Race ReconciledIn May 2009, the American Journal of Physical Anthropology published Race Reconciled, a special issue with cutting-edge work by biological anthropologists. These researchers do not agree on everything, and they have pointed debates. They are from the number-crunching and bone-measuring side of anthropology. Some of the articles are dense and difficult reading, with enough numbers, statistical tables, and computer simulations to make it hardly like reading at all. These researchers have read the critique of Richard Lewontin, and some have been in the forefront of re-examining Lewontin’s work (see previous section Attacking Anthropology and the Race Revival and see also the post on Teaching Race Anthropologically as well as the edited volume Anthropology of Race: Genes, Biology, and Culture for some of the latest research, featuring many of the authors discussed here).
Still, it is important to plow through the findings, because it is what our best bone measurers and number crunchers can accomplish. They very clearly recognize human biological variation. They see variation and measure it every day, examining things people cannot even visibly discern, like tiny bone markers and genetic material. And with all the disagreements, number-crunching, and consideration of how much humans vary, they agree
“Race is not an accurate or productive way to describe human biological variation” –Heather J.H. Edgar and Keith L. Hunley, Race Reconciled, 2009:2
Race is a categorization at the sub-species level. Everyone has long agreed that human beings are a single inter-breeding species, and have been for thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of years. To sort a species into sub-species, it is necessary to have biological variation AND a way to group that variation. We have biological variation. The problem comes in establishing the ways variation clumps, groups, or sorts into subsets. We can try this in terms of skin color or skull characteristics, bone measurements, and genetic variation.
Race Reconciled: Skin Color and Skulls
Most people in the U.S. think they use skin color to classify races. U.S. categories relate to skin color, but not exactly. If it was actually about skin color, racial classifications would look more like Brazil, with lots of different terms and gradations. If it were about skin color, then people might change race classification over the years, or children from the same parents could be classified as different races.
In contrast, the traditional U.S. system is known anthropologically as hypo-descent: children get the racial classification of the parent with the least socially desirable classification. Barack Obama, Halle Berry, and some of Thomas Jefferson’s descendants are considered black. The most extreme example is the “one drop rule,” that any black ancestry meant being classified as black. There have been recent shifts in these attitudes, and there have been regional and historical variations, but this system remains dominant.
Any racial terminology related to skin color, even in Brazil, must have some categories, or ways of marking off groups. However, what do these categories look like when compared to skin tones around the world? In a discussion of Race and global patterns of phenotypic variation, John Relethford plots human skin color variation:
The result is a continuous straight line ranging from the darkest extremes to the lightest extremes in skin color. There are no identifiable clusters. . . . Researchers are of course free to subdivide this continuum into different groups, but such clustering would be arbitrary and subjective in terms of the number of groups and the cutoff points used to distinguish them. The lack of apparent clusters is a reflection of the fact that skin color shows a classic pattern of clinal variation. (2009:17)
There are no clusters or clumps of black, white, yellow, or red skin colors. Like many traits used to measure race, skin color exhibits clinal variation, along a cline or smooth gradient between the extremes. A walk from the African tropics to northern Europe reveals this gradual variation in skin color. Some people postulate one reason for extreme racial classifications is because Europeans were traveling by sea, and so would meet an extreme example at each stop. The simple categories used in the U.S. may in part be a result of a small initial sample, drawn from the extremes of skin variation.
Unlike some textbooks and pronouncements which use this information to declare all physical variation is clinal, Relethford proceeds to consider craniometric or skull variation. Here the picture is different, as Relethford finds that crania are “geographically structured” (2009:18). The differences cluster according to geographic region and reflect genetic relationships: “Global patterns of craniometric variation reflect largely underlying patterns of genetic relationship, which in turn reflect geographic structure” (2009:19). However, even though there are recognizable clusters, “there are no abrupt breaks in the relationship between phenotypic and geographic distance . . . indicating that decisions for subdivision into clusters (or races) are going to be subjective” (2009:19). Relethford explains that although it is possible to discern geographic ancestry by continent, the number of groups which could be classified and the geographic cutoffs would be “subjective decisions” (2009:20).
