It's clear from the article that they didn't begin "speaking out" until they were contacted for the letter.

So you don't know if they're read it, yet you categorically state that someone is wrong in assuming they haven't read it since it's not stated that they have?

Still a losing tactic to accuse someone of racism while hiding behind AC.

You're making the mistake of assuming individuals only poses singular traits.

Using strawperson to accuse someone of strawperson. I love it!

The problem with that is they didn't come to this conclusion on their own, they were pressured to tow the Politically Correct agenda or face public exposure. After all, they don't want to lose their funding. That's not science, that's extortion.

It's a losing tactic to accuse someone of racism while hiding behind AC.

And no matter how much the science would upset people without blue eyes, it would still be science.

So you're taking exception to an unexpressed viewpoint? How nonintellectual.

You can't reviewed the claims either. Neither have the people objecting to the book. That's the point. I don't know if the guy is correct or not, but in the article posted, it's clear they have made misleading statements without reviewing the source material. And it's a pretty weak tactic to imply I'm racist just because I believe in pure scientific method.

According to the article, that is not the case. It's pointed out that people objecting to the book have no read it.

Sounds like the Political Correctness police are trying to suppress science they find to contain inconvenient truth. The great thing about science is it's still correct even if you don't want to believe it.

What are 400 Millimeter Dollars?

Time Shifting? Worked for the VCR.

It's true. Cunnilingus can give you throat cancer. http://healthland.time.com/201...