Is race real, Veeky Forums?

Is race real, Veeky Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24032721
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14655871
nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Either race is real or forensic science isn't, and I don't think you'll find many arguments disputing the existence of forensic science.

Yes. Different races because different traits, traditions, DNA, etc.

Don't they eat albinos in africa?

...

Sure, it's just not very significant.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/

Wut?

Oh look. It's _this_ thread again.

Depends on what you mean by "real." It's real in the sense that it's a social construct.

Oh piss off you braindead cuck. "Social construct" my ass. Race is real because people of different races are DIFFERENT. Are you saying French and Germans are the same? Yeah they're similiar but their not the same so piss off

This, You're going to have an extremely hard time convincing me Lithuanians are biologically, aesthetically, and behaviourally similar to a damn northern Canadian. And that's just the tip of the iceberg, there are 100s of subfactors and other differences that could be further accounted for

Oh my, so much alt-right hate speech. Someone call Kraut and Tea to refute these bigots!

Fuck off stupid Nazis.

There are so many topics on this board that are flooded with anti science bullshit by the second they are mentioned. Fucking science police.
"YOU CANT GO THERE ITS EVIL", don't they see they are acting against science and discoveries for no reason at all, just because it's "problematic"(problematic is a social construct BTW)?
My post is political(or meta) but OP's post isn't. Mods should ban those who bring politics into science. It got to a point where I believe most of these posts are people memeing how retarded anti science people are or just bots.

I despise of idiots coming from /pol/ similar to all of you, but it seems that science attracts many individuals that fall into a specific category. You can call them liberals, democrats, californians, etc., but each name has the same definition behind it, they push away topics that invoke a strange feeling within them, despite said topics pertaining to science. Race is REAL!!!

I take no sides in this fight, but both sides are wrong, this thread for failing to conduct their own research and look into forensics to learn more, and the idiots who deny the existence of various races and diversity in the Homo Sapien species.

The problem is that you, and the /pol/tards do not understand the science. You claim you do, but you don't.

For example, you say it's about diversity in homo sapiens, but if we you were shown scientific data about the apportionment of variation within and between groups, you will call it a liberal conspiracy or some kind of rhetorical fallacy as if science was a high school debate team.

>The problem is that you, and the /pol/tards do not understand the science. You claim you do, but you don't.
How exactly did you infer that from the single post I created within this thread?

>For example, you say it's about diversity in homo sapiens, but if we you were shown scientific data about the apportionment of variation within and between groups, you will call it a liberal conspiracy or some kind of rhetorical fallacy as if science was a high school debate team.
I would not, you assumed that I would consider it a "liberal conspiracy" and would pass it off as a rhetorical fallacy. I see science as it is, a human attempt to understand reality, and I attempt to remain as unbiased as possible, because this allows the most growth as an individual and also allows me to learn of this reality much more efficiently and easily.

>but if we you were shown scientific data about the apportionment of variation within and between groups

I think you mean Lewontin fallacy and is a fallacy indeed

this is what real scientific data about race looks like

no distinct races but also no "hurr durr we are all the same" picture

Why don't you give me a source for that picture, or attempt to explain the data in detail.

As for "lewontin's fallacy" it is not a fallacy at all. The man that tried to criticize him did not say Lewontin's data was incorrect . That data is observable fact. Science is based on repeatable observable data. Edwards tried to argue that DESPITE lewontin's data, race was still real. He was wrong, however, and there is no real genetic definition of race.

>I see science as it is
ok enjoy

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24032721

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14655871

nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html

Just to clarify, not the user you responded to.

It is obvious that there is diversity in the human species. In fact, some argue that these different "races" are highly similar but different species (This will end up going deeper if we discuss it...). Skin color is the most obvious difference, and you can begin to dig deeper and look at skeletal structures used frequently in forensics to identify a skeleton and behavioral traits that are used greatly by psychologists and marketers (And possibly governmental think-tanks...).

Race has already been tainted by idiots from /pol/ and blind racists who use it to push their own agenda.

We can measure the overall genetic diversity of large groups of humans.

As for your forensics garbage, only two parts of the skull can be used to identify some races: the nasal cavity and part of the lower jaw. Phrenology is not real science.

No one argues that races are separate species expect idiots from conspiracy theory websites.

Give me some time to read these articles...

>Why don't you give me a source for that picture, or attempt to explain the data in detail.

It clearly says what it is in the picture. Surely you know the terms?

The core of Lewontin fallacy is that just because statistical distributions overlap, even heavily, does not make those individual distributions them disappear. It is still a powerful argument against simpler forms of racism (hurr durr there are three distinct classical races), but does not rule out the idea of human genetic diversity in general.

>no distinct races
Hence distinct races are a social construct
>but also no "hurr durr we are all the same" picture
Sure, whatever, but that's not what we're talking about

Look, it's not that difficult a topic. Race is the same for humans as it is for dogs, cows, cats, etc. We can all breed together (African human and euopean human) but we are different nonetheless. We have different charactaristics and specialties. Stop being retarded this isn't that difficult to understand

It does not say what is in that picture. It only says they are PCAs. What data is being analyzed in that PCA? It just says "global data set" and "African data set." What data is in those sets? My assertion is that you have no idea, nor do you have an understanding of the source material. Like a typical raiding /pol/ tard you down downloaded an image with the belief that it supports your political ideology but you have no idea what it means.

As for Lewontin's data, it has nothing to do with statistical overlapping. We can sequence entire genomes from tens of thousands of people across the planet and his findings are still true.

This is exactly what I mean. I present and observable scientific fact, and you claim it's wrong because some shitposter on Veeky Forums or stormfront with GED is smarter than all people working in genetics today.

>As for your forensics garbage, only two parts of the skull can be used to identify some races: the nasal cavity and part of the lower jaw.
These two parts of the skull prove that there are differences. I have no idea if the presence of an occipital bun, pronounced brow bones, etc. have any significance in this field. As for phrenology, I never stated (or implied) that it was real or of any significance.

I have not delved deep enough into the study of human genetics and variation, and I define race as distinct groups of humans that differ in various features under the human species.

>n, and I define race as distinct groups of humans that differ in various features under the human species.
So you believe race is only skin deep, and you don't care to understand or believe the genetics?

>So you believe race is only skin deep
Never said this.

>and you don't care to understand or believe the genetics?
Or this.

It also appears that you cherrypick my posts for parts that you believe you can refute to piss me off? Are you attempting to be a troll or something, or are you seriously misinterpreting my posts?

X and Y chromosome