It really is so very bothersome that there is smearing and name-calling in conversations between anti- and hereditarians. By all means let’s condemn those who call the others “lying idiots” who are “deranged.” *thumbs up* 
https://twitter.com/phl43/status/1314898868912484352
I can't always seem to find the patience that others have. I'm often sorry about that. I edited my response to this thread in an effort to be a little nicer. You can still see how shaky the defence is of what emerge as noticeable implications from #NathanCofnas' published work.
Someone asked me, in response to my mini-thread above, why I would object to keeping "equally smart" kids out of the same class. He also suggested that Phillippe's defence is not elaborate, but a plain reading of #NathanCofnas's paper. I think the opposite is true. My response:
You presume we have an agreement on "equally smart." Nathan presumes IQ is an established measure of it.
I don't agree with that.
To make it worse: Nathan is concerned particularly with IQ differences between racial groups (the point of his paper).
Mine is an obvious reading.
I don't agree with that.
To make it worse: Nathan is concerned particularly with IQ differences between racial groups (the point of his paper).
Mine is an obvious reading.
John is correct, of course: in his paper with Andrew Winston, they speak of a "two-tiered educational system." It was #NathanCofnas himself who brought up segregation when, wrongly, he wanted to claim that he was being misquoted and defamed.
https://twitter.com/jpjjr1961/status/1315387306077978624?s=20
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
