151–160 of 231 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and the simplistic categorization of humans into ~5 races corresponds well to clusters on a genetic map Are you familiar with principal component analysis? That’s what was used to generate the very clearly clustered charts that you linked to. It’s useful for analysis because it exaggerates the density and distinctness of clusters based on major features. But what that means is precisely that those clusters are not…
> it exaggerates the density and distinctness of clusters It does the opposite - the PCA graph shown is 2D, meaning points in the N-dimensional space are projected onto a single plane. In this projection, information is lost - i.e. point-clouds that are distinct in 3D may overlap in 2D. While we are shown the axes along which the data is most distinct, the true clusters are even more distinct, as every added dimensio…
(No, of course they shouldn’t. It’s just that extracting features to artificially cluster points along the most characteristic axes is what PCA is for.)
[0]: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:3D_PCA_plot_of_Xavan...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> emotionally charged subject, which is unfortunate [...] The simplified and (generally) commonly accepted narrative [...] that potentially complicates a lot of the cultural positioning. [...] it's a shame Uh... what's a shame? None of that stuff happened. You've picked a fight with a strawman here. No one is engaging like that with the linked article, or here in the HN thread, except you.
He's talking about the fact that Aboriginals, not unlike Native Americans, reject any attempt to explain their origin via science as they stick to the story of their origin that comes from their religion, and see the science based origin as disrespectful.
if locals abandoned their knowledge and accepted the 40,000ya story told when I was a kid, they'd be out by just as much given the 80,000ya now indicated by artefacts at M2, Madjedbebe; the oldest site of continual human habitation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Got a source for this fact? Generalising opinions to a whole race is rarely wise. Perhaps like anyone else with religious beliefs, those who are offended simply want their culture respected.
some of them may not want their legal privileges backed by historical narratives compromised by scientific findings; this is very common with native american tribes, for instance the lipan apaches in texas. additional science can only hurt their position with respect to the BIA.
The (only recently created) legal privileges of native title are severely limited and can be effortlessly extinguished. These limited privileges are based on (belated) recognition of prior occupation, but irrespective of how long people were here before colonisation.
on the other side of the ledger, significant legal harms are imposed on predominantly Indigenous regions, including apartheid-style laws that are applied on the basis of race, and lower standards of basic services provided through dedicated streams again predicated on race.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Got a source for this fact? Generalising opinions to a whole race is rarely wise. Perhaps like anyone else with religious beliefs, those who are offended simply want their culture respected.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the wood. You can rank woods by the amount of strain energy per unit of mass that they can take before breaking. The higher this figure, the better the bow, because it'll store more energy for a lower mass in the limbs before it breaks, and the differences can be fairly significant. The best bow woods are all at the top of this list, along with a few that should be good in theory but aren't used likely for other…
Huh! I have a locally made wood bow made from red oak and it's an absolute bastard to shoot. I think the bowyer wanted to one-up my 55# Samick sage so he made it a 56# draw weight. And even with a thick leather armguard it hurts quite a lot to shoot because the brace height is barely over 5" and it doesn't have a trigger grip being a piece of wood. I wonder where red oak ranks on the strain/mass chart. I'm used to he…
Australian river red gum is theoretically decent, and I know that people have made serviceable bows from it. I think merbau backed with bamboo is about as good as it gets for Aussies, and merbau is an import.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it exaggerates the density and distinctness of clusters It does the opposite - the PCA graph shown is 2D, meaning points in the N-dimensional space are projected onto a single plane. In this projection, information is lost - i.e. point-clouds that are distinct in 3D may overlap in 2D. While we are shown the axes along which the data is most distinct, the true clusters are even more distinct, as every added dimensio…
No, sorry, you’re just wrong here. You can run PCA with pretty much any set of genetic samples and get a very nicely clustered graph, because that’s what PCA is for . See this PCA graph [0] on population groups present in Brazil. Should Xavante people be the sixth race in your taxonomy? They sure look distinct from other Amerindians and very distinct from the rest of the world! (No, of course they shouldn’t. It’s jus…
I believe I described PCA accurately, so could you elaborate which part of my statement is wrong?
> extracting features to artificially cluster points along the most characteristic axes is what PCA is for
How is the clustering "artificial"? Because if you generate data without clusters (e.g. points evenly distributed within a sphere), applying PCA to it won't show clusters either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, ppl in the same country have more similar genomes. But modern population genetics has found that 1. There is more similarity than difference between any 2 humans on earth (there are africans and europeans who share more dna than with others of their own ancestry. And, 2. People move around, a lot! We knew this already but there are a huge number of undocumented migrations that are being revealed by these studies…
Lewontin came to that conclusion by examining exclusively blood type alleles, which was kind of asinine because they have no apparent geographic distribution pattern at all. Other genetic markers tell a much clearer story, as the principal component analysis shows. It couldn't really be any more obvious - the PCA makes a map . You can literally see each of the continents represented in a projection of genetic data.
I don't think PCA plots really tell us much beyond there being distinct genetic clusters? One could do a PCA only on people with european ancestry, or people living in a small town, and there would be plenty of interesting structure to look at.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The simplified and (generally) commonly accepted narrative is that a cohesive group arrived here 45-60,000YA, Isn't the fascinating question "How did they arrive" ? My understanding is that timeline vastly pre-dates any kind of ship to make that voyage.
I think the gap between Asia and PNG (then connected to AU) has got down to 90km. Doable with bamboo rafts? Viewing a mountainous island from an elevated position would give them reason to attempt it. Timor to PNG is suggested as the water crossing needed.
[1] https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-welfare/profile-o...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You presumed wrong.
I don't see where that person specified which claim they wanted a source for, but I'll ask for a source for both claims. I still have no idea if you grew up among Aboriginals or Native Americans, or what makes you so confident about the other race/culture's beliefs.
Context makes it clear which claim they were asking for.
In any case, I'm not providing a source. This is a somewhat commonly known thing, and I was speaking from personal experience. If you're still really unsure where I grew up, you can probably figure it out from my other comments.
Feel free to search for whatever you find sufficient to corroborate my claims, or continue to be skeptical (as you should). I don't mind either way.
