A reply to common race denial claims

http://therightstuff.biz/2015/07/13/dnews-denies-race-exists/

I’m impressed with TRS, they’re breaking out the science.

Of particular interest to me are;

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/298/5602/2381

Within-population differences among individuals account for 93 to 95% of genetic variation; differences among major groups constitute only 3 to 5%. Nevertheless, without using prior information about the origins of individuals, we identified six main genetic clusters, five of which correspond to major geographic regions, and subclusters that often correspond to individual populations.

Genetic accuracy of prediction.
Ordinary continental grouping of race.

http://www.genetics.org/content/176/1/351.full

This provides empirical justification for caution when using population labels in biomedical settings, with broad implications for personalized medicine, pharmacogenetics, and the meaning of race.

Members of the same race have more genes in common most of the time.

http://philpapers.org/rec/SESRAS

It is nowadays a dominant opinion in a number of disciplines (anthropology, genetics, psychology, philosophy of science) that the taxonomy of human races does not make much biological sense. My aim is to challenge the arguments that are usually thought to invalidate the biological concept of race. I will try to show that the way “race” was defined by biologists several decades ago (by Dobzhansky and others) is in no way discredited by conceptual criticisms that are now fashionable and widely regarded as cogent. These criticisms often arbitrarily burden the biological category of race with some implausible connotations, which then opens the path for a quick eliminative move. However, when properly understood, the biological notion of race proves remarkably resistant to these deconstructive attempts. Moreover, by analyzing statements of some leading contemporary scholars who support social constructivism about race, I hope to demonstrate that their eliminativist views are actually in conflict with what the best contemporary science tells us about human genetic variation.

aka forensic anthropology and skeletons don’t lie:
http://shs2.westport.k12.ct.us/forensics/11-forensic_anthropology/skeletal_analysis_worksheet.htm

On taxonomy;

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19695787

The term race is a traditional synonym for subspecies, however it is frequently asserted that Homo sapiens is monotypic and that what are termed races are nothing more than biological illusions. In this manuscript a case is made for the hypothesis that H. sapiens is polytypic, and in this way is no different from other species exhibiting similar levels of genetic and morphological diversity. …

You’d think this was obvious.
The Nazi rant was low. Politics doesn’t prove anything scientific.

One response to “A reply to common race denial claims

  1. Pingback: Human taxonomic diversity paper | Philosophies of a Disenchanted Scholar

1. Be civil. 2. Be logical or fair. 3. Do not bore me.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s