Friday, December 5, 2014

James Watson Sells his Nobel Prize

James Watson selling Nobel prize 'because no-one wants to admit I exist'

World-famous biologist James Watson said he is selling the Nobel Prize medal he won in 1962 for discovering the structure of DNA because he has been ostracised and needs the money

James Watson, co-discoverer of the structure of DNA
James Watson, co-discoverer of the structure of DNA Photo: Alamy
James Watson, the world-famous biologist who was shunned by the scientific community after linking intelligence to race, said he is selling his Nobel Prize because he is short of money after being made a pariah.
Mr Watson said he is auctioning the Nobel Prize medal he won in 1962 for discovering the structure of DNA, because "no-one really wants to admit I exist".
Auctioneer Christie’s said the gold medal, the first Nobel Prize to be sold by a living recipient, could fetch as much as $3.5m (£2.23m) when it is auctioned in New York on Thursday. The reserve price is $2.5m.
Mr Watson told the Financial Times he had become an “unperson” after he “was outed as believing in IQ” in 2007 and said he would like to use money from the sale to buy a David Hockney painting.
Mr Watson, who shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for uncovering the double helix structure of DNA, sparked an outcry in 2007 when he suggested that people of African descent were inherently less intelligent than white people.
If the medal is sold Mr Watson said he would use some of the proceeds to make donations to the “institutions that have looked after me”, such as University of Chicago, where he was awarded his undergraduate degree, and Clare College, Cambridge.
Mr Watson said his income had plummeted following his controversial remarks in 2007, which forced him to retire from the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on Long Island, New York. He still holds the position of chancellor emeritus there.
“Because I was an ‘unperson’ I was fired from the boards of companies, so I have no income, apart from my academic income,” he said.
He would also use some of the proceeds to buy an artwork, he said. “I really would love to own a [painting by David] Hockney”.
Francis Wahlgren, the Christie’s auctioneer who is handling the sale of the medal, said he was confident it would fetch the $2.5m (£1,598347) reserve. He said demand for memorabilia associated with genetic discovery had “exploded” in recent years as the promise of biotechnology became apparent.
“The far-reaching aspects of their discovery affect everybody and are only being appreciated now,” said Mr Wahlgreen.
The auctioneer said he did not expect the controversy surrounding Mr Watson’s comments to deter potential buyers. “I think the guy is the greatest living scientist. There are a lot of personalities in history we’d find fault with – but their discoveries transcend human foibles,” he said
Auctions for memorabilia and art have been setting new records recently as investors look for inflation-proof investments. Earlier this month Christie’s brought in the highest-ever total for an auction at its contemporary sale in New York. The sale grossed $852.9m across 75 lots, including $25.9m for Jeff Koons’s Balloon Monkey sculpture.
Mr Watson – who insisted he was “not a racist in a conventional way” – said it had been “stupid” of him to not realise that his comments on the intelligence of African people would end up in an article.
“I apologise . . . [the journalist] somehow wrote that I worried about the people in Africa because of their low IQ – and you’re not supposed to say that.”
In 2007, the Sunday Times ran an interview with Dr Watson in which he said he was “inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really”.
He told the newspaper people wanted to believe that everyone was born with equal intelligence but that those “who have to deal with black employees find this not true”.
Mr Watson said he hoped the publicity surrounding the sale of the medal would provide an opportunity for him to “re-enter public life”. Since the furore in 2007 he has not delivered any public lectures.
“I’ve had a unique life that’s allowed me to do things. I was set back. It was stupid on my part. All you can do is nothing, except hope that people actually know what you are,” he said.
Prof Watson made his scientific discovery in 1953 at Cambridge University with Francis Crick. They were jointly awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize in Medicine with Maurice Wilkins, from King's College London, for identifying the elegant double helix in work that laid the basis for modern molecular biology.
Mr Watson said he one day wanted his children to auction the handwritten manuscript for his famous book, The Double Helix. “It will be worth a lot more. We’d have a reserve of at least $10m,” he said.

