# Interesting podcast conversation between Sam Harris and Charles Murray (of "Bell Curve" fame) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 23, 2017, 9:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052 "2017-04-23T09:21:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 50
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/981 "2018-04-04T20:43:51Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > GIGO, please look into “fair use”. I post long quoteboxes myself, but I put significant effort into snipping everything I possibly can. AFAIK I did use less than half of the article. And much less on the early one. Are those hard to follow or do they need to be simplified for you? And of course, [duly noted that you can not reply to the articles or the post.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZwuTo7zKM8) ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/982 "2018-04-04T22:04:51Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Quite the contrary. Ockham’s Razor would actually favor the \*\*non-\*\*genetic explanation of measured racial differences in IQ test scores. Okay, so Ockham’s razor says what specifically about: —The persistence of the disparity across socioeconomic categories —The fact that Hispanics have partially caught up, but blacks have not —The U of Chicago/Harvard intervention that dramatically improved performance of Hispanic and white kids, but did zilch for black kids —The $200 million injection into Newark schools that provided better facilities and boosted graduation rates but did nothing for test scores ? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/983 "2018-04-04T22:19:36Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Okay, so Ockham’s razor says what specifically about […] Easy. If you’re just looking for the simplest explanation that makes the fewest assumptions, all of these phenomena can be explained as somehow caused by persistent societal racism. We know for sure that persistent societal racism exists, whereas we do not know whether any racial-group-specific genetic differences in intelligence exist. Therefore, the social-effect explanation is the simplest. Of course, I didn’t claim that that’s necessarily the **correct** explanation. But it’s definitely the one we end up with if we’re really using Ockham’s Razor. You, on the other hand, seem to be trying to justify confirmation bias by **calling** it Ockham’s Razor, which is not the same thing. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/984 "2018-04-04T22:49:04Z")
You went astray with “somehow”, and your “confirmation bias” accusation is pot/kettle-ish as all getout. FWIW, my Bayesian prior was just what you believe. My very smart parents strongly held that view, and the only black kid in my high school class was adopted by my parents’ white friends and became the valedictorian at a school that was in the top 5% in Minnesota, a state with notably good public schools. And if the UoC/Harvard or Newark interventions, or all the shakeups mandated by NCLB, had different results, I would still believe what you do. Given the actual evidence, I can only conclude that Sam was right in his latest podcast to say that people like you and Klein are “abandoning scientific parsimony for the sake of political correctness.” (Such a way with words, that guy.) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/985 "2018-04-04T22:50:50Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > You do understand that IQ scores are significantly higher among whites and Asians than among others Are you also comfortable with the figures that show that thin people have higher IQs than fat people? ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/986 "2018-04-04T23:01:46Z")
> [@Gary\_Kumquat](#): > > Are you also comfortable with the figures that show that thin people have higher IQs than fat people? Cite? Interesting if true. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/987 "2018-04-04T23:22:45Z")
BTW, why would there be any question as to whether I would be comfortable with it? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2018, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/988 "2018-04-04T23:29:14Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > You went astray with “somehow” Nope. If the criterion is merely “which explanation is the simplest based on the available evidence”, then the “systemic racism” hypothesis wins hands down. If the criterion is something like “which explanation **relying only on scientifically supported explanations of cause-effect mechanisms** instead of vague ‘somehow’ handwaving is the simplest”, then both the systemic-racism hypothesis and the genetics hypothesis fail. > [@SlackerInc](#): > > FWIW, my Bayesian prior was just what you believe. […] > > And if the UoC/Harvard or Newark interventions, or all the shakeups mandated by NCLB, had different results, I would still believe what you do. “Believe”? “Believe” has nothing to do with it. My fundamental point in this discussion is that the issue is not a matter of belief, and we shouldn’t be using belief of any kind as a substitute for evidence. Not even if we apply statistics technical terms to it to make it sound more smart and science-y. I personally do not know, and don’t particularly care, whether there really are any significant genetic differences in intelligence that somehow manifest along racial-group lines. The most important relevant point in the current state of our knowledge on this subject, which you seem resolutely determined to ignore, is that **there is no scientific evidence for such genetic differences occurring between racial groups**. No amount of selective interpretation of cherrypicked incidents and studies can substitute for consistent and robust scientific evidence. The truly scientifically parsimonious view of race and IQ score differences is that there currently exists no scientifically satisfactory theory explaining their relation. Scientific parsimony does not require us to pick any scientifically unsupported hypothesis to “believe” just because otherwise we’d have to put up with uncertainty. