Reviews of Nicholas Wade's "A Troublesome Inheritance"

A list of reviews of Nicholas Wade’s book “A Troublesome Inheritance,” mainly by anthropologists and others who have investigated issues surrounding the concept of “race” in humans.

Bethune, Brian: Inheritance battles

Daniels, Anthony: Genetic disorder

Dobbs, David: The Fault in Our DNA

Fuentes, Augustín: The Troublesome Ignorance of Nicholas Wade

Geneticists, Lotsofthem: An Open Letter

Goodman, Alan: A Troublesome Racial Smog

Johnson, Eric Michael: On the Origin of White Power

Laden, Greg: A Troubling Tome

Marks, Jonathan: The Genes Made Us Do It

Marks, Jonathan: Review of A Troublesome Inheritance

Myers, PZ: The hbd delusion

O, Josyln (AAA): Is Cultural Anthropology Really Disembodied?

Orr, Allen H.: Stretch Genes

Raff, Jennifer: Nicholas Wade and race: building a scientific façade

Steadman, Ian: “Jews are adapted to capitalism”, and other nonsenses of the new scientific racism

Terrell, John Edward: A Troublesome Ghost

Yoder, Jeremy: Cluster-struck

Yoder, Jeremy: How A Troublesome Inheritance gets human genetics wrong

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn

7 thoughts on “Reviews of Nicholas Wade's "A Troublesome Inheritance"

    1. Thorough in that everything anybody ever said all crammed into one giant post. Not very useful. My list of reviews are those of people who understand the issue, in some cases the top anthropologists working in the area. Occam’s razor list is nothing like balanced; go have a look! It is very biased, going so far as to include enconia that look positive as positive reviews. Occom’s razor has an ax to grind, and it comes through very clearly in the list and the way the list is structured. Perhaps you meant to say “False Balanced.”

      The list provided here (above) includes only reviews that are critical of Wade’s book because Wade’s book sucks.

      Thanks for the link though!

  1. I did not get past page three where his main argument to support recent (last few hundred years) rapid genetic change was that women on some island had changed from having (on average) their first babies at the age of 22 from an previous average age of 24. If he starts off that badly why continue? And, by the way, I have no doubt there is a lot of recent genetic change but that is not it. The book is so clearly crap you don’t even need the scientists to tell you so.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.