21–30 of 30 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The out-of-Africa theory is junky agenda-driven science. It was debunked a decade ago. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-the-out-of-afr...
Still out of Africa.
When an article so clearly plays into what we want to hear, or so clearly confirms our beliefs, we should be more skeptical, not less.
I was born in Alabama. Growing up, I was repeatedly told that I was 1/256 Cherokee; this was supposedly the source of my mother's high cheekbones. When I got my 23andMe results, they showed 0% Native American, and .4% African. Well, .4% is of course just about 1/256. I believe the 23andMe result. I believe that the Cherokee thing was just a cover story concocted at some point to hide the fact that one of my family's…
The other interesting scientific result I've read is that there's more genetic variation within the traditional "races" than between them. I put "races" in quotations at this point because the whole concept is somewhat meaningless.
There are certain genes that are more common in different groups. But if I understand it correctly, you'll be able to find people from a different "race" who are more genetically similar to you than some people from your own "race".
We've been a multiethnic society since the first European boats landed and have redefined who counts as which race several dozen times since then. Even if there were some not insane standard for a "purebred" white person, it would be incredibly unlikely for any arbitrary bigot to happen to meet that standard.
I'm 88% Eastern European by Family Tree DNA test. Terroir and all that stuff. I think that the racial discourse is not just unfair and smelly, but also unfruitful. You ought to really look at culture. This won't help the right with the left, of course, because they hate to admit cultural differencies either.
Which cultural differences, specifically, are you talking about? Can you give some concrete examples?
Worldview and religious differences also lead to disagreements about fundamental values. And among other concrete examples that I personally think are important: how much respect should be given to religious/spiritual/supernatural beliefs, what rights are inalienable human rights, how people with various illnesses should be treated, how resources are distributed, what behaviour is acceptable during disagreements (on large scales and small) and what subjects/ideas/beliefs/actions are taboo seem like the big ones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most North American scientists agree that Asia isn't really in Africa per se . Perhaps this news hasn't reached your corner of the world.
Africa -> Asia -> Europe Africa -> ... -> Europe Africa is still where it started.
If we're going to speak meaningfully about where Europeans come from, we need to include wherever they picked up Neanderthal DNA (hint: not in Africa; no African population has it).
How to “scientifically” determine race was a huge problem for racist regimes like Nazi Germany, Apartheid South Africa and the Jim Crow United States. They ended up with various kludges, because there is no such thing as pure “white” blood, nor a convenient clean line between white and black or any other such socially-constructed category.
Is this at all surprising? Are there any "white" Americans who don't assume they have a few percent worth of some second ethnicity in their ancestry? We've been a multiethnic society since the first European boats landed and have redefined who counts as which race several dozen times since then. Even if there were some not insane standard for a "purebred" white person, it would be incredibly unlikely for any arbitrar…
We're talking about white nationalists, people who base their identity and self-esteem on a belief in their own racial purity. They wouldn't be seeking out these tests to validate something they already know to be untrue, or even suspect could be untrue.
I was born in Alabama. Growing up, I was repeatedly told that I was 1/256 Cherokee; this was supposedly the source of my mother's high cheekbones. When I got my 23andMe results, they showed 0% Native American, and .4% African. Well, .4% is of course just about 1/256. I believe the 23andMe result. I believe that the Cherokee thing was just a cover story concocted at some point to hide the fact that one of my family's…
>J. Scott Roberts, an associate professor at the University of Michigan, who has studied consumer use of genetic tests and was not involved with the study, said the companies tend to be reliable at identifying genetic variants. Interpreting them in terms of health risk or ancestry, though, is another story. “The science is often murky in those areas and gives ambiguous information,” he said. “They try to give specific percentages from this region, or x percent disease risk, and my sense is that that is an artificially precise estimate.”
I assume you're comfortable with the idea that you're descended from a slave and thus have chosen to override prior evidence to the contrary. But if you weren't comfortable with the idea, you can say the test is flawed and have just as powerful an argument.
Unless 23andMe can show statistical rigor behind their methods, everyone is going to see what they want in the results.