Originally posted by UsernameCory
I see race linked with sex chromosome. I will fail to produce off spring that have the y chromosome of a white or black man - even if I can have an off spring with a white or black woman. And I suppose without my own y chromosome, my people would have failed to first leave Asian and arrive in the new world.

Yes, I have a multi-racial background, but as an off spring, I had only one type of sex chromosome that differs from other people.

Y-chromosomes don't come in various colours.
There is just as much variation in sex chromosomes between Asians as there is between Asians and "the rest".

Originally posted by UsernameCory
I think you guys use out dated references when referring to scientist talking about the non existences of race. It has come back, though the discovery of pharmaceutical drugs targeting race, in a scientific way that races do matter in science. Though using this fact to justify negative racism, I would have to object that science has suggested that route by acknowledging race.
Races exist; get over it.

Some drugs work differently for different ethnic groups. Ethnic groups are not races.

Originally posted by kimish
The example you gave of the Africans from the different areas is correct, somewhat. But the fact is is that, yes the do have their differences but, they all . . . have on average the same bone density, have on average the same cranial capacity etc.

very poor logic, kimish.

An average is a midline figure.
You cannot say anything about the variation of a trait within a population based merely on the average of that trait for the population.

Originally posted by Kailassa
Ethnic groups are not races.

I think this is the important difference that people often miss in these kinds of discussions.

As far as I see it, the only genetic differences between groups of humans would occur in isolated ethnic groups, and even then, any differences would be largely negligible due to the timeframe, and wouldn't necessarily apply to all members of that group.

I find it strange that people talk about differences between 'whites' and 'blacks', as races, even so there are so many differences within these 'races'.

For example, people frequently just class Barack Obama as 'black', even so his people ( on his father's side ) are Luo from East Africa, who are completely different to most of the black Americans who are descended from people in West Africa !

Originally posted by kimish
... So than a different race of a different species??

Like to translate that into English?

Remember, there is evidence that homo sapiens bred with Neanderthals and we're not sure if their offspring were viable or not.

We know they were viable because 2/3rds of humans alive today are descended from the offspring of those unions.

In lieu of that, two different species reproducing and having viable offspring (homo sapiens + Neanderthal which would also go against some peoples arguments that different species breeding don't produce viable offspring which is not the case I have stated above)

This is why scientists are beginning to class Neanderthals as a subset of homo-sapiens, instead of classing them as a separate species.

it doesn't sound too far fetched that the 3 main races have evolved from different species many many years ago.

If you're talking about Bakshi's ideas, he was postulating that many different races evolved separately on the various landmasses, from different species of the the earliest mammals, and just happened to end up all looking humanoid and being interfertile.

Genetically, what he is suggesting is completely impossible.
Breeding wise, it's also impossible.

The reason he gives for his ideas is the supposed impossibility of primitive man crossing oceans. However it's already been proven that early man did have craft making such journeys, and that's been tested by making such journeys in the traditional primitive craft.


However if your talking about a theory some scientists hold that there were several waves of humans coming out of Africa and each wave after the first interbred to some extent with the natives they encountered in the various regions they went to, that's not impossible.

Originally posted by Kailassa



However if your talking about a theory some scientists hold that there were several waves of humans coming out of Africa and each wave after the first interbred to some extent with the natives they encountered in the various regions they went to, that's not impossible.

edit on 15/12/10 by Kailassa because: force of habit.

You bring up some good points . What if the races of humans today are not races but a subspecies of an obsolete race? Just a thought. Any who, I heard an interesting theory, I don't remember where, but it stated that Negroids mature more quickly and have higher levels of sex hormones because it was important for them to produce as many children as possible to help harvest food and such, which in tropical regions is available year round. More children = more food harvested. Where in the north with Caucasoids, food was only available at certain times of the year because of winter so having alot of children would have been detrimental because food wasn't as readily available. More children = less food and more mouths to feed. So the Caucasoids had to expend energy on harvesting and preserving food for the winter months as opposed to reproducing and raising many children. It all sounds feasible to me.