NationStates Jolt Archive

Race is only skin deep

For some reason, we still have people in our society who ignore biological studies. Educated people understand that there is no "human race" because we are all different. Each race has its own unique physiology that has its own evolutionary advantage.

I want to know what you guys think.

Can I see the post that Markaland was responding to? I do think that there are some differences between races, but I have a feeling that his post was in response to something inflammatory that you said.

Can I see the post that Markaland was responding to? I do think that there are some differences between races, but I have a feeling that his post was in response to something inflammatory that you said.

Its from the thread about Michael Jackson. Apparently Markaland thinks people can change their race.

Please be clear about what you mean by the word race.

When you refer to the Human race you are presumably referring to Homo Sapiens, a scientifically classified species, rather like Felis Domesticus.

If you then slide this word into the context of race relations, you are changing its meaning, away from designating the single biologically coherent group of Homo Sapiens, towards a culturally defined heterogeneous collection of characteristics that all belong to this single species.

Educated people understand the word race has two distinct meanings. Which are you using?

The fact is that there are differences based on race, but not gigantic ones. For example, although one particular race may be better at sport overall, not all of the people of that race are.

In reality, Homo Sapiens is the family we belong to. Like how all dogs belong to the Canine family. We dont say that all dogs are the same, so its beyond me why people think that humans are somehow above the laws of nature.

Each race is a member of the Homo Sapien family, however anthropologists are hesitant to say it and give us names because they fear the social impacts.

The fact is that there are differences based on race, but not gigantic ones. For example, although one particular race may be better at sport overall, not all of the people of that race are.

Even these differences are controversial. See Mark Twain on statistics.

If a small African tribe can have almost as much genetic diversity as a representative sample of NYC (and they do), then there's no significant difference between different "races" of people.

In reality, Homo Sapiens is the family we belong to. Like how all dogs belong to the Canine family. We dont say that all dogs are the same, so its beyond me why people think that humans are somehow above the laws of nature.

Each race is a member of the Homo Sapien family, however anthropologists are hesitant to say it and give us names because they fear the social impacts.

Family, in the designation Homo Sapiens is the Homo part, ie, Homo Erectus, Homo Pilanthricus, and Homo Sapiens are all part of the same family. Biologically this means that there is a chance of successful interbreeding between these members of the family, but the offspring will be sterile. (Horse + Donkey = Mule)

Until you can show that the offspring of certain mixed etnicity partners are always sterile, the human race, as in Homo Sapiens, is a single species, more closely related than a single family.

As I posted above, there is a confusion here that centers on the double meaning of the word race.

In reality, Homo Sapiens is the family we belong to. Like how all dogs belong to the Canine family. We dont say that all dogs are the same, so its beyond me why people think that humans are somehow above the laws of nature.

Each race is a member of the Homo Sapien family, however anthropologists are hesitant to say it and give us names because they fear the social impacts.
Wrong, Homo is a genus, Sapien is a species. It's a well organized system of classification. Kingdom, Phylum,Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species.
Each step includes fewer organisms that are more closely related.

For some reason, we still have people in our society who ignore biological studies. Educated people understand that there is no "human race" because we are all different. Each race has its own unique physiology that has its own evolutionary advantage.

I want to know what you guys think.


Straight from Mein Kampf.

This is bogus with no reality in science. Race is a social construct, without any standing in biology. There are no "unique physiological differences" between "races." The fact is there are more differences among people within a race than their are between races.

Family, in the designation Homo Sapiens is the Homo part, ie, Homo Erectus, Homo Pilanthricus, and Homo Sapiens are all part of the same family. Biologically this means that there is a chance of successful interbreeding between these members of the family, but the offspring will be sterile. (Horse + Donkey = Mule)

Until you can show that the offspring of certain mixed etnicity partners are always sterile, the human race, as in Homo Sapiens, is a single species, more closely related than a single family.

As I posted above, there is a confusion here that centers on the double meaning of the word race.
Homo is actually our Genus, not our Family.

Your argument is not a bad one, but current genetic research has essentially shot your claims down. We are much more closely related than previously thought. In fact everbody is about +99% the same. Though its true race is a genetic phenomenon, its much more a social construct than anything. Black people can play golf and white people can play basketball.

In reality, Homo Sapiens is the family we belong to. Like how all dogs belong to the Canine family. We dont say that all dogs are the same, so its beyond me why people think that humans are somehow above the laws of nature.

