Hi Ken, Scientifically there is ONE genus and ONE species of all human beings, Homo sapiens. There are 3 recognized races, distinguishable by certain physical characteristics, Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. Each of these races are characterized by unique physical differences. Each of these three races are further subdivided into ethnicities, depending on the language and region of the Earth from which they originated. Then within these ethnic differences there are cultural differences which further identify them. None of these racial, ethnic, or cultural distinctions make any meaningful genetic difference. No matter our skin pigmentation, hair or eye color we are still one animal, Homo sapiens, we share the same anatomy, the same blood, (with different types A, B, AB and O, plus the Rh factor present or not) All races can give or receive blood based on these factors alone. Society, especially white society has put some kind of premium on skin, hair and eye color. It has nothing to do with reality, just snobbery.
although, not universal, modern geneticists do not classify race by skin color as skin color does not determine a race of people by by skin color; but some do speak of some kin relationships within closely aligned common allelles. Africa, by such standards has 50+ races. But there are so many genes and differing factors that go into determining the complexion or skin tone that it is not useful in determining a "race". Some of the most contemporary geneticists however dispense with race altogether. But whatever you may want to call the connections there are not and have been only 3 skin pigmentations. That is false nonsense presented by a few European darwinists (not Darwin, who himself rejected the idea and proposed that he didn't believe in race, that he had identifield several diiferent pigmentations in his Beagle trip. But those wanting to use skin pigmentation to define "higher and lower" humans came up with that stupid 3 color scheme. I dare say Indonesians are not even similarly complected to Koreans (even though some settled there. as I said, overall there are so many genetic factors that determine the melanin, but new discoveries are indicating that those with melanin closer to the skin are more likely to have darker skin. this has been found to be across the board and not necessarily unique to humans. roses don't have skins, so I am not in full comprehension, but white roses melanin is deeper from the surface or something, I really don't know much about plant physiology. But as Mendel proved long ago, when you continually interbreed different color peas the color can sometimes throwback and two green peas could have a yellow offspring and the contemporary genetics have determined pigmentation is too complex to be any type of determinant in defining genetic inheritance, it can become so only when a group of people have had centuries of non-contact with people of different alleles but even then it can change. People however long ago.
identified themselves as a "race" or a "people" There were many shades of Egyptians but they considered themselves as one "race". Likewise even though the Jews were technically the same "race" (similar physical characteristics)as their neighbors, they identified each neighbor to be of separate races. The greeks did sort of use complexion, at least they classified differing peoples as being a and b color or a and c color. Overall they concluded there were nineteen "colors" for people, and I may believe they may be the first to do so. West Africa is the most difficult because of its climate bones were not well preserved and it was thought until very recently to have been thought to be the last area settled area. Another peculiarity of west Africa is that they now suspect they were paler or lighter skinned very early residents because there is a great deal of lore about people with washed out or sick skins.
There is similar lore about the Khoisans from the Bantu, but they had long been absorbed into the Bantu people by the time there were white settlers or Zulu who were also much darker than the Bantu. But back to West Africa their were several races, or kin family groups that did begin to move into the region (probably from displacement ) and they each considered themselves a distinct race of people from the other, and with their own physical features. This is the classical use of "race", a people who identified themselves as a unique
group with closer physical and cultural ties than the other, but if you prefer tribe or people, that's fine, but please don't try to tell me there are only 3 skin colors or races because frankly I know from my own eyes that's not true simply because a few Europeans wanted to feel superior and came up with that stupid assertion and we still teach in American schools. Even in very recent times the Rwanda civil war was fought between the Hutu and Tutsi who did think the other were merely a different tribe but a different race. Certainly tribe would not fit because both consisted of several families of tribes and they thought they could determine who belonged to which tribe merely by the physical characteristics. I probably couldn't. But when I was Taiwan shortly after they had been invaded by Chiang , I could very easily tell the Chinese from the Taiwanese, simply from their physical characteristics. I would go with my friend Billy Huang and we would be waiting in a line (the Chinese always got to go in front of all Taiwanese) and I would say "here comes some Chinese, they're going to cut in front and he would try to shush me) but I was always right just from the appearance. And the rickshaw driver had to be able to tell the difference because they were licensed for Chinese passengers or Taiwanese (I could go in either, but as I usually traveled with Billy Huang, I usually traveled in the Taiwanese rickshaws.) I never saw any signs posted, so the drivers had to know whom they could pick up simply by their physical characteristics. So many more than three races. Biologically, whether you are talking skin color or physical characteristics.
Finally there are very light skinned people in the US we call black and some really dark people we call white (Emilio Tarrio). Were I to label Tarrio by his color I certainly wouldn't call him white.) I don't what race I am, when I'm in the sun I don't need sunscreen except for the tip of my nose which pinkens and I get darker than most black Americans, but the unexposed parts of my body are about as pale as a person can be. But my wife has "black" relatives with blonde hair, blue eyes and golden skin. The three races is a mythical concept and the color of one's skin is not even relevant to determining the race one is, it's the color of your antecedents that determines the race.