Relethford considers racial labels as “a culturally constructed label that crudely and imprecisely describes real variation” (2009:20). Variation is real, exists, and has been structured by geography and migration, but the labels we use are a “crude first-order approximation” (2009:21). Relethford uses the example of how we see height as short, medium, and tall: “We tend to use crude labels in everyday life with the realization that they are fuzzy and subjective. I doubt anyone thinks that terms such as ‘short,’ ‘medium,’ and ‘tall’ refer to discrete groups, or that humanity only comes in three values of height!” (2009:21). (See also Relethford’s textbook section in The Human Species: An Introduction to Biological Anthropology and the discussion in the blog-post Race is a Social Construction).Posts: 496 | From: Greenland | Registered: Mar 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Forensic anthropologists sort real physical variation into categories we have made socially relevant. “There are so many possible distinctive biological races that the concept is virtually meaningless. We can only concur with Howells’ modification of Livingstone’s 1962 quote: ‘There are no races, only populations’” (Ousley et al. 2009:74). (Livingstone’s original quote [1962:279] was “There are no races, there are only clines”.)
The second article, Estimation and evidence in forensic anthropology: Sex and race does not have a provocative title, but is perhaps an even more incredible piece. The authors begin with sex identification, showing how sex is reliably estimated from a few craniometric variables, and how a prior identification of a roughly 1:1 sex ratio is unimportant for making the call. Things change when it comes to racial identification. Here, they take a set of bones from “Mr. Johnson” and compare them to a world database: “The results from these analyses fairly unambiguously estimate Mr. Johnson’s origin as an Easter Islander” (Konigsberg et al. 2009:81). However, since Mr. Johnson’s bones were found in Iowa, plugging in the Iowa probabilities allows Mr. Johnson to be reliably predicted as white. Forensic anthropologists base their estimates on the known prior composition of the population. If the same bones from Mr. Johnson had been found in Hawaii, they would have estimated “Easter Islander” or if found in Gary, Indiana, they would have estimated “American Black”:
Using the Iowa priors, the highest posterior probability is for “American White” at 0.6976. The identification of “Easter Islander,” which had the highest posterior when we used an uninformative prior, now has a relatively low posterior probability (0.0449). In contrast, using the Hawaii priors the posterior probability that “Mr. Johnson” was an “Easter Islander” is 0.9068, whereas the posterior probability that he was an “American White” was 0.0188. Using the Gary, Indiana prior the highest posterior probability (0.5342) was for “American Black” with “American White” having the second highest posterior probability (0.2728). (Konigsberg et al. 2009:82)
Posts: 496 | From: Greenland | Registered: Mar 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Understanding race and human variation: Why forensic anthropologists are good at identifying race
Stephen Ousley 1 *, Richard Jantz 2, Donna Freid 2 1Department of Applied Forensic Sciences, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA 2Department of Anthropology, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN
email: Stephen Ousley (sousley@mercyhurst.edu)
*Correspondence to Stephen Ousley, Department of Applied Forensic Sciences, Mercyhurst College, Erie, PA
Abstract American forensicanthropologists uncritically accepted the biological race concept from classic physical anthropology and applied it to methods of human identification. Why and how the biological race concept might work in forensic anthropology was contemplated by Sauer (Soc Sci Med 34 [1992] 107-111), who hypothesized that American forensic anthropologists are good at what they do because of a concordance between social race and skeletal morphology in American whites and blacks. However, Sauer also stressed that this concordance did not validate the classic biological race concept of physical anthropology that there are a relatively small number of discrete types of human beings. Results from Howells (Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 67 [1973] 1-259; Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 79 [1989] 1-189; Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology 82 [1995] 1-108) and others using craniometric and molecular data show strong geographic patterning of human variation despite overlap in their distributions. However, Williams et al. (Curr Anthropol 46 [2005] 340-346) concluded that skeletal morphology cannot be used to accurately classify individuals. Williams et al. cited additional support from Lewontin (Evol Biol 6 [1972] 381-398), who analyzed classic genetic markers. In this study, multivariate analyses of craniometric data support Sauer's hypothesis that there are morphological differences between American whites and blacks. We also confirm significant geographic patterning in human variation but also find differences among groups within continents. As a result, if biological races are defined by uniqueness, then there are a very large number of biological races that can be defined, contradicting the classic biological race concept of physical anthropology.