Join the discussion…

    "Melanin Theory" & The Joke of Black Scholarship

  • Truth is the biggest victim of political correctness.

    Truth is the biggest victim of those who cite political correctness in order to validate falsehoods.

    He isn't the first person to be fooled by group differences in IQ test results. It takes more than a number-cruncher's data collation skills to realize there's too much circumstantial effect on individuals' test results arising from non-biological group-based differences (such as class, culture, environment and other factors), to be able to claim the variations are biologically based.
    Anyway, he's from the time when the fact of that sort of eugenics-based nonsense was accepted as a given in much of the West, so a deep delve into the data seemed unnecessary. Just goes to show that the smartest among us are still just people, and are going to say and do stupid things just like the rest of us.

    This is easy to say if you are sitting in the West, where people of the 70 IQ level are a minority. What would you do if, say, faced by classrooms of Africans, Asians and Whites in Africa. You would find that Africans of any economic level sift to the bottom, Asians are very variable, and Whites cluster at the top in general. You would also find that mixed-race people tend to fit somewhere near Asians by-and-large. And this situation obtains across the economic spectrum. If you see this situation year after year, what are you to make of it? Ignore it? Pretend it doesn't exist?

      • What I do is recognize that IQ test results measure the ability to take IQ tests, and that the tests are skewed to the benefit of those who share irrelevant characteristics with those who create, administer and interpret those results.
        What you do, based on your feed, is look for reasons to consider blacks inferior, and then promote those reasons. Whether those reasons are reality based seems not to matter.

        But then why do Japanese and Koreans outperform whites, who created the tests? As an educator, I have noted that there is a correlation between IQ scores and the ability to reason through problems, and function well in life generally. It is not a perfect correlation, but it does exist. Pretending it doesn't exist in order to fit in with what is currently "cool" or "trendy" doesn't really cut it. As a scientist, it would not be seemly to do that.
        But I would really like to know how you explain the fact that Orientals outperform whites. That is an important question.
      'The Bell Curve' published in 1994, also showed the African race is less intelligent than the European race:
      On the pro side, you could extrapolate from that, in general, the most intelligent half of the black race, are only as intelligent as the least intelligent half of the white race

      one problem... you are too stupid to realize there are NO HUMAN RACES, there is THE HUMAN RACE.
      There is NO speciation in our peoples, just genetic variances.

      At one time, the English were called a race, the Scots, and even the Northumbrians. Now they are trying to tell us there is one race. Absolute social marxist rubbish, lies built on lies, for which the only purpose is to justify their living among us to improve their standard of living.
        • Dreamr Okelly, you are confusing the word "race" with the word "species."
          There is only ONE human species (all of humanity.) The word "race" refers to a sub-species or if you prefer, a population sub-group within the human species.
          For example, think of different breeds of dogs. German Shepherds and Chihuahuas are both DOGS but that doesn't mean there's no such thing as German Shepherds and Chihuahuas!
          So if you don't like the word "race" that's fine, just use the word "population sub-group."

          The word "race" has had different meanings over time. Race was used to describe religions, or even families. It has a particular meaning with regard to speciation, as you say, but that is not the meaning with which the word was originally imbued. Therefore it is not wrong to use the word as it is used colloquially, because everybody understands its meaning.
    I wish him the very best and offer nothing but contempt for the forces that continue to demonise him.

    Seig Heil Baby!
  • The average IQ of the nations have been determined, and African nations inhabit the bottom of the table, along with African colonies in the Carribean. The only controversy, is this fact does not reflect incumbent social marxist political ideology.
    National IQ table:

    Keep the gunpowder medal, hang out in metro UK and sell loose fags (cigarettes) on the street at pick-a-dilly.. the bobbie cops over yonder pond don't carry guns for the most part, so i hear, and beating or shooting the Elderly, Infirm or Obese, Ethnics, Women and Minors for petty infractions, Issues resolved by verbal warning or written ticket. .genetic engineering and the double standard paradox. Clone Sheep, not Heroes.. Use Batons not Bullets .the mind is a terrible drug to waste.
      The police were following your Marxist Mayor's orders, fool.
      Resist arrest- face the put-down.

