It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


It's time to deny the greatest ignorance of all--we are more alike than unalike

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 04:43 PM
i strongly believe in the difference of races, both in mentality, intellect and physique.
Does an Asian and a negroid look the same? No! Can you easily distinguish between them (provided they are not racially mixed)? Yes! There is plenty of proof regarding the differences of races.
Check IQ and nations, physique of races and differences in mentality.

posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 02:53 AM
reply to post by NarcolepticBuddha

Standing ovation, OP!! Brilliant! S&F, definitely!

If you don't get an applause (or two) from the mods for this thread, then shame on them! You put a lot of time into this thread. Great job! Quite interesting!

edit on 12/22/2012 by sled735 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 22 2012 @ 09:55 AM

Originally posted by Avgudar
i strongly believe in the difference of races,

You are welcome to believe in it, but the evidence just isn't pointing that way. The 5 OPs I have written are incredibly truncated, and the sources lacking in some places, I admit. But there is scarce biological evidence to suggest that there are human races, or that various ethnic groups show significant genetic differences to be classified as races. The only race is the HUMAN race. I have 4 entire posts filled with evidence and valid arguments to demonstrate this.

both in mentality, intellect

Mentality and attitudes are learned, not inherited. Admittedly, there are some psychological dispositions which seem to be present from the time of birth (such as A and B personality types.) However, all aspects of culture are acquired through learning as one ages. One's views as a child may change during the time they are a teenager, adult, elderly, etc. Mentality and attitudes change because they are learned and not inherited.

Intellect is likewise something that is acquired through enculturation. One is not born intelligent. They may be born with predispositions that allow them to become intelligent, but the genetics are quite complex and yield only slight differences from person to person in the grand scheme of things. A person becomes intelligent because they are encouraged and nurtured to become so. And even then, that person has to be curious, study, do their homework etc. Having the resources and access to good health care and good schools makes a HUGE difference as well.

and physique.

Oh yes, there are a lot of differences in one's physique. But you must consider that there are just as many differences within any so-called race as between them! There are short and tall, fat and skinny, muscular and lean, fast and slow, numerous variations in skin color, eye color, hair color, and the supposed shapes and sizes of these physical traits. We tend to focus on skin color because it is the most obvious thing to look at and notice. Genetics shows us that skin color is only skin deep and that it is governed by more than one complex genes which only comprise a fraction of the human genome. Using but a few phenotypical traits such as skin color and body build (say, muscular legs) just doesn't work because of the rest of the genome we are dismissing (especially the genotypes we cannot see without DNA analysis.)

When looking at skin color, we are most definitely judging a book by its cover:

Human ethnic groups are a lot of like the above photo. They may look different, be different sizes, and even contain subtle differences in the text. However, they are very nearly the same thing except for the cover and some subtle differences inside; when considering a person's entire genome vs. the phenotypes we can see with the naked eye.

Does an Asian and a negroid look the same? No! Can you easily distinguish between them (provided they are not racially mixed)? Yes!

The major flaw of this argument is that it is quite subjective. Everybody will see what they want to see and categorize as they choose. Asian means what? Chinese? Japanese? Sri Lankan? What about the seemingly light-skinned caucasoids of Northern India? These groups all reside on the Asian continent and have numerous differences between them.

The term "negroid" is equally unsuitable for the same reason. The ethnic groups of the African continent vary in things like skin color, height, physical builds. What about the so-called negroid groups that are not found in Africa?--such as the groups of Papua New Guinea

Now, your question is, do Asian's and negroids look the same? No, and usually any 2 random ethnic groups of the same continent will not look the same either. Again, Chinese do not look like Sri Lankans. Does that make them different races?

We can even find people who look significantly different but appear to have the same skin color. This is called biological diversity and it is present within any so-called race. You bring into question the idea of mixed races. And I am here to tell you there is no such thing as a "pure" ethnic group. Groups have always been interbreeding with other groups. So when you speak of negroid race, the mongoloid race, the caucasoid race are actually already speaking of an ethnic group that has been sufficiently mixed around.

There is plenty of proof regarding the differences of races.
Check IQ and nations, physique of races and differences in mentality.

The "proof" you speak of is only culturally derived. My OPs do a great job of explaining these cultural interpretations (I think.) Things like IQ scores vary between ethnic groups for socioeconomic reasons as a another poster graciously pointed out. When these complex socioeconomic factors are compensated for, the myth of racial intelligence disappears altogether.
edit on 22-12-2012 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 29 2012 @ 01:58 PM
I made the mistake of deleting uploaded images from my profile. This means that the pics that were originally in this thread have been removed.

Here are some of the most important illustrations:

A common example of a government census

This punnet square is a model of inherited traits governed by Mendelian genes.

However, some polygenic traits such as skin color are much more complex and more difficult to predict.

Skin color also comes in a wide range across a gradient wherein it is difficult to assess where one color begins and another ends; much like eye color. There isn't exactly white skin, black skin, brown skin etc, but more like a continuous scale that cannot be neatly divided.

This is an example of sophomoric attempts at racial classification.

Although much more sophisticated and detailed, do not be fooled by ANY attempt at racial classification as the entire notion is a fundamentally flawed concept.

Anthropometry was once used in the belief that "races" could be measured and divided anatomically. We now realize that the variation within and between so-called races does not allow for neat categories.

Finally, I use this as an analogy to illustrate the concept of skin color (phenotype) and genetics (genotype.) Although the book covers (skin color, phenotype) may look dramatically different from each other, the inside text, layouts, tables, and page numbers etc. are very nearly the same. This is a loose, although appropriate, comparison to make when examining phenotypes. The dramatic differences between humans are mostly only skin deep while we share much more in common genetically.

edit on 29-12-2012 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-12-2012 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-12-2012 by NarcolepticBuddha because: (no reason given)

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in