Geneticists have proven that race exists... check it out and verify

[goodsamaritan]

Intro:

Let's stick to scientific evidence and observation. 
Not politics.  Not "beliefs".

---------------- Begin Quote  ------------------

Look at this scientific study.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v444/n7118/full/nature05329.html
Look at the huge number of scientists and institutions that took part in this scientific study.

Here is an extract from the study above:

"We have constructed a first-generation CNV map of the human genome through the study of 270 individuals from FOUR POPULATIONS with ANCESTRY in EUROPE, AFRICA and ASIA (the HAPMAP collection). DNA from these individuals was screened for CNV using two complementary technologies: single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping arrays, and clone-based comparative genomic hybridization. A total of 1,447 copy number VARIABLE REGIONS (CNVRs), which can encompass overlapping or adjacent gains or losses, covering 360 megabases (12% OF THE GENOME) were identified in these populations."
..........

MODERN GENETICS have proved that we are all very much less alike than the Human genome project initially thought back in the year 2001. The HGP never even looked at COPY NUMBER VARIATIONS (CNV) because back then it did not even know that CNV's existed.

Here is an easy example of the error the human genome project made.

If one man has an apple and another man has 10 apples, then the HGP claimed that the apples between them were 99.9% identical. This was the logic of the human genome project, when it concluded that all humans are 99.9% identical.

BUT one man has more apples than the other.
This is a single "Copy number variation" (CNV)
As you can see CNV differences are very important.

Now modern science tells us that 12% CNV exists between the races.

Here it is presented in graphical form.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v444/n7118/fig_tab/nature05329_F7.html
............

Then look at this scientific study.
Go to the Hapmap here...
http://hapmap.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

Then click on the publication entitled:
"A SECOND GENERATION HUMAN HAPMAP with over 3.1mil SNP's"
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v449/n7164/abs/nature06258.html
Look at the huge number of institutions that took part (72) All the major genetic institutions from all over the world.

AND HERE are their findings:

"We describe the Phase II HapMap, which characterizes over 3.1 million human single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) genotyped in 270 individuals from four geographically diverse populations and includes 25–35% of common SNP variation in the populations surveyed."

So we know that
1) CNV differences between the races are 12%
2) SNP differences between the races are 20-33%.

Note that this is a second generation Hapmap study. The first generation study was of course the "human genome project."
The human genome project concluded that all humans are 99.9% identical based on SNP analysis.
How they did this considering that they only had the genome of one person is beyond me. This one genomes was also spliced together from multiple donors, so effectively it could not be used for any science apart to say that they had mapped the first human genome.

The second generation study as linked above proved that the real SNP difference is 25-35%. HUGE....

If the human genome is likened to a book, then a single SNP difference is a single word spelt wrong and a single CNV is a whole page that is different.

Genetics have proved huge genetic differences between the races.

This is SCIENCE fact.

What you have to ask yourself, is why liberals struggle to accept these scientific facts.

Don't liberals always claim that we have to celebrate our diversity.

hahahahaha

-------------

Source: http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1268895/pg1

-------------

Question: Maybe some of you guys and gals are more into this genetic stuff, kindly read, verify and explain.  This guy may be on to something.

[Brad462]

ok, so how does this make my life better.  This is just divide and conquer bullshit like much of the threads on glp.

[goodsamaritan]

I already said at the start not to get emotional about this.

The serious studies were dutifully linked.

Serious scientific studies are important for current interests and future interests.

I know a good number here are into these genetic geekiness.

I can trace my ancestors to several different races:

- malay
- chinese
- caucasian spanish
- native cuban
- aeta

My wife traces

- malay
- ilocano

The fighting cock industry is plenty aware about breeding and cross breeding. 
Cross breeds are called Battle Crosses and they are the ones you send to fights.
For example
http://longscoregamefarm.com/blood-lines/

[Brad462]

Oh, I am not getting emotional.  I am not a liberal so I don't have a problem with free speech.

[TylerDurden]

Domestic animals like cocks or dogs are not a good example re  good breeding practices. The so-called "pure breeds" have all been so heavily inbred by humans over many millenia that they invariably have all sorts of genetic defects in them. Unsurprisingly, any such animals when interbred with more wild counterparts like wolves etc., or even other  dog breeds, tend to  have somewhat healthier  offspring by comparison. Personally,  I think humans should only raise wild animals for producing meat, while not interfering with their breeding practices or nutrition.

