Lewontin's fallacy is not a fallacy

[Anonymous No.9998424]

Edward's critique which is shown in this image has never been taken seriously in the anthropological or scientific communities because it fails to understand that vague clustering (and a clade is a far more accurate depiction of race) of genetic traits does not lend any biological credibility to racial categories.

So it cannot be said that race exists among humans.

[Anonymous No.9998430]

>>9998424
Please delete the thread before the /pol/ice raid the place.

[Anonymous No.9998441]

Everyone knows /pol/'s views on any scientific topic are stupid and not even worth debating because they've been debunked so many times. Even /pol/ knows this and just continue to spread unscientific misinformation as propaganda.

[Anonymous No.9998454]

>>9998441
>>9998430
i am a /pol/tard. just not an aggressive one. I don't believe in my OP. I'm just trying to get /sci/ to debunk it.

[Anonymous No.9998793]

It should be clear by now, this once-scientific issue has been
over-run by political zealotry, and infested by racial politics.

>While acknowledging Lewontin's observation that
>humans are genetically homogeneous, Edwards
>saw Lewontin's argument as based on a political stance.
>Richard Dawkins agreed with Lewontin on the science,
>however Dawkins took issue with Lewontin's politics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_genetics

[Anonymous No.9998807]

>>9998430
>>9998441
I have come up with my own retort because /sci/ couldn’t


The genetic code which allows a person to produce lactase which only some geographic groups of people have is very insignificant in size with respect to the whole human genome. It is contained within only a single gene. Yet it had a radical effect on those people’s lives when dairy was the primary source of nutrients.

Just because it’s only a few small genes that differ between geographic peoples, that doesn’t necessarily mean they can’t have a significant effect. IQ could very well be determined by only minor genetic differences between groups. Yet IQ in modern society unfortunately creates huge wealth disparity in the same way that lactase production would have created a huge disparity in nutritional nourishment

[Anonymous No.9999678]

,

[Anonymous No.9999698]

>>9998424
>does not lend any credibility to racial categories
What's your definition of "racial category?"

[Anonymous No.9999700]

>>9998424
>please convince me that races don't exist so that I can continue to claim intellectual honesty while avoiding societal derision from acknowledging reality

[Anonymous No.9999724]

>>9998424
>So it cannot be said that race exists among humans.

Then what is racism about?

[Anonymous No.9999753]

>>9999724
just some unjustified apauling behaviour

[Anonymous No.9999755]

>>9999753
Then what is affirmative action (racism) about?

[Anonymous No.9999762]

>>9999724
>Then what is racism about?
It's people's right to discriminate with whom they deal. Leftists believe this right should only be allowed to the government

[Anonymous No.9999766]

>>9999755
>Then what is affirmative action (racism) about?
That's positive discrimination, goy.

[Anonymous No.9999957]

Makes perfect sense, it's one thing that makes a different species. Finches for example. Big beak or little beak. Separates the species. Then there's all the genetics in each species.

[Anonymous No.10000218]

>>9999753

What differences the kind of appalling behavior called "racism" from other kinds?

[Anonymous No.10001925]

,

[Anonymous No.10001993]

>>9998430
>>9998441
>>9998441
>hurr durr

[Anonymous No.10002007]

It's more than that Edwards never said Lewontin's data was wrong. Edwards only claimed you could categorize people based on other factors. It's a scientific fact that there is more genetic variation within populations than between them in humans. This is even acknowledge in the Witherspoon paper. That paper is about trying to match an individual with a population. It says nothing about how similar populations or people are to each other.

[Anonymous No.10002053]

>>10000000

[Another shit /pol/ thread No.10002063]

>>9999724
Modern day racism is about using phenotype (appearance) as a pre-determinant to someone's value, behavior and humanity. Visible physical differences do not justify any of this former, mostly pride/ego-driven condescending behavior.

[Anonymous No.10002222]

Im starting to think /pol/niggers are literally ADDICTED to talking about race on the internet

[Anonymous No.10002256]

>>9998424
"Edward" (whoever that is) doesn't seem to understand the concept of distance

[Anonymous No.10002260]

>>10002222
Dr King said it decades ago
>If it may be said of the slavery era that the white man took the world and gave the Negro Jesus, it may be said of the Reconstruction era that the southern aristocracy took the world and gave the poor white man Jim Crow.
>He gave him Jim Crow. And when his wrinkled stomach cried out for the food that his empty pockets could not provide, he ate Jim Crow, a psychological bird that told him that no matter how bad off he was, at least he was a white man, better than the black man.
>And he ate Jim Crow. And when his undernourished children cried out for the necessities that his low wages could not provide, he showed them the Jim Crow signs on the buses and in the stores, on the streets and in the public buildings. And his children, too, learned to feed upon Jim Crow, their last outpost of psychological oblivion.
They're addicted to being a master race. They really just can't help it at this point; they need their fix. Smile and nod at the brainlet.

[Anonymous No.10002270]

>>10000218
skin color?

[Anonymous No.10003344]

How does a sci thread on 4chan have so many libshits

[Anonymous No.10003351]

>clusters don't real!!!!!
>big five is objectively SCIENTIFIC unlike jungian dichotomies which are total astrology (and just so happen to correspond to four of the big five traits except with less behavioralism)

[Anonymous No.10003396]

Here's the initial data for the /pol/itically minded:
>He found that the majority of the total genetic variation between humans (i.e., of the 0.1% of DNA that varies between individuals), 85.4%, is found within populations, 8.3% of the variation is found between populations within a "race", and only 6.3% was found to account for the racial classification.
The data has been confirmed many times since the first study, but the conclusion is the thing that is disputed:
>Since such racial classification is now seen to be of virtually no genetic or taxonomic significance either, no justification can be offered for its continuance.
In other words: if the minute genetic differences in the human species between separate populations are irrelevant to taxonomic classification, then they are irrelevant to other considerations/scientifically do not exist. I agree that the differences should not be considered when it comes to taxonomy (all subtypes regardless of species should not be considered), but they have to be considered while examining a particular species if the examination involves them. You can't invalidate a study based on race by stating the fact that race doesn't exist on a taxonomic level, this is simply misinterpreting the categorical classification. The 14.6% difference between geographical groups of the 0.1% general difference between humans proves that races exist.