  • James Watson made his brilliant discovery using Rosalyn Franklin's data which they stole. Interested people may refer to their book The double helix. A brilliant scientist and a bad man. I wonder what he thinks of Carver.

  • old, broke and in need of money..hmm. yet,desires to sell his token of genius medal to buy a piece of ad-hockney art at some inflated price, and also contribute to, those who once looked after him until 2007 institutions in gratitude, long after his 15 minutes of fame were over, becoming a washed up-has been brainiac and an UnPerson living on Institutional welfare/fanfare must be horrible and degrading.. somehow makes sense that geniusboy was/is also a sexist and likely stole and/or took credit for a womans discovery and work...very 1960's and a good excuse for those times.., very caucasian in tactical thinking ( not to be confused with critical thinking) and pathetic behavior for such a self proclaimed intelligent pariah.. there was a caucasian comedian named Mork who recently committed suicide because he was going broke, desperate times require desperate actions, The funnyman was down to a reserve of $50 million net worth, being just another has-been, waning in popularity he couldnt face the facts being a Unperson , a forgotten funnyman has been., he was also oversexed and fueled by cocaine , alcohol and fame,,which pumped his ego and all these years later he was still paying dearly for it, alimony and rehab, he also had excessive body hair and was likely an entitled caucasian genetic primate> throwback with a trainable brain.. His fans called him a comic genius, i think he was as intelligent and Ignorant as his contemporary african funnyman named Bill Cosby another so called comic genius who reflects the society that both creates perpetuates and patronizes such ignorance, garbage and research as racial humor or psuedo intelligence.. caucasians are great at creating weapons, machine guns to atomic and hydrogen bombs and biological blunders as weapons, and selling their genius creation crap to people they consider as inferior beings..also the inventers of unsustainable lifestyles and throw away packaging aka no deposit no return humanity Africans as well as all people of color and of coarse women have invented alot more than peanut butter, give credit where credit is due..
    There is a caucasian reality TV show called Survivor-boy-man where groups of superior white people have to go into the wilderness and survive by their nimwits while competing for a predetermined amount of time for some monitary reward/ noble prize.. strange show.. the indigenous people of color seem to have no problem surviving in the natural world for time immemorial.. only the pale civilized TV genuises have to struggle against nature , their own brand of drama and control freak insanity and insecurity for the simpliest of creature comforts...
    i apologize to all the grammer Nazis out there who read this and cringe at my spelling in this lame blog. i'm a caucasian halfbreed sub-genius who lives with a few disabilities, i bred with a woman of color and my children have brains that do work, do not need comedians to laugh at their own social or genetic shortcomings despite the predjudice they must live with and endure,they have no scruples with race and care for the less fortunate of all races in their carreers of choice..(they are nurses).. anyway i hope this Noble prize dipstick James the Unperson gets his asking price for his token genius medal. and can buy his art piece and die of old age knowing he didnt die broke and unknown.. pathetic science,, but what does one expect of a prize created by one of the inventors of weapons of mass destruction..Mr Nobel and his guilty conscience. Rant on
      Indeed. And it is as simple as this. There is not one culture of learning, there are several. African culture does not value typical capitalist mentality. It is more tribal and more family focused. It is a struggle much more than the rat race.
      Countries that have a history of good, distributed free public education are at the top of that IQ list and countries that are more verbal and tribal are at the bottom of the list.
      IQ seems to be a matter of being able to read and write.... go figure.

