Social scientist Noah Carl, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Cambridge, was sacked on Tuesday night and stripped of his fellowship for conducting research deemed "problematic" and "racist."
A controversial scholar accused of conducting “racist” research was stripped of his fellowship at a Cambridge University college last night after an investigation into his work.
A panel at St Edmund’s College looking into complaints about Noah Carl, a social scientist, concluded that his work was “problematic”.
The former fellow had spoken at a eugenics conference and has said that hostility to immigrant groups draws on “rational beliefs” about stereotypes that are “quite accurate”.
In a letter of redress leaked to The Times Matthew Bullock, the master of St Edmund’s, confirmed Dr Carl’s fellowship had been terminated. Mr Bullock said that college heads had “considered the special investigation panel in relation to your complaints about the nature and quality of Dr Carl’s work.
One of his "problematic" works included criticizing incest:
Several reports have highlighted that, within Britain, allegations of electoral fraud tend to be more common in areas with large Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities. However, the extent of this association has not yet been quantified. Using data at the local authority level, this paper shows that percentage Pakistani and Bangladeshi (logged) is a robust predictor of two measures of electoral fraud allegations: one based on designations by the Electoral Commission, and one based on police enquiries. Indeed, the association persists after controlling for other minority shares, demographic characteristics, socio-economic deprivation, and anti-immigration attitudes. I interpret this finding with reference to the growing literature on consanguinity (cousin marriage) and corruption. Rates of cousin marriage tend to be high in countries such as Pakistan and Bangladesh, which may have fostered norms of nepotism and in-group favoritism that persist over time. To bolster my interpretation, I use individual level survey data to show that, within Europe, migrants from countries with high rates of cousin marriage are more likely to say that family should be one’s main priority in life, and are less likely to say it is wrong for a public official to request a bribe.
Another one of his "problematic" papers looked at what's driving terrorism in the West.
Nuffield College, New Road, Oxford, OX11NF, United Kingdom.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the British government reports a terrorism threat level for every country. This paper analyses variation in terrorism threat level across Western countries on 22nd March 2016, the day of the airport and metro station bombings in Brussels. It finds that percentage of Muslims in the population and military intervention in the Middle East are independently associated with terrorism threat level. In other words, Western countries which have a higher percentage of Muslims, and which have intervened militarily in the Middle East, tend to exhibit higher terrorism threat levels in March 2016. Despite a small sample size, these results are fairly robust across different specifications.
Another "problematic" study looked at the relationship between immigrants' nation of origin and their crime rates:
Open Quantitative Sociology & Political Science, Nov. 10, 2016, ISSN: 2446-3868
Public beliefs about immigrants and immigration are widely regarded as erroneous. For example, members of the public typically overestimate the immigrant fraction of the population by ~10–15 percentage points. On the other hand, consensual stereotypes about the respective characteristics of different groups (e.g., sexes, races, nationalities) are generally found to be quite accurate. The present study shows that, in the UK, net opposition to immigrants of different nationalities (n = 23) correlates strongly with the log of immigrant arrests rates (r = .77; p = 0.00002; 95% CI = [.52, .90]) and with the log of their arrest rates for violent crime (r = .77; p = 0.00001; 95% CI = [.52, .90]). This is particularly noteworthy given that Britons reportedly think that an immigrant’s criminal history should be one of the most important characteristics when considering whether he or she should be allowed into the country. In bivariate models, the associations are not wholly accounted for by a general opposition to non-Whites, non-Westerners, foreigners who do not speak English, Muslims, or those from countries with low average IQ. While circumstantial in nature, the study’s findings suggest that public beliefs about the relative positions of different immigrant groups may be reasonably accurate.
Scientific inquiry cannot be tolerated if the results upset prog-globalist narratives.
I have just learned that the mob has been successful in getting social scientist Noah Carl fired from his position at Cambridge. The statement from St. Edmund's apologises for the "hurt" caused by his appointment. Read the back-story herehttps://t.co/rmJ0YLtjMO
Noah is someone I know personally from Oxford. I don't agree with his politics or some of the conclusions of his research, but I know he is an intelligent and open minded truth seeker. If there is no place for heterodox scholars in the academy, that's very worrying. https://t.co/w25wCKXi5H