Razib Khan

Razib Khan, 2023
The colorful pseudoscience
Race & Racialism
Icon race.svg
Hating thy neighbour
Divide and conquer
Dog-whistlers
v - t - e

Newamul "Razib" Khan[1]:16 (1977–) is a Bangladeshi-American writer and an advocate of hereditarianism. Khan, on his blog, claims to have bachelor's degrees in biology and biochemistry.[2] Prior to 2019, Khan was a coauthor on several peer-reviewed publications in animal genomics, primarily for cat genomics.[3]

Khan's hereditarianism

VDARE and Steve Sailer

Razib Khan's views on human behavior are strongly influenced by racists such as Steve Sailer and J. Philippe Rushton.

Khan's first appearance in the hereditarian and racialist world was in 2000, when he had an exchange of letters with Steve Sailer in VDARE. Khan wrote:

I am writing this in response to Steve Hallaway's question to Mr. Sailer's articles, following his articles on the importation of Mexico's racial caste system. Mr. Hallaway's question turns on making similar assumptions about intermarriages between whites and East Asians as Mr. Sailer does about intermarriages between whites and New World Indians and whites and blacks. But there are a few problems with this argument....

If by "intelligence" once means analytic reasoning skills, it seems that the Northeast Asians — Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans — are somewhat more intelligent than the white norm. (I believe the I.Q. difference is generally listed as somewhere between 2-8 points, depending on the study). Most of the evidence also seems to point to New World Indians' scoring slightly below whites. Thus, Mestizos (white-Indian mixes) would have slightly lower IQs than whites, while Eurasians (white-East Asian crosses) would have slightly higher IQs. The correlation between the increasing blondeness of high I.Q. Eurasians would be somewhat mitigated if the less intelligent Eurasian men happened to import intelligent East Asian women to make up for their competitive disadvantage on the marriage market, while the more intelligent Eurasians would marry less intelligent blondes (i.e., European derived females). The key is how much more intelligent the high status Eurasian males are, and how much more intelligent Asian females are vs. European females

In addition, the most intelligent Eurasian men might also be the most "nerdish" as Mr. Sailer would say.[note 1] This would make it rather more difficult for them to attract high status "blondes." What I am saying is that there is a difference between the macho Mestizo and black men, who attain high status in most likely extroverted fields (say entertainment, sports, law, politics, and business) while highly intelligent Eurasians might be funneling into scientific fields, making their values, and their possible mates, a bit different. Melinda French Gates for instance, to use the classic example of a nerd-wife, is attractive, but not blonde.[5]

Gene Expression

Khan has had a website, in one form or another, called Gene Expression, sometimes shortened to GNXP, since the early 2000s.[6]

On Gene Expression, in June 2002 Khan could be seen mentioning J. P. Rushton several times (emphases in the original):

Religion in America (and race of course!) OK, people have been talking about this whole "Under God" thing for the past week or so. I won't touch it-both sides are well served by their advocates. But what interests me is this-the American Religious Identification Survey 2001 has arrived. Interesting facts that jump out at me? Well, the number of non-religious and non-Christian religious has increased a lot in the past 10 years. No surprise here. Immigration and a weakening of traditional social mores explains both these phenomena. But here is something that I want to look at from the prism of human biodiversity: 21% of Asian-Americans, 11% of Hispanic Americans, 10% of white Americans and 6% of black Americans describe themselves as "Secular." This tends to map onto Rushton's Rule rather well (blacks at one end-Asians at the other). [7]

Slavery and the Black Family James Q. Wilson[8] has a fascinating article (long) on African-American family life-especially the relative weakness of the "traditional nuclear family" amongst them. The questions he poses-and the answers he gives-might surprise you. Wilson's approach is mostly cultural-but read Rushton's Race, Evolution and Behavior: A Life History Perspective[9] and you get the same data interpreted in a rather different manner.[7]

Provisionalism rather than dogmatism I do want to clarify some points. I accept the general thrust of J. P. Rushton's work-that "blacks," "whites" and east Asians fall into a general spectrum on a variety of traits. General intelligence, or g, is likely one of them. I think it is important to recognize that I.Q. has consequences-that it could very well be that certain groups genetically well endowed in this area will be found in professions requiring symbolic logic and higher-level abstraction...

...Rushton's work-combined with the constancy of the black-white I.Q. gap over 80 years-convinces me that genetic differences do exist on a substantive level between the three outlier races-northern Europeans, east Asians, and sub-Saharan Africans. [7]

(added italics)

To the gas chambers-go!? Earlier today-one Philip Shropshire seemed to imply that some of us (specifically godless capitalist)-want to round up those on the left-end of the Bell Curve and send them to concentration camps or something. This is the sort of ad hominem attack that silences people and allows sites like Stormfront to monopolize the discussion of race differences. I will concede that I might be wrong-that races might not be that different in anything aside from the most superficial of outward phenotypic characteristics and prevalence of certain diseases in certain groups. But would Mr. Shropshire concede that those who believe major racial differences exist might be right? What if we are right? What if attempts to silence us push everyone to the sidelines except those who talk about white pride and the late great Fuhrer? (if Mr. Shropshire doesn't know-both godless and I are non-white and from an ethnic group who's average IQ might be rather low). Personally, I wish academic biological scientists would explore race differences. But at this time there isn't a chance in hell that's going to happen. Look at many of the scientists who are backed by the Pioneer Fund, which backs Mr. Rushton's work. They're psychologists and economists-who can diagnose the social illness. But it will take hard-core geneticists and neuroscientists to probe whether there are race differences biologically, as opposed to being artifacts of the way we view the data. Speaking for myself-I don't think acknowledging race differences would imply a rejection of the principle of equality before the law. Men and women are probably different in their very nature, the essentialist position. Yet we usually (military service being an exception) treat men and women the same. I personally think we should treat them the same 100% the same (Women should be able to serve in combat positions-granting that they can fulfill certain physical and psychological requirements that all soldiers have to clear). But aside from the radical Left-the fact that men and women are different allows society to not be shocked that most firefighters are men and most interior designers are women. Acknowledging race differences might stop the yearly lament that there aren't enough black scientists or engineers, and allow us to appreciate the many blacks in the entertainment field. [7]

Details, details ... why let ourselves be distracted? In the previous post, Godless shows I think quite of a bit of humility. I think both he & I acknowledge that all the details aren't hashed out on the issue of racial differences. Rushton and Edward Miller present some interesting hypotheses on why some races might have better reasoning capacities than others-but they don't really convince me. Rushton has the r vs. K reproduction strategy-Miller's ideas are more straightforward-indicating that cold climates and seasonal changes induced northern Europeans and Chinese to plan ahead and use their brains more (I make him some Lamarckian-but I think he presumes that stupid ones died in the big ice-no?). Rushton's hypothesis ultimately comes back to this sort of thinking as well. Of course, it gets me to wondering-how come the Tuareg of the central Sahara or the Inuit of Alaska aren't the most brilliant people in the world. Godless indicated that he thought that the Inuit might be bright-perhaps, but I've had friends who have lived among the native peoples of the north (as teachers) and they tell tales of extreme social pathology that makes the inner city look pleasant (the Inuit have large government subsidies so we libertarians can claim that the government did it). Some of the hereditarians that get backing from the pro-eugenicist and race realist Pioneer Fund have data that shows all the Middle Eastern peoples from Egypt to Iran are pretty lacking in intelligence. [7]

Unz Review and human biodiversity

Khan had a column at The Unz Review for many years and he often mentioned his devotion to hereditarianism and associated belief-systems such as human biodiversity. On December 30, 2002, Khan wrote:

For what it’s worth, I believe that one need not be racist (and use normative language like “superior” and “inferior”) and still accept human biodiversity.[10]

Tax returns from 2009 indicate that Khan received a grant of $108,000 from the Unz Foundation.[1]:16

Taki's Magazine and Richard Spencer

Khan has been a contributor to Taki's Magazine,[11] reportedly at the invitation of Richard Spencer.[12]

Quillette

Khan has written several articles for Quillette,[13].

Khan's career

In spite of his essentialist beliefs informed by hardcore racialists, Khan's career has been promoted by mainstream people and organizations.