[Anonymous No.10003550]

>>9999698
this, most of the arguments I've seen are weaselly constructed and state that one form of races doesn't exist while implying that all forms of races don't exist

[Anonymous No.10003563]

>>9998424
>Race is a social construct with no underlying biological reality
>But for 100 bucks you can get from 23andme a full breakdown of the racial components of your ancestry down to the percentage.
How does leftypol reconcile these two conflicting assertions?

[Anonymous No.10003569]

>>9998424
Lewontin's argument also applies to dogs. There is more genetic variation within breeds than between them. Does this mean that there are no significant differences between a german shepherd and a chihuahua?

[Anonymous No.10003938]

>>9998424
We can test this experimentally, right? Show me a white nigger.

[Anonymous No.10004540]

race doesn't exist!!! it's impossible to separate using genetic information

[Anonymous No.10004715]

human races are basically analogous to subspecies if you had a single honest bone in your body you'd acknowledge this

no skin off of my teeth anyways, nobody actually believes this one race the human race bs other than weirdo white redditors on the internet

archeo generics is getting better and better anyways the old multiregional theories will be vindicated as soon as a homo erectus skeleton is sequenced and we will be able to put this bs to bed

[Anonymous No.10004775]

>>10003563
>leftypol are SJWs
top kek

[Anonymous No.10004787]

>>10003569
Devils advocate, is this true when it comes to dog breeds?

[Anonymous No.10004812]

>>10004787
yes and no, there's two major branches of dog breeds and most dog breeds/dogs are part of the branch that is similar to human genetics patterns (pic related). playing devil's advocate would entail an argument against the responded to argument and not just a questioning of it.

[Anonymous No.10004816]

>>10004787
yes and no, there's two major groupings of dog breeds and most dog breeds/dogs are part of the grouping that is similar to human genetics patterns (pic related). playing devil's advocate would entail an argument against the responded to argument and not just a questioning of it.

[Anonymous No.10004820]

>>10004775
gas yourself

[Anonymous No.10004845]

>>10004820
>doesn't have a clue what leftypol is
>called on it
>"g-gas yourself"

[Anonymous No.10006737]

>>9999762
>I know what Leftists believe
you don't know shit, Cletus

[Anonymous No.10006745]

>>10003563
>leftypol
gtfo /pol/itard

[Anonymous No.10007164]

>>10003938
Polish people

[Anonymous No.10007204]

>>10004787
One allele can do more than 10000 others and dogs undergo artificial selection to make certain trait pronounced to the point where the norm for a certain breed can be a dozen standard deviations from other dog breeds in general.

[Anonymous No.10008003]

HAPPENING
>>185932848

[Anonymous No.10008009]

>>>/pol/185932848
happening

[Anonymous No.10008016]

>>10002260
>Projecting so hard
Pls stop...this is why /pol/ always thinks its right...

[Anonymous No.10008220]

>>10008016
>Projecting
He's not saying he's the master race m8
MLK was right about you cucks

[Anonymous No.10008246]

>>10006737
Studies have consistently shown than conservatives understand liberal positions much better than vice versa.

[Anonymous No.10008249]

>>10008016
That is a requisite for being a /pol/tard. First, you believe your beliefs and feeling are all 100% true, then you look for an echochamber that justifies them.

[Anonymous No.10008270]

>>10008016
The people there, I can say with certainty, are unfulfilled with simple shades of greyness outside their raging reds.

[Anonymous No.10008276]

>>9998441
Such as? Instead of making baseless claims, why don't you cite examples? You faggot.

[Anonymous No.10008321]

>>9998424
>more variation within than between
Which means the difference in means is less than the standard deviation. For IQ, the std is 15 and we have means of
>Asians 106
>Whites 100
>Hispanic 93
>Blacks 85
This is what /pol/ has literally been saying since forever ago.

[Anonymous No.10009145]

>>9998441
Wrong, poor bait.

[Anonymous No.10009794]

>>9998424
>anthropological
anthropology isn't a serious field, it is purely political

[Anonymous No.10009800]

>>10008321
this

Lewontin does not understand basic statistics

[Anonymous No.10009802]

>>10002222
>>10002260
>>10008220
>>10008249
they don't like lying to themselves, this is the difference. It is glaringly that leftists are being dishonest and lying on this front

[Anonymous No.10009806]

>>10009800
>>10008321
that only holds for single traits as well, when you index measurements of metrics, this changes

[Anonymous No.10009810]

>>10009802
Get off this board

[Anonymous No.10010481]

>>9999755
it is an act of unionization (collective barganing) against a monopolistic force in the attempt to counteract the rent-seeking behavior (a principle-agent problem) of the monopolistic force.

[Anonymous No.10012005]

>>10009802
Dear /pol/
Just because you turn it into a meme doesn't make it invalid
Sincerely, your mother's lover

[Anonymous No.10013262]

>>10008249
wow what insight this cannot be said of literally any ideology in existence

[Anonymous No.10013269]

>>10009810
delet this

[Anonymous No.10013285]

>>9999753
>apauling