posted
if there is no such thing as race, and it's just a social construct, then how come the Andamese and the people from Papua new guinea are not black because their dna is not african? obviously race has to be real if its in our dna.
Posts: 42 | From: Philidelphia | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: if there is no such thing as race, and it's just a social construct, then how come the Andamese and the people from Papua new guinea are not black because their dna is not african? obviously race has to be real if its in our dna.
Read and comprehend my posts and you'll come to realize, there is no such invention as, RACE. I.E., significant biological differences based on skin complexion. Also, the pseudo-science of DNA is invented and promoted by those same deceivers who promote the false concept of RACE.
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I still don't understand. If there is no such thing as race, and it's not in our DNA, then how did scientists determine that the Andamese ppl are not Black??? what did they use to come to this conclusion???
Posts: 42 | From: Philidelphia | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Race to most people means physical appearance and many people even use it as a casual synonym to "ethnicity".
All these things exist, only, phys. appearence is the only thing related to our DNA.
What the scientists, geneticists, are studying is "recent" common ancestry, aka extended family trees we can study since we all go back to a common point. Common-sensically, being of different genetic fams neither has to = races nor does it have to =/= races.
Taxonomically, the human species doesn't sub-divide down any further (genetically). So when folks say there is one humanity with no races (or one race) that's what they mean.
Do people differ? Yes, people are different -- think about it, even if you're black, it's an automatic virtual (almost absolute) fact you've got different genes from me (unless somehow you were this clone of me I didn't know about). Are you a different race? Well automatically *no* since you're black.
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: I still don't understand. If there is no such thing as race, and it's not in our DNA, then how did scientists determine that the Andamese ppl are not Black??? what did they use to come to this conclusion???
What do you define as black first off. If Adamese and other black Asians are you definition of black then they are gentically closer to Chinese and other non Black Asians than to Africans who resemble them. So are the non black Asians whom are Genetically the closest too the people you advocate "Black" also??
Second, all Humans can be traced back to Africans who left the continent during the OOA Migration(s). Can you provide evidence of a Modern Human species still alive that did NOT originate from these Africans??
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: I still don't understand. If there is no such thing as race, and it's not in our DNA, then how did scientists determine that the Andamese ppl are not Black??? what did they use to come to this conclusion???
What scientists are you referring to? And where did they say this?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Race is a reality. Ask any anthropologist or forensic scientist.
The only people who deny races exist are those with a socio-political agenda. Mostly its black people who deny race exists because they have an anti-white agenda. They want to destroy the white race through miscegenation. That's always been their goal and they hate it when they find a white guy or woman who doesn't want this and wants to preserve the white race.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, she might've meant how each group would cluster first with West Eurasia before with eachother, obviously their black unless they don't refer to themselves as such, but most people I know would refer to em as black on sight.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: Mostly its black people who deny race exists because they have an anti-white agenda. They want to destroy the white race through miscegenation. That's always been their goal
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: I still don't understand. If there is no such thing as race, and it's not in our DNA, then how did scientists determine that the Andamese ppl are not Black??? what did they use to come to this conclusion???
What scientists are you referring to? And where did they say this?
I learned that the Andamese and ppl from Papua New Guinea are genetically distant from black africans....they are not black. if there is no such thing as race, then how they are genetically distant from black africans??? race must be real then
Posts: 42 | From: Philidelphia | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: They want to destroy the white race through miscegenation. That's always been their goal
^I may only speak for some because black people are not a hive-mind nor a monolith, and will not deny that sentence about miscegenation and that it could be true for some. Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nobody can answer my question..if there is no such thing as race then how come scientists are able to tell the diff between an andamese person and a black african genetically???
Posts: 42 | From: Philidelphia | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: Nobody can answer my question..if there is no such thing as race then how come scientists are able to tell the diff between an andamese person and a black african genetically???
This is not what you asked, you asked how come scientists don't consider Andamese black because their DNA is not African.
