Human races are real according to evolution

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Like someone said, you need proper sources - not linking to a Nazi loon article you wrote.

So called "Lewontin's fallacy" was never a fallacy regarding the 99.9%.

“There is nothing wrong with Lewontin’s statistical analysis of variation,” argues
Edwards, “only with the belief that it is relevant to classification.” Notice that this

claim about relevance begs the question. Edwards believes that single-locus statistics
are not relevant to racial classification because they do not support racial
classification. The question of relevance remains unanswered. If single-locus studies
had found that populations were genetically distinct it seems as though Edwards
would consider them relevant to classification [...] "It is not clear that ‘Lewontin’s fallacy’ is a genuine fallacy." (Hochman, 2013)

As Hochman points out: if Lewontin's study came back showing high inter-populational differentiation, Edwards would not criticize single-locus.


For non-humans Fst is used, yet when it comes to humans, suddenly there is a different method applied by "race realists". Why?


"Genetic differences between groups develop under isolation because
lost alleles are not reintroduced, and new mutations are not spread. Under such
conditions, the kinds of genetic discontinuities develop that lead biologists to apply
the subspecies concept. These genetic discontinuities are represented by high FST
values." (Ibid.)

"
Perhaps the most obvious objection to the idea of ‘Lewontin’s fallacy,’ however,
is to point out that in non-human biology single-locus statistics are the standard tools

used for subspecies classification." (Ibid.)

"
Sesardic claims that he is simply applying the subspecies concept from non-human to
human biology. However, this passage suggests that multilocus, rather than singlelocus
statistics are used to determine whether non-human species are divisible into
subspecies. This is misleading, as the new multilocus clustering methods have not, to

my knowledge, been used to redefine subspecies in non-human animals." (Ibid.)

You never respond on this point because you are totally debunked.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Mod Hat ― Over

No, really, we're not doing Phrenology here.

While it is possible that phrenology might someday establish itself as a real thing, that day hasn't arrived yet. In that sense, it's kind of like tarot, only without the respectability.

To wit, has anybody ever noticed that Phrenology always has to do with the faults of nonwhites? Never is there any discussion of the caucasian proclivity toward paranoia and superficial supremacism as an acquired defensive behavior that renders them unfit for civilized society.

And there is a reason we don't. That is to say, no matter how satsisfactory it might feel to offer an answer to the question of "What's wrong with white people?" the question itself is as wrongly founded as the racists who have just joined our community and apparently seem determined to make their exits just as quickly.

Normally I say, "Welcome to our humble bedlam."

But no, we're not going to bother with such pretenses today.

Get over yourselves, or get out.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.