Racism

Creationism, Intelligent Design, and Evolution.
User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Racism

Postby Lausten » Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:57 pm

xouper wrote:When someone makes a claim of fact (especially if it is a generalization such as all X have characteristic W), it is legitimate to disprove that claim by citing a single counterexample. Contrary to your complaint, that is indeed a valid tactic.


Where is the burden of proof here? I believe it is on you. You are saying “race exist”. That is falsifiable. So, it is Lance who has provided counter examples and thus disproven your claim, according to the logic you just provided. Or at least his tactic is valid. If the tactic is valid in either direction then the tactic isn’t much of a tactic.

xouper wrote:Does that help explain what I mean when I say that consensus is not a valid scientific argument?


No, it demonstrates to me that you don’t know what "scientific consensus" means.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4858
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Racism

Postby Austin Harper » Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:19 pm

I think xouper knows what scientific consensus is. He is saying that we can't consider something to be correct solely based on its status as the consensus. The data must stand up to scrutiny. He has already stated the previously held consensus that the earth was the center of the universe. This has not stood up to scrutiny.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10243
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Racism

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:24 pm

Sub-species versus race.

These terms are, in fact, used by some people as interchangable. If we accept this as true, then my case is even stronger, since Neanderthal man is accepted by most anthropologists in that field as a subspecies rather than a separate species. Neanderthals show the high degree of genetic separation that I have pointed out is needed for clear races.

Biologists believing in race being a minority.
This is made clear by such things as the statement of position I posted from the American Anthropological Association. Their position is that 'race' is a social construct, not a biological reality. An official position like that would not be possible unless its members agreed.

This is demonstrated by Dr. Brace, Professor of Anthropology at the University of Michigan

http://www.cabrillo.edu/~crsmith/brace.html

He says : There is no such thing as a biological entity that warrants the term "race."
He goes on to explain the difference between social construct and biology. This view reflects that which is the majority in science today.

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4858
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Racism

Postby Austin Harper » Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:41 pm

Or Neanderthals could be a separate species; that is up for debate as well. Some classify them as Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, but others as Homo neanderthalensis.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10243
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Racism

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:54 pm

On the business of classifying 'races', and the people of the Pacific, here is a reference to support what I said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/18/world ... .html?_r=0

Simply, anyone who lumps together all the peoples of the Pacific as one 'race' does not know what he is talking about.

donniedarko
New Member
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:01 am

Re: Racism

Postby donniedarko » Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:52 am

I don't agree there are solid blocks of race such as 'white' and 'black' but I'm pretty sure any Swede is more genetically similar to another Swede than they are to any native Papua New Guinean, and that DNA and skeletal research would make that obvious. I think racial distinctions are more or less the result of branching caused by the separation of the continents by oceans and great mountain ranges. It's more than skin colour.

I would say the basic races would be Bantu, Pygmy, Khoisan, Middle Eastern/North African/Indian/Horn African, Oriental/Polynesian, European, Amerindian, Melanesian and Australian Aboriginal.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10243
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Racism

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:14 pm

donnie

Just to take one of your examples : Australian aboriginal.

Researchers have found that there is more genetic variation within this group than in all of Asia from Myanmar to Japan and Mongolia. There are roughly 200 tribes of Australian aboriginals, each of which is just as genetically distinct from the other 199, as Japanese are from Chinese.

So why do you put all these guys into one 'race'? Surely they should be 200 'races'?

Really, when you study the genetics of human variation, you have a choice between saying, as I do, that there is only one human race, or else (to be consistent with the scientific data) you have to say the human species is divided into perhaps a thousand or more 'races', each of which is genetically distinct.

Since the genetic difference within those more than a thousand 'races' is actually very small, that interpretation seems kind of ridiculous. And guess what? Most scientists agree that there is only one race.

User avatar
corymaylett
Regular Poster
Posts: 954
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:03 am

Re: Racism

Postby corymaylett » Sat Oct 06, 2012 11:49 pm

Lance Kennedy, from post #40 wrote:Now you can argue about the definition of the word 'race', but we end up discussing semantics. If we use the word in the same way as most English speaking people do, then we have a viable concept. Caucasian is a race, and negroid is a race. The fact that Obama is half caucasian and half negroid does not change the fact that both races exist.

Lance Kennedy, from post #687 wrote:Really, when you study the genetics of human variation, you have a choice between saying, as I do, that there is only one human race, or else (to be consistent with the scientific data) you have to say the human species is divided into perhaps a thousand or more 'races', each of which is genetically distinct.

Somewhat out of context, of course, but during the ensuing six hundred and some odd posts your thoughts seem to have evolved.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10243
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Racism

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:28 am

Thylacine

Not so much that as an appreciation that the word has two meaning depending on usage. It is like the word 'theory' which has an exact meaning in scientific terminology, and a much looser meaning in common parlance.

The word 'race' when used in common nature can mean a black guy is one race and a white guy another. However, if you are using it in the scientific sense, that is no longer true. Scientifically, the word 'race' has a more defined meaning, being the next taxonomic group below subspecies. The definition will be substantially different to the definition of 'race' when used in the more careless common way.

