Quoting Post Archived Topic: It will not be bumped to the top of the forum. Topic Do you think Race is a Social concept, or a biological concept? Membername   Not a member? Sign Up Free (takes 20 seconds) Password   Forgotten your password? Post Font: Verdana Arial Black Georgia Comic Sans Impact   Size: Tiny Normal Big Huge   Color: Default Dark Red Red Orange Brown Green Olive Cyan Blue Dark Blue Indigo Black [ Check Spelling ] [ Post Preview ] [ LiveTags ] Quote: from [m]kidd rune[/m] at 3:26 pm on Sep. 26, 2008[quote][quote] I read that whole thing and saw absolutely no proof...just the same rehashed race and biology study. The only valid truth on there is the ability to find someone's race based off physical appearance...but I've already asked the question...is that all we're basing race off of? Blacks on the negative extreme spectrum/ white in between (how convenient)/ and asians on a positive extreme spectrum. Blacks (Physically Superior, work horses) Whites (Adequate and Moderate in all areas) Asians (Physically inferior, braniacs) Can you link me to actual proof of someone finding out a person's race from collecting semen and/or blood? [/quote] Masatoshi Nei and Arun K. Roychoudhury "Evolutionary Relationships of Human Populations on a Global Scale" Some abstracts: http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/10/5/927 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8412653 http://lib.bioinfo.pl/pmid:8412653 [img]http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/7968/geneticdistances1vy4.jpg[/img] The following table of percentages of genetic differences between human populations presents the estimates for 19 populations from the above table in an easier to read and understand form. The human-chimpanzee genetic difference, giving the greatest degree of difference from the commonly accepted range using the same methodology, is added for context and comparison. [img]http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/1263/geneticrelationship1hv0.jpg[/img] If one were to spatially visualize the first column of the above scale, with a German standing at a distance of 20 feet from an Englishman, a Finn would stand at a distance of 50 feet, an Italian at 70 feet, a northern Indian at 200 feet, a Japanese at 610 feet, a North American Amerindian at 760 feet, a Nigerian at 1,330 feet, and a Chimpanzee at 16,000 feet. The greatest percentage of genetic difference is .176% between Nigerians and Australian Aborigines. This is 11% of the genetic difference of 1.6% between humans and chimpanzees, different biological Families whose ancestral lines are believed to have separated 5-7 million years ago. The .133% genetic difference between the English and Nigerian populations is 8.3% as large as the genetic difference between humans and chimpanzees. The .061% genetic difference between the English and Japanese or Korean populations is 3.8% as large as the genetic difference between humans and chimpanzees. Seen in this context, these are very significant genetic differences. It is also worth noting that for both the English and the Japanese, representing Europeans and Northeast Asians, the greatest percentage of genetic difference is with the Nigerians, and that the degree of this difference, .133% for the English and .149% for the Japanese, is very similar. By comparison, the English and Japanese degree of difference from the Australian Aborigine population, .122% for the English and .062% for the Japanese, is very different, with the English-Australoid difference twice as great as the Japanese-Australoid difference.[/quote] FAQ Keyword Search: Post Options Favorites Manager Notify me of new replies to this topic by email Notify me of new replies to this topic by private message Original Post Headst0ck Posted at 4:12 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 When you think in terms of race...do you truly believe there is a black gene, a white gene, and an asian gene that all makes us different as far as our physical, mental, and personality capabilities go? Do you truly believe race is a fact of biology? Could race just be a concept created by people to hinder any sort of unification of all humans?

Replies kidd rune Posted at 4:10 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 How can you tell what is a "white look" if  there is "no asian look"? Because White has a genetic basis - Asian is just anyone from Asia. People who settled in Far East Asia/ Europe became more developed in the history than the ones in Africa. What about the Amerinds? hersheyparker Posted at 1:18 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Two words: Social barriers. MaryLin Posted at 1:02 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from kidd rune at 5:33 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 I think some were just luckier to settle down on better soil and environment etc. What, in your opinion, is better soil/environment? People who settled in Far East Asia/ Europe became more developed in the history than the ones in Africa. jakelong Posted at 10:24 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from kidd rune at 7:02 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from jakelong at 6:44 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from kidd rune at 11:40 am on Oct. 18, 2008 There is no European or Asian look - that's unanswerable. There is no white or asian look then... There is a White look, but no Asian look (as I JUST SAID). How can you tell what is a "white look" if  there is "no asian look"?   kidd rune Posted at 7:02 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from jakelong at 6:44 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from kidd rune at 11:40 am on Oct. 18, 2008 There is no European or Asian look - that's unanswerable. There is no white or asian look then... There is a White look, but no Asian look (as I JUST SAID). But, being White doesn't mean you can ONLY have a certain look, but there are traits only found in people of White ancestry. jakelong Posted at 6:44 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from kidd rune at 11:40 am on Oct. 18, 2008 There is no European or Asian look - that's unanswerable. There is no white or asian look then... kidd rune Posted at 7:33 am on Oct. 19, 2008 I think some were just luckier to settle down on better soil and environment etc. What, in your opinion, is better soil/environment? BleedingSteelWings Posted at 6:28 am on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from MaryLin at 9:26 am on Oct. 19, 2008 It's originally supposed to be something biological but since there were formed "more advanced" races, the others got left behind. I think some were just luckier to settle down on better soil and environment etc. So I believe race is a social concept considering how the things are going on the 21st century. Of course there is no absolute truth since USA is powerful and there are all kinds of races there, including blacks and people from poor Asian countries, so in that case it is just biological. But considering the whole world, it is a social thing. Yeah, the environment definitely has a factor. it's actually kind of speciation if you look at it. Don't get me wrong, i think we're all human, we all have the same genetic baseline, but there are chromosomes that contain the race information. To be honest though, it's only subtle differences aside from color, which is only a prominence or absence of pigment in the cells. A slight different shape of skull you'll notice, as well as some other features. MaryLin Posted at 4:56 am on Oct. 19, 2008 It's originally supposed to be something biological but since there were formed "more advanced" races, the others got left behind. I think some were just luckier to settle down on better soil and environment etc. So I believe race is a social concept considering how the things are going on the 21st century. Of course there is no absolute truth since USA is powerful and there are all kinds of races there, including blacks and people from poor Asian countries, so in that case it is just biological. But considering the whole world, it is a social thing. El Burrito Posted at 4:44 am on Oct. 19, 2008 obviously there is something different in Caucasian / African / Asian etc, because we do look different. So there is the genetics. But the ideas we have with race are all out of colonialism. Basically, (for example), the British wanted cheap (free) labour, went into West Africa, took Africans as slaves, and needed some way to justify it. So they said, were white, you're black. Were 'civilised', you're not. That means we're more advanced than you. That means you are inferior to us, and the lowest common denominator there was being African in appearance. Thats a VERY rough, undetailed version of where our social idea of race came from. kidd rune Posted at 11:40 am on Oct. 18, 2008 Quote: from jakelong at 9:14 pm on Oct. 17, 2008 And the ORIGINAL point was about Europeans NOT whites.   Are the people I posted Eruopean looking or Asian looking? There is no European or Asian look - that's unanswerable. jakelong Posted at 9:14 pm on Oct. 17, 2008 And the ORIGINAL point was about Europeans NOT whites. Are the people I posted Eruopean looking or Asian looking? kidd rune Posted at 5:03 pm on Oct. 16, 2008 I said WHITES, not Europeans. I ask you to find me a White with an Epicanthic fold. jakelong Posted at 10:50 pm on Oct. 15, 2008 Because ALL asians have slanted eyes? Look at those people. Which ones are european looking and which are not? Does she have slanted eyes? european or asian? european or asian? eruopean or asian? european or asian? european or asian? You note that ALL the asians above have an Epicanthic fold... And we were not speaking of "whites" we were speakin of Europeans. I hve not made the DNA test on those ppl so I can't tell you if they are "aryans" or not but some of them ARE indo-iranians... kidd rune Posted at 5:11 pm on Oct. 15, 2008 Quote: from jakelong at 4:48 pm on Oct. 15, 2008 Still not getting the point.   If you look at the EXTREMES of what people think of as European and Asian yes you can. If you trying to find the divisions by looking at the wide variety of what europeans and asian CAN look like no. I see Whites with Epicanthic folds all the time... The thing is, there is 40,000 years of evolution dividing Caucasians from Mongoloids (or so your sites claim). Most recent 15 of 113 previous replies displayed.