In which case I asked you to reference these scientists you speak of and where they said this.
Now you backtrack and ask about the ability to tell the difference between an Andaman and an African genetically correct?
The simple fact that geneticists are able to note that Andaman islanders genetically cluster with mainland Asia before most of Africa(due to the fact that Andaman islanders carry ancestral lineages to mainland Asians, while some Africans carry ancestral lineages to Andamese) but cranio-facially Andamans and Africans align, shows that categorizing people into race can be extremely misleading in bio-anthropology.
The answer to your question of why race doesn't exist is within your own question, look deeper.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: Nobody can answer my question..if there is no such thing as race then how come scientists are able to tell the diff between an andamese person and a black african genetically???
If scientists told you 1+3=2 and even pulled out a calculator typed it in and got that result, would you believe it or not?
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is simple, just like any concept that must evolve with newly discovered facts, the term "race" has to be redefined. The term "race" must now take into consideration genetics.
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: Nobody can answer my question..if there is no such thing as race then how come scientists are able to tell the diff between an andamese person and a black african genetically???
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: They hate it when they find a white guy or woman who doesn't want this and wants to preserve the white race.
. That is all.
*
.. must .. not .. reply to this with words..
No, actually no, cassiterides, no one cares.
You want to preserve your race?
... that's nice.
Move along now.. run and play, chop-chop go on lad
Right...shouldn't he be somewhere with his pale people preserving his race and preaching preservation of same...A BLACK FORUM lol is the WRONG FORUM to bawl about preserving 'white' people...lol...there are 'WHITE' FORUMS for that...lol...what a fool-fool boy...lol....
HEAR THE LAPDOG NOW:
quote: Confirming Truth Member # 17678 posted 06 July, 2011 05:04 PM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You hit it on the nail.
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by cassiterides: Mostly its black people who deny race exists because they have an anti-white agenda. They want to destroy the white race through miscegenation. That's always been their goal
HEY DUNCE-HEAD WEY NAME CONFIRMED EEIDAT:
YOU LOVE DAGGA YUH SOME 'WHITE' GYAL NUH TRUE...AND QUITE SURE YOU WANT A 'WHITE' GYAL FE BREED FRAM YOU BECAUSE WE KNOW SEH YOU NUH WAA NO BLACK WOMAN FE BREED FRAM YOU AND AH GI YOU UGLY BLACK PICKNEY....
THAT BEING SAID...BY YOUR OWN ACTIONS AND WORDS REGARDING YOUR OWN ACTIONS, LOL- SEXING 'WHITE' WOMEN- YUH A PROMOTE MISCEGENATION AND GENOCIDE OF YOUR 'WHITE' PEOPLE THAT YOU LOVE SO MUCH...YES YOU PROMOTE GENOCIDE OF THE 'WHITE' RACE- ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS, LOL
SOMETIME UNNU JUS TALK PON UNNU SELF YUH SEEPosts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: Nobody can answer my question..if there is no such thing as race then how come scientists are able to tell the diff between an andamese person and a black african genetically???
GENETICALLY...
BUT, MORE IMPORTANTLY-
Can you tell them apart side by side...can you tell one is a Continental African, and the other is an Andamaese person/not African, if no info is given you about either..
I THINK NOT.
If a 'white' girl brings home an Andamese man to introduce him to her Black-hating father, do you REALLY REALLY think she could, after he sees her date, tell him seh 'BUT DADDY, HE'S NOT A N*GGER, HE'S ASIAN....'
you tell me he'll say, "genetically Asian? Oh, ok, that's different- he's not Black then; take him on upstairs to your room hun"....
NO...
IT WILL NOT GO THAT WAY...
DADDY GOING FAST FAST FOR THE ROPE, GUN AND LYNCH MOB....
REALITY....
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
To wrap this issue up once and for all in a logical and commonsense manner, the "definition" of something is valid based on how many people agree with it. For example, we know what an apple is because most people agree on that definition. That doesn't mean we won't find one or two muppets who insist an apple is an orange.