In this debate, I have been taking the view that is scientific. In that sense, there is only one race - the human race.

If I were using the word 'race', in the common way, as I was in post #40, the exact definition no longer applies and it is valid to say an African is one race, and a Chinese guy another.

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4832
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Racism

Postby Tom Palven » Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:40 pm

Austin Harper wrote:Or Neanderthals could be a separate species; that is up for debate as well. Some classify them as Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, but others as Homo neanderthalensis.


My own pet theory is that Neanderthals were blonde-haired and blue-eyed, square-jawed with sloping foreheads. They looked like Arnold Schwarzenegger; (Except for a few of the women.) gave rise to the Vikings, and still inhabit all of Scandinavia. Definitely a separate species. What say thou OOB? :wgrin:
(Oh, and many have a marvelous facility for linguistics..)
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
OutOfBreath
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:38 pm
Custom Title: Persistent ponderer
Location: Norway

Re: Racism

Postby OutOfBreath » Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:44 pm

Tom-Palven in another thread wrote:While you're here Dan, you never responded to my theory that the blonde-haired, blue-eyed Neanderthals were geneticaly swamped by the Cro Magnons who bred like rabbits. I expected a laugh, a go f yourself, or something!

Tom-Palven wrote:My own pet theory is that Neanderthals were blonde-haired and blue-eyed, square-jawed with sloping foreheads. They looked like Arnold Schwarzenegger; (Except for a few of the women.) gave rise to the Vikings, and still inhabit all of Scandinavia. Definitely a separate species. What say thou OOB? :wgrin:
(Oh, and many have a marvelous facility for linguistics..)

Ah, this is the post you're talking about. I've ignored this thread for some time now, seeing as it's a complete standstill.

Ehm, {!#%@} you? :)

Doesn't seem likely though, although it is now speculated and some evidence that early "modern humans" interbreeded with neanderthals. But that would go for most europeans.

That tall viking archetype has probably more to do with the rugged scandinavian lifestyle and climate provided better nutrition (fish, game etc) than in the farm-based continental empires. (They were tall for their time, not for ours)

Peace
Dan
What is perceived as real becomes real in its consequences.

"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4832
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Racism

Postby Tom Palven » Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:58 pm

OutOfBreath wrote:
Tom-Palven in another thread wrote:While you're here Dan, you never responded to my theory that the blonde-haired, blue-eyed Neanderthals were geneticaly swamped by the Cro Magnons who bred like rabbits. I expected a laugh, a go f yourself, or something!

Tom-Palven wrote:My own pet theory is that Neanderthals were blonde-haired and blue-eyed, square-jawed with sloping foreheads. They looked like Arnold Schwarzenegger; (Except for a few of the women.) gave rise to the Vikings, and still inhabit all of Scandinavia. Definitely a separate species. What say thou OOB? :wgrin:
(Oh, and many have a marvelous facility for linguistics..)

Ah, this is the post you're talking about. I've ignored this thread for some time now, seeing as it's a complete standstill.

Ehm, {!#%@} you? :)

Doesn't seem likely though, although it is now speculated and some evidence that early "modern humans" interbreeded with neanderthals. But that would go for most europeans.

That tall viking archetype has probably more to do with the rugged scandinavian lifestyle and climate provided better nutrition (fish, game etc) than in the farm-based continental empires. (They were tall for their time, not for ours)

Peace
Dan


This blue-eye, red/blonde-hair/Neanderthal question is truly something I wondered about independently long ago, and I've been meaning to google-search it for a couple of weeks now since this racism thing came up, and just did, and there is a lot of speculation about it. I'm reminded about when I wondered if big, strong, football player Tim Timbow, who can't seem t make it as a quarterback, might do well at tight end position, and wondered if this was a novel idea, and, you guessed it, there were a whole lot of sites speculating about that idea. "Nothing new under the sun."
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
Flash
Has More Than 6K Posts
Posts: 6001
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:09 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Racism

Postby Flash » Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:48 pm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/05/neanderthal-sex-modern-humans-interbreeding-africa_n_1942142.html?utm_hp_ref=science
The last sex between Neanderthals and modern humans likely occurred as recently as 47,000 years ago, the researchers added.

Yes, 47000 years ago on Monday, June 21 at 3 o'clock in the morning and after a well liquored party in the next cave.
When I feel like exercising, I just lie down until the feeling goes away. Paul Terry

User avatar
maunas
Poster
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:10 am

Re: Racism

Postby maunas » Sat Dec 01, 2012 1:27 pm

ethnology: The branch of anthropology that deals with the division of humankind into races and with their origins and distribution and distinctive characteristics. The branch of anthropology that deals with the origin, distribution, and characteristics of human racial groups.


Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/ethnology#ixzz2Do3vNVPP
Singularity! Because entangled.

