Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Calendar
Monthly
Weekly
Agenda
Archive
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support Hardline Crawlers :
Forums
Rock Crawling Forums
General Discussion
Forgot to tell this story from when I was last at HPO
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ridered3" data-source="post: 322379" data-attributes="member: 1371"><p>Stanford doctorate professor and Nobel Prize winner</p><p></p><p>Snipit from here. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0213.html" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0213.html</a></p><p><span style="color: red">He preached a philosophy of ''retrogressive evolution.'' Stipulating that intelligence was genetically transmitted, he deemed blacks genetically inferior to whites and unable to achieve their intellectual level. As a corollary, he suggested that blacks were reproducing faster than whites - hence, the retrogression in human evolution. He drew further scorn when he proposed financial rewards for the ''genetically disadvantaged'' if they volunteered for sterilization. </span></p><p></p><p>From here <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B._Shockley#Statements_about_populations_and_genetics" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B._Shockley#Statements_about_populations_and_genetics</a></p><p>Statements about populations and genetics</p><p>Late in his life, Shockley became intensely interested in questions of race, intelligence, and eugenics. He thought this work was important to the genetic future of the human species, and came to describe it as the most important work of his career, even though expressing such politically unpopular views risked damaging his reputation. When asked why he seemed to take positions associated with both the political right and left, Shockley explained that his goal was "the application of scientific ingenuity to the solution of human problems."[28]</p><p></p><p><span style="color: red">Shockley argued that the higher rate of reproduction among the less intelligent was having a dysgenic effect, and that a drop in average intelligence would ultimately lead to a decline in civilization.[29] Shockley advocated that the scientific community should seriously investigate questions of heredity, intelligence, and demographic trends, and suggest policy changes if he was proven right.[30]</span></p><p></p><p><span style="color: red">Although Shockley was concerned about dysgenic effects among both blacks and whites, he perceived the situation among blacks as more problematic. According to 1970 US Census, unskilled and skilled whites had on average 3.7 and 2.3 children, respectively, whereas the corresponding numbers for blacks were 5.4 and 1.9.[31]</span></p><p></p><p>He donated sperm to the Repository for Germinal Choice, a sperm bank founded by Robert Klark Graham in hopes of spreading humanity's best genes. The bank, called by the media the "Nobel Prize sperm bank," claimed to have three Nobel Prize-winning donors, though Shockley was the only one to publicly acknowledge his donation to the sperm bank. However, Shockley's controversial views brought the Repository for Germinal Choice a degree of notoriety and may have discouraged other Nobel Prize winners from donating sperm.[32]</p><p></p><p>In 1981 he filed a libel suit against the Atlanta Constitution after a reporter called him a "Hitlerite" and compared his racial views to those of the Nazis. Shockley won the suit but received only $1 in damages. Shockley's biographer sums this up as saying that the statement was defamatory, but Shockley's reputation was not worth much by the time the trial reached a verdict.[35]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ridered3, post: 322379, member: 1371"] Stanford doctorate professor and Nobel Prize winner Snipit from here. [url=http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0213.html]http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0213.html[/url] [color=red]He preached a philosophy of ''retrogressive evolution.'' Stipulating that intelligence was genetically transmitted, he deemed blacks genetically inferior to whites and unable to achieve their intellectual level. As a corollary, he suggested that blacks were reproducing faster than whites - hence, the retrogression in human evolution. He drew further scorn when he proposed financial rewards for the ''genetically disadvantaged'' if they volunteered for sterilization. [/color] From here [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B._Shockley#Statements_about_populations_and_genetics]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B._Shockley#Statements_about_populations_and_genetics[/url] Statements about populations and genetics Late in his life, Shockley became intensely interested in questions of race, intelligence, and eugenics. He thought this work was important to the genetic future of the human species, and came to describe it as the most important work of his career, even though expressing such politically unpopular views risked damaging his reputation. When asked why he seemed to take positions associated with both the political right and left, Shockley explained that his goal was "the application of scientific ingenuity to the solution of human problems."[28] [color=red]Shockley argued that the higher rate of reproduction among the less intelligent was having a dysgenic effect, and that a drop in average intelligence would ultimately lead to a decline in civilization.[29] Shockley advocated that the scientific community should seriously investigate questions of heredity, intelligence, and demographic trends, and suggest policy changes if he was proven right.[30][/color] [color=red]Although Shockley was concerned about dysgenic effects among both blacks and whites, he perceived the situation among blacks as more problematic. According to 1970 US Census, unskilled and skilled whites had on average 3.7 and 2.3 children, respectively, whereas the corresponding numbers for blacks were 5.4 and 1.9.[31][/color] He donated sperm to the Repository for Germinal Choice, a sperm bank founded by Robert Klark Graham in hopes of spreading humanity's best genes. The bank, called by the media the "Nobel Prize sperm bank," claimed to have three Nobel Prize-winning donors, though Shockley was the only one to publicly acknowledge his donation to the sperm bank. However, Shockley's controversial views brought the Repository for Germinal Choice a degree of notoriety and may have discouraged other Nobel Prize winners from donating sperm.[32] In 1981 he filed a libel suit against the Atlanta Constitution after a reporter called him a "Hitlerite" and compared his racial views to those of the Nazis. Shockley won the suit but received only $1 in damages. Shockley's biographer sums this up as saying that the statement was defamatory, but Shockley's reputation was not worth much by the time the trial reached a verdict.[35] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Latest posts
B
For Sale
Artec Back-bone truss for 14 bolt
Latest: Bebop
Yesterday at 7:19 PM
Off Road 4x4 Parts For Sale
P
YouTube of the day
Latest: paradisepwoffrd
Monday at 8:21 AM
General Discussion
Cash LeCroy Illness
Latest: ridered3
Sunday at 2:58 PM
General Discussion
For Sale
Jeep TJ tube buggy for sale $32,000.00
Latest: ridered3
Saturday at 3:52 PM
Vehicles For Sale
Official "Post your trail riding pics" Thread
Latest: Piros 1
Saturday at 2:27 PM
General Discussion
Forums
Rock Crawling Forums
General Discussion
Forgot to tell this story from when I was last at HPO
Top