Why is nobody mentioning that...

[Dresta]

...the racial dichotomy of 'white' and 'black' that so dominates contemporary American politics and culture is logically nonsensical? Can someone provide me with a tangible definition of what 'race' is (if anyone says skin colour i will slap them)? Why can't people get past this kind of prejudicial black and white thinking?

Sad really: things won't really improve until you do and stop looking at people collectively based on their skin colour.

[Im Still Ballin]

In the end its all about making that dosh.

[NumberSix]

...the racial dichotomy of 'white' and 'black' that so dominates contemporary American politics and culture is logically nonsensical? Can someone provide me with a tangible definition of what 'race' is (if anyone says skin colour i will slap them)? Why can't people get past this kind of prejudicial black and white thinking?

Sad really: things won't really improve until you do and stop looking at people collectively based on their skin colour.
Race has nothing to do with skin color, but there are indeed 4 distinct human races.

[ZMonkey11]

...the racial dichotomy of 'white' and 'black' that so dominates contemporary American politics and culture is logically nonsensical? Can someone provide me with a tangible definition of what 'race' is (if anyone says skin colour i will slap them)? Why can't people get past this kind of prejudicial black and white thinking?

Sad really: things won't really improve until you do and stop looking at people collectively based on their skin colour.

They do. You just don't read enough to actually understand it's happening. It's ok, keep acting like you're smart.

[chocolatethunder]

Race has nothing to do with skin color, but there are indeed 4 distinct human races.
Yes that is indeed a theory not a fact. Some accept three major races not four and others accept four. Those theories are not widely accepted in academia but they are in popular culture.

[NumberSix]

Yes that is indeed a theory not a fact. Some accept three major races not four and others accept four. Those theories are not widely accepted in academia but they are in popular culture.
Which is the one that is in dispute? :confusedshrug:

[dude77]

They do. You just don't read enough to actually understand it's happening. It's ok, keep acting like you're smart.

the irony of this post when you have that guy as an avatar :oldlol:

[dude77]

Yes that is indeed a theory not a fact. Some accept three major races not four and others accept four. Those theories are not widely accepted in academia but they are in popular culture.

either way, it's quite obvious there are differences between certain groups .. enough to make some type of distinction .. you can call it whatever you want but they exist

[Dresta]

They do. You just don't read enough to actually understand it's happening. It's ok, keep acting like you're smart.
Read what exactly? I hope you don't mean the newspapers, because that would just be asinine.

And if they were, then it wouldn't be such a dominant and inflammatory topic (as it clearly is, and as you've clearly demonstrated with your bitter post that lacks any kind of contribution whatsoever). Keep thinking with your emotions kiddo!


Race has nothing to do with skin color, but there are indeed 4 distinct human races.
Not in the modern world there isn't, certainly not in the modern United States, where racial variations are myriad (even within those original 4 groupings you would have had many additional subdivisions with clear genetic differences and differences in appearance). The idea of a strictly subdivided human race would lose its force if people stopped talking about it all the damn time, because it is complete piffle (then everyone can go back to being bigoted towards other nationalities, as many already do without a second thought).

[Straight_Ballin]

Read what exactly? I hope you don't mean the newspapers, because that would just be asinine.

And if they were, then it wouldn't be such a dominant and inflammatory topic (as it clearly is, and as you've clearly demonstrated with your bitter post that lacks any kind of contribution whatsoever). Keep thinking with your emotions kiddo!


Not in the modern world there isn't, certainly not in the modern United States, where racial variations are myriad (even within those original 4 groupings you would have had many additional subdivisions with clear genetic differences and differences in appearance). The idea of a strictly subdivided human race would lose its force if people stopped talking about it all the damn time, because it is complete piffle (then everyone can go back to being bigoted towards other nationalities, as many already do without a second thought).

Every nationality has it's associated jokes and stereotypes, and they are in place for a reason, because actions of said nationality have caused them to be in place.

[UK2K]

Every nationality has it's associated jokes and stereotypes, and they are in place for a reason, because actions of said nationality have caused them to be in place.
Afghans **** sheep.

I know, I've seen it.

[NumberSix]

Not in the modern world there isn't, certainly not in the modern United States, where racial variations are myriad (even within those original 4 groupings you would have had many additional subdivisions with clear genetic differences and differences in appearance). The idea of a strictly subdivided human race would lose its force if people stopped talking about it all the damn time, because it is complete piffle (then everyone can go back to being bigoted towards other nationalities, as many already do without a second thought).
You may want to believe that, but unfortunately, science doesn't value wishes. Only facts.

