03-04-2004 01:13									#121
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I hereby declare Cali and Japher to be defeated.

	03-04-2004 01:22									#122
	Put an end to popups!

Just tired of all you race-sensative yahoos trying to prove that your not racist, or at least prejudice..

This topic will come up again all to soon...

What about PA? If you think you beat us, then you must think you beat him...

---

quote: You are genarilizing about ALL BLACK PEOPLE based on elite athletes. This is a selection set taken from a miniscule fraction of ALL BLACK PEOPLE, an entirely non-random set, known to represent and extreme that is 3 or 4 standard deviations away from the norm. You have NO EVIDENCE that this represents ALL BLACK PEOPLE, yet, due to racism, people choose to believe that black people are better runners and jumpers.

I, nor Cali, never said ALL BLACK people. Generalizations and Characterizations are key to the fabric of policy, ever hear of a poll?

	03-04-2004 01:37									#123
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I support ALL BLACKS!

Attachment: logo_allblack.jpg
This has been downloaded 61 time(s).

	03-04-2004 06:51									#124
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Whaleboy But enough to classify as a race? You could look at it as subsets within the human race, for example, consistent genetic variations related to geographical distribution. Nonetheless, the genetic variation among humans is incredibly low compared to other mammalian species due to a bottleneck about 75'000 years ago that reduced this species to a few thousand individuals.

I know this, I've argued it over and over with several people on this board, m'kay?

The conclusion from it is twofold - one, race does not have any significant biological meaning beyond the rather superficial aspect of skin color, and two, genetics is irrelevant when discussing race. Rather, it is the social and cultural baggage that goes along with race that is important.

	03-04-2004 07:08									#125
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich race does not have any significant biological meaning beyond the rather superficial aspect of skin color

What makes you think so? I know of no research that conclusively backs up this assumption.

	03-04-2004 07:10									#126
	Get a bigger avatar today!

There's tons of it. The average genetic variation between individuals of the same race is LARGER than the genetic variation between the "average" individuals of different races.

	03-04-2004 07:41									#127
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich There's tons of it. The average genetic variation between individuals of the same race is LARGER than the genetic variation between the "average" individuals of different races.

It's not the amount of genes that are different, but which ones are different that matter. Humans are 90-odd percent genetically similar to a fly, yet would you consider a fly 90 percent the same as you? You obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Perhaps I should be the one doing the.

	03-04-2004 07:59									#128
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: It's not the amount of genes that are different, but which ones are different that matter. Humans are 90-odd percent genetically similar to a fly, yet would you consider a fly 90 percent the same as you? You obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about.

It was either this thread, or another one, where I argued the exact same thing to a bunch of people who are virtually ignorant of biology (I'm assuming you are, since you've never seen this "evidence").

% correlation of genotype is not equivalent to % correlation of phenotype. The point of the genetic variation thing is that you cannot use DNA testing to determine whether two individuals are of the same race.

	03-04-2004 08:08									#129
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich It was either this thread, or another one, where I argued the exact same thing to a bunch of people who are virtually ignorant of biology (I'm assuming you are, since you've never seen this "evidence"). % correlation of genotype is not equivalent to % correlation of phenotype. The point of the genetic variation thing is that you cannot use DNA testing to determine whether two individuals are of the same race.

Better tell the cops then because they've been using DNA to identify race for years.

	03-04-2004 08:18									#130
	Remove this text

Again, you don't understand what I mean.

Let me explain how you compare two samples of DNA:

First, there is a process called PCR, polymerase chain reaction, that makes fifty gazillion copies of the DNA molecules, enough to work with.

Then proteins called restriction enzymes are released into the two things of DNA. Restriction enzymes cleave DNA at certain base pair sequences. They release the same restriction enzymes into both things of DNA.

The DNA is then compared through gel electrophoresis - there's this gelatin that DNA molecules can move through. The two things of DNA start in different columns. Because DNA is negatively charged, a positive charge at the other end of the gel pulls it through. After a certain amount of time, the charge is stopped. The heavier segments of DNA move more slowly through the gel, and (because they've been pigmented) form dark bands closer to where the DNA started. The smaller segments form bands further towards where the charge was. Because the number and size of the DNA segments is determined by the sequence of DNA (more/fewer/different places for the restriction enzymes to cut it at) you can measure the correlation between the two sources of DNA. However, it is easily possible for their to be higher corellation between individuals of different races than between individuals of the same race, thus % corellation cannot be used to determine if two indivduals are of the same race.

	03-04-2004 08:27									#131
	Suffering from ads?

Dog breeds vary tremendously but genetically are almost indistinguishable. Do you consider a Bulldog to be the same as a Greyhound in all non-superficial aspects? There goes your genetic theory. NEXT!

	03-04-2004 13:10									#132
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Ah, yes. Because, like pedigree dog breeds, humans have been subjected to hundreds of generations of highly selective inbreeding designed to deliberately magnify specifically selected recessive traits, haven't they?

Next.

	03-04-2004 13:14									#133
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Caligastia Better tell the cops then because they've been using DNA to identify race for years.

Really?


http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askas...0/mole00404.htm

........appears to suggest otherwise.

	03-04-2004 13:18									#134
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

http://ny.essortment.com/humangenomepro_rcaf.htm

quote: While DNA can prove direct ancestry or linage, it can’t prove race or ethnicity. The reason for this is that human beings are so much alike, and have had genetic mixtures for so long even the most defining racial or ethnic traits are found in almost every human family. Skin color, facial structure, hair and eye color, all things that are use to define race or ethnicity lose definition when traced as part of a DNA analyst. There is no gene that can accurately define an American Indian for instance, because many of the so-called defining characteristics are genetically identical to many Asians and African Americans. Even so-called ethnic diseases don’t do much to identify individuals either. There are always exceptions that prove the rule doesn’t hold up. Sickle Cell Anemia for example, thought to be a disease of Black individuals is found as a genetic trait and disease throughout the Mediterranean

...seems to suggest otherwise too.

	03-04-2004 13:27									#135
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Rather than being used "for years", we're looking at a nascent science newly born from the Human Genome project, and though some cases have been brought using it, it needs to be considered that this science is very much in its infancy.

	03-04-2004 17:36									#136
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Caligastia Dog breeds vary tremendously but genetically are almost indistinguishable. Do you consider a Bulldog to be the same as a Greyhound in all non-superficial aspects? There goes your genetic theory. NEXT!

MORON!!!!!

We're talking about HUMANS, you idiot.

	03-04-2004 18:02									#137
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

If we're talking about humans, let's talk about human differences then and not genetic differences.

Genetics have no part in this discussion.

	03-04-2004 20:52									#138
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Genetics have no part in this discussion

If we talk about "race" then they do. Theres no other way. Ethnicity on the other hand is cultural, so we can use that instead.

Needless to say, such definitions are highly whimsical and useless imo, its just that bigots on their own small-minded agenda blow it out of proportion and make it a political issue. We don't see people divided on the basis of eye-colour these days do we? *Insert standard Goering warning from history statement here*.

	03-04-2004 21:57									#139
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Race isn't exactly a genetic issue.

	03-04-2004 22:14									#140
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Space05us Race should be ignored altogether.

said a fellow eskimo hater.

	05-04-2004 20:07									#141
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp Ah, yes. Because, like pedigree dog breeds, humans have been subjected to hundreds of generations of highly selective inbreeding designed to deliberately magnify specifically selected recessive traits, haven't they?

You're missing the point. Whether dogs have been selectively inbred or not makes no difference. The point I am making is that genetic similarity does not necesarily translate into actual similarity. Dogs illustrate this perfectly.

	05-04-2004 20:12									#142
	Got spare money?

We're talking about people.

	05-04-2004 20:13									#143
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Park Avenue If we're talking about humans, let's talk about human differences then and not genetic differences. Genetics have no part in this discussion.

The differences between people are based on upbringing and genes.

	05-04-2004 20:15									#144
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Whaleboy Needless to say, such definitions are highly whimsical and useless imo, its just that bigots on their own small-minded agenda blow it out of proportion and make it a political issue. We don't see people divided on the basis of eye-colour these days do we? *Insert standard Goering warning from history statement here*.

Again, skin color is a generally valid category because it corresponds directly to ethnicity, which is cultural and is DEFINATELY a valid category. Eye color is not.

	05-04-2004 20:21									#145
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Race isn't exactly a genetic issue.

By definition, it is. Ethnicity on the other hand is cultural, correlated somewhat with certain racial characteristics.

	05-04-2004 20:27									#146
	Remove this text

quote: gain, skin color is a generally valid category because it corresponds directly to ethnicity, which is cultural and is DEFINATELY a valid category. Eye color is not.

What I am trying to say is that the link between skin colour and ethnicity is whimsical. It is conceivable of a time where those definitiosn become as arbitrary as hair or eye colour. You'll note that the nazis considered eye colour a defining characteristic of the aryan race.

What I am trying to say is that if you are of African origin, then "racially" you are negroid, whereas ethnically you could be as British as rugby-related sodomy. The connection between ethnicity and genetic characteristics is wholly capricious.

EDIT: The link between nationality and ethnicity is still more tenuous, I just use that as an example. Perhaps "Western" is more accurate, though all of these classifications are inherently flawed due to their arbitrary nature, as they are best defined on an individual and not a functional/phenomenal basis.

	05-04-2004 20:29									#147
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

The statistics say differently.

	05-04-2004 20:30									#148
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Lies, damn lies...

	05-04-2004 20:37									#149
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp Really? http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askas...0/mole00404.htm ........appears to suggest otherwise.

This guy makes the valid point that looking solely at an individual's skin tone is unlikely to yield an accurate picture of their racial background.

The UK's own Forensic Science Service is able to identify race fairly accurately through a process it calls "photofitting", that is to say, to come up with the best estimate of the appearance of a criminal who has left behind a drop of blood or a piece of skin.

	05-04-2004 20:42									#150
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich We're talking about people.

The same principle that applies to dogs also applies to people.