> we understand on some level the work that goes into good science

Meanwhile people who are informed on the state of actual science say "50% of published research is false."

https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/jo...

I mean, as the paper says:

> Second, most research questions are addressed by many teams, and it is misleading to emphasize the statistically significant findings of any single team. What matters is the totality of the evidence.

I think few people would refute this.

> What matters is the totality of the evidence.

If half of the evidence contradicts the other half would it be fair to conclude that we don’t know much about the things we have researched?

93% of surveyed geneticists and behavioral psychologists claim that the black-white IQ gap has a non-zero genetic component. Do you know better than them?

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.0039...

I'm inclined to believe them, but not rule out the possibility it was their bias speaking. Historically doctors have believed a white woman's pelvis is better for child bearing, whereas a black woman's is better for hard labor. That has since been proven wrong. There is no discernable difference between the races in the pelvic area.

Regardless, the argument against discrimination is that one has no CHOICE what race they are born with. Because there is no choice, race does not reflect their invididual merits or lack thereof, and one should not be awarded or punished based on that factor alone. There is also significant variation within a race with regard to IQ or otherwise, that exceeds the difference of the mean value between races