5 ms·

I will disagree with your views, scientifically we are same race and our genetic differences are insignificant. Our ancestors originated in Africa. Indeed today

I will disagree with your views, scientifically we are same race and our genetic differences are insignificant. Our ancestors originated in Africa. Indeed today most nation's are a hotpot of multi-culture, language, colors, food etc. All these difference you talk about came from our tribal nationalistic mentality. Indeed the reason USA and many other countries succeeded is due to openness to embrace diversity. Single human race does not mean everyone is same, I am not sure if you heard "Unity in diversity". All the boundaries we talk about today hopefully do not extend to space.

neoplatonian 7y ago
" the reason USA and many other countries succeeded is due to openness to embrace diversity." - I'd say it was due to a combination colonialism of Asia, subjugation of Africa by the slave trade and world wars recking Europe. By 1950s, USA was already ahead of the rest of the world. Because it was in that position that it was able to attract immigrants which then helped to sustain its position. There are many countries which are open to diversity - India would probably lead that list historically followed by modern Canada. But none is close to USA. On the other hand, Japan, South Korea, China and Asian tigers have done well without being open and diverse.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- dear 7y ago
  >On the other hand, Japan, South Korea, China and Asian tigers have done well without being open and diverse. They all make money by selling to the USA.
- SamReidHughes 7y ago
  The USA just had a lot of land and a low population. America already had a better quality of life than Europe in the 1700's.
  - ever1 7y ago
    source ?
    - SamReidHughes 7y ago
      Well you might ask why people kept going on ships across the ocean if the quality of life was worse. A randomly googled source is https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/news-wires-white-papers-and-books/1754-1783-business-and-economy-overview https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/news-wires-white-papers... , which casually mentions a bunch of relevant numbers.
DuskStar 7y ago
> I will disagree with your views, scientifically we are same race and our genetic differences are insignificant. Insignificant except for the ability to digest lactose in adulthood, resistance to malaria, efficient metabolization of alcohols... And that's just off the top of my head for "significant genetic differences that tend to be associated with a race". And if you're saying that "99.99% of our dna is shared, so there are no significant differences and no races" - why would that not also apply to species like dogs? So, a question for you - do you have any scientific basis for your views, or are they based on an idea of how the world should be?
- dragonsh 7y ago
  > So, a question for you - do you have any scientific basis for your views, or are they based on an idea of how the world should be? The average nucleotide diversity (pi) for the 50 segments is only 0.061% +/- 0.010% among Asians and 0.064% +/- 0.011% among Europeans but almost twice as high (0.115% +/- 0.016%) among Africans. The African diversity estimate is even higher than that between Africans and Eurasians (0.096% +/- 0.012%). From available data for noncoding autosomal regions (total length = 47,038 bp) and X-linked regions (47,421 bp), we estimated the pi-values for autosomal regions to be 0.105, 0.070, 0.069, and 0.097% for Africans, Asians, Europeans, and between Africans and Eurasians, and the corresponding values for X-linked regions to be 0.088, 0.042, 0.053, and 0.082%. Thus, Africans differ from one another slightly more than from Eurasians, and the genetic diversity in "Eurasians is largely a subset of that in Africans, supporting the out of Africa model of human evolution." Clearly, one must specify the geographic origins of the individuals sampled when studying pi or SNP density. [1] [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1462113/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1462113/
  - DuskStar 7y ago
    Is there more genetic diversity in wolves, or in individual breeds of domesticated dogs? I would assume wolves. Does that mean that there are no dog breeds? For that matter, you seem to be conceding the point that there are different groups of people similar to those commonly referred to as "races" that have discernibly different traits - in this case nucleotide diversity. In other words, I do not think that your paper does not support your assertion that races do not exist. (And also completely failed to address the "these specific traits are significant and associated with particular races" component of my argument)

neoplatonian 7y ago

" the reason USA and many other countries succeeded is due to openness to embrace diversity." - I'd say it was due to a combination colonialism of Asia, subjugation of Africa by the slave trade and world wars recking Europe. By 1950s, USA was already ahead of the rest of the world. Because it was in that position that it was able to attract immigrants which then helped to sustain its position. There are many countries which are open to diversity - India would probably lead that list historically followed by modern Canada. But none is close to USA. On the other hand, Japan, South Korea, China and Asian tigers have done well without being open and diverse.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
dear 7y ago
>On the other hand, Japan, South Korea, China and Asian tigers have done well without being open and diverse. They all make money by selling to the USA.
SamReidHughes 7y ago
The USA just had a lot of land and a low population. America already had a better quality of life than Europe in the 1700's.
- ever1 7y ago
  source ?
  - SamReidHughes 7y ago
    Well you might ask why people kept going on ships across the ocean if the quality of life was worse. A randomly googled source is https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/news-wires-white-papers-and-books/1754-1783-business-and-economy-overview https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/news-wires-white-papers... , which casually mentions a bunch of relevant numbers.

DuskStar 7y ago

> I will disagree with your views, scientifically we are same race and our genetic differences are insignificant. Insignificant except for the ability to digest lactose in adulthood, resistance to malaria, efficient metabolization of alcohols... And that's just off the top of my head for "significant genetic differences that tend to be associated with a race". And if you're saying that "99.99% of our dna is shared, so there are no significant differences and no races" - why would that not also apply to species like dogs? So, a question for you - do you have any scientific basis for your views, or are they based on an idea of how the world should be?

dragonsh 7y ago
> So, a question for you - do you have any scientific basis for your views, or are they based on an idea of how the world should be? The average nucleotide diversity (pi) for the 50 segments is only 0.061% +/- 0.010% among Asians and 0.064% +/- 0.011% among Europeans but almost twice as high (0.115% +/- 0.016%) among Africans. The African diversity estimate is even higher than that between Africans and Eurasians (0.096% +/- 0.012%). From available data for noncoding autosomal regions (total length = 47,038 bp) and X-linked regions (47,421 bp), we estimated the pi-values for autosomal regions to be 0.105, 0.070, 0.069, and 0.097% for Africans, Asians, Europeans, and between Africans and Eurasians, and the corresponding values for X-linked regions to be 0.088, 0.042, 0.053, and 0.082%. Thus, Africans differ from one another slightly more than from Eurasians, and the genetic diversity in "Eurasians is largely a subset of that in Africans, supporting the out of Africa model of human evolution." Clearly, one must specify the geographic origins of the individuals sampled when studying pi or SNP density. [1] [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1462113/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1462113/
- DuskStar 7y ago
  Is there more genetic diversity in wolves, or in individual breeds of domesticated dogs? I would assume wolves. Does that mean that there are no dog breeds? For that matter, you seem to be conceding the point that there are different groups of people similar to those commonly referred to as "races" that have discernibly different traits - in this case nucleotide diversity. In other words, I do not think that your paper does not support your assertion that races do not exist. (And also completely failed to address the "these specific traits are significant and associated with particular races" component of my argument)