Darwinism News

Negative reviews of Nicholas Wade’s Troublesome Inheritance

Spread the love

Conveniently compiled by Greg Laden at ScienceBlogs, here, to balance all the positive ones at Occam’s Razor.

Readers will recall that some of us are still trying to figure out just what happened. For now, the picture appears to be: Nicholas Wade, once he was safely retired from progressive media, decided to pursue the racial implications of Darwinian evolution mechanisms seriously.

It’s not clear whether anyone realized at first what he was doing. For one thing, you’d have to start by accepting that Darwinism has racial implications. That the human race could be separating.

That’s probably the source of some confusion.

So a bunch of followers praised Wade’s book. Then it all stopped.

Some critics didn’t even deal fairly with his thesis.

In other news, birds fly.

Anyway, if you need a con bibliography, this is it for now.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

5 Replies to “Negative reviews of Nicholas Wade’s Troublesome Inheritance

  1. 1
    jerry says:

    Wade said nothing in his book that contradicts ID. It is mostly a book on speculation about differences between groups of humans. No one denies there are differences between groups of humans. These differences also shows up genetically by area of the world. The question is do these differences make an important difference in any respect.

    Why are their different skin colors, eye colors, hair types, facial features etc? Is it because of Darwinian processes? Probably some is due to selection. So Wade argues Darwinian processes may cause other differences which we cannot see but are behavioral. Seems reasonable. Nothing to get upset over.

    The question is what may be other differences that have been influenced by environmental factors? There are probably some but how many? It will continue to be researched no matter who wrings their hands in opposition.

  2. 2
  3. 3
    News says:

    jerry at 1: “So Wade argues Darwinian processes may cause other differences which we cannot see but are behavioral. Seems reasonable. Nothing to get upset over.” Unless they are argued as reasons for differences in behaviour in which social or legal institutions have an interest.

    Cat. Pigeons.

    We didn’t start it. Just watching.

  4. 4
    jerry says:

    Denyse,

    He does argue that in places and I am sure the reviews cover them. The one that could be controversial is that a gene associated with aggression is much more common within some Africans than with other groups. It was I believe still small, about 5% in some African groups but negligible in others.

    As the book goes on it gets less specific and as I said very speculative. He starts placing emphasis on government/society shaping genomes in the future by who gets favored today. Those who were successful in the Han system would produce more offspring and thus shape the overall group allele distribution. He emphasizes that in the past it was the successful who spread their genes about with wives and servant girls. Obviously not true today as rich have less children.

    Nothing to get upset over. That does not say future research might find something that will make people uneasy. Thomas Sowell has speculated that the reason African is behind other areas of the world is the lack of trading routes due to few navigable rivers and natural ports. Trading leads to a different type of societal structure which might affect allele distribution. Africa does not have as many mountain ranges as the other continents and it’s river systems are not as extensive as Europe and Asia.

  5. 5
    Ragnar says:

    Well once people start to take racism like “Oh, it’s not that bad” (fools) because of Darwinism this world will SINK

Leave a Reply