The book is heavily seasoned with references to peoples' works. They are even collected at the end of the book with chapter by chapter lists. But the book is more than a collection of descriptions of research results. He seeks to draw the dots between the individual research results and reach some suggestions and hypotheses for further thought and inquiry on the subject. I suspect your strong reaction over the last couple days is more due to the latter as filtered or paraphrased by your reviewers. Concerning "distinct biological races", are you happier with "biological races with fuzzy edges"? Wade discusses to some length the objections that meaning of a "race" implies sharp edges. That "race" has fuzzy edges must certainly be the case considering that each of us is a biological composite of many, many distant ancestors who themselves need not have been from the same ancient population. Wade certainly concurs in that. Probably best working definition that someone is of a specific race is that the very large majority of his biological ancestors came from the same ancient regional population. People of "mixed race" would be those who have large chunks of their genetic inheritance from people of different regional populations. So who appointed you the definer of Watson's alleged "racist comments"? That he was pressured to resign his post I think is mainly about the power of the PC mafia and the flow of financial contributions and grants to the institution he ran (Cold Springs Harbor Institute?). Kenneth Nordtvedt Haplogroup I Clade Modalities and Trees at: http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net -----Original Message----- From: Debbie Kennett Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2014 4:13 PM To: y-dna-haplogroup-i@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [yDNAhgI] Recommended book Ken I have provided links to critical views of Wade's work. I have yet to receive any sensible response from anyone explaining why they disagree with the technical points raised in those critical reviews. As you seem to be the only person who has even attempted to read the book perhaps you can enlighten me and point me to the scientific papers which are supposed to support Nicholas Wade's view that there are distinct biological races. James Watson, as I'm sure you will know, was forced to retire early after making racist comments: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/fury-at-dna-pioneers-theory-africa ns-are-less-intelligent-than-westerners-394898.html It's not surprising that he endorses Wade's book. I'm not familiar with the other two scientists, but population geneticists have uniformaly denounced Wade's book. Wade's education and work history are somewhat irrelevant. The focus should be on the arguments. No one has yet provided any evidence in support of Wade's arguments. Debbie ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to Y-DNA-HAPLOGROUP-I-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message