Justification of racism

Uh no, try again, there is greater in group variation than "between race" variation. btw, congratulations on coming out as a racist

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

genetic differences between races are entirely environmental in origin. remove the environmental barriers, and you remove the racial barriers. the only reason to keep either is fear.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes, let me tell ya. I'm a huge racist.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

So, does this sound racist???

Look familiar? Yeah, that's what I said earlier in this discussion. So, sounds pretty racist, huh? :roflmao:

Next time, try not to pull the race (or racist) card so fast. Not everyone is as biased as you are.

EDIT: Furthermore, please do some research regarding race variations before making false accusations. A good place to start are the links I previously posted.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes I'm extremely bigoted, I can't stand people who see people as colour and caste [or religion] rather than human beings.

 

What is so wrong with admitting differences in color, caste or religion? Through exploration and understanding, we are able to learn about others and ourselves. So I am in full support of diving deeper into various aspects of our biological, socialogical, and theological differences. Why should we pretend that we are equal and the same? And futhermore, just because someone is different, or rather because someone points out the differences, that doesn't make them superior or inferior for that matter. It is simply just differences that make up the various ends and middles of the spectrum of human life and existance.

 

that sounds great in theory MZ, but you know as well as i do that racism is not based on an appreciation of, or celebration of, differences. if it were, then wouldn't it make more sense to advocate sharing and community, rather than segregation? the truth is, that most racists agendas are fear-based, and the bottom line is, that we are all individuals, and should be appreciated as such, and not identified by, and related to, the environmental conditions in which our ancestors were confined to.

i love differences in culture. i love appreciating it and sharing it. but that's not what racism is about. come on! how many white supremacists do you see enjoying a night in china town, or attending a gospel choir concert, or traveling outside of whitieville to soak up and appreciate ANY alternative culture? never.

edit: unless there's a clan rally or a protest somewhere. my bad...

 

I believe that too and I'll go you one further: on a fundamental level, "racism" (in my opinion) has its roots in the simple mechanism known as "natural selection." It's natural for ANY species to gravitate towards members of their species that are the closest to themselves in appearance. it is likewise natural for ANY species to tend to shun those whom seem the most different. If this principle was untrue, then we wouldn't have distinctly separate races to begin with... we'd simply have a world filled with homogenous "brown people" who had all interbred freely over the millenia.

Well, that's not the world we have... what we have is natural selection at work, just as it has and will continue to work for all animals on this planet -- humans included.

So, where does racism truly begin..? In my opinion -- and I honestly don't care how politically incorrect this makes me -- racism begins as a totally natural, genetically-imposed instinct that every single form of life known on this planet has demonstrated, in one way or another. It's too bad that human arrogance tends to prohibit most of us from admitting that our own inner animal selves even exist. Perhaps one day, our species will have a grand epiphany and realize that what we've been experiencing is the same process of natural selection and intra-species competition that has been the driving mechanism behind evolution for nearly two billion years on this Earth. Human beings are not exempt from that mechanism -- we are a product of it. We should try and minimize it as much as possible, but we are still a product of it.

 

But you're not merely admitting differences are you? Its not like saying he is short, she is plump. You actually believe that entire groups of people are defined by statistical delineations of genetic differences.

 

There are no genetic races, at least not defined so far, according to your links. I quoted a relevant passage from the most relevant link you posted, on that topic.

My other assertions are similarly supported. Which is not too surprising to me, because I've been around the web on this argument before.

 

Of course there is. All the physical qualities that one observes in humans have corollaries on the genome. It's simply a matter of recording those corollaries for each specific quality that one associates with a race and then creating a genetic racial profile.

It's been done by molecular biologists and is used in forensics to catch criminals. I can't post links but if you search under the following title you will find the article:

The Inconvenient Science of Racial DNA Profiling

 

You're confusing genography with race.

