Twenty-eight year-old social scientist Noah Carl is at the top of his academic achievement after St Edmund’s College at the University of Cambridge awarded him a coveted Toby Jackman Newton Trust Research Fellowship.  This is a big deal for a young scholar who is at the beginning of his career.  He should be celebrating, but he’s been shamed into hiding.

Quillette has the story of the petition that is attempting to ruin his career and life:

Three hundred academics from around the world, many of them professors, have signed an open letter denouncing Dr Carl and demanding that the University of Cambridge “immediately conduct an investigation into the appointment process” on the grounds that his work is “ethically suspect” and “methodologically flawed.” The letter states: “we are shocked that a body of work that includes vital errors in data analysis and interpretation appears to have been taken seriously.” Yet the letter contains no evidence of any academic misconduct. It does not include a single reference to any of Dr Carl’s papers, let alone any papers that are “ethically suspect” or “methodologically flawed.”

If you are like me, you might smell something fishy here.  This reaction seems a little over-the-top just because a man got an award based on peer-reviewed research. Dr Carl’s research have appeared in journals like Intelligence, Personality & Individual Differences, The American Sociologist, Comparative Sociology, European Union Politics, and The British Journal of Sociology. He’s no sloppy scholar.

What topic is so anathema to these three hundred academics that they feel they have to denounce him without specifics?  Well, Dr. Carl writes about how intelligence affect beliefs and attitudes.  The piece that is most often cited paper is his 2014 paper called Verbal Intelligence is correlated with socially and economically liberal beliefsBut, he also has written,  Leave and Remain voters’ knowledge of the EU after the referendum of 2016 and Cognitive Ability and Political Beliefs in the United States.

Which of his papers do his critics deem to be problematic? The online petition criticizing this man’s work doesn’t specify.  They simply allege that his work is flawed, and — absent any evidence or citation — people sign the petition.  Hundreds, in fact.

Quillette attempts to get to the bottom of the controversy:

So why all the fuss? Dr Carl’s crime is that he has defended intelligence researchers who’ve written about the taboo topics of race, genes and IQ and argued that stifling debate in these areas is likely to cause more harm than allowing them to be freely discussed by academics. It appears to be this, and the fact that he spoke at the London Conference of Intelligence in 2017 alongside some of these researchers (although he did not himself speak about race, genes or IQ at that conference), that is the basis for the accusation, made in the letter, that he is guilty of “pseudoscientific racism.”

Wow.  Those are big words.  Big accusations.  Looks like the real problem people have with him is that he doesn’t believe British universities have enough diversity of political opinion. According to Dr. Carl, a lack of diversity leads to academics being ostracized for having different opinions.

And then, as if on cue…  this happens to him.

One of the people who signed the petition is left wing political activist Professor David Graeber.  He described Dr. Carl on Twitter as a “very creepy ‘race scientist’.”

Wow his academic language is impressive, no?  So, why all the vitriol?  Because he believes Dr. Carl is “methodologically flawed.”

Again…  why?

Graeber responded, “That’s easy. The concepts ‘race,’ ‘genetic intelligence,’ and ‘criminality’ are all concepts with at best questionable scientific validity, so any study that assumes all 3 as unproblematic is so wildly methodologically flawed that one can only assume a racist motive in the author.”

Wow.  Talk about a flawed methodology, professor Graeber.  You could’ve simplified your complaint and just denounced the fact that he describes himself as a conservative.  We got the message loud and clear.

The academic mob is one of the meanest, I’m convinced, because their bigotry is camouflaged by big words and condescension.  In the meantime, Dr. Carl has been advised not to talk to the media and is unable to defend his reputation from these horrible attacks.

These modern day witch hunts have to end, they should be denounced, and Dr. Carl should continue to pursue his important work.  Or else, the idea of inclusion, tolerance, open academic inquiry, and intellectual curiosity will all be dead.

Image Credit: Wikimedia

Hat Tip: Quillette

About The Author

Mark Meckler

Mark was a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, and served as the national coordinator. He left the organization to work more broadly on expanding the self-governance movement beyond the partisan divide. Mark appears regularly on television in outlets as diverse as MSNBC, ABC, NBC, Fox News, CNN, Bloomberg, Fox Business and the BBC. He’s highly sought after for the tea party perspective from print and electronic media outlets, from the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, L.A. Times, Washington Examiner, Politico and the The Hill. Mark blogs at, and his opinion editorials regularly run in many of the leading political newspapers both on and offline. Mark has a BA in English from San Diego State University and graduated with honors from University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law in 1988. He practiced real estate and business law for almost a decade. For the last eleven years of his legal career he specialized in Internet advertising law. When not fighting for the future of our nation, Mark is an avid horseman, and lives in rural northern California with his wife Patty and two children.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

15 + 2 =