5 ms·

You definitely keep on talking about race. "Swede" is a race. "Arab" is a race, as you use it. There absolutely were ancient people who shared genetic traits

You definitely keep on talking about race. "Swede" is a race. "Arab" is a race, as you use it. There absolutely were ancient people who shared genetic traits (and therefore some expressed characteristics) with modern Swedish people. There literally must have been, that's how genetics work, and 5,000 years is barely a blink, genetically. What you are conflating (among many, many things) are environmental impacts on human maturation with genetics, and in exactly the same way that the eugenicists of the early 1900s were attempting to do. Every single thing you've said so far has been thoroughly debunked in the ensuing 100 years. You are spouting old, racist tropes, and I assume don't even know it. But maybe you do know it, and maybe that's the point.

barry-cotter 4y ago
> There absolutely were ancient people who shared genetic traits (and therefore some expressed characteristics) with modern Swedish people. There literally must have been, that's how genetics work, and 5,000 years is barely a blink, genetically. That’s kind of my point. 5,000 years ago there were no people who looked like Swedes. Now there are because of selection pressures. A new genotype came into existence by working on standing variation and some de novo mutations. If we agree that selection pressures can radically change the appearance of a people then there’s not much to disagree on. Evolution can work on many things apart from physical appears. Different places have different selection pressures, with the obvious consequences.
- TameAntelope 4y ago
  > 5,000 years ago there were no people who looked like Swedes. Now there are because of selection pressures. 100% false. You need to realize that. 5,000 years is not enough time to do anything significant, genetically.
  - User23 4y ago
    It absolutely is if there is a severe population bottleneck that selects for some trait in the survivors.
    - TameAntelope 4y ago
      ...which has never happened in human history. Bottlenecks? Yes. Bottlenecks that selected specifically for a specific gene? No.
      - barry-cotter 4y ago
        Tibetans and Andeans both have adaptations for living at high altitudes. The Tibetan ones are better because they come from Denisovans, predating the existence of modern humans. There’s been massive positive selection on lactose persistence. 5,000 years ago no human adults could digest lactase. The differences in diabetes among human populations track closely with length of time they have been using agriculture.
        TameAntelope 4y ago
        That is not an example of a bottleneck, nor is it an example of a genetic adaptation occurring recently, as both happened more than ten thousand years ago. And none of this has anything whatsoever to do with the cultural concept of race. There are people who are not "Tibetans" who have this genetic adaptation, and there are "Tibetans" who do not have this genetic adaptation. Further, the pairing of this genetic trait with other genetic traits does not exist. Having this genetic trait does not make you more likely to have a set of other genetic traits, and none of the genetic traits add up to a specific "Tibetan" set of features or traits, all of which you would need to have to be called "Tibetan". There is no such thing as "genetic race".
        User23 4y ago
        Please stop violating the HN guidelines. I get that you're emotional about the subject and have a religious zeal for it, but that's no excuse for name-calling. There is no evidence that anyone you're replying to is writing in bad faith. They may be wrong, although you've failed to show that in any way that satisfies intellectual curiosity, but that doesn't justify personal attacks and slimy rhetoric[1]. [1] http://coolhaus.de/art-of-controversy/erist32.htm http://coolhaus.de/art-of-controversy/erist32.htm
  - barry-cotter 4y ago
    Are you saying that there have always been people who looked like Swedes in Sweden? Because from my reading of the literature 5,000 years ago there people living there had blue eyes but dark hair and a complexion we’d associate with Mediterranean peoples. Most dog breeds were created in less than 150 years. Call it 150 generations. 5,000 years is 200 generations at 25 years per generation. Enough time to change quite dramatically.
    - TameAntelope 4y ago
      There is no such thing as a genetic "Swede". Literally every trait you could name is neither exclusive on its own or in any particular combination with Swedish people. And no, humans were not bred like dogs, so your math is both offensive and completely useless. At this point I'm beginning to think you're being intentionally hateful.
      - barry-cotter 4y ago
        > humans were not bred like dogs That the selection pressures on dogs were due to humans performing artificial selection and those on humans due to the environment does not mean that they weren’t both selection pressures. Thus brown ancestors to the very pale Swedes.
        TameAntelope 4y ago
        There were no meaningfully powerful selection pressures on Swedes, such as the pressures we applied to dogs, not in the time period you've specified. Please stop spouting racist ideas, these were debunked thoroughly in the 1910s by Franz Boas and then over and over again by his students.
        User23 4y ago
        Many, if not most, human populations spent the majority of their existence with some kind of arranged marriage system. I wouldn't say "bred like dogs" because it's insulting, but human mating and procreation isn't remotely random. This is true even in societies that no longer practice arranged marriages.

