How great is the difference between the human races really ?

how great is the difference between the human races really ?

and biologically speaking is it even plausible to differentiate the ethnic groups into "races" ?

and is it true that reseach which points into the direction of important differences like in intelligence etc is so politically incorrect that publishers or universities reject the funding or publication ?

inb4 SJWtards flood the thread.

Yes, genetic differences exist no matter how much some ignorant braindead retards try to deny biology

They're the same type of diversity you'd find in chimps, but less so. Bear in mind, we share quite a bit DNA with one another, as well as extinct subspecies.

>how great is the difference between the human races really ?

Infinitesimally small amount of change in the phenotype. Everything else is pretty much the same.

>Yes, genetic differences exist no matter how much some ignorant braindead retards try to deny biology
See

No there are tons of genetic variances. Get genetics 101 before attempting another post please.

Obviously you haven't met an abo

Divide the changes by the total amount of genes.

Tell me that is not infinitesimally small.

Not an argument.

That's certainly an interesting question. It seems obvious that if we can vary so much in physical appearance between races that it would be quite plausible that we can differ intellectually and psychologically between them. It's probably pretty difficult to actually measure though, as race and culture are so closely entwined that you might not be able to tell which is the predominant factor.
There's also the issue of what societies might do with such information. One one hand, while they could explain why we don't see equal outcomes/performance/etc for certain things, on the other there's always the fear that the information will be used as a basis for discrimination.

1 extra chromosome is infinitestimally small when divided by the total amount of chromosomes.

Tell me that is insignificant.

If I'm not.mistaken, the fact that we can all fuck each other and have healthy offsprings mean that we are pretty related.

Don't forget the hybridization events that occured much earlier in our history. The Aborigines are a good example.

Here's a chart.

>1 extra chromosome is infinitestimally small

No it isn't. 1/46 is about 0.02. That is not infinitesimally small.

If you were to divide the genes that actually change for black people by the total amount of genes you would literally get 0.000000001 or even smaller.

There are definitely genetic differences, but it's more useful to differentiate between different ethnic groups than "races".

"Races" like caucasoid/mongoloid/negroid, or black/white/asian/native american/whatever are way too broad.

[citation needed]

It'd be very difficult to answer your question in an entirely objective manner, since in order to do so, we would need to find tribes or groups of people who have not breed with any other since their conception. Then we need to take into account location and how that affects development of organisms. After we would need then to start replicating the collected DNA and start splicing with other codes that have been found, essentially "racemixing", to study what genetic sequences have been replaced and how the code has changed. But the problem with that is the location, a tribe that exists in a jungle, and a tribe that exists in the arctic have 'evolved' to support that climate. Then taking into account food, temperature, weather, ideological differences, diet, and pathogen exposure we would then need to pretty much clone one of the samples, but have each grow up in different environments to study the full extent on epigenetics due to habitat.

The thing with science is that it is all trial and error, you can create a cure for a disease because you have a clean and sample that gets remade and changed thousands of times. It would take far too long to fully study human genetics to the extent needed for an objective statement on the matter. With that said, it is not a discouragement, simply a reality of us against time.

>talking about race
>not using Haeckel's diagram to b8 people

Not visually.

...

Look up the human genome project

There is enough phenotypical differentiation that we would be classified into anything from subspecies to subgenera depending on the view of those doing the classification.

In before muh nonsterile hybrids, red wolves are a nonsterile hybrid between wolves and coyotes.

While we're on the subject why is a great dane considered the same species as a chihuahua?

That math is fundamentally flawed because only like 1% or so of our DNA(don't quote me on that) actually determines our phenotype. I'm far too lazy to look up the actual numbers, but like 80-90% of our DNA is made up of viral DNA, non-human DNA, DNA that controls cellular shit, or just plain junk. There's that "fact" going around that humans share 50% of our DNA with bananas, which is surprisingly close to true. We have so many genes and so few of them do anything that any percentage is going to be infinitesimal and thus completely irrelevant.
Because they can interbreed and share a very recent common ancestor. The whole species terminology is extremely fuzzy. Great for casual use, but best not to apply it too closely to similar species.