American Journal of Physical Anthropologyn (2009) Volume 139 Issue 1, Pages 68 - 76
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is clear that statements about the absence of race on a genetic level is pure hogwash.
Hum Immunol. 2006 Jan-Feb;67(1-2):73-84. Epub 2006 Apr 5. Related Articles, Links The haplotype structure of the human major histocompatibility complex.Alper CA, Larsen CE, Dubey DP, Awdeh ZL, Fici DA, Yunis EJ.CBR Institute for Biomedical Research, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.There is great interest in the use of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and linkage disequilibrium (LD) analysis to localize human disease genes. The results suggest that the human genome, including the major histocompatibility complex (MHC), consists largely of 5- to 200-kb blocks of sequence fixity between which random recombination occurs. Direct determination of MHC haplotypes from family studies also demonstrates similar-sized blocks, but otherwise gives a very different picture, with a third to a half of Caucasian haplotypes fixed from HLA-B to HLA-DR/DQ (at least 1 Mb) as conserved extended haplotypes (CEHs), some of which encompass more than 3 Mb. These fixed haplotypes differ in frequency both in different Caucasian subpopulations and in Caucasian patients with HLA-associated diseases, complicating disease susceptibility gene localization. The inherent inability of LD analysis to "see" DNA fixity beyond three markers contributes to the failure of SNP/LD analysis to define in detail or even detect CEHs in the MHC and probably elsewhere in the genome. More importantly, the use of statistical analysis, rather than direct haplotype determination and counting, fails to reveal the details of haplotype structure essential for gene localization. Given the oversimplified picture of the MHC (and probably the rest of the genome) provided only by SNP/LD-defined blocks, it is questionable whether this approach will be of great help in disease susceptibility gene localization or identification.
Br J Haematol. 1997 Aug;98(2):356-64. Related Articles, Links
Specificity and sensitivity of RHD genotyping methods by PCR-based DNA amplification.
Aubin JT, Le Van Kim C, Mouro I, Colin Y, Bignozzi C, Brossard Y, Cartron JP.
Centre d'Hemobiologie Perinale, Paris, France.
We have compared the sensitivity and specificity of four PCR methods of RHD gene detection using different sets of primers located in the regions of highest divergence between the RHD and RHCE genes, notably exon 10 (method I), exon 7 (method II), exon 4 (method III) and intron 4 (method IV). Methods I-III were the most sensitive and gave a detectable signal with D-pos/D-neg mixtures containing only 0.001% D-positive cells. Moreover, method II could detect the equivalent DNA amount present in only three nucleated cells in the assay without hybridization of PCR products, whereas the sensitivity of the other methods was 10-50 times less. Investigation of D variants indicated that false-negative results were obtained with method II (D(IVb) variant), method III (D(VI) and DFR variants) and method IV (D(VI) variants), but not method I. Weak D (D(u)) was correctly detected as D-positive by all methods, but most cases of Rh(null) appeared as false-positives, as they carry normal RH genes that are not phenotypically expressed. Some false-positive results were obtained with method I in a few Caucasian DNA samples serotyped as RhD-neg but carrying a C- or E-allele, whereas a high incidence of false-positives was found among non-Caucasian Rh-negative samples by all methods. In the Caucasian population, however, we found a full correlation between the predicted genotype and observed phenotype at birth of 92 infants. Although we routinely use the four methods for RHD genotyping, a PCR strategy based on at least two methods is recommended.
Hum Immunol. 2006 Jan-Feb;67(1-2):125-39. Epub 2005 Nov 4. Related Articles, Links
Disease Relevant HLA Class II Alleles Isolated by Genotypic, Haplotypic, and Sequence Analysis in North American Caucasians With Pemphigus Vulgaris.
Lee E, Lendas KA, Chow S, Pirani Y, Gordon D, Dionisio R, Nguyen D, Spizuoco A, Fotino M, Zhang Y, Sinha AA.
Department of Dermatology, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY.
Early studies of genetic susceptibility to pemphigus vulgaris (PV) showed associations between human leukocyte antigen (HLA) DR4 and DR6 and disease. The emergence of DNA sequencing techniques has implicated numerous DRB1 and DQB1 loci in various populations, leading to confusion regarding which exact alleles confer susceptibility. The strong linkage disequilibrium among DR and DQ HLA alleles further complicates the investigation of the true susceptibility loci. In this study, we report genotyping data for the largest sampling of North American Caucasian non-Jewish and Ashkenazi Jewish PV patients studied to date and compare our data with other population studies. To pinpoint true susceptibility, alleles among overrepresented sequences, we applied a step-wise reductionist analysis through (1) determination of the degree of linkage disequilibrium (LD) between purportedly associated alleles, (2) haplotype frequencies comparisons, and (3) primary sequence comparisons of disease-associated versus non-disease-associated alleles to identify crucial differences in amino acid residues in putative peptide binding pockets. Collectively, our data provide extended support for the hypothesis that the HLA associations in Caucasian PV patients map to DRB1*0402 and DQB1*0503 alone. Further structure-function studies will be required to define the exact mechanisms of HLA-mediated control of susceptibility and resistance to disease.
PMID: 16698434 [PubMed - in process]
Ann Hum Genet. 2006 May;70(Pt 3):350-9. Related Articles, Links
A comparison of individual genotyping and pooled DNA analysis for polymorphism validation prior to large-scale genetic studies.
Yang HC, Lin CH, Hung SI, Fann CS.
Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan 115.
Polymorphism validation is an important issue in genetic studies because only polymorphic markers provide useful information. We analyzed genetic data for 180 SNPs in the human major histocompatibility complex region in Caucasian and Taiwanese populations, and evaluated ethnic heterogeneity between these populations to illustrate the importance of polymorphism validation. An initial individual genotyping experiment (IGE) with 95 samples was compared with a DNA pooling allele-typing experiment (PAE) of 630 individuals for polymorphism validation based on authentic data sets. Afterwards, all samples were genotyped individually in a confirmation study. Under narrow (broad) polymorphism criteria, 24 (41) polymorphic SNPs in Caucasians could not be validated in the Taiwanese population, suggesting a 13% (23%) inconsistency rate and revealing a strong discrepancy between genetic backgrounds, probably due to ethnic heterogeneity. IGE yielded high sensitivity and specificity for polymorphism validation, but may be sensitive to sampling variation. PAE showed high sensitivity (97%) and specificity (100%) using a narrow polymorphism criterion, but reduced specificity (83%) using a broad criterion. Public domain polymorphism databases should therefore be used with caution and polymorphism validation should be performed routinely prior to conducting large-scale genetic studies. PAE is a cost-saving, reliable alternative to IGE for polymorphism validation, especially for a stringent polymorphism criterion.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
[QUOTE] In a worldwide survey of 50 populations, a team of geneticists has identified many fingerprints of natural selection in the human genome. These are sites on the genome where specific sequences of DNA show signs of having become more common in the population, presumably because they helped their owners adapt to new climates, diseases or other factors. The genetic regions where natural selection has acted turn out to differ in various populations, doubtless because each has been molded by different local forces on each continent.
This chart shows the sites along the genome (listed at the left) at which natural selection has occurred in the genome of eight regional groups (shown at top). These are 1) Biaka pygmies, 2) Bantu-speaking Africans, 3) Western Europeans, 4) Middle Easterners, 5) South Asians (people of Pakistan and India), 6) East Asians, 7) Oceanians and 8) Native Americans. The colored bars show the degree of selection at each site, with yellow denoting a signal of clear but moderate statistical significance and red denoting high statistical significance.
The three West Eurasian groups show very similar patterns of selection, which probably occurred before they separated into three geographically distinct populations but after their ancestors split from those of East Asians.
