Changes for page The Existence of Race

Summary

• Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -31,23 +31,23 @@
31	31
32	32	Genetic clusters consistently mirror the major traditional races. If humans are partitioned into, say, five genetic clusters, these turn out to correspond to people of Africa, Europe (and West Asia), East Asia, Oceania, and the Americas, respectively. (Increasing the number of clusters can subdivide groups further; for example, a six-group analysis might separate out a specific population like the Kalash of South Asia as its own cluster.) The point remains that human genetic variation is geographically structured in a roughly hierarchical way, reflecting our evolutionary history of populations expanding and diverging in relative isolation. These genetic groupings correspond closely to classical racial groupings, even if researchers today often use the terms “population” or “ancestry” instead of “race”.
33	33
34		-One striking genetic finding is that sub-Saharan Africans form the most divergent branch of the human family tree. Worldwide DNA surveys consistently show that *Africans (especially indigenous sub-Saharan groups) have the greatest genetic distance from all other human populations*. This is consistent with the “Out of Africa” model: African lineages are the oldest and most diverse, whereas non-African populations stem from one subset of Africans that migrated out \50–70,000 years ago, acquiring additional differentiation subsequently. After the primary African vs. non-African split, the next major genetic differentiation is often observed between Oceanian (Australo-Melanesian) peoples and the rest of Eurasians. Other continental groups – Europeans, East Asians, Native Americans, etc. – cluster intermediate to those extremes. In essence, humans have a *tree-like genetic structure* with real branches, rather than being a uniform blend./foot
	34	+One striking genetic finding is that sub-Saharan Africans form the most divergent branch of the human family tree. Worldwide DNA surveys consistently show that *Africans (especially indigenous sub-Saharan groups) have the greatest genetic distance from all other human populations*. This is consistent with the “Out of Africa” model: African lineages are the oldest and most diverse, whereas non-African populations stem from one subset of Africans that migrated out \50–70,000 years ago, acquiring additional differentiation subsequently. After the primary African vs. non-African split, the next major genetic differentiation is often observed between Oceanian (Australo-Melanesian) peoples and the rest of Eurasians. Other continental groups – Europeans, East Asians, Native Americans, etc. – cluster intermediate to those extremes. In essence, humans have a *tree-like genetic structure* with real branches, rather than being a uniform blend.{{footnote}} https://www.amren.com/archives/back-issues/october-1999/#:~:text=If%20we%20return%20to%20the,fascinating%20topic%20for%20another%20day{{/footnote}}
35	35
36		-It is true (as often cited) that within-group genetic variation is large: roughly 85% of human genetic variation exists *within* local populations, and only \15% between major races. However, this fact – first highlighted by Richard Lewontin in 1972 – does not mean races are meaningless, and it can be misleading if taken out of context. The key rebuttal is known as “Lewontin’s Fallacy.” Lewontin had calculated variation one gene at a time, finding each gene’s differences small between groups. But later statisticians (such as A. W. F. Edwards) pointed out that while any single gene varies mostly within groups, the correlations among many genes allow nearly perfect classification of individuals into their population of origin. As Edwards noted, *Lewontin’s argument “ignores the fact that most of the information that distinguishes populations is hidden in the correlation structure of the data and not simply in the variation of individual factors.”* When many loci are considered together, distinct genetic signatures emerge for different races. In practical terms, while two individuals from different races may share certain genes or traits, when you look at hundreds or thousands of genetic markers simultaneously, the overall pattern reveals their differing ancestry.
	36	+It is true (as often cited) that within-group genetic variation is large: roughly 85% of human genetic variation exists *within* local populations, and only \15% between major races. However, this fact – first highlighted by Richard Lewontin in 1972 – does not mean races are meaningless, and it can be misleading if taken out of context. The key rebuttal is known as “Lewontin’s Fallacy.” Lewontin had calculated variation one gene at a time, finding each gene’s differences small between groups. But later statisticians (such as A. W. F. Edwards) pointed out that while any single gene varies mostly within groups, the correlations among many genes allow nearly perfect classification of individuals into their population of origin. As Edwards noted, *Lewontin’s argument “ignores the fact that most of the information that distinguishes populations is hidden in the correlation structure of the data and not simply in the variation of individual factors.”* When many loci are considered together, distinct genetic signatures emerge for different races. In practical terms, while two individuals from different races may share certain genes or traits, when you look at hundreds or thousands of genetic markers simultaneously, the overall pattern reveals their differing ancestry.{{footnote}} https://someofmybestfriendsarewhite.tumblr.com/post/80846397928/race-is-biologically-non-existent-im-not-making#:~:text=An%20argument%20is%20that%20there,it%20is%20fallacious%20because%20it{{/footnote}}
37	37
38		-Moreover, the level of between-group genetic differentiation humans *do* have (about 10–15% variation partitioned between races) is not biologically trivial. In population genetics, a statistic called F<sub>ST</sub> measures the genetic differentiation among populations. Humans’ inter-group F<sub>ST</sub> values (on the order of 0.1–0.2 between continental groups) are comparable to or greater than those seen between subspecies in many other animals. In fact, one analysis showed humans have *higher* genetic differentiation and heterozygosity than some species that are formally divided into multiple subspecies. For example, many mammal and bird species are split into subspecies for far smaller genetic gaps. Thus, by zoological criteria, it is reasonable to view major human populations as akin to subspecies.
