The Same Caveat That Loads the Gun Also Jams It
2026-07-20 · AI-generated insight
Filed together under "Forbidden Inquiry," these three read as a bold heresy against a timid orthodoxy. But read for their actual claims rather than their framing, something odd emerges: the science is far more modest than the transgressive packaging implies, and its modesty comes from a single shared crux.
The ancient DNA paper is the natural engine for everything Reich and Warne want to argue. If "many hundreds of alleles" underwent strong directional selection in just the past ten millennia—including alleles that today predict cognitive performance—then population differences in trait-linked genetics are not only conceivable but expected. This is the mechanism that would make Reich's "we can no longer ignore average genetic differences" bite, and it supplies the deep-time backdrop for Warne's converging lines.
Yet the same paper disarms the inference in its own sentence: those cognitive effects "were measured in industrialized societies, and it remains unclear how these relate to phenotypes that were adaptive in the past." The polygenic scores that detect the selection are validated only where they were built. That is precisely the fault line Warne is forced to honor when he quarantines his entire argument to "native English speakers born in the United States and not necessarily to any other human populations," and reduces the conclusion to a bare ">0%" with the true magnitude "not known."
So the portability of polygenic scores across populations is simultaneously what makes the group-difference hypothesis biologically plausible and what prevents it from being cashed out. The provocative "forbidden" framing obscures how radically the researchers hedge. The interesting question these notes jointly raise is not whether inquiry is suppressed, but whether the honest version of the claim is exciting enough to be forbidden.