Howlin Wolf 1) I'm not sure. I'll have to look in some biology textbooks and stuff and find out the defition or "race" first. 2) Unless you wish to get into pure survival terms, there is no moral difference between hating someone for their beliefs or for their skin colour. The result is the same: you're pointing to a segment of society and saying "You suck, I'm so glad I'm better than you". 3) I chose that rally in the USA as an example because it very clearly illustrated a point.
Some idealists want people to believe all races are equal. Why do Asians appear to be better at math? Since it is not biological then what is it?
Three-quarters of students in my course are Asian/Indian, et cetera. For some maths they are way better than me, mostly because I have never really studied any maths. But as the lecturer explains things, it is most often me who understands the concepts involved. Most of the Asian/Indian students tend to be very good at following formulae, learning by rote, et cetera. At least that's how it seems for the chaps I know personally.
That is true. The Asians (including Indians) do study math very well at an early age.Because of the way they study - it is more rote than concepts (in general), while we study here as "chug and dump". The other part is the activities in high school that distracts American kids. Now the same Asians/Indians born and raised here in a standard white culture follow the same path as whites with same level of success. So, I think it has more to do with culture than race. The African-Americans usually have their culture separate from the white culture and hence results differ.
Race is just a definition of cosmetic differences between peoples. As I understand it, there is greater genetic variation in blacks. While whites and asians may be catagorized as a "race", negros are actually a number of races. Depending upon what criteria of cosmetic differences you want to use to define "race", there are probably dozens of human "race"s. A neighbor of mine mentioned to me that people of all races have been made into slaves at one time. In America, blacks were the choice for enslavement just as a practical matter. A white slave could run away and blend in with other whites some place else. A native American could run away and blend in with other native Americans. But a black person got to this continent on a slave ship. So, there was no doubt that he was not a free person. There was nothing else intrensic to being a slave other than they were easy to identify. On the flip side, people who are of the mentality to enslave another human being really don't care about the person's race. Such people can always find an excuse to disrespect another human being. This attitude that someone has the "right" to enslave another still exists in society. It only takes other forms of disrespect.
definition of race? If I remember correctly, biologically the term "race" is only applied if members from each group are so different they can no longer mate with each other and biologically produce "successful" offspring. So there wouldn't be any separate human races. I wish I hadn't sold my old bio book so I could look it up again. But I'm damn sure this is what I was taught. It's all in how you define the word "race". -Xenu
In order for an Asian to make the trip to America, they probably already have some economic and educational background that places them above your average Asian. Both by design and practicality, emigrants coming to the US are the "cream of the crop". I work for an engineering comany and we have people from all over the world. (Russia, India, Iran, Vietnam, Mexico etc....) Many of these were degreed and educated at home and came here because the jobs were better. One thing that keeps America on top is it's brain drain of the rest of the world. It is better here and these people are not stupid.
reply to thoth and ScotiaB Neanderthal man (Homo sapiens neanderthalis), as opposed to us (Homo sapiens sapiens), is the same species as modern man. This is not controversial. This is accepted taxonomic fact. They are definately different, hence a different subspecies (or race if you want to use an antiquated term) but, as definately, the same species. There is evidence that there was indeed genetic mixing between H.s.neanderthalis and H.s.sapiens. As a biological term, race is antiquated and not used by us (biologists) much anymore. Maybe it's used more by botanists.
paulsamuel In the most recent of their two studies, the scientists found an average of 35.3 differences between the Neanderthal sequences and those of living humans, compared to only 10.9 differences between the sequences of living people. They concluded that the mtDNA lineage of Neanderthals branched off prior to the common ancestor of all present-day lineages, probably around 465,000 B.P. Also, the Neanderthal was genetically no closer to living Europeans than to people from other regions, casting doubt on a Neanderthal ancestry for modern Europeans. The verdict on common ancestry for HSN and HSS is still out, however, due to the differences in body structures and variations in mtDNA, one would have to take the position that HSN and HSS are two distinct species. This of course can change as more data is acquired.
reply to thoth Thanks for the data update re. neanderthals. Just a few notes 1) I never suspected or stated that Neanderthals and modern humans did not have significant genetic differences, I only stated the "taxonimic fact" that Neanderthals and modern humans are the same species with as much taxonomic validity as any other taxonomic designation. 2) The mtDNA data is based on a hypervariable region used for population genetics studies. This region is too variable for higher taxonomic comparisons, the reason being that the change in this region is not linear in relation to time so there is the introduction of a lot of homoplasies to correct for in the comparisons. 3) It is not surprising to find that the genetic data don't support the hypothesis that Neanderthals were the ancestors of modern man since they were contemporary. Finally, you said, "however, due to the differences in body structures and variations in mtDNA, one would have to take the position that HSN and HSS are two distinct species." Based on the molecular data I have seen, there is no evidence that H.s.n. and H.s.s. should be considered different species, in fact, quite the contrary.
paulsamuel Sorry, I meant to say race not species,,,,,it was late here,,, results of nuclear DNA are still under review. The original ? was Do different human races exist? The correct answer is no but did.
Dear fellows, All of you, in my oppinion, have some points that are corect, but all of you ignore the whole and therefore your theories are incomplete and just too influenced by your whishes. For example, the Neanderthal men and the Cro-Magnon. Last year I was at some European Championship, so I get the chance to see all the kinds of people of Europe. To my surprise, I discover that according to the definiton, the Neanderthal man still exist today: low forehead, big eyes arcade, skull with a small angle. The proud heirs of Neadhertal men were some french and polish. All the other characteristics were normal, they were blondes, blue eyes, white, etc. So, my conclusion is that since not all the french and poles look like that, the Neanderthal men mingle with others and hasn't disapear.
if you had seen some russians living in the south parts of the countryPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! edit to add- they did mingle actually. There has been found a sceleton of a young stoneage girl that had properties of both - the Neanderthal man and Homo Sapiens. off topic- I think it was in France they found this one stoneage man and he had some preserved organic material (don't remember what, but his head wasn't preserved). So anyway the scientist out of a joke took genetic samples of the local people. And what you know, they actaully found a descendant of the stone age man! Some 55 (on the look) year old man. talk of family treesPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! he must have the oldest known relativePlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Dear Dacian Prince Your perceptions are incorrect. Neanderthals have distinct morphological (skeletal) characteristics that are not present today in modern humans, this is indisputable. However, it is accepted that modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) interbred with Neanderthals (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis). This purported interbreeding does not prevent us from discriminating between modern humans and Neanderthals. As thoth pointed out, human races do not currently exist, but they once did, i.e. when Neanderthals were extant. Best, Paul
Anybody ever read "Almost Adam", by Petru Popescu? Or something like it. Basically, this irate archeologist somehow found a place in the african primordial jungle where two species of proto-humans were living side by side, as enemies though. One was species X (because i forget what they called it), and the other (the bad ones) were the Robusts. And in the book there were half/half children, too. I dunno, just a thought.
do you know that scientists have concluded that human-human is 100% possible human-chimpanzee (sp) is possible! we have only some 1-3 percent of genetical difference and that difference isn't so crucial that an offspring can not be made. scary huh?!
I thought we had only .001% difference? Besides, who wants to create a human/chimp hybrid? It'd be an ungodly weird looking creature..and people would only use it as a pet, butler, or worker in an acid mind Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And that wouldnt be cool.
of course it wouldn't be cool. disgusting, but possible and I checked the web and found that we have a 1 - 2 percent of genetical difference. that is only ~50 genes. http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/docsdis/2002/dc-02-07.htm http://health.ucsd.edu/news/2002/04_08_Varki.html http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/genome/facts.html http://www.cnpt.embrapa.br/redbiobr/nov_1020.htm
OOoh, okay, thanks for the clarification. That .001% difference must be between one human and another.
