters are spot on part of the time:

            “Jews feel more comfortable in culturally mixed societies than in culturally distinct nations, and even more comfortable if they have an influence in them.”

            Uh yep, you got it.

            As for the rest of your reply, take it to NPR.

          • David Ashton

            Provide and explain just one example of “word twisting” on my part from any of the comments I have ever posted on this site. Put up, or shut up yourself.

          • Augustus3709

            When most people speak of “the Jews”, whether they realize it or not they are probably talking about the Ashkenazis.

            The word “Jew” is a particularly blurry word, though not one that is impossible to explain.

            A religion, yes, with 2 parts: A racially closed part, and a racially open part.

            Ethnically: a type of “race”, more or less, with the 3 main types, middle eastern, Sephardic, and Ashkenazi, with the added caveat of various levels of racial mixture with local populations.

            The movers and shakers are the Ashkenazis, who in many cases are genetically 70-80% White. This makes things really fun.

          • David Ashton

            In brief crude summary: the general “basic meaning” of “race” is a group or community distinguished by a shared similar inheritance (e.g. the “British race”). Before the recent nonsense that “race does not exist”, in scientific usage it referred to a predominantly inbreeding population with common genetic characters expressed in an identifiable collective phenotype (e.g. the Mongolids, Australids, Europids, Sanids, Negrids), allowing for intermediates, &c.

            The German geneticist Otmar von Verschuer argued that Jewry could be called a “race”, although not classifiable as one of the primary subspecies of human taxonomy. He acknowledged that Jews were composed largely of two racial groups, It is not hair-splitting to require exact information and precisely agreed definitions.

            There is much recent material available on-line regarding the DNA of modern Jews and the Khazar question. For substantial print contributions, it is worth taking together the relevant contributions from J.R. Baker, C.S. Coon, C.D. Darlington, H.F.K. Guenther, F. Lenz, R. Lynn & H.L. Shapiro, plus some skepticism on “tribal origins” from Shlomo Sand.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            It is not the wise policies of Israel that we are criticizing, we are criticizing those who don’t allow us to do the same, and they belong to one and the same ethnic group.

          • benvad

            Thats what irritates me.

          • tetrapod

            I tend to agree with your second paragraph, even though I myself am guilty of often bringing up the “jewish angle”. I’m not saying there’s no truth in that perspective, in fact there’s a lot. But at some point you have to say “so what?”

            Does our complaining about tribal machinations and their baneful impact on our country lead to any action? If so, what form does it take?

            Do we use this forum to develop strategies for taking the fight to the Schumers and Zuckerburgs who torment us with impunity?

            Have we looked closely enough at ourselves as pan-Europeans? If so we must admit we’ve brought many problems upon ourselves through lack of our own strong ethnic identity. Granted, many leftist Jews are despicable, but we were asleep at the controls when they usurped our culture.

          • M.

            Jews do have a racial element, actually. A distinguishible descent. Some Jews can be spotted a mile away. They’re considered an ethnoreligious group, not just a religious one. And there are Jewish atheists.

            That said, I agree with you that most the posts suggesting some Jewish conspiracy over here are ridiculous.

          • anony

            Something that is open and above board cannot rightly be called a conspiracy.

        • HE2

          Israel is paying the “infiltrators” a sizable lump of cash to move to Sweden. Most are Somalis.
          Unbelievably, Sweden is accepting them.

      • benvad

        It has to be a Jewish State so it’s claimed, but why? We’re all the same so let in non jews.

        Ahhh but that’s not so, it’s a case of “Do as I say, not as I do”.

    • Prove Me Wrong

      The Bell Curve was co-written by Richard Hernstein and published by Adam Bellow who are both Jewish. Steven Pinker addresses your concern in many lectures. Jews have also spoken at every American Renaissance conference. Jared Taylor acknowledges this fact all the time. Arthur Jensen also known to some as the “father of race realism” was Jewish. You can’t equate liberalism with Jewry. If you want more examples of prominent Jewish race-realists, let me know. I’ve been compiling an extensive list.

      • John Smith

        Isolated examples don’t refute my statement about the hypocrisy I was referring to. Obviously, my original post is an oversimplification; it’s not 110% true 110% of the time. And I didn’t “equate” liberalism with Jewry.

        But just look at the overall balance sheet of the racial egalitarian crowd. From day #1, it has been disproportionately larded with a certain (hypocritical) tribe.

