Yeah, you probably did, it might be one of the pseudoscience things far-right spread on social media presenting them as facts. Sooner or later, they get relayed by factoid pages that don’t know they are far right. One such factoid I’ve seen around is that red hair (and sometimes also blond hair) were going to become extinct due to race mixing. This is also false, but while a rightwing Facebook page is the first place I saw it, I’ve seen it repeated by many people with no ties to the right wing, who didn’t question it.
Another close example I’ve seen is the IQ map. It’s based on a fraudulous study by Richard Lynn, a segregationist behavolioral scientist. His study was actually published in a reputable journal, but later removed when it was found his numbers were bullshit. He then cofounded his own journal with like-minded people. The thing is, while this map is shared by fascists online, it’s rarely contested. I’ve seen many discussions on Twitter where a racist posted the map, and many leftists were talking about how IQ isn’t mostly genetic and that these numbers must be a result of poverty, or some began saying the concept of IQ itself was racist… But no one questioned the numbers, altho they were actually wrong and a quick search coul’ve shown it.
It is frequent that when in an argument, a statement is presented as a fact and another as a conclusion of that fact, many only try to contradict the conclusion and take the original claim for granted. This tendency is often abused for propaganda purpose.
Yeah, you probably did, it might be one of the pseudoscience things far-right spread on social media presenting them as facts. Sooner or later, they get relayed by factoid pages that don’t know they are far right. One such factoid I’ve seen around is that red hair (and sometimes also blond hair) were going to become extinct due to race mixing. This is also false, but while a rightwing Facebook page is the first place I saw it, I’ve seen it repeated by many people with no ties to the right wing, who didn’t question it.
Another close example I’ve seen is the IQ map. It’s based on a fraudulous study by Richard Lynn, a segregationist behavolioral scientist. His study was actually published in a reputable journal, but later removed when it was found his numbers were bullshit. He then cofounded his own journal with like-minded people. The thing is, while this map is shared by fascists online, it’s rarely contested. I’ve seen many discussions on Twitter where a racist posted the map, and many leftists were talking about how IQ isn’t mostly genetic and that these numbers must be a result of poverty, or some began saying the concept of IQ itself was racist… But no one questioned the numbers, altho they were actually wrong and a quick search coul’ve shown it.
It is frequent that when in an argument, a statement is presented as a fact and another as a conclusion of that fact, many only try to contradict the conclusion and take the original claim for granted. This tendency is often abused for propaganda purpose.
I’m pretty sure it was on Reddit at some point but I’m not saying that makes it any more trustworthy.
It systematically ignored the scores of Africans with high IQ
In previous works, he even used outdated methods like skull measuring.
I don’t think this is what I was referring to, but very interesting.