Classic Essays

Race Realism Quotes


Science is on our side.

DR. FRANCIS CRICK (pictured), Nobel Prize winner and co-discoverer of DNA:

“We need to get rid of our liberal preconceptions. Men are not born equal, this is something which has not yet got through to the politicians, and it is by no means clear that all races are equally gifted.”

Forensic anthropologist George W. Gill, in 2000:

“The idea that race is ‘only skin deep’ is simply not true.”
Neil Risch, Professor in Human Genetics and Director of the Center for Human Genetics at the University of California, San Francisco, in 2005:
“if you expect absolute precision in any of these definitions, you can undermine any definitional system. Any category you come up with is going to be imperfect, but that doesn’t preclude you from using it or the fact that it has utility. We talk about the prejudicial aspect of this. If you demand that kind of accuracy, then one could make the same arguments about sex and age! You’ll like this. In a recent study, when we looked at the correlation between genetic structure [based on microsatellite markers] versus self-description, we found 99.9% concordance between the two. We actually had a higher discordance rate between self-reported sex and markers on the X chromosome! So you could argue that sex is also a problematic category. And there are differences between sex and gender; self-identification may not be correlated with biology perfectly. And there is sexism. And you can talk about age the same way. A person’s chronological age does not correspond perfectly with his biological age for a variety of reasons, both inherited and non-inherited. Perhaps just using someone’s actual birth year is not a very good way of measuring age. Does that mean we should throw it out? No. Also, there is ageism—prejudice related to age in our society. A lot of these arguments, which have a political or social aspect to them, can be made about all categories, not just the race/ethnicity one.”
“Caucasoids and Mongoloids who live in their homelands and in recently colonized regions, such as North America, did not rise to their present population levels and positions of cultural dominance by accident. They achieved all this because their ancestors occupied the most favorable of the earth’s zoological regions, in which other kinds of animals also attained dominance during the Pleistocene. These regions had challenging climates and ample breeding grounds and were centrally located within continental land masses. There general adaptation was more important than special adaptation. Any other subspecies that had evolved in these regions would probably have been just as successful.”
Professor R. Ruggles Gates, M.A., Ph.D., D.Sc., together with Professor Wesley C. George, M.A., Ph.D., and Professor Henry E. Garrett, Ph.D., D.Sc., wrote in conjunction that:
“We do not believe that there is anything to be drawn from the sciences in which we work which supports the view that all races are equal or alike, or likely to be equal or alike in anything approaching the foreseeable future. We believe, on the contrary, that there are vast differences and vast areas of difference within mankind, not only in the physical appearance, but in such matters as adaptability to varying environments and in deep psychological and emotional qualities as well as mental abilities and capacity for development. We are of the opinion that in ignoring these differences and depth of difference modern man and his political representatives are likely to find themselves in serious difficulties sooner or later.”
Louis Leakey in The Progress And Evolution Of Man In Africa (Oxford University Press, 1961):
“As a social anthropologist, I naturally accept and even stress the fact that there are major differences, both mental and psychological, which separate the different races of mankind. Indeed, I would be inclined to suggest that however great may be the physical differences between such races as the European and the Negro, the mental and psychological differences are greater still.”
Hans Eysenck, Professor of Psychology at London University in 1971:
“All the evidence to date suggests the strong and indeed overwhelming importance of genetic factors in producing the great variety of intellectual differences which we observe in our culture, and much of the differences observed between racial groups.”
Richard Dawkins in The Ancestor’s Tale (2004):
“However small the racial partition of the total variation may be, if such racial characteristics as there are are highly correlated with other racial characteristics, they are by definition informative, and therefore of taxonomic significance.”
“So clearly differentiated are the types of mankind that, were an anthropologist presented with a crowd of men drawn from the Australoid, the Negroid, East Asian or Caucasoid types, he could separate the one human element from the other without hesitation or mistake.”
* * *
Previous post

Oy Vey, What a Country!

Next post

Right and Wrong: "Diversity" Destroys Morality

Notify of
Inline Feedback
View all comments