Supplementing jakebeal's great answer on current research (not - digging old).
...but the research results recognized?
It seems "unlikely", perhaps unless the result is so evident, one cannot ignore it.
First, most journals have statements disallowing publishing unethical research. And without journal publication it is hard to get academic credit.
Second, if you managed to publish it somewhere, I bet that the reaction to its ethics will influence the evaluation of its scientific value. (Look at the reaction to any research results related to emotionally-charged topics. In this case it would be harder, because the reaction would be almost all-negative.)
Third, many people can think that if you are OK with one breach of ethics, you may be OK with breach of scientific procedures, or any other fraud (to support one's view of world, for fame, etc...).
After 15 years, he publishes a paper and confirms that there is a set amount of characteristics that can be transferred via genes.
- if you show that some traits are genetic, it won't be recognized (claiming that you are a racist),
- if you show that certain genes are responsible for certain traits, this result may be recognized (as it is easy to test it, and in more ethical way).
My personal stance is that all data should be used. (All in all, we use historical data from wars and atrocities, rather than forgetting the history; we can't change the past, but we can change the future.) However, creating lack of incentives to pursue highly unethical research might be worth it.