/sci/ - Science & Math

Politics
That or there is just not enough difference to pass the threshold of being so different there are functional differences.

>>12638887
Jews.

/thread

>>12638887
politics bro

>>12638887
No scientist wants be credited with such a discovery

they are when you're dead

>>12638887
Because someone would get butthurt about this.

>>12638887
they are but instead of calling then subspecies we call them races

>>12639140
They could name human subspecies after themselves though, how cool would that be

>>12639387
this. rest of thread is retarded.

>>12638887
Because it doesn't matter, all sorting humans into subspecies would do is give fodder to racists. As well, there is enough gene flow between human populations that it wouldn't make sense to classify us into subspecies. You cant just point to variation in a population and say "new species"

>>12639741
Australian aboriginals have been an isolated genetic cluster for over 50, 000 years. Why can;t they be a subspecies?

>>12639419
what?

>>12639759
They probably would be had they remained isolated. other animal populations diverge all the time but they have a tendency to converge again after a significant period of time but before speciation has occurred. We don't reclassify those species until significant barriers to breeding occur, so why reclassify humans? Also no one agrees on taxonomy so you can just say whatever you want, the entire discipline is for autists

>>12638887
they were but then hitler happened

>>12639759
they are, have you ever looked at one? they factually lost their ability to make fire or tame dogs via degenerative evolution.

>>12638887
>>12639798
>>12639832
The problem is subspecies are classified as not interbreeding on a regular basis, and because we live in an international world humans of all populations interbreed. In other words, different "races" would technically be subspecies if they were isolated.

>>12639843
the problem is that statistically, races DON'T interbreed on a regular basis.

>>12639850
You don't understand the requirement. Most subspecies are so isolated that they practically never interbreed with others of their species, like the Kodiak bears of Alaska. Humans meanwhile interbreed enough that the species barrier is practically nonexistent. Take black Americans for example. We think of black Americans as being African when in reality most of them have European genes in them as a result of slavery. This breaks down the subspecies barrier.

>>12639387
>>12639721
One race human race bigots

>>12638887
chink has the [math]\mathbb{PHENOTYPE} [/math]

I get your point, but human races are not the same as subspecies. Subspecies exhibit significant and highly consistent genetic differences between specific local populations. The genetic differences between human groups are not the same: they are much smaller and less consistent, despite being very apparent in the phenotype. Human races are more analogous to dog breeds than subspecies. Two dog breeds can look and behave very differently, but in fact the total genetic difference is very small, compared to for instance two subspecies of zebra which look almost identical. This is all because subspecies formed over a much longer time than humans took to spread across the earth and form our various ethnic groups.

>>12638887
This is easily settled by defining your terms.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK542546/
>the general view being that subspecies are groups of actually or potentially interbreeding populations that are phylogenetically distinguishable from, but reproductively compatible with, other such groups
Humans meet those criteria, a species that meets those criteria has subspecies, therefore humans have subspecies.

>>12638887
Because we are so god damn identical genetically. It takes a little more understanding of basic genetics, biochemistry, and cellular biology to realize that just because things look "different", act slightly "different", and having various averages of intelligence, they can still be super genetically related and thus, the same species. It's just plain factually wrong to try and classify various barely diverged people groups as different "subspecies". Plus, the implication of such classifications can and will lead to unwarranted discrimination, atrocities, etc.
As a biochemist and geneticist, it just baffles me how fucking stupid and uninformed the average person is on these topics. Old systems of physiology differences for classification of different species is an old and weaker classification system, that oftentimes had very little basis in raw genetics.

>>12640112
Peak midwit. We share 98.8% of our DNA with chimps and look how different that they are. Try letting a chimp babysit your kids and then tell me that "genetic differences don't matter".

>>12638887
It woudn't be trackable by site anymore we're too mixed it would have to supervised by AI reading genome data to place you in more relevant groups than what humans could

>>12640244
Do you have any idea what a huge difference having 1 less chromosome or changing the order of the genomes can make? I think not

>>12640244
>Hmmmm lets just delete this base pair what could go wrong