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4832
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Racism

Postby Tom Palven » Sun Dec 02, 2012 3:13 pm

The two sites below, pictures of Susan Rice's lily-white husband, and an article about their investments, tend to demonstrate how political party barriers and racial barriers can be overcome in the spirit of bipartisan kleptocracy. :mrgreen:

http://www.google.com/images?q=susan+ri ... sult_group

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11 ... -canadian/
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
James Eubank
Spammer/Banned
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Racism

Postby James Eubank » Sat Jan 26, 2013 6:15 am

The answer is in the religious book "Quran". It says we are the sons and daughters of a one man, Adam and a women Hawwa. They were created by God and then placed in Heaven. Now why the earth created and How Adam and Hawwa were placed in earth, the whole explanation is in this book. I have read this complete book. I recommend this book to everyone. After reading this book, huge number of people have converted their religion to the religion of this book. Because it gave answers to all questions. Answers of all questions are written in this book . Please read it, you will also get your answer related to human origin as well as answers to many other questions.

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4858
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Racism

Postby Austin Harper » Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:42 pm

I read it; it's rubbish.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
maunas
Poster
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:10 am

Re: Racism

Postby maunas » Sat Aug 03, 2013 9:18 pm

Race
H pylori– associated atrophic gastritis appears to be more common among Asian and Hispanic persons than people of other races.
In the United States, H pylori infection is more common among African Americans than white persons, a difference attributed to socioeconomic factors. However, whether higher rates of H pylori– associated atrophic gastritis are observed among African Americans has not been established.
Autoimmune atrophic gastritis is more frequent in individuals of northern European descent and African Americans and is much less frequent in southern Europeans and Asians.
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1 ... view#a0199
Singularity! Because entangled.

User avatar
maunas
Poster
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:10 am

Re: Racism

Postby maunas » Sat Aug 03, 2013 9:47 pm

Race and ethnicity play a major role in the growth of body hair. As an example, Asian and Native American women tend to have little body hair, whereas Middle Eastern and Mediterranean women tend to have moderate to large amounts of body hair. (www.uptodate.com/patients) Women of Mediterranean descent tend to develop more terminal hair on the arms & legs than of Asian ancestry,while European women are in middle.
Singularity! Because entangled.

User avatar
Daedalus
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:38 pm
Custom Title: Ave Atque Vale

Re: Racism

Postby Daedalus » Sat Aug 03, 2013 10:57 pm

maunas wrote:Race and ethnicity play a major role in the growth of body hair. As an example, Asian and Native American women tend to have little body hair, whereas Middle Eastern and Mediterranean women tend to have moderate to large amounts of body hair. (http://www.uptodate.com/patients) Women of Mediterranean descent tend to develop more terminal hair on the arms & legs than of Asian ancestry,while European women are in middle.


Specific types play that role, race is still an artificial, variable, and social construction that sometimes overlaps those types.
"Propaganda is a monologue which seeks not a response, but an echo." (W.H. Auden)
"Given time and plenty of paper, philosophers can prove anything." (Robert Heinlein)
"The map is not the territory." (Alfred Korzybski)
“You’re in the desert, you see a tortoise lying on its back, struggling, and you’re not helping — why is that?" (Bladerunner)

User avatar
maunas
Poster
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:10 am

Re: Racism

Postby maunas » Sun Aug 04, 2013 1:47 pm

Daedalus wrote:
maunas wrote:Race and ethnicity play a major role in the growth of body hair. As an example, Asian and Native American women tend to have little body hair, whereas Middle Eastern and Mediterranean women tend to have moderate to large amounts of body hair. (http://www.uptodate.com/patients) Women of Mediterranean descent tend to develop more terminal hair on the arms & legs than of Asian ancestry,while European women are in middle.


Specific types play that role, race is still an artificial, variable, and social construction that sometimes overlaps those types.

Hi Daedalus,
NO! GENERAL TYPES play that role and with the modification that-- race is becoming an artificial,variable,and social construction......because of physical and cultural interbreeding in our modern world. Otherwise i repeat my post 530 on page 14 of this forum: Just as exclusively reproducing classes of man result in the formation of mananimals (please see my op- post 463 on page 12 of this forum), similarly varieties or races of life forms naturally get created before the formation of subspecies under conditions of reproductive and/or climatic isolation's.Genetic and epigenetic differences,though small, lead to easily distinguishable phenotypic and behavioral differences. Human races(which you mention) are highly interbred.Person of any IQ level can be born in any of these races, though, the percentage of such persons may vary from race to race.Africa, till ten millennia ago has served like a bone marrow of human evolution with stem populations of humans spreading from there to other continents and differentiating in to various continental races.
Last edited by maunas on Sun Aug 04, 2013 6:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Singularity! Because entangled.

User avatar
Daedalus
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:38 pm
Custom Title: Ave Atque Vale

Re: Racism

Postby Daedalus » Sun Aug 04, 2013 2:05 pm

maunas wrote:
Daedalus wrote:
maunas wrote:Race and ethnicity play a major role in the growth of body hair. As an example, Asian and Native American women tend to have little body hair, whereas Middle Eastern and Mediterranean women tend to have moderate to large amounts of body hair. (http://www.uptodate.com/patients) Women of Mediterranean descent tend to develop more terminal hair on the arms & legs than of Asian ancestry,while European women are in middle.