We're all humans, man. For the most part anyway. I heard there's Neanderthals and Alien lifeforms among us but I can't see any solid proof... So as far as this "black race" thing, by consensus it simply means someone who tans/browns and has some color even when not tanning. Simple Posts: 525 | From: Terra | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: Nobody can answer my question..if there is no such thing as race then how come scientists are able to tell the diff between an andamese person and a black african genetically???
GENETICALLY...
BUT, MORE IMPORTANTLY-
Can you tell them apart side by side...can you tell one is a Continental African, and the other is an Andamaese person/not African, if no info is given you about either..
I THINK NOT.
If a 'white' girl brings home an Andamese man to introduce him to her Black-hating father, do you REALLY REALLY think she could, after he sees her date, tell him seh 'BUT DADDY, HE'S NOT A N*GGER, HE'S ASIAN....'
you tell me he'll say, "genetically Asian? Oh, ok, that's different- he's not Black then; take him on upstairs to your room hun"....
NO...
IT WILL NOT GO THAT WAY...
DADDY GOING FAST FAST FOR THE ROPE, GUN AND LYNCH MOB....
REALITY....
both groups look exactly alike.
i am curious do any andamese ppl live in mainstream asian society??
Posts: 42 | From: Philidelphia | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged |
It all has to do with the haplogroups. The Andaman Islanders have not mingled with the populations of Africa for over some 30,000 years yet they have retained the traits they left the mainland continent with--because the environment they migrated to is similar to that of tropical Africa. But during this time there have been mutations on their chromosomes which specify only that they have not mingled with populations in Africa for a very long time.
So what are they? Well, using the colloquial way of speaking, they are indeed black--based purely on their surface phenotypical traits. This is how people operate in the real world. Immigration officers or policemen don't react to people based on their DNA but based on what they look like.
Are they Africans? A case can be made for such: Analogically: An Alsatian/German Shepherd originated in Germany but has been bred in places like China for over 100 years. They are still sold as "Alsatians".
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
It all has to do with the haplogroups. The Andaman Islanders have not mingled with the populations of Africa for over some 30,000 years yet they have retained the traits they left the mainland continent with--because the environment they migrated to is similar to that of tropical Africa. But during this time there have been mutations on their chromosomes which specify only that they have not mingled with populations in Africa for a very long time.
So what are they? Well, using the colloquial way of speaking, they are indeed black--based purely on their surface phenotypical traits. This is how people operate in the real world. Immigration officers or policemen don't react to people based on their DNA but based on what they look like.
Are they Africans? A case can be made for such: Analogically: An Alsatian/German Shepherd originated in Germany but has been bred in places like China for over 100 years. They are still sold as "Alsatians".
Okay, thank you for explaining it to me that way. I am starting to slowly understand now
but, just because they haven't mingled with Africans for 30,000 years means they are not Black African genetically?? Now that part I don't understand, what diff does that make??
Posts: 42 | From: Philidelphia | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged |
To wrap this issue up once and for all in a logical and commonsense manner, the "definition" of something is valid based on how many people agree with it. For example, we know what an apple is because most people agree on that definition. That doesn't mean we won't find one or two muppets who insist an apple is an orange.
Not true. Sometimes, an apple is indeed, an orange.
You are confusing definition with perception, and validation with majority acceptance (Status Quo). They are not the same. Validation is a proven fact, while consensus is requires no validation.
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
It all has to do with the haplogroups. The Andaman Islanders have not mingled with the populations of Africa for over some 30,000 years yet they have retained the traits they left the mainland continent with--because the environment they migrated to is similar to that of tropical Africa. But during this time there have been mutations on their chromosomes which specify only that they have not mingled with populations in Africa for a very long time.
So what are they? Well, using the colloquial way of speaking, they are indeed black--based purely on their surface phenotypical traits. This is how people operate in the real world. Immigration officers or policemen don't react to people based on their DNA but based on what they look like.
