The Idea of the Minimalist Biological Phenomenon of Race
@TheDisproof @HobbesianM @Cedarwooded @HbdNrx @surreal_society @EuropeanDefense @Caliban_18 @EvolutionistXX @Bananaaquamelon @WhyTea7pic.twitter.com/2EdBoAIsH8
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Subspecies is fine with me, but I think race is fine too
'Race really doesn't exist. We are different SUBSPECIES of humans. Please stop using that silly term "race." Euros have up to 6% Neanderthal DNA. East Asians have up to 5% Denisovan. Afros have ZERO.' You don't know what you're talking about
I don't know the exact percentages, but I think the general idea of more Neanderthal in non-africans and Denisovan in Asians is correct
Of course it is. That's not evidence for the other guy's assertions.
His interpretation of their meaning
They do. It doesn't mean what this guy thinks it means though. https://www.edge.org/conversation/christopher_stringer-rethinking-out-of-africa …
Races have been described as geographically circumscribed, genetically differentiated populations and as “distinct evolutionary lineages” within a species (Shaffer and McKnight 1996; Templeton 2002). Modern humans consist of only: Homo sapiens sapiens
Human populations can be distinguished by genotype and phenotype, and geographically circumscribed is a relative term. Subspecies of cheetahs and zebras are capable, at least in theory, of meeting each other in the wild. With tiger subspecies, interbreeding in the wild occurs.
Sorry but phenotype is a poor method, only genotype can be empirically and objectively used as it is a 1 or 0 result unlike phenotype which is affected by environment and multiple factors, plus it is a range. .
As we've seen with statistical classification of race from human faces, phenotypic classification is impressively reliable with the right tools. And genotype is a range, not a binary: it's a magnitude of genetic difference between two populations. Where to draw line ∴ debatable.
You're extremely keen to dispute the idea of subspecies in the particular case of human beings (& not in other animal species), yet you ignore the fact that species itself is debatable as an ontological category. Despite its usefulness, many taxonomists consider it to be unreal.
Relevant. Source: https://books.google.com/books?id=wrgmSr471AcC&pg=PA389&lpg=PA389&dq=%22Sewall+Wright,+who+can+hardly+be+taken+for+a+dilettante+in+questions+of+population+genetics,+has+stated+emphatically+that+if+differences+of+this+magnitude+were+observed+in+any+other+species,+the+groups+they+distinguish+would+be+called+subspecies.&source=bl&ots=DaVK8S2sNc&sig=OvYyF4BhG2vQ9v85ivxgFCUvmdw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=t_xWVZ_NOoGvsQW8noDABg&ved=0CAsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Sewall%20Wright%2C%20who%20can%20hardly%20be%20taken%20for%20a%20dilettante%20in%20questions%20of%20population%20genetics%2C%20has%20stated%20emphatically%20that%20if%20differences%20of%20this%20magnitude%20were%20observed%20in%20any%20other%20species%2C%20the%20groups%20they%20distinguish%20would%20be%20called%20subspecies.&f=false …pic.twitter.com/fPF7RxxLyH
I had no idea about this book. This is banging
Been aware of it for years. I quoted it in this 2 year old article, 2 years old on the 14th of this month. Damn I'm old.https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/02/14/science-magazine-taking-race-out-of-human-genetics/ …
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.