Hi Ken, Scientifically there is ONE genus and ONE species of all human beings, Homo sapiens. There are 3 recognized races, distinguishable by certain physical characteristics, Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. Each of these races are characterized by unique physical differences. Each of these three races are further subdivided into ethnicities, depending on the language and region of the Earth from which they originated. Then within these ethnic differences there are cultural differences which further identify them. None of these racial, ethnic, or cultural distinctions make any meaningful genetic difference. No matter our skin pigmentation, hair or eye color we are still one animal, Homo sapiens, we share the same anatomy, the same blood, (with different types A, B, AB and O, plus the Rh factor present or not) All races can give or receive blood based on these factors alone. Society, especially white society has put some kind of premium on skin, hair and eye color. It has nothing to do with reality, just snobbery.
although, not universal, modern geneticists do not classify race by skin color as skin color does not determine a race of people by by skin color; but some do speak of some kin relationships within closely aligned common allelles. Africa, by such standards has 50+ races. But there are so many genes and differing factors that go into determining the complexion or skin tone that it is not useful in determining a "race". Some of the most contemporary geneticists however dispense with race altogether. But whatever you may want to call the connections there are not and have been only 3 skin pigmentations. That is false nonsense presented by a few European darwinists (not Darwin, who himself rejected the idea and proposed that he didn't believe in race, that he had identifield several diiferent pigmentations in his Beagle trip. But those wanting to use skin pigmentation to define "higher and lower" humans came up with that stupid 3 color scheme. I dare say Indonesians are not even similarly complected to Koreans (even though some settled there. as I said, overall there are so many genetic factors that determine the melanin, but new discoveries are indicating that those with melanin closer to the skin are more likely to have darker skin. this has been found to be across the board and not necessarily unique to humans. roses don't have skins, so I am not in full comprehension, but white roses melanin is deeper from the surface or something, I really don't know much about plant physiology. But as Mendel proved long ago, when you continually interbreed different color peas the color can sometimes throwback and two green peas could have a yellow offspring and the contemporary genetics have determined pigmentation is too complex to be any type of determinant in defining genetic inheritance, it can become so only when a group of people have had centuries of non-contact with people of different alleles but even then it can change. People however long ago.
identified themselves as a "race" or a "people" There were many shades of Egyptians but they considered themselves as one "race". Likewise even though the Jews were technically the same "race" (similar physical characteristics)as their neighbors, they identified each neighbor to be of separate races. The greeks did sort of use complexion, at least they classified differing peoples as being a and b color or a and c color. Overall they concluded there were nineteen "colors" for people, and I may believe they may be the first to do so. West Africa is the most difficult because of its climate bones were not well preserved and it was thought until very recently to have been thought to be the last area settled area. Another peculiarity of west Africa is that they now suspect they were paler or lighter skinned very early residents because there is a great deal of lore about people with washed out or sick skins.
There is similar lore about the Khoisans from the Bantu, but they had long been absorbed into the Bantu people by the time there were white settlers or Zulu who were also much darker than the Bantu. But back to West Africa their were several races, or kin family groups that did begin to move into the region (probably from displacement ) and they each considered themselves a distinct race of people from the other, and with their own physical features. This is the classical use of "race", a people who identified themselves as a unique
group with closer physical and cultural ties than the other, but if you prefer tribe or people, that's fine, but please don't try to tell me there are only 3 skin colors or races because frankly I know from my own eyes that's not true simply because a few Europeans wanted to feel superior and came up with that stupid assertion and we still teach in American schools. Even in very recent times the Rwanda civil war was fought between the Hutu and Tutsi who did think the other were merely a different tribe but a different race. Certainly tribe would not fit because both consisted of several families of tribes and they thought they could determine who belonged to which tribe merely by the physical characteristics. I probably couldn't. But when I was Taiwan shortly after they had been invaded by Chiang , I could very easily tell the Chinese from the Taiwanese, simply from their physical characteristics. I would go with my friend Billy Huang and we would be waiting in a line (the Chinese always got to go in front of all Taiwanese) and I would say "here comes some Chinese, they're going to cut in front and he would try to shush me) but I was always right just from the appearance. And the rickshaw driver had to be able to tell the difference because they were licensed for Chinese passengers or Taiwanese (I could go in either, but as I usually traveled with Billy Huang, I usually traveled in the Taiwanese rickshaws.) I never saw any signs posted, so the drivers had to know whom they could pick up simply by their physical characteristics. So many more than three races. Biologically, whether you are talking skin color or physical characteristics.
Finally there are very light skinned people in the US we call black and some really dark people we call white (Emilio Tarrio). Were I to label Tarrio by his color I certainly wouldn't call him white.) I don't what race I am, when I'm in the sun I don't need sunscreen except for the tip of my nose which pinkens and I get darker than most black Americans, but the unexposed parts of my body are about as pale as a person can be. But my wife has "black" relatives with blonde hair, blue eyes and golden skin. The three races is a mythical concept and the color of one's skin is not even relevant to determining the race one is, it's the color of your antecedents that determines the race.