Are they Africans? A case can be made for such: Analogically: An Alsatian/German Shepherd originated in Germany but has been bred in places like China for over 100 years. They are still sold as "Alsatians".
Okay, thank you for explaining it to me that way. I am starting to slowly understand now
but, just because they haven't mingled with Africans for 30,000 years means they are not Black African genetically?? Now that part I don't understand, what diff does that make??
There is no such thing as being "Black African", genetically. You don't understand because you can't relieve yourself of the arbitrary race concept or understand the difference between genetic mutation and phenotype. A great many mutations can build up over 30,000 years. Only 15% of our mutations are attributable to outward appearance so the other 85% that make Andamanese and Africans different is significant. It took less time for Europeans to turn white. Mutations are steady also (they occur at a constant rate).
Think about it. How many generations is 30,000 years? Say 25 years = 1 generation. That is 1200 generations. You are closely related to your first cousin as you are only separated by 2 generations. You are less related to your second cousin as you are separated by three generations. You are EVEN less related to your 4th cousin because you are separated by 5 generations! So pray tell, how do you figure people who have been separated for 1200 generations are in any way related, in the conventional sense?
In addition, I'm not even sure where the 30,000 year date comes from since the ancestors of SE Asians were a part of the first migrations out of Africa some 60,000 years ago and I'm not privy to any evidence suggesting their return or a second migration out of Africa coinciding with the date of 30,000 ybp. That would mean they're as far removed from native Africans as anybody else (including "white" people [North Europeans], Asians, and native Americans).
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The question of "race" is problematic bcause biologists don't use the term for other living species. A term is meaningful scientifically the more general its usage.
So terms like "populations" or "population clines" are preferable. On the matter of haplogroups we note that a very early haplogroup A is much removed mutationally from E1b1a and E1b1b. HgA is found in Southern Africa mainly among he Khoisan. Yet all 3 groups are called "Africans".
The problem arises because we tend to lump groups that share the same geographical spaces as belonging to that space--no matter how large. But that approach is a mixture of geography and biology.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: Okay, thank you for explaining it to me that way. I am starting to slowly understand now
but, just because they haven't mingled with Africans for 30,000 years means they are not Black African genetically?? Now that part I don't understand, what diff does that make??
quote:Originally posted by Oh Mother: ^ Good question Nyasha.
Not really, if you understand the genetics, and look at it from a genetics point of view.
quote:Originally posted by Sundjata: There is no such thing as being "Black African", genetically.
Now I ain't 'goan say dat either.
Nyasha, it is simple - just think about seperating any two populations -- people diverge over time by chance, just as you (or someone you know) diverged from and was not born a twin from their sibling(s).
So yes, proximity, or lack there of in the case of Africans and Australian Abs. indeed plays a role here at the population level.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: The question of "race" is problematic bcause biologists don't use the term for other living species. A term is meaningful scientifically the more general its usage.
So terms like "populations" or "population clines" are preferable. On the matter of haplogroups we note that a very early haplogroup A is much removed mutationally from E1b1a and E1b1b. HgA is found in Southern Africa mainly among he Khoisan. Yet all 3 groups are called "Africans".
The problem arises because we tend to lump groups that share the same geographical spaces as belonging to that space--no matter how large. But that approach is a mixture of geography and biology.
Truth
Though, those markers you mention are merely paternal for each individual and so on down the line account for an increasingly miniscule amout of your ancestors, in addition to already counting for a teensy part of your DNA / genetic make up. I'm pretty sure (that as it so happens) the major population world dichotomy that anyone will come up with will be two populations consisting of Africans and Everyone else. Then Everyone else breaks into groups. But genetically there does appear to be a group that conforms to Africa, not that I'm going against what you bolded because I'm all for it in the academic sense.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
It all has to do with the haplogroups. The Andaman Islanders have not mingled with the populations of Africa for over some 30,000 years yet they have retained the traits they left the mainland continent with--because the environment they migrated to is similar to that of tropical Africa. But during this time there have been mutations on their chromosomes which specify only that they have not mingled with populations in Africa for a very long time.
