and recorded the color of their pupils' hair and eyes to determine whether students belonged to the true "Aryan race."

You don't have to take my word for it that the kind of science that Karl Pearson introduced into the collection of University College London was an example of Nazi science before Nazism existed,  how about The Holocaust Museum?

Hitler and other Nazi leaders viewed the Jews not as a religious group, but as a poisonous "race," which "lived off" the other races and weakened them. After Hitler took power, Nazi teachers in school classrooms began to apply the "principles" of racial science. They measured skull size and nose length, and recorded the color of their pupils' hair and eyes to determine whether students belonged to the true "Aryan race." Jewish and Romani (Gypsy) students were often humiliated in the process.

That would have preceded them being excluded from education (read the end of the first of this impromptu mini-series from Monday) on the basis of their biological classification and, then, murdered.

I don't know if he ever gave a reason why, in his early 20s,  Karl Pearson changed the spelling of his first name to the German version of it with at "K" but he was certainly convinced of the racial superiority of the "Aryan race" going back to before Hitler was born.  You can read that in his earlier depravity published as The Ethic of Freethought and Other Addresses and Essays, which, I believe, displays Pearson's, as many other figures in the British establishment of his day's primary goal of discrediting and eliminating Christianity and the morality of Christianity which they found uncongenial to their enjoyment of their wealth and class position.  As has been seen, Karl Pearson's socialism was not really incompatible with the British class system and was, in fact, indistinguishable from Nazi socialism.

I would especially recommend the bizarre essay, A Sketch of The Sex-Relations In Primitive and Medieval Germany for what it exposes as the kind of racist, pseudo-scientific anthropology and history - more like gossip and racist lore - that not only Karl Pearson but his teacher - master, really - Francis Galton,  Charles Darwin and such a huge part of the pseudo-scientific basis of Darwinism applied to human beings rested on.  The same can be said of the quality of the material that Sociobiology and Evolutionary Psychology rests on today, as can be seen, especially, in the peer-reviewed, published work of the scientific racist - and before his retirement honored scientist in good-standing, Kevin Macdonald and his buddy John Hartung.  Like the Republican reaction to Trump's treason on display last weekend, something which was certainly no surprise, it took those who reviewed, published and cited such science having its blatant anti-semitism thrown in their faces to get them to distance themselves from it.

And speaking of which, you really haven't gotten the full measure of Darwinian racism until you have read Karl Pearson's and Margaret Moul's 1925 study: The Problem of Alien Immigration Into Great Britain, Illustrated By An Examination of Russian and Polish Jewish Children, which, checking very early this morning, I found what use Pearson had made of that horrific relic of the German genocide in East Africa made by one of its scientific staff, Eugen Fischer that I learned of only yesterday.   I had read Pearson and Moul's paper quite a while back and it wasn't until this morning that thinking about Fischer's little box of fake hair jogged my memory.  I found what I expected to on page 19, in the section analyzing "Hair Pigmentation of Jews".

Our results were obtained with Fischer's glass silk hair scale which has a large series of numbered patterns, and we have grouped them above into eight classes of fairly definite character for comparison with those of other observers. It is very difficult to grasp what other observers who have not worked with standard scales really mean by their colours. Thus Jacobs' 35.5 yo of black hair seems compatible with nothing else recorded, and must certainly include all the very dark brown hairs. For the final comparison it has not seemed possible to do more than divide the whole series into dark and light hair as given by the second percentages in each column. Under these circumstances Jacobs' adult Jews correspond reasonably with the Galician adult Jews. A large mass of material for the German Jewish boys is provided in Virchow's German pigmentation survey and is directly comparable with ours, both sets of boys being of school age. Now our boys were those on whom the special eye examination was made, and these were on the whole older than the general school population. Hence our boys are likely to be older than the German boys. Yet they are clearly a lighter haired population. Of course hair darkens with age, and if we were to suppose the German Jewish boys to become as dark as the Jewish adults in the first two columns in our table as they grow older, there is no reason to suppose that the alien Jewish boys (who start older) would catch them up. Here again it seems possible that there is some infusion of foreign blood.

