Haven't given it much thought really, but I wouldn't mind being a man for a week. Just to see how much easier life would be.

Juuuust kidding.

(October 2, 2014 at 11:37 pm)Deidre32 Wrote: Haven't given it much thought really, but I wouldn't mind being a man for a week. Just to see how much easier life would be.

Juuuust kidding.

Why you sorry ? guys do have it easier.

We also die younger, and, it's somewhat socially acceptable to have your ass kicked on the street by strangers.

Ups and downs I guess.

(October 2, 2014 at 11:30 pm)Aractus Wrote:

(October 2, 2014 at 10:15 am)ForumMember77 Wrote: LOL, thanks for the laugh.

You've went from shouting fact and claiming you have a consensus among scientists, to, insulting the integrity of anyone I mention that disagrees.

I said there were many a scientifically minded folk, evolutionary biologists and anthropologists alike, who openly dispute what you say on Dawkins' site.

They are all crackpots I guess ?

I said I was curious and you quelled my curiosity, thanks. Please, continue to tell people that race is just a figment of our collective xenophobia.......... wait, if race doesn't exist then people can't call me racist anymore.

Human racial classifications have vexed anthropologists and geneticists for the last half-century, since biologists began to question the validity of taxonomy be- low the species level (Wilson and Brown 1953). The following flaws were repeat- edly pointed out (Lieberman and Jackson 1995; Keita and Kittles 1997; Templeton 1998). (1) There are no agreed-upon criteria for when to assign formal names to groups that might more appropriately be considered aggregates of local populations. (2) Race classifications fail for phenotypically intermediate populations. (3) They fail for individuals who trace their ancestry to two or more named races. (4) They are defied by sets of characters that show independent geographic trends. (5) It has been difficult to relate many human populations as distinct evolutionary lineages.

Another objection to racial classifications has been advanced for the past 30 years. This view holds that race classifications are unjustifiable when the variation within groups exceeds the variation between groups. Lewontin (1972) showed that 85.4% of the human species diversity could be attributed to allelic variation within populations, 8.3% to variation between populations within races, and only 6.3% to interracial variation. Many other studies have reiterated this finding (Barbujani et al. 1997).

Long, J. C. & Kittles, R. A. (2003). Human genetic diversity and the non-existence of biological races. Human Biology, 75 (4), pp. 449-471. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/hub.2003.0058

Stop getting all uptight and logical about it and say if you want to be a black guy or an china man, fucking hell it's not difficult !

And why when there's no fundamental difference?

For atheists who think that Christians, Muslims and Jews are dumb for believing in ancient mythology, you are showing incredible arrogance and hypocrisy by believing in scientifically discredited ancient mythology yourselves.

(October 1, 2014 at 12:53 am)ForumMember77 Wrote:

(October 1, 2014 at 12:37 am)Aractus Wrote: snip

I think I heard this one before.

The argument goes that;
Within any of the assumed racial categories that exist, the potential gene variety of all the human races can be found and expressed. Thus race doesn't exist/has no taxonomic meaning.

That is to say a black woman can have a white baby and so on, recent example; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/articl...other.html

Is this what you mean?

Because I think I remember this being debunked as left-wing political bias trying to infect science.
Whilst it's true that the genetic variety of the entire human species is present, and even expressed, in any of the assumed racial categories.
The prevalence of said gene expression is correlated within groups, that we call races.

And differences are not 'skin deep'.

Human racial classifications have vexed anthropologists and geneticists for the last half-century, since biologists began to question the validity of taxonomy be- low the species level (Wilson and Brown 1953). The following flaws were repeat- edly pointed out (Lieberman and Jackson 1995; Keita and Kittles 1997; Templeton 1998). (1) There are no agreed-upon criteria for when to assign formal names to groups that might more appropriately be considered aggregates of local populations. (2) Race classifications fail for phenotypically intermediate populations. (3) They fail for individuals who trace their ancestry to two or more named races. (4) They are defied by sets of characters that show independent geographic trends. (5) It has been difficult to relate many human populations as distinct evolutionary lineages.

Another objection to racial classifications has been advanced for the past 30 years. This view holds that race classifications are unjustifiable when the variation within groups exceeds the variation between groups. Lewontin (1972) showed that 85.4% of the human species diversity could be attributed to allelic variation within populations, 8.3% to variation between populations within races, and only 6.3% to interracial variation. Many other studies have reiterated this finding (Barbujani et al. 1997).

Long, J. C. & Kittles, R. A. (2003). Human genetic diversity and the non-existence of biological races. Human Biology, 75 (4), pp. 449-471. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/hub.2003.0058
[/quote]

That's exactly how I said the argument goes, and I've already explained why it's all perceived to be wrong by many people with more knowledge in this area than either of us.

As I said, I asked why and you explained. I was a little curious to see if people were still trying to pedal this discredited idea.

Can't we just agree that your a big stupid doo doo head far too indoctrinated to grasp your wrong, and continue on with the game ?

The illusion of separateness from other races and other life forms is the cause of much suffering. I live - that is sufficient.

(October 3, 2014 at 12:13 am)Aractus Wrote: And why when there's no fundamental difference?

For atheists who think that Christians, Muslims and Jews are dumb for believing in ancient mythology, you are showing incredible arrogance and hypocrisy by believing in scientifically discredited ancient mythology yourselves.

I was just kidding in my last comment. But as for racial distinctions in people I don't think it's a myth it's just that there aren't really people around who are 100% identifiable as one race.

Really if you look at everything like this then there are no classifications.

What makes a man different from a woman? Is a man still a man if he looses his penis and balls in an accident? Or a man who wants to be a woman who cuts off his penis and balls on purpose then uses hormones to grow breasts is he then a woman? In biology different species are separated by if they can breed with one another so does this make a man who has no balls not human because he can't breed with other humans?

The bottom line is that classifications of any type are just a human invention for convenience whether it's been put to use for bad or for good.

In this case it's being put to use for the reasons of a light hearted thread which seems harmless enough.

(October 3, 2014 at 12:38 am)paulpablo Wrote: I was just kidding in my last comment. But as for racial distinctions in people I don't think it's a myth it's just that there aren't really people around who are 100% identifiable as one race.

Really if you look at everything like this then there are no classifications.

What you seem to be suggesting is that racial borders don't exist, I agree.

Doesn't mean you couldn't sort your way through a series of pictures with a trained eye and accurately tell where in the world that person was from/where there ancestors were from.

You could probably even judge the ancestry of those with mixed lineage if you really prepped for it.

(October 3, 2014 at 12:30 am)ForumMember77 Wrote: That's exactly how I said the argument goes, and I've already explained why it's all perceived to be wrong by many people with more knowledge in this area than either of us.

As I said, I asked why and you explained. I was a little curious to see if people were still trying to pedal this discredited idea.

You're the one peddling scientifically discredited mythology. Last I checked your expert Dawkins was neither a geneticist, anthropologist or even biophysicist - all he is is an evolutionary biologist, and behaviourist. So you can't use him as an expert in other fields that he has an opinion on.

There are no distinct human races, all human beings belong to the same race.

You couldn't answer any of my questions which should be easy if your claims were true.

1. How many distinct human races are there, and what are they?
2. Show me geneticists who say they can determine what a person's distinct race is from their DNA?

I think I will stick to my perfect shade of the golden brown.