Interesting read but I believe he wrote this simply because it conflicts with Gould's ideas that appeared in his book "The Mismeasure of Man". I believe Gould's book also received a fair amount of
criticism but I guess that's just the nature of scientific debate:
The Mismeasure of Man has been considered highly controversial among psychologists who support the concepts Gould examined.
Bernard Davis (1916–1994), professor of microbiology at the Harvard Medical School, accused Gould of setting up straw man arguments, as well as incorrectly defining key terms (notably "reification"), choosing data in a "highly selective" manner, and in general being motivated more by political concerns rather than scientific ones.[9] Davis claimed that a laudatory review by Philip Morrison, which appeared in Scientific American, was written because the journal's editorial staff had "long seen the study of the genetics of intelligence as a threat to social justice."[10]
Statistician David J. Bartholomew, of the London School of Economics, wrote that Gould erred in his use of factor analysis[11] and irrelevantly focused on issue of reification and ignored scientific consensus on the existence of the g factor of intelligence.[12]
In an article written for the April 1982 edition of Nature, Steve Blinkhorn, a senior lecturer in psychology at Hatfield Polytechnic, accused Gould of selectively juxtaposing data in order to further a political agenda.[13]
Psychologist Franz Samelson wrote a review in Science, which tended to be critical on a number of counts.[14] Samelson, for example, was critical of Gould's argument that U.S. Army intelligence tests contributed to the Immigration Restriction Act of 1924.
I've read a few book by Gould but haven't read the above one.
Mike