	38	+Moreover, the level of between-group genetic differentiation humans *do* have (about 10–15% variation partitioned between races) is not biologically trivial. In population genetics, a statistic called F<sub>ST</sub> measures the genetic differentiation among populations. Humans’ inter-group F<sub>ST</sub> values (on the order of 0.1–0.2 between continental groups) are comparable to or greater than those seen between subspecies in many other animals. In fact, one analysis showed humans have *higher* genetic differentiation and heterozygosity than some species that are formally divided into multiple subspecies. For example, many mammal and bird species are split into subspecies for far smaller genetic gaps. Thus, by zoological criteria, it is reasonable to view major human populations as akin to subspecies.{{footnote}} https://someofmybestfriendsarewhite.tumblr.com/post/80846397928/race-is-biologically-non-existent-im-not-making#:~:text=of%20the%20framework%20of%20race,of%20potential%20human%20phylogenetic%20species{{/footnote}}
39	39
40		-In sum, genetic evidence strongly supports the existence of biological racial groupings. Humans are a diverse, polytypic species – not in the sense of completely discrete, non-interbreeding groups (human races grade into each other and have fuzzy boundaries), but in the sense of statistical clusters of both genes and traits. These genetic clusters are real enough that they can be used predictively (e.g. for biomedical purposes or forensically) and reflect deep evolutionary history.
	40	+In sum, genetic evidence strongly supports the existence of biological racial groupings. Humans are a diverse, polytypic species – not in the sense of completely discrete, non-interbreeding groups (human races grade into each other and have fuzzy boundaries), but in the sense of statistical clusters of both genes and traits. These genetic clusters are real enough that they can be used predictively (e.g. for biomedical purposes or forensically) and reflect deep evolutionary history.{{footnote}} https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/07/19/once-again-are-races-social-constructs-without-scientific-or-biological-meaning/#:~:text=The%20meaning%20of%20the%20biological,evolutionary%20origin%20of%20group%20members{{/footnote}}
41	41
42	42	## Morphological and Physical Differences Among Races##
43	43
44	44	Beyond genetics, human races manifest observable physical differences that go far deeper than skin color. The most obvious is pigmentation (populations from sunny tropical latitudes evolved darker skin, while those from higher latitudes evolved lighter skin to synthesize vitamin D), but many other evolved traits distinguish human groups. Anthropologists and biologists have documented racial differences in body proportions, skeletal morphology, facial features, hair texture, metabolism, and other physiological traits, often as adaptations to different environments.
45	45
46		-Skeletal Structure: Skulls and skeletal measurements vary sufficiently by ancestry that forensic anthropologists can often determine a person’s race or ancestry from skeletal remains with high accuracy. In actual forensic case studies, anthropologists correctly estimated ancestry \91% of the time using skeletal evidence. Under research conditions, using detailed craniometric measurements, accuracy rates between 81% and 99% have been reported for identifying an individual’s race from the skull. These successes are possible only because cranial shape and dimensions differ by population – for instance, features of the eye orbits, jaw, nasal aperture, etc., exhibit patterns characteristic of Africans, Europeans, East Asians, and so on. The existence of such consistent skeletal differences (so much so that “race” can be diagnosed from a skull) underscores that race has biological reality.
	46	+Skeletal Structure: Skulls and skeletal measurements vary sufficiently by ancestry that forensic anthropologists can often determine a person’s race or ancestry from skeletal remains with high accuracy. In actual forensic case studies, anthropologists correctly estimated ancestry ~~91% of the time using skeletal evidence.{{footnote}} https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28133721/#:~:text=skeletons%20of%20individuals%20from%20known,recent%20cases%20showed%20a%20significantly{{/footnote}} Under research conditions, using detailed craniometric measurements, accuracy rates between 81% and 99% have been reported for identifying an individual’s race from the skull.{{footnote}} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craniometry#:~:text=A%20few%20studies%20claim%20that,99%25%20accuracy%20depending{{/footnote}} These successes are possible only because cranial shape and dimensions differ by population – for instance, features of the eye orbits, jaw, nasal aperture, etc., exhibit patterns characteristic of Africans, Europeans, East Asians, and so on. The existence of such consistent skeletal differences (so much so that “race” can be diagnosed from a skull) underscores that race has biological reality.{{footnote}} https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28133721/#:~:text=skeletons%20of%20individuals%20from%20known,recent%20cases%20showed%20a%20significantly{{/footnote}}
47	47
48		-Specific skeletal and body-form differences follow ecogeographical rules. Populations from cold climates tend to have bulkier bodies and shorter limbs, conserving heat (an instance of Bergmann’s rule and Allen’s rule), whereas those from hot climates are more long-limbed and slender to dissipate heat. For example, within Africa, Nilotic peoples (such as the Dinka and Maasai of East Africa) are renowned for being extremely tall and lean – adult males often exceed 6 feet, with elongated limb proportions. This “elongated” physique is thought to be an adaptation for survival in hot, arid environments. In contrast, Arctic indigenous groups (like Inuit) tend to have stockier, compact bodies presumably adapted to cold stress (shorter limbs, more body fat insulation), though these groups were not mentioned in our sources. Even within more temperate regions, historical European races were differentiated by stature and build – e.g. the Nordic race was characterized as tall and long-legged, whereas the Alpine and Dinaric races of central Europe were more stocky on average.
	48	+Specific skeletal and body-form differences follow ecogeographical rules. Populations from cold climates tend to have bulkier bodies and shorter limbs, conserving heat (an instance of Bergmann’s rule and Allen’s rule), whereas those from hot climates are more long-limbed and slender to dissipate heat. For example, within Africa, Nilotic peoples (such as the Dinka and Maasai of East Africa) are renowned for being extremely tall and lean – adult males often exceed 6 feet, with elongated limb proportions.{{footnote}} https://www.amren.com/archives/back-issues/october-1999/#:~:text=The%20Elongates%2C%20on%20the%20other,modern%20American%20game%20of%20basketball{{/footnote}} This “elongated” physique is thought to be an adaptation for survival in hot, arid environments. In contrast, Arctic indigenous groups (like Inuit) tend to have stockier, compact bodies presumably adapted to cold stress (shorter limbs, more body fat insulation), though these groups were not mentioned in our sources. Even within more temperate regions, historical European races were differentiated by stature and build – e.g. the Nordic race was characterized as tall and long-legged, whereas the Alpine and Dinaric races of central Europe were more stocky on average.{{footnote}} https://archive.org/stream/racialelementsof035485mbp/racialelementsof035485mbp_djvu.txt#:~:text=one%20or%20the%20other%20race,over%20the%20nape%20of%20the{{/footnote}}
49	49
50		-Facial and Cranial Features: Classic racial anthropology noted differences in head shape (cranial index), facial width, nasal form, etc. Africans on average have more prognathic (forward-projecting) jaws, whereas Europeans tend to have straighter profiles, and East Asians have distinctive flatter facial bone structure. Nose shape varies clinally: narrow noses are more common in dry or cold climates (to humidify and warm air), while broad noses are more common in humid tropical climates. Eye shape is another differentiator – the epicanthic fold of East Asian populations (and some others) is a familiar trait, though its adaptive significance is debated (it might protect the eyes from cold or glare). Hair form ranges from tightly coiled Afro-textured hair (adapted perhaps to dissipate heat from the scalp) to straight, thick East Asian hair (which retains heat and may have evolved for cold climates), with Europeans often intermediate (wavy or curly hair). These traits *bundle together* in populations due to shared ancestry and evolution, giving each race a recognizable phenotypic profile.
	50	+Facial and Cranial Features: Classic racial anthropology noted differences in head shape (cranial index), facial width, nasal form, etc. Africans on average have more prognathic (forward-projecting) jaws, whereas Europeans tend to have straighter profiles, and East Asians have distinctive flatter facial bone structure. Nose shape varies clinally: narrow noses are more common in dry or cold climates (to humidify and warm air), while broad noses are more common in humid tropical climates./foot Eye shape is another differentiator – the epicanthic fold of East Asian populations (and some others) is a familiar trait, though its adaptive significance is debated (it might protect the eyes from cold or glare). Hair form ranges from tightly coiled Afro-textured hair (adapted perhaps to dissipate heat from the scalp) to straight, thick East Asian hair (which retains heat and may have evolved for cold climates), with Europeans often intermediate (wavy or curly hair). These traits *bundle together* in populations due to shared ancestry and evolution, giving each race a recognizable phenotypic profile.
51	51
52	52	As one historical example, Hans F.K. Günther described how even a “casual onlooker” could distinguish the predominant races in Europe by a combination of features: *“North-west Europe, especially Scandinavia, shows...tall, fair, narrow-faced men and women, with long heads... The Austrian Alps show\...a definite type described as the Dinaric race \[broad-headed, high-cheekboned]... Spain and southern Italy…\[are] settled by a relatively homogeneous \[Mediterranean] population,”* and so on. Such “ocular proof” of racial phenotype continues to be evident in modern populations, albeit mixed to varying degrees.
53	53