Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Biological Case Against Race
American Outlook, publication of the Hudson Institute ^ | Spring 2002 | Joseph L. Graves Jr.

Posted on 06/04/2002 5:24:31 PM PDT by cornelis

click here to read article

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 321-331 next last
To: RaceBannon
Where's that sign? "We Hire the Handicapped!"??

What, me working?

41 posted on 06/04/2002 6:26:58 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: ThePythonicCow
statistically significant differences

Good grief! The Europeans really like soccer!

43 posted on 06/04/2002 6:28:10 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
Just because two groups overlap doesn't mean that they don't have statistically significant differences.

Yes, possible. But not demonstrated biologically. Your proposition is excellent and experimentally it is shown to not be the case.

I am curious as to why you are hostile to something very simple and obvious?

44 posted on 06/04/2002 6:28:46 PM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
Tell me directly, what is this simple obvious fact to which you find me hostile. Be clear and unambiguous.
45 posted on 06/04/2002 6:30:48 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
Considering my comment provocative.
46 posted on 06/04/2002 6:33:43 PM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Comment #47 Removed by Moderator

To: BurkeCalhounDabney
I think that the real reason for this excessive zeal for color blindness (and gender, preference, religious, age, and whatever else blindness) is that it's part of the fundamental liberal confusion. Equality of result, not of opportunity. We are not of nature, with our various differences, rewarded according to a higher moral authority by some measure that we must strive to discover, but rather above nature, all equally deserving of identical outcomes. It's the pablum (spelling?) of the masses, the false ideal of a perfect society. It's communism, socialism, liberalism (in the current abuse of the word). It's tyranny.

It must be defeated, over and over again.

48 posted on 06/04/2002 6:35:54 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
No - I am asking not why you find my comment curious, but what is this something very simple and obvious of which you speak?
49 posted on 06/04/2002 6:37:12 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Arleigh
The idea of a "social construction" is that there's a real phenomena out there in the world, but that it's there because we believe it is. Example: Money is a social construction. Money really does have value. People will give you things for money. So there's no denying the reality of it. But ... it wouldn't have value unless people believed it did. Apply the analogy to race. There may be real differences between lightly and darkly complected people. The open question has to do with causality. Do our attitudes, beliefs, institutions, etc create those differences or not? Citing more and more evidence of the differences doesn't answer the causal question.
50 posted on 06/04/2002 6:37:28 PM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
[Sickle-cell anemia] is based on proximity to malarial areas. Thus there are Asian populations prone to it and African populations not.

Not to mention some Italian populations.

51 posted on 06/04/2002 6:38:25 PM PDT by Dumb_Ox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: BurkeCalhounDabney
It is based on ancestral proximity to malarial areas.

Yes. That is correct and I would assume undesood and inherent in the comment.

What is proven is that sickle cell anemia does not correlate with with what we define as racial groups.

Why are you emotionally attached to the idea of biologically based race categorization?

52 posted on 06/04/2002 6:39:00 PM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
Do you know the story about an American newspaper reporter asking Baby Doc Duvalier (former Haitian dictator) what percentage of Haitian society was white? Baby Doc says 95%. The reporter is _sure_ he's been misunderstood. So he repeats the question: What percentage of Haitians are _white_? Again, he gets the answer: 95%. Finally he asks how Baby Doc defines a white person. Baby doc shoots back: How do you define a black person in America? The reporter replies: Someone with some black blood. Baby doc smiles and says. That's how we define a white person in Haiti -- a person with some white blood.
53 posted on 06/04/2002 6:40:58 PM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Irene Adler
I think the 15-point gap is pretty consistent over all the common IQ tests.

Are there any IQ tests that do not require some sort of basic cultural awareness on the test-taker's part?

54 posted on 06/04/2002 6:41:15 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: cornelis; All
We Dodged Extinction
‘Pruned’ Family Tree Leaves Little Genetic Variety

Just one group of chimpanzees can have more genetic diversity than all 6 billion humans on the planet. (Corel)

Special to
A worldwide research program has come up with astonishing evidence that humans have come so close to extinction in the past that it’s surprising we’re here at all.
    Pascal Gagneux, an evolutionary biologist at the University of California at San Diego, and other members of a research team studied genetic variability among humans and our closest living relatives, the great apes of Africa.
     Humanoids are believed to have split off from chimpanzees about 5 million to 6 million years ago. With the passage of all that time, humans should have grown at least as genetically diverse as our “cousins.” That turns out to be not true.
     “We actually found that one single group of 55 chimpanzees in west Africa has twice the genetic variability of all humans,” Gagneux says. “In other words, chimps who live in the same little group on the Ivory Coast are genetically more different from each other than you are from any human anywhere on the planet.”