Steven Pinker

Khan's career received a boost from Steven Pinker beginning in 2006 when Pinker gave an interview to Khan in Gene Expression.[14] Pinker has called Khan " an insightful commentator on all things genetic."[15][16]

When Pinker received criticism about his book The Better Angels of Our Nature, he responded on his website with a page titled Frequently Asked Questions about The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined with the following:

But aren’t you just being defensive? Authors always think that negative reviews of their book are wrong. Has anyone else replied to Kolbert?

Razib Khan has a response in the Gene Expression blog on the Discover magazine Web site:[2][17]

Pinker has promoted Khan via Twitter on several occasions.[2][15][18]

Pinker has given interviews to Khan in recent years, distributed via Khan's social media sites.[19][20]

The New York Times

In 2011, The New York Times reported that Khan was among the few atheist conservatives:

In 2008, feeling the absence of irreligious voices on the right, Mr. Khan, who also blogs about science for Discover magazine’s Web site, started SecularRight.org. Today, the site usually gets 500 to 1,000 hits a day, Mr. Khan said, although there are spikes as high as 10,000.[21]

The website SecularRight.org still exists, but has been inactive since August 2019.[22]

In 2014[23] and 2015[24] the New York Times published opinion pieces by Khan and in 2023 Ross Douthat in his piece My Fantasy Bookshelf mentioned he had recorded a podcast with Khan[25].

Kathryn Paige Harden

Khan and psychologist and promoter of behavioral genetics (a.k.a. biological determinism), Kathryn Paige Harden[26] appear to have a mutual admiration society. In her much-publicized book, The Genetic Lottery,[27] Harden acknowledges Razib Khan for "conversations"[28] and on his Substack, Khan refers to Harden as his friend.[29]

Harden has expressed an interest in promoting Khan's career.[30]

Insitome Institute

Khan was Director of Scientific Content for the now-defunct Insotome Institute, a genome-oriented think tank[31][32].

National Review

Khan has published several articles in the National Review.[33]

National Public Radio

National Public Radio ran a story about Khan called Curious Father Decodes His Unborn Son's DNA.[34]

Discover Magazine

Khan had a blog called Gene Expression at Discover Magazine. He generally avoided the topic of race with a few exceptions.[35] [36] When he left Discover, he indicated he was joining up (or joining up again?) with Ron Unz.[37].

"You're a subhuman retard"

When he was writing a column for Discover Magazine, Razib Khan declared that civility is important: "Comments are important. From the comments over the past 8 years of blogging I have learned much. But civility is important, and I enforce that with some zeal."[38]


In what he no doubt considers a compelling argument, he retweeted right-wing Wilfred Reilly and far-right Koch-funded Independent Women's Forum Inez Stepman defending the use of the term.[39]

The rightwing turducken of civility

GenRAIT

On the podcast Standing on the Shoulders of Giants with David McKay, Khan said that most of his time was spent working on a startup called GenRAIT.[40] The GenRAIT website's About page, as of October 2023, did not provide any information about who was involved in the organization.[41] However, Taylor Capito was identified via the GenRAIT Twitter/X account as CEO of GenRAIT.[42] Khan frequently posts images of himself and Capito on Twitter/X.[43][44][45][46][47][48] Capito holds a BS in Psychology.[49] According to LinkedIn, the head of science is Amanda Vondras[50] and the CTO and co-founder is Santanu Das.[51]

A company called Bioinformatic CRO was identified on Twitter/X as a partner of GenRAIT[52] Khan is a former employee of Bioinformatics CRO.[53]

Controversies

Because Khan's career has received boosts from mainstream individuals and organizations, his history as a promoter of race pseudoscience is often overlooked until controversy brings it out into the open.

The New York Times "cancellation"

See the main article on this topic: Cancel culture

He was asked to write for The New York Times, but after his history of racist connections was publicized, his offer was rescinded.[54]

Khan wrote about it on his blog, claiming that it did not negatively impact his career.[55]

Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes, wrote an inflammatory piece in Taki's Magazine lamenting:

Razib Khan was fired from The New York Times for being racist even though he’s brown and everyone involved in his lynching was white.[56]

In fact one of the primary individuals in Khan's "lynching" was Jamelle Bouie,[57] now a columnist at The New York Times who happens to be African American.[58] Khan acknowledged this fact, without mentioning names when he wrote:

I have no idea what the optimal age to get canceled is. There weren’t so many of us in 2015 when it happened to me. The N is getting big enough at this point that we can probably do that survey soon. I can tell you that getting canceled for being exactly who you are, saying exactly what you think and see, and talking/writing with absolutely anyone is kind of a non-event. It’s a funny commentary on our times that one of the people they say was most rabid behind the scenes about protecting the readership of The New York Times from a dangerous mind like mine, has since joined The New York Times. Does America feel safe now, buddy? [59]

"Jamelle Bouie is a DEI person who is evil"

In a tweet on January 30, 2025, Khan expressed his feelings about Bouie, calling him "a DEI person who is evil.[60]

Razib Khan believes NYTimes columnist Jamelle Bouie is DEI and evil

E.O. Wilson rebuttal controversy

After E. O. Wilson died, Monica McLemore published an article in Scientific American noting Wilson's connections to racialists and debt to hereditarianism called The Complicated Legacy of E. O. Wilson.[61] Khan went ballistic, writing:

My immediate reaction was that the op-ed was indecent. It was muddled and uninformed at best, disrespectful and misleading at worst. Along with many others, I expressed this view on social media and began to hear from yet more who weren’t speaking publicly. I heard through the grapevine that multiple Scientific American staffers were embarrassed by the piece and I was encouraged to submit a rebuttal. After a quick flurry of emails and direct messages, a few of us agreed this shouldn’t be allowed to stand without a rebuttal.

Other scientists of some stature shared our disgust, but disagreed; they argued against dignifying something so unworthy with a response. It would give Scientific American undeserved oxygen and attention. Engagement with a publication that to many seems to have lost its way risked being more reward than rebuke. To be candid, I felt their approach, probably perfectly standard in past decades, was wholly out of step with today’s dispensation, when attacks on science are legion, genuine fear of the social-media mob is rampant in academia and whole careers are “canceled” on a specious basis. Ignored long enough, the lie becomes canon.

It wasn’t difficult to find signatories to the rebuttal, and we could have collected hundreds. I stopped seeking names after a few dozen, because the message is abundantly clear when you see who signed. Dr. David C. Queller is one of the most prominent critics of Wilson’s late foray against Hamiltonianism. Dr. David Sloan Wilson and Dr. Jerry Coyne both signed without hesitation. In other circumstances, they have had some very pointed disagreements, but on this they concurred (Wilson, notably, was emphatic that we shouldn’t engage in “Great Man” hagiography on the podcast I recorded with him). Some of those who signed, no doubt share many political and social views with the author of the Scientific American piece. It’s not my place to speak for them, but some made clear their sincere political goals are not served by association with sloppy smear jobs.[62]

When some of those who signed Khan's rebuttal became aware of Khan's racialist history, they rescinded their signatures. This was criticized by mainstream individuals such as Matthew Yglesias who tweeted sarcastically "Seems like a healthy intellectual climate,"[63] and Nicholas Christakis who tweeted "I think it was James Baldwin himself who said 'if a Klansman were to say that the sun rises in the east, I would agree with him, because I ally myself with the truth.' And, to be clear, the point is that (Khan's) rebuttal was accurate (and neither EO or Razib deserve this, IMHO)."[64] Christakis later admitted that he got the source of the quotation wrong, it was actually by Bayard Rustin.[65]

Unfortunately for Khan and his defenders, the papers that Wilson had made available to researchers upon his death revealed he was even more explicitly racist than Monica McLemore and others realized:

[J. Philippe] Rushton was arguing that “r/K selection theory” applies to different human races. This model was developed in the 1960s by Wilson and the population biologist Robert MacArthur to characterize distinct evolutionary reproductive strategies among different species of animals. It distinguishes species that produce large numbers of offspring (or those that are “r-selected”) with little subsequent parental investment (for example, many insects) from those that produce few offspring (or are “K-selected”) with greater parental investment (elephants, humans). Rushton’s intent was rather to demonstrate that “behavioral genetics seems to suggest that r/K relationships are heritable” among humans, and that, furthermore, different human “races” have different strategies: specifically, that Black people are r-selected, while whites are K-selected. Moreover, he carefully explained to Wilson that this model accounted for racial disparities in IQ, postulating that Black people are not selected for high intelligence because their selection strategy favors, essentially, quantity over quality.

