Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

James Watson — Why does he say the things he does?

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Anybody willing to offer predictions about when Darwinists will be getting back big time into the eugenics business?

Africans are less intelligent than Westerners, says DNA pioneer
SOURCE: news.independent.co.uk

. . . His views are also reflected in a book published next week, in which he writes: “There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so.”

Comments
It seems to me that with the concept of Genetic entropy that we might expect certain groups of people to have important genes for say, intelligence, decay over time. That's what we should expect if mutations accumulate from a common ancestor that was designed. Perhaps some populations decay faster than others?EJ Klone
October 19, 2007
October
10
Oct
19
19
2007
11:14 AM
11
11
14
AM
PDT
Yeah. I knew it was more complex than what I wrote but I thought that fellow was getting confused by the talk of paint and light etc. Of course I didn't know it was quite as complex as you have described. One of these days I must read that book about genetic entropy.Janice
October 19, 2007
October
10
Oct
19
19
2007
02:44 AM
2
02
44
AM
PDT
Janice: Its not quite as simple as you think: Melanin comes in two types: pheomelanin (red) and eumelanin (dark brown to nearly black). Both amount and type are determined by four to six genes which operate under incomplete nce. One copy of each of those genes is inherited from the father and one from the mother. Each gene comes in several alleles, resulting in a great variety of different skin tones. Even if it was just a simple case of the efficiency of one melanin in the skin of people, I would still hold that it demonstrated less information for the younger descended races from Africans,and thus still conformed to genetic entropy...But as the case stands my inference to subtractive color mixing is strong and my case for the Genetic Entropy of skin color in younger human races is bolstered all the more!bornagain77
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
05:46 PM
5
05
46
PM
PDT
Re skin colour: The skin contains specialised cells that produce melanin which is a black pigment. People who produce it very efficiently have black skin. European, Asian and Indo-American folk, produce it less efficiently. Albinos produce next to none. So all skin, hair and eye colours depend on how much melanin you produce. The information dictating how much melanin you are able to produce is in your DNA.Janice
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
04:55 PM
4
04
55
PM
PDT
Alas, lotf is no longer with us, so this reply is rather belated, but in case he comes back: I have no idea what you mean by Darwinista but how can you seriously say ID science advocates are being denied their say writing on a blog that advocates ID science? That independent blogs have arisen to support ID does not mean the scientific establishment is not suppressing it. Look no further than the cases of Sternberg or Gonzalez for pertinent examples.professorsmith
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
01:10 PM
1
01
10
PM
PDT
rrf, No sir, I write on my own time. But my job doesn't chew up that much of my time, so I have time to research, read and write on ID. A subject that has captured my interest, to put it mildly.bornagain77
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
12:30 PM
12
12
30
PM
PDT
I could probably get a lot more technical with the subject Bornagain77, you have a gift for cranking out the prose. Please tell me you work the night shift. Because, I'd hate to think we are benefiting from your detailed treatises while you are on the clock!rrf
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
10:04 AM
10
10
04
AM
PDT
DaveScot: "lotf is no longer with us" thanks, it becomes nauseating trying to reason against arrogant ignorance and poor logic.Borne
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
09:34 AM
9
09
34
AM
PDT
[...] Here’s a post criticizing him from the religious perspective, which I found rather [...]The post in which I get all un-PC. (But in good faith, really!) « The Tiger in Somerville
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
08:43 AM
8
08
43
AM
PDT
(Atom, I just may got you beat . . .)
