Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seeing how African populations are extremely diverse and we're just seeing the extent of it I would refrain from making such definitive statements. >To repeat, interest in human populations and such phenotypic differences does not imply scientific racism once you realize the basic scientific principle that humans are animals and consider how animals exist in populations with phenotypic differences. That's a needlessl…
> Seeing how African populations are extremely diverse and we're just seeing the extent of it I would refrain from making such definitive statements. There's no reason to not. Holocene expansion of farming/pastoral populations all over the world (including Africa) has largely homogenized human ancestry into identifiable distinct strands that is in varying proportions. Africa is indeed diverse genetically but it is no…
Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins
71–80 of 95 posts
Re: Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
The science is constantly evolving to this very day on the supposedly 'trace levels' of Neanderthal DNA in Africans (especially as we gather a more diverse range of cohorts) so I'll leave it at that. I just want to comment on this: opposing 'scientific racism' is an ideological claim now?! The dude has a pretty large record making claims about race and IQ and 'human biodiversity', works in an industry that's banking…
> The science is constantly evolving to this very day on the supposedly 'trace levels' of Neanderthal DNA in Africans (especially as we gather a more diverse range of cohorts) so I'll leave it at that. No, the trace levels of Neanderthal DNA in Africans is very unlikely to change by gathering more diverse range of cohorts. It is a matter of identifying major strands of ancestry within Africans (by admixture over thou…
>No, the trace levels of Neanderthal DNA in Africans is very unlikely to change by gathering more diverse range of cohorts.
Black Americans? Broad pronouncements like this square... strangely... with the ginger whiskers I see every time I look in the mirror.
What is the value of slightly more Neanderthal DNA, anyway?
Re: Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
He’s clearly not arguing that, but maybe you’re angry at him because some of his other points hit too close to home for you? > These include many people who I know personally, who are diversity loving progressives, but who seem to fall into the trap of disaggregation. Since I don't love diversity and don't care about that issue I don't bring it up with them often. But it's what I call a revealed preference. Or, to gi…
yeah ok
> And one last thing: I am sure no one who reads VDARE has watched any pornography of late, but if anyone would care to, they would find that the only class of women that rivals busty blondes in disproportionate numbers in American pornography is East Asian females. Unlike brunette European females, Asian females don't look particularly impressive when blonded in my opinion, and the fact that few Asian females in these films bleach their hair like their European counterparts seems to confirm that most porn viewers share my impression. In other words, Asian females (whether it be for cultural or biological reasons) are in some cases competitive with blondes. (From personal experience in a region of the country where there are many Eurasians- due to the fact that the area is 95%+ white and the non-white marriage pool somewhat limited - I can attest that many Eurasian men prefer Asian females for the same reasons as some European men do).
Re: Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins
#74Multiple inaccuracies there. Crick and Watson certainly didn't discover DNA as the substrate for Mendelian inheritance, that was known long before. They (in collaboration with Rosalind "don't talk to me about this woman" Franklin) discovered its 3D structure . Africans do have Neanderthal DNA, up to 0.3%. The post tries very hard to make it look like 'Out of Africa' is wrong and not the mainstream accepted by the maj…
graham was on my committee and i know him personally even before grad school (this is razib). from the acknowledgments his 2013 paper https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/jou... "Thanks to Razib Khan, Sharon Browning, and Don Conrad for several useful discussions" you can nitpick the piece but this is from an attack piece on me: "MANY PROMINENT geneticists familiar with Khan’s work do take him ser…
Hey Razib! I was wondering if you ever had a chance to revisit this old piece of yours and if the views expressed in it still hold up:
https://vdare.com/letters/vdare-khan-letter-and-sailer-reply...
Re: Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins
#75Multiple inaccuracies there. Crick and Watson certainly didn't discover DNA as the substrate for Mendelian inheritance, that was known long before. They (in collaboration with Rosalind "don't talk to me about this woman" Franklin) discovered its 3D structure . Africans do have Neanderthal DNA, up to 0.3%. The post tries very hard to make it look like 'Out of Africa' is wrong and not the mainstream accepted by the maj…
I didn't know claiming a genetic component in explaining differences in racial averages for IQ is scientific racism.
That's... quite the statement to make with a straight face.
Re: Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Protip: when someone's wiki page has a 'Controversies' tab it doesn't look good If wikipedia had existed in the time of Copernicus, Plato, Giordano Bruno, Galileo or Darwin, I do not think they would be without their own large ‘controversies’ section ;)
Quoted post unavailable.
> I don't think someone arguing that Africans shouldn't be classified as humans[0]
Having read this interesting reference, I can only conclude that you either didn't actually read it, or that you're intentionally trying to mislead your fellow HNer in the hopes they don't actually read it.
Re: Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins
#77The title reminds me of Doctor Who.
Re: Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Protip: when someone's wiki page has a 'Controversies' tab it doesn't look good If wikipedia had existed in the time of Copernicus, Plato, Giordano Bruno, Galileo or Darwin, I do not think they would be without their own large ‘controversies’ section ;)
Quoted post unavailable.
> [0]
What a great post, thanks for linking it!
Re: Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins
#79Related reminder: "Everyone is a descendent of Charlemagne" or "After a couple of millenia, every human is related." https://www.sarahwoodbury.com/were-all-descended-from-charle... https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/info%3Adoi%2F1... https://github.com/pannous/hieros/wiki/paradoxon
Honest question: Why pick Charlemagne as an example here? The statement “Everyone is a descendent of X” is true for a lot of people who lived around that time and had descendants, no? Is Charlemagne chosen because he was a notable person of that era?
Re: Yo mama's mama's mama's mama: our understanding of human origins
#80Related reminder: "Everyone is a descendent of Charlemagne" or "After a couple of millenia, every human is related." https://www.sarahwoodbury.com/were-all-descended-from-charle... https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/info%3Adoi%2F1... https://github.com/pannous/hieros/wiki/paradoxon
Honest question: Why pick Charlemagne as an example here? The statement “Everyone is a descendent of X” is true for a lot of people who lived around that time and had descendants, no? Is Charlemagne chosen because he was a notable person of that era?
I fully agree with you. Picking Charlemagne is completely misleading. I don't know why this paradoxon of genetics formed around this persona, maybe to overcome initial disbelief.