National Science Foundation: White Scientists Superior To Black & Asian Scientists

National Science Foundation: White Scientists Superior To Black & Asian Scientists

I, like you might be after you see it, was surprised after I saw that the National Science Foundation, the source for funding for the so-called hard sciences, came right out and said it.

“White scientists are more likely to win a grant from the National Science Foundation than researchers from other racial and ethnic groups,” they said.

We knew white scientists were doing well, but that was from relying on anecdotal observations. Here we have, Science mag says, “an independent analysis of more than 2 decades of NSF data on its merit review process.”

They say that “NSF funding rates” had “white scientists at the top and Asian researchers at the bottom”. Blacks are somewhere in the middle.

Well, thats the hard numbers, done scientifically. Must then be true: white scientists provide the better sort of science.

Question is, is it nature or nurture? Surely both, and in different proportion in different people. Well, we can leave that to whoever is interested in teasing out such subtleties.

It’s anyway clear that once a person has success, they often go on to more successes. Since it’s true of individuals, it can be true of the groups to which those individuals belong. So that if a white guy invents some nifty new science, he’s likely to snag the next and large grant on the topic. And if the same things happen with a lot of white guys, then those guys will go on to collect the money, get more papers, be put in places of authority, and so on and so forth.

Even the study authors know this, saying initial successes “have cascading impacts that perpetuate a cumulative advantage to White [principal investigators] across all of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.” Not an especially interesting observation, a banality. But there you go.

The rate at which whites do better isn’t loads higher than Asians, but in large groups any small difference in magnified (my emphasis):

Every scientist submitting a proposal to NSF faces stiff competition; overall success rates fluctuated between 22% and 34% over the study period. But white scientists consistently did better, Chen and colleagues found. (Scientists are asked to voluntarily provide their race and ethnicity when applying for a grant.)

In 2019, for example, NSF funded 31.3% of proposals from white scientists, versus an overall rate of 27.4%. In contrast, the success rate was 22.4% for Asian scientists and 26.5% for Black scientists. Proposals from Latino scientists were funded 29% of the time, a rate slightly above average but below the rate for white scientists.

Whites must be pretty smart to keep ahead like this.

Not only that—I don’t want you to miss this—black success rates were four points higher than Asian success rates.

I mean, you hear a lot about IQ tests and the like, and how much better Asians do than blacks (and whites). But those tests are, to a certain extent, artificial environments. When the electron hits the screen, it turns out blacks are better scientists than Asians. Which is why they win more awards.


It’s not because Asians aren’t trying hard enough. “Asian scientists,” they say, “submit the second most proposals of the various groups every year, roughly half the number sent in by white scientists.”

Even with all that effort, Asians can’t keep up with blacks, who do the least work. Well, if whites do the most, and Asians next most, and Latinos “submit about 50% more proposals to NSF than do Black scientists”, blacks must do the least. This is confirmed by our researchers: “Black researchers submit one proposal for every 20 proposals NSF receives from white scientists.”

Yet still they beat Asians.

There are, of course, various kinds of grants. Some are for teaching and other bureaucratic meddling, the growing scourge of science. About three quarters of grants are for science itself (what they call “research” grants).

White scientists enjoy an even larger advantage over most other groups in winning research awards, the study found. For nonresearch awards, most nonwhite groups did better than the NSF-wide average.

Whites are not just doing well, but really knocking those test tubes out of the labs.

Blacks are catching up, though and might soon overtake everybody. There were words in the report about how the NSF is going to bolster “programs designed to increase the success of Black applicants.” Soon they will be able to do even less work.

Buy my new book and learn to argue against the regime: Everything You Believe Is Wrong.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal click here; Or go to PayPal directly. For Zelle, use my email.


  1. Robin

    Time for affirmative action. Looks like the Asians are going to sit at the back of the bus, next to the whites. The heck with scientific merit! Full steam ahead!

    Yessiree. The liberal elites have made great strides in the last 60 years. We’ve gone from the term “Colored People” to “People of Color”. To coin a Briggsianism: Amirite?