barry-cotter 4y ago

> There absolutely were ancient people who shared genetic traits (and therefore some expressed characteristics) with modern Swedish people. There literally must have been, that's how genetics work, and 5,000 years is barely a blink, genetically. That’s kind of my point. 5,000 years ago there were no people who looked like Swedes. Now there are because of selection pressures. A new genotype came into existence by working on standing variation and some de novo mutations. If we agree that selection pressures can radically change the appearance of a people then there’s not much to disagree on. Evolution can work on many things apart from physical appears. Different places have different selection pressures, with the obvious consequences.

TameAntelope 4y ago
> 5,000 years ago there were no people who looked like Swedes. Now there are because of selection pressures. 100% false. You need to realize that. 5,000 years is not enough time to do anything significant, genetically.
- User23 4y ago
  It absolutely is if there is a severe population bottleneck that selects for some trait in the survivors.
  - TameAntelope 4y ago
    ...which has never happened in human history. Bottlenecks? Yes. Bottlenecks that selected specifically for a specific gene? No.
    - barry-cotter 4y ago
      Tibetans and Andeans both have adaptations for living at high altitudes. The Tibetan ones are better because they come from Denisovans, predating the existence of modern humans. There’s been massive positive selection on lactose persistence. 5,000 years ago no human adults could digest lactase. The differences in diabetes among human populations track closely with length of time they have been using agriculture.
      - TameAntelope 4y ago
        That is not an example of a bottleneck, nor is it an example of a genetic adaptation occurring recently, as both happened more than ten thousand years ago. And none of this has anything whatsoever to do with the cultural concept of race. There are people who are not "Tibetans" who have this genetic adaptation, and there are "Tibetans" who do not have this genetic adaptation. Further, the pairing of this genetic trait with other genetic traits does not exist. Having this genetic trait does not make you more likely to have a set of other genetic traits, and none of the genetic traits add up to a specific "Tibetan" set of features or traits, all of which you would need to have to be called "Tibetan". There is no such thing as "genetic race".
        User23 4y ago
        Please stop violating the HN guidelines. I get that you're emotional about the subject and have a religious zeal for it, but that's no excuse for name-calling. There is no evidence that anyone you're replying to is writing in bad faith. They may be wrong, although you've failed to show that in any way that satisfies intellectual curiosity, but that doesn't justify personal attacks and slimy rhetoric[1]. [1] http://coolhaus.de/art-of-controversy/erist32.htm http://coolhaus.de/art-of-controversy/erist32.htm
- barry-cotter 4y ago
  Are you saying that there have always been people who looked like Swedes in Sweden? Because from my reading of the literature 5,000 years ago there people living there had blue eyes but dark hair and a complexion we’d associate with Mediterranean peoples. Most dog breeds were created in less than 150 years. Call it 150 generations. 5,000 years is 200 generations at 25 years per generation. Enough time to change quite dramatically.
  - TameAntelope 4y ago
    There is no such thing as a genetic "Swede". Literally every trait you could name is neither exclusive on its own or in any particular combination with Swedish people. And no, humans were not bred like dogs, so your math is both offensive and completely useless. At this point I'm beginning to think you're being intentionally hateful.
    - barry-cotter 4y ago
      > humans were not bred like dogs That the selection pressures on dogs were due to humans performing artificial selection and those on humans due to the environment does not mean that they weren’t both selection pressures. Thus brown ancestors to the very pale Swedes.
      - TameAntelope 4y ago
        There were no meaningfully powerful selection pressures on Swedes, such as the pressures we applied to dogs, not in the time period you've specified. Please stop spouting racist ideas, these were debunked thoroughly in the 1910s by Franz Boas and then over and over again by his students.
      - User23 4y ago
        Many, if not most, human populations spent the majority of their existence with some kind of arranged marriage system. I wouldn't say "bred like dogs" because it's insulting, but human mating and procreation isn't remotely random. This is true even in societies that no longer practice arranged marriages.