Scientists who will not resile from their truths irrespective of the punishments imposed upon them by their professional Establishments or the heinous blackening of their life’s work and their reputation by the media are, perhaps unsurprisingly, a rarity these days.  But such was Richard Lynn, who has died at the age of 93.  His achievement is immense, his humanity is unbesmirched by the all too predictable dog-whistle reportage from the mainstream media.  The Telegraph, for example, reported that his work on comparative group IQ had been “debunked”, and quoted Flynn and Singapore (neither functioning rebuttals).  Lynn’s magazine Mankind Quarterly is considered by its critics to be “a cornerstone of the scientific racism establishment”.  Well, there’s a surprise.  I wonder what the ethnicity of these critics is.

Lynn’s real legacy will not be the bitter badmouthing of the anti-white factions who now command the centre.  It will be in the diffusion of his ideas among the great mass of thinking dissidents, some of whom turned up in the comment section of the DT obit (paywalled).  Here are a few excerpts:

A short walk from my front door and I witness human devolution in full swing.

Depending on the study, intelligence is 50-80% heritable, higher than many other personality traits. That is to say, the difference in intelligence between people is 50-80% due to genetic differences, passed on from parents to children. This is hard science and has nothing to do with racism, but the implications are studiously ignored because to study or discuss them is to commit career suicide.

People who refute his ideas are similar to religious zealots who refute that evolution exists at all.
“Yes there is evolution, but it does not affect intelligence”.
In which case how did the intelligence of humans evolve and increase?

His ideas have not been debunked by scholarly research, they have been deliberately suppressed by people who will not allow anyone to consider that certain ethnic groups are not as intelligent as others.
The Dutch may be the tallest people on earth but pygmies would be exactly the same with a better diet is the usual false theoretical structure.

I am vehemently against the idea of eugenics. I believe society as a whole would be better if eugenicists were suffocated at birth…

A recent area of scientific advance is in the field of paleo-genetics, for which Svante Paabo won the Nobel Prize in Physiology/Medicine in 2022. It is now accepted that all contemporary non-Africans have 1% to 2% Neanderthal Man DNA. Recent advances have shown that the newly discovered archaic hominid species Denisovan Man contributed .1% to .2% of the DNA of current East and South Asian populations, with a striking 6% of the genome of highland New Guinea populations and 5% of the genome of Australian Aboriginals being Denisovan!
Then in 2020 scientists at U. Cal. Berkeley examined the contemporary African genome using Paabo’s groundbreaking techniques, and discovered that fully 11% (on average) of the contemporary sub-Saharan African genome is derived from an as-yet-undiscovered archaic hominid species (1) that separated from the lineage that eventually led to Homo sapiens 635,000 years ago, (2) with which species Africans interbreeded 45,000 years ago (long after Eurasian Homo sapiens left Africa).
Check out Dr. Paabo’s Nobel Prize acceptance speech on YouTube! Upshot: the sub-Saharan African genome is 11% that of a primitive archaic hominid species. All of the above is undisputed, albeit it has been given the “Hunter’s laptop” treatment by the media, surprise surprise. Sorry, folks, but genetics is real.

All that is needed to refute his data are a few properly conducted studies which Do Not show the same pattern as thousands of previous studies which show racial differences in mean IQ. No one objects when these studies show that East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews are, on average, more intelligent than other groups. The histrionics are over the dramatic differences between one race and all the others. If one allows oneself to think the unthinkable, that this difference is real, the underachievement and all the dysfunctions of that group become readily understandable, without need to invoke discrimination as the only possible explanation.

Certainly, but brain size does not seem to differ. Maybe it’s how the brain is used, or how the different structures interact, or… well we could be here with that debate for a long time!
Don’t let it pass you by that we are examining ourselves, an enquiry which is fraught with conceit, prejudice, wilful misinterpretation etc.
The fundamentals are always helpful. Does the physiology and behaviour promote survival?
The differences may be infinitesimally small and difficult to spot but hey, DNA has all the time in the world (I use that phrase with purpose) to help itself survive and the hosts, in many ways, may not be important at all.
Who is in charge here, DNA or the human species?
I know where I’d place my bet.

Thank you for your dedication to truth, Richard Lynn.  One fears that rarities such as you would never be granted a career today.