Publishing a study that concludes that, because of this, black people are innately less intelligent than others (and not, for example, that environmental or social factors are to account), would be controversial.
That's how science should operate. The comment I was responding to seemed to indicate such statements were problematic, even without attributing the cause to innate biology.
"Women can't do science" and "bell curve arguments about some races being less intellectually capable than others" are both causal arguments. "The SAT exhibits racial bias" is an observational statement. You took the GP's argument about causal misattribution and turned it into one about hiding observational conclusions, but that wasn't present in the original comment.
I'm done responding to you though because you're tone is confrontational and emotional.
Suppose you manage a school district and you find that, after controlling for socio-economic income, your students' SAT scores are drastically predicted by race. Suppose you don't publish it, because you fear it might be used as fuel for some racist. What if it turns out that a geographic area that happened to correlate with race was getting an inferior water supply with lead in it, and because nobody was willing to look any further, the problem went on for an extra decade before being fixed?