Using a combination of haplotypes to establish the putative history of your combined genetic code does not always work. I know a guy whose genography puts him partly in Turkey and partly in sub Saharan Africa and partly in many other places . He's big and blond with blue eyes and a marine in the US army. His father is mixed black, he got all the recessive genes. You have to come from a fairly ethnocentric group to be "identifiable" as a "type" You meet this guy with his cute white wife and you think he's all American white stock, you see his father and you're like wtf?


https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/participate.html

 

It's both. Yes and yes. Yes, I am admitting differences. And yes, people are defined by genetics. That is not to say that it won't change over time. Hell, one day we may all be the same gray color and have exactly the same characterists. Is it possible? Sure. Is it likely? No. Why? Because just as willnever said previously, it is natural for people to gravitate towards others with the same characterists. Natural selection. The majority of animals are like that. If it wasn't the case, different species of birds would be interbreeding. But finches are finches. Blackbirds are blackbirds. Doves are doves. Difference fish would be interbreeding as well. We would have to start calling fish salmout (salmon and trout mixed). The list goes on. And to ever claim that all humans are the same is just as to claim that all fish or birds or lions or tigers or pinguins are the same. And part of natural selection is for the protection of our own type. Just as it's been proven that more complications have a higher risk of occuring when you try to breed two types of dogs that aren't a close choromosomal match, the same applies to humans. A prime example of this is...


http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/124082.php

Humans are not all alike. We have our genetic and biological differences. To ignore these differences and to refuse to investigate further into such research is ignorant and will only hold us back as humans.

I really don't see how anyone can argue with this. We aren't all exactly the same. I just don't understand what is so wrong with admitting that.

 

You're right. If vegetarians have longer intestines its because they are a different race.

 

Are you serious? No. You're not getting my point. Because someone has a characterist, it is not BECAUSE of their race. But rather a CHARACTERIST of their race.


And not that it is even relevent to the discussion, but vegetarianism is not a pre-determined characteristic.

 

But its not. Not everyone who is Asian gets gestational diabetes. The probability differences are due to geography, adaptation and inherited haplotypes which combine with diet and physical activity and hormonal balances to produce certain results. You could only predict a possibility as we do for breast cancer inheritance, not certainty. Just because you have the BRCA1 gene does not mean you are white black or asian, and you WILL get cancer. It just increases the probability that you might. And its absence does not mean that you won't.

 

the whole race thing is complete poppycock you can go from caucasion to black over many generations. the reason person A's skin is darker than B's is where they live and how much sunlight they get.. the bodys defence to sunlight/uv rays is melanin.. the more sun you get the more melanin you have to protect your body. its like a natrual defence

you could take a black person and turn them white over generations if you put them in areas where there isnt alot of sunlight on the flipe side you could turn a white person into a black one over generations by putting them in an enviroment where there is alot of sunlight

.i used the terms white and black not as racist but as general terms no matter what terms i use someone will likely be offended.

 

this can be debated.. im going to use terms white and black for simplistic reasons...

you can have a white person with generally black features and vica verca are they put in the black race or white race? i dont think so.. id like to see someone on there drivers license to be white in color but has african on there race

 

I don't even know where to begin here. When two dark skinned, curly haired people breed. What is the baby going most likely to be? Dark skinned and curly haired. Genetics. If two light skinned people with brown straight hair breed, whats the baby going to be most likely? Light skinned with brown straight hair. The characterists ARE affected by many things, and mainly geography. And because of these factors we have different races. Each race has it's own characterists. However, again, because of natural selection, most animals breed with those closer to their own genetic makeup thus maintaining their characterists and thus continuously defining their race.

 

true.. two mixed people could havea white baby or a black baby most likely it will be mixxed but there is a possiblility that they could have a complete black or complete white child and now adays id be confident in saying most people are mixed maby not white black but white/hispanic or white russian ect

 

Like I said you have to be pretty ethnocentric and inbred to get those kinds of results.And no, natural selection actually favours diversity, inbreeding is the quickest route to extinction since it accumulates the recessive genes in successive generations and leads to cumulative defects turning into inborn errors of metabolism.

The best example for these are consanguinous groups like Parsis and Ashkenazi Jews.