...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Diop's work "no better than pornography"
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oshun: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] Mr. Diop, I know this is 2018 and you haven't been on the scene for about 30 years but now that your back are you sure you can find a black person who, is closer to a Swede than Peter Botha? Peter Botha was of Dutch extraction and the highest YDNA frequency there is R-M269. The highest frequency YDNA for Swedes is haplogroup I1, that is believed to have originated in Northern Europe. The ancestor is I-M170. That's big in Norway, the Caucases, Croatia. It's one of the most European haplogroups. The Dutch, your Peter Botha types are also heavy with the Hap I . That haplogroup is virtually unknown in indigenous Africans. [/qb][/QUOTE]I think you're taking what he says way too literally. What he means is that people can be more closely related genetically, to people of other races and that genetics and race aren't the same thing. Weren't the Egyptian samples peppered with haplogroup I? Even if they were northern Egyptians that had faced Levanite immigration, the mainstream media releases are implying the data is representative of all of Egypt by excluding needed qualifiers to describe the results. So if we're to assume this data is representative of the south, how does that compare against the morphological data that shows physical features that many associate with "blackness." The situation is either: The southern Egyptians are genetically akin to (some) other Africans and are morphologically "black" or they're exactly what Diop is saying in this situation. Same with say an Adamanese. An Adamanese is going to be seen as black by people who see them. That doesn't mean they're closely related to African blacks. [QUOTE][qb] Genetics in a historical context often leads us in more of a geographically oriented outcome as per a person's ancestors than strictly a phenotypical profile. [/qb][/QUOTE]But identifying with sex, ancestry, race, is all subjective in it's importance. All can be argued to have a history too. What I mean by that is that people with the same haplogroups have a history and people with certain features have a history. Both groups have had people who preceded them that'd fit under the same category of similar genes and features that did stuff. [QUOTE][qb]Look at how many people are getting their DNA tested these days. There is probably going to be more emphasis on that even on the layman's social level than we are seeing now. [/qb][/QUOTE]True but people don't need a DNA test to tell them what race [b]they[/b] are, so why would it make them excited? They can personally experience treatment based on their appearance for that. He's not denying anyone the right to find out other aspects of human beings. So I really don't know what's with the false dichotomy. You don't have to look at morphological data and say that because you know someone's race, knowing other parts of who they are physically is not relevant. [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] We watch youtube videos now where people get excited about there DNA test results and their complexities rather than just going by these simplistic color based racial categories "black" or "white". [/qb][/QUOTE]Well yes, because most people learn their race early in life. That's not going to be "new" for individuals, but it can be new when it comes to discussing ancient people who we never got the chance to meet. [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] And there is going to be more and more improved transportation therefore more so called "mixing" going on and these "do you consider yourself black or white" type of questions will become increasing over-simplified socially. [/qb][/QUOTE]When women were being called witches because their eyes turned red, scientists showed and explained to people that it was because of how people cooked in their houses which changed the color, not demonic possession. A scientist interested in historical accuracy of the behavior and achievements of people with a certain morphological types, which is at the foundation of anti black discrimination is not "wrong." Anyone else putting together data on race is not wrong either, simply because we may one day get over race. Why don't you complain about how useless a review of race is when people put together data on unarmed black shootings, educational outcomes,health etc? After all you're saying soon there will be so much mixing no one will care. But while everyone's waiting for your racial utopia, what do human beings do in the meantime? Accept foul treatment on historical falsehood because someday maybe people will stop believing in it? And whose going to take the first step in showing it's false using science if they're heckled at every turn with this "soon it'll be over anyway" talk. If a scientist wants to tackle that, then there's nothing wrong with that. Diop is not demanding for every scientist to drop what they're doing to focus on race. [QUOTE][qb] You say physical appearance is a reality but so what? It's a reality as to how people are socially categorized but it doesn't mean biologists have to classify people according to social conventions and ignore DNA. It's better in my opinion that an effort is made to keep racial politics out of bio-anthropological analysis. [/qb][/QUOTE]There you go again: Diop's NOT telling anyone they cannot classify people some other way. You can be a woman, black, etc at the same time. What he's talking about is DNA being used to determine race. DNA being used to understand humanity outside of racial categorization is fine, using DNA to try to prove races against morphological data is not. The only reason why we're even seeing genetic data in race debates is because racists want to hold onto blacks being defective genetically, since their religious appeals harbor no interest to the public anymore. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3