Each race is a member of the Homo Sapien family, however anthropologists are hesitant to say it and give us names because they fear the social impacts.

Actually, the differences in dogs are also biologically superficial. Dog breeds, like human races, are artificial constructs. The only way organizations such as the AKC know a dog's breed is by its registry or papers, since it is not possible to determine genetically one "breed" from another.

You confuse surface appearance with significant biological differences.

The genetic and phenotypic differences are extremely marginal.

In reality, Homo Sapiens is the family we belong to. Like how all dogs belong to the Canine family. We dont say that all dogs are the same, so its beyond me why people think that humans are somehow above the laws of nature.

Each race is a member of the Homo Sapien family, however anthropologists are hesitant to say it and give us names because they fear the social impacts.

Actually, there have been numerous tests done to try and determine a biological race. The truth of the matter is that there is more genetic variation between an individual of a given "race" (race here is referring to the social concept of race - ie. ethnicity) than there is between the "races" themselves. As such, there is absolutely no reason to biologically call these groups races.

In dogs, there is more genetic variation between breeds than between individuals within a breed. As such, we can biologically determine that they have been parts of separate breeding groups for a sufficient amount of time and are separate "races."

due to thousands of years of "race mixing" there are no more "pure" examples of any race. if you only took the most stereotypical examples of each race, those who would by appearance most closely match the "standards" of what each race looks like, ignoring genetics, you would have a few million in each group with a few billion left outside those parameters

so whats the point of worrying about race at all?

For some reason, we still have people in our society who ignore biological studies. Educated people understand that there is no "human race" because we are all different. Each race has its own unique physiology that has its own evolutionary advantage.

I want to know what you guys think.

If you think there are separate human races from a biological standpoint, it is you who apparently wishes to ignore biological studies.

There is only one human race. If you start classifying people by their genetic parameters or physical apparence and call each of the groups "Race", there would be six billion groups, as every human being is unique.

due to thousands of years of "race mixing" there are no more "pure" examples of any race. if you only took the most stereotypical examples of each race, those who would by appearance most closely match the "standards" of what each race looks like, ignoring genetics, you would have a few million in each group with a few billion left outside those parameters

so whats the point of worrying about race at all?

In truth, there is no evidence that any part of the human race has ever been separated long enough to develop distinct human races. As such, it woudln't be "any more" so much as "ever."

There's a difference between race and regional variations. Read a bloody anthropology book.

I think enough has been said here already from a scientific perspective. From a moral/legal one, involuntary segregation on the basis of race is both illegal and a denial of "God" given rights that are identified both in the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of rights. At

You have started a couple of slippery, slightly evasive, pro-Nazi threads. Why not just state your position honestly:

I am a neo-Nazi racist who believes white people are superior to all other people on the planet.

For some reason, we still have people in our society who ignore biological studies. Educated people understand that there is no "human race" because we are all different. Each race has its own unique physiology that has its own evolutionary advantage.

I want to know what you guys think.

There is no such thing as different human races. Only different ethnicity and skin colors. Thruth is, according to a study I read, I have more common genetical material with a black man who shares the same bloodtype than I have with another Canadian who's of a different bloodtype.

Kinda makes you think, doesn't it?

For some reason, we still have people in our society who ignore biological studies. Educated people understand that there is no "human race" because we are all different. Each race has its own unique physiology that has its own evolutionary advantage.

I want to know what you guys think.
the genetic variation between individuals we identify as "caucasian" is usually greater than the average variation between a randomly selected caucasian person and a randomly selected african person. if you gauge uniqueness based on genetics, the racial classifications would not be structured the way they are currently set up; people would be classified by characteristics that most often do not correlate to their skin tone or facial structure.

It's true and it is not racist. All you must do is to look at the bone stucture of different people and you will see a differance.

the genetic variation between individuals we identify as "caucasian" is usually greater than the average variation between a randomly selected caucasian person and a randomly selected african person. if you gauge uniqueness based on genetics, the racial classifications would not be structured the way they are currently set up; people would be classified by characteristics that most often do not correlate to their skin tone or facial structure.

HA!


I beat you to it, Bottle!


Who's DA MAN?


(answer: me, I'm da man!)

Race as a phenotypic subdevision of the human species is a valid concept, but really tells us very little about a given population. Genetic spread, population movement and random variation since the first human stepped out of Africa has seen to that. But thier are some cool racial differences:

British, German and some Asian Desert Nomads digest lactase very easily, as thier ancestors drank milk (everyone else apparently made cheese instead). Thus very few modern decendants are lactose intolerant.