:D Obviously his cup of blessing doesn't run dry...he can bless all and still have more to give.Atom
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
07:35 AM
7
07
35
AM
PDT
lotf is no longer with usDaveScot
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
07:24 AM
7
07
24
AM
PDT
lotf you asked, If black paint contains cyan (and in colour theory black is a combination of cyan, yellow and magenta) how can I get cyan paint from black paint? If you can’t it doesn’t contain the information for cyan does it? Paint is a extremely difficult medium to work with as far as separating to a proper color, so let's use a computer program for our example of separating colors, There are two options for the way you can set up the computer program for separating colors. One is to set up the program as if all the information is in the white color. The method of dealing with colors is called additive color mixing. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/addcol.html#c1 The other way is to set up the program as if all the information is in the black color. This method of dealing with colors is called subtractive color mixing. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/subcol.html#c1 These are the only two options for setting up the computer program, that is if you want a full range of colors for your program. If the computer program is set up on the material basis of how color acts (subtractive color mixing), the computer program will be encoded with information for each of the primary colors of black (cyan, magenta, yellow) and add them to one another to get from a completely white (background) screen to a completely black (colored) screen. Subtract from some or all of the information you have for any or each of the primary colors you have for black in the computer program to get to the desired color you want between black and white. Subtract all the information for each primary color to get to a white (background) screen. Whereas, if the program is set up for white light having all the information (additive color mixing), the computer program would have all the information for the primary colors for white light (blue, red, green) encoded in its program. Add all the primary colors up and you will get a white screen. Like-wise subtract any or all of the information for the primary colors you have for white to get to any color you want between white and black. Subtract all primary colors to get to the black (background) screen! Thus, my assertion that the African Race has more information for color stands upon the scientific principle of subtractive color mixing! lotf, If this is not clear enough for you to understand I'm sorry. I could probably get a lot more technical with the subject, but I see very limited benefit from going any further into the details, and my patience for explaining this subject to you is shot.bornagain77
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
07:20 AM
7
07
20
AM
PDT
@kairosfocus I no longer wish to derail this discussion with bible talk, my apologies if I have offended you. I asked about race on the other discussion shall we take this up there?lotf
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
06:32 AM
6
06
32
AM
PDT
PS: Now that my troublesome web access over the past several days is working a tad better [yet another ICT headache! Add to that the firetruck that overturned at the local airport Monday, leading to the loss of air access by the 19 seater puddle-jumper . . . the "joys" of living in paradise! But then when I look across at my favourite treasure on mornings, she is well worth it!!! (Atom, I just may got you beat . . .)], here is a useful link on difficulties and much more. PPS: On defining race; this was done in the earlier thread on Dawkins' antisemitic remarks. Go look up the Oxford English Dictionary or another credible source -- this is not a serious objection; and we are not so ignorant, stupid insane or wicked that we can't google or yahoo a word. BA 77 is dead right that LOTF you -- sadly -- are coming across as arrogant, conceited and superciliously contemptuous while being in fact willfully ignorant [or too lazy to look up on Google or Yahoo] and/or simply wanting to be difficult. Please, fix this.kairosfocus
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
05:43 AM
5
05
43
AM
PDT
@bornagain77 It is so simple a child can see it, black is a combination of all other colors for a material object. I don't dispute this at all what I dispute is that black contains all the 'information' for the other colours. If I have black paint how can I get cyan for example? If black paint contains cyan (and in colour theory black is a combination of cyan, yellow and magenta) how can I get cyan paint from black paint? If you can't it doesn't contain the information for cyan does it? I don’t know if you are really this ignorant, but from reading your post with others, I have a feeling you are not ignorant, but just enjoy being difficult for the sake of being difficult, because you have some sort of ax to grind with your “religious” concept of God! If this is truly the case, I can assure you that your triviality and pettiness is not appreciated by myself or others on this site. I'm sorry if you see it this way I am honestly trying to understand. Answer my question above and that may get us back on track I hope.lotf
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
05:22 AM
5
05
22
AM
PDT
LOTF: It is now very clear that you know that this blog is not along the lines you are trying to pull the debates. Were it so, I would answer you point by point. But, for excellent reason, it is not -- and you know that. Just to exemplify [pardon Patrick, IMHCO, LOTF needs to know that there are in fact reasonable answers to his sort of Village Atheist objections], in the case you just identified:
--> In the context, Lot was in a semi-backslidden, compromising condition so his behaviour is not to be regarded as an example of upright conduct -- just as JR spoke of. --> Lot had just tried to intervene to save some visitors to the city from probable rape by many of the men of the city by offering them shelter under his roof [instead of their staying overnight in the open in the Market], and faced a confrontation with an angry crowd on his getting on a high horse to "lecture" to them on their blatant immorality and out of control sensuality -- especially since he was a mere immigrant. --> Now, his offer of hospitality under ANE culture imposed an obligation of defence to the point of death if needs be; and he was trying to carry it out in light of ANE common practices, in an impossible situation of facing probable massacre of his whole family and the guests by an enraged crowd. (NB: By his earlier self-centred, material prosperity based choices, he put himself in the wrong place at the wrong time. Guess why I have utterly no desire to emigrate with my own family to today's No 1 parallel to that ancient cesspool of evil, regardless of the material prosperity that would ensue?) --> In the wider background, the city -- its cup of iniquity brimming over -- was under imminent threat of judgement of destruction, and God was intervening to save what was savable out of it; having interacted through intercessory prayer with the better [but far from perfect] example of godly conduct in the account, Abraham, in which there was not enough of a remnant left in the city that made it worth saving. (Cf here key parallels to the situation I linked in 22 above.) --> The account then goes on to further misadventures by Lot, which show just how corrupted he and his family had become during their sojourn in that proverbial city of bright lights and out-of-control sensuality. (Hint, hint . . .)