        And of course there are race realists that belong to that certain tribe. The policies and behavior of Israel (that I previously mentioned) prove this.

        I stand by my original post.

        • David Ashton

          It seems reasonable to suppose that Jewish anthropologists &c developed the theme of environmentalism/egalitarianism in primarily European comparisons mainly in reaction to negative biological characterizations before Nazism and more intensively as a result of Nazism; see e.g. Mitchell B. Hart, “Jews and Race” (Brandeis UP, 2011). The latter response spawned “Ashley Montagu”, Otto Klinberg, Leon Kamin, Steven Rose, Richard Lewontin, &c.

          However, race realism and/or eugenics have been advanced by persons of Jewish ancestry, not excluding early writers like Benjamin Disraeli, Karl Marx, Ludwig Gumplowicz, Cesare Lombroso & Oscar Levy. Modern such exponents would include: Amram Scheinfeld, Curt Stern, Stanley Garn, Michael Levin, Linda Gottfredson, Seymour Itzkoff, Milord Wolkopf, Byron Roth & Michael Hart.

      • Franklin_Ryckaert

        If I remember correctly Jensen was only 1/4 Jewish. But yes, there are Jews and Jews. Unfortunately many times the good Jews don’t prevail over the bad ones.

      • M.

        “If you want more examples of prominent Jewish race-realists, let me know.”

        Eric Zemmour.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      Hammer too can be an Ashkenazic name. What a coincidence!

    • NoMosqueHere

      Rasmus Nielsen and Molly Przeworski must hypnotized by those jews. Whites can no longer think for themselves, the jewish hypnosis is too strong.

      • LHathaway

        lol, music can be hypnotizing.

    • David Ashton

      Two steps forward, one step back, as your old CPSU comrades would have said, John Engelman.

  • anony

    The herd instinct and the survival instinct are alive and well in academia.

    • TruthBeTold

      I was thinking they were afraid that they would be branded racists so this is a pre-emptive strike. Protest quickly and loudly to let people know you’re on the right side.

    • Easyrhino1

      Tenure is tough to come by and expensive to lose.

      • anony

        I agree. Tenure needs to be done away with and real academic freedom needs to be reinstated.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      That seems to be the only form of Darwinism they allow themselves.

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    Wade:

    “I hope that readers will see through the lack of specifics in their charges and judge my book for themselves.”

    Exactly. The letter is ideology speaking. Wade treads on sacred territory.

    I’m one third through A Troublesome Inheritance. I’ve read his Before the Dawn (2006), a wonderful book. So I am eagerly reading Troublesome inheritance. Already, I can see the caution with which Wade approaches the issues is exactly as he indicates in his statement above.

    VDARE’s Steve Sailer provides some scientist’s support in “Geneticists Denounce Nicholas Wade’s ‘Speculative’ Chapters as ‘Speculation,’” By Steve Sailer on August 12, 2014.
    Imagine the threat of ostracism and denial of funding, tenure and grants for any academic brave enough to speak up for Wade.

    • Pro_Whitey

      And really what is Wade’s political agenda? My guess is that he is a standard leftist, because few of anything else survive at the NYT for very long, but that he thinks that when it comes to science, one should try to get at the truth. Ultimately the left views the truth to be whatever it desires to call the truth, so Wade’s insistence on facts is quite troublesome.

  • willbest

    See and I actually found Wade’s book hard to read because he couldn’t just disclaim once in the beginning and write his book clearly. Instead he had to sprinkle it in every 5th paragraph. But I suppose, if he didn’t do that he would have had to find another 15% worth of content to make it book length again.

  • Evette Coutier

    Once science and politics mix, science is dead.

    • WR_the_realist

      It would be nice if the mixture of science and politics led to politics being dead, but this never happens.

      • Evette Coutier

        Maybe one day they will invent an anti politics pill.

    • LHathaway

      It’s no longer the politicalization of science. It’s the weaponization of information. How exactly would the truth about genetics and racial differences play out? Considering how things are run now, they will likely examine the genetics and declare whites inferior. It’s what they do already.

  • shawnmer

    I’m fresh off a particularly fruitless “debate” with some cultural Marxist, who claimed a background in biochemistry. One of those exasperating, endless affairs where you feel yourself getting dumber with each reply! One obtuse evasion after insult after dishonest deflection. I’m sure most here can relate.