You ever see a crime where they find buried bones and then some person examines the bones and says something to the effect of "looks like we have an African American female. Roughly 20 years old". That's because race is a scientific fact. It's a physically existing reality. It's not imaginary. It's not a matter of talking about it. People from different parts of the world have unique features.

[KeylessEntry]

one strange thing about race is the way that people tend to segregate themselves.

check out this map of racial distribution in america. its amazing how cities like houston and chicago are so heavily segregated today

http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/explorer

[COnDEMnED]

Afghans **** sheep.

I know, I've seen it.
So do the Amish. ****ing gross.

[K Xerxes]

Human skin color is mainly down to a pigment called melanin. If you were to move to Africa and your descendents were to live there for generations, the selection pressure would eventually favor more melanin production, meaning the skin colours would gradually become darker.

There is only 'one' race in this definition: the human race. Race is not skin color.

[NumberSix]

Human skin color is mainly down to a pigment called melanin. If you were to move to Africa and your descendents were to live there for generations, the selection pressure would eventually favor more melanin production, meaning the skin colours would gradually become darker.

There is only 'one' race in this definition: the human race. Race is not skin color.
Some idiot always has to come in with this line like it's the first time it's ever been said:facepalm

Humans are a species. Races are subdivisions of our species. You're right about skin color though. Skin color has nothing to do with race.

[Dresta]

You may want to believe that, but unfortunately, science doesn't value wishes. Only facts.

You ever see a crime where they find buried bones and then some person examines the bones and says something to the effect of "looks like we have an African American female. Roughly 20 years old". That's because race is a scientific fact. It's a physically existing reality. It's not imaginary. It's not a matter of talking about it. People from different parts of the world have unique features.
Oh, yeah, so what would they say if they found the bones of a Blake Griffin, or Jason Kidd? Don't bring up science with me and pretend i'm going off belief when the science contradicts what you are saying. The 4 racial categories you speak of haven't been in widespread usage by scientists since the 19th and early 20th centuries because they are lacking scientific accuracy and validity. In other words: science has rejected them because they are inaccurate and unrepresentative of reality, which is far more complex.

And no, i haven't seen a crime like that, and neither have you (except on tv). That is hardly scientific btw.

Find one place where i said people that originated from different parts of the world didn't have different features. But Slavs and Anglo-Saxons also have very different features, yet they are in the same racial group according to you. Racial distinctions are not even close to being as easy to make out as you are claiming.

These are what you were referring to i suppose?: 'The term Australoid, together with other terms such as Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid, belong to the systems of human classification developed by 19th-century anthropologists and physiologists and relate to outdated notions of race that have largely been abandoned.' (from OED)

[K Xerxes]

Some idiot always has to come in with this line like it's the first time it's ever been said:facepalm

Humans are a species. Races are subdivisions of our species. You're right about skin color though. Skin color has nothing to do with race.

You are free to believe that and some scientists would support you, but others do not. I personally do not find value in dividing humans past the species level considering we are genetically and characteristically all similar enough to produce fertile offspring.

[Dresta]

You are free to believe that and some scientists would support you, but others do not. I personally do not find value in dividing humans past the species level considering we are genetically and characteristically all similar enough to produce fertile offspring.
Agreed, it doesn't make sense at all in a rapidly globalising world, scientifically or otherwise.

[NumberSix]

You are free to believe that and some scientists would support you, but others do not. I personally do not find value in dividing humans past the species level considering we are genetically and characteristically all similar enough to produce fertile offspring.
No, unlike you, there are no scientist that don't understand the definition of species. You're an ignorant person who doesn't understand definitions, but they aren't.

Let me put it in coloring book terms for those such as yourself...


We all understand that dogs are a species. There are hundreds of subspecies of dogs, but they are still all dogs. We all recognize that German-Shepherds and Greyhounds are different subspecies of dogs. Can they produce fertile offspring? Of course. Nobody is unaware that mutts can breed. The fact that they can breed doesn't mean they aren't subspecies. I don't even know where you came up with such a ridiculous idea. Again though, you're an ignorant person.

[NumberSix]

Agreed, it doesn't make sense at all in a rapidly globalising world, scientifically or otherwise.
It actually makes perfect sense. There are 4 unique human races. It's not a matter of opinion. Like I said, when you find bones, you can identify which race the person was. Pretending this isn't true serves no purpose.

[Prometheus]

basketball

[K Xerxes]

No, unlike you, there are no scientist that don't understand the definition of species. You're an ignorant person who doesn't understand definitions, but they aren't.

Let me put it in coloring book terms for those such as yourself...