So what are they? Well, using the colloquial way of speaking, they are indeed black--based purely on their surface phenotypical traits. This is how people operate in the real world. Immigration officers or policemen don't react to people based on their DNA but based on what they look like.
Are they Africans? A case can be made for such: Analogically: An Alsatian/German Shepherd originated in Germany but has been bred in places like China for over 100 years. They are still sold as "Alsatians".
Okay, thank you for explaining it to me that way. I am starting to slowly understand now
but, just because they haven't mingled with Africans for 30,000 years means they are not Black African genetically?? Now that part I don't understand, what diff does that make??
There is no such thing as being "Black African", genetically. You don't understand because you can't relieve yourself of the arbitrary race concept or understand the difference between genetic mutation and phenotype. A great many mutations can build up over 30,000 years. Only 15% of our mutations are attributable to outward appearance so the other 85% that make Andamanese and Africans different is significant. It took less time for Europeans to turn white. Mutations are steady also (they occur at a constant rate).
Think about it. How many generations is 30,000 years? Say 25 years = 1 generation. That is 1200 generations. You are closely related to your first cousin as you are only separated by 2 generations. You are less related to your second cousin as you are separated by three generations. You are EVEN less related to your 4th cousin because you are separated by 5 generations! So pray tell, how do you figure people who have been separated for 1200 generations are in any way related, in the conventional sense?
In addition, I'm not even sure where the 30,000 year date comes from since the ancestors of SE Asians were a part of the first migrations out of Africa some 60,000 years ago and I'm not privy to any evidence suggesting their return or a second migration out of Africa coinciding with the date of 30,000 ybp. That would mean they're as far removed from native Africans as anybody else (including "white" people [North Europeans], Asians, and native Americans).
There is no such thing as being Black African genetically...allrighty confused again .. well then where did the whole "andamese are gentically distant from black africans" concept come from? genetics have something to do with it.
quote:So pray tell, how do you figure people who have been separated for 1200 generations are in any way related, in the conventional sense?
okay, so that is the only thing that makes them not black is that they migrated out of Africa 60,000 years ago? do they still speak the same language? i saw them on youtube and they dont appear to act any diff from some of the tribes I saw in africa to be honest. they also didnt mix with any other races either
Posts: 42 | From: Philidelphia | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: There is no such thing as being Black African genetically...allrighty confused again
Why would that be confusing at all? What genes define being "Black"? Black is a social construct that has nothing to do with genetics and for the most part, we all share the same genes anyway.
quote: .. well then where did the whole "andamese are gentically distant from black africans" concept come from? genetics have something to do with it.
You are the only one inserting color labels. The fact is that they are distinct from Africans the same way Europeans and Asians are. They are distinct because they are unrelated, unrelated because they're separated by 2400 generations, with different mutations arising in each one, making them more and more distinct in their genes as time passes, just like Europeans and Asians.
quote:okay, so that is the only thing that makes them not black is that they migrated out of Africa 60,000 years ago?
That makes them non-African. if you want to refer to them as "Black" because they have tropical features like dark skin, then that's your choice. That doesn't mean they're related to Africans.
quote: do they still speak the same language?
Africa has over 2500 languages and none of them are spoken on the Andaman islands.
quote:i saw them on youtube and they dont appear to act any diff from some of the tribes I saw in africa to be honest.
This is ignorance. Africa is diverse in both ethnicity and social organization. You will find anything from bands to kingdoms, tribes to empires. You have people who still hunt and gather to those practicing "modern" subsistence and mixed agriculture.
