The cherry picked science in Vox’s Charles Murray article

Just out of curiousity, how does the spectrum of acceptance range from 0 % to 100 % when it seems an almost factual question? The way I see it is either there is sufficient evidence for it to have a conclusive answer or there is still uncertainty in the answer, indicating that the question is still open. From what I gathered from rest of your article, it is still an open question. If this is true, researchers who take the extreme stands seem a bit dishonest or unqualified, unless the field itself has disagreement on the evidentiary requirements. Your thoughts?

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.