We all understand that dogs are a species. There are hundreds of subspecies of dogs, but they are still all dogs. We all recognize that German-Shepherds and Greyhounds are different subspecies of dogs. Can they produce fertile offspring? Of course. Nobody is unaware that mutts can breed. The fact that they can breed doesn't mean they aren't subspecies. I don't even know where you came up with such a ridiculous idea. Again though, you're an ignorant person.

Dogs are categorised into breeds because of generations of selective breeding leading to an exaggeration of characteristic differences. Were humans to undergo a similar process, I would find more value in subdividing this species.

Instead of continuing to insult me for no real reason, you should research more into this subject until you come to the realisation that '4 unique human races' is certainly not a consensus in the scientific community. To reiterate, I said you CAN divide Homo sapien into specific subclasses if you want, but other scientists may find different criteria, and smarter scientists (IMO) don't bother.

[NumberSix]

Dogs are categorised into breeds because of generations of selective breeding leading to an exaggeration of characteristic differences. Were humans to undergo a similar process, I would find more value in subdividing this species.
They did. :hammerhead:

Instead of continuing to insult me for no real reason, you should research more into this subject until you come to the realisation that '4 unique human races' is certainly not a consensus in the scientific community. To reiterate, I said you CAN divide Homo sapien into specific subclasses if you want, but other scientists may find different criteria, and smarter scientists (IMO) don't bother.
Actually, you didn't say that. You argued the definition of "species". You were wrong. Get over it.

[K Xerxes]

Actually, you didn't say that. You argued the definition of "species". You were wrong. Get over it.

So what you're telling me is that this:


There is only 'one' race in this definition: the human race.

is what got you so riled up for no reason, despite you admitting that this is a commonly used line, and despite me clearly showing that I knew understood the definition of species:


I personally do not find value in dividing humans past the species level considering we are genetically and characteristically all similar enough to produce fertile offspring.

Really?

[TonyD]

lol Ish... Sometimes this place is more entertaining than the games.

[NumberSix]

So what you're telling me is that this:



is what got you so riled up for no reason, despite you admitting that this is a commonly used line, and despite me clearly showing that I knew understood the definition of species:



Really?
How fcuking stupid are you? I mean, really?

1) Yes, you misused the word "race" for what really is a species. I can't possibly see how that wasn't clear that that was exactly what I was mocking you for.

2) You EXACTLY showed that you don't know what a species is. You said that anything that can breed is a species and NOT separate sub-species. I then explained to you in the most dumbed down way possible that different sub-species of the same species can in fact breed successfully, thus CLEARLY showing that your definition was wrong:hammerhead:

What the hell point did you think my comparison with dogs was making? I mean, I'm actually stunned how that you could have read it and the point be completely lost on you.

Like, dude. You're shockingly dumb. I just hope you're really young, because that's pretty bad if you're grown up and that mentally lacking.

[Dresta]

It actually makes perfect sense. There are 4 unique human races. It's not a matter of opinion. Like I said, when you find bones, you can identify which race the person was. Pretending this isn't true serves no purpose.
No there aren't. You are taking something extremely complex and simplifying it to the crudest kind of reductionism. Unique how? Do they have organs in different places? There aren't clear lines between races, it's more of a blurry and continuous field of differences, and the dividing lines invented by human beings in the 19th century are both subjective and arbitrary. DNA sequencing shows this. Each of these 3 (lets not include Australoids) can be subdivided another 10 times at least, and two of these subdivisions can have more in common genetically with those from a completely different group than from one of the other subdivisions of their shared racial group.

Moreover, all supposed races share 99.99%+ of their genetic makeup, meaning that the differences in appearance attributable to race are subjective, and that there is no need to create subjective subdivisions in a species so genetically homogenous, and which is only becoming more so.

You keep on banging on about 4 scientifically proven and unique races, when modern scientists have don't agree at all on this 'fact': some posit 3, others 6, others 7 etc. Most acknowledge that any attempted classification would be subjective, not objective as well.

You are completely wrong on this.

[NumberSix]

No there aren't. You are taking something extremely complex and simplifying it to the crudest kind of reductionism. Unique how? Do they have organs in different places? There aren't clear lines between races, it's more of a blurry and continuous field of differences, and the dividing lines invented by human beings in the 19th century are both subjective and arbitrary. DNA sequencing shows this. Each of these 3 (lets not include Australoids) can be subdivided another 10 times at least, and two of these subdivisions can have more in common genetically with those from a completely different group than from one of the other subdivisions of their shared racial group.

Moreover, all supposed races share 99.99%+ of their genetic makeup, meaning that the differences in appearance attributable to race are subjective, and that there is no need to create subjective subdivisions in a species so genetically homogenous, and which is only becoming more so.

You keep on banging on about 4 scientifically proven and unique races, when modern scientists have don't agree at all on this 'fact': some posit 3, others 6, others 7 etc. Most acknowledge that any attempted classification would be subjective, not objective as well.

You are completely wrong on this.
It's not blurry at all. A Caucasoid skeleton can be clearly distinguished from a Mongoloid. There are exactly 4 distinguishable races. No more, no less. There are 4 that are clearly distinct. No less. Beyond that, only mixtures of the 4.

[senelcoolidge]

People tend to like to be around people like themselves or that share common things like language and culture, that's why you have that segregation.
Why are Europeans so obsessed with categorizing people? I've been to other countries and places and people make less of deal about "race" and looks than around the Euro-centric places.

[Dro]

No, unlike you, there are no scientist that don't understand the definition of species. You're an ignorant person who doesn't understand definitions, but they aren't.

Let me put it in coloring book terms for those such as yourself...


We all understand that dogs are a species. There are hundreds of subspecies of dogs, but they are still all dogs. We all recognize that German-Shepherds and Greyhounds are different subspecies of dogs. Can they produce fertile offspring? Of course. Nobody is unaware that mutts can breed. The fact that they can breed doesn't mean they aren't subspecies. I don't even know where you came up with such a ridiculous idea. Again though, you're an ignorant person.
Why are you insulting the hell out of the dude when he's coming back at you with normal, reasonable responses? He's not insulting you. Who pissed in your cereal this morning? I'm not saying I agree or disagree with either of you but all these insults you're throwing his way just make you look immature...

[K Xerxes]

How fcuking stupid are you? I mean, really?

1) Yes, you misused the word "race" for what really is a species. I can't possibly see how that wasn't clear that that was exactly what I was mocking you for.

2) You EXACTLY showed that you don't know what a species is. You said that anything that can breed is a species and NOT separate sub-species. I then explained to you in the most dumbed down way possible that different sub-species of the same species can in fact breed successfully, thus CLEARLY showing that your definition was wrong:hammerhead:

What the hell point did you think my comparison with dogs was making? I mean, I'm actually stunned how that you could have read it and the point be completely lost on you.

Like, dude. You're shockingly dumb. I just hope you're really young, because that's pretty bad if you're grown up and that mentally lacking.

:lol

Honestly nothing like an aggressive armchair expert. You'll grow out of it as you mature. Please do carry on insulting me as though it has any affect on me or the 'debate' we had.

[NumberSix]

People tend to like to be around people like themselves or that share common things like language and culture, that's why you have that segregation.
Why are Europeans so obsessed with categorizing people? I've been to other countries and places and people make less of deal about "race" and looks than around the Euro-centric places.
Why are Koreans obsessed with categorizing themselves as Koreans? Why are Japanese obsessed with being Japanese?

Americans don't really get it, because there are no Americans. The rest of the world is not like that though. Ethnic groups are a result of many thousands of years. Frenchmen like speaking their language, living in their land and in their culture. Indians like living in their land and in their culture. Chinese like being Chinese.

[NumberSix]

:lol

Honestly nothing like an aggressive armchair expert. You'll grow out of it as you mature. Please do carry on insulting me as though it has any affect on me or the 'debate' we had.
I've never claimed to be a nice person or asked anybody to like my personality.

[Dresta]

It's not blurry at all. A Caucasoid skeleton can be clearly distinguished from a Mongoloid. There are exactly 4 distinguishable races. No more, no less. There are 4 that are clearly distinct. No less. Beyond that, only mixtures of the 4.
There are not '4 that are clearly distinct' actually, many argue for there being 6 or 7 actually. So once again, there is nothing even coming close to a consensus on this matter, and yet you are portraying it as if it were objective fact. You've done no more than go 'this is my opinion guys and it is 100% fact, you better believe it.' All 'facts' from you, but no actual evidence. :lol

Here is what you seem to be talking about:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2011/01/alas_poor_yorick_or_is_it_othello.html

[QUOTE]In the absence of DNA, can you really determine race from a jawbone?

Probably not. Forensic anthropologists try to infer the ancestry, gender, and age of human remains by measuring their dimensions and observing their features with the naked eye. The jawbone is one of the more useful bones in the body, as researchers have compiled a number of mandibular traits (PDF) that they think differ slightly between races. For example, if you place an Asian jawbone on a table, the bottom of it will likely maintain contact with the tabletop all the way around. African and Caucasian mandibles, in contrast, tend to undulate, or rise and fall along the lower border. The gonia—that's the area beneath your ears where the jawbone turns upward—generally curve more sharply in an Asian jaw. People of African descent often have slightly curled surfaces on the rear edges of their jaws, whereas European jaws are more likely to have a flatter edge. (Take a look at this picture.) But all of these traits are imprecise indicators. It's impossible to identify a person's ancestry definitively from a single bone.