As an author of the r/K model, one would have expected Wilson to have been outraged at Rushton’s proposal, which implied, as many nineteenth-century scientists did, that human “races” constituted different species — a view no reputable biologist, including Wilson, would have publicly defended. But Wilson immediately dashed off a letter to Rushton applauding his application of the r/K model as “one of the most original and interesting [ideas] I’ve ever encountered in psychology,” adding that the work was “courageous.” “In this country the whole issue would be clouded by personal charges of racism to the point that rational] discussion would be almost impossible,” he wrote, urging Rushton to “press ahead!”[66]

Recent racialist activities

Khan's views on race and association with racists are not only in the past. He still firmly believes in hereditarianism and Black genetic inferiority and has friendly relationships with hereditarians and racists.

The Quillette gang

Khan announced on his Substack:

Quillette Social, January 7th, 2023 in New Orleans. I’ll be there, but so will Claire Lehmann, Jon Kay, Jamie Palmer, Bo Winegard, Cory Clark, Stuart Reges, Pamela Paresky, Joel Kotkin, Lee Jussim and Wilfred Reilly.[67]

Unsupervised Learning

Khan's website Unsupervised Learning features promoters of race peudoscience such as Bo Winegard[68] and Steve Hsu[69] and members of the far right such as Jonathan Keeperman[70], Colin Wright [71], Curtis Yarvin[72] and John Sailer[73]

Curtis Yarvin

Khan is apparently a personal friend of Yarvin and an image of Yarvin and Khan at Yarvin's wedding was posted on X/Twitter.[74] Yarvin believes "democracy is done"[75] and claims Black people were better off under slavery[76]

Other views

Khan has said that he has always been an atheist.[77]

External links

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ See Steve Sailer's essay "Nerdishness: The Great Unexplored Topic".[4]

