How accurrate is this site on "race"?
I know this is a personal website, and not a reliable “peer reviewed” product. It does seem to be researched and use valid sources - for the most part. It basically refutes both racial extremism (White/Nordic supremacy, Afrocentrism) as political correctness. It also seeks to clear up some common misconceptions about who is “white” or “non-white”.

I know “Race” debates are old hat here, but I was wondering how well or how poorly the information in this site stacks up. Is it accurate or does it contain errors or fallacies. If nothing else, I think it provides fodder for some interesting debate. To a lay person it may make perfect sense, but perhaps it is not all that sound.

Here are some specific items that I found strinking.

(Sociologist and anthropologist Robert Stuckert examined census and fertility data to estimate how many blacks in America had passed as white, and how many whites had African ancestry as a result. His statistical tables showed that during the 1940s, 15,550 light-skinned blacks per year crossed over to live as whites, for a total of about 155,500 for the decade. Based on these figures, he determined that by 1950, some 21% of whites (about 28 million people then) had black ancestry within the last four generations, and he predicted that this number would only grow in the decades to come: Robert Stuckert, Ohio Journal of Science, 1958.)

from the section “White Americans”…I have never seen this study before, and would be interested to see if anything more recent (in the age of DNA swabs) backs this up.

An even more unusual claim, in my opinion, is this one from the section “Britons”.

(An interesting feature of Celtic languages is that in several characteristics they resemble some non-Indo-European languages. These characteristics include the absence of a present participle and the use instead of a verbal noun (found also in Egyptian and Berber), the frequent expression of agency by means of an impersonal passive construction instead of by a verbal subject in the nominative case (as in Egyptian, Berber, Basque, and some Caucasian and Eskimo languages), and the positioning of the verb at the beginning of a sentence (typical of Egyptian and Berber: The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition)

It goes on to feature phrases that appear to contain cognates in Gaelic and Hebrew. Since I know neither language I have no idea what to make of this. As Gaelic is Celtic/Indo-European and Hebrew is Semitic/Afro-Asiatic, I assume any resemblance between the two - apart from modern borrowings from a common source, would be pure coincidence.

Anyway, what do others think of this site?

Being a professional, this board is only helpful on such issues as your example if publications/studies etc are cited.(As you did) Otherwise, it is mostly unsupported, but mostly intelligent, informed, opinions that I find here.