Reminder that race has no scientific basis.
""There really is, for humankind there’s really no such thing as race. There’s different tribes but not different races. We’re all one species." -- Bill Nye
How does it feel knowing that you've based your entire worldview on an meaningless and arbitrary concept?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
jaymans.wordpress.com
youtube.com
nature.com
sciencedirect.com
sciencedirect.com
science.sciencemag.org
nature.com
pnas.org
genome.cshlp.org
nature.com
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
sciencedirect.com
unamusementpark.com
udel.edu
mediafire.com
cell.com
telegraph.co.uk
nature.com
sciencedirect.com
jbhe.com
statisticbrain.com
udel.edu
psycnet.apa.org
papers.ssrn.com
anthropology.si.edu
jenjdanna.com
psycnet.apa.org
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
twitter.com
Shill Lie the Shabbas Goy is a fucking moron if he thinks there aren't genetically distinct populations in the world who exhibit differences in behavior, character, physicality, mental capabilities, etc., just like every other group of animals on the planet. Fuck you too.
Please provide me with peer-reviewed scientific research that suggests that race exists.
I'll wait.
How do you define race? I'll wait.
>dog breeds are just a social construct!
Guitars have no scientific basis either. Yet you know one when you see one.
Scientifically speaking, if you take away the strings, it's no longer a stringed instrument. Take away the neck, and it's just a hollow chunk of wood. Yet any observer would immediately recognize it as a guitar. Yet the definition of guitar - 'a stringed instrument with a neck, body, and either sound hole or pickups tuned for mid-range frequencies' is not met.
Take the wheels off of a car, and it's still a car. Take the lightbulb out of a lamp, and it's still a lamp.
Humans recognize distinctions that science can't adequately categorize. Race is one of those things.
That said, you can tell a person's race by looking at their DNA. So, scientifically, race may be hard to cetegorize, but it's not unfounded. Divergent evolution is measurable, and has real-world effects.
If science can't find a basis for it, then why do doctors screen nigger babies for sickle cell, but not whites? How can they tell the white isn't at risk for sickle cell?
Bill Nye is not a scientist, by the way.
Welp, you can still look at ethnicity. Certain ethnic groups seem to have a lower IQ. Now for that bone marrow transplant with my fellow human sickle cell descent...
Firstly. Bill Nye is more qualified than anybody on Sup Forums.
>Humans recognize distinctions that science can't adequately categorize. Race is one of those things.
So basically MUH FEELINGS.
>Bill the BS in mechanical engineering Guy
>geneticist
wew lad
There are genetically distinct populations, but each of the groups we think of as 'races' in the usual sense contains many such. For example, we usually think of black Africans as constituting a 'race', but the black population in Africa includes groups that are genetically as different from each other as they are from any European people.
>Welp, you can still look at ethnicity. Certain ethnic groups seem to have a lower IQ.
IQ is not static. It changes over time. Nurture has a lot to do with it.
>Reminder that race has no scientific basis.
en.wikipedia.org
Hilarious how liberals claim to be love facts and logic so much and be so enlightened by their own intelligence, yet they're willing to deny basic science if it conflicts with their feelings.
>(((Bill Nye)))
NOT AN ARGUMENT.
Here's a short video that goes a little deeper into Bill Nye's point.
Look, just because Bill Nye has decided to move in on Neil Degrasse Tyson's "shallow but comforting hippie speak" gig, doesn't mean he knows what he's talking about. The fact is there are physical and genetic differences between race. And it's a lot more complicated than white/black/brown/yellow. There are races, racial groups, sub-races, etc. They can actually detect racial differences through genetic testing. They wouldn't be able to do so if there were no genetic differences to detect.
nature.com
sciencedirect.com
sciencedirect.com
science.sciencemag.org
nature.com
pnas.org
genome.cshlp.org
nature.com
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
no click zone
>can't adequately categorise
meaning that science at this stage isn't good enough, like astronomy wasn't good enough before the telescope.
Bill Nye is just reiterating basic science. Literally nothing he said is controversial. It is the widely accepted position amongst the scientific community that race is completely arbitrary. If you want to believe that there is a massive Jewish conspiracy among all the biologists of the world then go ahead. But know that you are stupid.
You're absolutely right. And generally speaking Africans as a whole are categorically distinct from the rest of humanity.
>wordpress
into the bin it goes.
Post some peer-reviewed articles pls. You're the one making the positive claim that race has a basis in reality. So go ahead and prove it.
The beauty of the scientific method is that it works through constant trial, again and again, neverending.
There are hardly any studies on race anymore, nobody will fund them.
Guess why.
>The fact is there are physical and genetic differences between race
There are physical and genetic differences between people of the same race.
This means fuck all.
