Your own institution's article basically admits he was right about four out of five things, although it does its best to downplay it.
Being in field is perfectly fine as long as you have the right opinion.
-
-
sorry im a little unclear as to what you're claiming here?
-
I mean you don't get in trouble for researching race&iq and reporting that it's zero, you get in trouble for researching & saying it's real.
-
if anything, within in the field, much of the funding seems to come from orgs whose agenda is to push race science (e.g. pioneer fund)
-
I think you're neglecting the fact that Pioneer Fund is one fund, and 100% of the rest of society is pushing the opposite.
-
Suppose you want to be a Harvard professor. Would you prefer to have "supported Murray" or "debunked Murray" on resume?
-
Sure. For example, Harvard scientist Steven Jay Gould's refutation of Murray is not very good, but that doesn't prove Murray correct
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.