Unlike Saini, Carl is a scientists who publishes science, while Saini is a journalist who published pseudoscientific drivel designed to push her agenda, which she blatantly admits in her Nature piece above.
Real scientists like Carl, or, say, David Reich, recognize her garbage for what it is. She interviews him for her book, and is shocked to learn that the super star Harvard geneticist doesn’t share her absurd positions on biological origins of race, or lack thereof. Saini belongs to a group which in turn Reich calls out in his book for obfuscating, rather than illuminating the issue of the biological origin of correlations between ancestry and phenotypic traits different than the melanin levels.
The best example is how Saini in her book completely uncritically and unironically uses Lewontin’s 1972 argument that there can be no significant differences between populations, because majority of variance is within group and not between groups. Bringing this up and not even discussing obvious counterarguments shows that it’s not science that’s being done, but rather agenda pushing. This is of course par for the course, as Lewontin himself was also quite open about the fact that for him, science is only a tool to push his view on how society should be run, and if science disagrees, so much worse for science.
Real scientists like Carl, or, say, David Reich, recognize her garbage for what it is. She interviews him for her book, and is shocked to learn that the super star Harvard geneticist doesn’t share her absurd positions on biological origins of race, or lack thereof. Saini belongs to a group which in turn Reich calls out in his book for obfuscating, rather than illuminating the issue of the biological origin of correlations between ancestry and phenotypic traits different than the melanin levels.
The best example is how Saini in her book completely uncritically and unironically uses Lewontin’s 1972 argument that there can be no significant differences between populations, because majority of variance is within group and not between groups. Bringing this up and not even discussing obvious counterarguments shows that it’s not science that’s being done, but rather agenda pushing. This is of course par for the course, as Lewontin himself was also quite open about the fact that for him, science is only a tool to push his view on how society should be run, and if science disagrees, so much worse for science.