Noted Nobel Prize winner says that blacks are less intelligent than whites. Will they take away his Prize?

Question

Heard on the Michael Savage radio program last night that a noted DNA genetecist, Dr. James Watson, recently wrote a paper saying that blacks were less intelligent than whites. It should be noted that Dr. Watson won the Nobel Prize for his work in discovering the structure of DNA.

Now that he has come out with this politically incorrect paper, will the people of The Nobel Committee demand that he return his prize?

You can see the article on michaelsavage.com

Just trying to start a little dialogue. He may have won the prize in 1962, but he just recently wrote the article.

Answer 1

how do you know it's not true ? I'm not dissing blacks but he did discover DNA maybe there is scientific backing for his claim. Lets not all get out panties in a bunch.

Answer 2

Knowledge of molecular biology these days, does not allow coming to the conclusion neither that blacks are less intelligent than whites nor that black people play better basketball. Charles Darwin waited for 20 years before he published evolution theory, even he did not lack the evidence. Shouldn’t Dr. Watson be more patient?lol I don’t think they will demand that he return his prize but this is for sure: he’s not going to win Nobel Prize for this paper.

Answer 3

I read the article.

It's one man's opinion. Based on the "testing" he says but I noticed he didn't reference any... Scientists opinions should rest on a firm bed of research.

Where is it?

I'm not saying he's necessarily wrong but where's the beef?

BTW did you read this part of the Savage article;
"Steven Rose, a professor of biological sciences at the Open University and a founder member of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science, said: " This is Watson at his most scandalous. He has said similar things about women before but I have never heard him get into this racist terrain. If he knew the literature in the subject he would know he was out of his depth scientifically, quite apart from socially and politically."

Answer 4

C'mon, this guy won in 1962. Maybe you don't remember 1962 but this was pretty common rhetoric, sad as that may be.

This is a guy who was prejudiced then and is still prejudiced.

Answer 5

It's all about sampling. If you sample 1000 people, 500 Black and 500, white the data could appear to favor one race over the other. It doesn't prove anything. Tests can also be bias based on race.

Answer 6

Personnally, I don't believe in generalisations and I am against racism. However, freedom of speech and especially scientific freedom must be respected. He may be wrong, but he has the right to say it. Perhaps some scientific facts may be politically uncorrect, but we can't discaard them on this basis, we must prove they are scientifically uncorrect too. For instance, if a study said that black people play better basketball (lol) due to a specific gene or sth., no one would contest it as a racist generalisation!

Answer 7

He's quite elderly. He's also a science legend, so I suspect the science world will forgive any questionable hypotheses he puts forth and chalk it up to mild senility.

Answer 8

Maybe. He should have just stuck to anti-Semitic remarks. The Nobel Prize committee has no problem with anti-Semitism.

Answer 9

i assume he is talking IQ.............
i have heard IQ ia a flawed measure of intellegence..........
It is not a good measure of financial success,,,,,check the MENSA population.............
I like truth where ever it falls..Lies are too tough to keep up with..truth, like gravoty, doesn't change

Answer 10

Savage ? Nah - sweet joke, but who
needs to reassure how crap smells ?
It's okay. Calm down. *pad shoulder*
You are right and ***** dangs are longer.

Answer 11

Stephen Colbert is running in South Carolina.