Also, I think the word "race"  is incorrectly used,  the term "subspecies" is more appropriate, scientifically speaking. After all, within bigger groups like  Caucasians, Mongolids and Africans, for example,  there are many different, separate ethnic  "races" such as pygmies, Hottentots, Ainu etc.,  and I do not see blond Aryan or redheads as being roughly  identical genetically to darker-haired Caucasian types  either(I mean a  short, dark-haired Welshman, for example,  just does not resemble all that  ethnically a typical tall Scandinavian blond type). And then there is the likely  widely varying  admixture of modern humans with so-called "apemen", such as the recently reported Neanderthal/Denisovans/Rhodensis components of modern human DNA.

[eveheart]

Also, I think the word "race"  is incorrectly used,  the term "subspecies" is more appropriate, scientifically speaking.

Thank you, TD. well said!

Some years ago, geneticists used the term gene cluster to signify these differences. There have been times in human history when race was used to define those possessing certain gene clusters as non-human.

Don't liberals always claim that we have to celebrate our diversity

GS, what is your meaning for the phrase celebrate diversity? Here, it has to do with learning about other customs and cultures enough to prevent violent acts of hatred to people who are somehow different. It's a path to peaceful coexistence based on the idea that if you get to know another person, you may be able to look past that person's hated (and possibly false) stereotype. It has nothing to do with liberalism.

[goodsamaritan]

I did not write that, i just quoted that:

"celebrate diversity"
... until the hahahaha

That was the original author.

That must be something relevant in your  culture and politics in your respective countries, not a term we use in my country.

According to my English comprehension, that guy is making a pun / joke about how he understands diversity and with genetic studies showing genetic diversity is true.

And this is why I said above to stick to the science because some of us here are not privy to western country politics. ( I just write good enough english )

[PaleoPhil]

Great find GS! Thanks for sharing it. This should make plenty of PC libtards squirm.  More importantly, one can only hope that it will reduce the censorship of genetic research at liberal universities and reverse some of the damage that the political dogmatist S. J. Gould did to the field. No surprise that this study does not appear to have been widely reported in the mainstream media.

Peter Frost wrote a good blog article on it back in 2007. Here are some good quotes from it:

"The findings reveal “human-to-human variation is more than seven-fold greater than earlier estimates, proving that we are in fact very unique individuals at the genetic level,” -J. Craig Ventner, PhD

“one-tenth of 1 percent of 3 billion is a heck of a large number -- 3 million nucleotide differences between two random genomes.” -John Hawkes, PhD

"a tiny sliver of the genome still amounts to a lot of DNA." -Peter Frost, PhD

http://evoandproud.blogspot.com/2007/12/999-truism.html

[goodsamaritan]

Phil,

How do these new studies of human genetic variation compare with other mammals?

Races / Sub species of dogs, big cats, pigs, sheep, cattle, goats, etc.

[PaleoPhil]

I read that chimps actually have way more genetic diversity than H. sapiens sapiens. However, Jeff Leach said that the human microbiome is one of the most diverse populations on earth, which gave us quite an advantage over other species. Thanks little guys! 

[eveheart]

Those who came out saying that there was no difference between the so-called races were claiming that in the context of widely-held beliefs in scientific racism. Gould was at the tail end of a long period of scientific racism. It was nobody's intention to imply that there is no genetic difference among H. sapiens. True, there was (and still is) this type of racism om society, but the foregone assumption of white superiority is not the conclusion of modern genetics.

[goodsamaritan]

I read that chimps actually have way more genetic diversity than H. sapiens sapiens. However, Jeff Leach said that the human microbiome is one of the most diverse populations on earth, which gave us quite an advantage over other species. Thanks little guys! 

Are you familiar with what some call Junk DNA?

[PaleoPhil]

Yeah, Everheart, I know, but Gould took things so far in the other direction, and so in line with leftwing ideology, it was ridiculous. Gould's art work still has lots of folks hoodwinked. I grant that he had excellent writing skills and a flair for the soundbite (the phrase "hen's teeth and horse's toes" is pure artistry, assuming he came up with that). He is useful in one way--if you see someone throw his name around like it's supposed to be proof of something, then you know that person doesn't know nearly as much as they pretend. I prefer the likes of Theodosius Dobzhansky (who, ironically, Creationists led me to), Peter Frost, and John Hawkes. Granted, I'm an ignorant amateur, so take it with a grain of salt. 

Yes, GS, I have heard of "junk DNA," but it's been quite a while, so do fill me in on it, please.

[goodsamaritan]

The "we were engineered by god / gods / aliens" camp says the existence of various races shows humans were engineered.  They say the existence of "lots" of junk dna shows this to be true.  Also the RH negative issue.

So since you are the genetic geek, you might want to take a look at those 3 issues in the genetic analysis: races / sub species, junk dna, rh negative

Do other mammals have this issue of junk dna and rh negative?

