Geoffrey MillerVerified account

Tuvel's "Defense of Transracialism" and the Gilley's "The Case for Colonialism" triggered a huge backlash, but neither was about innate group differences.

Thinking about this more... if 'published' implies 'not suppressed,' then there will be much more suppressed work than we could possibly be aware of. The unknown postdoc whose work just gets constantly desk rejected won't make headlines the way the retraction scandals did.

Possibly! The unknown postdoc could complain that her work is being suppressed because it's politically incorrect, but the easy rejoinder is "No, it's just bad work," And maybe that's true! Impossible to know unless we see the work. Which we can't. Because it was desk rejected.

The more general thought is that "Where's the evidence that work is being suppressed?" is an appropriate skeptical stance, but limited in its application. The evidence would be the suppressed work, which we don't have access to because of that very suppression.