    So I’d like to pose this question to the forum. Genetic racial differences are driven not by identifying race-exclusive genes, but by certain patterns, like allele frequency. Correct?? I even got the person to concede this much when I cited an example of Hispanic patients having biochemical differences as it relates to Hepatitis B. So, this is proof of genetic differences, then, I pose to him. RIGHT??

    “No!” He says. I am “out of my depth,” and am just not getting it.

    I have read numerous articles on this. And all the objections always seem to boil down to is to state that breaking races down into discrete categories is an arbitrary process, or to weave the science into a political statement that we are all “equal” and the whole question is either unimportant or immoral.

    Has ANYONE here ever heard a real argument from these people?

    • LHathaway

      How about this. Racial differences will simply prove whites are inferior.

      • shawnmer

        Can you elaborate?

  • freddy_hills

    Meanwhile, Jacque Cousteau is asking marine biologists to sign another petition stating that water isn’t wet.

  • 4321realist

    “Now, geneticists have crafted a joint response, concluding that “there is no support from the field of population genetics for Wade’s conjectures.”

    This period of time will be known by future historians as the “Age of Liars.”

  • Easyrhino1

    Have to wonder how many of those “nearly 140 senior human population geneticists” that signed the NYT letter did so because they really believed or because they didn’t want to get attacked by the $PLC etal.

    • Stan D Mute

      I don’t wonder. If they’re real geneticists then they’re all, 100% of them! lying to avoid problems with getting their own grants funded. Just like the “climate scientists” who must adhere to the religion of “Global Climate Change” or lose their jobs/funding.

      This is one of the most powerful weapons the Marxists have – forcing otherwise honorable men to lie in order to keep their jobs and their families fed.

    • LHathaway

      What was it? The 88 concerned scholars regarding the Duke Lacrosse team?

      88 and 140 seem like such small numbers. How about 1,000? How about 10,000?

      There will come a day when there will be a reckoning. Justice demands it. It’s very unlikely I will live to see it, but I do believe it’s coming. Say it’s like believing in the Easter Bunny, Chris Cringle or the Tooth Fairy but History records justice being meted out again and again. This time we will call it social justice.

      We will collect them, we will brand them, and we will place them outside our borders.

  • Oldcorporal

    These “senior human geneticists” obviously had a communal crap hemorrhage when they heard about Mr. Wade’s book, and are now trying to distance themselves from it, at speeds which would probably set a new record for the 100-yard dash. Well, they can say what they want; I intend to read his book as soon as my local library gets around to acquiring it. I requested it in writing months ago; it’s still not here, despite assurances to me that it would be bought. They wouldn’t allow me to donate my copy of “White Identity” a couple of years ago, either.

    • shawnmer

      Oh, you “outed” yourself with that offered donation. Librarians are nearly uniformly leftist, and if they have a “black list” reserved for those they resolve to give DMV class service, you’re almost assuredly on it.

      But have you read the “letter” linked to above? It says precisely NOTHING. I found the video of downed pilots Saddam released in the Gulf War more convincing.

    • Easyrhino1

      One can’t even access the Amren website from the King County library system here in WA.

      • Franklin_Ryckaert

        Thanks to Abe Foxman’s “hate filter” I suppose.

      • TheHBD

        Maybe the ACLU will take up your cause and sue the King County Library system on your behalf. They’ve done it to protect access to porn sites from public computers and now here where I live the local homeless population stinks up every public library while looking at salacious images in plain site of children. Ain’t this a great country!

        • Franklin_Ryckaert

          That is their form of the “pursuit of happiness”!

        • WR_the_realist

          The ACLU will defend porn for bums in public libraries. It won’t defend honest, sober race realism.

      • cloudswrest

        I had a similar experience with the internet connection provided on the Disney Wonder during a Disney cruise three years ago. Amren was blocked by their firewall. And this was a paid internet subscription, accessed from my stateroom, not their internet cafe.

  • Ultimate187

    It’s CYA time for everyone involved. Leonardo and other great scientists of ages past were opposed by the Church. It’s happening again, only now it’s the Church of Political Correctness.

  • JohnEngelman

    On most issues the consensus of the experts is more likely to be right than wrong. Because it is dangerous to inquire into the biological reasons for racial differences in ability and behavior, the consensus of the experts on this issue cannot be trusted.

    • LHathaway

      I would disagree with your first idea, John. When it comes to social sciences like psychology, anthropology and sociology, I wouldn’t trust the experts. One might be wary of more fields than just those.

