Race differences

[TCO]

Originally posted by Ramo


No, it's already been proven by the human genome project, and your thesis has obviously has lost. The differences between "races" are literally skin deep. Period. End of story. You lose.



The idea that there's been 50,000 years of seperate evolution has no scientific basis, whatsoever.



There're only a few genes that control skin color. There are thousands and thousands that control brain functions. And 50,000 years wouldn't be long enough to significantly affect something as substancial as that.

Love to see this proof. I thought things were much more open than you say.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Sava
Genetics and race play a part in the potential for intellegence, but the environment has more to do with someone's IQ than anything else.

The statistics are flawed because they aren't spread out across income levels. I bet if you took a look at the IQ statistics across the board, the general IQ curve would be similar to the income curve.

Blacks living in the ghetto aren't any dumber than their white trash counterparts. The dumbest people I know are white. It just so happens there is a higher percentage of black people living in poverty than white people.

I also think that if you looked at immigrants, you would see an interesting trend. First-born children from immigrants living above the poverty line tend to be more intellegent than people who's ancestors have been in the US for over 100 years.

Sava, you can do a few things to examine this issue. you can do multiple regressions to remove SE status as a variable. You can look at twin studies. In both cases, the racial gap remains.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Zhu Yuanzhang
bleck, there's a long sad tradition of this kind of BS psuedo-science. I highly recomend picking up Gould's The Mismeasure of Man for a good thorough history and debunking of this sort of thing...

I've read Gould's book. It is pretty thin stuff. Shrill. (ad hominem, guilt by association, etc.) and lacking a grounding in recent peer-reviewed literature.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
If there is one black person who is smarter than even one White/Asian person, this entire theory is invalid.

Huh!! two groups can have significant differences even if every member does not. For instance Toyotas generally have better repair records than Fiats. That distinction remains regardless of a good Fiat and a bad Toyota.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Ramo


Try this (you'll note that it's from the HGP people themselves).

http://www.ornl.gov/hgmis/elsi/minorities.html

HUH!?

I looked at this. It is a description of a symposium to allay fears that the research would give the wrong results. It is not a proof of your bald statements regarding genetics. Gotta do better than just post a link and run. Some people actually look at them. (If you have more specific material, please produce it.)

[TCO]

Originally posted by Ramo


I didn't say that there were thousands of brain functions (which there may be, depending on how you define a brain function, but that's not at issue), but that there are thousands of genes that control brain functions.

So? There are multiple genes affecting height and stature certainly has a genetic component. The point remains, you only have to change a few codons to get differences in function.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Ramo

No thanks, I know my math. Actually, it would be wise for you to read up on stats, you know sampling errors and the like.

Are you familiar with the use of multiple regressions. This is a very simple process for dealing with issues like nature/nurture. Helps those who get wrapped around the axle and can't deconvolute multivariable functions. (nature, nurture, nature and nurture)

[Rex Little]

I think that blacks (in sub-saharan africa) are generally different from whites (in north america) in their ability to build a civilization.

An awfully shaky conjecture, IMO. First (a minor point), whites didn't build civilization in North America; they built it around the Mediterranean and copied it over to NA and elsewhere. Second, how would you define what qualities, specifically, constitute "ability to build a civilization"? I haven't a clue, myself. Finally, the difference in environmental conditions is so great that it's the obvious first place to look for an explanation for the difference in civ-building.

[WFHermans]

This Gould person thinks that jews from New York have the right to go to Palestine land, murder the people whose family lived there for thousands of centuries and take their houses.
NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE. And, did you have luck yet convincing the moderator to have post like these removed and have us banned? That is how you always "win" arguments.

To put it very simply, and answer this instead of calling me nazi or having this post removed:

IF YOU SEE A GROUP OF ONE THOUSAND NEGROES AND ONE THOUSAND CHINESE, CAN YOU THEN HONESTLY SAY THOSE TWO GROUPS OF PEOPLE ARE EXACTLY THE SAME????

[TCO]

Re: The titles sound relevant on these:

Ramo, did you just grab articles at random with titles related to this discussion. These articles don't advance your point (HGP proves that race is only skin deep). Did you even read them, before putting them here? Are you falling prey to the "throw enough **** against the wall" type of logical fallacy?

Most of this stuff is related to the alarm that some groups have about HGP. (They are worried about getting unfavorable answers from the research.) Many of the articles try to allay this fear and dwell on medical benefits of HGP work. But they are not scientific comments on genetic basis of race differences. These articles don't support your statements, Ramo.

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2001/04/olson-p1.htm

Doesn't support you points. Is more about the good that can come to racial groups from the medical research based on HGP.

http://news.bmn.com/hmsbeagle/97/notes/profile

unavailable

http://news.bmn.com/hmsbeagle/27/people/pressbox.htm

unavailable

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/race.html

Doesn't address your point on genomics. Is more general on our topic here and has both opposing and pro views.

http://www.nap.edu/books/0309059313/html/index.html

A little more meaty than some of your other links...but still not related to your claims. This book is about the social ramifications of doing biodiversity resarch AT ALL. It is not "results of experiments" to prove or disporve your points.

http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm

No facts regarding HGP claims by you. Just a PR announcement from some anthropologists.

http://www.africana.com/DailyArticles/index_20010129.htm

article is fairly neutral and doesn't convincing prove your point. Has both arguments. I find this quote interesting:

"In effect, he [President Clinton] was implying that there are no meaningful differences between populations. That belief is wrong and dangerously so," wrote Jon Entine in the San Francisco Examiner. "We share 98.4 percent of our genes with chimpanzees, 95 percent with dogs, and 74 percent with microscopic roundworms. Only one chromosome determines if one is born male or female. There is no discernible difference in the DNA of a wolf and a Labrador retriever, yet their inbred behavioral differences are immense. Clearly, what's meaningful is which genes differ and how they are patterned, not the percent of genes. A tiny number of genes can translate into huge functional differences."

[BeBMan]

Re: Re: The titles sound relevant on these:

Originally posted by GP

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2001/04/olson-p1.htm

Doesn't support you points. Is more about the good that can come to racial groups from the medical research based on HGP.
[/q]

Have you read part three and four of this?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Rex Little
An awfully shaky conjecture, IMO. First (a minor point), whites didn't build civilization in North America; they built it around the Mediterranean and copied it over to NA and elsewhere. Second, how would you define what qualities, specifically, constitute "ability to build a civilization"? I haven't a clue, myself. Finally, the difference in environmental conditions is so great that it's the obvious first place to look for an explanation for the difference in civ-building.

Im just not convinced its all due to environmental differences. Surely an area as huge as sub-saharan africa must have some areas that have a similar environment to europe or north america.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Ramo


But to assert that there are significant differences in intelligence between these groups is patently absurd. As the evidence in this thread has demonstrated, their existences are totally counterintuitive to science, in general.

Just becuause you don't like it, doesn't make it absurd.

[Ramo mode] metals do differ in atomic weight. but to say that thye differ in conductivity is absurd. [/Ramo mode]


Many, many studies have found an IQ difference between racial groups. Produce some that show no difference? Now the question becomes the source of that difference. The way to attack this question is by multiple regression of different causative factors. Not silly statements that "nurture is all, nature is nothing" devoid of numbers.

[TCO]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Dogs are in theory selectively bred (and culled) for specific breed traits, over many generations. The degree of focus on selective breeding is extreme (when talking champion bloodlines that are the best technical representatives of their breeds) that it is totally incomparable to relatively undirected human breeding.

BTW, I think studies have shown that there is a very slight bias in fast twitch to slow twitch muscle fiber ratios in American whites and American blacks, but the overall degree of shift was not considered statistically significant.

I will go look for the data, but I think the muscle fiber data is much more solid than you claim.

[TCO]

Originally posted by MrFun




Using animals or sports as an analogy in conjunction with race, is simply reverting back to the late 19th century ideology of Social Darwinism, and racial pseudo-science.

Why anyone on Apolyton would embrace these out-dated ideologies that justified the concept of white supremacy, is beyond me.

human beings are animals. What are you a creationist? If man could evolve from the apes, surely that proves that evolutionary pressures affect our species. Why is it so hard to think different family groupings were formed by evolution? (different tigers were formed by different environments.)