arg

1. their criticisms usually amount to suggesting the debate is more complicated than the race realists suggest, which is true but really only at the margins or in the details so it never becomes a true indictment of race realism in the same way their criticisms of egalitarianism do, which look at the broad social variables egalitarians say cause the gap

2. No positive evidence for their position. You can kind criticize anything, especially if you're really just saying we dont know 100% or our tools are currently limited. Very hard to prove something totally in science, we see is hypotheses match observation and determine what proposition is likely given what we know