[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

Search:


View post   

>> No.15673113 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15673113

>>15673110
>the italians are more distant...
here's where I got that from

>> No.15346751 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15346751

>>15346534
>Might as well declare each individual their own subspecies.
If it's more than three it might as well be 7 billions ? That doesn't sound right.
Grey wolves have 38 subspecies despite recent population bottlenecks, why shouldn't we have something similar ?

>The effective genetic ancestry of modern humans is only ~7,000-14,000 individuals.
I thought you were talking about gene flow between populations. How does it compare with the effective genetic ancestry of other species with subspecies ? Is it on the low end of the spectrum (in which case your argument fails), or outside of it entirely ?

>The right tool would be simple single base-pair differences.
Between populations ? That would hide dissimilarities that are due to differences in allele frequency.
After all "most of the information that distinguishes populations is hidden in the correlation structure of the data"

>1. Humans compared to most other animals are very similar to one another,
I dunno. Genetic distance between continental groups is similar to that of wolves and coyotes.
>2. Most of the genetic differences are within populations because we're highly inbred subsets of Africans.
That is irrelevant, the remaining differences can still be significant.

>Otherwise you're just equivocating association with causation.
We haven't established independent causal relationships for the difference in behaviour between wolves and dogs. But I think it's genetics. Don't you ?

>> No.14546125 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, genetic distance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14546125

>>14546106
>There remains no useful agreed upon definition for "race" in that context
The genus and species "Homo sapiens" is a poor classification.

>> No.14496673 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14496673

>>14496654
Genetics.

>> No.12118322 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12118322

>> No.12070989 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12070989

>>12070707

>> No.12066128 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12066128

>>12066008
Genetic distances between 42 selected human populations averages at 0.133. It ranges from 0.002 to 0.457. New guineans average distance from other humans is around 0.2.

>> No.12025457 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12025457

>>12025444
>>12025436
Ethiopians have caucasian admixture but they're still connected to west africans.

>> No.12021754 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12021754

>>12021631
>insignificantly removed
Quantify that please.

>> No.12012242 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12012242

>>12012191
>Not a /pol/tard. Is there any actual evidence of significant genetic differences between blacks, whites and asians?
Yes. Pic related, our maximum FST goes over 0,3. For reference, different but related species and different subspecies are in the range of 0,15 to 0,25. Wolves and coyotes are at 0,15.
>Would it be possible to tell which race someone belongs to just by looking at their genome?
Yes, accurately. That's the business of 23andme and others.

>> No.11822648 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11822648

>>11822506
I only know 4chan racists, of which I am.
They all usually admit that races are connected clusters with objective genetic distance that separate them, and that they are genetically inferior in terms of intelligence only when considered as one group.
Adding the claims that the clusters are discrete with set boundaries and that there's no individual or sub-group that can show intelligence are strawmen invented by anti-racists to avoid answering to reasonable arguments for racism.

>> No.11762197 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11762197

>How different ?
This table quantifies it.

>> No.11700978 [View]
File: 360 KB, 800x976, humangeneticdistance.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11700978

>>11700972
Only one I found that shows genetic distances on a tree.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]