      This is simply not true. Go to Africa, and see how they suffer and struggle with problems that White or Chinese people are able to solve. The world is not what it was in the Stone Age, when an IQ of 70 sufficed. Nobody is pleased about the fact that blacks have not been as well endowed intellectually, it is tragic. Africa's situation is dire because the Left insists they should compete the same as others, which they simply can't. Africans in many cases inherited infrastructure, but it has simply gone to rack-and-ruin. It doesn't do them any good to make excuses all the time. The problem must be acknowledged and faced. It is cruel not to do so.
    If we are born with genetic predispositions toward some diseases why then would this not apply to intelligence?

    Sure. That is a valid hypothesis.
    But millions of Africans die due to diseases like Malaria, AIDS, cholera. Yet it is obvious to us that fact is down to socioeconomic and environmental factors rather than genetics. The same also applies to intelligence.
    Also IQ tests are far from an established science. There are countless other factors at play. The jury is still out on this one.

    • Steady on- we'll be hearing crys that sickle cell anemia is WRACIST next... ;-)
      Or was invented in a CIA laboratory.

    • Because no one knows how "intelligence" is determined genetically nor how to measure it phenotypically. Intelligence does not reside on a particular gene that can be analyzed. People everywhere are born with a wide continuum of cognitive abilities and no genetic background can predict who will be a great runner, a brilliant artist or skilled surgeon. None of those people are racially or personally superior in any way, as humans, to the merely average among their peers.

      But IQ predicts success in life. There is a strong correlation. Solving the type of problems in IQ tests means you can solve problems that present themselves in life. I know it is easier to blame everything on anything other than genetics, but we have too many studies with twins to suggest it is all simply nurture. We can't all be Einstein, just as we can't all be black, Jamaican athletes.

      Genetic predispositions towards some diseases are not racial. In the same race you will see lot of fluctuation depending upon your ancestors.

      Different diseases, different language genes, different genes that affect brain size, hormone levels, etc.
      Society is a racial construct.

      • Jews have a strong tendency to Tay-Sachs and breast cancer.

      • Ever heard of Sickle Cell Disease? Or the heart medication that was made specifically for blacks and approved by the FDA because conventional heart medications do not work as well for them? What about the fact that mixed race individuals who are in need of organ transplants, such as bone marrow transplants, have a much more difficult time in finding suitable donors due to their mismatched genetics? Obviously, genetics/DNA are much more significant than you would like them to be. It's people like you who deny the obvious who are a burden to the advancement of the fields of science and medicine, as well as society in general.
        It's people like you who are responsible for the outcasting of Mr. Watson for simply stating the TRUTH.

        Watson made himself an outcast by speaking like a racist fool who knows nothing about how intelligence is determined genetically. Different genetics does not mean inferior. People carrying the sickle-cell trait have superior resistance to malaria, which is why the gene persists in African people and endemic areas. People without the sickle-cell gene are much more likely to get infected and die from malaria.

        I think Watson understands how sickle-cell persists. I also think he isn't afraid to rattle the PC cage. Science is science. If you see that over many, many decades blacks all over the world score in a certain way, and whites in a certain way, and Chinese in a certain way, you try to understand the phenomenon. Steve Biko himself said that blacks aren't much good at maths and science, if you respond to appeals to authority. Blacks are best in running owing to certain types of muscles (why do white people who have all the advantages not win on the athletics track?) and Orientals or whites dominate in other, intellectual fields. That is the reality of life.

            • None of those things makes a particular race superior in any way from another. Science does not concern politics in any way. That is a product of politicians. All mammalian muscles work identically. Are white people worthy of a head start if they are too slow and poorly trained? Are blacks the only race capable of leading, since they are the fastest? Different is not superior, it's just different. Variation and differential survival is the way species evolve. The fact that we're all here is proof that every race of our species is perfectly adapted, yet independently and differently from each other.

