`  ::What about the point that there are valid non ``race`` or ``genetics`` ways of describing the issue? Instead of ``presumably`` how about something like ``no scientific basis/consensus``? The ``thrive/environment`` point probably should mention nutrition and other possible environmental causes?  The paragraph still suffers from the same problem of framing the issue exclusively in terms of ``race`` or ``genetics`` which is not right, all possible causes should describe the issue using their own descriptive terms. Why does the proposed paragraph also try to sneakily describe ``intelligence`` only in terms of ``genetic potential``? Is the author of the paragraph arguing that ``genetic potential`` is the only valid way of describing ``intelligence`` now too? What is the scientific basis for such an argument? The above paragraph is much more subtle (nice try) but is still riddled with the same errant exclusive framing of the issue around ``race`` or ``genetics``.  1 July 2005 05:08 (UTC)`