Perhaps the most important bit of science on race

[CanOWorms]

I wonder how many posters here are pissed off that humanity came from Africa.

 

[Jaskalas]

Pretty amazing stuff. With the breakdown of tribal, geographical isolation, how long before we reintegrate into a single unified 'race'?

 

[cybrsage]

I wonder how many posters here are pissed off that humanity came from Africa.

Probably none...those who would be pissed about it will rationalize that they are the improved product...that the original is flawed.

 

[Mursilis]

I wonder how many posters here are pissed off that humanity came from Africa.

Probably the same as the number of angry feminists who are pissed off that the documentary was called "The Journey of MAN"!

 

[Dr. Zaus]

<snip>

Because our ability to notice mutations is very very short and very very limited and, therefore, it does not make sense that we would have observed every mutation.

Further, there's nothing wrong with marxism: see the anarchist communist perspective.

 

[Infohawk]

I wonder how many posters here are pissed off that humanity came from Africa.

None or very few. Most P&Ners aren't anywhere near as obsessed by race as you are.

 

[Lemon law]

Thus goes the science of Wells, written by Wells,

I seem to recall another better supported theory that traces almost all human genetic variation from the eruption of the last super volcano at Toba some 65,000 years ago.

I will not say the work of Wells is pure bunk, but in the fullness of time, its going to take
"science" more time and research to arrive at a better supported consensus. Its just the nature of science, and it simply can't be rushed when the evidence is so fragmentary at present.

But maybe Craig234, there may be more than just one human DNA clock ticking and the Wells one just adds to our understanding.

 

[Craig234]

Thus goes the science of Wells, written by Wells,

I seem to recall another better supported theory that traces almost all human genetic variation from the eruption of the last super volcano at Toba some 65,000 years ago.

I will not say the work of Wells is pure bunk, but in the fullness of time, its going to take
"science" more time and research to arrive at a better supported consensus. Its just the nature of science, and it simply can't be rushed when the evidence is so fragmentary at present.

But maybe Craig234, there may be more than just one human DNA clock ticking and the Wells one just adds to our understanding.

Acting like you are restraining yourself from saying it's "pure bunk" is ridiculous, but certainly there are a lot of questions remaining.

I'm shocked how much stuff there is to still discover and get information from.

As Wells said as well, we're lucky there are isolated populations still around - that might not be isolated soon - for DNA info going back tens of thousands of years.

 

[davmat787]

I watched a very interesting documentary on NatGeo last night called "The 2 Million Year Old Boy". Fossilized remains about 1.9 million years old were found in South Africa just outside Pretoria. The remains are of a new species, previously unknown to science. While they did not want to use the term "missing link", they believe the remains could be of a transcendent species to man.

Lots of interesting info if you like anthropology, should be replayed quite a bit in the upcoming weeks.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

The assumption of geologic stability over time does not hold and thus dating of fossil recors, while relatively stable within layers, are not an accurate representation of the temporal distance between layers.

This is why oil can be found accurately with modern geology but you get nat-geo bullshit like the 2myo boy.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I wonder how many posters here are pissed off that humanity came from Africa.

I can imagine that some posters here would be very upset over this fact.

Anyways, it is really interesting, hopefully some people will reflect on this and begin to eliminate their racial hatred.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

I can imagine that some posters here would be very upset over this fact.

Anyways, it is really interesting, hopefully some people will reflect on this and begin to eliminate their racial hatred.

This is a very intelligent group of people and it's highly unlikely that there's much hate for blacks here.

It's more likely that a color-blind perspective is viewed as racist by people that want to set right what once went wrong: hoping that the next post will get them a free home.

 

[Fern]

=Craig234;32945244-snip-

- A later branch went to central Asia; and 10 to 20 people migrated in an ice age to North America 15,000 years ago, the first people in the Americas, ancestors to the Natives.

I saw a show on this. And it was based on genetic markers (they actually had much more fancy term that I can't recall ATM. Paleontology using DNA.) and the typical stuff (burial mounds, tools etc.)

But they indicated more than 10 or 20 Northern Euro's using the enlarged polar ice cap to travel to N.A.

They also found Asians using the glacier along the West coast to get to N.A. and on down further South.

In that show however, they claimed native Americans had DNA showing they were hybrid Northern Euro and Asian.

Cool stuff.

Started watching a show last night about a 2 million year old fossil of an early human-type found in South Africa. Unfortunately didn't get to finish watching so don't know how it turned out.

Fern

 

[RabidMongoose]

This is a very intelligent group of people and it's highly unlikely that there's much hate for blacks here.

It's more likely that a color-blind perspective is viewed as racist by people that want to set right what once went wrong: hoping that the next post will get them a free home.

I hope that you're right, but I have seen some troubling things on this forum over the last 10+ years. There is definitely room for improvement.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

I hope that you're right, but I have seen some troubling things on this forum over the last 10+ years. There is definitely room for improvement.

While the normalization of bigoted statements is a bad thing my qualitative data collection (from an anthropology methods class I took) shows that racially insensitive/trolling on general forums tends not to be related to hate-groups. The racist groups 1) don't like to think 2) don't like to read unless its racist-approved and 3) tend not to correlate with the "geek" demographic that this forum serves.

To quote one informant:
"I just do it to piss people off, they should realize that this is the internet and it's not fucking real; I don't care what it is, if it pisses someone off then it's my job to do it".

 

[RabidMongoose]

While the normalization of bigoted statements is a bad thing my qualitative data collection (from an anthropology methods class I took) shows that racially insensitive/trolling on general forums tends not to be related to hate-groups. The racist groups 1) don't like to think 2) don't like to read unless its racist-approved and 3) tend not to correlate with the "geek" demographic that this forum serves.

To quote one informant:
"I just do it to piss people off, they should realize that this is the internet and it's not fucking real; I don't care what it is, if it pisses someone off then it's my job to do it".

I think that ATPN attracts more than just the 'geek' demographic. I would say that most of the subforums have that 'geek' demographic, but this forum seems to be much more. I wouldn't be surprised at all if a group of racists who happen to be geeks told some other racists about this place, maybe at Stormfront, and then a group of them came here as non-geeks.

Regardless, I think that we're going a bit too off topic here, but I do hope that you're right, it would make me feel a lot better about this place.

 

[Lemon law]

Please Craig234 learn some reading comprehension, I definitely said I did not think the Wells research was pure bunk yet you somehow you claim I did. I merely cited earlier research that indicated a human biological genetic clock started 25,000 years before Wells claimed it did.

Or we can go into the footnotes, as Well States his proof for footnote one is proved by another article written by Wells.

Personally I find the Wells theories very interesting and not necessarily incomparable with earlier theories, but I am not ready to buy the Well's theory as the all inconclusive
theory of human genetics yet. Don't be so hyper sensitive Craig234 because we humans still don't have enough evidence yet from a very fragmentary fossil record. And Carbon 14 dating is almost worthless that far back.

 

[peonyu]

Science [Politically correct Science atleast] says race does not exist. Yet on the other hand it often does say it exists. Anyone who has studied medicine knows that one of the first questions you ask anyone is their Race. The reason why is some races have diseases/intolerances that are unique to them.

Sickle Cell anemia is a black disease for example. Those who are predominantly White heritage wise but have a Black great grandfather way back can have that disease, yet knowing his ancestry would make it easy to reveal the possibility of having the disease and lead Doctors to test for that diagnosis.

Cystic Fibrosis is a common "Caucasian" disease...The list goes on and on.

As far as being able to mix goes, we are all human beings so we are able to. Yet it does not mean that races do not or cannot exist. Afterall, the Animal kingdom has various seperate "races" of animals that can successfully mate and produce fertile offspring aswell. Coyotes and Wolves are seperated by several hundred thousand years of evolution yet they can breed together and have fertile pups. There are vast numbers of other Species that can do the same [including people, and science recognizes those groups as Sub-Species or Races in the Animal kingdom].


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies


As far as I go, I have no problem with any group of people, yet being involved in the Medical field and studied other areas of Science it makes me question why articles like this are produced...They are right on one hand [we are all human] but contradict themselves at the same time by stating there are NO differences. Sorry but there are, if there were not then I would not have to ask the race of people I deal with everyday.

 

[DrPizza]

40000 years is only 200 generations? I'd bet it's closer to 280 generations.

 

[bfdd]

What about the pure Homo Sapiens vs. those that have Neanderthal genetic interbreeding?

"Any human whose ancestral group developed outside Africa has a little Neanderthal in them &#8211; between 1 and 4 per cent of their genome, Pääbo's team estimates. In other words, humans and Neanderthals had sex and had hybrid offspring. A small amount of that genetic mingling survives in "non-Africans" today: Neanderthals didn't live in Africa, which is why sub-Saharan African populations have no trace of Neanderthal DNA. It's impossible to know how often humans invited Neanderthals back to their cave (and vice versa), but the genome data offers some intriguing details.
"It must have been at least 45,000 years ago," says David Reich, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School who was involved in the project. That's because all non-Africans &#8211; be they from France, China or Papua New Guinea &#8211; share the same amount of Neanderthal DNA, suggesting that interbreeding occurred before those populations split. The timing makes the Middle East the likeliest place where humans leaving Africa and resident Neanderthals did the deed."


http://www.newscientist.com/article...genome-reveals-interbreeding-with-humans.html

They don't find Neanderthal DNA in people with deep rooted African genetics I believe, it's mostly a European thing. I have had an anthropology professor tell me I have Neanderthal DNA simply by examining my head. I believe the "modern human" is a bunch of sub species and their intermix currently.

 

[davmat787]

40000 years is only 200 generations? I'd bet it's closer to 280 generations.

That is what I was thinking too, way back then the average life span was probably half of what it is today. Combine that with the lack of societal pressures and taboos relating to the age of acceptable sexual activity and the average age of a birthing mother was probably closer to 16 or so.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

I look like the cave-men from the Geico comercial.

I can confirm that we have a larger cranial capacity and it is dedicated to the prefrontal cortex.

If you start at 14 then stop at 26 because all of your post 26 of-spring die because you got eated by a lion then the average generation is 20.

 

[Craig234]

Please Craig234 learn some reading comprehension, I definitely said I did not think the Wells research was pure bunk yet you somehow you claim I did. I merely cited earlier research that indicated a human biological genetic clock started 25,000 years before Wells claimed it did.

Well, let's see who has the need for reading comprehension. You wrote:

"I will not say the work of Wells is pure bunk, but..."

Lemon Law, I won't say you are intentionally lying here, but...

Now, if I said, that, I'd clearly be indicating that I suspected something close to your 'intentionally lying' but was going to stop short of quite making the accusation.

It's still a strong insinuation - if I really didn't think you were lying at all, I wouldn't say it, now would I? The only reason to say that is to say 'what you are doing is close to lying.'

So, when you said that, you were clearly raising the possibility that Wells *is* doing something close to publishing "complete bunk", and stopping short of quite saying that.

It's not that you weren't saying anything of the sort. You were making a strong insinuation.

And that insinuation was completely baseless - you offered nothing beginning to justify calling his claims anything close to "complete bunk".

And so I responded quite accurately:

"Acting like you are restraining yourself from saying it's "pure bunk" is ridiculous, but certainly there are a lot of questions remaining."

That is exactly what you said. You 'acted like you are restraining yourself from saying it's "pure bunk"' by saying you won't quite accuse him of that.

As I showed above, saying that is NOT 'not saying anything against him', it's making the accusation that he's close to that accusation and you are stopping a little short of it.

Now, you misrepresent what I said falsely claiming that said you did say simply his claims are 'complete bunk'. I did not say that.

I said you are 'acting like you are restraining yourself' from making that claim you are tempted to make - and that's exactly what you did, however much you deny it now.

It sounds like Mitt Romney - the best guide to what he has said is anything after his saying 'I never said...'

Or we can go into the footnotes, as Well States his proof for footnote one is proved by another article written by Wells.

Personally I find the Wells theories very interesting and not necessarily incomparable with earlier theories, but I am not ready to buy the Well's theory as the all inconclusive
theory of human genetics yet. Don't be so hyper sensitive Craig234 because we humans still don't have enough evidence yet from a very fragmentary fossil record. And Carbon 14 dating is almost worthless that far back.

Good to hear you 'aren't ready to buy his claims as all inclusive'. That would be consistent with my saying 'there are many questions remaining.'

I'm not being 'hyper-sensitive' when you toss out the phrase 'complete bunk' for no justified reason, when you claim I am the one not using reading comprehension.

You are the one who clearly has the issue with it.

If you could just say the other part you said about the science, that would be a fine post instead of the one you made.

Sometimes people don't realize what they wrote. Perhaps that's the case here and you might better understand what you said and where it's wrong.

 

[Craig234]

40000 years is only 200 generations? I'd bet it's closer to 280 generations.

2000, not 200. Still a small number for all of modern human history post-Africa.

It's a rough figure I recall him mentioning.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Forgot I was in a Craig thread.. now unsubscribing.