When we find something "negative" out about ethnic minorities, why..

[Japher]

GePap, now your getting the picture

So black people can run but can't swim?

Not as well as white people, or Chinese "women"

In general, however, swimming is a learned ability. Most black people choose not to swim as it is not as highly reveared in their society as other sports... Racial Society Influence (RSI).

And they can;t throw discuss or lift weights

Not as well as white people I guess. Could be due to RSI or the fact that most weight lifters are shorter than general members of their race, this gives them a lower center of gravity, and thus a better ability to lift heavy things over their heads.

, bu they can box? What about shooting?

Black boxer have some of the best reaches which is technical advantage in boxing... Butterbean can't hold a candle to some of 'em.

@C0ckney

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap
For those who are creating race definitions:

What race is Tiger Woods?

The fact that a category has "extremes" at which it fails does not mean the category does not exist (or at least that it isn't useful). Tell me EXACTLY where the Amazon becomes the Atlantic, or neither of them exist!

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kucinich


The fact that a category has "extremes" at which it fails does not mean the category does not exist (or at least that it isn't useful). Tell me EXACTLY where the Amazon becomes the Atlantic, or neither of them exist!

Actually, the Amazon has a well defined Delta region. So the Amazon ends, you get the Amazon Delta, and then the Ocean Not that hard to know at all.

Tiger Woods is not an extreme at all-if anything, he is the opposite of extremes.

For example-which trait is more important-shape of nose and lips, or skin color? Is somene from india with black skin and narrow high bridge nose the same race as a light skinned narrow high bridge nose person, or a dark skin flat, broad nose person?

Are arabs "white"? or is there a distinction between Arabs and Germans?

Sorry, but the factors are so many, and most importantly, they all disappear through the generations with enough breeding.

[Japher]

Sorry, but the factors are so many, and most importantly, they all disappear through the generations with enough breeding.

True. It should be against the law to marry within ones race...

Tiger Woods is not an extreme at all-if anything, he is the opposite of extremes.

Yup, all black people are good at sports and have fondness for white chicks

[GePap]

I have already said this, but in terms of genetic drift, the pygmies and the people of Ethiopia are further apart than a Maori and a Swede, or a Russian from Andean indian. Most of the superficial differences between human beings appeared relatively recent due to having to adapt to new conditions. If anyone doubts the speed at which this can happen, look what man has done to dogs in the last 10,000 years. All dogs are the same species even though looking at a Chihauhau and a great dane you might not see it.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap
Actually, the Amazon has a well defined Delta region. So the Amazon ends, you get the Amazon Delta, and then the Ocean Not that hard to know at all.

Take a piece of string and lay it across the delta, exactly along the line where the river "ends" and the ocean "begins".

How about this? What's the border between "liberals" and "conservatives"?

The fact the a group has fuzzy edges, does not mean that it isn't valid.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by Japher

Why are most 'elite atheletes' for a given event generally of a similar ethnic background? I.e. there aren't a whole lot of good WR or Olympic Sprinters that aren't black.

Thats what I'm talking about. You are genarilizing about ALL BLACK PEOPLE based on elite athletes. This is a selection set taken from a miniscule fraction of ALL BLACK PEOPLE, an entirely non-random set, known to represent and extreme that is 3 or 4 standard deviations away from the norm.

You have NO EVIDENCE that this represents ALL BLACK PEOPLE, yet, due to racism, people choose to believe that black people are better runners and jumpers.

I am going to forward this statement off to the national board of behavioral sciences and see what they have to say... mmm-kay?

What the fvck would they know about it? They base all their conclusions on human behaviour on tests involving white rats and rhesus monkeys!

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kucinich

Originally posted by GePap
Actually, the Amazon has a well defined Delta region. So the Amazon ends, you get the Amazon Delta, and then the Ocean Not that hard to know at all.

Take a piece of string and lay it across the delta, exactly along the line where the river "ends" and the ocean "begins".

How about this? What's the border between "liberals" and "conservatives"?

The fact the a group has fuzzy edges, does not mean that it isn't valid.

Notice how all the example you are using are dualities?

We are not talking a case were you can decide at the borders to arbitrarilly say X or Y, and be sure about the vast mayority of X and Y. Here the choice is between X,Y,Z, W, R, T, J,K, L, J, P, G, B, and C and on top of that, you can't even create a good definition of any of the letters.

For exmaple, as you have never yet said, are Arab's "white"? Why are the Chinese and Japanese one race? or are they actually two races?

[Whaleboy]

Race and differences are ..different things.

Like, you have scientific differences, but that does not constitute a race. That is a definition based upon a certain grouping of those differences, or perhaps a geographic relationship, put together as a means of subdividing peoples.

Race according to skin colour is like race according to eye colour, however the former is seemingly of more historical importance. It is however completely arbitrary, like I said earlier, the differences between us as individuals are far far greater than any differences caused by small genetic variations.

[Elok]

Originally posted by GePap
But the question still stands- If a child has one "white", "black", "Asia" and "Indian" grandparent each- what race is the child?

Human. Outside of disease risk, race is only relevant insofar as people get touchy about it, IMO. Until there are obsessive polls in the papers about which politicians appeal to the miscellaneous-negro-asian-honky-american vote, that child is mercifully free of race, and can concentrate on marginally less stupid things to give him/her a sense of belonging. Maybe joining the shriners.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap


Notice how all the example you are using are dualities?

We are not talking a case were you can decide at the borders to arbitrarilly say X or Y, and be sure about the vast mayority of X and Y. Here the choice is between X,Y,Z, W, R, T, J,K, L, J, P, G, B, and C and on top of that, you can't even create a good definition of any of the letters.

For exmaple, as you have never yet said, are Arab's "white"? Why are the Chinese and Japanese one race? or are they actually two races?

Different people give different definitions. The point is that the concept is valid.

You can also be, say, 1/2 white and 1/2 asian.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Race and differences are ..different things.

Like, you have scientific differences, but that does not constitute a race. That is a definition based upon a certain grouping of those differences, or perhaps a geographic relationship, put together as a means of subdividing peoples.

Race according to skin colour is like race according to eye colour, however the former is seemingly of more historical importance. It is however completely arbitrary, like I said earlier, the differences between us as individuals are far far greater than any differences caused by small genetic variations.

Skin color is a more "valid" category for race because skin color is inherited with much less variation.

[Whaleboy]

Skin color is a more "valid" category for race because skin color is inherited with much less variation.

True, but a similar situation occurs with eye colour, height etc etc. It's a useless definition for race, since I'd use the term ideally to mean members of a species who can mate with each other and produce fertile offspring.

At once conscious and individual are the only two distinctions imo that aren't fallacious.

[Kuciwalker]

True, but a similar situation occurs with eye colour, height etc etc. It's a useless definition for race, since I'd use the term ideally to mean members of a species who can mate with each other and produce fertile offspring.

That's a completely different meaning of the term "race" - it is distinct from the one referring to skin color.

In contrast to eye color, skin color actually is a useful category when looking at group statistics, because it is directly associated with a number of other truly valid categories.

[Whaleboy]

In contrast to eye color, skin color actually is a useful category when looking at group statistics, because it is directly associated with a number of other truly valid categories.

But enough to classify as a race? You could look at it as subsets within the human race, for example, consistent genetic variations related to geographical distribution. Nonetheless, the genetic variation among humans is incredibly low compared to other mammalian species due to a bottleneck about 75'000 years ago that reduced this species to a few thousand individuals.