Specific types play that role, race is still an artificial, variable, and social construction that sometimes overlaps those types.

Hi Daedalus,
I agree with your statement, but with the modification that-- race is becoming an artificial,variable,and social construction......because of physical and cultural interbreeding in our modern world. Otherwise i repeat my post 530 on page 14 of this forum: Just as exclusively reproducing classes of man result in the formation of mananimals (please see my op- post 463 on page 12 of this forum), similarly varieties or races of life forms naturally get created before the formation of subspecies under conditions of reproductive and/or climatic isolation's.Genetic and epigenetic differences,though small, lead to easily distinguishable phenotypic and behavioral differences. Human races(which you mention) are highly interbred.Person of any IQ level can be born in any of these races, though, the percentage of such persons may vary from race to race.Africa, till ten millennia ago has served like a bone marrow of human evolution with stem populations of humans spreading from there to other continents and differentiating in to various continental races.


I believe the word you're looking for is not "race", which again is and has always been an artificial construction by people, with no rigorous definition when applied to humans.
"Propaganda is a monologue which seeks not a response, but an echo." (W.H. Auden)
"Given time and plenty of paper, philosophers can prove anything." (Robert Heinlein)
"The map is not the territory." (Alfred Korzybski)
“You’re in the desert, you see a tortoise lying on its back, struggling, and you’re not helping — why is that?" (Bladerunner)

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4832
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Racism

Postby Tom Palven » Sun Aug 04, 2013 3:16 pm

Daedalus wrote:
maunas wrote:
Daedalus wrote:
maunas wrote:Race and ethnicity play a major role in the growth of body hair. As an example, Asian and Native American women tend to have little body hair, whereas Middle Eastern and Mediterranean women tend to have moderate to large amounts of body hair. (http://www.uptodate.com/patients) Women of Mediterranean descent tend to develop more terminal hair on the arms & legs than of Asian ancestry,while European women are in middle.


Specific types play that role, race is still an artificial, variable, and social construction that sometimes overlaps those types.

Hi Daedalus,
I agree with your statement, but with the modification that-- race is becoming an artificial,variable,and social construction......because of physical and cultural interbreeding in our modern world. Otherwise i repeat my post 530 on page 14 of this forum: Just as exclusively reproducing classes of man result in the formation of mananimals (please see my op- post 463 on page 12 of this forum), similarly varieties or races of life forms naturally get created before the formation of subspecies under conditions of reproductive and/or climatic isolation's.Genetic and epigenetic differences,though small, lead to easily distinguishable phenotypic and behavioral differences. Human races(which you mention) are highly interbred.Person of any IQ level can be born in any of these races, though, the percentage of such persons may vary from race to race.Africa, till ten millennia ago has served like a bone marrow of human evolution with stem populations of humans spreading from there to other continents and differentiating in to various continental races.


I believe the word you're looking for is not "race", which again is and has always been an artificial construction by people, with no rigorous definition when applied to humans.


What word is he looking for?
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

nmblum88
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7815
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:28 pm

Re: Racism

Postby nmblum88 » Sun Aug 04, 2013 4:53 pm

Tom-Palven wrote:
Daedalus wrote:
maunas wrote:
Daedalus wrote:
maunas wrote:Race and ethnicity play a major role in the growth of body hair. As an example, Asian and Native American women tend to have little body hair, whereas Middle Eastern and Mediterranean women tend to have moderate to large amounts of body hair. (http://www.uptodate.com/patients) Women of Mediterranean descent tend to develop more terminal hair on the arms & legs than of Asian ancestry,while European women are in middle.


Specific types play that role, race is still an artificial, variable, and social construction that sometimes overlaps those types.

Hi Daedalus,
I agree with your statement, but with the modification that-- race is becoming an artificial,variable,and social construction......because of physical and cultural interbreeding in our modern world. Otherwise i repeat my post 530 on page 14 of this forum: Just as exclusively reproducing classes of man result in the formation of mananimals (please see my op- post 463 on page 12 of this forum), similarly varieties or races of life forms naturally get created before the formation of subspecies under conditions of reproductive and/or climatic isolation's.Genetic and epigenetic differences,though small, lead to easily distinguishable phenotypic and behavioral differences. Human races(which you mention) are highly interbred.Person of any IQ level can be born in any of these races, though, the percentage of such persons may vary from race to race.Africa, till ten millennia ago has served like a bone marrow of human evolution with stem populations of humans spreading from there to other continents and differentiating in to various continental races.


I believe the word you're looking for is not "race", which again is and has always been an artificial construction by people, with no rigorous definition when applied to humans.



What word is he looking for?


Tom, you silly fellow with your outdated standards for conversation!
The point is not to enlighten but simply to piss around the lawn to establish a right to the territory.