  2. John B(S)


    Yet it is STILL NAACP

    Imagine if it were NAAPOC, it’d be so much easier to make it into a word instead of always having to spell

  3. Hagfish Bagpipe

    “Asian” — funny how you can take all the wildly different peoples of Asia and turn them into one big blob of Asian soup. Same with “Hispanic” — a term invented in the 1970s for a crazy assortment of peoples. “Black”, same thing, especially regarding African tribes. “White” is a fantastically heterogenous agglomeration, as is “Pacific Islander”. Even “Jew” under close examination difractionates into diversiticulated distillates, and they all hate each other and argue incessantly. By the way, how come the study under question doesn’t break out the poor oppressed Jews who don’t get no grant loot? Never mind, point is all these racial categories, while having some faint basis in reality, are mainly designed as divide & conquer word wizardry psyop hocus bogus flim flam flummery to antagonize everyone and get them to tear each other’s hair out and write spleen-venting blog posts and comments… especially stupid comments… instead of going out and doing useful stuff like painting the house or rooting out the occult power orchestrating all these sinister machinations.

  4. Robin


    Are Spaniards people of color? Are Arabs Asians? Are Jews White? Where is the Ministry of Official Truth when you really really need them?

  5. I think I detected your satire, although your humor is so dry that this article could have been written straight by many of our media outlets. They would have of course supplied color commentary, and the absence of this is what makes your article here so droll.

  6. Remember that Jews are considered to be white when it’s convenient to them.

    Asians are raised in a culture of lying, cheating, and arrogance, and it shows in their grant proposals. As does their cultural reliance on pseudo-religious nonscience like chi flow. (The NSF doesn’t give many grants to water dowsers, either.)

    Always remember that most funded “science” projects are “social”, and therefore not actual science.

  7. Johnno

    If the runner ups want to do better, they need to look at and copy whatever it is that whitey is doing.

    But instead it will be the application process that will be rejigged and tweaked until it finally provides the answer they are looking for.

    The question is… will there be any grant money left when it finally does?

    Far better to just take it to the casino and bet it all on black. 50/50 odds will be a better return on investment by then.

  8. Cary Cotterman

    As for Jews–most are Caucasian, whether it’s convenient for them or not. People like Jack Benny, Benny Goodman, and William Shatner are typical white guys about as much as it’s possible to be.


    Finding it difficult to see what these folks are talking about. Most years have at least some non-white group “doing better” than whites. See the racialist authors attached tweet’s color graph.

  10. Vermont Crank

    We will have to wait to hear from Fauci on this. He said “I am science” and he is cos science costs money and Fauci controls and dispenses almost all of it; Science costs money and he who dispenses the money can control the science observes Charles Ortleb.

    Faucii controls and dispenses 7.7 billions of dollars to his Bunsen Burner Buddies and woe betide that scientist who dares to challenge the proclamations of the impeccable and infallible Fauci.

    The genius Dr Peter Duesberg did and and he was non-personed by Tiny Tony…

  11. Milton Hathaway

    “Scientists are asked to voluntarily provide their race and ethnicity when applying for a grant.”

    I’m imagining how that conversation went:

    NSF Head of the Grant Award Committee: “We are worried that our grant awards process may be racist.”

    Henny Youngman’s Doctor: “Do the people awarding the grants even know the race of the applicant?”

    NSF-HotGAC: “Yes, we ask them on the application.”

    HYD: “Why do you do that?”

    NSF-HotGAC: “We need that information to determine if our process is racist.”

    “Doctor, it hurts when I do this.” Indeed it does.

    On another level of stupidity, why in the world would the NSF expect a grant applicant to answer the race/ethnicity question honestly? If you are Asian and you want that grant money, are you going to say you’re Asian? I didn’t think so. Now, go re-interpret the study results with that nugget of reality in mind.

  12. Jan Van Betsuni

    RFP Bulletins signaling a Strong Diversity Preference are not targeting Cal. Tech. grads.

  13. PaulH

    Well, they are always telling us to “believe the science.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *