/sci/ - Science & Math

Check the archive and find out.

>>9974339
>there's more genetic variation within a racial group than between different groups
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Genetic_Diversity:_Lewontin's_Fallacy

>>9974341

How do I do that? Sorry but I'm new.

bump

>>9974344
You should definately lurk more before posting. Your thread sucks.

>>9974363

:(

poor op

>>9974391
get fucked

>>9974339
FWIW I personally reject the idea of 'races', we're all the same species, we can transfuse blood between us all (given the right ABO type, of course), and transplant organs between us all regardless of so-called 'race'. 'Race' is an artificial construct intended to create divisiveness and it needs to be rejected, it has no rational, logical basis. There are genetic variations within our species just like any other species, and those variations are driven by enviornmental conditions; the fact that those variations breed true is irrelevant to the subject, we're still the same species.

>>9974933
>FWIW I personally reject the idea of 'races', we're all the same species, we can transfuse blood between us all (given the right ABO type, of course), and transplant organs between us all regardless of so-called 'race'.
http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1993074,00.html
https://bethematch.org/transplant-basics/matching-patients-with-donors/how-does-a-patients-ethnic-background-affect-matching/

is race the same as etnicity

>>9974933
>hurr durr muh social construct durr
Goddamn you're like a literal echo chamber.
There is only one species, the animal species.

>>9975147
>hurr durr muh separate races are different species
Goddamn you're like a literal echo chamber. Humans consist of precisely 2 subspecies, even though I'm not educated in bio at all.

>>9974339

>>9974341

fpbp

>>9975222

fpbp?

>>9975184
>Humans consist of precisely 2 subspecies,
Yes. The intelligent ones and... you.

>>9974339
mhmm i bet jher pussy is wet. id fuck her deep>>9974339
>>9974339

>>9974339
>there's more genetic variation within a racial group than between different groups
This turned out to be a total lie. Even Dawkins has called it out. It's called Lewontin's Fallacy.

Race is perfectly real, but it makes some people very uncomfortable, so they deny science.

>>9974339
weho is she? Who is herfather.

>>9975347
This guy seems to be trying to connote that Pygmies are less human.

>>9975561
No he is connoting that leftists are less human, and he is right.

>>9974933
>it has no rational, logical basis.
its location based dummy, why do you think they're called Caucasians

A race of humans is just a group of them who collectively share certain traits that became expressed as a result of that group's shared ancestral environment. Of course that "exists". To say that race doesn't exist is to say that humans don't exist.

>>9975964
>To say that race doesn't exist is to say that humans don't exist.

No not really. It just means it's a social and cultural thing that varies based on the society/people/person.

>>9975132
No

>>9975262
best post in the board

Better a good barbarian then a scum Greek.

I am sure you know this quote.

>In October 1999 Witten, representing the Jewish delegation at an American Renaissance meeting, said: "In all honesty, American jewery deserves a pogrom strictly due its involvement in the pornographic industry, let alone the large scale improprieties they are responsible for in the world of finance and the Zionist lobby as a whole"[38][39], going on to note that "[the] goyim are far more clever than you give them credit for, if the jews provoke them to mass antisemitism ever again, then American jewery surely would have deserved it"[40], garnering a mostly lukewarm and muted response from the attendees.

>>9976484

DA JOOOOOOOOOS

>>9974391
There there OP

>>9974344
>newfag
>creates threads about race
Nothing surprising here

>>9977565
>on 4chan
>too stupid to create coherent argument
>strawman
Nothing surprising here.

>>9977468
Why would you not be allowed to criticise Jews?

>>9977574
You don't even know what a strawman is retard

>>9977627
it's a fogical allalacy.

>>9974339
>more genetic variation within than between
>variation
what defines a race is the difference in phenotype between it and another race, not the variance in phenotype. This argument is semantic, it tries to conflate 'difference' with 'variance'.
Its like saying the peaces on a chess board are all the same colour because the white and black peaces both have a variety of peaces, but simply observation shows that the two side are different.

>>9977610

Why would you think I care whether you do or not?

>>9977668
Are you Jewish?

> more genetic variation within a racial group than between different groups which is used as an argument against races existing
This idea was peddled by a famous Jewish biologist and it's officially known as Lewontins fallacy.

Think of it this way: take all types of fruit that exist and put them in a blender and you'd get a brownish mixture with purple and greenish pigments. Then do the same for all vegetables and you'll also get a brownish mixture with purple and greenish pigments. The average color for each group is quite similar, but the color differences between each fruit or each vegetable are greater than the differences between each group's respective average. Lewontin's fallay is based on a mathematical artifact that, through dishonest trickery, appears to mean something significant when discussing race. However, it's quite irrelevant. There are still some significant color differences between fruits and vegetables, just as there are significant differences between races. The idea that differences are overshadowed by averages doesn't matter.

>>9975132
Marxist retard biology academics pretend race doesn't exist and instead label race as "ethnicity" to create a type of sophist diversion to explain away all the gaps in the science world that exist due to pretending race isn't real. ShaunKANG is a white person who says his ethnicity is black and some idiots actually do play along with that charade. Obviously that doesn't mean anything and he'll still be in a lower quintile for organ matching probabilities with actual black people.

>>9978216

Are you?

