Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What a large family you have, I wonder where those cousins tests would say they were from!
I think it's no different from anyone else, in that all of us have many, many people related to us. I just didn't expect them to be from that part of the world.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 38,766,834 times
Reputation: 7185
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyGem
huh?
the phenotypical differences between humans has nothing to do with "so called" race.
how we look is due to an arrangement of alleles and how those genes code for physical differences which are expressed superficially.
the differences are purely superficial and have nothing to do with "race".
what are you talking about "german shepherds don't exist"?
in a family of brunettes (no brunettes for 10 generations on either side of the family) a red head appears with blue eyes ... now what? you think mom was getting some on the side from the milkman?
Well, I don't agree because there are definitely phenos and genos with associations to "so called races" that do not spontaneously arise in other "so called races". Sickle cell anemia, melanin distribution, hair protein sturcture, facial bone structure, type of adipose tissue and its distribution over the body, etc. etc. Forensic analysis of human skulls can determine whether the individual "caucasoid, negroid or mongoloid". Differences between Africans, scandinavians, and Ainu, for example, can be cataloged and categorized in a scientific manner. That's not imaginary.
Although many of our differences are superficial, many are not. Populations separated by distance and time will drift away from the progenitors and from eachother - humans are not special in that sense.
I said the bit about "German Shepherds don't exist" because it is analogous to your statement that "races don't exist" when examined logically. "German Shepherds don't exist" is false.
An example of a family of brunettes going back 10 generations does not say anything other than there was heterogeny in the line at some point and it is falllacious to imply that "brunette" is a "so called race".
Now, if a family of Africans (African for at least 10 generations) spontaneously welcomes a redheaded child with blue eyes, mom gets to be pretty suspicious, doesn't she? (that article that you're tempted to respond with - I think mom is pretty suspicious and I think dad would believe that a woman can get pregnant from a toilet seat).
Well, I don't agree because there are definitely phenos and genos with associations to "so called races" that do not spontaneously arise in other "so called races". Sickle cell anemia, melanin distribution, hair protein sturcture, facial bone structure, type of adipose tissue and its distribution over the body, etc. etc. Forensic analysis of human skulls can determine whether the individual "caucasoid, negroid or mongoloid". Differences between Africans, scandinavians, and Ainu, for example, can be cataloged and categorized in a scientific manner. That's not imaginary.
Although many of our differences are superficial, many are not. Populations separated by distance and time will drift away from the progenitors and from eachother - humans are not special in that sense.
I said the bit about "German Shepherds don't exist" because it is analogous to your statement that "races don't exist" when examined logically. "German Shepherds don't exist" is false.
An example of a family of brunettes going back 10 generations does not say anything other than there was heterogeny in the line at some point and it is falllacious to imply that "brunette" is a "so called race".
Now, if a family of Africans (African for at least 10 generations) spontaneously welcomes a redheaded child with blue eyes, mom gets to be pretty suspicious, doesn't she? (that article that you're tempted to respond with - I think mom is pretty suspicious and I think dad would believe that a woman can get pregnant from a toilet seat).
Google or YouTube "Sandra Laing" for a twist on this story.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 38,766,834 times
Reputation: 7185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucario
Google or YouTube "Sandra Laing" for a twist on this story.
That wasn't the article I had in mind, but Sandra Laing's is a very interesting story. Does anyone know the origins of the proverbial "red-headed stepchild" and/or why such a stepchild would be beaten?
That wasn't the article I had in mind, but Sandra Laing's is a very interesting story. Does anyone know the origins of the proverbial "red-headed stepchild" and/or why such a stepchild would be beaten?
"These results show that when individuals are sampled from around the globe, the pattern seen is not a matter of discrete clusters – but rather gradients in genetic variation (gradual geographic variations in allele frequencies) that extend over the entire world. Therefore, there is no reason to assume that major genetic discontinuities exist between peoples on different continents or 'races.' "
All humans share 99.9% of their DNA. We are much more alike than different.
The external differences, particularly skin color, merely reflect adaptations to our environment.
The canine analogy falls short, however, because the breed differences in dogs is largely man made and artificial. Selective breeding in animals has its pitfalls, as it sometimes selects for undesirable traits that actually would have detrimental effects on survival in the wild, such as deafness and hip dysplasia. Left to themselves, feral dog populations worldwide tend to look much like Australian dingoes. Fascinating article here:
So the concept of "race" has little scientific value. It merely describes groups of humans with similar external phenotypes. We can look at groups with similar phenotypes, however, and deduce that they may be more likely to share genes for conditions that are not externally obvious, such as sickle cell anemia in people with black skin. Or we can look at cultural groups which can have a higher risk of certain medical conditions because of preferential marriage within the group, such as Tay Sachs disease in certain Jewish populations. Sickle cell developed as an environmental adaptation (it confers resistance to malaria) but is also influenced by preferential marriage within cultural groups.
When cultural barriers to intermarriage between persons of different "races" break down, phenotypic differences become blurred. Do we then need to invent new "races" to classify the descendants of those marriages? I think not. Those barriers are dropping rather rapidly in the USA.
Sandra Laing's story vividly illustrates how "race" is a cultural construct, not a scientific one. Was her white father her biologic father? It would be wonderful to have DNA to show for sure. Apparently that did not happen or was not made public if it was.
Mitochondrial DNA can show us where our ancestors lived in the distant past. It cannot tell us if we have a blood relative living in a certain town in a certain country.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 38,766,834 times
Reputation: 7185
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
The canine analogy falls short, however, because the breed differences in dogs is largely man made and artificial. Selective breeding in animals has its pitfalls, as it sometimes selects for undesirable traits that actually would have detrimental effects on survival in the wild, such as deafness and hip dysplasia. Left to themselves, feral dog populations worldwide tend to look much like Australian dingoes. Fascinating article here:
This is essentially why I disclaimed the canine analog as logical rather than scientific; the differentiation of dog breeds is still similar enough in scope to the differentiation of human "races" to make the analogy in that context. Construct or not, you can't say races don't exist and be right.
This is essentially why I disclaimed the canine analog as logical rather than scientific; the differentiation of dog breeds is still similar enough in scope to the differentiation of human "races" to make the analogy in that context. Construct or not, you can't say races don't exist and be right.
Ah, but there is no genetic basis for "race" as most of us use the term.
That's why people get upset when DNA surprises them with unexpected results based on their perception of their own race.
Well, the problem is that, although even the most dissimilar humans are about 99.9% identical genetically, that 0.1% does account for distinct genotypical and phenotypical heritable traits. We are all human, but there are very real sub-groups with markers that can be identified by forensic analysis (as well as visual inspection). That's not a social construct. While it's accurate in a sense to look at an ethnic Japanese, an ethnic Eastern European Jew, a phenotypical scandanavian, an African and a native Amazon tribesman or a German Shepherd, a mutt, a Chihuahua and a labrador and say "there is no difference, they are all human/dogs", it is also somewhat silly to say "German Shepherds don't exist".
What a difference .1% makes.
Medical doctors and other scientists have to keep in mind the very real differences due to different reactions to medications and likelihood of diseases due almost solely to DNA.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
