You need to get out more......visit this site for some more truth and quit reading all that garbage put out by *******s...they have propagandized you but you can shake it off if you try>>>>http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_1WaO1OGuwzI/SdRowemSgBI/AAAAAAAAIr0/P-0dCi4epBY/s400/2007dna.jpg
The *******s always sabotage my links....try this one before it is disabled>>>>>http://www.wired.com/politics/law/magazine/16-01/ps_dna
From National Public Radio by George W. Gill Slightly over half of all biological/physical anthropologists today believe in the traditional view that human races are biologically valid and real. Furthermore, they tend to see nothing wrong in defining and naming the different populations of Homo sapiens. The other half of the biological anthropology community believes either that the traditional racial categories for humankind are arbitrary and meaningless, or that at a minimum there are better ways to look at human variation than through the "racial lens." "I am more accurate at assessing race from skeletal remains than from looking at living people standing before me," Gill says. Enlarge Photo credit: © Christopher Futcher/iStockphoto Pro and con Are there differences in the research concentrations of these two groups of experts? Yes, most decidedly there are. As pointed out in a recent 2000 edition of a popular physical anthropology textbook, forensic anthropologists (those who do skeletal identification for law-enforcement agencies) are overwhelmingly in support of the idea of the basic biological reality of human races, and yet those who work with blood-group data, for instance, tend to reject the biological reality of racial categories. I happen to be one of those very few forensic physical anthropologists who actually does research on the particular traits used today in forensic racial identification (i.e., "assessing ancestry," as it is generally termed today). Partly this is because for more than a decade now U.S. national and regional forensic anthropology organizations have deemed it necessary to quantitatively test both traditional and new methods for accuracy in legal cases. I volunteered for this task of testing methods and developing new methods in the late 1980s. What have I found? Where do I now stand in the "great race debate?" Can I see truth on one side or the other—or on both sides—in this argument? Bones don't lie First, I have found that forensic anthropologists attain a high degree of accuracy in determining geographic racial affinities (white, black, American Indian, etc.) by utilizing both new and traditional methods of bone analysis. Many well-conducted studies were reported in the late 1980s and 1990s that test methods objectively for percentage of correct placement. Numerous individual methods involving midfacial measurements, femur traits, and so on are over 80 percent accurate alone, and in combination produce very high levels of accuracy. No forensic anthropologist would make a racial assessment based upon just one of these methods, but in combination they can make very reliable assessments, just as in determining sex or age. In other words, multiple criteria are the key to success in all of these determinations. "Clines" represent gradients of change, such as that between areas where most people have blue eyes and areas in which brown eyes predominate. Enlarge Photo credit: © Nicholas Monu/iStockphoto I have a respected colleague, the skeletal biologist C. Loring Brace, who is as skilled as any of the leading forensic anthropologists at assessing ancestry from bones, yet he does not subscribe to the concept of race. [Read Brace's position on the concept of race.] Neither does Norman Sauer, a board-certified forensic anthropologist. My students ask, "How can this be? They can identify skeletons as to racial origins but do not believe in race!" My answer is that we can often function within systems that we do not believe in. "The idea that race is 'only skin deep' is simply not true." As a middle-aged male, for example, I am not so sure that I believe any longer in the chronological "age" categories that many of my colleagues in skeletal biology use. Certainly parts of the skeletons of some 45-year-old people look older than corresponding portions of the skeletons of some 55-year-olds. If, however, law enforcement calls upon me to provide "age" on a skeleton, I can provide an answer that will be proven sufficiently accurate should the decedent eventually be identified. I may not believe in society's "age" categories, but I can be very effective at "aging" skeletons. Deeper than the skin The next question, of course, is how "real" is age biologically? My answer is that if one can use biological criteria to assess age with reasonable accuracy, then age has some basis in biological reality even if the particular "social construct" that defines its limits might be imperfect. I find this true not only for age and stature estimations but for sex and race identification. The "reality of race" therefore depends more on the definition of reality than on the definition of race. If we choose to accept the system of racial taxonomy that physical anthropologists have traditionally established—major races: black, white, etc.—then one can classify human skeletons within it just as well as one can living humans. The bony traits of the nose, mouth, femur, and cranium are just as revealing to a good osteologist as skin color, hair form, nose form, and lips to the perceptive observer of living humanity. I have been able to prove to myself over the years, in actual legal cases, that I am more accurate at assessing race from skeletal remains than from looking at living people standing before me. So those of us in forensic anthropology know that the skeleton reflects race, whether "real" or not, just as well if not better than superficial soft tissue does. The idea that race is "only skin deep" is simply not true, as any experienced forensic anthropologist will affirm.