In short, were there time and space, and were this the proper focus of this blog, your shopping list of objections could be reasonably answered: through speaking uncomfortable, unwelcome truth to power. [NB: You may find Gleason Archer's well-known work on Bible Difficulties a good place to start if/when you really want serious answers. There are also entire major and quite good web sites that deal with the sort of question you are asking, if you are sufficiently open-minded to do a simple web search.] But, you also know from 36 - 38 above that your behaviour constitutes a "hijack" [your term] attempt is based on knowing the rules but insisting on putting up such "rationalist" polemics. Your insistent hijacking/ diversionary and atmosphere- poisoning behaviour at this site is therefore, sadly, inexcusable. For instance, I must note that you evidently have not even bothered to follow up the link I gave in 22 above, which would address a major bloc of your concerns and would give you enough background to see what is going on in the background that Jason and others have been trying to point you to. That sort of pattern of rushing on to the "next objection" without acknowledging the relevance of an earlier response is on long experience telling -- sadly so. What is more (given the wider context of debates over ID and certain common slanders), you are probably also trying to -- by pushing for a "hijack" into such matters -- provide "evidence" for the slander that the design inference is an "improper" injection of "religion" into the realms of "science." All of which on the evidence of recent developments addressed in the blog, promotes the kind of usurpation of power by utterly uncivil and even tyrannical agendas tied to evolutionary materialist views. Here, I note by citing from the above, how Mr Watson's racism is simply yet another playing out of the inner absurdities of this view. Cf. his remark, that There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. In fact, on the evidence, there is no good ground for us to accept that Evo Mat is capable of accounting for the emergence of a credible mind or grounding the binding nature of morality. In short, it is inescapably self-referentially absurd and so necessarily false. GEM of TKIkairosfocus
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
05:12 AM
5
05
12
AM
PDT
Lotf, Cyan (from Greek ??????, meaning "blue") may be used as the name of any of a number of a range of colors in the blue/green part of the spectrum. lotf, excuse my poor choice of words , but color is really not that difficult of a concept to understand. Red, yellow, Blue are the primary colors! black is obtained in paint (a material object) by combining these three colors, subtract (or more easily do not add) the proper amounts of blue/yellow absorbing paint (material) to obtain the proper shade of cyan you want! It is so simple a child can see it, black is a combination of all other colors for a material object. I don't know if you are really this ignorant, but from reading your post with others, I have a feeling you are not ignorant, but just enjoy being difficult for the sake of being difficult, because you have some sort of ax to grind with your "religious" concept of God! If this is truly the case, I can assure you that your triviality and pettiness is not appreciated by myself or others on this site.bornagain77
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
04:26 AM
4
04
26
AM
PDT
@Jason Rennie Do your own leg work. You should probably start by not again assuming the biblical text is a newspaper written to you yesterday. Your comment indicates that you are still doing this. In the face of such Chrsitian charity I find it tough to ask another question, you have blessed me with enough of your time I'm sure. But anyway, how do you see Lot's behaviour, is it moral do you think to hand your children over to a gang to be raped?lotf
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
01:13 AM
1
01
13
AM
PDT
@professorsmith The current Darwinista has tried to usurp this power by denying ID science advocates the right to have their say. I have no idea what you mean by Darwinista but how can you seriously say ID science advocates are being denied their say writing on a blog that advocates ID science? I think we have to move away from propogating a myth that ID science is being surpressed and on to producing papers and evidence to back up the ID case.lotf
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
01:02 AM
1
01
02
AM
PDT
@bornagain77 White light has the inherent ability (information) to produce all the colors of its own accord, when it is properly separated, whereas a black material object has the inherent ability (information) to reflect all the colors of its own accord, when it is likewise properly separated . Ok so tell me how I can get the information for cyan from a black material object? Black absorbs light not reflects it btw, that's why it's black. That is why I can draw a solid inference from the proven greater genetic diversity of Africans to their skin color also, both have been scientifically proven to have more information! You must be using some definition of information that I am unfamiliar with, could you quantify it for me please?lotf
October 18, 2007
October
10
Oct
18
18
2007
12:55 AM
12
12
55
AM
PDT
Leo, The fossil record, the practically 100% case of detrimental mutations to DNA and the principle of Genetic Entropy everywhere I look make the case rock solid for ID,, the only thing that remains is to overturn the highly suggestive similarities found between genomes! The evolutionary perspective has completely overlooked the foundational principles of science that rule out a evolutionary scenario..Yet they stubbornly hang on to superficial scientific credibility through the shallow inferences they are able to make through these similarities...Man is making great strides through projects like ENCODE,,the time is indeed short for the alchemy of evolution! Whether evolutionists like them apples or not!!!!bornagain77
October 17, 2007
October
10
Oct
17
17
2007
07:50 PM
7
07
50
PM
PDT
bornagain77, It's nice to see that you are writing up the paper before the evidence is in. I think the correct answer is "It would be really cool if they could. Maybe then we could increase our knowledge of the situation and let the results lead us to a compatible theory"leo
October 17, 2007
October
10
Oct
17
17
2007
06:46 PM
6
06
46
PM
PDT
Nochange, I really don't know if they can extract the DNA of a complete Genome from ancient bone fragments,,,I think they seem to be limited to extracting mtDNA from ancient bone fossils. It would be really cool if they could, we could really prove a lot ID-wise if we could get our hands on that type of crushing evidence!!!bornagain77
October 17, 2007
October
10
Oct
17
17
2007
06:27 PM
6
06
27
PM
PDT
In the world today one nation stands head and shoulders above all others in economic and military acheivement. And guess what - it’s the nation with the most racial diversity in its population and individual equality codified into its laws. Never argue with success.