      • JohnEngelman

        In the social sciences it is not possible to test theories with controlled, repeatable experiments the way it is in chemistry or physics.

        For example, in economics we cannot go back in time, choose a different policy, and measure different results.

        Moreover, theories in the social sciences often arouse emotions in ways that theories in the experimental sciences do not.

        How one explains the Great Depression will be influenced by how one feels about businessmen, civil servants, factory workers, labor leaders, college professors, and so on. The New Deal shifted wealth, power, and prestige from Wall Street to Washington, DC. The heroes of the New Deal were not businessmen, but labor leaders, civil servants, and intellectuals.

        Nevertheless, social scientists have accumulated a great deal of information about their specialties. One should study their writings with respect and the awareness of how one’s own emotions can influence one’s judgement of what is true and false.

  • JDInSanD

    “the Chinese may be good at business”

    Ya mean businesses like Lockheed Martin, Bank of America, Coca Cola, Ford and Apple or businesses where you have to leave your communist homeland to run a Chinese restaurant or laundry?

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      There is a special gene for running a “take away restaurant” and the Chinese have that.

      • El_Baga_Doucha_Libtard

        I don’t know that selling dog meat and calling it “beef” really constitutes good business sense, but it sure is a great — albeit disgusting — way to boost profit margins.

  • journey

    “dispersal from the African homeland 50,000 years ago” This is a myth and remains fluid as more findings are being found. And this myth implies all humanity evolved from blacks.

    “A Troublesome Inheritance seeks to explain how race can be understood without racism. . . .” How can this be accomplished as racism implies some races are superior to others?

    “‘It may be hazardous to compare the IQ scores of different races if allowance is not made for differences in wealth, nutrition and other factors that influence IQ.’ . . .” Whites also started with nothing so how is that whites are not on the same level in social development as say blacks? And why is that whites are the main innovators and inventors on this planet? The answer lies in inherent racial genetic differences.

    Of course, it will take courage and persistence to not back down as our “guests” have succeeded quite well in the infiltration and control of academia in white societies. This has resulted in intellectual dishonesty and restrictions on a free discourse regarding racial differences.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      If all non-Africans are descendants of emigrants from Africa 50,000 years ago, then one has to explain how come they evolved into white Cro-Magnons in Europe in a mere 10,000 years. Even more difficult is it to explain how they evolved into Australian Aboriginals who lived in Australia already 60,000 years ago. That would have taken -( minus!) 10,000 years!

      • journey

        I can assure you whites did not evolve from blacks. And humans appeared on this planet about 1 millions ago.

  • Augustus3709

    Basic Evolutionary Truth:

    Humans who evolved in Temperate climates have higher IQs, and people who evolved in Equatorial climates have lower IQs.

    This is neither hateful nor confusing. This should be common knowledge.

    • journey

      The racial IQ/intelligence level is inherent meaning not influenced by the environment. This country spent trillions in trying to prove what you are saying that the environment can influence the IQ/intelligence level, all failed.

      In reality, the higher IQ racial groups gravitated toward the more temperate climate areas (need more brain power to survive) whereas the lower IQ racial groups went toward the tropics (Africa = less strenuous to survive).

      • Augustus3709

        Well, putting black Africans in a cold climate today no longer does anything because they wear our coats and sit in our heated rooms. So, there is no pressure to evolve through generational adaptation.

        Thousands of years ago people didn’t know where they were on the earth or that there was a nicer climate ten thousand miles away. I think the adaptation to the environment occurred, not the smarter people intentionally traveling to a harder environment. If they were so smart, why not stay put in an easier environment?

        And Africa is not an easy environment. I used to think that, but it’s actually very savage. Even the Africans themselves struggle there. They can die in the 120 F degree sun like anyone else. That’s why they prefer to laze about in the shade.

        • journey

          Man appeared 1 millions ago. And they did migrate quite a bit. Blacks would still be in Africa except for the white man. Existence in Africa is still easier than freezing to death. And game/food source was plenty.

          But let’s not just speak of the blacks but also of the Indians in North America when the whites discovered them. They were still living in the Stone Age. They had superior genes than blacks as shown by their philosophy toward nature but lacked the genes to develop technologically.

          Again, this country spent trillions in trying to raise the IQ/intelligence of blacks by such as Head Start, all failed. It’s the Nature vs Nurture argument.