Norma
Skepticism:
" Norma, you poor sad lonely alcoholic. You entire life is devoted to interrupting other people's posts on this forum, regardless of the topic, to tell them what's wrong with them. The irony is, here you are doing it again, with this very post.
Your fanciful card games, movie sojourns and exciting overseas trips, that all take place within the four walls of an aged care retirement home, do not suggest your own children offered you the care, I gave my parents."

User avatar
Daedalus
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:38 pm
Custom Title: Ave Atque Vale

Re: Racism

Postby Daedalus » Sun Aug 04, 2013 5:50 pm

Tom-Palven wrote:
Daedalus wrote:
maunas wrote:
Daedalus wrote:
maunas wrote:Race and ethnicity play a major role in the growth of body hair. As an example, Asian and Native American women tend to have little body hair, whereas Middle Eastern and Mediterranean women tend to have moderate to large amounts of body hair. (http://www.uptodate.com/patients) Women of Mediterranean descent tend to develop more terminal hair on the arms & legs than of Asian ancestry,while European women are in middle.


Specific types play that role, race is still an artificial, variable, and social construction that sometimes overlaps those types.

Hi Daedalus,
I agree with your statement, but with the modification that-- race is becoming an artificial,variable,and social construction......because of physical and cultural interbreeding in our modern world. Otherwise i repeat my post 530 on page 14 of this forum: Just as exclusively reproducing classes of man result in the formation of mananimals (please see my op- post 463 on page 12 of this forum), similarly varieties or races of life forms naturally get created before the formation of subspecies under conditions of reproductive and/or climatic isolation's.Genetic and epigenetic differences,though small, lead to easily distinguishable phenotypic and behavioral differences. Human races(which you mention) are highly interbred.Person of any IQ level can be born in any of these races, though, the percentage of such persons may vary from race to race.Africa, till ten millennia ago has served like a bone marrow of human evolution with stem populations of humans spreading from there to other continents and differentiating in to various continental races.


I believe the word you're looking for is not "race", which again is and has always been an artificial construction by people, with no rigorous definition when applied to humans.


What word is he looking for?


The first thing I stated was correct... genetic types.

Daedalus wrote:Specific types play that role, race is still an artificial, variable, and social construction that sometimes overlaps those types.


Specifically "Phenotype".

nmblum wrote:Tom, you silly fellow with your outdated standards for conversation!
The point is not to enlighten but simply to piss around the lawn to establish a right to the territory.

Norma


Norma, you do realize that's precisely what you're doing now, right? :lol:

I mean really, how can you project that much and be so blissfully unaware... it's just a comedy of psychological myopia on your part.
"Propaganda is a monologue which seeks not a response, but an echo." (W.H. Auden)
"Given time and plenty of paper, philosophers can prove anything." (Robert Heinlein)
"The map is not the territory." (Alfred Korzybski)
“You’re in the desert, you see a tortoise lying on its back, struggling, and you’re not helping — why is that?" (Bladerunner)

User avatar
maunas
Poster
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:10 am

Re: Racism

Postby maunas » Sun Aug 04, 2013 7:14 pm

Daedalus, Tom-Palven, nmblum and people who read the dialogue since Post #700 Post by Daedalus, Please note that i have made an important modification at the beginning of my reply in Post #701.
Singularity! Because entangled.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10243
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Racism

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sun Aug 04, 2013 8:12 pm

The whole reason we can have an argument like this is that there is no clear cut definition of 'race' scientifically. Any definition offered must remain fuzzy and open to personal opinion. What is needed is a statement that a population becomes a separate 'race' when it differs from another population by a certain percentage of the genome. No such definition exists, which means this whole discussion is meaningless.

The reality is that the difference between the mean genome of one 'race; and another is less than the difference between the genomes of myself and Tom Smith who lives down the street. This means that the genetic difference between human 'races' is pretty damn small, and my own opinion is that considering 'race' among humans to be a scientifically meaningful distinction is probably quite wrong. However, without a clear cut scientific definition, we will be arguing the point ten years after armageddon.

User avatar
Daedalus
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:38 pm
Custom Title: Ave Atque Vale

Re: Racism

Postby Daedalus » Sun Aug 04, 2013 8:14 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:The whole reason we can have an argument like this is that there is no clear cut definition of 'race' scientifically. Any definition offered must remain fuzzy and open to personal opinion. What is needed is a statement that a population becomes a separate 'race' when it differs from another population by a certain percentage of the genome. No such definition exists, which means this whole discussion is meaningless.

The reality is that the difference between the mean genome of one 'race; and another is less than the difference between the genomes of myself and Tom Smith who lives down the street. This means that the genetic difference between human 'races' is pretty damn small, and my own opinion is that considering 'race' among humans to be a scientifically meaningful distinction is probably quite wrong. However, without a clear cut scientific definition, we will be arguing the point ten years after armageddon.


