To think 'academic freedom' and whistleblower punishment are misused in those protesting the suspension of Nathan Cofnas

I'd say if they're going on pub-whatever and legitimately criticising his shitty academic arguments then they can absolutely crack on.

Why would you do that?
Until now did you care about his work?
If so do you care about the quality of other academics work? There are planty out there that is questionable.
Or is this some sort of revenge and wanting to start some sort of witch hunt?
What is your ultimate goal?

I encourage anyone able to do so from a position of fairness, to undertake a review of any of Cofnas's work and place any comments on pubpeer or otherwise publish them. I have looked at work of his that is not to do with his controversial race ideas, and find it of questionable quality as scholarship.

I’ve reported your hate speech @HollyhocksandPeons
Vile person.

Awful. I was just scrolling through the comments to see if anyone else had already flagged up that highly offensive remark.

So according to you, autistic people are not ‘right in the head’? How nasty, untrue and offensive. Is this how you describe autistic people in your everyday life, or are you just trying to pluck slurs out of the air because you don’t like this guy?

That does seem to have been a bit of a balls-up. Don’t universities have HR departments?

Yes. Possibly even more so.

And other high profile positions outside of sports and entertainment!

Yes, you're right. And it's arguable that some of those aspects of intelligence that IQ doesn't capture are significant aspects of fitness for ac academia.

IQ is a measure of something. What actually counts as intelligence is up for grabs though.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/its-rigged-the-dirty-secret-behind-what-iq-scores-really-measure/ar-AA2baw3x

"“Intelligence is a very complex thing. It’s difficult to define and difficult to measure,” says Dr Rebecca Sear, a psychology professor and anthropologist at Brunel University of London.
Fundamentally, intelligence describes how well we can adapt and thrive in our environment. That’s something that is influenced by lots of different cognitive skills, many of which aren’t captured by IQ.
For example, interpersonal skills, creativity, empathy and common sense all play a role in how well we adapt to the world around us."

IQ is a measure of intelligence. A better question would be why it should be the sole measure of fitness for academia. My suspicion is racism. But that he dresses it up as meritocracy too give plausible deniability.

But then he explicitly defines meritocracy in a way that causes black people to disappear.

Why is he obsessed with IQ as a supposed measure of intelligence? Why did he take discrimination based on US high school record and call that meritocracy?

You can't do that and then say 'oh, have I made black people disappear? Oh dear, how did that happen?'. I mean, he deliberately made it happen with handwaving and poor logic and then called it the truth.

But he didn't say he wants black people out per se; he said that he wants to end EDI, to bring back meritocracy. And that the disappearance of black people will be an inevitable consequence (rather than aim) of that. That inevitability follows from his assumption/cherry-picking of evidence that racial differences in IQ are genetic (because if they're environmental then a true meritocracy would require a leveling of the playing field). He's always said and meant that. Ghent always knew it. They explicitly said they tolerated it as part of academic freedom (because it's important that people be allowed to posit unpopular hypotheses), until Arday's suicide bought them too much public heat - they're a business with customers, after all.

I know. His entire hereditarian revolution blog made me feel extremely queasy and grubby when reading it. He goes on to lament about how the only people who agree with him tend to be white supremacists and neo Nazis.

I'm a bit surprised that Ghent university hired someone who explicitly said that they were launching a campaign to get black people out of prominent positions in an anti-woke revolution and then suspended him when they found out he meant it.

That's why he made it and keeps coming back to it. Because people are impressed by a statistic that they can't refute and think that means that the rest of his argument is also solid, when it's actually a pile of crap.

Wtaf that is completely obscene. I am speechless.

Then people are looking in the wrong place. His argument that white people do better than black people in academic attainment in the US is incontrovertible! They'd be better focusing on his arguments that genetics explain racial IQ differences, which is poor science and clearly part of a dodgy agenda.

"But “culture” is not the reason why we see the same basic pattern of racial disparities among population-representative groups of sub-Saharan Africans, Europeans, and East Asians wherever they go all over the world. Furthermore, culture generally reflects the average characteristics of the community that generates it. A culture of doing homework is more likely to arise in a mean IQ 105 population that is genetically adapted to the arduous demands of the rice paddy than it is in a mean IQ 85 population that is adapted to hunting and gathering on the savanna"

https://ncofnas.com/p/a-guide-for-the-hereditarian-revolution

I think one of the problems with Cofnas is that he Gish Gallops. Puts out so much shit that it takes far too much energy to refute it all, and his claims are far easier to make than they are to refute so he has a real head start.

his confident claims about black people not doing homework because they are hunter gathers rather than paddy field workers

😱😱. did he say that? I cannot understand how any university thought it was a good idea to give this utter ignoramus a job,