          You put whites in Africa or anywhere, they will create an advanced civilization. Because their inherent racial genes go with them independent of environment. Whites are the main innovators and inventors of this planet because of their genes. An environment can enhance superior genes but it cannot change inferior genes to superior genes. This is so because each racial group possess their genes inherently independent of environment.

        • journey

          Even Nicholas Wade missed the point that the differences
          in racial genetics are inherent not environment as shown by his statement: “What I do say (p. 193) is that ‘It may be hazardous to compare the IQ scores of different races if allowance is not made
          for differences in wealth, nutrition and other factors that influence IQ.’ . . .”
          He missed the point that whites also started with nothing. The whites just like the other races had to create societies/civilizations from nothing.

          All this confusion is partly due to our “guests” who have effectively not allowed a free discourse on academic subjects on many levels.

    • LHathaway

      It’s only amusing that this theory is actually predated by a similar genetics argument put forth by Leonard Jeffries a few decades ago. Jeffries claimed that black genes were augmented by the value system of the Sun, and that, ‘white people are ice people; dirty, dastardly, devilish, devious, diabolical folks’.

  • http://jewamongyou.wordpress.com/ Reuben H

    One wonders what would happen to the careers of scientists who refused to sign such a document.

    • journey

      Same what happened to Jason Richwine (he lost his job) and Arthur Jensen (although he had tenure so they could not fire him. The best they could do was to make his life miserable). And also countless others.

    • anony

      You really don’t wonder, do you? Their careers would stall, or worse, they’d be soon looking for other employment. Their academic reputations would take a huge hit, lowering their odds in a dramatic way of ever being employed in US academia again. And that might be a blessing in disguise for them.

  • Mrfinoni

    If they don’t complain they might lose their funding. Its all about the MONEY!

  • Mrfinoni

    The ‘stupid’ fear is that once Whites realize Blacks are less intelligent that we will seek to enslave them because they are incapable of living in civilized society. The truth we all know Blacks are less intelligent and yet Whites treat them with benevolence. Their response is a total lack of gratitude, as befits an immature childish person, or a person who is less intelligent. The fears of a new Nazi emerging from racist White society is a bogeyman and totally unfounded. The modern radical feminists are just as brainwashed as the Communists and Nazis of the past.

    • serious123

      You make a good point and it is certainly why blacks will never admit the truth. But that really doesn’t explain to me why whites as the majority not subject to that threat will not admit the truth. I have wondered if it is not the fact that the Jews have a difficult to argue with fear of another holocaust yet the media influence to vigorously oppose any and all race theories.

  • El_Baga_Doucha_Libtard

    Whites are still more creative than Northeast Asians are. History supports that statement and so does the research on what is required for creativity. Creativity requires intelligence (small, but meaningful, advantage to the Northeast Asians), psychopathy (big advantage to whites, although it has a huge downside, as the majority of loony people don’t accomplish much in the way of creative achievement), individualism/aggression/testosterone (another big advantage for whites).

    I know that some Northeast Asian countries are doing a lot in terms of patents, but patents don’t distinguish between quality and quantity. In terms of innovation, I see conflicting reports on that, but it is an undeniable truth that the Northeast Asians have been pulling their weight in that regard. One excellent explanation for that is that the Northeast Asians are not so “blessed” with diversity — they get to focus on getting the job done, whereas we must first focus on hiring enough women and minorities, then we can concentrate on getting the job done.

    • journey

      Like to comment on patents and studies from Asian countries (especially the Chinese). They are to be questioned and examined closely. Their objective standards are subpar in comparison to Western societies. The Japanese of all the Asian countries does have higher standards. They always did as known by their social behavior during the last tsunami.

  • Augustus3709

    People, people! We don’t need to “justify” believing in the White race or supporting White nationhood “because we’re the smartest” or “the most creative”.

    There are no prerequisite “reasons” why we deserve to exist. It’s a biological imperative to fight for survival. We fight for our community because it’s our community, period. That’s all that matters. Every other debate can come later.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      Yes, survival is an end in itself. It needs no justification based on merit. At least all plants, animals and non-white human races act that way. Only the silly white man thinks he needs an “excuse” to survive.

      • Augustus3709

        Our advanced logic and critical thinking has made us great, but things have changed with globalism and immigration, and now we need to be more primal and selfish, or else we’ll be eaten alive by those who are less developed.