Exactly, race isn't a useful word when discussing anything rigorous, only "phenotype" or the discussion of specific genetic markers for mostly superficial differences.
"Propaganda is a monologue which seeks not a response, but an echo." (W.H. Auden)
"Given time and plenty of paper, philosophers can prove anything." (Robert Heinlein)
"The map is not the territory." (Alfred Korzybski)
“You’re in the desert, you see a tortoise lying on its back, struggling, and you’re not helping — why is that?" (Bladerunner)

User avatar
maunas
Poster
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:10 am

Re: Racism

Postby maunas » Mon Aug 05, 2013 6:43 am

If an Eskimo couple live in Congo in Africa, give birth and bring up children there, will the children show the phenotype of a native Negro with curly hair and black skin as an adult? NO! . If races do not exist then they should. Race is defined as that genotypic difference which prevents change in phenotype, even when conception and development takes place in a radically different climate from the native climate of parents.
Last edited by maunas on Mon Aug 05, 2013 10:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Singularity! Because entangled.

User avatar
maunas
Poster
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:10 am

Re: Racism

Postby maunas » Mon Aug 05, 2013 7:09 am

In different contexts different races are superior or inferior. What we need in today's world is "Hybrid Vigor" .
Singularity! Because entangled.

User avatar
Daedalus
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:38 pm
Custom Title: Ave Atque Vale

Re: Racism

Postby Daedalus » Mon Aug 05, 2013 3:09 pm

maunas wrote:If an Eskimo couple live in Congo in Africa, give birth and bring up children there, will the children show the phenotype of a native Negro with curly hair and black skin as an adult? NO! . If races do not exist then they should. Race is defined as that genotypic difference which prevents change in phenotype, even when conception and development takes place in a radically different climate from the native climate of parents.


That's a laughably non-rigorous and naïve definition that may work for you, but don't pretend it's real.
"Propaganda is a monologue which seeks not a response, but an echo." (W.H. Auden)
"Given time and plenty of paper, philosophers can prove anything." (Robert Heinlein)
"The map is not the territory." (Alfred Korzybski)
“You’re in the desert, you see a tortoise lying on its back, struggling, and you’re not helping — why is that?" (Bladerunner)

User avatar
maunas
Poster
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:10 am

Re: Racism

Postby maunas » Mon Aug 05, 2013 3:56 pm

That's a laughably non-rigorous and naïve response. You can replace Eskimo's by Caucasoids who can tolerate the hot weather of Congo better. Whites settled in central Africa since many generations still give birth to white children.
Singularity! Because entangled.

User avatar
Daedalus
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:38 pm
Custom Title: Ave Atque Vale

Re: Racism

Postby Daedalus » Mon Aug 05, 2013 4:19 pm

maunas wrote:That's a laughably non-rigorous and naïve response. You can replace Eskimo's by Caucasoids who can tolerate the hot weather of Congo better. Whites settled in central Africa since many generations still give birth to white children.


*sigh*

What do you make of the white Greek man who can soak up the Mediterranean sun all day, and the white Irish man who would literally die of it? Are they a different race? We call them both white, both Caucasian, but what exactly does that mean as a rule?

Whatever you want it to mean of course, because it's pure BS. You're confusing phenotype and genotype, adaptive traits and superficial traits. Do some basic research before you pontificate.

For example...

Aboriginal Australians are, by racial definitions, black. Of course if you actually bother to check the genes they're more closely related to Asian Pacific Islanders than anyone we call black these days. What race are they? Do you define them by their superficial features, how they tolerate the elements, or by their genetics?

You do whatever you want when you talk about race of course, because it's a mostly meaningless and non-rigorous construction. Have fun with it, but don't delude yourself by looking at examples of things other than racial traits, and then calling them "race".
"Propaganda is a monologue which seeks not a response, but an echo." (W.H. Auden)
"Given time and plenty of paper, philosophers can prove anything." (Robert Heinlein)
"The map is not the territory." (Alfred Korzybski)
“You’re in the desert, you see a tortoise lying on its back, struggling, and you’re not helping — why is that?" (Bladerunner)

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4832
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Racism

Postby Tom Palven » Mon Aug 05, 2013 5:12 pm

maunas wrote:If an Eskimo couple live in Congo in Africa, give birth and bring up children there, will the children show the phenotype of a native Negro with curly hair and black skin as an adult? NO! . If races do not exist then they should. Race is defined as that genotypic difference which prevents change in phenotype, even when conception and development takes place in a radically different climate from the native climate of parents.


I agree with you, and would say that races of people are somewhat similar to breeds of dogs. Afghans are big, fast dogs, Pomeranians are small, slow dogs, and Bassett Hounds are medium-sized slow dogs, but they're all dogs. Some breeds of dogs are more subject to certain medical problems, just as various races of humans are more subject to certain problems than others. The word "race" seems like a perfectly good, useful, word when referring to such things as screening for certain race-related diseases. The fact that Nazis, Ku Klux Klansmen, and apartheid regimes may use race-typing for nefarious purposes is evil, but that doesn't mean that the word "race" is evil or meaningless, or that the racial differences you mentioned don't exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_health

That about all I have to say on the subject, but you are certainly free to make a hobby out of nitpicking with Xou..., uh,.. Daedalus if it suits your fancy.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
Daedalus
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:38 pm
Custom Title: Ave Atque Vale

Re: Racism

Postby Daedalus » Mon Aug 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Tom-Palven wrote:
maunas wrote:If an Eskimo couple live in Congo in Africa, give birth and bring up children there, will the children show the phenotype of a native Negro with curly hair and black skin as an adult? NO! . If races do not exist then they should. Race is defined as that genotypic difference which prevents change in phenotype, even when conception and development takes place in a radically different climate from the native climate of parents.