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Return of Private Foundation: The Unz Foundation, 990-PF (2009) Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 Relative angels and absolute demons by Razib Khan (October 9th, 2011) Gene Expression blog, Discover Magazine (archived from November 20, 2011).
  3. ↑ Razib Khan Google Scholar.
  4. ↑ Nerdishness: The Great Unexplored Topic by Steve Sailer (1999). Archived from May 13, 2013.
  5. ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20190130045354/https://vdare.com/letters/vdare-khan-letter-and-sailer-reply-america-s-imported-caste-system
  6. ↑ Gene Expression Razib Khan (retrieved May 26, 2025)
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 Gene Expression - posted by Razib June, 2002
  8. ↑ Slavery and the Black Family by James Q. Wilson (May 01, 2002) American Enterprise Institute.
  9. ↑ Race, Evolution and Behavior: A Life History Perspective by J. Philippe Rushton (1995) Transaction Publishers. ISBN 1560001461.
  10. ↑ https://www.unz.com/gnxp/wow-times-have-changed-but-it-s-still-whitey-s-fault/
  11. ↑ https://www.takimag.com/contributor/razibkhan/130/
  12. ↑ https://undark.org/2017/02/28/race-science-razib-khan-racism/
  13. ↑ https://quillette.com/author/razib-khan/
  14. ↑ 10 questions for Steven Pinker (July 04, 2006) Gene Expression by by Darth Quixote (archived from August 12, 2006).
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 Our Cats, Ourselves (Razib Khan is an insightful commentator on all things genetic). by Steven Pinker (2:28 PM · Nov 25, 2014) Twitter (archived from August 9, 2023).
  16. ↑ 10 questions for Steven Pinker (and others)s by Razib Khan (Jul 3, 2006 1:25 AM) Discover Magazine.
  17. ↑ https://stevenpinker.com/frequently-asked-questions-about-better-angels-our-nature-why-violence-has-declined
  18. ↑ Excellent evidence-based analysis of abortion opinions by Razib Khan | http://nyti.ms/1DdokRm by Steven Pinker (4:46 PM · Jan 3, 2015) Twitter (archived from August 10, 2023).
  19. ↑ https://otter.ai/u/K-EpIDNmoQkO7czrWgab8HKE-48?f=%2Fshared-notes
  20. ↑ https://www.razibkhan.com/p/steven-pinker-the-blank-slate-20#details
  21. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/19/us/19beliefs.html
  22. ↑ https://secularright.org/SR/wordpress/
  23. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/opinion/our-cats-ourselves.html?searchResultPosition=4
  24. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/03/opinion/the-abortion-stereotype.html?searchResultPosition=3
  25. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/26/opinion/fantasy-bookshelf.html?searchResultPosition=1
  26. ↑ https://liberalarts.utexas.edu/psychology/faculty/kh24738
  27. ↑ https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/can-progressives-be-convinced-that-genetics-matters
  28. ↑ https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQI2A9M5jPX5pR7WEyOh-b41tt3LNKYzASx2JT0vE9KyZiPtKzs6qfeCXXdYLszUDjArTkVVLZOHbpCS0HYtvIkiM2oD1jmGN6rCWT4RfdvL9kKK1cwTODsCe43G2Cm6Kc2_sYfm5YPYi5Rf7wHOgeHk-35fJ8ZumB3mhpN41kzMr46Ev5jtyoPRc/s1527/harden_khan.png
  29. ↑ https://www.razibkhan.com/p/rkul-time-well-spent-08082021
  30. ↑ https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgy4K8HEKweKooqxGbcY3czT4p3mzWwhYMQ7Xax9t21h_iGt3v3KV4zrJFSXd9rMAm_QhhIuht7Zen2dX61qx7mJNEwMxg8bFjk2Nk5tvuFlMFjZkpdBUFOR1C2leydTUcr5S4TGtHtm1a02eAn6LSqSBLsqiAHBHBviHu5_5L65mJK3T8QGBZXYgg=w402-h293
  31. ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20201023001443/https://www.insitomeinstitute.org/about/team
  32. ↑ About Insotome Institute (archived November 23, 2020).
  33. ↑ https://www.nationalreview.com/author/razib-khan/
  34. ↑ https://www.npr.org/2014/06/29/326669395/curious-father-decodes-his-sons-dna
  35. ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20111201223044/http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/11/on-structure-variation-and-race/
  36. ↑ https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/why-race-as-a-biological-construct-matters
  37. ↑ https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/endings-and-beginnings
  38. ↑ "...civility is important..." Razib Khan (March 25, 2010) Gene Expression - Discover Magazine
  39. ↑ This was my first political act lol... Inez Stepman (October 4, 2023) Twitter/X
  40. ↑ Geneticist Razib Khan on the Standing on the Shoulders of Giants podcast (March 2, 2023) YouTube
  41. ↑ GenRAIT - About (retrieved October 5, 2023)
