` ::::David.Kane, this is exasperating. All my quotes were from Jensen 1969.  All of them.  ``He concluded`` is not only sourced to Tucker, it is a perfectly adequate assessment of Jensen's own statement - to quote again, ``The reasonable answer, I believe, is to think at present only in terms of negative eugenics rather than in terms of positive eugenics.``  ::::It's been very frustrating to nail the focus here.  Let me lay it out this way: ::::*Why isn't Tucker sufficient? Because Jensen is a BLP? ::::*If Tucker is insufficient because this is a BLP and the claim is allegedly ``contentious``, how is it contentious? Does Jensen dispute it? Or does he concede to it? Do other references dispute Jensen concluded this? Or do they agree he did?  More directly, for the sake of argument here, if even Jensen's own quotations confirms the same thing post 1969 (as you seemed willing to allow above) then isn't it disingenuous to argue that the claim is only narrowly ``contentious`` in the context of this one paper?! ::::So focus.  It isn't our job to ``vet`` the strengths or weaknesses of Tucker's claims.  He's the authority-we aren't.  So if Tucker's to be given extra scrutiny here, by what rationale?  Thanks.   `