Actually, there are several meta-analyses published in mainstream journalsthat demonstrate broad consensus on heritability estimates across different populations and average IQ levels. While there's healthy debate about specific methodologies, the core findings about genetic influences on behavioral traits have been replicated extensively and almost certainly free from political knee jerk reactions in recent years.

Yes, research continues, but funding priorities and publication incentives do shape which questions get investigated and for past few decades these researches were taboo and funding taken away from those attempting to study it.

I'd encourage looking at the actual publication record rather than characterizations from either "activists" or critics. The data tells a more complex story than the simplified narratives on either side.

No, they haven't. The opposite thing has happened (I owe another thread details): as we've shifted to genomics, the estimates have cratered. This isn't an "activist" thing.

You know you're in trouble when people start implying that actual genomic and quantitative psychological research in academic labs is suspect because of "taboos". In fact, since you made that point, and since I really shouldn't be digging into this before responding to the other person I said I would respond to: I'll leave it there.

All you've done here is just offer your conjectures not facts. I understand, you have a business to run that hinges on the reputation of your political ideology not actual SLA uptime.

In case anybody was wondering whether you were commenting in good faith.