Absolutely WRONG, at least learn some archaeology and taxonomy before you spew your uninformed bull shit.
I'm not racist, but
Oliver Taylor
Evan Mitchell
>Most non black people have some Neanderthal DNA. And Neanderthals were a separate species. Why?
Because male offspring of human and neanderthal was infertile
Nolan Harris
Genetic clustering shows that we are very homogeneous for all genes, with a few exceptions. Milk drinking and skin color, mainly.
There's just no reason to define different human races, since we are so genetically, morphologically and behaviorally similar. Any given human has only 15-20% of similarity between humans of the same group. So if person from group A had, say, green ears, there is more than likely than person from group A will have blue ears, and person from group B will have green ears.
Curiously, there was another race of humans. They were almost anatomically like us, but had cavemen browns and were a bit bulkier.
Jonathan Butler
Top of his class right here
Hudson Flores
It's settled. Humans & Neanderthal are capable of interbreeding (do sex generating fertile offspring). Therefore Humans & Neanderthals are subspecies of a same species.
Michael Ward
this is correct, but you can still run a k-means algorithm to define some races
it's not settled
male neanderthal + female human produced infertile offspring
Chase Thomas
>male neanderthal + female human produced infertile offspring
Source?
Joshua Rivera
taxonomy is not a science yet
Jaxon Watson
Yes, but that goes towards my second point: Why?
Generally, there's no point. Culture, languages, wealth, those are more important when deciding to classify people.
Genetically speaking, more often than not there is simply no good reason to classify us as different things. For all intent and purposes, treating ourselves like a single race is good enough in the majority of cases.
Unless you are studying sunburns, adult calory intakes, malary data or alpinism I guess.
Gabriel Davis
newscientist.com
>Some of the genes, meanwhile, appear to have led to fertility problems. For instance, Sankararaman found that the X chromosome is almost devoid of Neanderthal DNA. This suggests that most Neanderthal DNA that wound up on the X chromosome made the bearer less fertile – a common occurrence when related but distinct species interbreed – and so it quickly disappeared from the human gene pool. “Neanderthal alleles were swept away,” says Sankararaman.
+ there are no neanderthal Y chromosomes in humans
basically 'thal-human people were less fit and possibly infertile and only those carrying harmless (straight hair?) or helpful(light skin?) alleles survived
>Why?
i think it's interesting to try to find the best clustering of humans, purely for algorithmic reasons
though it's pretty hard nowadays(post-colonial times) because half the world moved around and there is new, let's say, ethnogenesis happening in the americas
even before colonial times you have basically mixed populations in central asia, east africa ..
basically you'd need a % - let's say 70% or above ancestry and you are of race X and below 70% you are of mixed heritage?? i guess
it's pretty hard to do it
pic related is the best clustering (k=5), because it also happens to match continents
you'll notice that one of the bedouin sample is more african though lmao (each line is a person sampled if i remember correctly)
a sindhi dude is more than half african, while his neighbor is quadroon asian
but this is the best you can get in terms of races - 5 races, matching continents - caucasian, australian, native american, asian, african
at lower k's or higher k's you start getting weird shit