The latest in guilt by association without any actual scientific criticism. Business as usual in this field. I don't mind too much because reasonable people will check the primary sources and come to their own conclusions.https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/education/2018/12/no-objecting-cambridge-s-appointment-eugenicist-not-about-free-speech …
-
In your point about him using the information from http://therelegionofpeace.com , did you not think it important to note that he went through their data and removed bits that he found were not correct? Or was it more important to go for the guilt by association angle?
Not to mention of course that he also validated it against other, less contested sources.
