Re: Rushton, why?

David James Russell (djrussel@ARTSCI.WUSTL.EDU)
Mon, 31 Oct 1994 18:12:32 -0600

Well, I think that this sarcastic reply helps no one. This debate is
clearly void of any scientific merit or relevance and such whimsical
responses only make these esteemed scientists more mephatic in their
replies. I too joined this list for actual anthropological dialogue, not
psuedo-science that I thought Franz Boas had eliminated nearly a century
ago. If anything, this equally inane debate that we today see is
actually more worthy of anthropological study than IQ and brain size.
I think that one could actually do an interesting and much more
anthropological study in how and why Americans ever find something like
the "Bellcurve" interesting. I think that a real ethnographer could find
some facinating overlap of science, religion, kinship and all that other
nice stuff we are supposed to be studying as Anthropologists


On Sun, 30 Oct 1994, Luis Medina wrote:

> I think mr Rush is definetly right lets cut education for people of color
> and for any one with any degree of color in their ancestry.... Ancestry
> cards and Proof of citicenship should be prerequisites to obtain any
> Federal funded aid. Reform welfare to exclude Democrats too: there is a
> strong correlation between being a Democrat and being black.
> Exclude Baptist too (strong correlation with having a low IQ too)
> Lets all buy murray & rushton 's books and read such literary and
> scientific wonders. Make this literature a required topic in highschools and
> universities. And prey for a White God.
> OHHOPS, the only reason I suscribed to this list was to look for antro
> point of view of AIDS (better if it reffers to AIDS and art) any hint any
> body? yea yea I know its an old unimportant and now forgoten topic...