1996-12-12 - Re: Redlining

Header Data

From: “E. Allen Smith” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
To: dthorn@gte.net
Message Hash: 6052b8ce04773aaeef55df62eaa57d24ff685c06b056a68a944d705e72988502
Message ID: <01ICXFPL6XZOAEL7YC@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-12-12 21:08:37 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 13:08:37 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: "E. Allen Smith" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 13:08:37 -0800 (PST)
To: dthorn@gte.net
Subject: Re: Redlining
Message-ID: <01ICXFPL6XZOAEL7YC@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


From:	IN%"dthorn@gte.net"  "Dale Thorn" 12-DEC-1996 14:56:52.69

>Actually, there is not only good evidence for the environmental argument,
>but you can reason it out yourself if you give attention to some things
>that don't make it into most discussions on this topic.

	Yes, there are strong arguments for the environment being the
determining factor... there are also strong arguments (such as interracial
adoption still leaving blacks below the average IQ of adopted siblings)
for it being genetics. We won't be able to find out which is which until
we know what the genetic determinants of intelligence are, which will take
some time. (Using current techniques, several hundred years at the minimum...
but I'm not prepared to predict how good techniques will get). As I previously
stated, I don't believe it is any part genetic.
	-Allen





Thread