Nothing about the article you posted in your first comment seems racist. You could argue that believing in the conclusions of Richard Lynn’s work makes someone racist, but to support that claim, you’d need to show that those who believe it do so out of willful ignorance of evidence that his science is flawed.
Scott itself makes a point of the study being debated. It's not. It's not debated. It's pseudo science,or "science" made with so many questionable points that it's hard to call it "science". He links to a magazine article written by a researcher that has been fired, not surprisingly, for his pseudo scientific stances on racism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Carl
Saying in 2025 that the study is still debated is not only racist, but dishonest as well. It's not debated, it's junk
It is debated: just not by serious scholars or academics. (Which doesn't necessarily make it wrong; but "scientific racism is bunk, and its proponents are persuasive" is a model whose high predictive power has served me well, so I believe it's wrong regardless.)
