Originally Posted by
CynicismandMisanthropy
You do you know the individual differences betwwen two peopels genome is only .02% right? And that only 15% of that .o2% can even be loosely related to race right. I should also add that a majority of the the DNA is junk DNA. It has not been activated by operons and thus does not code for anything. This is because as a species we maintain rather strong ties and interbreed with different populations quite often. Also can you claim that there are three races but you don't explain what are the phenotypic and genotypic differences between them. For race to have meaning, for race to be more than a typology, one has to have concordance. In other words, skin color needs to reflect things that are deeper in the body, under the skin. But, in fact, human variation is rather non-concordant.
I'll give you an example of concordance. Height is actually quite concordant with weight. As we get taller, we gain weight, we have more weight. One aspect of size is concordant with another aspect of size.
But most of human variation is non-concordant. Skin color or eye color or hair color is not correlated with height or weight. And they're definitely not correlated with more complex traits like intelligence or athletic performance. Those things evolve and develop in entirely different ways. Just as skin color develops in a different way from size, intelligence, athletic performance, other traits develop in different and independent ways.
A map of skin color gradients looks sort of like the map of temperature. It gets lighter, as you go towards the poles and it's darker near the equator. But then take a map of, say, the distribution of blood type A. Looks entirely different. There's no relationship between the two maps. The distributions are non-concordant. Simply, one is not related to the other. Now you keep going on about IQ but you have not made a concordance with it. You have made a weak corelation but you have not proven a causation. You have to provide a link between skin color, or whatever you're using to judge race, and IQ. This means that you have to prove that either the gene which codes for skin color also codes for IQ, or that that they code as a collective rather than on their own. Otherwise you could just as well claim that the decrease in the number of pirates is responsible for the increased rate of cancer. The number of pirates of pirates has gone down, the rate of cancer has gone up, I made a corelation. What I would have to do after this is explain why and how the decrease in pirates leads to an increased rate of cancer. Just to add to the ridiculousness I'll say that Pirates have a gene which makes them immune to cancer, and that Pirates have plasmids which they can use as vectors to transfer the cancer resistant gene via horizontal gene transfer. Again ridiculous, but that's how you would go about doing such a ridiculous thing.
I thought we were talking about race, not species. Unless you're claiming that minorties aren't Homo Sapiens. Let's not forget there's more genetic diversity within a group of chimps on a single hillside in Gomba than in the entire human species. This is because they tend to be more isolated, have shorter life spans, and have been a bit longer. Most animals are very limited by habitat and geographical features such as rivers and canyons, so it is easy for groups to become isolated and genetically distinct from one another. Humans, on the other hand, are much more adaptable and have not been limited by geography in the same way. We're very clever beasts. Early on, we could ford rivers, cross canyons, move great distances over a relatively short time, and modify our environment to fit our needs. We are also extremely mobile as a species. Even the remotest island tribe in the Pacific originally came from elsewhere and maintained some contact with neighboring groups.
We may think global migration is a recent phenomenon, but it has characterized most of human history. Whether we're moving halfway around the world or from one village to another, the passage of genes takes place under many circumstances, large scale and small: migration, wars, trade, slave-taking, rape, and exogamous marriage. Combine this tendency with the fact that it takes many generations to accumulate a lot of genetic variation, because new variants arise primarily through mutation - copying errors from one generation to the next. On the other hand, it takes just a very small amount of migration - one individual in each generation moving from one village to another and reproducing - to prevent groups from becoming genetically distinct or isolated. The reason domesticated dogs for example have so many sub-species or races is due to selective breeding under controlled conditions.
Oh man, do I love how you carry on. This is way better than any stand up comic. Your first error is a failure to note the origin of 'white' problems: namely, that among 'white' people there are many who are inferior, and that these not only rear more inferiors, but have reduced society in complexity to the point that it rewards inferiors: those shuffling untermenschen who go off and become moronic bureaucrats, corrupt marketers, nagging spouses and cheating paramours. Looking at white societies today, it's impossible to believe the white race is superior to other races, because white societies are a mess.
You want us to blame many complex problems on a simple source: other races. Oh Yes, other races have been are manipulating you, causing problems... the solution is to reduce their population and let the light colored untermenschen rule! You would like us to believe that one day while the white man was asleep, a horde of blacks, latinos, and asians snuck in the back door, indoctrinated the white man's children, and took over the country. But if all non-whites died tomorrow, what would happen? The basic problems of whites would remain. Our nation's problem is not that it now has a better tan but that it has no gods, no kings, no colletives, only man. You ignore that reality, and prefer to send us on a wild goose chase after non-whites, so that white privilege can take the place of actually fixing our society. Not only does this ignore the problem, but by offering a placebo solution, perpetuates it.
Reply With Quote