To be honest, you have no idea what you're talking about. Even if you're young and uneducated, I'd still expect you to have enough sense and decency to not paint an entire continent with one brush, let alone associate culture and behavior with genetics.
quote: they also didnt mix with any other races either
Race is a fallacious concept and why can't you understand that isolation and time is what makes people different? Who did East Asians mix with to become different from Africans? No one! So what is your point?
I hope that you're no older than 15.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: There is no such thing as being Black African genetically...allrighty confused again
Why would that be confusing at all? What genes define being "Black"? Black is a social construct that has nothing to do with genetics and for the most part, we all share the same genes anyway.
quote: .. well then where did the whole "andamese are gentically distant from black africans" concept come from? genetics have something to do with it.
You are the only one inserting color labels. The fact is that they are distinct from Africans the same way Europeans and Asians are. They are distinct because they are unrelated, unrelated because they're separated by 2400 generations, with different mutations arising in each one, making them more and more distinct in their genes as time passes, just like Europeans and Asians.
quote:okay, so that is the only thing that makes them not black is that they migrated out of Africa 60,000 years ago?
That makes them non-African. if you want to refer to them as "Black" because they have tropical features like dark skin, then that's your choice. That doesn't mean they're related to Africans.
quote: do they still speak the same language?
Africa has over 2500 languages and none of them are spoken on the Andaman islands.
quote:i saw them on youtube and they dont appear to act any diff from some of the tribes I saw in africa to be honest.
This is ignorance. Africa is diverse in both ethnicity and social organization. You will find anything from bands to kingdoms, tribes to empires. You have people who still hunt and gather to those practicing "modern" subsistence and mixed agriculture.
To be honest, you have no idea what you're talking about. Even if you're young and uneducated, I'd still expect you to have enough sense and decency to not paint an entire continent with one brush, let alone associate culture and behavior with genetics.
quote: they also didnt mix with any other races either
Race is a fallacious concept and why can't you understand that isolation and time is what makes people different? Who did East Asians mix with to become different from Africans? No one! So what is your point?
I hope that you're no older than 15.
if she's a Black female, then yeah- she mussi real young....
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nyasha the Andamese are both Black and Asian genetic distance is not a signifier of race which is a social construct it is possible to use genetics to distinguish an Irishman from an Italian or a Khoi-san from a Senegalese in this regard West Eurasians are closer to Africans than they would be to those East Eurasian who are black.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
What really counts in the biology of living organisms is how the organism interacts with its environment for survival purposes.
This is true for humans as it is true for zebras and elephants. The human species began some 160-200KYA which is a relatively short time when one considers the fact that the crocodile, turtle and cockroach, etc. have been around in their present form for some 150 million years.
Now the whole issue concerning humans how closely are humans in groups related to each other and whether there is any significance in terms of cognitive abilities attached to the fact that human groups may be phenotypically distinguishable from each other ways in terms of surface phenotype.
It is understood that the modalities of adaption to the environment is what has brought about the phenotypical differences observed in humans. This is the case with surface biological traits such as pigmentation. Groups that have survived in the world's temperate zones tend to be less pigmented than groups that did not. For example, a Swede walking on a street in Dakar, Senegal is easily distinguishable in this regard.
But there are some traits that have evolved and have become widespread in a group for no other particular reason than that these are traits that just occurred by random mutation in some core group and just got passed on. For example, the epicanthic eye fold of East Asians does not confer any advantage on East Asian eyesight yet it is fairly widespread in that group.
One important issue in all of this is the phenotype-genotype problem. For example, 2 groups that have separated more recently could be phenotypically more distinguishable than 2 groups that have separated less recently. The explanation here is the environment.
So which groups are closer? The answer is that it depends. Were a group of Andaman Islanders be flown over to South Sudan for its coming independence day this Saturday everybody would assume that they are South Sudanese--except, of course, the islandesr themselves. Not so with Zulu or Xhosa South African visitors who would be easily distinguishable on account of pigmentation and body structure, etc.