              • You seem caught on this superior and inferior differentiation. Nobody is suggesting that individuals should be discriminated against owing to their race, as far as I know. Statistics deals with aggregates and large sets of data. It is how we work out the viability of drugs, and expenditure of resources, for instance. The whole point is that people cluster around certain characteristics that are imbued genetically as a consequence of isolated breeding and differing evolutionary patterns. For Africans, athletic ability was more important in their particular environment, and so that became the determinant of fitness for procreation purposes (i.e., those athletically proficient were most sought-after as breeding partners). In Europe, athletic ability was less important, whilst intellectual activity became more important, because forward-planning was required. In Japan and Korea, this was even more pronounced. When you have these evolutionary pressures for 500,000 years, differences between human population groups emerge. When you then mix these people together again, the differences become quite noticeable and important. In athletic endeavour in general, whites as a group cannot compete with blacks as they have evolved differently; in intellectual endeavour, blacks cannot compete with Japanese or Koreans or whites, because they have evolved differently. However, individuals can always buck this. Chihuahuas cannot compete in running with Greyhounds, just as Border Collies are brighter than Newfoundlands. Nurture plays a role, but the basic genetic scaffold is what sets limits, unfortunately, for us all, in differing ways.
                The thing is, I am sure you know all this, and can think it through, but don't seem to want to do so. You are reacting to it ideologically, from a Leftist position, which actually confounds the problem with something else, which is the treatment of people in society. Science is not politics.

                So, you think that believing that the proposition that all people are created equal, as put forth in the US Constitution, is a leftist position? I have to agree with you there. Right-wingers have always been ready to defend regressive policies like fascism, ethnic cleansing, segregation, slavery, voting restrictions on blacks and women and Jim Crow laws. The major flaw in your silly thesis is that intellectual ability can't be measured or timed like a race or weightlifting contest. Culture plays a dominant role in shaping how intellect is used. Our president, raised in Hawaii, is clearly a lot smarter, successful and accomplished than both of us, despite being one-half Kenyan (lol). All normal human brains have essentially equivalent potential and are shaped by the environment they develop in. Stating that "an individual can buck this" kind of blows your theory to hell.

                  • You must educate yourself on statistics, and outliers. It is vital to your education. And surely you can understand the difference between difference in law and difference in physical reality? A man of 6'6" is not the physical equal of a man of 4' tall, although they are equal in law. There is a difference between the laws of nature and the laws of humanity. I can't believe you are unable to discern this difference?
                    And as for Obama being smarter than me, I dispute that most vehemently. Luckily, though, I am not an American, so excuse myself from whatever it is that drives your "argumentation" forward.

          • Move along, you apologist troll.

            So he get's treated like a pariah for his IQ comment, but not for stealing the X-ray data used to prove the shape of DNA from a female scientist without giving her any credit for the discovery because she is a woman?
            It seems to me that the IQ issue is rather easily solved. You just sample the population and sort the people by IQ score..... and let the chips fall were they may.
            The data will prove him correct or prove him wrong. He may be right or he may be wrong. Proving it is a simple matter.
            And of course our liberals friends will accept the outcome right, no matter what it is..... because they are all about science.

    • IQ is garbage and an invalid and non-scientific way of assessing intelligence. Why waste anyone's money and time? Problem IQ issue doesn't exist!

    • IQ tests of this scientist's era were (and many today are still) inherently flawed by the biases of the creators of the tests. Its textbook example of how bias works in most intro to psychology classes.
      Black people only score worse than white people on IQ tests designed to test intelligence based on white cultural perceptions of intelligence.

      • And these self same ''white cultural perceptions'' are also the reason why Asians come out top of the class.
        Thanks for the laugh.

        So he "stole" the results of someone who ran an x-ray crystallography experiment for him? Sounds more like he just didn't make her an author-- it's not like she had any real input, she just collected the data on the single crystal for him, and that is not worthy of a claim of discovering anything.

      • She ran her own research in another lab. She was the one to make the crystal and analyze it for her own work, not Watson. Her data was reviewed without her knowledge and co-opted. Her input data was essential to verifying the structure. Yes, co-authorship was absolutely due for her contributions, since she proved the structure.

         © Copyright of Telegraph Media Group Limited 2014

        ...and I am Sid Harth

No comments:

Post a Comment