/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11669086]

does this article prove that there is no "black" race, but many African races? eli5 if possible

https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article/study-africans-more-genetically-diverse-rest-world

[Anonymous No.11669087]

additionally, are there any similarities that all of the different africans racial groups share that they don't with whites or Asians?

[Anonymous No.11669102]

It just means there's more genetic diversity. They didn't experience the population bottlenecks that Europeans or East Asians went through to achieve their present status.

[Anonymous No.11669114]

>>11669102
thank you for your reply. is there so much genetic diversity that they shouldn't be grouped together as a biologic race "black"?, just as you wouldn't group whites and Asians as a race?

[Anonymous No.11670832]

>>11669114
I mean theres genetic diversity between whites and asians too. Salvs are more authoritarian than NW europeans, throughout history. Chinese vs indians obviously.

Race is the first, crudest category, but that doesn't mean its wrong. Its just not the end of human biodiversity.
>See africa
>See all the people in this one continent with brown skin, tribal lifestyles, more religious...
>It might be helpful if we could refer to that as an entity

Sure, you can divide it up, or we could just say theres two or three races (pic related).

But its certainly less diverse if you only consider sub-saharan africa (which makes sense bc theres a big fucking desert running through it).

[Anonymous No.11670844]

>>11670832
Errrrr cannot find that figure in the paper?

[Anonymous No.11670887]

>>11669086

[Anonymous No.11671006]

>>11670844
Sorry its from their supplementary materials here
science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2008/02/21/319.5866.1100.DC1/Li_SOM.pdf

Figure S3

[Anonymous No.11671025]

>>11670887
The PCs represent structure of the penis. We know Africans have big dicks, but why does that mean they are a different race?

[Anonymous No.11671036]

>>11669086
>but many African races
east african and west african is probably the best division there

[Anonymous No.11671118]

>>11670832
>Talk about genetic differences within races
>Then mention some generic cultural differences

[Anonymous No.11671133]

>>11670832
>Adding in 'no continuum' in post
What exactly does that lack of continuum show?

[Anonymous No.11671192]

>>11671118
They are not 'generic cultural differences'
Religiousness has a heritability of 0.4, the structure of the society will be linked to genes/ life history strategy (name an african city in subsaharan africa, pre colonialism that even came close to a city state).
We could say general intelligence too (0.8 - 0.86 heritable).
The culture is an expression of genes.

[Anonymous No.11671206]

>>11671133
More distant ancestry

[Anonymous No.11671221]

>>11671133
The discussion in>>11671006
tells you what each of the figures means

[Anonymous No.11671239]

>>11671192
"In this study, we analyzed genotype data from several different yet complementary perspectives:
A global view of individual ancestry, genetic relatedness among populations, and fine-scale
population structure. Historically, populations that have migrated away from each other often
settle in geographically distinct regions, and the longer the time since divergence, the less
genetically similar they tend to be. Consequently, genetic differentiation between populations
8
reflects both history and geography. Using the same genetic distance matrix, we constructed a
phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1B) to represent the likely historical order of population divergence, and
used the PCA plots to depict the genetic relatedness among the populations (Fig. 2, also Figs. S3-
5). "

[Anonymous No.11671341]

>>11671192
Heritability doesn't mean hard-coded in your DNA. It's literally any trait that can have a similarity from parent to child. Including obvious environmental factors.

[Anonymous No.11671816]

>>11671341

[Anonymous No.11671821]

>>11671341
"Heritability is a statistic used in the fields of breeding and genetics that estimates the degree of variation in a phenotypic trait in a population that is due to genetic variation between individuals in that population."

>literally doesn't know what heritability is

[Anonymous No.11671838]

African americans in America are all like 1/4th white. Just look at someone like xxxtentacion for example.

[Anonymous No.11671840]

>>11671821
>>11671816
Yeah, the variation. In a specific population. The environment you inherit will influence your genes.

It's crazy to me that people spew concepts they have absolutely zero knowledge of.

[Anonymous No.11671846]

>>11671840
So it is in the genes.

