William M. Briggs quotes a scholarly paper on origins and determinants of intelligence quotients, IQ’s, a paper whose publication is condemned by a raft of other scientists:

In a very short time, it is likely that we will identify many of the genetic variants underlying individual differences in intelligence. We should be prepared for the possibility that these variants are not distributed identically among all geographic populations, and that this explains some of the phenotypic differences in measured intelligence among groups.

However, some philosophers and scientists believe that we should refrain from conducting research that might demonstrate the (partly) genetic origin of group differences in IQ. Many scholars view academic interest in this topic as inherently morally suspect or even racist. The majority of philosophers and social scientists take it for granted that all population differences in intelligence are due to environmental factors.

The present paper argues that…

Today two priest-pundits offer essays that really cannot be missed, says the eminently alert Phil Lawler:

Father George William Rutler is at his best, which is very, very good, as he analyzes the US bishops’ discussion of capital punishment for Crisis. He focuses attention on the decision by Pope Francis to change the Catechism, to say that the death penalty is now “inadmissible.” One hapless bishop described that word a bit of “eloquent ambiguity,” and readers will enjoy Father Rutler’s reaction to that comment. On the new wording itself, Father Rutler writes:

If “inadmissible” does not mean something essentially different from what has already been said magisterially about capital punishment, why is it necessary to revise the Catechism to include it? Secondly, if the word “inadmissible” is deliberately ambiguous, why does it belong in a catechism whose purpose is to eschew ambiguity?

Now you see the alleged white supremacist, now you don’t.

Chalk up another for MainStream Mediums, who LEAP toward something that reinforces their narrative.

Last week, the FBI says it foiled a plot to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D), after the FBI infiltrated an anti-government militia and arrested 13 members who “talked about murdering ‘tyrants’ or ‘taking’ a sitting governor.”

And while the FBI never suggested a race-based ideology in its criminal complaint, the MSM – as well as Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel (D), took the ‘white supremacist’ ball and ran with it – hard.

On Friday, however, the Washington Post profiled several members of the group. Notably absent were accusations of ‘white supremacy’ – perhaps after acknowledging:

“One of alleged plotters, 23-year-old Daniel Harris, attended a Black Lives Matter protest in June, telling the Oakland County Times he was upset about the…

See how our supreme pontiff laid yet another egg.

By Phil Lawler ( bio – articles – email ) | Oct 08, 2020 How much longer can sensible Catholics maintain that Pope Francis is merely trying to develop— rather than to change— the teachings of the Catholic Church?

With the release of Fratelli Tutti this week we have seen a pattern of media coverage that is now familiar. First there are headlines suggesting that the Pope has written something new and radical. Then the more sober analysis, arguing that this new papal statement is in line with Catholic traditions. The analysts who issue such reassurances are always arguing uphill— not only because the original media headlines leave a lasting impression, but because the papal text itself contains so much evidence of the Pope’s wish to promote change.

Yes, there is solid, traditional Catholic teaching to be found in this…