>>9974339
>What little I've read says that there's more genetic variation within a racial group than between different groups which is used as an argument against races existing.
Yes, but not all genes get to manifest itself in the individual's phenotype.
Also think of the difference between man and women.
Just one single chromosome account for entire organs that is present in one gender but not in the other, as well as size, hormones etc.
So you don't need a myriad of different genes to distinguish people by race.

>>9974339
this is only true for individual locis/genes

When you start looking at more and more loci and genes that vary between humans , the chance of person 1 from racial group A and person 2 from racial group B being more closely to each other than person 1 and person 3 also from racial group A tends towards 0.

meaning a caucasoid person is going to be genetically more similar to another caucasoid person than they will be to a mongoloid or a negroid person.

Can someone who's a defendant of racial classifiers of humans provide an exhaustive list of the races? Very serious question. There seems to me to be a strong cultural factor in regards to classification, not based on science. The classic groupings are Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid but that's obviously not exhaustive.

Colloquially in America it seems to me like:
>Caucasian (and sometimes Hispanic)
>Black
>Asian
>Indian / Middle Easterners in their own undefined category. Indian/Pakistan sometimes being Asian
>Everything else in one big Other

Native Americans? Not Caucasian but not fitting into anything else there. What about South American natives? Same race as Alaska natives despite being possibly thousands and thousands of years removed? Are Aborigines their own race too? This classification only makes sense to me under narrow conditions where we ignore all the complicated parts.

>>9979068
the question of races can be thought of as a question of clustering.
Which human populations of somewhat related people (ethnic groups) are more genetically to each other and do human populations form clusters.

There are several ways to go about answering this question in terms of bayesian information criteria, principle component analysis, expectation maximisation , k-means and other clustering techniques in unsupervised machine learning.

so no there isn't an "exhaustive list of races" and the results you get will be tremendously sensitive to the threshold you set for "race" , but the human species is definitely clustered to the extent that this is true >>9979049

No

>>9979068
btw, genetically, indians and middle easterners are caucasoid, the same cluster as whites (except for some australoid people in india)

subsaharan africans have the most human genetic variation because they have been living there longer than the rest of humanity has been living in the other areas so have had more time to develop mutations and genetically drift so subsaharan africans form a very loose cluster if at all compared with caucasoids and mongoloids who definitely cluster.

native americans are descended from mongoloids from alaska but the problem with clustering the "other" groups like pacific islanders, inuits, aboriginals, and native americans is that those groups have had so much founder effect and genetic bottlenecks that genetic drift has worked much faster. especially pacific islanders.

>>9979085
Of course you can classify anything using any measure of similarities and differences if you like. The specific point I was addressing was the strong cultural component tossed into the equation, which is tangential to any scientific method. We can draw the boundaries of physiological classification right around the exact same spot that our cultural views fit them and pretend it's scientific but that's just framing the facts to fit a pre-existing and arbitrary picture.

>>9979093
>mongoloid
kek

>>9979096
is the cultural component a big deal? nearly everyone has an idea of "black" that in the context of human beings means "of subsaharan african stock". When we talk about race at any level of resolution whether it be the tribe or the ethnic group or the nation or the race , we're talking about people of shared ancestry, a lineage.

it's not a physiological classification but an ancestral/genetic classification.

It just so happens that prior to the technology of being able to do ancestral and genetic classifications, anthropologists were able to ascertain which ethnic groups were more or less related and constructed groupings of those ethnic groups (races) based on history, geography, linguistics and facial features and those anthropologists did a surprisingly good job based on the crude information they had available. so the 19th century understanding of different races and which ethnic groups comprise them does map onto the genetic and ancestral reality quite well, at least the parts that have survived and are still talked about today (i.e. caucasoid and mongoloid groupings, the negroid grouping to a lesser extent).
but nevertheless, the 19th century guesses based on language, history and facial features isn't the state of the art which needs to be debunked if you wish to debunk racial classification at all levels and claim its unscientific.

bringing up the cultural component of the semantics to say e.g." italians used to be considered non-white " isn't really relevent and if you want to go for that then you're just attacking the weakest form of the argument.

>>9979114
Yes the cultural component is a big deal when the question in the thread is about the "realness" of race. You and I can interpret OP's question in different ways and arrive at different answers. If he's just asking whether or not humans can be classified into ancestry groups then no shit races are real. My interpretation is that OP is asking more specifically about the validity of the racial "clusters" we usually divide humans into. And if a very strong factor in that delineation is admitted cultural interpretations of where to draw the lines in the sand then that says something about the "realness" of it (however one interprets that)

>>9974339
Our concept of race is a somewhat arbitrary construct because we could ultimately break them down to very small groups. Having said that the general idea that there is significant diversity within the human species is correct. It does make sense to differentiate and the differences between say blacks and whites are obvious and at least whites have enough similarities to make the grouping justified, but it really depends on your taste.

Of course they exist.
I harvested tissue from about a hundred different races of beans yesterday.

>>9979085
>slavs far away from western cucks
Feels Good

>>9974344
Let me guess, first board you tried was /pol/

>>9979654
>"far away"
lol you have no idea how tiny that FST distance is.

>>9979654
TFW askenaz are turko-slavic turbomutts.

>>9974391
Fuck off