Bravo to @patrickaturley & @MichelleNMeyer for correcting Charles Murray’s absurd claims about polygenic scores being free of the environmenthttps://www.wsj.com/articles/genetic-scoring-presents-opportunity-peril-11580762369 …
This misrepresents what @charlesmurray argued. It's incredibly disingenuous virtue-signaling, and nothing more.
-
-
There are two versions of this bookhttps://quillette.com/2017/03/27/a-tale-of-two-bell-curves/ …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Is there a
@LetterWiki in the works on this topic? -
We would be honoured to host this conversation and it certainly deserves to be had.
@primalpoly &@kph3k, what say you?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Not exactly. The critique is that polygenic scores depend on the environment where the data come from, so they don't necessarily represent "what is innate and what is added by the environment." This is true even within a homogeneous population.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
No, it represents exactly what he argued. He quotes his own book where exactly he claims polygenetic scores represent innate traits free from environmental influence. See
@kph3k reply to him in that thread.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Would you care to clarify?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Isn't that the story of how people interpret
@charlesmurray's work?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.