And apparently Science doesn't either. The statement:
"It is clear that black people are less intelligent than white people-just ask any employer of black people"
isn't science GiC, and I think it's sad that you think it is.
Genetic determinism of intelligence is scientific, it may not be definitively proven but there is substantial support for the theory. And you will note that Dr. Watson did not say that African intelligence is inferior
to other intelligences (such as those of Europeans or Japanese), only that it is 'not the same as', which is why Dr. Watson was surprised at the outcry, that there is genetic drift (especially considering the size of many founder groups) is a very plausable hypothesis.
1) Watson hasn't examined the socio-economic factors involved.
Watson is a geneticist, so he addresses issues of genetics, which is a wonderful thing because here we can get absolute answers in time, something that won't come from psychology and sociology. Furthermore, there is increasing evidence that several traits are caused by genetics; that intelligence is one of them seems fairly obvious when one compares humans to other species closely related in evolution, to extend this to assume there is a genetic difference causing intelligence differences within a species is hardly far-fetched.
2) Watson hasn't actually accrued any evidence for his statement- he has applied his own bias and pulled evidence out of where the sun doesn't shine.
It's interesting that the overwhelming majority of the criticism is comming from politicians and civil rights activists; geneticists are remaining fairly quiet on the issue, sure some are trying to distance themselves from him but I don't know of any that have presented evidnece to discredit the underlying theory of genetic determinism. And genetic determinism is not pulled out of Watson's posterior, but is rather heavily favoured amongst geneticists.
The problem is not that Watson's scientific theories are not plausable, rather the problem is that the implications of said theories are politically incorrect and unpopular.
3) Watson has made an hypothesis into a conclusion without proof. It's absolutely fine to propose a scientific examination to show whether white people are more intelligent than black people, it's not fine to say that your hypothesis that white people are more intelligent than black people is proven without any scientific evidence for it.
But Watson didn't definitively say anything, infact he said that he hopes all peoples are genetically equal, he just doesn't think that it's likely. Scientists make statements about how likely or unlikely some theory seems to them constantly, usually no one takes note...the ONLY reason that someone took note here was not because his assumption contradicted some established theory in genetics, but because it went beyond the bounds of what the PC thought police viewed as acceptable.
Your side is condemning him for being unscientific without presenting any genetic evidence for a contrary theory in genetics...which is utterly absurd.
4) Watson's claim would mean that the gene for intelligence is the same gene for skin colour- prove it.
Not true at all. Watson's claim would mean that, like the genes for skin colour, the genes for intelligence are affected by the influence of small founder groups and genetic drift and that unlike skin colour genes for intellience are influenced by different enviroments and darwinian natural selection.
Again, it's not about being PC, it's about the Scientific Method. Watson made a claim which is idiotic enough to disprove his own hypothesis.
And before Watson publishes such a theory in Nature
the requirements of the scientific method must be fulfilled; however, the fact that there is not yet definitive proof for his theories does not mean that they should be silenced, especially since the opposite theories have perhaps even less evidence in the field of genetics.