you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Fourth_stage 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Lynns findings were replicated by Becker though and i dont really see a problem with pioneer fund.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Sorry for the long response, I just got back to responding to the other guy.

The problem with the pioneer fund is the organization is lead by Eugenics, Segregationists, and National Socialist sympathizers. Unfortunately, politics and science is something that should not exist. And having far-right biases like that ruins any sense of neutrality that exists in their research. I say the same about research that comes out of Blacklivesmatter groups, or Communists or Democrats. We need data that has been peer reviewed outside of an echo chamber. Otherwise, we'll never get the whole story.

By the way, can I get a background on who this Becker person is? When searching for him, his name popped up in an article that funnily enough, was criticizing inaccurate European datasets.

https://globalvoices.org/2019/07/12/pseudoscientific-racial-theories-by-discredited-british-psychologist-keep-going-viral-in-the-balkans/

[–]Fourth_stage 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you for the reply

The problem is not many want to fund research on controversial topics, that why pioneer fund was useful and helped to expand knowledge on human biodiversity https://vdare.com/articles/pioneer-fundophobia

By the way, can I get a background on who this Becker person is?

Here is his world IQ project https://www.researchgate.net/project/Worlds-IQ