>There are genetically distinct populations
Scientifically false. There are no distinct and discrete human populations. Almost 90% of SNVs are shared in all humans. Less than 1% of alleles are unique to any one continent.
So the logic conclusion would be to suspend judgement until the science comes out, right?
>muh feelings
No. You can tell EASILY when someone's even half black. You can easily recognize what race a person is until you get into the weird mocha blends of southeast asia, parts of india, or various islands.
Race is real. It's not even really up for debate. Anyone who suggests otherwise is not being realistic.
By Africans do you mean people who live in Africa, and whose ancestors also lived in Africa? At least up to a certain point? You do realize that category would also include, among other things, the Arab Egyptians (who are also mixed with the Copts), right?
If "race" is a social construct, then "subspecies" is a social construct, since these two terms (along with "breed") mean exactly the same thing on a biological level. And yet, each year there are thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers which have as their topic some aspect of this or that subspecies which is under consideration. Note that no one ever asks these many thousands of biological scientists why they're writing research papers about "social constructs". The truth is that, while our *definition* of "race" is to some degree a social construct, the concept which the definition is attempting to describe is not. Race is a vital biological category.
Basically any argument that claims race has some real meaningful genetic definition relies on the conspiracy theory that somehow all the world's geneticists and people who research human evolution are all lying.
>Nurture has a lot to do with it.
And nature has even more so. IQ is highly heritable at a 0.8 correlation. That is a higher guarantee than an HIV transmission through a sexual encounter.
>It is the widely accepted position amongst the (((scientific community))) that race is completely arbitrary.
No, it's not. By that logic, there are no differences between white and black people that are not completely arbitrary. And that's just referring to the large racial groupings that cover a wide range of actual races. You could argue that at some level of detail the distinctions are arbitrary. But now we're quibbling over specifics after completely rejecting Bill's argument.
>IQ is highly heritable at a 0.8 correlation.
Source?
Subspecies is a genetic definition. It can't be justified in humans when we have such low genetic diversity and are very related to each other. Humans have 1/10th the genetic diversity of bonobos or chimps.
Bill Nye is a mechanical engineer
His opinions on human biology and race have just as much weight as mine. Fuck off with this bullshit.
Race and Intelligence: the Facts
unamusementpark.com
THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY
udel.edu
100 Facts about Whites and Blacks
mediafire.com
Race can be determined via brain scans.
cell.com
Human intelligence up to 75% inheritible
telegraph.co.uk
Human intelligence is highly heritable.
nature.com
Scientific consensus is that IQ tests are not racially biased.
sciencedirect.com
Very poor Whites are comparably intelligent to very wealthy blacks.
jbhe.com
Some statistics about welfare in the USA:
statisticbrain.com
Privately, intelligence experts hold more hereditarian views than they express in public.
udel.edu
Black children raised in White households have similar IQs to black children in black households.
psycnet.apa.org
92% of biracial children with black fathers out of wedlock, 82% on welfare.
papers.ssrn.com
There seems to be confusion and disagreement here about what 'race' even means. Yes, there are genetically distinct populations, no, larger groupings are not anything but arbitrary. For the first half or so of the twentieth century Italians were not regarded as white in America, but hardly anyone today would say they aren't.
Ah yes. Every single person in the scientific community is involved in a massive Jewish cover up!
Very logic.
>Firstly. Bill Nye is more qualified than anybody on Sup Forums.
This is how I know your bait
Then read the citations in the article you dip.
Sub-Saharans. Or niggers for your average /pol browser.
Then why don't you retards trust all the published data from the world's top geneticists from the past 40 years and believe in garbage pseudoscience from psychology professors like Rushton and Jensen?
We currently have suggestions based on studies, such as IQ differences between the races.
The next step is to pursue the connections, but nobody wants to fund that for fear of being called "racist, xenophobic nazi scum" and losing your business, in the scientists case their career.
...
just because science cant proove it, it doesnt mean that it's non existent
ofc that applies the other way around
>My Bill Nye quote can only be debunked with peer-reviewed scientific research!
>So you'll have to accept that common sense is wrong!
Sophistry never changes.
It does not matter. He said nothing controversial.
You need to have a Ph.D in Physics to understand that the Theory of Gravity is true.
Race being a made-up arbitrary concept is a scientific fact.
...
>Human intelligence is highly heritable.
That's not the debate. This is a non sequitur.
You'd have to prove that different races have different heritability for intelligence. There is zero evidence that the genetics of intelligence are drastically different between races and tons of evidence that we overall very similar genetically.
what's wrong with being a different species?
It would make you more unique.
Most of these sources are shaky as fuck.
Step it up nigga.
>le science meme
>>>reddit.com
Yet forensic scientists can determine a person's race/ancestry based on their skull shape alone.
anthropology.si.edu
jenjdanna.com
If there was literally no biological/scientific basis for race this wouldn't be possible.
>There is zero evidence that the genetics of intelligence are drastically different between races
Oh boy.
Oh holy shit.
Here we go.
Stop acting like this guy is arguing in good faith. Like most of his kind (see his flag) he is just shitposting. He's making an absurd statement and demands an undeclared level of proof before being proven wrong. But the truth is, no matter how much proof you give him it will never be enough. Or he'll just say something about their being genetic differences between individuals and that means that all racial genetic features are just a total coincidence. Or some other bullshit. He is not here to argue. He is here to shit all over the board with absurd arguments and sophistic deflection.
Fake picture. That picture or data is not in the cited article.
Also
>making a picture of a PCA without the data of what the PCA is.
Race is a legitimate thing. I've proven this time and time again on here that there has to be screenshots of my explanations by now.
I don't even want to talk about it this time, just saging this moronic shitposting thread.
>Archaeologist/Anthropologist
There's literally not a single argument in this video. At one point, the narrator even admits that for medical reasons, race is used, but insists that it's the result of the environment of your ancestry. AKA race.
I'm skimming through these, but none of them refute the fact that different human populations cluster around different genes.
One paper notably says
>Races are highly genetically differentiated populations with sharp geographical boundaries.
Who said anything about "sharp" geographical boundaries? Of course race is a spectrum like color. It doesn't mean it's not different colors don't exist.
psycnet.apa.org
You'll have to do the legwork and find a copy yourself but this one study.
...
Then prove the opposite, which is that all humans are the same race.
You post a Bill Nye quote as though it's gospel, then you look at a laundry list of sources against you and say "M-Most of those are dumb..."
I can't even begin to imagine how high of an opinion you have of yourself.
>not seeing the difference between a civilized person and a monkey
Abo's please leave.
False, the average height difference among males is greater than the average height difference between males and females ergo there is no scientific basis for gender.
This is antiscience liberal logic. Rather than looking like le-smart educated progressive you're actually making yourself look foolish.
you're wrong troll, all peoples are equal except white people who are devils and subhuman scum. Give australia back to the aboriginal people.
>humans have a low genetic diversity
Have you not seen the wide range of hominids on the planet?
So you're telling me the entire global community of experts in genetics is just lying?
youre right. the different "races" are actually different species and leftists like bill (not a scientist) nye are covering it up.
>Most of these sources are shaky as fuck.
Proceeds to not post any sources disproving arguments.
>has no scientific basis
>anthropologists can't tell what race, sex and age you are by your skeletal remains
lel
Science? It's relative, man.
Have you published your findings in a peer-reviewed scientific journal? If you've proved that race does exist then the scientific community will be more than happy to look at that evidence that you've presented. But knowing Sup Forums, you're probably just another broscientist.
>literally fucking nature journal
>where pretty much all scientific papers are published
>shaky
Either middle school kid or failure of a high school kid that never went to college. Or troll.
Sage
>Science is a big conspiracy!
>but you guys are the science deniers for not believing what I say on Sup Forums
Shit nigger what a terrible gradient.
Nobel prize for sure. If any of these retards actually had anything they could easily win a nobel prize for turning the past 40 years of research in human evolution on it's head.
You guys don't want an easy million dollars, or whatever the award is these days?
>Subspecies is a genetic definition.
And what is that definition, please?
>genetics = colors of the rainbow
So.. you basically have no argument right?
Have you ever seen the raw data on any of this "research"?
>splitting hairs and being intentionally obtuse despite obvious proof there are shit people and then not shit people and they typically adhere to various groups outside of what could be considered statistically identical
>flag
Are you guys taking over again for Canada? Is this a subtle coup?
Original creator needs to calibrate his monitor
>ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Did you even read the fucking study?
>It is now well documented that substantial disparities exist in the quality and quantity of medical care received by minority Americans, especially those of African, Asian and Hispanic heritage. In addition, the special needs and responses to pharmaceutical treatment of these groups have been undervalued or ignored. This article reviews the genetic factors that underlie varying responses to medicines observed among different ethnic and racial groups. Pharmacogenetic research in the past few decades has uncovered significant differences among racial and ethnic groups in the metabolism, clinical effectiveness, and side-effect profiles of many clinically important drugs. These differences must be taken into account in the design of cost management policies such as formulary implementation, therapeutic substitution and step-care protocols. These programs should be broad and flexible enough to enable rational choices and individualized treatment for all patients, regardless of race or ethnic origin.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING.
I see how you completely ignored my peer reviewed evidence so il keep posting it again and again
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
>It is now well documented that substantial disparities exist in the quality and quantity of medical care received by minority Americans, especially those of African, Asian and Hispanic heritage. In addition, the special needs and responses to pharmaceutical treatment of these groups have been undervalued or ignored. This article reviews the genetic factors that underlie varying responses to medicines observed among different ethnic and racial groups. Pharmacogenetic research in the past few decades has uncovered significant differences among racial and ethnic groups in the metabolism, clinical effectiveness, and side-effect profiles of many clinically important drugs. These differences must be taken into account in the design of cost management policies such as formulary implementation, therapeutic substitution and step-care protocols. These programs should be broad and flexible enough to enable rational choices and individualized treatment for all patients, regardless of race or ethnic origin.
...
>still believing in race
>not realizing everyone is literally jews vs goyims
>jews successfully influencing whtie cucks once again
It's called an analogy you insufferable cunt. Though I think you're probably smart enough to know that, but butthurt enough about it BTFOing your moronic argument to plead ignorance.
Maybe I have. Maybe I work in bioinformatics.
If you don't trust it, why not get your own data? Get DNA samples from thousands of people and do the test yourself. That's how science works.
Just don't be surprised when you don't get the answers you want and they're the same as what we've been seeing for 40 years.
Go to the article and then look for the "Supporting Online Material" section. Then look for the "Download supplement" section.
Now tell me about how we don't have PCA data.
>Source is literally Dong Dong and Ya-Ping
Toppest keks
>IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE TOPIC THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING.
The study literally confirms that different ethnicities react differently to different medications because they are BIOLOGICALLY DIFFERENT.
How retarded are you?
It's an analogy nigger. The point is that just because you cannot tell exactly where Caucasian becomes East Asian (see the people of central asia for example) does not mean that these different groups do not exist.
It is a fact that you can genetically trace people's ancestries to specific regions. This means that not all populations are genetically the same.
>This article reviews the genetic factors that underlie varying responses to medicines observed among different ethnic and racial groups.
>no scientific basis
Come on m8 you can't be this dumb.
Then I guess I'm a tribist now.
The analogy doesn't work. Genetics is not that simple. You were just brainwashing by gibberish that's easy to explain to idiots.
Black Lives Matter completely BTFO. Nice work, user.
>Boas is the accepted father of the modern egalitarian school of anthropology. He was a Jewish immigrant from Germany with little formal training in the anthropological field, having done his doctoral thesis on the color of water. Boas introduced what he called "cultural anthropology" to the discipline. Until his arrival, anthropology fell in the realm of physical science. Boas effectively divided anthropology into the separate disciplines of cultural and physical anthropology.
>Early physical anthropologists were truly race scientists because they studied man and his evolutionary development through the study of the measurable physical characteristics of the human races, past and present. Any good physical anthropologist could pick up a human skull and, based on its characteristics, quickly identify the race of the specimen. Of course, this physiological knowledge was vital in sorting out the unearthed remnants of early man and piecing together man's prehistory and evolutionary development. Cultural anthropology dealt more with the different contemporary cultures of mankind and culturally related questions of antiquity and prehistory, making it a far less precise science, and one open to wide interpretation.
>Surprisingly, before he became such a prominent anthropologist, Boas expressed his acceptance of racial differences in mental characteristics. In The Mind of Primitive Man, he wrote:
>Differences of Structure must be accompanied by differences of function, physiological as well as psychological; and, as we found clear evidence of differences in structure between races, so we must anticipate that the differences in mental characteristics will be found.
Only one of your source was nature. Rest were shaky at best. Sorry man.
Also, here is the abstract from the Nature article:
>General intelligence is an important human quantitative trait that accounts for much of the variation in diverse cognitive abilities. Individual differences in intelligence are strongly associated with many important life outcomes, including educational and occupational attainments, income, health and lifespan. Data from twin and family studies are consistent with a high heritability of intelligence, but this inference has been controversial. We conducted a genome-wide analysis of 3511 unrelated adults with data on 549692 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and detailed phenotypes on cognitive traits. We estimate that 40% of the variation in crystallized-type intelligence and 51% of the variation in fluid-type intelligence between individuals is accounted for by linkage disequilibrium between genotyped common SNP markers and unknown causal variants. These estimates provide lower bounds for the narrow-sense heritability of the traits. We partitioned genetic variation on individual chromosomes and found that, on average, longer chromosomes explain more variation. Finally, using just SNP data we predicted ~1% of the variance of crystallized and fluid cognitive phenotypes in an independent sample (P=0.009 and 0.028, respectively). Our results unequivocally confirm that a substantial proportion of individual differences in human intelligence is due to genetic variation, and are consistent with many genes of small effects underlying the additive genetic influences on intelligence.
Please try harder next time.