Many South-East aisians have 5, not 4 types of taste bud. No one is quite sure why.

West africans are highly susptible to sickle cell anemia. This is because those with partial sickle cell do not get tropical Malaria.

However, even here the differences are more local than the traditionally defined '5 races' (Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Negroid, Capenoid and Australoid). Skin, as it happens, is one of the easiest phenotypic characteristic to change. Given that we are no longer subject to true natural selection it seems that humans will eventually become a greyish-mottled soup of chracteristics, and I for one see this as no bad thing (though thier won't be many natural blondes left outside sweden!)

HA!


I beat you to it, Bottle!


Who's DA MAN?


(answer: me, I'm da man!)
drats, you did indeed. i am forced to admit that you are the man, while i am not.

by the way, did you know that your name is perfect for dramatic yelling?

DAMN YOU, SKALADOR!!!!!!!
*shakes fist at sky*

it's just great!

HA!


I beat you to it, Bottle!


Who's DA MAN?


(answer: me, I'm da man!)
:(
You're going to make Bottle sad!


:p

DAMN YOU, SKALADOR!!!!!!!
*shakes fist at sky*

LOL

It's true and it is not racist. All you must do is to look at the bone stucture of different people and you will see a differance.
Yes, look at bone structure.
It's different in people
Any different people. Not between race. As both Skalador and Bottle have said, there's more variation inside a "race" than between a random individual from one and a random individual from another.

HA!


I beat you to it, Bottle!


Who's DA MAN?


(answer: me, I'm da man!)

I think Demipublicents beat you both. ;)

by the way, did you know that your name is perfect for dramatic yelling?

DAMN YOU, SKALADOR!!!!!!!
*shakes fist at sky*

it's just great!

LOL, I wasn't aware of that, but I shall thank you for pointing it out.

Skalador is proud to say that your fist shaking and damnations will be equally distributed between all its citizens regardless of ethnicity or skin color.

But since we really don't like A positive bloodtypes, those bastards will get an extra share :P

I think Demipublicents beat you both. ;)

What? I require proof! I will not let him have the title of "Da man" without suitable evidence!

HA!


I beat you to it, Bottle!


Who's DA MAN?


(answer: me, I'm da man!)

Of course, I beat you both!

MUHAHAHAHAHA!

What? I require proof! I will not let him have the title of "Da man" without suitable evidence!

Can I be "Da woman" instead? Then you can still be da man and my boyfriend won't get confused about his sexuality =)

Of course, I beat you both!

MUHAHAHAHAHA!

*Hangs his head in shame*

Fine, you win this time, Dempublicents. You are "Da (Edit:Wo)man", and I am but a pale imitation of your gloriousness.

Next time shall be different. Someday, I'll get you Dempublicents!

*Shakes his fist at the sky*

It's true and it is not racist. All you must do is to look at the bone stucture of different people and you will see a differance.
Bone structure is as much a result of lifestyle as it is of genetics. Any differences that can be attributed to race are minor. You might as well say left handed people are of a different race.

Can I be "Da woman" instead? Then you can still be da man and my boyfriend won't get confused about his sexuality =)

Done deal!


I still am Da Man! All bow to my manly manliness, and all the other qualities Da real Man possesses!

And you, of course, are Da Woman.

*bows gracefully*

*Shakes his fist at the sky*
:(
I haven't got to shake my fist at anything yet...

*shakes fist at the ceiling*

It's just not the same...

:(
I haven't got to shake my fist at anything yet...

*shakes fist at the ceiling*

It's just not the same...

Well, I could steal your dinner if you want, then you could shake your fist and curse at me. I'm hungry, so it'd work out well for both.

:(
I haven't got to shake my fist at anything yet...

*shakes fist at the ceiling*

It's just not the same...

Just shake your fist at those evil, good-for-nothing,criminal and impure A positive bloodtype persons! They're the reason this country's going to waste!

[/bullshit] :D

Well, I could steal your dinner if you want, then you could shake your fist and curse at me. I'm hungry, so it'd work out well for both.
Hmm...
Deal.
:p

:(
I haven't got to shake my fist at anything yet...

*shakes fist at the ceiling*

It's just not the same...

How about:

*shakes fist at mother-in-law*

it's quite liberating, especially if she's A positive...