Yes, a blog biased in favor of your position is sure to be a much better source. I'll get right on that.
The idiot politically correct, cultural Marxist gibberish that is drilled into our brains from the time we can understand spoken language tells us that race does not exist, and that what we call race is simply an expression of culture. The reality, however, is that culture is an expression of race. This is why African blacks, many of who were totally isolated from one another for thousands of years, lived a very similar lifestyle, had very similar beliefs. Their race was that which had adapted to the land they lived on, and their culture was a manifestation of this. They lived in a harsh land, which required much violence, and thus they are a physical people with incredibly high testosterone. But the *******s, with their cultural Marxist religious dogma, would have us believe that the physique of the black man is some type of cultural phenomena. This is ridiculous and idiotic on the face of it. It is not so long ago that whites understood the concept of race. All of our grandparents surely understood it. Not because they were “racialists,” sitting around thinking about it, but because it is such an obvious reality that it requires a massive brainwashing program, beginning in very early childhood, to cause a person to deny its existence. The non-white races of the world are still very familiar with this concept today; all East Asians have a militant racial pride. Yasuhiro Nakasone, the former Prime Minister of Japan, stated that Japan was a “homogeneous nation” with “one ethnicity, one state and one language.” This attitude is surely not due to stupidity. Having spent several years living in various Asian countries, I have had a chance to directly observe the characteristics of different races, being immersed among them. East Asians have not merely the obvious physical differences – which the Jews will no doubt claim at some point don’t exist either – but an entirely different emotional and psychological framework. Forgive me for stating the obvious, but regrettably it is necessary: emotional and psychological structure are as biological as physique. Should we not expect people with an entirely different physical form to also have variant brain patterns? Is not (what appears to white men as) the cold, detached culture of the East Asian societies a manifestation of these neural structures, which are in turn a manifestation of the genetic heritage of their ancestors, passed down through their DNA in the very same way as their squinted eyes and lack of muscle mass? Remember your Ancestors We are, all of us, nothing more or less than the collective genetic heritage of our ancestors. We know this, somewhere deep in us, and this is what the “white guilt” phenomena plays on – if race doesn’t exist, why are we conditioned that we are supposed to feel guilty for black slavery? The White race has always been a proud and noble people. Our physical achievements in constructing complex civilizations, which are often cited by White Nationalists as the proof of our greatness, are the least of our achievements; we have a compassion and a morality that goes far and beyond that of most peoples on the planet. We developed a legal code and political system for the express purpose of providing justice and equality to all men. We have created the most beautiful art on the planet, an expression of our genetically rooted respect for the beauty of existence. All of this comes from our ancestors. Because that is what race is. It is the physical, emotional, intellectual and spiritual heritage of our forefathers. To deny the existence of your race is to deny everything you are. Get up off your knees, white man.
It appears my adversaries have withdrawn from the field of battle...a tactical decision no doubt. heh heh
This is from your Wired link: Why is the article using "mainly" and "primarily" qualifiers if race is cut and dry"? Why is he not saying "always" in place of those words?
Racism in present day America is an utter lie. Are there racist in America, for sure. When I watch shows like American Idol-The Voice-and other talent shows, I see people of all races and religions and life-styles. White people cheer and vote for blacks-Latino- Asian- Gay- I see black people vote or all races and creeds. I see a Black man elected as president-elected by the votes of white folk. Racism in current day America is a tool of the leftist in America-Al Sharpton is not only a vile racist, he is also a JEW-HATER as is Jesse Jerkson. Jr. God bless-Dr. Ben Carson... .
Who said 'race' is cut and dry....much has been learned, much is being learned and a lot more will be eventually revealed despite all the efforts of misguided liberals and Negroes who feel threatened by genetic research aka..............................the real issue? DNAWitness touches on race and racial profiling a subject with such a tortured history that people can't countenance the existence of the technology, even if they don't understand how it works. "Once we start talking about predicting racial background from genetics, it's not much of a leap to talking about how people perform based on their DNA why they committed that rape or stole that car or scored higher on that IQ test," says Troy Duster, former president of the American Sociological Association. "This is analyzing data derived from a crime scene," Frudakis counters. "It's just a way for police to narrow down their suspect lists." But his position, rational as it may be, is no match for the emotions that surface with any pairing of race and crime. Tony Clayton, a black man and a prosecutor who tried one of the Baton Rouge murder cases, concedes the benefits of the test: "Had it not been for Frudakis, we would still be looking for the white guy in the white pickup." Nevertheless, Clayton says he dislikes anything that implies we don't all "bleed the same blood." He adds, "If I could push a button and make this technology disappear, I would." Thus you see how racial politics aka political correctness resents and often interferes with(in liberal universities)genetic studies and have in mamy cases ruined the careers of genetical researchers by labeling them and demonizing them as 'racist'. Very similar to the way the Roman Catholic Church persecuted Scientists in the middle ages.
Sorry to shock you by saying things you've never been allowed to hear. White people are superior to the spoiled, lucky, and dishonest ruling class. By putting us down, the rich neutralize the only race that should be in their place. It is the duty of everyone to fight for the majority's freedom from class tyranny. "Who decided" that the only duty is every man for himself? That is the alternative you would propose if you had the honesty to tell us what you really think This "who is?" fallacy assumes that no one is asserting that authority over us now. You propagate the lie that the status quo is the natural state and not one established by force, by the Deciders. Speaking freely has no power. It is just a trick to let off smoke without fire. The Class Supremacists have total control over everything that matters. No power can be totalitarian in your sense. You don't understand the difference between a free choice and a pick from a restricted list of alternatives. You illustrate that they practice thought control when you think I threaten them with Internet pixels.
I spent over 20 years in the the electronics manufacturing industry. Most of the workforce was multi-national....Mexican, East Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese etc. Different nationalities hated each other and the cafeteria was self-segregated.
Next, these vindictive academented misfit faddists will be saying that there's no such thing as species. Do unto otters as you would have otters do unto you.
We don't need no Netiquette Nannies We don't need no Thought Control Hey! Web Wizard! Whiz on the other side of the Wall All in all, you're just another Brick through our Window
Because perfectionism leads to paralysis. Intelligent people make decisions based on the preponderance of evidence.
I have my biases but their not racist they're cultural/ethnic based and it cuts across colour of skin or origin... there is a Moral Zeitgeist at work, every generation being more progressive than the one that came before...not only is there a generational difference but if you live long enough each one of us also notices the change within themselves...
yup, he believes that by merely citing a racist blogger that agrees with him he's met the the burden of proof required...
really!...well it just so happens the vast preponderance of evidence supports the view there are no races...I spoke with my family archeologist/historian and she informs me that she knows of no legitimate anthropologist, archeologist or geneticist that supports the different "race" viewpoint, she says that you may have found some a few decades ago but that idea is now completely discredited... - - - Updated - - - and that is proof of what?
Exactly. So if it is not always true, you use qualifiers like "mainly" and "primarily". So the person making the claim in that article is saying it is not true all of the time. He is saying what I have been saying all along...races are not distinct and clearly demarcated. They are generalizations.
The people saying that racial groups are distinct and separate from one another. Are you not one of those people? That is completely irrelevant to me. It has nothing at all to do with this debate. Mainstream scientists have come to a consensus that does not support your conclusion. You are claiming they are doing this for emotional or political rather than scientific reasons. But that excuse could be used to dismiss anyone...including you or your sources.
What does DNA have to do with personal behavior anyway? Is a criminal's DNA different from a law-abiding person's? Races can be separated by other things than what is expressed through DNA. Even if people aren't able to understand that the united Liberal/Conservative Axis of the hereditary ruling class turned these unfit predatory races loose on us, it is undeniable that if we threaten the 1% with punishment for race treason, they have the power to change things back to the way they were before the Civil Rights movement. The game is over for the minorities then; they never freed themselves and are totally dependent on the ruling class backing them up. Anthropologists and archeologists are just passive pseudo-intellectuals who don't ask questions about things that don't make any sense if taken as is without further analysis. In other words, they don't connect the dots; they only collect the dots. Why would any pre-historic tribe choose to live in the deserts, jungles, mountains, or frozen North? No one dares ask that obvious question, so only someone not intimidated by dogmatic political-correctness censorship can answer it. These tribes were fugitive bandits who had to hide out in No Man's Land to escape justice. They were too low- IQ to build anything on their own, so they had to steal from superior races in order to live comfortably. Banished to lands practically unfit for human habitation, they were forced to adjust to the same kind of lifestyle that wild animals survived in. Bringing them back into the lands they had preyed upon is a mistake unless they are tamed by restrictive and harsh training in acting civilized.
once again he is not comprehending what he is reading...there is huge gulf of knowledge that he can't bridge..."can't see the forest for the trees"