Primate Tree
The branch lengths illustrate the number of genetic differences, not only between species, but among species as well. The pruned bush for humans shows how little genetic diversity exists. (Marco Doelling/

The Family Bush
“The family tree shows that the human branch has been pruned,” Gagneux says. “Our ancestors lost much of their original variability.”
     “That makes perfectly good sense,” says Bernard Wood, the Henry R. Luce Professor of Human Origins at George Washington University and an expert on human evolution.
     “The amount of genetic variation that has accumulated in humans is just nowhere near compatible with the age” of the species, Wood says. “That means you’ve got to come up with a hypothesis for an event that wiped out the vast majority of that variation.”
     The most plausible explanation, he adds, is that at least once in our past, something caused the human population to drop drastically. When or how often that may have happened is anybody’s guess. Possible culprits include disease, environmental disaster and conflict.

Almost Extinct
“The evidence would suggest that we came within a cigarette paper’s thickness of becoming extinct,” Wood says.
     Gagneux, who has spent the last 10 years studying chimpanzees in Africa, says the implications are profound.
     “If you have a big bag full of marbles of different colors, and you lose most of them, then you will probably end up with a small bag that won’t have all the colors that you had in the big bag,” he says.
     Similarly, if the size of the human population was severely reduced some time in the past, or several times, the “colors” that make up our genetic variability will also be reduced.
     If that is indeed what happened, then we should be more like each other, genetically speaking, than the chimps and gorillas of Africa. And that’s just what the research shows.
     “We all have this view in our minds that we [humans] started precariously as sort of an ape-like creature” and our numbers grew continuously, adds Wood. “We’re so used to the population increasing inexorably over the past few hundred years that we think it has always been like that.”
     But if it had, Gagneux notes, our genetic variability should be at least as great as that of apes.

A Stormy Past
Gagneux is the lead author of a report that appeared in the April 27 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The study, carried out with researchers in Germany, Switzerland and the United States, is the first to examine large numbers of all four ape species in Africa.
     “We can do that now because new technology allows us to non-invasively take some hair, or even some fruit that these apes chew, and then we get their DNA from a couple of cells that stick to a hair or a piece of fruit they chewed.”
     Then they compared the DNA variability of apes and chimps to that of 1,070 DNA sequences collected by other researchers from humans around the world. They also added the DNA from a bone of a Neanderthal in a German museum. The results, the researchers say, are very convincing.
     “We show that these taxa [or species] have very different amounts and patterns of genetic variation, with humans being the least variable,” they state.
     Yet humans have prevailed, even though low genetic variability leaves us more susceptible to disease.
     “Humans, with what little variation they have, seem to maximize their genetic diversity,” Gagneux says.
     “It’s ironic,” he notes, that after all these years the biggest threat to chimpanzees is human intrusion into their habitats. When he returned to Africa to study a group of chimps he had researched earlier, Gagneux found them gone.
     “They were dead,” he says, “and I mean the whole population had disappeared in five years.”
     Yet as our closest living relatives, chimps still have much to teach us about ourselves.

Lee Dye’s column appears Wednesdays on A former science writer for the Los Angeles Times, he now lives in Juneau, Alaska.

55 posted on 06/04/2002 6:42:13 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dumb_Ox
Not to mention some Italian populations.


If 10 to 20% of the US population happened to be from malarial regions of Bangladesh we would understandibly, but superficially, associate Sickle cell anemia with that ethnic or racial group.

56 posted on 06/04/2002 6:42:26 PM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
"It's communism, socialism, liberalism (in the current abuse of the word). It's tyranny." I don't think that has anything to do with this issue. It's an empirical question. Can you find a genetic marker for race? Ie, is there some gene that darkly complected people carry in common which is causally responsible for the traits that people associate with darkly complected people?
57 posted on 06/04/2002 6:42:53 PM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Extracting and karyotyping XYY is pretty straight forward. The X0 Turner's syndrome (female) is similarly determined. XXY is Klinefelter's syndrome. It is mechanical observation. The presence of the genotypic expression as observed via the karyotype is not a guarantee of phenotypic expression. A phenotypic expression confirmed by examination of the karyotype would be unsurprising.

A description of typical XYY supermales gleaned from another web page:

58 posted on 06/04/2002 6:45:37 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Billy_bob_bob
"To summarize: Bla bla bla Lysenkoism bla bla bla nonsense data bla bla bla egalitarianism bla bla bla equality bla bla bla ." If you're telling me that's what you understood from the article, I believe you.
59 posted on 06/04/2002 6:45:40 PM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin
OK, I haven't kept up with the literature like I should have. The IQ information is

The most dangerous creature on God's Green Earth is as follows: a man with a high IQ, high testosterone, a violently crackpot idea or two, an absolute certainty of his own righteousness, and an ability to turn on the "Reality Distortion Field" and inspire people to commit mayhem in his name.

60 posted on 06/04/2002 6:48:31 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 321-331 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson