At 04:03 PM 7/16/2007, Professor David Gordon wrote:
>So what Martin seems to mean by his comment
>
>'Why not defer to the experts?'
>
>is why not misrepresent their work to conform to his prejudices!
>
>Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi and Piazza (1994) did not identify 10
>different races - that is their clear conclusion and their 'expert' opinion.
>
>Martin calls this 'Political Correctness' I call this 'science' - it
>seems that 'Political Correctness' covers all scientific results
>that right wing bigots do not like! I guess that means I will now
>do-well according to Martin?
It all depends what you mean by race. The race-deniers tend to use an
outmoded notion of race as a straw man to exclude the possibility
that genetically differentiated populations even exist. If you use
race to denote 'fuzzy sets' of alleles that associate with one
another in populations then you are using it in a sense that has
currency in biomedical research---and you can always find lots of
studies in Medline using the term race in this sense for legitimate
epidemiological purposes, unless they've banned it since the last
time I checked. And this kind of valid definition of race is
sometimes circumlocuted euphemistically for PC reasons.
David Klein
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|