Because the human genome is still so little understood, in most cases the genes at the sites of selection (shown along the right) are of unknown function. One exception is that of genes affecting skin color that have been under strong selective pressure in non-African populations. These include the gene SLC24A5 (shown in red, at center of chart), one version of which has been favored in European, Middle Eastern and South Asian populations. SLC24A5 is not under selection in East Asians, who presumably acquired their pale skin through a different set of genes, an example of what is known as convergent evolution.
Another set of genes found to be under selection in non-African populations are three NRG or neuregulin genes (the third, NRG3, is shown in red) and a receptor gene they all interact with (ERBB4, also in red). The NRG genes make signaling proteins that are active in the developing embryo in shaping tissues like the brain, heart and breast. A variant of NRG1 has been implicated in schizophrenia. The researchers do not know which of the several roles of the neuregulin genes has caused it to come under selection.
The principal human races presumably emerged as the populations of each continent responded to different evolutionary pressures. "Our work supports the notion that regional populations have adapted in a variety of ways, some shared, some not, to the selective pressures they encountered as they dispersed from the ancestral African homeland some 80,000 years ago," said Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the University of Chicago.
The authors of the new study are Dr. Pritchard and his colleagues Joseph Pickrell and Graham Coop. It was published online last month in Genome Research. It is the first to look for signals of selection in DNA samples gathered by the Human Genome Diversity Project.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
In this study, multivariate analyses of craniometric data support Sauer's hypothesis that there are morphological differences between American whites and blacks. We also confirm significant geographic patterning in human variation but also find differences among groups within continents. As a result, if biological races are defined by uniqueness, then there are a very large number of biological races that can be defined, contradicting the classic biological race concept of physical anthropology.
In other words, the results are meaningless.
Posts: 496 | From: Greenland | Registered: Mar 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Caveman: Did you read this part?
quote:
In this study, multivariate analyses of craniometric data support Sauer's hypothesis that there are morphological differences between American whites and blacks. We also confirm significant geographic patterning in human variation but also find differences among groups within continents. As a result, if biological races are defined by uniqueness, then there are a very large number of biological races that can be defined, contradicting the classic biological race concept of physical anthropology.
In other words, the results are meaningless.
This does not make the results meaningless.
There is nothing biologically that limit the number of races. For example, we don't have one mtDNA haplogroup or y-Chromosome haplotype for mankind there are many. as a result, there is nothing biologically that limit mankind to just three races.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: This does not make the results meaningless.
There is nothing biologically that limit the number of races. For example, we don't have one mtDNA haplogroup or y-Chromosome haplotype for mankind there are many. as a result, there is nothing biologically that limit mankind to just three races.
So is each haplotype a race ?
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is a simple example of why race is subjective and meaningless.
quote: Relethford uses the example of how we see height as short, medium, and tall: “We tend to use crude labels in everyday life with the realization that they are fuzzy and subjective. I doubt anyone thinks that terms such as ‘short,’ ‘medium,’ and ‘tall’ refer to discrete groups, or that humanity only comes in three values of height!” (2009:21).
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: This does not make the results meaningless.
There is nothing biologically that limit the number of races. For example, we don't have one mtDNA haplogroup or y-Chromosome haplotype for mankind there are many. as a result, there is nothing biologically that limit mankind to just three races.
So is each haplotype a race ?
This is a stupid question. You know the answer yourself.
The haplogroups are used to categorize continental populations that corresponds to three or four populations found on the American, European, Eurasian and African continents.
quote: The haplogroups are used to categorize continental populations that corresponds to three or four populations found on the American, European, Eurasian and African continents.
How many races in the world? Three, Four, Five or more? Please be specific, since you claim this is based on science!
Posts: 496 | From: Greenland | Registered: Mar 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Caveman: Here is a simple example of why race is subjective and meaningless.
quote: Relethford uses the example of how we see height as short, medium, and tall: “We tend to use crude labels in everyday life with the realization that they are fuzzy and subjective. I doubt anyone thinks that terms such as ‘short,’ ‘medium,’ and ‘tall’ refer to discrete groups, or that humanity only comes in three values of height!” (2009:21).
Scientist use biological matter: HLA and haplogroups to identify populations/races, not the" terms such as ‘short,’ ‘medium,’ and ‘tall’ refer to discrete groups".
quote: The haplogroups are used to categorize continental populations that corresponds to three or four populations found on the American, European, Eurasian and African continents.
