Race. Whats the point?

[The Alma Mater]

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1468202

Medical journal referring to Inca bones.

Fascinating However, it merely seems to be a dominant genetic trait, not something supporting the idea of "races". To quote the study itself:

As shown in this study, the incidence of the Inca bone is relatively high in populations of eastern Asian origin such as Arctic Eskimos, American Indians, and Tibetans}Nepalese. However, this trait is not restricted to East Asians and related populations, also occurring in Subsaharan Africans. This indicates that the Inca bone is not a uniquely eastern Asian regional character.

Nevertheless, thank you. I did not know about this

[Genital Confusions]

little known fact - the genetic difference (and hence the actual difference) between any two humans on earth is less than that between some chimpanzee siblings. so we're all basically the same.

True, there is very little variance in humans compared to most other organisms on the planet. This is mostly due to a population bottle-neck that occurred a long time ago.

Toba!

[Neovistrana]

The darker the skin, the darker and more shrivelled the heart. Common knowledge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-u7yllp ... playnext=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRAI9VJNJTg

Clearly these flawless videos will change your mind. But it's not your fault you're so stupid, you lack melanin, the spirtual life force that makes Blacks superior to you pasty little bastards.

[Daistallia 2104]

Sidequestion: what do the people that believe in races think happens if two races interbreed ? Is a new race created ?

http://inventerare.wordpress.com/2008/0 ... to-be-one/

Don't let the vaugely racist-sounding name of the website "Testimony of the Spade" throw you off. Its an archaeology blog.

Scroll down to where it has photos and discusses the "Inca bones" referring to the extra bones in the skulls of some ethnic groups.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articl ... id=1468202

Medical journal referring to Inca bones.

!st is a blog - discarded.

2nd does not support your ideas.

Abstract
The variation in frequency of the Inca bone was examined in major human populations around the world. The New World populations have generally high frequencies of the Inca bone, whereas lower frequencies occur in northeast Asians and Australians. Tibetan/Nepalese and Assam/Sikkim populations in northeast India have more Inca bones than do neighbouring populations. Among modern populations originally derived from eastern Asian population stock, the frequencies are highest in some of the marginal isolated groups. In Central and West Asia as well as in Europe, frequency of the Inca bone is relatively low. The incidence of the complete Inca bone is, moreover, very low in the western hemisphere of the Old World except for Subsaharan Africa. Subsaharan Africans show as a whole a second peak in the occurrence of the Inca bone. Geographical and ethnographical patterns of the frequency variation of the Inca bone found in this study indicate that the possible genetic background for the occurrence of this bone cannot be completely excluded. Relatively high frequencies of the Inca bone in Subsaharan Africans indicate that this trait is not a uniquely eastern Asian regional character.

Note also the use of the term population, NOT race.
You've not answered the the interbreeding qusetion.

[WallachIX]

Yes. this is very true.
Any evolutionary biologists may want to correct me if I'm wrong, but "race" exists only as a genetic variation social construction in our species. All humans were originally Africa, or came from the area we now call Africa. Some migrated north to areas like Europe. Here's where Darwinism comes to play. Humans, the ones in Europe, who had a favored characteristic of less melanin, were more likely to survive. Why was this a favored trait? In individuals with heavier concentration of melanin, I.E. "black people", it is much harder to convert the sun's energy into vitamin E. This vitamin is indeed vital to us. So, in the north, where the weather is not so "bright" so to speak, the "white people" survived and reproduced. Whereas back in the south, in the Motherland, it was more favorable to have heavier concentrations of melanin due to the weather conditions. It is sunny, so people with a natural protection to skin cancer, melanin, had a favored characteristic.

recent studies suggest diet contributed to the caucausoid phenotype as well as less sunlight.

Yeah, so essentially "race" is a social construct to keeep funny looking people distant from us. Race also made it easier to justify slavery. "They are not OUR race, they are different. Therefore, I can own them with no moral qualms." You gotta love justification like that...

indeed.

From its inception, this modern concept of "race" was modeled after an ancient theorem of the Great Chain of Being, which posited natural categories on a hierarchy established by God or nature. Thus "race" was a mode of classification linked specifically to peoples in the colonial situation. It subsumed a growing ideology of inequality devised to rationalize European attitudes and treatment of the conquered and enslaved peoples. Proponents of slavery in particular during the 19th century used "race" to justify the retention of slavery. The ideology magnified the differences among Europeans, Africans, and Indians, established a rigid hierarchy of socially exclusive categories underscored and bolstered unequal rank and status differences, and provided the rationalization that the inequality was natural or God-given. The different physical traits of African-Americans and Indians became markers or symbols of their status differences...

[Cameroi]

I don't get the concept of race. Really, what difference does melanin levels and recurring traits make in a person's character?

absolutely none. it's just something idiots get emotionally attatched to as yet another excuse for fanatacism.

[Cybach]

http://www.science.smith.edu/exer_sci/E ... /Raceh.htm

Kane then quotes Lee Evans, a black athlete who held the Olympic and 400-meter record:

We were bred for it. Certainly the black people who survived in the slave ships must have contained a high proportion of the strongest. Then, on the plantations, a strong black man was mated with a strong black woman. We were simply bred for physical qualities (p. 79).

Later on in the article, Kane returns to this theme, admitting that the "breeding hypothesis" is among the most controversial theories regarding black success in sport. Nonetheless, without citing sources, he presents data which estimates that because of the great hardships involved in slavery only one individual survived for every two condemned to it. The inference here is that the strongest survived and ultimately were the ancestors of the physically superior black athletes

A fitting quote for the whole why over representation in the sport debate. It makes a certain amount of sense, that the descendants of humans "bred" for slavery, where physical attributes were desired would have physical advantages to your everyday person. Whether it's true or not is another question, but it's certainly food for thought.



