Are some races inherently superior to others?

[Disserbia]

What Trenton makes the world takes a shit on.

That's false. Trenton hasn't actually made anything in decades.

[United Kingdom of Kent]

Only thing I have heard is that blacks have quick reflex muscles which make them faster at short distances naturally from birth.

[Immoren]

The Aryan race is superior industrialized first and we just think of new tech that makes things easier for us.

There is no 'Aryan race'.

There is only... the Master race!

[Evraim]

Only thing I have heard is that blacks have quick reflex muscles which make them faster at short distances naturally from birth.

West Africans more so than blacks.

[United Kingdom of Kent]

Only thing I have heard is that blacks have quick reflex muscles which make them faster at short distances naturally from birth.

West Africans more so than blacks.

Yer it was something like that, couldn’t remember the precise details though.

[Gauthier]

Foot races are the master race. We must purge all of the lesser races.

Foot races are the master race.
Marathons are foot races.
Kenyans dominate marathons.
Therefore Kenyans are the master race.

[Greater Murrika]

Yes

Road rally > NASCAR

But really, NO

Road rally? Beter than NASCAR?

[New Rogernomics]

Genetically yes. Some studies have shown that certain racial groups having been to exposed to environmental conditions can perform better than others in some sports, racial groups can be less or more prone to certain diseases, live longer or live shorter lives. But that is where it ends, no such thing as a superior race.

[Mavorpen]

Genetically yes. Some studies have shown that certain racial groups having been to exposed to environmental conditions can perform better than others in some sports, racial groups can be less or more prone to certain diseases, live longer or live shorter lives. But that is where it ends, no such thing as a superior race.

Sorry but no. This is true for concentrated geographical populations and ethnicities. It has nothing to do with the faulty category of "race."

[Zweite Alaje]

Genetically yes. Some studies have shown that certain racial groups having been to exposed to environmental conditions can perform better than others in some sports, racial groups can be less or more prone to certain diseases, live longer or live shorter lives. But that is where it ends, no such thing as a superior race.

Sorry but no. This is true for concentrated geographical populations and ethnicities. It has nothing to do with the faulty category of "race."

Exactly, "race" has more to do with cultural elements. Genetically humans exist in a continuum with no clean cut racial divisions.

[New Rogernomics]

Genetically yes. Some studies have shown that certain racial groups having been to exposed to environmental conditions can perform better than others in some sports, racial groups can be less or more prone to certain diseases, live longer or live shorter lives. But that is where it ends, no such thing as a superior race.

Sorry but no. This is true for concentrated geographical populations and ethnicities. It has nothing to do with the faulty category of "race."

What you are saying ignores my point, 'races' are made up of ethnicities (Tongan, Fijian, Samoan, Maori,etc) , for example Polynesians are more adapt at running [in rugby]. Simply saying there are different races doesn't imply there is no such thing as ethnicity, nor does it imply that studies are carried out on the basis of 'race' or 'ethnicity', instead through looking at genetic variations of people that happen to be part of group x.

[Mavorpen]

Sorry but no. This is true for concentrated geographical populations and ethnicities. It has nothing to do with the faulty category of "race."

What you are saying ignores my point, 'races' are made up of ethnicities (Tongan, Fijian, Samoan, Maori,etc) , for example Polynesians are more adapt at running [in rugby]. Simply saying there are different races doesn't imply there is no such thing as ethnicity, nor does it imply that studies are carried out on the basis of 'race' or 'ethnicity', instead through looking at genetic variations of people that happen to be part of group x.

That's...nice?

That doesn't address a single thing I said.

[New Rogernomics]

What you are saying ignores my point, 'races' are made up of ethnicities (Tongan, Fijian, Samoan, Maori,etc) , for example Polynesians are more adapt at running [in rugby]. Simply saying there are different races doesn't imply there is no such thing as ethnicity, nor does it imply that studies are carried out on the basis of 'race' or 'ethnicity', instead through looking at genetic variations of people that happen to be part of group x.

That's...nice?

That doesn't address a single thing I said.

Okay then, how you can genetically profile ethnicity, since it is a cultural construct. I am curious.
Edit:

New genetic data has enabled scientists to re-examine the relationship between human genetic variation and 'race'. We review the results of genetic analyses that show that human genetic variation is geographically structured, in accord with historical patterns of gene flow and genetic drift. Analysis of many loci now yields reasonably accurate estimates of genetic similarity among individuals, rather than populations. Clustering of individuals is correlated with geographic origin or ancestry. These clusters are also correlated with some traditional concepts of race, but the correlations are imperfect because genetic variation tends to be distributed in a continuous, overlapping fashion among populations. Therefore, ancestry, or even race, may in some cases prove useful in the biomedical setting, but direct assessment of disease-related genetic variation will ultimately yield more accurate and beneficial information.

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n1 ... g1435.html

I will leave you with this: "disease-related genetic variation will ultimately yield more accurate and beneficial information", "These clusters are also correlated with some traditional concepts of race, but the correlations are imperfect because genetic variation tends to be distributed in a continuous, overlapping fashion among populations", " it is inaccurate to state that race is "biologically meaningless". You can test by race, but it is an imperfect measure. Why on Earth you want to argue that you can't test by race I have no idea, you can't adequately test by ethnicity either.

[Mavorpen]

Okay then, how you can genetically profile ethnicity, since it is a cultural construct. I am curious.