I will start by pointing out the sheer racism of it and the sheer pseudo-science -or, rather, if it wasn't done by scientists what should be considered pseudo-science -  of using artificial, dyed fiberglass to make a biological and racial classification of real people based on their hair color.  And it continued, in quite similar terms to that used by Nazis to classify Jews, Gypsies, etc. as the British study did things like compare eye-color to the size of heads of Jewish children, evaluated them on their cleanliness, The whole thing reeks.  Yet it was considered valid science under the regime of Darwinism.   I have not done it yet but I would expect if I could find the documents I would find this paper by Pearson and Moul cited by the Nazi scientists who, in the next few years,  made the racial classification used to mark people for murder.   I would imagine Eugen Fischer knew of this use of his little box of fake hair, I wouldn't be surprised if Pearson or one of his colleagues sent him the published paper.   I wouldn't be surprised if Pearson didn't express his thanks for the scale Fischer provided.   Scientists like to extend that kind of professional courtesy to each other.

Update:  Going over this to correct the text, I realized that I should call your attention, in light of that quote from the Holocaust Museum, " Nazi leaders viewed the Jews not as a religious group, but as a poisonous "race," which "lived off" the other races and weakened them,"  the primary motivation that Pearson and Moul stated for why they had done their study on Jewish Children was concern that such "aliens" as the Jews of Poland and Russia would become "parasitic" on Britain and the native British society.   It was a dilemma for them that there was a notably distinguished (since it's Britian, read that "rich and powerful")  native British Jewish population whose opposition would certainly not be congenial to the status of their study (one word, "Disraeli") so they made a distinction between those admirable Jews and the ones who's hair color, head size and "cleanliness" they were talking about.  I could point out to how Darwin did pretty much the same thing, only it was Gladstone and Irish home rule, but I've got other things to do right now.

Update 2:  When Hitler came to power in 1932, he promoted like-minded scholars. Eugen Fischer became the director of the Kaiser WilhelmInstitute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics, and he implemented the Nazi policies with such enthusiasm that Franz Weidenreich, a distinguished anatomist who had been forced to emigrate because of his ancestry, later suggested in the pages of the journal Science that he be tried as a war criminal.

Encyclopedia of Race and Racism

Update 3:  I had a few minutes this afternoon so I looked around, the Pearson Moul study is cited by contemporary neo-Nazi, white supremacist and racist publications that note it supports their anti-Semitism.  Just to tie up that loose end.  I do not generally give links to neo-Nazi websites, whether or not they explicitly announce their allegiance.  I will give you a clue, some of them are listed on the Southern Poverty Law Center list of racist organizations.

I have also found that, some racist "testing apparatus" apparently created by Eugen Fischer was apparently found at a university  lab in South Africa, the lab being a source of pro-apartheid propaganda.  The information is behind a paywall I can't afford to get past so I'm not sure if one of those is the box of fake hair mentioned below but I can't imagine he didn't make more than one of them as he continued in that line of  junk science when the Nazis took over eight years after Pearson and Moul used their copy of it.  I have been looking to see what Nazi citation of the paper there must have been but don't have the time to look in depth, just now.  As Baur, Fischer and Lenz included citations of British Darwinists, including Pearson in their book, I can't imagine they were unaware of its contents.   I did note that when Edwin Black was doing his research into American eugenics he found that a lot of records of American eugenics which he couldn't find here, he found copies of in German archives, efficiently collected and organized by Nazi researchers, he said:

Because the German and American wings[of eugenics]collaborated so closely, the German archives clearly traced the development of German race hygiene as it emulated the American program. More importantly, because the American and German movements functioned as a binary, their leaders bragged to one another and exchanged information constantly. Therefore I learned much about America’s record by examining Reich-era files. For instance, although the number of individuals sterilized in Vermont has eluded researchers in that state, the information is readily available in the files of Nazi organizations. Moreover, obscure Nazi medical literature reveals the Nazis’ understanding of their American partners. Probing the prodigious files of Nazi eugenics took my project to the Bundesarchiv in Berlin and Koblenz, the Max Planck Institute in Berlin, Heidelberg University and many other repositories in Germany.

As the Pearson-Moul study was published in a major journal of British eugenics and as the topic was a heavily anti-semetic study of the very Polish and Russian Jews that the Nazis were already planning on murdering before they took power under the policy of Lebensraum,  it's impossible to imagine them not studying it thoroughly.   I wouldn't be surprised if some of it didn't inform some of the most vile of their anti-Jewish popular propaganda, such as the section asserting the dirtiness and low intelligence and unflattering moral character Pearson and Moul asserted.