/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8885270
NOBODY that has a background in science and is not politically motivated dismisses the idea of race.

There is more genetic distance between a European person and an African person than between an Asiatic Lion and an African Lion, which are considered not only different breeds but different SPECIES altogether.

Nobody can deny Human genetic diversity in terms of looks, height, strenght, endurance, speed, and even intelligence. Skull shapes are different. Cranial capacity is different. Even differences in cortical neuron counts are statistically significant.

We live in a very politically correct world that does not want to hear these facts of life. But shutting your eyes will never make them go away.

>Genetic Differentation Among African and Asiatic Lions Is Less Than Found Among Different Human Groups:

>The mtDNA distance between Sub-Saharan Africans and White Europeans is around 2.0

>The mtDNA distance between African and Asiatic Lions is around 0.92:

>In spite of the ability of lions to disperse long distances, patterns of lion genetic diversity suggest substantial population subdivision (mtDNA ΦST = 0.92; nDNA FST = 0.18), and reduced gene flow, which, along with large differences in sero-prevalence of six distinct FIVPle subtypes among lion populations, refute the hypothesis that African lions consist of a single panmictic population.

>http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000251

>“There is only one spcies of lion: Panthera leo. The Asiatic lion is just one of many subspecies, all of which have been geographically isolated from one another for thousands of years. Though they all possess slightly different physical and behavioral traits, they are still capable of interbreeding and producing viable offspring.”

>http://animal.discovery.com/tv-shows/wild-kingdom/about-animals/asiatic-vs-african.htm

>>8365065

>>8179129
>>8179142
>Genetic Differentation Among African and Asiatic Lions Is Less Than Found Among Different Human Groups:

>The mtDNA distance between Sub-Saharan Africans and White Europeans is around 2.0

>The mtDNA distance between African and Asiatic Lions is around 0.92:

>In spite of the ability of lions to disperse long distances, patterns of lion genetic diversity suggest substantial population subdivision (mtDNA ΦST = 0.92; nDNA FST = 0.18), and reduced gene flow, which, along with large differences in sero-prevalence of six distinct FIVPle subtypes among lion populations, refute the hypothesis that African lions consist of a single panmictic population.

>http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000251

>“There is only one spcies of lion: Panthera leo. The Asiatic lion is just one of many subspecies, all of which have been geographically isolated from one another for thousands of years. Though they all possess slightly different physical and behavioral traits, they are still capable of interbreeding and producing viable offspring.”

>http://animal.discovery.com/tv-shows/wild-kingdom/about-animals/asiatic-vs-african.htm

in the meanwhile

>>6557452
Scientifically speaking yes, there are groups as per pic related, BUT you quickly get into semantics arguing about it with leftists on the internet because everyone that isn't a scientist in the field has a different idea of what "race" means.

Furthermore all humans are actually more similar to each other genetically than we would expect given how long we've been around (though that's still hardly any time at all on geological time scales.) It's thought that this means some catastrophe came pretty close to making us extinct at some point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixation_index#FST_in_humans

Frankly I don't understand the detail of any of this, ask /sci/ (in a non-/pol/ fashion) if you want more information.

>>6545635
That's big if it's really what the study implies, but the paper title in footnote 1 is actually about mtDNA ... I don't know enough about genetics, but it seems dubious to infer much at all about phenotype from this. Can it be used as a proxy in genetic drift studies or something?
>Spoiler: I don't really know what genetic drift is either

>>5433299
>Firstly, 'black people' is an arbitrary bin base don sociological definition.
No it isn't.

Black people refers to people of sub-saharan african abstraction. i.e. negroes.
these ethnicities (as there are indeed many different negroid ethnicities) can be differentiated from ethnicities from other parts of the world by looking at differences in allele distributions.

This isn't arbitrary. The fact is that certain groups of people are more genetically similar to each other than others.

Furthermore it is not merely a correlation that has been found, it is a correlation where other possible associated factors have been controlled for >>5433286 , providing strong evidence that there is not only a correlated relationship but a causal relationship, and therefore that negroes do not share the same distribution of intelligence as europeans, and furthermore that the mean intelligence of negores is lower than that of europeans.

finally
>The most meritocratic and scientifically justified means of judging an individual's intelligence will always remain as testing the individual rather than placing them into any of an infinite arbitrarily defined bins.
First of all, as already said and demonstrated, they are not arbitrary, secondly your point is both obvious and besides teh point.
Yes, obviously there is varition in any population.
And yes obviously, testing an individual's intelligence is more accurate than saying " you're white therefore your IQ must be 100" for example. Nobody is saying anything like that.

The fact still remains that there is strong evidence that negroes have a lower mean IQ than white europeans.

>>5356392

Hows that cognitive dissonance working out for you?

>>4990690
[cont.]
Indeed, in 2008 Rajender et al determined that male control subjects average 21.19 repeats, rapists average 18.44 repeats, murderers average 17.59 repeats, and men who murder after they finish raping average 17.31 repeats.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/50x2125530hku64l/fulltext.pdf?page=1

The shortest repeat lengths are associated with a higher degree of violence, earlier criminal records, verbal aggression, assertive personalities, extraversion, neuroticism, and self-transcendence (mystical tendencies).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19448851

Sjoberg et al proved that higher testosterone levels increased aggressive tendencies in males with the 3R allele that is the most common MAOA allele in black people but did not increase aggression in males with the 4R allele that is the most common MAOA allele in whites.

http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v33/n2/pdf/1301417a.pdf

To summarize, African Americans have fewer CAG repeats in the androgen receptor gene, which somehow increases testosterone spikes. Higher testosterone decreases MAOA enzyme levels in those with the 3-repeat allele. Plus, androgen receptor alleles with fewer CAG repeats beget more androgen receptor activity. These receptors translocate to the cell nucleus and down-regulate the MAOA gene. African Americans likely have a significant genetic component to their lower baseline cortisol levels and lower cortisol spikes in response to threats. This further allows higher testosterone levels and decreases MAOA levels directly.

Also pic related, we don't need to identify specific genes to say that the vast differences in FST and genetic clustering are the reasons why blacks are less intelligent/more violent.

>>4771943

Actually, yes. That's a perfect example of the different races of humans. Hell, there's more of a genetic gap between Caucasians and Blacks than there is between a Dog and a Wolf.

Niggers are not people.

>>4691165

There are genetic differences among human populations that have been caused by geographical influences.

We don't have to be geneticists to see the plethora of examples through groups with predominant skin color, eye color, hair color, immunities, vulnerabilities to specific genetically caused diseases, etc.

One of my favorite examples is Iceland.

>>4434126
>Your average french man had more in common genetically speaking with a north african than a chinese person.
North-African =/= Sub-Saharan African(what every one means when they say 'African')

Ok /sci/ I have an idea that anyone the least bit educated is a supporter of racism. Care to challenge my hypothesis?

Please don't just insult people, if you disagree with me post a brief summary of points you feel racism fails on, or why egalitarianism is superior.

>>4128342
Wrong nigger worshipper!

Negroids and European whites are further apart genetically than dogs and wolves.

>>3972905
>implying all races are social constructs

If you wish, convert the term "race" to "isolated groups which have experienced evolution over several thousand years."

>>3841444
>>3841442

Idiots.

Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies
http://www.cell.com/AJHG/abstract/S0002-9297(07)62578-6
>We have analyzed genetic data for 326 microsatellite markers that were typed uniformly in a large multiethnic population-based sample of individuals as part of a study of the genetics of hypertension (Family Blood Pressure Program). Subjects identified themselves as belonging to one of four major racial/ethnic groups (white, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic) and were recruited from 15 different geographic locales within the United States and Taiwan. Genetic cluster analysis of the microsatellite markers produced four major clusters, which showed near-perfect correspondence with the four self-reported race/ethnicity categories. Of 3,636 subjects of varying race/ethnicity, only 5 (0.14%) showed genetic cluster membership different from their self-identified race/ethnicity. On the other hand, we detected only modest genetic differentiation between different current geographic locales within each race/ethnicity group. Thus, ancient geographic ancestry, which is highly correlated with self-identified race/ethnicity—as opposed to current residence—is the major determinant of genetic structure in the U.S. population. Implications of this genetic structure for case-control association studies are discussed.

TL;DR:
>Thus, ancient geographic ancestry, which is highly correlated with self-identified race/ethnicity—as opposed to current residence—is the major determinant of genetic structure in the U.S. population

And: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050128221025.htm

Why are antiracists so retarded?

>>3636260
Race is a genetic reality.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050128221025.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_genetics