Perhaps an analogy would help. Think of the German origined automobile called the Mercedes-Benz. Assume that over the last 70 years it has been manufactured not only in Germany but also in Britain, Russia and those parts of East Asia with similar climatic conditions. Thus there would be manufacturing emphasis on the vehicle's heating system, defogger system and headlight system[ for fog and cold winter days], braking system for slick, icy roads, etc. Thus the Benzes manufactured for similar Northern clime conditions would continue to resemble each other in terms of the features mentioned above--even though they have been manufactured separately for the last 70 years.
Now suppose that the parent plant in Germany decided in the last 20 years to manufacture automobiles for tropical Africa.
Right away there would be "evolutionary phenotypical" modifications put into place. There would be new adaptive manufacturing changes put into place. There be changes to the Benz's cooling an AC systems, shocks system, suspension system[ higher and more robust suspensions], bigger and more effective windshield wipers[ for heavy rains], space for 2 spare tyres--rather than one, preference for lighter paint colours such as white, cream, yellow, etc, to reflect off the sun's rays and for visibility at night, etc.
Now after manufacturing compare the 2 Benzes: they would look different yet the tropicalised Benz would be more closely related in time to the German Benz than would the German Benz be to the older, more established, and more "phenotypically" similar Russian Benz--even though there have been some non-noticeable[position of radio, etc] design changes[ mutations] over time given the tastes of the manufacturers in the different climatically and environmentally similar areas.
The result is that the tropicalised Benz is easily distinguishable in a Sales lot from a German or Russian Benz even though the tropicalised Benz is of more recent manufacture.
So how do we classify now? Major changes in a shorter space of time or less visible changes in a longer space of time?
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: if there is no such thing as race, and it's just a social construct, then how come the Andamese and the people from Papua new guinea are not black because their dna is not african? obviously race has to be real if its in our dna.
If you asked people what are some examples of different "races" Many would say "blacks" , "whites" and "Asians" etc. .
But if somebody thinks that there is no such thing as race then the terms "blacks" , "whites" and "Asians" are meaningless.
Therefore if you ask:
"if there is no such thing as race, and it's just a social construct, then how come the Andamese and the people from Papua new guinea are not black because their dna is not african?"
^^^^the question doesn't make sense because if we accept the premise that there is no such thing as race you can't go on and then use the word "black" or "not black" in the end of the sentence because these are racial terms.
Most genetic scientists of today generally do not use the term "black African". They only use the term "African" because the word "Africa" has an accepted standard definition which defines a geographic area. When it comes to people however it's not always cut and dry to define them as belonging to one geographic location only especially since some continents are attached by land. This is not the case with the Andamese because unlike many other peoples they have remained isolated for thousands of years.
But "black" does not have an accepted standard definition. It means different things to different people. It's more politics than science and it's looks based.
Politically the Andamese look very similar to certain Africans. Therefore people who have more recent ancestry African may want to consider the Andamese black because it simply makes us a larger group when competing against other "non-black" groups, sheer strength in numbers is the idea.
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
A true example of the "evolutionary" automobile analogy above:
The French automobile company, Peugeot manufactured a vehicle specifically for Africa some years ago--the famous Peugeot 504. It was robust and powerful vehicle made of heavy steel and with powerful headlights. It was easily spotted with its very high suspensions--made for those neglected African roads. You rarely see such vehicles in France.
Interestingly enough there are still some of them running in Nigeria--all locally refurbished but as robust as ever.
Again and more frivolously on the issue of adaptiveness and "evolutionary change". Think of "Chinese food" for the international palate and Chinese food in China.
I was told that in China people don't eat the "Chinese food" eaten in restaurants outside of China. Such restaurants survive because they serve what the "foreign devils"[LOL] like to eat. The Chinese cooks had to adapt to the new environments.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: Nobody can answer my question..if there is no such thing as race then how come scientists are able to tell the diff between an andamese person and a black african genetically???
