Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 7:08pm:



Pretty sure there is no such study.  But, I'm always eager to learn - if you know of one, can ya share it with me?

... wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 7:23pm:


This might enlighten you to how the concept of "race" is a social construct...

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 8:44pm:



If they had exactly the same genes, there wouldn't be any differences to see.  Maybe a scar or something, but the structure would be identical.

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 8:44pm:



Genes control all a persons traits, not just those you can see.  Genes don't play by the rules of your fad ideology. 

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 8:44pm:



The emphasis I, or anyone places on it is their perorgative, and not a question for science.  The issue here is whether it exists.

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 8:44pm:


Because it defies science.  

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 8:44pm:


That's the spirit. 

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 8:44pm:


yeah.  I believe in evolution.  Creationist bullshit never did sit well with me.

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 8:44pm:



A mixture of a few by the looks of it.  What breed of dog is this?

... wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 7:23pm:


We’ve been secretly posting them throughout this thread. Only those with eyes to see will find them.

Don’t bother looking. Your ability to open a link is not great at the best of times. As for actual reading, forget about it.

Anyway, you know already. Why bother?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 9:31pm:


Such differences are superficial physical ones, nothing more.

Get back us when you understand the genetics, Mist.   

... wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 9:37pm:


You really don't understand how genetics work, do you?   All humans share the same genes, it is what makes us human.  How those genes combine determine our physical characteristics.   Physical characteristics however are just that, physical characteristics, they do not make us different to the point where we cannot interbreed.  If they did, then we would be separate species.   The "races" aren't, though, are they?  Therefore while you concentrate on those physical differences, in reality they are meaningless, except socially.

Quote:


What "fad ideology"?  I am expressing the scientific opinion on the issue.   You however are attempting to claim that the social reaction to physical differences is important.  It is, if you're a racist.  I am not.  Are you?

Quote:


As science has shown, the concept of "race" is non-existent.  You appear unable or unwilling to accept this reality for some strange reason.   

Quote:


Does it?  Please demonstrate how it does so.

Quote:


I suspect you understand evolution about as well as it appears you understand genetics.   

Quote:


Immaterial to the argument.  If you believe "race" means there are substantial differences between groups which affect their ability to interbreed or make them somehow "inferior" to other groups, then I'd suggest you are an idiot.  "Race" in the way racists use the term is based upon their prejudices, not scientific reality.   

Brian Ross wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 11:01pm:


OK, let me put it another way.  Why are the only genetic differences the ones we can see?


What causes the genetic representations we can see to differ, but those we can't to be identical?  It's a distinction that's a little too politically convenient to be correct, wouldn't you say?  I mean, you are the expert on genetics here, so if anyone would know, I figure it'd be you.