Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 8, 2021 - Radio Renaissance - Jared Taylor

09:46

The Real War on Science

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello, I'm Jared Taylor with American Renaissance.
	I'm sure you've heard lefties complain that conservatives hate science, that they don't believe in evolution, or in man-made global warming, or even the coronavirus.
	Here's a typical headline from the Philadelphia Inquirer.
	GOP, Fox News have waged war on science.
	If conservatives have waged war on science, they have been utterly routed.
	The lefty position on everything gets ten times the coverage.
	The real war on science comes from the left, and it's on one of the most important questions facing the entire world.
	What have blacks and berserk white people been rioting and yelling about for the last couple of weeks?
	It's the idea that systemic, unconscious, institutional racism is holding black people down.
	Are overweight?
	Have children out of wedlock?
	It's our fault.
	If Africa and Haiti are a mess, that's our fault too.
	Looting your local target is the first step in setting things right.
	But what if races are different and just can't achieve at the same level?
	We accept that certain groups are different.
	Crazed feminists pretend that men and women are basically the same, but we know better.
	We know it's not systemic sexism that keeps women out of professional football.
	We know it's not systemic sexism that puts men in prison at 14 times the rate for women.
	Men and women are different.
	Well, races can be different too.
	And the science behind this is overwhelming, especially when it comes to intelligence.
	Anyone who has looked into mental testing knows that East Asians score higher than whites, on average, and blacks score lower than whites.
	Even Wikipedia recognizes this.
	Listen to this.
	Roth et al., 2001, in a review of the results of a total of 6 million 246,729 participants in other tests of cognitive ability or aptitude found a difference in mean scores between black people and white people of 1.1 standard deviations.
	That means an average white IQ of 100 and an average black IQ of 85. The only debate is over how much of the difference is caused by genes and how much by environment.
	But the races are different, and you can't expect groups that are different to behave exactly the same.
	Well, the left doesn't want you even thinking about this.
	Last December, Nathan Kofnus, a graduate student at Oxford, published this article with a journal called Philosophical Psychology.
	It was called Research on Group Differences in Intelligence: A Defense of Free Inquiry.
	Mr. Kofnus quoted a number of leftists who openly want to suppress this kind of research.
	Howard Gardner, who became famous for theories about multiple intelligences, says, and I quote, I do not condone investigations of racial differences in intelligence because I think that the results are likely to be incendiary.
	He's not worried the results might be wrong.
	He's worried they'd be right.
	Noam Chomsky, the famous leftist intellectual, opposes research on sex differences, too.
	He says studies like this are, quote, of no scientific interest and of no social significance except to racists and sexists.
	James Flynn, of the famous Flynn Effect, says that as far as race and intelligence are concerned, and I quote, If universities have their way, the necessary research will never be done.
	They'd rather not know.
	Daniel Dennett, who is a philosopher at Tufts University, says that if he ever came across research on race differences in intelligence, he would be, and I quote, If this many people are willing to say openly that they want to smother the truth,
	How many people do it without admitting it?
	How many writers, editors, professors, big tech executives deliberately suppress information?
	And what about Mr. Kofnus's paper that defended free inquiry?
	Academics tried their best to get the paper retracted, unpublished.
	And some of the people bullying the publisher admitted they hadn't even read it.
	Here's another story for you.
	The Journal of Intelligence is a peer-reviewed journal about intelligence.
	Here is its description of itself on its website.
	Please note the final sentence, which was added in 2018.
	The journal will not publish articles that may lead to or enhance political controversies, and the editors will judge whether that is the case.
	Well, think about that.
	They will reject a paper that might be controversial.
	It could have flawless data, brilliant analysis, but better not publish something controversial.
	Well, could a scientific publication possibly be more openly cowardly?
	Anything important is likely to be controversial.
	Well, just last month, this very Journal of Intelligence rejected a paper by researchers at Cleveland State University.
	Here is a preprint version.
	It's about measured cognitive differences among UK adults of different ethnic backgrounds.
	And it's based on a huge data set that the researchers had to get through a Freedom of Information request.
	And they found group differences.
	But all they did was describe them.
	They said nothing about why some groups score higher than others on IQ tests.
	Doesn't even appear.
	The rejection letter from the Journal of Intelligence is on a blog by independent scholar Emil Kierkegaard.
	The editor wrote that the findings may lead to interpretations and conclusions which are politically controversial.
	The truth might be controversial.
	Even something Wikipedia admits is true might be controversial.
	So... Are the people who rail about conservative anti-science mentality going to tell the editors of the Journal of Intelligence to man up and publish this paper?
	Not a chance.
	And you know what passes for lefty science these days?
	Here's a headline for you.
	Three Concordia researchers collaborate to engage indigenous knowledges in the study of physics.
	It's just as bad as it sounds.
	These three goofballs at Concordia University in Montreal picked up a $163,000 grant to get Eskimos to explain physics to them.
	Dr. Tanja Tajmel, that's the goofball on the right, who is a physicist, says she questioned the colonial assumptions of Western science.
	The goofball in the middle, who claims to be of the Kanyankahaka tribe, worries that Indigenous ways of knowing have been suppressed and marginalized.
	As the university press release explains, by engaging indigenous understanding and involving indigenous communities in the co-creation of knowledge, the project aims to decolonize contemporary physics research.
	So, It looks like they're going to spend $163,000 talking about physics with Algonquin Medicine Man.
	And while lefties promote this moonshine, they are actively suppressing any kind of research into what actually causes the racial inequalities they claim to care so much about.
	They want to turn the country inside out in order to achieve black-white equality in every field.
	That is just as crazy as turning the country inside out to make sure that there are just as many Mexicans as blacks in the NBA.
	Science is dead when people just prefer not to know.
	When you get in trouble even for wondering.
	Well, what if the data show that homosexuals make bad parents or that women police officers are more likely to panic?
	Or that whites are genetically more likely than East Asians to be violent?
	Or that self-discipline is a heritable trait?
	Who would fund the research?
	Who would publish the papers?
	I was just kicked off of YouTube after running a channel there for eight years that had maybe 20 million views.
	The same thing is happening in science.
	If you stray from the one true faith, out you go.
	But don't worry.

▲