    • Olorin

      Exactly precisely correct, Augustus. I have been saying this in Second Amendment circles for 20 years now–particularly among women, who in liberal cities/campuses internalized the PC orthodoxy that it is WRONG to fight for their survival, using lethal force if necessary, because they might, you know, end up shooting a five-time black felon and drug using rapist, and we all know how unjust a use of “white privilege” that would be.

      Victimization is presented as a high order of moral, ethical, and social response for whites in general and white women in particular. This is a toxic remnant of Christianity, with its equatorial/tropical/Mediterranean roots and its tendency to hold this life and its material conditions in very low esteem. Or as my mother once said, “Turn the other cheek, my foot. They have to sleep sometime.”

      We have a Second Amendment establishing the right to survival because my ancestors who fought the Revolution realized all of this. If you read Tucker’s Blackstone or the records of the First Congress, you will find discussions among the Founders that very specifically lay out their thinking about how not all tyrants are kings or elected officials. Sometimes they are people who exist outside of the social fabric and aren’t content to stay there, but come into society to destroy it/its members.

      The Second Amendment vests the right to survive in individuals, as prior to and outside of the lawmaking process. Pity it has been eroded so badly by those who want to reserve the (imperial) power of granting life and death for themselves and their buddies.

      • anony

        Self defense is the fundamental human right.

      • Augustus3709

        If you study female psychology you realize that women instinctively know that they can’t survive alone, and therefore need to side with the group for security and resources.

        Unfortunately, today the “group” is race-hating egalitarianism and man-hating feminism.

        Women are wonderful when they’re on our side, and terrible when they’re against us. It’s not completely their fault, it’s the people who control the culture who brainwash them.

        Females can’t really do work during and after pregnancy, and yet they still need resources to take care of children, so they evolved to be selfish, to be happy to accept the material help of others. By the same token, men evolved to be happy to give that help. Feminism exploits and ruins this delicate balance.

        Fast forward to the modern world, and women have retained the knack for selfishness, and many just don’t seem to care about the future of the race or civilization. This is a fundamental problem.

        As for Christianity, it can be good or bad, it just depends on how it’s used. Christian Morality is good when it’s for the White in-group, but bad when it goes out to non-Whites. You turn your cheek to forgive your brother, but not an alien from another continent. It would not be difficult to grandfather in Christianity in a pro-White environment.

  • David Ashton

    Step forward, John Engelman.

    • anony

      Please stop inviting him. The less of his inane comments, the better.

      • David Ashton

        OK. He doesn’t usually need an invitation to put his foot in it.

  • David Ashton

    This list would be welcome, starting with John Glad.
    The shift in Jewish outlook from Communism to Zionism, and from racial equality to Ashkenazi IQ superiority, is completely comprehensible.

  • anony

    It is a waste of time to argue with a “true believer”. And the Monk is correct.

  • David Ashton

    These matters are not settled by letters of denunciation, however numerous the signatories. Wade’s theories invite correction and development, not defamation and excommunication. How many scientists maintain that all human population lineages are biologically identical, or that natural and social selection could not have occurred since hominids entered the sapiens stage?

  • shawnmer

    So, at a certain point race won’t exist, literally.

    But wait, I thought it already “didn’t exist?” If you guys are gonna collectively blow smoke, at least be consistent.

  • Chasmania

    Some truths are self evident.

    The same common sense that tells me not to stick my hand into a fire, not to drink boiling water, not try to walk thru a closed door, etc…also tells me that people are DIFFERENT, and that it’s not some silly social construct.

    This common sense tells me that the larger portion of blacks have poor impulse control, poor future time orientation and are taught that I, thru the color of MY skin, “owe” them something, as does the culture that my forefathers created. Because of this I know to follow the Derbyshire rules.

    If that’s racism, well, so be it.

  • SheilaTX

    Nice straw-man. The point is not that there are no Jewish race realists, nor that there are no Christian kumbaya liberals. What you are being deliberately obtuse about is the absolute certainty that whatever anti-Christian, anti-Western and anti-HBD group one is speaking of, Jews will be in its forefront and their number and influence will be far in excess to their proportion of society at large. This is true across the nations and the ages . . . strikingly similar to the way blacks will be in the forefront of stupidity and dysfunction across the nations and the ages.

    For every name on your purported list, I (and others) could provide dozens in opposition. Cherry picking data is neither new nor clever. Perhaps you ought to read up on statistical averages, percentages related to population proportion, and similar metrics.