And here is the argument against the above quote, since the paper gives arguments for both sides of the debate;

Perhaps the strongest argument against the biological hypothesis supporting a genetic advantage for the black athlete is that the concept of "race" itself is viewed today as more of a sociological than a biological construct. In theory, for individuals to be members of the same race they should possess relatively homogenous genetic material, and be heterogeneous with respect to other homogenous groups. In his presidential address to the American Anthropological Society Washburn (1963) strongly argued against the existence of such entities, especially when limited to what we commonly know as Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid classification. He wrote that such classificatory schemes were a product of nineteenth-century thinking, and that to appreciate human variation it is much more productive to examine an individual’s culture, ancestral migratory patterns, and environmental adaptation than to target a minor factor like skin color as a racial determinant. As an example he asks whether it makes any sense to place the relatively isolated Australian Aborigine into the same group as the inhabitants of Africa just because of skin color? Further, he points out that even within groups within Africa such as the Pygmies, there are at least three different origins for people so classified. The point being that because of a variety of historical factors homogenous genetic groups are not existent in today’s world. More recently, biologist, Richard Lewontin reaffirmed Washburn’s contention in stating: "if you pick at random any two ‘blacks’ walking along the street, and analyze their 23 pairs of chromosomes, you will probably find that their genes have less in common than do the genes of one of them with a random white person" (Begley, 1995). Data from the Human Genome Diversity Project confirms these assertions by showing that inter-individual genetic variation between people in the same sociological racial grouping is much greater than between the averages contrasted across different classifications (Begley, 1995).

Consequently, we now have two very different types of black athlete, those of West African descent, from which it has been alleged that most blacks in the United States are descendents, and those who come from East and North Africa. The former group are commonly linked to the power and speed events such as sprinting and high jumping, while the latter are more typically associated with events such as the mile run or marathon in which endurance and persistence are the essential factors. It is interesting to note that Burfoot (1992), after making a more modern case for the biological superiority of the black athlete in yoking achievement to physique in both sprinting and distance events, ultimately writes:

The word "black" provides little information about any one or any group. Of the 100,000 genes that determine human makeup, only one to six regulate skin color, so we should assume nothing about anyone based on skin color alone. West Africans and East Africans are both black, but in many physical ways they are more unlike each other than they are different from most whites. (p. 94).

Furthermore, in the United States, where black athletes have excelled on both the national and international level, the assumption of intra-group homogeneity is problematic since migratory patterns and intermarriage among peoples from different groupings have created a genetic admixture which is too complex to meaningfully disentangle. Price (1997b) points out that although most black Americans are descendants of slaves who emanated from western Africa, 90% have some white blood in their ancestry. An interesting example of this point is illustrated when one attempts to categorize Tiger Woods. He has been hailed by some as the first black golfer to win the Masters. But Tiger contends that he does not consider himself black, but "cablinasian," which more accurately portrays his Caucasian, Black, American Indian and Asian heritage (El Nasser, 1997). Again, from a sociological viewpoint what constitutes a black in the United States relates to whether or not an individual has any black ancestry, rather than whether his or her underlying genetics is representative of a group of people a common gene pool. Consequently, even if we were to subscribe to the variability hypothesis conveyed by Burfoot (1992) and Gladwell (1997), we would still have the problem of identifying individuals who were members of the group to which the idea applied. Simply categorizing individuals as black or white would not be enough.

[Risottia]

I don't get the concept of race. Really, what difference does melanin levels and recurring traits make in a person's character?

Of course, more melanin makes one want to rape white wimmin and eat raw white babies.
Also, being Jewish makes one want to eat cooked white babies and dominate the world.
Being a tall, blonde-haired, white-skinned, blue-eyed Slav makes one want to steal vital space from the real Aryan supermen. Who, oddly enough, are led by a short, dark-haired, impotent moustachio.


Eh, the very concept of race is total bollocks. I'll go for authority and quote Einstein (a German Jew! Abomination!): "Race? I belong to the human race".

[JuNii]

I don't get the concept of race. Really, what difference does melanin levels and recurring traits make in a person's character?

alot of people are petty enough to focus on that which makes us different. whether it be melanin levels, Lifestyle choices, habits or even how one thinks.

the point? guess it makes them feel superior.

[The_pantless_hero]

I don't get the concept of race. Really, what difference does melanin levels and recurring traits make in a person's character?

People have to treat other people differently. It's a requirement of human society. If it isn't done by race, it has to be done by job or arbitrarily decided level of importance. Look at India and Japan for examples.

[Kejoh]

I don't get the concept of race. Really, what difference does melanin levels and recurring traits make in a person's character?

alot of people are petty enough to focus on that which makes us different. whether it be melanin levels, Lifestyle choices, habits or even how one thinks.

the point? guess it makes them feel superior.

however, if we only saw what we all had in common, how would we tell each other apart?

[Taeshan]

There is no point behind race. It is the stupidest divider of humans in the world.

[New Imperial Tyrannia]

I don't get the concept of race. Really, what difference does melanin levels and recurring traits make in a person's character?

[LOL ANARCHY NUBZ]

I don't get the concept of race. Really, what difference does melanin levels and recurring traits make in a person's character?

But races mixing is COMMUNISM! HOW HAVE YOU NOT GOT THIS YET?!

[Kejoh]

I don't get the concept of race. Really, what difference does melanin levels and recurring traits make in a person's character?

But races mixing is COMMUNISM! HOW HAVE YOU NOT GOT THIS YET?!

however, consider the following:
communism = win