Fairly easily.

[Zweite Alaje]

That's...nice?

That doesn't address a single thing I said.

Okay then, how you can genetically profile ethnicity, since it is a cultural construct. I am curious.
Edit:

New genetic data has enabled scientists to re-examine the relationship between human genetic variation and 'race'. We review the results of genetic analyses that show that human genetic variation is geographically structured, in accord with historical patterns of gene flow and genetic drift. Analysis of many loci now yields reasonably accurate estimates of genetic similarity among individuals, rather than populations. Clustering of individuals is correlated with geographic origin or ancestry. These clusters are also correlated with some traditional concepts of race, but the correlations are imperfect because genetic variation tends to be distributed in a continuous, overlapping fashion among populations. Therefore, ancestry, or even race, may in some cases prove useful in the biomedical setting, but direct assessment of disease-related genetic variation will ultimately yield more accurate and beneficial information.

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n1 ... g1435.html

I will leave you with this: "disease-related genetic variation will ultimately yield more accurate and beneficial information", "These clusters are also correlated with some traditional concepts of race, but the correlations are imperfect because genetic variation tends to be distributed in a continuous, overlapping fashion among populations", " it is inaccurate to state that race is "biologically meaningless". You can test by race, but it is an imperfect measure. Why on Earth you want to argue that you can't test by race I have no idea, you can't adequately test by ethnicity either.

All testing for race is doing is seeing what regional gene variants are more prevalent in an individual.

[New Rogernomics]

Okay then, how you can genetically profile ethnicity, since it is a cultural construct. I am curious.
Edit:
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n1 ... g1435.html

I will leave you with this: "disease-related genetic variation will ultimately yield more accurate and beneficial information", "These clusters are also correlated with some traditional concepts of race, but the correlations are imperfect because genetic variation tends to be distributed in a continuous, overlapping fashion among populations", " it is inaccurate to state that race is "biologically meaningless". You can test by race, but it is an imperfect measure. Why on Earth you want to argue that you can't test by race I have no idea, you can't adequately test by ethnicity either.

All testing for race is doing is seeing what regional gene variants are more prevalent in an individual.

Exactly, I wouldn't stop all research on testing for race; as it is geographically based. Would make more sense to not use the terms race or ethnicity; if you are arguing that race is has no basis, then nor does an arbitrary division based on language or culture such as ethnicity.

[New Rogernomics]

Okay then, how you can genetically profile ethnicity, since it is a cultural construct. I am curious.

Fairly easily.

No you can't, nor can you with race, it would only work if you measure a geographical region (which that race or ethnicity happens to be in).

[Zweite Alaje]

All testing for race is doing is seeing what regional gene variants are more prevalent in an individual.

Exactly, I wouldn't stop all research on testing for race; as it is geographically based. Would make more sense to not use the terms race or ethnicity; if you are arguing that race is has no basis, then nor does an arbitrary division based on language or culture such as ethnicity.

I'm not arguing against the reality of race, I'm not a liberal. What I am saying is that race isn't cookie cutter divided. Everyone has some racial "impurity".

[Mavorpen]

All testing for race is doing is seeing what regional gene variants are more prevalent in an individual.

Exactly, I wouldn't stop all research on testing for race; as it is geographically based. Would make more sense to not use the terms race or ethnicity; if you are arguing that race is has no basis, then nor does an arbitrary division based on language or culture such as ethnicity.

Maybe to you. I'll stick with the science.

[Mavorpen]

Fairly easily.

No you can't, nor can you with race, it would only work if you measure a geographical region (which that race or ethnicity happens to be in).

Yes you can.

[Yankee Empire]

Sorry but no. This is true for concentrated geographical populations and ethnicities. It has nothing to do with the faulty category of "race."

Exactly, "race" has more to do with cultural elements. Genetically humans exist in a continuum with no clean cut racial divisions.

Right no "Clean cut" divisions, which is why the concept of racial "purity" is nonsense.

But this doesn't discount Race.

Afte all don't genetics play a role in how a culture is formed as well as enviroment and thought?

[Mavorpen]

Exactly, I wouldn't stop all research on testing for race; as it is geographically based. Would make more sense to not use the terms race or ethnicity; if you are arguing that race is has no basis, then nor does an arbitrary division based on language or culture such as ethnicity.

I'm not arguing against the reality of race, I'm not a liberal. What I am saying is that race isn't cookie cutter divided. Everyone has some racial "impurity".

It has jack shit to do with liberalism.

[Mavorpen]

Exactly, "race" has more to do with cultural elements. Genetically humans exist in a continuum with no clean cut racial divisions.

Right no "Clean cut" divisions, which is why the concept of racial "purity" is nonsense.

But this doesn't discount Race.

Afte all don't genetics play a role in how a culture is formed as well as enviroment and thought?

No, it discounts race as a valid biological taxonomy.

[Yankee Empire]

Right no "Clean cut" divisions, which is why the concept of racial "purity" is nonsense.

But this doesn't discount Race.

Afte all don't genetics play a role in how a culture is formed as well as enviroment and thought?

No, it discounts race as a valid biological taxonomy.

How?

[Zweite Alaje]

I'm not arguing against the reality of race, I'm not a liberal. What I am saying is that race isn't cookie cutter divided. Everyone has some racial "impurity".

It has jack shit to do with liberalism.

Yes, it does. Liberals the main proponents of race denial.