Investigators can also take bone measurements using calipers, then input the data into a University of Tennessee database containing a reference library of measurements from more than 1,800 bones of known ancestry, age, and gender. The program will determine whether the mystery bone falls within the typical ranges for various racial groups. It's pretty hard to hazard a reliable guess with one or two measurements, since the ranges overlap. But if a series of measurements for a whole skull, or an entire skeleton, tend to fall more comfortably within one range than another, the forensic anthropologist can make a determination.

Racial classification is an inexact science, if that's even the right word for it. Forensic anthropologists never make definitive ancestry pronouncements. They say a bone is "consistent with" European ancestry or "likely" of Asian ancestry. And practitioners say it takes years of experience to achieve mastery, since you have to see piles and piles of disembodied mandibles to be able to recognize the sometimes subtle differences among them. (Although one study (PDF) has suggested that the grizzled veterans of forensic anthropology are no better at surmising race than their bright-eyed prot

[Pointguard]

It's not blurry at all. A Caucasoid skeleton can be clearly distinguished from a Mongoloid. There are exactly 4 distinguishable races. No more, no less. There are 4 that are clearly distinct. No less. Beyond that, only mixtures of the 4.

There are more differences between Africans than there are between all the other races even in comparison against each other. Africans can average 4 ft in height in South Africa with a light complexion, thicker build and slanted eyes and or 6ft 4 in height, big eyes, dark complexion and thin build in Somalia. And these traits are consistent in the whole population of both. True they share the melanin content but their distinctions are definitely as big as it gets among humans.

[aboss4real24]

WHITE PPL R ALWAYS GNNA B Salty lmao

u had us in slavery for hundreds of years

Then as soon as u freed us We take over sports and the entertainment business and music


And to top it off theres a black president

[NumberSix]

There are more differences between Africans than there are between all the other races even in comparison against each other. Africans can average 4 ft in height in South Africa with a light complexion, thicker build and slanted eyes and or 6ft 4 in height, big eyes, dark complexion and thin build in Somalia. And these traits are consistent in the whole population of both. True they share the melanin content but their distinctions are definitely as big as it gets among humans.
Surprise surprise.... "African" is not a race. There's more than 1 race in Africa.

[JUDGE WITNESS]

Surprise surprise.... "African" is not a race. There's more than 1 race in Africa.
:oldlol: :oldlol: numbersix beatin me to the punch

[NumberSix]

WHITE PPL R ALWAYS GNNA B Salty lmao

u had us in slavery for hundreds of years

Then as soon as u freed us We take over sports and the entertainment business and music


And to top it off theres a black president

Is there?

[Dresta]

There are more differences between Africans than there are between all the other races even in comparison against each other. Africans can average 4 ft in height in South Africa with a light complexion, thicker build and slanted eyes and or 6ft 4 in height, big eyes, dark complexion and thin build in Somalia. And these traits are consistent in the whole population of both. True they share the melanin content but their distinctions are definitely as big as it gets among humans.
Plenty of North Africans don't.

Seriously though, what is your obsession with Africa dude? Nobody cares about how great you think it is man.

[chocolatethunder]

Which is the one that is in dispute? :confusedshrug:
Australoid.

[oarabbus]

There are more differences between Africans than there are between all the other races even in comparison against each other. Africans can average 4 ft in height in South Africa with a light complexion, thicker build and slanted eyes and or 6ft 4 in height, big eyes, dark complexion and thin build in Somalia. And these traits are consistent in the whole population of both. True they share the melanin content but their distinctions are definitely as big as it gets among humans.

4ft? What?

[eliteballer]

Sub-Saharan Africans actually have the least amount of neanderthal DNA of all humans....so wouldn't that mean blacks are superior?:lol

[eliteballer]

Plenty of North Africans don't.

Seriously though, what is your obsession with Africa dude? Nobody cares about how great you think it is man.

North Africa is pretty distinct from Sub-Saharan Africa. Sub-Saharan is traditionally what people think of as black people, while the North is Arabs, Berbers, etc.

[BigMacAttack]

NumberSix do you know what a fact is?

[sd3035]

Race has nothing to do with skin color, but there are indeed 4 distinct human races.

According to most anthropologists, there are 3 main races