[Anonymous No.11671851]

>>11671840
>same environment
Lets compare white south africans and black south africans then

[Anonymous No.11671862]

>>11671840
Where is that pic even from. Not a biology textbook?

[Anonymous No.11671870]

>>11669086
>there is no "black" race, but many African races
Nigger, that's basic anthropology. It's common knowledge that not every sub-Saharan African belong to the same race. Saying that Maghrebis, Somali and Yoruba are the same is like saying that Meds, Slavs and Nords are the same.

[Anonymous No.11671873]

>>11671840
And this is dumb. You can get heritability estimates from different environments as long as you control for environment no? This is just that "flower in different soil" meme

[Anonymous No.11671879]

>>11669086
No.

[Anonymous No.11671896]

>>11671846
>>11671851
Y'all are a tad bit retarded. The general idea is that we all live in an environment set up to make white people succeed and black people fail. Change the environment, and you can change the outcomes. High heritability will remain.

[Anonymous No.11671915]

>>11671873
Yes, the flower thing. That's literally what heritability is.

[Anonymous No.11671960]

>>11671915
My god I know. but I've said we've had studies of africans in developed nations, controlled for SES, in the same SES, the differences persist and are heritable. Saying africans are like those flowers in crappy soil is wrong.

What is you're actual point?

[Anonymous No.11671970]

>>11671915
Also, between group heritability is a thing, as is group heritability

[Anonymous No.11671989]

Most American blacks aren't even black

They're all mixed mutts

It baffles me when they identify purely as black

[Anonymous No.11672004]

>>11671960
We haven't totally controlled for SES, and you imply that means the remaining differences are due to genes. That's totally not true.

[Anonymous No.11672013]

>>11671989
>25% european admixture
>We're just like our ancestors
>Continue to listen to rap and be degenerate
Even their ancestors would disown them

[Anonymous No.11672034]

>>11671989
think about obama
>50% white
>50% EAST african
>first black president
as if he had anything in common with the average black in america lol

[Anonymous No.11672044]

>>11672004
What is it due to then?

And no I havent claimed its 100% genes. I'm saying (for example) the differences between populations that are clearly observable are partly due to genetic differences between these populations. Do you think otherwise?

[Anonymous No.11672226]

>>11672044
You have implied that the "heritability" of IQ represents the portion of the racial IQ gap that is due to genes. That's wrong, and extremely suspect of racist motivations. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, as "heritability" is misleading to a layman.

The answer is we don't really know. There isn't any evidence that points to a genetic component, but we also shouldn't rule it out. But we know of many environmental components where there are clear racial disparities.

[Anonymous No.11672454]

>>11672226
I did not imply that. But the idea it's majority environmental is clearly wrong.

The heritability of white european IQ is 0.6-0.86, ie the variability of IQ that is due to variation in the genes of the europeans.

Why should it be substantially different for between group variation in IQ? We know SES only acounts for maximum 4 points on an IQ test in afro-americans.

Whites always score, on average, better than blacks no matter the economic bracket they come from. The top 10% of blacks score lower than the top 40% of whites (in america)
>implying 'motivations'
Ok, but i could claim you just desperately want all populations to be the same, as you've literally just said stuff.

>environmental components
Ok developed sub sah african countries (Botswana, Congo, Tanzania...) score worse than comparable countries outside africa (e.g. Kazakstan)

I could equally claim poorly maintained environments are just a reflection of a lower genetic disposition to actually change their environment, form complex social structures...

[Anonymous No.11672474]

>>11669086
/pol/ plz go

[Anonymous No.11672752]

>>11672454
>But the idea it's majority environmental is clearly wrong.
It's not "clearly" wrong until we have evidence to support that. We don't. A study would have to conclude some sort of maximum IQ suppression from all combined environmental factors, maybe not possible. Otherwise, find the genetic components.

You can't use heritability to analyze differences between groups. I'm no expert, but that's what experts say.

>We know SES only acounts for maximum 4 points on an IQ test in afro-americans.
Doubt, and income alone is not the entirety of environmental factors, not even close.