Bravo DaveScot, well said. If I could only add one thing, pertaining to the issue of ID and evolutionism, I would add that this country is also great because of the freedoms that we enjoy. Foremost amongst those freedoms is freedom of speech and the freedom to think as one wishes. The current Darwinista has tried to usurp this power by denying ID science advocates the right to have their say. They seek to deny us our freedoms and suppress scientific advancement. These actions could have dire consequences for this nation.professorsmith
October 17, 2007
October
10
Oct
17
17
2007
05:09 PM
5
05
09
PM
PDT
"The main point of the whole post was that the genome lost information!!!!" I wonder if we could look at the number of mutations, and compare them with old skeletons to get a genetic clock of when the fall took place (I think we can all agree the pre-Fall genome was perfect). Seems to me it would be more accurate than the back-of-the-napkin calculations used by backtracking all the begats in Genesis.Nochange
October 17, 2007
October
10
Oct
17
17
2007
04:46 PM
4
04
46
PM
PDT
Lotf; You are confusing black material with white light. White light has the inherent ability (information) to produce all the colors of its own accord, when it is properly separated, whereas a black material object has the inherent ability (information) to reflect all the colors of its own accord, when it is likewise properly separated . That is why it is proper to say a black material object has more inherent information for color than any other color material object! That is why I can draw a solid inference from the proven greater genetic diversity of Africans to their skin color also, both have been scientifically proven to have more information! Is this clear enough for you now?bornagain77
October 17, 2007
October
10
Oct
17
17
2007
04:21 PM
4
04
21
PM
PDT
"Ok help me out - where in the bible is Lot condemed for giving his virgin daughters’ to strangers so that they can rape them?" Do your own leg work. You should probably start by not again assuming the biblical text is a newspaper written to you yesterday. Your comment indicates that you are still doing this.Jason Rennie
October 17, 2007
October
10
Oct
17
17
2007
03:11 PM
3
03
11
PM
PDT
We cannot understand much of the history of late 19th and early 20th century anthropology, with its plethora of taxonomic names proposed for nearly every scrap of fossil bone, unless we appreciate its obsession with the identification and ranking of races. For many schemes of classification sought to tag the various fossils as ancestors of modern races and to use their relative age and apishness as a criterion for racial superiority. ~ Stephen Jay Gouldbevets
October 17, 2007
October
10
Oct
17
17
2007
02:15 PM
2
02
15
PM
PDT
@Jason Rennie Sure that takes some hard work and thinking, but that seems preferable to this knee jerk ignorance you display don’t you think ? Ok help me out - where in the bible is Lot condemed for giving his virgin daughters' to strangers so that they can rape them?lotf
October 17, 2007
October
10
Oct
17
17
2007
02:05 PM
2
02
05
PM
PDT
If you mix red, yellow, and blue paint !(the three primary colors for a material object) you will get the black color,,,Thus the all the information for color, when talking about a MATERIAL object is in the black color…Is this clear enough for you?” I finally understand what you mean, my apologies for the tardiness. But I don't agree. By saying all the information for colours are in black material objects implies that one can 'produce' all the colours from black. From a beam of white light and a prism one can produce all the colours, what is the equivalent for black material objects? If this can't be done how can you state that the 'information for color is in the black color'?lotf
October 17, 2007
October
10
Oct
17
17
2007
02:01 PM
2
02
01
PM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply