/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15674148
>>15674263
>technically there is no reason not to split any species into increasingly small subgroups...
Technically there is. Here's one of the top of my head. Genetic diffs in humans play a critical role in understanding disease and medicine and in how they affect us. The fact that in some if not all of the proposed sub groups, you can observe differences in disease patterns is a perfect example of its usefulness. I'm not sure which is worse, being ignorant of this or pretending to be.

> these subspecies should follow the lines of existing racial development.
I did not and I don't believe anyone else in this thread has proposed this idea. Another hypothetical fantasy. You are arguing based on fear, which I said at the start was the one of the reasons you would be against the sub grouping of humans.

So far I have proven through logic and reason
>There are measurable differences between sub groups
>There is good cause to use these sub groups

And your counter argument is that technological advancements are a result of luck and that other groups didn't want to do it anyway and fearful outlandish hypothetical situations.