[Anonymous No.11672945]

>>11672752
>we dont have evidence to support that
Ok but then you have to explain why people from these countries adopted into wealthy, happy families don't see a boost in IQ camparable to even a standard deviation. Why first generation immigrants don't see a substantial boost of that magnitude...
ie this is disproved by behavioural genetics and twin studies

>you can't use heritability to analyse differences between groups
All human behavioural traits are heritable to some degree. So all of these differences have some kind of genetic root. To claim its majority environmental means one of two things i) there has not been enough time for changes between populations to be explained by genetics (eg flynn effect, secular gains in height)

ii) the two populations are genetically identical
This is clearly false
>FInd the genes
You dont need to, but heres some we have found that show significant variation between different races

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842692/

https://www.pum.edu.pl/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/13211/54-01-01.pdf

https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/exploring-the-association-between-the-2-repeat-allele-of-the-maoa-gene.pdf

https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/31/2/288/999088

[Anonymous No.11673064]

>>11672945
>Ok but then you have to explain why people from these countries adopted into wealthy, happy families don't see a boost in IQ camparable to even a standard deviation.
Adoption studies usually go into detail about it. They typically say how the adopted kids do improve, which is promising, though when adopted at age 7 or whatever, considerable damage is already done, and they still are at the mercy of society as a whole.

[Anonymous No.11673283]

>>11673064
Those improvements are lost by the time they leave home/ age 24. ie the heritability of these traits increases with age.

[Anonymous No.11673289]

>>11673064
we can compare human babies from different races too. Reaction times, self recognition...

[Anonymous No.11673346]

>>11673283
>ie the heritability of these traits increases with age
Or leaving your white home and going into society turns you into just another black person so you only get hired for black jobs and have no upward mobility even if you are smarter because you were raised in a more affluent environment.

[Anonymous No.11673372]

>>11673346
Then why isnt this true of any other groups. Chinese and indian adoptees do fine.
>"Have no upward mobility"
well you're more likely to be accepted into college than whites of the same SAT score. More likely to get a job interview than whites of the same qualification. Most employment bias is in favour of minorities when corrected for qualifications attained...
You'd have to prove this claim too, not just state it.

[Anonymous No.11673461]

>>11673372
You've done it buddy. You've ruled out every environmental factor. Go publish these amazing findings.

[Anonymous No.11673485]

>>11673461
I didn't say that. But the environmentalist case has been dead since the 90's

[Anonymous No.11673499]

>>11673485
Oh, well that means someone must have ruled it out. Someone inform Charles Murray, because not even he would make such a bold claim.

[Anonymous No.11673505]

>>11673372
The problem is that it is a million times easier to tell a white person from a black person than it is to tell a college educated black person from a non college educated black person.

[Anonymous No.11673527]

>>11673283

>Those improvements are lost by the time they leave home/ age 24

Not even him but that's false. The improvements become marginal by adulthood due to heritability but still retain to a degree. Which is how epigenetics and gene expression can even span generations in the first place. I.E. lifestyle choices in one generation can increase the likelihood of expressing itself or being silent in the next generation.

[Anonymous No.11674759]

>>11673527
If it's so bad for them why did blacks choose to force integration in the usa.

Every oppressed nation/ people in history has fought for separation, not integration. Apart from afro-Americans.

[Anonymous No.11675004]

>>11672454
its very easy to imagine situations where within and between group heritability diverge.


>>11673283
>btfo

[Anonymous No.11675016]

>>11669114
>>11669086
>you wouldn't group whites and Asians as a race?
Why not ?

[Anonymous No.11675019]

>>11671192
Timbuktu

[Anonymous No.11675035]

>>11669086
>https://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article/study-africans-more-genetically-diverse-rest-world
Categories :
>Biotech & Pharma
>Racial Justice

[Anonymous No.11675155]

>>11669087
Yeah, they're all black.

[Anonymous No.11675291]

[Anonymous No.11675294]

>>11675155
>what are aborigines

[Anonymous No.11675300]

>>11675291
this fellas obviously never been to bulgaria

[Anonymous No.11675509]

>>11675291
That quote is fake you fucking faggot