GBWhite
Very Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2013
- Messages
- 1,006
- Reaction score
- 1,440
I answer that question with a question George.
How many species of Humans are there?
Oh, how I wish they would dispense with the political correctness nonsense and do (well, publish honestly what has been done rather than all the ******** about us all being identical) a proper taxonomical review of humans. If we applied the same rules to humans that we do to snakes, we'd have so many species and subspecies of humans it would be crazy. Which of course is why the world's geneticists came to a consensus and by banding together managed to effectively ban any such material from being published, and only release all the 'oh, we're all identical other than skin colour' crap. Right in the region I'm in now there are two ethnic groups (which if were classified as animals would be separate taxa), they evolved side by side, one in the hills one in the jungle lowlands, and they're so radically different. One is ultra petite and slender, the other is ultra stocky and robustly built. It's really cool to see how radically differently they evolved in the different environments, but so close together. It reminds me so much of hill and floodplain death adders, fully reproductively compatible but remaining so genetically isolated for so long, living side by side, and genetically differentiating.
If there is only one species of human, there is only one species of death adder (and there's a fair argument for that).
Totally agree Sdaji, especially with the last sentence.
We only have to look at our indigenous people here in Australia to justify the argument that humans could (and probably should for that matter) be classified into separate taxa.
It's pretty obvious that even though there are uniquely distinct characteristics associated with particular races of humans zoological science doesn't appear (for some reason) to want to accept that we are also animals and as such choose to ignore this fact and place us all in the same basket.
Cheers,
George.
It would be relatively difficult, I agree, to find pure Europeans in Australia, but certainly they exist and aren't that rare.
I take offence at that statement :lol:
Oh, how I wish they would dispense with the political correctness nonsense and do (well, publish honestly what has been done rather than all the ******** about us all being identical) a proper taxonomical review of humans. If we applied the same rules to humans that we do to snakes, we'd have so many species and subspecies of humans it would be crazy. Which of course is why the world's geneticists came to a consensus and by banding together managed to effectively ban any such material from being published, and only release all the 'oh, we're all identical other than skin colour' crap. ....
Another conspiracy theory...you cannot be serious! There is more genetics data available out there on humans than any other organism. There are also plenty of people still publishing articles and books pushing the ideology of human races.
You may be surprised to discover that when compared with many other mammalian species, humans are genetically far less diverse. Take for example the species closest to man... the chimpanzee. The subspecies group Pan troglodytes troglodytes, which occurs in central Africa, has higher levels of overall genetic diversity than do humans globally. Needless to say, the genetic variation between them and the subspecies P. t. verus found in western Africa, is that much greater again.
It is not simply about visible variation, which can be the result of genetic plasticity in a small number of gene loci that just happen to possess a large number of allelic variants. It is about the total genetic variation between groups and how abruptly that is delineated.
Ever wondered why anthropologists (and sociologists) could not agree amongst themselves as to the actual number of supposed geographic races of man? It ranges from three 3 to 75 or more, depending on the author. Even if we restrict ourselves to the so-called ‘major races’ and omit the ‘minor races’ it varies from the ‘3 great races’ to 4 or 6 or 9 etc. The reality is that there are no distinct boundaries. You take genetic samples from the middle of specific continents thousands of kilometres apart and they will show clear and consistent variation whenever repeated. However, sampling done at smaller regular distances reveals that these changes are gradual and the differences cumulative. The characteristics upon which racial discrimination is based are clinal, the main reason most modern anthropologists have abandoned the notion of geographic races of mankind.
If you want a pertinent example of clinal variation, look no further than what has been used as a keystone characteristic for racial discrimination... skin colour. The fact is that skin pigmentation in humans is greatest in the tropical band and gets progressive less with increasing distance from the equator. Even within one country this can be clearly evident, such the skin colour of southern Italians compared to their northern counterparts.
Enter your email address to join: