Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

If you can see this message, the SSL certificate expiration has been fixed.
Become a Patron!

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 106 KB, 626x530, IMG_2038.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9143309 No.9143309 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

How effective is this method in determining who exactly a person was in racial terms? How many times has this worked, and what percentage of cases has this worked?

I'm wanting to know because I keep hearing people say that race is only a skin color, however race can be also determined by bone structure as well.

Is this standard procedure for forensic anthropology in the US, and if so, how effective is it? I heard that it can be confusing to identify a mixed race individual by simply looking at the lower jaw bone, but does it work? I know this is a very politically incorrect question to ask, but I want to hear an experts side of the story.

>> No.9145405

I actually have a very detailed training manual for forensic anthropology. I'll take some pictures and post them at some point

>> No.9145409

there are a metric fuckton of differences between the races, a common one to point out being that blacks have higher bone density (ie they sink in water). The biggest problems when it comes to researching these types of differences is that it is a cultural taboo in the western world, the whole equality and diversity thing means pointing out that we aren't carbon copies makes you a racist.

asia is a great place to look for these kinds of research papers, because quite frankly they don't give a fuck about western social trends.

>> No.9145981

racist

>> No.9146030
File: 1.69 MB, 3264x2448, IMG_3115[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9146030

1/7

>> No.9146034
File: 1.57 MB, 3264x2448, IMG_3116.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9146034

>>9146030
2/7

>> No.9146038
File: 1.14 MB, 3264x2448, IMG_3117.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9146038

>>9146034
3/7

Apologies for their being sideways. They are showing up as vertical on my file explorer, not sure how to fix it

>> No.9146040
File: 1.95 MB, 3264x2448, IMG_3118.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9146040

>>9146038
4/7

>> No.9146043
File: 1.43 MB, 3264x2448, IMG_3119.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9146043

>>9146040
5/7

>> No.9146047
File: 1.64 MB, 3264x2448, IMG_3120.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9146047

>>9146043
6/7

>> No.9146049
File: 1.37 MB, 3264x2448, IMG_3121.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9146049

>>9146047
7/7

And I think thats the most the book says about race/sex. I can also dump the cause of death indicators too if anyone is interested.

>> No.9146052

>>9146030
>>9146034
>>9146038
>>9146040
>>9146043
>>9146047
>>9146049
tl;dr or gtfo

>> No.9146053

>>9146052
>Are there differences in skull characteristics between races?

Yes.

>> No.9146055
File: 48 KB, 800x591, wtf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9146055

>>9146040
>>9146043
>>9146047
>race not biologically constructed
>show skulls differences based on race

>> No.9146095

>>9143309
It has been shown that racial classification of skeletal morphology only works accurately if you are looking at a skeleton from the same population that was sampled in order to find the racial characteristics linked to that population's race. In other words, what these methods are really finding is the morphology of a population, which only coincides with race when the subject is of the same population and thus the same race. This is expected from the modern anthropological view that only populations are the true source of genetic group variation, not races.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.1330240103/abstract

http://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/anre.2015.78.issue-1/anre-2015-0002/anre-2015-0002.xml

>> No.9146147

>>9146055
Those are literally the only two reliable differences we know about. The nose and parts of the lower jaw.

The rest of the "muh skulls" stuff is BS. Phrenology is not a real science.

>> No.9146156

>>9143309
morphology doesnt mean shit. Look at molecular data, even better nucleotide differences, all that will dictate morphology anyways.

>> No.9146157
File: 94 KB, 481x593, concerned adolf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9146157

>>9146147

so we're not one race the human race?

>> No.9146178

>>9146157
You can believe in whatever fantasy you want

>> No.9147284

I don't see why skull shape's correlation with race is so controversial. Nobody would argue that there isn't a link between facial features and ethnicity, and those race specific facial features are because of the bone structure. Doesn't mean if the slope of your forehead is 2 degrees off that you're some sort of mongoloid.

>> No.9147682

>>9146157
We are, because interbreeding has made sure of it. Think of a situation where you release a group of dogs of different breeds into an area, after a thousand years (more than the amount of time needed actually) you won't be able to distinguish any breeds from the population.

>> No.9147687

>>9147284
Because it's not correlated to race. It's correlated to population genetics.

>> No.9147768

>>9146157
Irrelevant as your entire eurangutan race will get wiped out of the earth's surface. Get extinct'd subhuman.

>> No.9148223
File: 87 KB, 600x450, 1502143088154.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9148223

>>9147682
But interbreeding is only heavily encouraged and promoted in only white majority countries. Africa will be still blacks 1000 years from now, Asia will be still Asians 1000 years from now.

>> No.9148245

>>9147687

largest genetic clusters in human population = races

>> No.9148289
File: 51 KB, 572x532, racegene.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9148289

>>9147687
Each genetic cluster delineate into race.

>> No.9148675

>>9148245
>>9148289
>largest genetic clusters in human population = race
What does "largest genetic cluster" refer to?

Why are these not the "largest genetic clusters?"

In reality, biologists know that human populations form clines, and cannot be objectively delineated into races.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cline_(biology)

>> No.9148677
File: 151 KB, 572x532, clines.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9148677

>>9148675
Meant to attach pic

>> No.9148692

>>9148677
Is the Middle East white?

>> No.9148699
File: 380 KB, 800x1090, 1401130258539.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9148699

a native Peruvian who lived in the 15 century

>> No.9148702

>>9143309
that German skull is so aesthetic

>> No.9148713

>>9148692
Where does skin color appear on your graph?

Can you just show me these "largest genetic clusters" without referring to arbitrary characteristics? Because if not, you are just showing me clines, not races.

>> No.9148732

>>9148702
It's wrong tho.

Inuits have the biggest skulls.

The pic cherrypicks skulls to show how the german have a big skull...again...

Truly pathetic.

>> No.9148843
File: 405 KB, 817x881, arab2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9148843

>>9148692
Currently they are classified as white in America. From 2020, they will have their own classification.

>> No.9150418
File: 205 KB, 1000x1000, skulls.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9150418

>>9146043
>>9146047

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action