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.
You are completely out in left field. In science there is no such thing as "race." There are only Kingdoms, Divisions (or Phylum), Classes, Orders, Families, Genus, and Species. "Race" only exists in the minds of the truly ignorant.
Actually, you're in left field. While there might not be a such thing as race in biological classifications, there will be variations in species based on geographical location. The traits that favor survival in one area of the world are not the traits that will favor survival in another area of the world. For example, some areas might favor intelligence as a survival trait while another might favor brute strength. While each area could probably claim a trait that makes them superior, others would have other areas that make them superior.
However, we circumvent mother nature's natural selection all the time so starting from about the 1960's forward, all bets are off. We help support those with low IQ's and allow them to breed so intelligence should be dropping....we bypass the natural conception process so we can expect to be breeding in more fertility problems in future generations....we keep the sick alive long enough to breed so we should be breeding in weakness... At least, from this point forward (more likely starting around the 1960's) we can expect that we are weakening the race not strengthening it so it really doesn't matter who started out superior. As a matter of fact, those who started out superior probably would reach the point of having a society that takes care of the unintelligent and sickly before those of lesser intelligence would. Once you reach that point though no one is breeding for superiority. Mother nature, however, would breed for superiority but what constitutes superiority would be based on the challenges of the particular environment for a group of people.
Correct me if i'm wrong but if the following below definition of evolution is correct. Then those that claim they're superior to others could have a valid point. Basically wouldn't the belief in evolution be validating racism as acceptable and should be tolerated. Note I personally do not believe in evolution. I believe we were all created by a supreme being and all equal in value under the eyes of that supreme being.
Evolution-A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form.
Not superior but different. Scandinavians are the strongest people, Africans are the most athletic, and us Irish can drink everyone else under the table.
We're all homo sapiens, our skull shape and size tells us this, but each different peoples have different strengths and weaknesses based on where we evolved.
Race is a human construct.
And evolution is about adaptability, nothing more.
The more adaptable, the more likely any one species is to survive significant environmental changes.
What we perceive as race is simply a manifestation of the adaptability of the human species.
Scientific evidence disagrees with you. I didn't say that people can't be of mixed race.
No, =science= agrees totally with me and YOU are almost completely not understanding why, even though you use the TOTALLY bogus term "mixed race" as if you started out with something nonbogus in the first place and as if now "mixed race" actually means something.
So, again, stop posting, sit on your hands, think about EVERY aspect of race that you can, move onto the bogus "mixed race" way of thinking if you must, think about EVERY aspect of that whatever-it-is (new race?), THEN understand why there really is no such thing as "races".
======
Note that "race" is a bogus biological thang. It says NOTHING about "culture" which is a sociological thang. Do NOT confuse your navel contemplation with cultural overtones.
Stop posting, sit on your hands, and start thinking about EVERY aspect of race that you can.
And then...
Take one of your false races, mate it with another of your false races, and say with a straight face "This new person is X race!" for any race X.
There are differences between races, from bone and muscle structure to diseases that affect certain races of peoples (sickle cell, Epstein Barr, etc.). That doesn't mean one is superior over another, just that there are differences, just as dogs have differences.
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,300 posts, read 4,406,723 times
Reputation: 2394
If you believe in evolution then that just means that a people group (not an entire colored "race") has adapted to their particular environment but can be challenged to their superiority in that environment. No one is universally superior.
Well the biological definition of race isn't the same as our government's definition of it.
All race really means now is what box on a census or other form someone chooses to check off. Someone can be just as much white as they are black and for political purposes only acknowledge the black.
As far as the government, race should be discontinued as a criteria for anything. If you want to use a particular HLA kit based on race when tissue typing, that's a whole different matter.
"Race" only exists in the minds of the truly ignorant.
Is that why every government form and program asks for your race?
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.