I think your question just proved race doesn't exist. "racially" an Andamese person would be "Black" in America. Race lumps a bunch of ethnic groups into one, based off someone's perception ideal of what "Black" is.
There is no such thing as a Black African, or Black Africa.Posts: 53 | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged |
A true example of the "evolutionary" automobile analogy above:
The French automobile company, Peugeot manufactured a vehicle specifically for Africa some years ago--the famous Peugeot 504. It was robust and powerful vehicle made of heavy steel and with powerful headlights. It was easily spotted with its very high suspensions--made for those neglected African roads. You rarely see such vehicles in France.
Interestingly enough there are still some of them running in Nigeria--all locally refurbished but as robust as ever.
Again and more frivolously on the issue of adaptiveness and "evolutionary change". Think of "Chinese food" for the international palate and Chinese food in China.
I was told that in China people don't eat the "Chinese food" eaten in restaurants outside of China. Such restaurants survive because they serve what the "foreign devils"[LOL] like to eat. The Chinese cooks had to adapt to the new environments.
As an auto enthusiast, I can tell you that the Peugeot 504 [not sure how that ever got into this topic, LOL] was product for the global market. It simply had a strong following in African countries, and hence, the product was heavily promoted over there and kept in production [locally in Nigeria, Egypt and Kenya for example] for a while even though the vehicles were phased out of production in the home market (France).
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: if there is no such thing as race, and it's just a social construct, then how come the Andamese and the people from Papua new guinea are not black because their dna is not african? obviously race has to be real if its in our dna.
Its simple dumbass andamese people are black Asians, Papua new Guineans are black Melanesian and most Africans are black Africans!!
Black doesn't equal African get it through your thick head!!
Posts: 1064 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: if there is no such thing as race, and it's just a social construct, then how come the Andamese and the people from Papua new guinea are not black because their dna is not african? obviously race has to be real if its in our dna.
Its simple dumbass andamese people are black Asians, Papua new Guineans are black Melanesian and most Africans are black Africans!!
Black doesn't equal African get it through your thick head!!
quote:Originally posted by asante:
As i said before a black person is a person with dark skin.
Black Sicilian _________________________________________________
Just curious. How then would you call East Asians from Beijing, China--using your colour scheme? Or South Asians from Mumbai? And would they agree?
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: Nobody can answer my question..if there is no such thing as race then how come scientists are able to tell the diff between an andamese person and a black african genetically???
[b]I think your question just proved race doesn't exist.
It does, and I already tried telling her this.
quote:Originally posted by AGÜEYBANÁ(Mind718):
quote:Originally posted by Nyasha: Nobody can answer my question..if there is no such thing as race then how come scientists are able to tell the diff between an andamese person and a black african genetically???
This is not what you asked, you asked how come scientists don't consider Andamese black because their DNA is not African.
In which case I asked you to reference these scientists you speak of and where they said this.
Now you backtrack and ask about the ability to tell the difference between an Andaman and an African genetically correct?
The simple fact that geneticists are able to note that Andaman islanders genetically cluster with mainland Asia before most of Africa(due to the fact that Andaman islanders carry ancestral lineages to mainland Asians, while some Africans carry ancestral lineages to Andamese) but cranio-facially Andamans and Africans align, shows that categorizing people into race can be extremely misleading in bio-anthropology.
The answer to your question of why race doesn't exist is within your own question, look deeper.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because he may well be related to these guys who dropped some babies before they g got their azzes handed to them and thrown out of Europe and back into Africa..or turned Christian switching sides the result would be the same him http://www.flags-of-the-world.net/flags/it-sar.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_svnsF5OLbI And here is a better way of explanation KLIK ME^.. Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
And "Melanesians"[ from Greek "melanchros"] also means "black people". So "black Melanesians" would mean "black black people". But that's OK with then I would imagine.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
.. well then where did the whole "andamese are gentically distant from black africans" concept come from? genetics have something to do with it. 
Printer-friendly view of this topic