“I agree with Dr. Watson”

Is the title of an editorial (alternate link) written by Nigerian Idang Alibi in response to the comments attributed to famous geneticist James Watson (blogged about it here).

Needless to say, I was somewhat shocked by the title of the column and even more so with its content.

For example,

Since then (Watson’s comments being made public), some of us cannot hear anything else but the outrage of black people who feel demeaned by what Watson has said. So many people have called the man names. To be expected, some have said he is a racist. Some even wonder how a “foolish” man like Watson could have won the Nobel Prize. Even white people who, deep in their heart, agree with Watson want to be politically, correct so they condemn the man.

Any truth to that last sentence? It would be interesting to know the stats on this group of people.

The following would brand Mr. Alibi a racist if he weren’t a black man,

But I do know that in terms of organising society for the benefit of the people living in it, we blacks have not shown any intelligence in that direction at all. I am so ashamed of this and sometimes feel that I ought to have belonged to another race.

The following would draw the righteous indignation of Al, Jesse and Quanell, and of course, the politically correct whites Alibi mentioned in the opening,

Anywhere in the world today where you have a concentration of black people among other races, the poorest, the least educated, the least achieving, and the most violent group among those races will be the blacks. When indices of underdevelopment are given, black people and countries are sure to occupy the bottom of the ladder. If we are intelligent, why do we not carry first when statistics of development are given?

In a moment of honest reflection Idang lets it out,

As I write this, I do so with great pains in my heart because I know that God has given intelligence in equal measure to all his children irrespective of the colour of their skin. The problem with us black people is that we have refused to use our intelligence to organise ourselves socially and politically.

Couldn’t agree more with this paragraph in regards to what he says about God giving his children intelligence.

As to the latter part of the paragraph, he has a point. So long as demagogues like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Quanell X keep telling their community (and they in turn listen to them) that their internal problems are always someone else’s fault, black people in America will sacrifice their God-given intelligence at the altar of victimhood.

[On a related note, Dr. James Watson resigned from his position of Chancellor of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, so I guess he did get Carleton S. Coon’ed.]

Advertisements

Answers in Genesis chimes in on James Watson’s Comments

Paul Taylor from AiG wrote an article, DNA Pioneer in Evolutionary Racism Storm, addressing Dr. Watson’s ill-conceived comments.

Taylor writes,

At Answers in Genesis (both U.K. and U.S. sister offices) we profoundly disagree with Watson’s views on the origin of the so-called “races.” We concede that most evolutionists would share Rose’s non-racist views and that most evolutionists would be equally shocked by Watson. Nevertheless, it is only fair to point out that Watson is actually being more consistent with evolutionary theory than Rose. As soon as one believes that human beings have evolved from creatures of lesser intelligence, it is an easy corollary to assume that some people groups are more evolved than others. Watson repeated these views in the same newspaper (The Independent) on October 19, 2007, while protesting that this was not a comment on the “inferiority or superiority” of any people group. Yet we contend that a comment on the supposed intelligence levels of different people groups is clearly a value judgment.(emphasis mine)

Is Taylor right in saying that Watson is “actually being more consistent with evolutionary theory” than evolutionists who correctly denounce Watson’s comments?

I like Taylor’s closing sentence,

Contrary to the belief of evolutionists, there is actually only one race—Adam’s race. And Adam’s race includes “black” people, “white” people—all human beings everywhere.

Dr. James Watson Makes Regrettable Comments

Dr. James Watson, who along with Francis Crick, “discovered” the double helical structure of DNA, with a little help from one of their friends, X-Ray Crystallographer Rosalind Franklin.

Watson and Crick won the 1962 Nobel Prize in Medicine for their groundbreaking work as well as worldwide acclaim.

Dr. Watson was to speak to an audience at the Science Museum, but his speech was canceled due to some ill-advised comments he made.

According to this story,

DNA pioneer Dr Watson, who discovered the double helix with Briton Francis Crick, has been roundly condemned for saying he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really”.

Also,

Dr. Watson was also quoted as saying that while he hoped all races were equal, “people who have to deal with black employees find this is not true.”

He also added,

there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of people geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically.

Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so

Then of course, a statement to avoid the inevitable conclusion of his statements,

However, he said people should not discriminate racially, because “there are many people of colour who are very talented.”

These statements seem to be a racist’s dreams come true. One can almost see a collective “I told you so” from white supremacist groups.

I wonder if Watson realizes the import of what he allegedly said, and if he’s going to get Carleton Coon(ed) for said comments.  Probably not since Watson’s words will probably be dismissed as the ramblings of an old man.

Watson has also made other brow raising comments, according to this story,

In 1997, he told a British newspaper that a woman should have the right to abort her unborn child if tests could determine it would be a homosexual.

Wonder what Joel Ginsberg would say to that?