How many races in the world? Three, Four, Five or more? Please be specific, since you claim this is based on science!
The mtDNA haplogroups of the continental populations are illustrated below.
quote: The haplogroups are used to categorize continental populations that corresponds to three or four populations found on the American, European, Eurasian and African continents.
How many races in the world? Three, Four, Five or more? Please be specific, since you claim this is based on science!
quote: The haplogroups are used to categorize continental populations that corresponds to three or four populations found on the American, European, Eurasian and African continents.
How many races in the world? Three, Four, Five or more? Please be specific, since you claim this is based on science!
The mtDNA haplogroups of the continental populations are illustrated below.
.
This is only mtDNA M and it's subclades
there are many other mitrochondrial haplogroups
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Haplogroup M1 has a restricted geographic distribution in Africa, being found mainly in North Africans and East Africa at low or moderate frequencies. If M had originated in Africa around before the Out of Africa migration, it would be expected to have a more widespread distribution and you would also expect to find more subclades that are derived from it but there isn't. Also M1 has a younger coalescence age than the Asian-exclusive M lineages. One of the basal lineages of M1 lineages has been found in Northwest Africa and in the Near East but is abssent in East Africa. Also M1 is not restricted to Africa. It is relatively common in the Mediterranean and enjoys a well-established presence in the Middle East. The fact that the M1 sub-clade has a coalescence age which overlaps with that of haplogroup U6 (a Eurasian haplogroup whose presence in Africa is due to a back-migration from West Asia) and the distribution of U6 in Africa is also restricted to the same North African and Horn African populations as M1 supports the scenario that M1 and U6 were part of the same population expansion from Asia to Africa. The timing of the proposed migration of M1 and U6-carrying peoples from West Asia to Africa (between 40,000 to 45,000 ybp) is also supported by the fact that it coincides with changes in climatic conditions that reduced the desert areas of North Africa, thereby rendering the region more accessible to entry from the Levant.
The haplogroups are used to categorize continental populations that corresponds to three or four populations found on the American, European, Eurasian and African continents.
ok according to Clyde:
White = H T U V W X I J K
Black = L
Yellow = C+D A G B F M N
Red = Yellow
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Haplogroup M1 has a restricted geographic distribution in Africa, being found mainly in North Africans and East Africa at low or moderate frequencies. If M had originated in Africa around before the Out of Africa migration, it would be expected to have a more widespread distribution and you would also expect to find more subclades that are derived from it but there isn't. Also M1 has a younger coalescence age than the Asian-exclusive M lineages. One of the basal lineages of M1 lineages has been found in Northwest Africa and in the Near East but is abssent in East Africa. Also M1 is not restricted to Africa. It is relatively common in the Mediterranean and enjoys a well-established presence in the Middle East. The fact that the M1 sub-clade has a coalescence age which overlaps with that of haplogroup U6 (a Eurasian haplogroup whose presence in Africa is due to a back-migration from West Asia) and the distribution of U6 in Africa is also restricted to the same North African and Horn African populations as M1 supports the scenario that M1 and U6 were part of the same population expansion from Asia to Africa. The timing of the proposed migration of M1 and U6-carrying peoples from West Asia to Africa (between 40,000 to 45,000 ybp) is also supported by the fact that it coincides with changes in climatic conditions that reduced the desert areas of North Africa, thereby rendering the region more accessible to entry from the Levant.
This has nothing to do with the thread you started.
Man originated in Africa. As a result, specific haplogroup sub-clades, have been assigned to different populations for example, L3 originated in Africa, but scientists maintain that L3(M,N) are chracteristic of Eurasian populations.
The haplogroups are used to categorize continental populations that corresponds to three or four populations found on the American, European, Eurasian and African continents.
ok according to Clyde:
White = H T U V W X I J K
Black = L
Yellow = C+D A G B F M N
Red = Yellow
Remember this is what scientists claim , I am only repeating their assertions.
posted
The scientists are mostly wrong, because they can't even agree on how many races there are. Just like the example of short, medium, and tall for people's heights, there is an infinite number of ways you can decide on the cutoff for each class. What is considered tall for some Asians, would only be about average for Germans.
