Renouncing Judaism

[The Grand Nudger]

I get the impression that there is some politics at play here when I hear on various science shows that there is no such things as race, from a biological perspective.

Sure, but that has nothing to do with the fact that you can't determine someone's race by the size of their skull, the color of their skin, or, in any consistent sense, their genetics.  These categories aren't just invented whole cloth, they're internally incoherent. It's complete nonsense, but we've tried to organize societies around it - as you say, politics.

I don't know. Maybe what they are doing is sequencing the entire human genome and comparing that and you get the results that you mentioned.
I think what they need to do is determine what counts as racial features. I'm guessing, this is skin color related, skull shape related, hair thickness, hair density on the head.
Next, they need to figure out the genes that only effects those features.

That is exactly how we ended up realizing that we were so hilariously wrong, yes.  

What's wrong with police forensics? Skull shape is used to determine whether a person is asian, caucasian, african(black).
For sure, there must be some genes that control those features.

Same thing that was wrong with phrenology - which is what the whole skull thing came out of.  

My dentists told me that it is easier to drill the teeth of asian. They tend to be softer
African(black) is the hardest.
For caucasians, it is somewhere in the middle.
If that is true, again, there should be genes behind those features.

Get a new dentist.  

But intermarriage is something that is more recent.
For the past 5000 y, it was a rare thing, I think.
The king and queens would intermarry. In the case of ancient Egypt, apparently, they would not mix. They would marry brother and sister.

Inbred royals are hardly the rule of human reproduction.  Still, yes - we have..as I mentioned, tried to isolate the breeding populations.  It never worked.  Go figure, people like to fuck.

In the example that you gave, you mentioned the people of North America. The people who describe themselves as black aren't fully black. They all seem to be mixed (African(black) + caucasian).
There seems to be a wide spectrum. For example, Eddy Murphy looks quite a bit black, but probably has some white genes.
Oprah isn't as black as him. Will Smith isn't as black as him.

So much for skin tone.

I think they describe themselves as black for political reasons (The whites do not like the slightest bit of blackness skin color).
Even some of the white people have a certain amount of black heritage and even native american heritage.

A weird take.  They could call themselves anything they liked and society would remind them of their blackness all the same. Similarly, our society compels us to hide what we've long seen as poor genetics..ironically enough, by claiming native american ancestry to cover african american ancestry - just as one example. Similarly, people who seem to fit nothing more than the one drop rule, easily presented (used to be passing) as white overwhelmingly identify as minorities - it's pretty clear that they have no say in that matter either.

The reason for the chimpanzee thing might be that they didn't suffer from genetic contraction.
For humans, it is thought that the population crumbled at some point to under 10,000 members.

-and then fucked their way across every continent but antarctica with reckless abandon.  One giant unplanned, uncontrolled, unrelenting breeding experiment.

Race realism by any name in any context fails by any metric.