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/989 "2018-04-05T00:11:40Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > The truly scientifically parsimonious view of race and IQ score differences is that there currently exists no scientifically satisfactory theory explaining their relation. This is more reasonable than the vast majority of what I’ve seen in this thread, so I’ll take it. Do you agree that, framed this way, it is unfair to blame “failing schools” (teachers and administrators) and teacher unions for the differences? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/990 "2018-04-05T01:01:11Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Okay, so Ockham’s razor says what specifically about: > > —The persistence of the disparity across socioeconomic categories **Kimstu** ’s replies already dealt with that, and then: > [@SlackerInc](#): > > —The fact that Hispanics have partially caught up, but blacks have not \*\*The fact has been that scientific racists like Murray told us that that Hispanic advance was not going to happen. \*\* > **[Heritage Scholar's Take on Immigrants' IQs Not Too Ridiculous for Charles Murray](https://newrepublic.com/article/113174/charles-murray-defends-heritage-scholars-take-immigrants-iqs)** > > Earlier this week, the Heritage Foundation released a new report, “The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer,” that confounded nearly everyone who read it. Using some preposterous methodology, its two authors, Jason... > [@](#): > > Trying to comprehend how Richwine and Rector could have reached such a conclusion, Wonkblog’s Dylan Matthews found a clue in the dissertation Richwine wrote for his 2009 Harvard Ph.D. in public policy. “Richwine’s dissertation asserts that there are deep-set differentials in intelligence between races,” Matthews explained. > > … > > [Richwine] > > "No one knows whether Hispanics will ever reach IQ parity with whites, but the prediction that new Hispanic immigrants will have low-IQ children and grandchildren is difficult to argue against.’” Since that discovery, Yahoo’s Chris Moody found that Richwine has also written for [AlternativeRight.com](http://AlternativeRight.com), considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. > > … > > Murray, of course, coauthored The Bell Curve—an infamous defense of the old notion that there are inherited, racial differences in human IQ (that this magazine excerpted in the early '90s). It turns out that Richwine held a one-year fellowship with the AEI while he was writing his dissertation and sought Murray’s input before he presented it to a committee. > > Reached by phone today, Murray remembered his impressions. “Jason’s dissertation was, I think, a careful presentation of the data on the subject. > [@SlackerInc](#): > > —The U of Chicago/Harvard intervention that dramatically improved performance of Hispanic and white kids, but did zilch for black kids Already replied to, (and it also made a mockery of Murray and others regarding the Hispanics) nowhere did you told us that the Chicago intervention did what the other intervention I quoted from Florida did. > [@SlackerInc](#): > > —The $200 million injection into Newark schools that provided better facilities and boosted graduation rates but did nothing for test scores Already replied to, ‘Ockham’ told you first that besides you being inadvertently in favor of corruption in schools (the Newark intervention came originally because of corruption in those schools) the intervention there once again did not help the parents or the households directly too. Since Murray and others are wrong about the Hispanics, why should the assumption is that they are still right about Black students when in reality a lot of interventions are not adequate for that community? ---
**Author:** ![Surreal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eada6e/32.png) [@Surreal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Surreal)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/991 "2018-04-05T01:30:42Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Cite? Interesting if true. He could be referring to this this study: [https://www.nature.com/articles/0803279](https://www.nature.com/articles/0803279) > [@](#): > > Results: > In unadjusted analyses, lower childhood IQ scores were associated with an increased prevalence of adult obesity at age 42 years. This relation was somewhat stronger in women (ORper SD decrease in IQ score [95% CI]: 1.38 [1.26, 1.50]) than men (1.26 [1.15, 1.38]). This association remains statistically significant after adjusting for childhood characteristics, including socio-economic factors, but was heavily attenuated following control for adult characteristics, particularly education (women: 1.11 [0.99, 1.25]; men: 1.10 [0.98, 1.23]). When weight gain between age 16 and 42 years was the outcome of interest, structural equation modelling revealed that education and dietary characteristics in adult life mediated the association with childhood IQ. > > Conclusions: > **A lower IQ score in childhood is associated with obesity and weight gain in adulthood.** In the present study, this relation appears to be largely mediated via educational attainment and the adoption of healthy diets in later life. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/992 "2018-04-05T01:54:14Z")
Could be. Makes sense. Not sure what point they were trying to make, though. GIGO: I’m sorry, but I just can’t understand you. La la la! [Vancome Lady Makeup Counter - YouTube](https://youtu.be/oVEftcbAUUc) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/993 "2018-04-05T01:59:13Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > The most important relevant point in the current state of our knowledge on this subject, which you seem resolutely determined to ignore, is that **there is no scientific evidence for such genetic differences occurring between racial groups**. This overstates the case, I think. The view that black-white differences in IQ are strongly influenced by genetics is a plausible, though unproven, theory that has many supporters in the field of cognitive research. Obviously these researchers are basing their views on scientific evidence. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/994 "2018-04-05T02:33:09Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Could be. Makes sense. > > Not sure what point they were trying to make, though. > > GIGO: I’m sorry, but I just can’t understand you. La la la! [https://youtu.be/oVEftcbAUUc](https://youtu.be/oVEftcbAUUc) Well, I have to apologise for thinking I did not need to tell you that in a 4th grade level. It is also telling that on 3 different posts you are telling us that the points made by the cites I made are also impossible to follow. (So, clearly it is not my fault, you have a gross problem dealing with cites and the reality that those who you are following are racists) So, very simply: Murray, like other scientific racists, thought that Hispanics would never improve their IQ, that was poppycock. And “scientists” that fail in such spectacular manner should not be respected at all. And thank you for finding the evidence. The intervention by the millionaire in Florida is evidence that most interventions you cited did not help black kids in the proper way because that millionaire clearly did. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/995 "2018-04-05T03:01:16Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > The view that black-white differences in IQ are strongly influenced by genetics is a plausible, though unproven, theory that has many supporters in the field of cognitive research. Such as? I think there’s been much too much conflation here of “evidence that could be consistent with a genetic basis for racial-group IQ test score differences” with “evidence that actually **indicates** a genetic basis for racial-group IQ test score differences”. Before I can tell whether any given researcher(s) are in fact asserting the existence of the latter rather than the former, I’d need you to cite the specific claims they are making. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/996 "2018-04-05T03:07:57Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Do you agree that, framed this way, it is unfair to blame “failing schools” (teachers and administrators) and teacher unions for the differences? As I said, I haven’t been following the discussion on school policy choices so I don’t have an existing opinion about claims of “failing schools”. And I’m afraid your track record in the part of the discussion I **have** been following does not inspire _a priori_ complete confidence in the accuracy of your description. But if you point me to a specific instance of what you consider “unfair blame” being assigned in this regard, I’ll check it out and see whether I agree with you. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/997 "2018-04-05T04:05:14Z")
> [@Gary\_Kumquat](#): > > Are you also comfortable with the figures that show that thin people have higher IQs than fat people? It’s not at all surprising that the two disparate groups have some difference in IQ distribution. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/998 "2018-04-05T07:26:30Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Such as? I think there’s been much too much conflation here of “evidence that could be consistent with a genetic basis for racial-group IQ test score differences” with “evidence that actually **indicates** a genetic basis for racial-group IQ test score differences”. Before I can tell whether any given researcher(s) are in fact asserting the existence of the latter rather than the former, I’d need you to cite the specific claims they are making. You’re trying to take us down into the weeds, but I want us to stay a little bit higher up. Experts, including the editor of the journal Intelligence and the attendees canvassed at an ISIR conference ([Genetics, genetic groups, intelligence, expertise, by James Thompson - The Unz Review](http://www.unz.com/jthompson/genetics-genetic-groups-intelligence/)), are willing to endorse more generally the prospects for race-based IQ differentials being genetically based to a substantial degree. If you think this is bogus, then you are essentially declaring an entire class of scientists to be illegitimate. How is that different from a climate change denier who insists that all the climatologists at the IPCC are charlatans? Even the scientists who most harshly criticized Harris and Murray in Vox come across to me as not likely to endorse most of the rhetoric we’ve seen in this thread. Not only did they acknowledge that there are many legitimate researchers in the field whose views are closer to Murray’s than theirs, there’s this interesting paragraph in a followup, also in Vox: > **[There’s still no good reason to believe black-white IQ differences are due to...](https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/6/15/15797120/race-black-white-iq-response-critics)** > > Our response to criticisms. > [@](#): > > I suspect that Khan’s reflexive criticism comes from a place of exasperation with the idea, still in circulation among some social scientists, that