Some so-called scientists sometimes behave as if they are gods. They manipulate research processes; they deliberately tailor and guide the outcomes towards hidden agendas. They then publish such findings in research journals and blogs. That is the route used by controversial scholars in their academic exercises for seeking recognitions and grants.

Recently a professor in the London School of Economics, Satoshi Kanazawa who relishes his role as an agent provocateur, provokes a public outrage with a research finding he tags “Objective Attractiveness” that was published and eventually removed by Psychology Today magazine from its website. Kanazawa who is referred to as evolutionary biologist and psychologist entitled his article “Why Are Black Women Less Physically Attractive than Other Women?”

Kanazawa, has always been criticised by fellow scholars over his provocative studies which could be tagged as his mere personal opinions than credible findings. While the student union in London have called for his dismissal from the university some respected bloggers who have studied some of his works have publicly come out to criticise his faulty findings.

Khadijah M. Britton, for instance points out recently that: “Kanazawa is a repeat offender, with years of roundly criticized and heartily debunked pseudoscience-based shock-jockery under his belt. Despite this, he is still posting on the blog of a reputable mainstream publication, still teaching at a respected university and still serving on the editorial board of one of his discipline’s peer-reviewed research journals. Though, possibly not for long: this particular post’s racist hypothesis offended many, unleashing serious righteous outrage across the internet: social media users raced to blog, tweet and even petition demanding that Psychology Today remove Kanazawa as a contributor to their Web site and magazine.”

While many could be easily fooled by academic theories churn-out from the campuses, we should be wary of accepting every research finding as infallible. It has been discovered that some researchers are not only fake but are subjective in all their methods: in determining the population, in selecting the participants for studies and in the analyses of the findings. They give figures not necessarily reliable or accurate statistics on the findings.

Since Kanazawa and his likes do not believe in the idioms that “Beauty is in the eyes of beholders” his research’s conclusions are nonsensical, unscientific, godless and outright stupid.

How could one measure and rate the attractivenness of a woman? Should the attraction be on the face, body structure, gesticulation, complexion or the attitudes? How could one determine the entire physical embodiments of a woman?

In my writing in 2002 when a Nigerian lady, Agbani Darego won the Miss World title (Miss World 2002), I did state that: The African (black) femininity, without exaggeration, enables one to mirror oneself from unblemished and fleshy cheeks. They (black women) are healthy and full of life; exhibiting enticing physiques. An African (black) woman is dark, thick and robust, devoid of a skinny, bony and tiny body frame. Artificial makeup and expensive attires are not what make the natural beauty of a black woman.”

Though I am not a scientist like Professor Kanazawa, I can rightly say like majority of people who use their senses to pass judgement that black is naturally beauty and attractive.

canadian pharmacy Vigora