Nobel Prize Not SJW-Proof, As Scientist Discovers

[BjornP]

Taking away his honory titles simply for being "offensive" would be wrong. But if the reason goes beyond just hurt feelings, it's not so controversial.

Bobby Fischer said mean things about Jews . . . he was still a Grand Master Chess Champion. If Michael Phelps dons blackface and does a minstrel show, he still won 23 gold medals. I don't get this whle retroactive "You said offensive shit, therefore all the awards for your achievements in life are revoked" mentality.

Winning chess matches or swimming contests does not really compare. No one is taking away his recognition or awards for his actual work. If he no longer qualifies for...whatever made him earn those honory titles to begin with, then it would go beyond simply "saying offensive shit". Then "offensive shit" would be secondary. Your own cited article in the OP state that the organization didn't simply strip those honory titles because he was "offensive", they also say his views are "completely unsupported by science" and "unsubstantiated". There would be more of a traditional "PC academia trying to silence criticism" to the story, if there was only talk of how offensive his views were. As it is, there is not.

But particularly with this scientist, I'd like to hear his case. He obviously feels that the data supports his views. He's expressed that he wishes the data did not support his views and that other explanations were viable. He already took heat for this very topic years ago, and is only now being punished for honestly saying his view on the subject has not changed. Why would he take such a public beating over a span of years if he didn't really believe the data supports his position?

And if the data doesn't support his position, how hard is it for an entire academy of outraged SJW scientists to simply present the data and say "Nope, you're wrong, here's what the data says"?

Instead we get the academic community acting like a bunch of petulant middle-schoolers. They're making it clear that any member expressing what they feel are "condemnable" scientific views is fodder for public humiliation and revocation of any awards.

"Science" should be better than this.

I am not a geneticist or biologist, so I can't determine the accuracy of his views. Googling around, I am not reading a whole lot of acceptance of his views. I doubt all of the people who don't accept his line of thinking are SJW Marxist political correctness worshippers. Again, the reason his honorary titles got taken from could be because of what he was given those honorary titles for. I don't know that reason. But their own, stated reason doesn't exclusively indicate that he lost his titles because of some SJW witchhunt, so I don't really think this fits the usual SJW harrasment bill we see in the SJW thread.

[SuburbanFarmer]

I don’t think he’s correct, but it doesn’t matter. Pretending that he didn’t change the world is just retarded. He’s a great man. And his entire life has been based on the study of genetics - are we surprised that he explains everything in those terms?

The ‘lower IQ’ areas on that map are a near-perfect overlay of impoverished and unstable areas on earth. Tying it to race is a leap beyond faith.

[Speaker to Animals]

Welcome to the dark age. Science must be subordinated to the new religion.

[Zlaxer]

I don’t think he’s correct, but it doesn’t matter. Pretending that he didn’t change the world is just retarded. He’s a great man. And his entire life has been based on the study of genetics - are we surprised that he explains everything in those terms?

The ‘lower IQ’ areas on that map are a near-perfect overlay of impoverished and unstable areas on earth. Tying it to race is a leap beyond faith.

Conversely, it could be said that those impoverished and unstable areas produced less intelligent genes....

I think most (professional grade) studies account for those types of factors.

[DBTrek]

Your own cited article in the OP state that the organization didn't simply strip those honory titles because he was "offensive", they also say his views are "completely unsupported by science" and "unsubstantiated". There would be more of a traditional "PC academia trying to silence criticism" to the story, if there was only talk of how offensive his views were. As it is, there is not.

That's what his opponents claim. Data supporting those claims - not provided. Data supporting his claim - not provided. For a bunch of scientists, these fuckers sure don't produce much data.

I am not a geneticist or biologist, so I can't determine the accuracy of his views. Googling around, I am not reading a whole lot of acceptance of his views. I doubt all of the people who don't accept his line of thinking are SJW Marxist political correctness worshippers. Again, the reason his honorary titles got taken from could be because of what he was given those honorary titles for.

I agree, it's not as egrgious as trying to strip him of his Nobel prize. I still think it warrants a firm rebuke from the public. The guy didn't drug and rape dozens of women, Cosby-style. The guy is a DNA pioneer who interprets data differently than his contemporaries. When did that become a yank-your-honorary-awards offense?

[Zlaxer]

StA is right - we're entering a dark age brought on by Marxists....

[C-Mag]

I don’t think he’s correct, but it doesn’t matter. Pretending that he didn’t change the world is just retarded. He’s a great man. And his entire life has been based on the study of genetics - are we surprised that he explains everything in those terms?

The ‘lower IQ’ areas on that map are a near-perfect overlay of impoverished and unstable areas on earth. Tying it to race is a leap beyond faith.

I see those patterns line up too. It's hard to ignore, and I believe not wise either.

The question is, what do you do about it. My solution is nothing. Allow for self determination. Western nations shouldn't be trying to fix the problems.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I'll bet "America's Dad" was more an honorary title.

Has it been stripped?



SCIENCE!

[Fife]

I don’t think he’s correct, but it doesn’t matter. Pretending that he didn’t change the world is just retarded. He’s a great man. And his entire life has been based on the study of genetics - are we surprised that he explains everything in those terms?

The ‘lower IQ’ areas on that map are a near-perfect overlay of impoverished and unstable areas on earth. Tying it to race is a leap beyond faith.

The low-IQ regions need more progressive government, and probably some regime change. There's your obvious correlation.

[Fife]

I'll bet "America's Dad" was more an honorary title.

Has it been stripped?

I would there are some plaintiffs' attorneys seeking to have his titles and what is left of his residuals transferred to an imposed trust for massaging. You can live forever if you just cause enough actual IRL harm.