Contents
1. Summary
2. Selected Quotes

Link: https://web.archive.org/web/20220822155648/https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04008-x

1. Summary

In late 2021, Nature Journal published a paper containing “global guidelines for ethical DNA research on ancient human remains,” which apparently translates to “Critical Race Theory for genetics research.” It was co-written by around 60 authors, many of whom are well-known archaeologists and geneticists, and is one of the most duplicitous and self-contradictory papers I’ve ever read.

In brief, the article implores scientists to respect the cultures of indigenous people around the world, recognize their historic struggles, and acknowledge their status as natives in their respective homelands. Except for indigenous Europeans, because White people are evil, bigoted, racist colonizers.

I’m not editorializing here. The paper reads like it was written by Trotsky. The first section is pro-brown, the second is anti-White, and the final section outlines their “guidelines for ethical genetics.” These proposed “guidelines” are five vague platitudes that bear little resemblance to the preceding sections, which contain the authors’ intended message: Brown people good, White people evil.

The paper explicitly states that heritage and DNA must be disconnected from identity for Whites but connected to identity for non-Whites. The indigenous status of non-Whites must be recognized and respected because they have been colonized. The indigenous identity of Whites must be combated via “deconstruction” because they are “xenophobic” (i.e. do not want to be colonized).

The authors used the broad racial term “West Eurasian” (Caucasoid) rather than “European” and included a jab at Israel, presumably for plausible deniability. Nevertheless, it’s clear that they’re targeting Whites; they aren’t protesting Middle Eastern or North African nationalism.

This paper vindicates what I’ve been saying for years: Do not trust geneticists, only trust the data and always analyze it yourself when possible. This is especially true now that academics are scrambling to control the narrative before this rapidly-evolving field slips out of their grasp.

2. Selected Quotes

“ethics of DNA research has a particular urgency because of the rapid growth of the field, the social and political impacts of studying ancestry”

“Over the past decade, ancient DNA has provided new evidence […] refuting myths of the ‘purity’ of any population and falsifying racist and nationalistic narratives.”

“While some have sought to misuse genetics as a tool for determining group belonging, in our opinion it is inappropriate for genetic data to be used as an arbiter of identity”

“In many countries in the Americas, Indigenous heritage is embedded in national identity and integrated into governmental cultural institutions. For instance, following Independence in Mexico, mestizos (people of mixed ancestry)—who form the great majority—embraced legacies from the Nahua (Aztec), Maya, Zapotec and other Indigenous groups as an integral part of national identity”

“Making Indigenous perspectives central is critical in regions with histories of settler colonialism, expropriation of Indigenous lands and artifacts, and persistent disenfranchisement of Indigenous communities”

“Researchers must work with […] scholars from the country of origin to seek permissions to study the remains of ancient individuals, and engage in discussions about […] historical injustices”

“The meaning of Indigeneity varies globally.”

“There are many places in the world where discussions about who is Indigenous have contributed to xenophobic and nationalistic narratives. In these places, using Indigenous identity to determine who can permit ancient DNA research can be harmful, as it can contribute to conflict among groups and to discrimination.”

“In West Eurasia, the suggestion that groups who claim local origins should have a special status has contributed to xenophobia and genocide.”

“European archaeologists have worked for decades to deconstruct narratives that claim ownership of cultural heritage by specific groups. Ancient DNA research ethics in a West Eurasian context must follow this movement away from the use of self-identified notions of ancestral connections to certain lands, while simultaneously ensuring respect for the perspectives of national minorities who have been the subject of discrimination.”

“The danger of government leaders citing archaeological and ancient DNA research to support favoured narratives of group iden