Paul Essien
Platinum Member
- Jun 9, 2017
- 5,654
- 2,986
- 970
- Banned
- #361
mga138
Ok--Then I will say that I think race is biological. I believe that those biological differences are hereditary and affect far more than just skin color (skin tone is just a small detail among many differences between the races). I say that the races have different average intelligence, and that is biological and inheritable as well. I will say that the biggest hoax of our time is the notion that Blacks are relentless victims of White racism and that this racism is responsible for the the disparities that we see in society. So, my first question to you is--do you believe that race is a biological reality or merely a social construct?
Look. There is only one human species (Homo Sapiens)
But - NO - we are not all the same.
Yes - There are persistent and real genetic differences that cluster within racial groups, and more so than many have believed.
Yet these differences still fall far short of indicating sub-speciation, which is the normal standard used by biologists to indicate different “races” or breeds of a larger species.
DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans.
While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair colour can be identified between individuals.
No consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another.
It has never been a case of there not being differences between the way human beings look.
The trouble is in the imprecise taxonomy. How do you define a “race” and might there not be other equally valid ways of dividing humans into taxonomical groupings ?
We have been here before - Many scientists worked hard (REAL HARD) on finding working definition of race as a biological fact. They all failed.
They all failed not because genetic differences can’t be observed between various humans (after all, if there weren’t mDNA differences, we wouldn’t know much about human maternal ancestry).
They all failed because genetic differences do not support social races, races that divide people into (pardon my words) “black”, “white”, “yellow” and “red”.
The only living subspecies of the species Homo sapiens is Homo sapiens sapiens. That is current scientific knowledge. And it is very likely to remain the only one, unless Sasquatch or the Yeti decide to walk into a science lab for a DNA test one day.
There is a reason why blood transfusions and bone marrow transplants work. This is why a “black ” persons blood can save an white Irishman’s life with a transfusion and vice versa Some blood types have an affinity for certain groups of people…but the genes are the same.
Ok--Then I will say that I think race is biological. I believe that those biological differences are hereditary and affect far more than just skin color (skin tone is just a small detail among many differences between the races). I say that the races have different average intelligence, and that is biological and inheritable as well. I will say that the biggest hoax of our time is the notion that Blacks are relentless victims of White racism and that this racism is responsible for the the disparities that we see in society. So, my first question to you is--do you believe that race is a biological reality or merely a social construct?
Look. There is only one human species (Homo Sapiens)
But - NO - we are not all the same.
Yes - There are persistent and real genetic differences that cluster within racial groups, and more so than many have believed.
Yet these differences still fall far short of indicating sub-speciation, which is the normal standard used by biologists to indicate different “races” or breeds of a larger species.
DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans.
While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair colour can be identified between individuals.
No consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another.
It has never been a case of there not being differences between the way human beings look.
The trouble is in the imprecise taxonomy. How do you define a “race” and might there not be other equally valid ways of dividing humans into taxonomical groupings ?
We have been here before - Many scientists worked hard (REAL HARD) on finding working definition of race as a biological fact. They all failed.
They all failed not because genetic differences can’t be observed between various humans (after all, if there weren’t mDNA differences, we wouldn’t know much about human maternal ancestry).
They all failed because genetic differences do not support social races, races that divide people into (pardon my words) “black”, “white”, “yellow” and “red”.
The only living subspecies of the species Homo sapiens is Homo sapiens sapiens. That is current scientific knowledge. And it is very likely to remain the only one, unless Sasquatch or the Yeti decide to walk into a science lab for a DNA test one day.
There is a reason why blood transfusions and bone marrow transplants work. This is why a “black ” persons blood can save an white Irishman’s life with a transfusion and vice versa Some blood types have an affinity for certain groups of people…but the genes are the same.