  42. ↑ Find @GenRait_Inc CEO @TaylorCapito at the Festival of Genomics and Biodata in Boston GenRAIT (October 5, 2023) Twitter/X
  43. ↑ Startup event (retrieved November 17, 2023) Twitter/X
  44. ↑ #appliedlive business on top casual on the bottom Razib Khan (September 20, 2023) Twitter/X
  45. ↑ Me and Taylor at #appliedlive in Austin today and tomorrow representing ⁦@GenRait_Inc Razib Khan (September 20, 2023) Twitter/X
  46. ↑ Fav. pic from today at #AppliedLive conference here in Austin Razib Khan (September 20, 2023) Twitter/X
  47. ↑ Day 2 #appliedAI repping @GenRait_Inc Razib Khan (September 21, 2023) Twitter/X
  48. ↑ The fun at booth 20 at The Festival of Genomics and Biodata GenRAIT (October 5, 2023) Twitter/X
  49. ↑ Taylor Capito - LinkedIn (retrieved October 5, 2023) LinkedIn
  50. ↑ Amanda Vondras (Retrieved October 5, 2023) LinkedIn
  51. ↑ Santanu Das (Retrieved October 5, 2023) LinkedIn
  52. ↑ GenRait, Inc. CEO @TaylorCapito and Justin Duplantis of @BioinfoCRO (a GenRait, Inc. partner) GenRAIT (October 5, 2023) Twitter/X
  53. ↑ Razib Khan Linkedin Profile< Razib Khan (Retrieved October 5, 2023) LinkedIn
  54. ↑ https://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/03/new-york-times-drops-razib-khan-204287
  55. ↑ Get lucky Razib Khan 'Razib Khan's Unsupervised Learning' July 6, 2021 (archived May 27, 2025)
  56. ↑ https://www.takimag.com/article/when_heroes_are_villains_gavin_mcinnes/
  57. ↑ https://tktk.gawker.com/new-times-op-ed-writer-has-a-colorful-past-with-racist-1692187849
  58. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/column/jamelle-bouie
  59. ↑ https://www.razibkhan.com/p/get-lucky
  60. ↑ to give a sense of where i am coming from, kendi is a DEI person who is kind and well-meaning. @jbouie is a DEI person who is evil (January 30, 2025) Razib Khan Twitter/X (Archived January 30, 2025)
  61. ↑ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-complicated-legacy-of-e-o-wilson/
  62. ↑ https://www.razibkhan.com/p/setting-the-record-straight-open
  63. ↑ https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjnhM3qW5K1Vh5z1JcqowmL8ncVlqdXVSHqPUTD7xiKjCdgciXmgIsyxNy2fNIhWbRWRMrIep5BexFCvj3RkRJYp9EOplkVxmEN_Zim4XtruVOCQnrpZHAyNPVtPcMnoT45VmwIDcnv5lhdTCGMYF9zeXvp2He_RbYGTO0En0A2SnycIrDinLY1KGM=w400-h505
  64. ↑ https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjFlfT9IWpvOgZQq1K2J0SMg-HCTELrivy_6Q1gHncaLNXkuq8CoWbCawY_kacDGCa7cClzwgazjVCdZq9yvSCQ_2m3rk_Tq6eR9xQAXWR5CixkUc0bWWIiieWy69hyViFESt-wXrwefZwFmESGP7SeSDNf2q9aHWK5c-i2dyXnwCOMOq-8x76sRBM=w534-h964
  65. ↑ https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjVuzvfMlztshSFCwSzr1XkGK_2wni_5idY4V8auK02I5IGGohO-608ChlEmKD7UXrkhQniii4V9s_Oc0GoYuhwXlX5zYn9lQVZtO7YvvnT72nFAxAvni04wUiugTMywy9rvwcjJOyMxag-IpOsXQQGu4tQpCJU_LofrA-24NfpxrI3sNIzrSSrlIs=w558-h451
  66. ↑ https://www.nybooks.com/online/2022/02/05/ideology-as-biology/
  67. ↑ https://www.razibkhan.com/p/rkul-time-well-spent-01012023
  68. ↑ (redacted) and Bo Winegard: probing the intellectual darker webUnsupervised Learning May 16, 2025 (retrieved May 26, 2025)
  69. ↑ Steve Hsu: IQ, artificial intelligence and academiaUnsupervised Learning March 30, 2024 (retrieved May 26, 2025)
  70. ↑ Jonathan Keeperman: becoming Lomez Unsupervised Learning May 30, 2024 (retrieved May 26, 2025)
  71. ↑ Colin Wright: in the trenches of the gender wars Unsupervised Learning April 4, 2024 (retrieved May 26, 2025)
  72. ↑ Curtis Yarvin: reflections on a life of poetry Unsupervised Learning November 19, 2024 (retrieved May 26, 2025)
  73. ↑ John Sailer: a time of troubles in higher education Unsupervised Learning April 26, 2024 (retrieved May 26, 2025)
  74. ↑ Here's Razib at Curtis Yarvin's wedding. It's always interesting to see who people choose to trust when seeking information outside their area of expertise! Jesse Spafford X/Twitter March 22, 2025 (retrieved May 26, 2025)
  75. ↑ Curtis Yarvin Says Democracy Is Done. Powerful Conservatives Are Listening David Marchese New York Times January 18, 2025 (retrieved May 26, 2025)
  76. ↑ Curtis Yarvin “Historian” for Tech Bros Says Blacks Were Better Off With Slavery Patrick Young The Reconstruction Era January 29, 2025 (retrieved May 26, 2025)
  77. ↑ Razib Khan, Anti-Woke Mage Of Old Religion: Atheist scientist and controversialist says Woke triumph resembles historical victory of Christianity over Roman paganism by Rod Dreher (Feb 1, 2021 10:18 AM) The American Conservative.
This article is issued from Rationalwiki. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.