race is “just” a social construct or that the racial categories used in the US today are entirely meaningless. I am sympathetic to this objection to pure social constructivism, and we said in our post that lay notions of race are not wrong or useless. Self-reported racial categories, coarse as they are, also generally reflect underlying differences in genetic ancestry. For instance, in a 2015 paper by Neil Risch et al., which Khan cites extensively, more than 99 percent of people who reported being African American had some proportion of African ancestry. > > But even this close correspondence between African ancestry, as measured from DNA, and self-reported race does not undermine our claim — race is not the same as ancestry. For one, there can be a range of ancestral backgrounds within any one self-identified racial group. If someone has any African ancestry, you can probably tell with a reasonable degree of confidence that he or she will identify as black, but the reverse is harder: If you know someone is black, you do not know what percentage African versus European versus American ancestry he or she has. > > Ancestry also allows for more continuous and granular distinctions than our relatively crude categories of race. The ancestry components that geneticists are most commonly including in their analyses are making fine-grained distinctions between people who would all be lumped together as “white” in the US today. > > Finally, we ignore some ancestral differences and focus on others when we categorize people into races. As a historical example, consider Carl Brigham’s 1923 book, A Study of American Intelligence. In a section titled “The Race Hypothesis,” Brigham attempts to classify people from different European countries in terms of their “Nordic,” “Alpine,” and “Mediterranean” blood: The Italians are estimated to be 70 percent Mediterranean; the English as 80 percent Nordic. > > The effort to divide Europe’s inhabitants by “blood” is crude, but in one respect, Brigham wasn’t wrong — with modern technology, you could certainly differentiate a person with English ancestry from a person with Italian ancestry. But sometime in the past century, we stopped conceptualizing the differences between the English and the Italians in terms of race. We elevate to the status of “race” the distinctions that are our current political and cultural preoccupations, while eliding others. > > Ironically, the genetic differences between racial groups are a big part of why it’s methodologically difficult to resolve the persistent questions about the origins of group differences to anyone’s satisfaction. Populations and sub-populations don’t just differ in the frequency of certain genetic variants; they also differ in which variants are present at all, and in the pattern of correlations between genetic variants. > > Currently, everything we know about the specific genetic variants associated with intelligence has been discovered in people of European ancestry, but because of these genetic differences between populations, applying genetic discoveries gleaned from one population to understand another turns out to be very difficult. I can’t help but read this as, essentially, “okay, if you really press me on it I would probably have to admit genetically based IQ differences between people based on ethnic ancestry, but the way we are dividing up ‘races’ is far too broad, crude, and based on ‘our current political and cultural preoccupations’.” I’m completely open to that idea, that it comes down to better defining who counts as part of which group, maybe using genetic testing rather than self-identification. But I had not gotten the sense that you or almost anyone here is okay with that approach, or willing to entertain the possibility of ethnic variation in average IQ. > [@Kimstu](#): > > As I said, I haven’t been following the discussion on school policy choices so I don’t have an existing opinion about claims of “failing schools”. And I’m afraid your track record in the part of the discussion I **have** been following does not inspire _a priori_ complete confidence in the accuracy of your description. But if you point me to a specific instance of what you consider “unfair blame” being assigned in this regard, I’ll check it out and see whether I agree with you. I guess you haven’t seen the influential documentary “Waiting for Superman”? What about, for starters, the Mother Jones piece I linked to and excerpted not long ago in this thread? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/999 "2018-04-05T12:25:26Z")
Opinions can be bogus as the example of the scientists that fell for paranormal powers showed. And I have plenty of experience on the abuse of surveys from climate change deniers to say that the survey cited is incomplete, for starters. Seeing the spectacular failure from the scientific racists regarding the Hispanics, anyone that claims that most researhers should agree more with Murray is the one peddling nonsence. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2018, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052/1000 "2018-04-05T13:36:44Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > …this interesting paragraph in a followup, also in Vox… That was seven paragraphs, Sparky. What happened to your high horse about “fair use?” It seems a bit inconsistent. Unless… unless you were only bringing it up earlier as a way to attack **GIGO**. But there’s no way that could possibly be the case. Right? Because that would mean you’re a straight-up assho– Ohhhh, never mind. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052.md?page=49) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-podcast-conversation-between-sam-harris-and-charles-murray-of-bell-curve-fame/785052.md?page=51)