I agree with you, and would say that races of people are somewhat similar to breeds of dogs. Afghans are big, fast dogs, Pomeranians are small, slow dogs, and Bassett Hounds are medium-sized slow dogs, but they're all dogs. Some breeds of dogs are more subject to certain medical problems, just as various races of humans are more subject to certain problems than others. The word "race" seems like a perfectly good, useful, word when referring to such things as screening for certain race-related diseases. The fact that Nazis, Ku Klux Klansmen, and apartheid regimes may use race-typing for nefarious purposes is evil, but that doesn't mean that the word "race" is evil or meaningless, or that the racial differences you mentioned don't exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_health

That about all I have to say on the subject, but you are certainly free to make a hobby out of nitpicking with Xou..., uh,.. Daedalus if it suits your fancy.


The concept of race isn't evil, it's just an ignorant notion for people who like a messy shorthand.

People like you Tom! ;)

Sure the differences exist, but do they represent what people conceptualize as a race? Nope.

P.S. Still waiting for you to support your views on that other thread... or are you going into full denial-mode instead? I understand if you are... I probably would be too if I were a conspiratorially-minded moron.
"Propaganda is a monologue which seeks not a response, but an echo." (W.H. Auden)
"Given time and plenty of paper, philosophers can prove anything." (Robert Heinlein)
"The map is not the territory." (Alfred Korzybski)
“You’re in the desert, you see a tortoise lying on its back, struggling, and you’re not helping — why is that?" (Bladerunner)

User avatar
maunas
Poster
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:10 am

Re: Racism

Postby maunas » Mon Aug 05, 2013 5:38 pm

Autoimmune atrophic gastritis is more frequent in individuals of northern European descent and African Americans and is much less frequent in southern Europeans and Asians.
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1 ... view#a0199. Gray hair tends to occur earlier in Caucasians and later in Asians. The frequency of Autoimmune diseases in different populations depend on their genetic differences. Similarly the frequency of heart diseases,diabetes, heat tolerance and innumerable other diseases, also including physiology,anatomy and phenotypic differences between populations of different ancestral descent living in the same geographical locality and eating the same types of foods since millennia, has not made them genetically homogenous. Though some superficial phenotypic expressions like skin color may have changed due to inherent variability hidden in our genomes
which makes certain omnipresent genes in our species to express dominantly due to climatic effects. So i stick to my definition of race with some modifications viz: Races of life forms naturally get created before the formation of subspecies under conditions of reproductive and/or climatic isolation's.Race is defined by that genotypic difference which prevents radical change in phenotypic expression potentials, even when conception and development takes place in a radically different climate from the native climate of parents.
Last edited by maunas on Tue Aug 06, 2013 3:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Singularity! Because entangled.

User avatar
Daedalus
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:38 pm
Custom Title: Ave Atque Vale

Re: Racism

Postby Daedalus » Mon Aug 05, 2013 6:11 pm

maunas wrote:Autoimmune atrophic gastritis is more frequent in individuals of northern European descent and African Americans and is much less frequent in southern Europeans and Asians.
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1 ... view#a0199. The frequency of Autoimmune diseases in different populations depend on their genetic differences. Similarly the frequency of heart diseases,diabetes, heat tolerance and innumerable other diseases, also including physiology,anatomy and phenotypic differences between populations of different ancestral descent living in the same geographical locality and eating the same types of foods since millennia, has not made them genetically homogenous. Though some superficial phenotypic expressions like skin color may have changed due to inherent variability hidden in our genomes
which makes certain omnipresent genes in our species to express dominantly due to climatic effects. So i stick to my definition of race with some modifications viz: Races of life forms naturally get created before the formation of subspecies under conditions of reproductive and/or climatic isolation's.Race is defined by that genotypic difference which prevents radical change in phenotypic expression potentials, even when conception and development takes place in a radically different climate from the native climate of parents.


Where is it defined that way, please cite.

I ask this by the way, because the scientific consensus is that there are no subspecies of humans.

AAPA Report wrote:Pure races, in the sense of genetically homogeneous populations, do not exist in the human species today, nor is there any evidence that they have ever existed in the past.


http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1455.html

The only really accepted definition of race, which doesn't apply to humans, and the succinct argument against what you're claiming:

Nature Genetics, Keita et al wrote:Arguments against the existence of human races (the taxa 'Mongoloid', 'Caucasoid' and 'Negroid' and those from other classifications) include those stated for subspecies10 and several others15. The within- to between-group variation is very high for genetic polymorphisms (approx85%; refs. 16,17). This means that individuals from one 'race' may be overall more similar to individuals in one of the other 'races' than to other individuals in the same 'race'. This observation is perhaps insufficient18, although it still is convincing because it illustrates the lack of a boundary. Coalescence times19, 20 calculated from various genes suggest that the differentiation of modern humans began in Africa in populations whose morphological traits are unknown; it cannot be assumed from an evolutionary perspective that the traits used to define 'races' emerged simultaneously with this divergence15. There was no demonstrable 'racial' divergence.

Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA genealogies are especially interesting because they demonstrate the lack of concordance of lineages with morphology15 and facilitate a phylogenetic analysis. Individuals with the same morphology do not necessarily cluster with each other by lineage, and a given lineage does not include only individuals with the same trait complex (or 'racial type'). Y-chromosome DNA from Africa alone suffices to make this point. Africa contains populations whose members have a range of external phenotypes. This variation has usually been described in terms of 'race' (Caucasoids, Pygmoids, Congoids, Khoisanoids). But the Y-chromosome clade defined by the PN2 transition (PN2/M35, PN2/M2) shatters the boundaries of phenotypically defined races and true breeding populations across a great geographical expanse21. African peoples with a range of skin colors, hair forms and physiognomies have substantial percentages of males whose Y chromosomes form closely related clades with each other, but not with others who are phenotypically similar. The individuals in the morphologically or geographically defined 'races' are not characterized by 'private' distinct lineages restricted to each of them.


Deal with it.
"Propaganda is a monologue which seeks not a response, but an echo." (W.H. Auden)
"Given time and plenty of paper, philosophers can prove anything." (Robert Heinlein)
"The map is not the territory." (Alfred Korzybski)
“You’re in the desert, you see a tortoise lying on its back, struggling, and you’re not helping — why is that?" (Bladerunner)

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10243
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Racism

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Aug 05, 2013 8:25 pm

To Maunas
There is no doubt that there are minor genetic differences between different human populations of differing geographic origin. A person from Finland will be a little different genetically from a person who came from Ireland. etc. etc.

The question is not whether genetic differences exist, typical of geographies, but whether those differences are large enough to justify the word 'race'. Since the differences are, in fact, very small (less than 0.1% of the total genome), I am inclined to say no. Most scientists in relevant disciplines also say no.

However, there is no clear cut scientific definition of 'race'. Without that, we are just pissing upwind.

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4832
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Racism

Postby Tom Palven » Mon Aug 05, 2013 9:19 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:To Maunas
There is no doubt that there are minor genetic differences between different human populations of differing geographic origin. A person from Finland will be a little different genetically from a person who came from Ireland. etc. etc.

The question is not whether genetic differences exist, typical of geographies, but whether those differences are large enough to justify the word 'race'. Since the differences are, in fact, very small (less than 0.1% of the total genome), I am inclined to say no. Most scientists in relevant disciplines also say no.

However, there is no clear cut scientific definition of 'race'. Without that, we are just pissing upwind.


Lance,
In the Wikipedia article I cited titled "race and health" it seems that Wikipedia editors and, apparently, health researchers, are familiar with the term "race" and find it to be a useful word. In post 708 Daedalus suggested that the word be replaced with "phenotype," which seems a little clumsy. Is there another, more appropriate, perhaps a Newspeak term, that you might suggest to Wikipedia?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_health
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
Daedalus
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 8:38 pm
Custom Title: Ave Atque Vale

Re: Racism

Postby Daedalus » Mon Aug 05, 2013 9:32 pm

Tom-Palven wrote:
Lance Kennedy wrote:To Maunas
There is no doubt that there are minor genetic differences between different human populations of differing geographic origin. A person from Finland will be a little different genetically from a person who came from Ireland. etc. etc.

The question is not whether genetic differences exist, typical of geographies, but whether those differences are large enough to justify the word 'race'. Since the differences are, in fact, very small (less than 0.1% of the total genome), I am inclined to say no. Most scientists in relevant disciplines also say no.

However, there is no clear cut scientific definition of 'race'. Without that, we are just pissing upwind.


Lance,
In the Wikipedia article I cited titled "race and health" it seems that Wikipedia editors and, apparently, health researchers, are familiar with the term "race" and find it to be a useful word. In post 708 Daedalus suggested that the word be replaced with "phenotype," which seems a little clumsy. Is there another, more appropriate, perhaps a Newspeak term, that you might suggest to Wikipedia?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_health


You keep implying that this is a matter of PC or some social issue... it's not. If you want to use the term race casually go for it, who cares? The issue arises when you want to use the word "race" to actually refer to a real genetic difference in the way Maunas is.

As usual, you have it ass backwards.
"Propaganda is a monologue which seeks not a response, but an echo." (W.H. Auden)
"Given time and plenty of paper, philosophers can prove anything." (Robert Heinlein)
"The map is not the territory." (Alfred Korzybski)
“You’re in the desert, you see a tortoise lying on its back, struggling, and you’re not helping — why is that?" (Bladerunner)


Return to “Origins”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest