race is a valid scientific category, answering questions and fallacies

[Luiz Henning]

In this topic, I will argue that human races exist, examine the most common arguments I hear in favor of racial denial, and explain why, in the final analysis, why they are wrong.

first of all i want to leave a quote from my previous topic:

Quote

A race of people is just a geographically defined set of populations that, in the past, if not now, lived together and reproduced more with each other than with strangers. Given that definition, it is obvious that races are real because it is obvious that people of African descent, Europe, East Asia, etc., are real. A better question is whether or not it is useful to categorize people by race.

Biological differences between races can be easily identified with any research method, be it RFLP or SNP. Either method identifies the same racial origin. A white is the white studied by SNP or RFLP. To say that there may be more differences between, of the same race than between, of different races (as deniers tend to lie) is totally false (and I will answer later why this statement is false). Genetic differences between races are reinforced by the study of alleles that influence disease. Of the 3849 alleles under the SNP classification, only 21% are common to all humans. That is, 79% of racial differences.800 white patients and 800 black patients with heart problems took the drug ACE ENALAPRIN and different responses were observed. The drug had no effect on black patients. Codeine, the differences allowed a prediction. Researchers can predict a self-identified race of someone with more than 95% accuracy using their blood and more than 99% accuracy by looking at their genome (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

"No reliable scientist believes in the race" is it ?:

Some people think that they do not have the basic knowledge to judge the validation of the race (and even then, some still want to guess about the subject, I call this the Dunning - Kruger effect). So, they submit to the experts, and the experts say that race does not exist. The problem with this argument is that, while most vocal anthropologists and biologists deny race, academic research shows that there is no real consensus on this topic.

now for some questions:

What is a biological race or subspecies and how is it specified ?: A biological race or subspecies of a species is a population that is distinguished from other biological breeds / subspecies of this species by the following criteria:

Each breed is identified in a unique geographical location. Uniqueness does not imply environmental variables not shared with the geographical location of other breeds.

Each race has a unique natural history.

The members of a race share a set of phylogenetically concordant phenotypic characters. Phylogeny refers to evolutionary drives; the more recent to the last common ancestral population, the closer two populations are phylogenetically. The phenotype refers to physical appearance, behavior and other manifestations of gene expression.

There is a recognizable phylogenetic partition between races.

Evidence of phylogenetic distinction must normally come from concordant distributions of multiple characteristics, independent and based on genetics. The above criteria are the phylogeographic criteria for the purpose of race or subspecies. (2) "Subspecies" implies a higher level of differentiation than "race", but these words are used interchangeably.

How many races or subspecies are there among humans ?:

There are at least five subspecies among humans: European or white, sub-Saharan or black African, East Asian continent, Melanesian Australians and Native Americans. Evidence supporting this notion:

•  

  All five clusters have historically differed in unique geographic targets.

  All five groupings have natural histories.

  The vast majority of those belonging to any of these groups can be easily distinguished from the vast majority of groups belonging to other groups by a) a visual examination of the general physical appearance; b) multiple distances, say 21-24, between craniofacial landmarks; 3) c) 20 discrete cranial lines, 4) etc. This is because members of a race share a set of phenotypic characters consistent with their evolutionary history.

  There is a recognizable phylogenetic partition between the five clusters in the form of general physical appearance and also neutral genetic markers (3) The simultaneous evidence for the classification of these five clusters as separate subspecies / races comes from genetic studies involving a) 993 microsatellite markers, (4) b) 79 autosomal RFLPs (5) c) 8 Alu inserts, (6) d) 40 slow evolution biallel insertion exclusions, (7) etc.

  At least 5 races ?:

  One may wonder why a more definitive answer has not been established. You can also ask how you can be sure that the final say on this subject will be at least five runs or no runs at all.

  A more definitive number requires more research. Consider the following questions that need to be clarified:

  24 distances between highly selective and neutral craniofacial landmarks result unequivocally in eight geographic groups: European or white, sub-Saharan African or black, East Asian continent, Australo-Melanesian, Native American, South Asian Indian, Eskimo-Siberian and Jomon-Pacific. (8) Five male groups have already been seen to be of races, but what about the three additional groups? Siberian Eskimos are closely related and derived from the East Asian continental group, and it is unclear whether they should be designated as a separate race. South Asian Indians group together before joining the other groups, clearly forming a separate grouping based on 199 informative ancestry markers, a combination of 471 insertion / exclusion polymorphisms and 729 microsatellites, (9) and distance between landmarks highly selective craniofacials. (10) However, it is known that the Indians of South Asia result from the mixture of several geographically distinct populations. For example, look at this example of population affinities based on informational ancestry markers (genomics DNAPrint). Recognizing that South Asians from different parts of India are craniofacially grouped based on widely neutral distances between landmarks, it is easy to find South Asians tending more towards southern Europe or towards East Asia or Aboriginal in appearance. will South Asians be classified as a separate race or a people to whom the concept of race does not apply according to the phylogeographic criteria for the separate race? The people on the Pacific islands are a mix of Asian and Australopalanean origins. Are Pacific Islanders classified as a separate race?

  Multiple distances between craniofacial landmarks, largely neutral in terms of selection, showing that southern Europeans are grouped with populations in the Middle East before joining the group of indigenous inhabitants of northern southern Europe. (11) An analysis of more than 5,700 SNPs also reveals a north-south distinction in Europe, the northern group consisting of inhabitants of northern southern Europe. (12) Therefore, is it significant to speak of a Euro-Mediterranean subspecies composed of a northern and southern race, each merging in its borders with other groups, or of a single Euro-Mediterranean race?

  American Indians form clusters in North and South America based on 993 microsatellite markers.  Is it significant to talk about two races among American Indians?

  On the other hand, the phylogeographic criteria for single races make it clear that the number of races will not be below five.

  Responding to some fallacies:

  Myth 1: "Race is a social construct" Fact: Even racial groupings such as Hispanics combine genetic profiles with great precision, while Africans, Europeans and Asians orient genetic profiles with perfect precision. Even if there was a hypothetical continuum, it does not imply equality. If that is the case, since the point where yellow turns to orange and the point where orange turns red are arbitrary social constructions, yellow and red are the same color: https: //web.archive .org / web / 20200828201744 / https: //www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Genetic-structure%2C-self-identified-race%2Fethnicity%2C-Tang-Quertermous/32c77165dfb863e9cf764b7c592b9a3139d8b0ae

  Myth 2: "Race is just a matter of skin" Fact: Scientists have studied the level of genetic differentiation between different groups of human beings in relation to different biological processes. The populations studied were African, European and East Asian, with the nervous system responsible for much of the variation, even more than pigmentation: https://web.archive.org/web/20200707094740/https://bmcevolbiol. biomedical center. com / articles / 10.1186 / 1471-2148-11-16

  Myth # 3: "Races have more variation within them than they do each other" (also known as Lewontin's fallacy, I even intend to create a topic refuting lewontin's "argument") Fact: The statement is only true when examining frequency of different alleles between bound in an individual locus and is therefore called the Lewontin fallacy. When scientists analyze geographically distinct populations, such as Europeans, Africans and Asians, and measure the genetic similarity in many thousands of loci, the results are complete. Instead, the results show that visitors to a population are never 

  similar to other individuals other than those belonging to their own: https://web.archive.org/web/20200709083145/https://www.ncbi .nlm.nih. .

  Note: some links are numbered hyperlinks and other common links (in the myth section). I have yet to make a topic refuting the fallacy of the lewontin fallacy, however, that's it for now.

  Conclusions:

  Genetics, medicine, biology and science as a whole prove the existence of race, there is no reason to deny it.

   

   

   

I want to apologize for the mistake, I didn't understand what happened, anyway it is there, for those who want to see

Edited February 16, 2021 by Luiz Henning

[CharonY]

!

Moderator Note

There have been many, many threads on this topic on this forum, with pretty much the same arguments over and over again. As typically all of the discussion ultimately followed the same pattern, including eventually getting locked, I took the freedom to pre-empt the inevitable ending and invite OP to read through the existing discussions on this forum.