I've recently been examining racist arguments without taking the attitude that there just must be something factually incorrect about them. I've noticed a few things about them.

First, racists often rely far more extensively on empirically derived facts than their opponents do. That is, racists don't "just make it up" and then rantingly insist upon their narrative. Instead, they do quite a bit of research before they write.

Second, racists are usually more fair in their conclusions and in their presentations than they are usually credited for being.

Third, the opponents of racism, whom I'll call "egalitarians," are usually the ones who sound as if they were defending some sort of preconceived quasi-religious orthodoxy. Strip away their pejoratives, or ignore them, and judge the racist viewpoint in the light of its own merits, and racism seems at times to be rather convincing.