The statement i made is not about "validity" of such discussions/articles, but the fact that articles and discussions exist, and me claiming that if they exist, and people read them, and make conclusions (right or wrong), then talking about it (like Mozer and few others did) is not a taboo.
Taboo, no, but if a person is relying on research, then the research should be accurate and accurately presented.
This one no longer shows link to the whole article, just the abstract (but it was there when i saw it)
-
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1357034X030092004
Not a problem; I have access to the full text of the document. This is not a study but an argument that such studies should not be blocked or suppressed because of political correctness.
None of the rest of these are actual studies, either; it's a collection of news reports (which are notoriously unreliable for scientific information), an encyclopedia discussion of the issue (ditto) and an internet chat. Some of them reference studies, but that's not on point.
The Live Science link is a good example of why news sources are not good sources of scientific information. The headline claims that the study was about why black athletes run so fast and that is going to be what most people will take away from it, but the study itself was about body type and made no actual conclusions about race and athletic ability, only about race and certain body measurements. The scientists in question speculated that there is a link between body type and speed, but they didn't actually study that issue.
If your point is just that people are talking about it, then sure, I will totally agree--some people are talking about it. There have been some studies. And if Nina Mozer wants to talk about it, then she should have at it.
But saying that race is a possible factor in athletic performance is one thing; making assertions that race IS a determining factor in athletic performance is something else entirely. And she should be taking a drubbing, not for bringing it up, but for making a statement that is not supported by the evidence.