Thank you for taking the time to read and respond. One of the many things I appreciate about Medium is that it is not always an echo chamber.

I am curious specifically which conclusions you think are unprofessional?

I'm going to take a guess and assume that it is where I take a book about ancient DNA and have takeaways about race and immigration in modern society.

Race, racism, and xenophobia are unscientific. As far as I can tell, there is no scientific basis for race and hatred of immigrants. Therefore, you are technically correct. Any conclusions that I drew about race and immigration did not come directly from the work.

My larger point is that in the past many advocates for white supremacy have used bad science to back up their theories about race. White supremacy looks to justify itself. This book seems to be about solid evidence-based science, without a political agenda. As such, we can check to see if the science backs up the white supremacists' theories or not. My takeaway is that the science of ancient DNA actually undermines white supremacists notions of race and, by extension, racism. Therefore it is exactly the lack of connection between the science and race that I am trying to convey in my conclusions.

I am open to specific criticism of any of my essays. I write to discover. Sometimes I reach for conclusions that are as much about what I am discovering about myself as they are about the material I am interacting with. I am especially curious about how race and the concept of whiteness operates in myself and the larger society.