Scientists Prove Race Does Not Exist Genetically

by SYN 9 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  SYN
• 

  breeze

  I am confused, color, eyes, skin, etc, I thought were determined by GENES....

  So I am wrong???
• 

  Undecided

  Something doesn't jive to me.

  Maternal DNA suggested that even "white" people had, on average, 33 percent of genes that were of Amerindian ancestry and 28 percent African. - Reuters

  If there is no difference in the DNA of African or Indian, how can they give percentages of each race?

  Ken P.
• 

  RubyTuesday

  You ask a geneticist what race is and she'll say, .....Race is scientifically meaningless. Take any population in comparison to any other population, and you'll find as much genetic diversity within each as between the two.....You ask a philosopher what race is and he'll say, Race is a fallacy. The concept is incoherent and self-contradictory, not to mention pernicious.... You ask a social scientist what race is and she'll say, ..Look, race may not have a genetic or metaphysical basis, but it is a social fact. Another will reply, ...Yes, but it's of declining significance in the new global economy.... Another will chime in, ...It's an epiphenomenon of class...Another will say, ...It's a social construction that must be viewed as it interrelates with and cross-cuts others like class, gender, sexuality, and religion.
• 

  Mutz

  50,000 years ago modern humans began the migration from East Africa. From then on subsequent migrations populated the rest of the earth. Scientists have traced back the Mytochondrial DNA showing that we are all related. It's only 2000 generations (wonder how many that is in WT generations? heh) since this happened. So much for the Bible bashers laughable theory that mankind is only 6000 years old.
• 

  LucidSky

  "Race" is just a general category of features, like breeds of dogs or cats. It is somewhat ambiguous since races can and do mix though.

  But to say that race is not reflected in a person's genes is like saying that a parent's genes aren't reflected in his child.
• 

  ThiChi

  The 2000 Generation estimate has been revised considerably in the recent past. So this of itself does not prove anything. The time line has been constantly compressed not expanded. So we have common parents?
• 

  kelsey007

  I have always said that in the human factor there is only one race- the human race. Just like dogs- there are many dif shapes, sizes and colors. It can be argued that obese poeple have a "fat" gene that thin people do not have or at least not the same type of "fat" gene. But they are still of the human race. Just dif shapes, sizes and colors.
• 

  troucul

  this is interesting...wasn't it said that Adam had to be black, since the white gene is present in a black person? Yet the black gene is not present in a white person. Since the man transfers the genetic information via the sperm, Adam must have been black. Or have I been misinformed?
• 

  funkyderek

  this is interesting...wasn't it said that Adam had to be black, since the white gene is present in a black person? Yet the black gene is not present in a white person. Since the man transfers the genetic information via the sperm, Adam must have been black. Or have I been misinformed?

  Yes, grossly misinformed in fact. Adam was a mythological character. Also, there's no "white gene" or "black gene". Skin colour is mainly determined by about six genes.

  To say race has no scientific meaning is probably too strong. Certainly, people who share common ancestry and common characteristics (such as skin color, body size and shape) that distinguish them from other people are normally grouped as a race, and of course they generally share genes that are less common in other races. But the boundaries of race are very fluid and difficult to define, and the differences between individuals within any one race are usually greater than the differences between races.