    • John Smith

      BRAVO !

    • LHathaway

      One could say the subtext of your article, intended or not, contains the message that we should all be kumbaya liberals. Aren’t Jews, in addition to whatever else they are, more intelligent on average?

      Again, to descend to conspiracy theory, as I sometimes do, I think the idea being sold is that Jews are getting revenge for the Holocaust. Oh, people don’t think that now, they are too much into white-supremacy, perhaps, but they are supposed to think that later. Apparently, dumb girls are supposed to be impressed by primitive, multigenerational, displays of revenge?

      • John Smith

        Which holocaust?

        Too bad there is not more focus on the Bolshevik holocaust in the old Soviet Union.

        About 50 million or so of my people systematically murdered over a period of DECADES.

        • LHathaway

          Well, I didn’t intend my outburst to be serious. I hope I was just saying, more or less, That is the conspiracy. There’s a conspiracy afoot blaming Jews for all problems in the world past and present. Kind of like an underground version of multiculturalism, with Jews the embodiment of evil manipulation instead of whites. Anyone going on about Jews has either been duped, or is part of the conspiracy. That’s my opinion. In either case, I prefer not to talk about ‘Jews’. In a practical sense, all it does is reveal you as a Nazi.

          What the future holds is hard to say. The time may come when leftists will blame Jews, they certainly will never blame themselves. Maybe the day will come when we will all believe it’s the Jews fault, but who cares what crazy leftists want us to think? But as our own John Engelman says, you can only get people to believe what they want to. Perhaps they are counting on that.

  • 4321realist

    “I am just trying to help.”

    Hahahahaha

    How?

    By overlooking so many important points your argument is useless?

    That’s helping?

  • anony

    It seems we have something in common besides race realism and hiking the AT; F.I.R.E. has been one of the organizations I’ve supported since its inception.

    I strongly encourage all who can to support this wonderful institution.

  • journey

    Well, you must some health care studies and get educated. Those studies certainly say races exist. LOL

  • journey

    Your posting goes against all empirical evidence and observations. What are you smoking? And you think the computer you are using did not come from white brain power? LOL
    Heck, China and Japan innovations, inventions, wealth mainly came from white brain power. Noticed most students go to Western societies to get educated? Anyway your posting is compete nonsense.

  • journey

    You know, you smell like an Afrocentric black study brainwashed entity. Have seen similar like you on blogs. Surprised you have not gone more over the cliff with your nonsense.

  • guest

    Faithfully and ably translate Wade’s current book into Chinese in, say, 60 manuscript copies.
    Assemble professors and able graduate students from the top six universities in China,
    in the domains of behavioral science and genetics. Give them facial netting some voice
    alteration so they can be video taped but with suitable personal privacy. Ask them to discuss the manuscript copy they have carefully read. Observe the contrast with what obtains in “the land of the free and the home of the brave”. You will get a good bit of at least tacit endorsement of Wade’s work; polite and reasoned questioning of other parts; and informed disputation about some other elements. The book will be discussed, if quietly, with an openness and objectivity that would make the USA seem the recrudescence of the old USSR. And copies of any publication of it would be sought by all. We should begin the
    transition of the Smithsonian from D.C. to Beijing . That’s exactly where Smithson would have it were he to arise from the grave and chart the locus of the future.

  • ElComadreja

    Negros could easily be (and would be in an honest world) classified as a separate species.

  • tetrapod

    This attack on Wade has nothing to do with a reasoned debate on differing interpretations of genetic data, and everything to do with rendering his opinions “controversial”, hence indeterminate, and therefore inconsequential. Alinskian obfuscation at its finest.

  • http://disenfranchisedchristianmen.com/ youfamissim

    It’s a Mo-Fo when you kill God, claim his mantel (ill=prepared) and then seek to advance ideas and conclusions that require seven league leaps of faith that, in comparison, make faith in a supreme being a puddle jump. It is from this perch academics build a re-enforced room around themselves using secular matter. This allows them to control the information going in and out. It also prevents them from being impacted by the environment surrounding them. Insulated, safe, and removed from reality, selectively deaf dumb and blind, they neither hear, speak, nor see evil and are never mistaken. What a life.

  • Paleoconn

    What a bunch of cowards scurrying to disassociate themselves from Nick Wade. Could Stalinist Russia have been much worse than this as far as freedom of expression?