[PaleoPhil]

Heh, heh, when it comes to the gods, GS, I take most seriously those who say there are many and that they are crazy. I distrust those who say there is only one, omnipotent (male) god who I must enslave myself to, and carry a book around. I don't trust book-carrying people, sorry.  When I see someone carrying a book, I run the other way. 

"Junk DNA" probably means "I haven't figured this stuff out yet, so I'll dismiss its importance and claim that everyone is basically the same, because that will ensure my tenure." 

BTW, when my grandfather came to this country (USA), his "race" was listed as "Irish," and his color "white." So when the census dude came around to me and asked for my race, I told him "Irish." He didn't like that answer (despite the fact that he's supposed to accept whatever the respondent tells him), and asked again, so I responded along the lines of "My grandfather's race was listed as 'Irish,' and if it was good enough for my grandfather, then it's good enough for me." He grudgingly accepted that. LOL

Race used to mean something more along the lines of ethnicity/nationality/tribe. Lately it has come to basically mean skin color, which is ridiculous and will some day be seen as such.

[goodsamaritan]

Heh, heh, when it comes to the gods, GS, I take most seriously those who say there are many and that they are crazy. I distrust those who say there is only one, omnipotent (male) god who I must enslave myself to, and carry a book around. I don't trust book-carrying people, sorry.  When I see someone carrying a book, I run the other way. 

"Junk DNA" probably means "I haven't figured this stuff out yet, so I'll dismiss its importance and claim that everyone is basically the same, because that will ensure my tenure." 

Let me rephrase my query so we can have something substantial:

The "we were engineered to be human" camp says the existence of various races shows humans were engineered.  They say the existence of "lots" of junk dna shows we were engineered.  Also the RH negative issue shows we were engineered.

So since you are the genetic geek, you might want to take a look at those 3 issues in the genetic analysis: races / sub species, junk dna, rh negative

Do other mammals have this issue of junk dna and rh negative?

[PaleoPhil]

Engineered, eh? Like I said, I think the gods are crazy, so I don't think they properly engineered anything. I think they tried to make something in a half-assed manner, screwed it up, said "Oh, what the hell," and then had a party and got drunk. 

The gods did make the other animals, it's true, but for some reason, the other animals aren't as arrogant and mixed up as we humans are.

[goodsamaritan]

Engineered, eh? Like I said, I think the gods are crazy, so I don't think they properly engineered anything. I think they tried to make something in a half-assed manner, screwed it up, said "Oh, what the hell," and then had a party and got drunk. 

Do you mean that human genetic make up is MESSED UP compared to Chimps and Gorillas?  Are there studies on this?

Comparing the human and chimpanzee genomes: Searching for needles in a haystack
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/12/1746.full

?

[TylerDurden]

PP is right, junk DNA is increasingly seen as being more useful than people thought. As for Gould, he was a very dangerous pseudo-scientist, really  only a Marxist philosopher at best. Fortunately,  advances in evolutionary biology managed to debunk the  utter drivel he spouted, over the years. Fortunately, he died a while back - like Max Planck one stated:-" Science advances one funeral at a time".

[PaleoPhil]

Do you mean that human genetic make up is MESSED UP compared to Chimps and Gorillas?  Are there studies on this?

The human gene pool is apparently less diverse, which is a disadvantage, though we have a more diverse microbiome, which is an advantage. Unfortunately, Americans have thrown away much of that advantage by developing the least diverse microbiome in the world (which is what Jeff Leach's research has shown).

[Projectile Vomit]

Interesting discussion. For those who aren't familiar, Jeff Leach is the founder of the Human Food Project, and the American Gut Project. You can find links in a recent blog post where I discuss some of the work he's doing.

I also recently wrote on the bias of science, which seems to be an underlying topic here too. Fancy how that issue keeps cropping up...

[sabertooth]

Bias is inherent within the scientific method itself. Based upon the revelations of quantum mechanics on how the act of observation by a human can  in itself directly effect the outcome of the experiment, these observations at the macro level of our living human reality are just as distorted by P.O.V. of the observer as observations made at an abstract quantum level.  As is above so is below and beyond to infinity.

I see the "randome" repeating patterns of so called genetic gibberish that are not fully understood as evidence that there is still much mystery left to be solved.

Geneticist have yet to completely map the human Proteome, or understand how its multiplicity of functions intelligently alter the DNAs structure in accordance's to an innate perception of the environment, to evolve the DNA epigenticaly. These seemingly miraculous and scientifically ignored functions of the unmapped proteins of the proteome are responsible for the manifestation of the DNA into a living and evolutionary life form. These unmapped interactions between the Genome, proteome, and environment are responsible for the phenomenon of separation of species and racial diversity.