I've noticed that when a white person and an Asian person have children, the children look 80 percent white. They could easily be mistaken for non-mixed children half the time. I've noticed this with several different families. (Yes, I've seen plenty of blond-haired blue-eyed kids who had an Asian biological mom or dad) On the other hand, when a black person and a white person have a child, the child looks 80 percent black, most of the time. (Seems a bit reminiscent of the one drop rule) It's almost as if Asian + White = White and White + Black = Black Some genes seem to be a lot more dominant than other genes, I guess.
There seems to be some truth to that. I would never have known actress Chloe Bennett was half Chinese if she hadn't made a big deal about it. Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D’s Chloe Bennet Changed Her Last Name Because ‘Hollywood Is Racist’
Genes show different dominate strengths. The gene for brown eyes are dominate over blue eyes for instance. Curly dark hair dominates over straight light hair.
All genetics are bound be demographics and migrational breeding. African genetics are dominant in Africa and Asian in Asia. only in relatively recent times has intermixing become an influence.
Given the fact that the whole notion of different "races" of humans is complete and utter nonsense? No, they are not.
We are talking about genetics, not osteology. They are entirely different fields, and whatever terms are used in osteology is not relevant, seeing as the term "race" has a different meaning in different fields.
Certain genes are dominant in all humans and animals. That is a simple fact. The fact that most Americans are a genetic hodgepodge of genes complicates identification of genetic dominance. For instance most American blacks are a mix of African, American Indian, and Caucasian genes means they do not look like many African immigrants. Don't know about you but an African immigrant is usually easy to discern from an American black. My genes are mostly all Caucasian, English and German so I look like most white people.
what I find more odd, is that most mixed people (white plus whatever) never call themselves white, regardless of how white they look. well not so much odd, as pandering to social 'fashion'.
From the little I know, a child always draws their genepole from both parents and grandparents. If a white woman with two white parents has a child with a black man with two black parents, the child can come out as either lighter or darker. It works pretty much the same as haircolour where brunettes can have a blonde offspring if that is in the lineage (this should mean it is not really true that dark genes are dominant). Furthermore, two mulatta siblings can look racially different where one is lighter snd the other one is darker. I am not sure, but perhaps gender also plays a part here? Daughters only inherit the Y-chromosome and I suppose that would have some kind of effect on how dark/light a mixed race female-offspring tyrns out. Generally, it is very easy to tell who is mixed and who is not. Sometimes it is even possible to tell that someone fully white is a mix of two different ethnicities. Most Americans are ethnic mixes and the average American really does not fit in any particular country in Europe, they just look "European" or depending how "pure" they are, they can pass as "Northwestern European"/"Southern European" etc. All your traits have been "faded out" due to all the mixing. Anyhow. This should be very easy for any biologist to answer and I guess it would not be too hard to google the answer.