So, in other words, all this is nothing, but subjective, and unreliable methods of dividing humans into arbitrary races, that actually do not exist.
Posts: 496 | From: Greenland | Registered: Mar 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Caveman: The scientists are mostly wrong, because they can't even agree on how many races there are. Just like the example of short, medium, and tall for people's heights, there is an infinite number of ways you can decide on the cutoff for each class. What is considered tall for some Asians, would only be about average for Germans.
So, in other words, all this is nothing, but subjective, and unreliable methods of dividing humans into arbitrary races, that actually do not exist.
LOL. What are your credential to say the scientist are wrong? Cite some of your research to support your opinion.
The geneticist agree on the haplogroups carried by individual continental populations. The number of haplogroup sub-clades increase as researchers resolve the haplogroups and discover new mutations.
Even while making this statement you have not cited any literature supporting your ideas.This is nothing but your opinion.
quote:Originally posted by Caveman: The scientists are mostly wrong, because they can't even agree on how many races there are. Just like the example of short, medium, and tall for people's heights, there is an infinite number of ways you can decide on the cutoff for each class. What is considered tall for some Asians, would only be about average for Germans.
So, in other words, all this is nothing, but subjective, and unreliable methods of dividing humans into arbitrary races, that actually do not exist.
LOL. What are your credential to say the scientist are wrong? Cite some of your research to support your opinion.
The geneticist agree on the haplogroups carried by individual continental populations. The number of haplogroup sub-clades increase as researchers resolve the haplogroups and discover new mutations.
Even while making this statement you have not cited any literature supporting your ideas.This is nothing but your opinion.
.
You seem to be defending RACISM. What I've been trying to show you, is that science can be manipulated to advance BOGUS FACTS and RACISM.
There Are No Human Races, Just Variations of Phenotypes that Do Not Always Correspond to People Genetic Makeup. Basically, clusters of Geographic Populations (C), but most of them are related to each other in one way or another.
Posts: 496 | From: Greenland | Registered: Mar 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Caveman: You seem to be defending RACISM. What I've been trying to show you, is that science can be manipulated to advance BOGUS FACTS and RACISM.
There Are No Human Races, Just Variations of Phenotypes that Do Not Always Correspond to People Genetic Makeup. Basically, clusters of Geographic Populations (C), but most of them are related to each other in one way or another.
I am not defending racism. I was just showing that Forensic anthropologists can determine race.
Just because scientist can determine race has nothing to do with racism. Racism is negative emotions and feelings that one group has towards another group.
It was okay for the Academic to use "race" to demonstrate white Supremacy. The Academe only wants to move away from the concept that races exist because the cranial metrics when applied to the founders of the four River Valley civilizations indicate that they were negroes. This falsifies the myth that the founders of ancient civilization were "whites".The evidence resulting from archaeological excavations of negro skulls and skeletons destroys the idea of "whites" civilizing the world.
You call this racism only because Afro-Americans learned what race was represented by the skulls found during archaeological excavations and published in their writings that the Sumerians, Egyptians, Harappans and Xia/Shang in China were all Negroes based on cranial measurements and multivariate analysis.
The fact remains scientists have created methods that can identify the race of individuals.The first scientific method was cranial measurements and multivariate analysis to identify races. Next they used Blood Groups, and HLA to identity the race of individuals. Today in addition to craniometrics , and HLA, races are catogorized by genetics researchers. These scientists claim there are continental populations, that represent the main populations (races) associated with those continents.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
You call this racism only because Afro-Americans learned what race was represented by the skulls found during archaeological excavations and published in their writings that the Sumerians, Egyptians, Harappans and Xia/Shang in China were all Negroes based on cranial measurements and multivariate analysis.
You call this racism only because Afro-Americans learned what race was represented by the skulls found during archaeological excavations and published in their writings that the Sumerians, Egyptians, Harappans and Xia/Shang in China were all Negroes based on cranial measurements and multivariate analysis.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic