Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [evol-psych] Re: Request for prediction/speculation

Expand Messages
  • Ronald C. Blue
    Variance of two races can not be measured because race does not exist genetically! Current models suggest that we all originated from one female within the
    Message 1 of 13 , Nov 3, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Variance of two races can not be measured because race does not exist
      genetically! Current models suggest that we all originated from one female
      within the last 250,000 years. Minor variation due to some limited
      isolation has produced noticeable differences for some individuals. For
      example being an American native, to me all whites, blacks, and Asian -
      look alike. But strangely the Japanese look familiar... Humm, perhaps it
      is because I read the latest report that said the closes group to the
      American native are the Japanese. But I will tell you one things for sure,
      those Japanese boys sure do build good cars and they own the most robots in
      the world!

      Ron Blue
      http://turn.to/ai (USA only)
      http://www.enter.net~ronblue
      "The age of extremely superior artificial intelligence has begun."
    • Henry Harpending
      Ralph is right on. There is a lot of visible denunciation of the race concept , but when anyone is forced to say what the race concept is it invariably comes
      Message 2 of 13 , Nov 3, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Ralph is right on. There is a lot of visible denunciation of
        "the race concept", but when anyone is forced to say what the
        race concept is it invariably comes out sounding like species.
        It is all word play. The answer is a number, that number is
        about 1/8, and all the rest is word salad and sophistry.

        Boyd and Silk ought to know better, but then again genetics is
        not their specialty. And Venter! We sequence a single genome
        and announce that there are no race differences: my little kid
        can figure out that that makes no sense.

        In fairness to the genome jocks, we have to remember that they
        consume a lot of grant money and that the minute anyone starts
        crying racism they are at risk of losing that funding.

        A colleague last week described a meeting at NIH where a
        prominent genome jock stood up and said humans were all the same,
        race differences were insignificant, and so on. My colleage said
        he "had a tear in his eye, one hand on his heart, and his other
        hand on his wallet".

        Henry Harpending





        --- In evolutionary-psychology@y..., Ralph L Holloway <rlh2@c...>
        wrote:

        > There is the major straw-man argument: "...large-scale genetic
        differences
        > should occur along sharp boundaries. If such genetic
        differences exist,
        > they have not been observed."
        >
        >
      • Michael Lamport Commons
        What would happen if one did the following factor analysis: Enter the: assumed superficial race characteristics names of the races brain case volume other
        Message 3 of 13 , Nov 3, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          What would happen if one did the following factor analysis:

          Enter the:
          assumed superficial race characteristics
          names of the races
          brain case volume
          other physical characterists individually
          short sequences of DNA individually

          Has this been done? Is the data available easily? Why or why not?


          My Best,

          Michael Lamport Commons, Ph.D.
          Research Associate and Lecturer

          Program in Psychiatry and the Law
          Department of Psychiatry
          Harvard Medical School
          Massachusetts Mental Health Center
          74 Fenwood Road
          Boston, MA 02115-6196

          Telephone (617) 497-5270
          Facsimile (617) 491-5270

          Commons@...
          http://www.tiac.net/~commons/
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Henry Harpending" <harpend@...>
          To: <evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 8:41 PM
          Subject: Re: [evol-psych] Majority against race concept (are they right?)


          > Ralph is right on. There is a lot of visible denunciation of
          > "the race concept", but when anyone is forced to say what the
          > race concept is it invariably comes out sounding like species.
          > It is all word play. The answer is a number, that number is
          > about 1/8, and all the rest is word salad and sophistry.
          >
          > Boyd and Silk ought to know better, but then again genetics is
          > not their specialty. And Venter! We sequence a single genome
          > and announce that there are no race differences: my little kid
          > can figure out that that makes no sense.
          >
          > In fairness to the genome jocks, we have to remember that they
          > consume a lot of grant money and that the minute anyone starts
          > crying racism they are at risk of losing that funding.
          >
          > A colleague last week described a meeting at NIH where a
          > prominent genome jock stood up and said humans were all the same,
          > race differences were insignificant, and so on. My colleage said
          > he "had a tear in his eye, one hand on his heart, and his other
          > hand on his wallet".
          >
          > Henry Harpending
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In evolutionary-psychology@y..., Ralph L Holloway <rlh2@c...>
          > wrote:
          >
          > > There is the major straw-man argument: "...large-scale genetic
          > differences
          > > should occur along sharp boundaries. If such genetic
          > differences exist,
          > > they have not been observed."
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > News in Brain and Behavioural Sciences - Issue 75 - 2nd November, 2002
          > http://human-nature.com/nibbs/issue75.html
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >
          >
        • Ralph L Holloway
          ... The spectrum is continuous, yes, but human settlement isn t. Populations get separated from each other by mountains, rivers, lakes, deserts, and a host of
          Message 4 of 13 , Nov 3, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            On Sun, 3 Nov 2002, H.M. Hubey wrote:
            > >>In keeping with the scientific
            > >>definition of color, if hues are to be divided into color groups,
            > >>large-scale differences should occur along sharp boundaries.
            > >>
            >
            > Of course they don't!
            >
            > All you have to do is start up any graphics program (eg. a paint
            > program) on a Mac or PC
            > and the look at the 2D distribution of the colors.
            >
            > It is obvious that there are no such large-scale sharp differences along
            > the boundaries.
            > Instead of a sharp difference between Red and Blue, we observe a
            > gradient that runs from
            > Red to Blue via shades of purple. Ditto for Red & Green (yellow, orange
            > etc gradient)
            > and so on.
            >
            > Yet no fool says that colors are not real or that they don't exist, or
            > that "Red is not a
            > scientific concept" or any of the other silly things that some people
            > say about race.

            The spectrum is continuous, yes, but human settlement isn't. Populations
            get separated from each other by mountains, rivers, lakes, deserts, and a
            host of linguistic, religious, and other cultural barriers that effect
            gene flow to different degrees. I don't think I would use the color
            spectrum wavelengths as an analogy.

            All best,


            Ralph L. Holloway
            Dept. Anthropology
            Columbia University
            NY, NY 10027
            212-854-4570
            Fax= 212-854-7347
            Web Page www.columbia.edu/~rlh2
          • John Goodrum
            Ralph L Holloway wrote: Perhaps I m wrong, but these figure were done back in the 70 s with mostly blood group gene frequencies. I , and I m sure there are
            Message 5 of 13 , Nov 3, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Ralph L Holloway wrote:

              Perhaps I'm wrong, but these figure were done back in the '70's
              with mostly blood group gene frequencies. I , and I'm sure there are
              others among us, who would really appreciate seeing an actual
              calculation being done here on known DNA sequence materials for the
              groups you mention, you know, with real numbers. I know it would help
              me. The answer might not change in any particular way, but seeing the
              actual calculating being done would be very useful.
              ----------------

              Ralph,

              As far as the actual calculating, a couple of papers that go through
              the math are:

              Excoffier, L., Smouse, P.E., Quattro, J.M. 1992. Analysis of molecular
              variance inferred from metric distances among DNA haplotypes:
              application to human mitochondrial DNA restriction data. Genetics
              131:479-494. Free at:
              http://www.genetics.org/cgi/content/abstract/131/2/479

              and

              Weir, B.S., Cockerham, C.C. 1984. Estimating F-statistics for the
              analysis of population structure. Evolution 38:1358-1370.

              I think at least the first one has some real numbers, although for
              mtDNA and I don't recall what populations are used.

              Also, I seem to remember that the user manual that comes with Arlequin
              software has a methods section with explanations of different types of
              data analysis:

              http://lgb.unige.ch/arlequin/software/


              JG
            • John Goodrum
              ... That was my sentiment exactly, and why I wrote The Race FAQ, because I couldn t see how the race question could ever be resolved without the perspective
              Message 6 of 13 , Nov 3, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                H.M. Hubey wrote:

                > The numbers are relative.
                >
                > What I would like to see is similar calculations involving different
                > species e.g. chimps and humans,
                > or cats, lions and tigers.
                >
                > Then we would have some feeling for what these numbers indicate.

                That was my sentiment exactly, and why I wrote The Race FAQ, because I
                couldn't see how the race question could ever be resolved without the
                perspective gained by looking at what makes a race in other species.

                Sewall Wright (of Fst fame) said a long time ago that if any other
                species showed the level of genetic population structure (i.e., Fst)
                seen in humans, the divisions of that species would be called
                subspecies. Was he right? Or is the 10-15% of variance found between
                continental populations truly negligible as we're so often told?
                Well, there's a lot of literature out there these days, and I invite
                anybody and everybody to do their own review of it. But as far as I
                can tell, Wright was correct. The references are all there in my
                paper and you can check them for the data analysis methods used.

                On the other hand, of course, the fact that races exist in humans in
                the same way that they exist in other species doesn't tell us a lot
                about the ramifications, if any, for humanity as a whole.

                JG
                The Race FAQ -- http://www.goodrumj.com/RaceFaq.html
              • Mark E. Hall
                ... Well, I think one thing that has been lacking in these posts is how race is to be defined. Which leads to my question, what are the racial
                Message 7 of 13 , Nov 4, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Ron Blue writes:

                  > Variance of two races can not be measured because race does
                  > not exist genetically! Current models suggest that we all
                  > originated from one female within the last 250,000 years.
                  > Minor variation due to some limited isolation has produced
                  > noticeable differences for some individuals.

                  Well, I think one thing that has been lacking in these posts is how
                  "race" is to be defined. Which leads to my question, what are the
                  racial classifications that are to be used? Without advocating a
                  post-modern stance, I would note that within the USA, race has been
                  defined differently at different time periods. Ethnicity for that
                  matter has been to. But don't take my word for it necessarily, check
                  out (in no particular order, and what is sitting on my desk at home at
                  the moment):

                  Guterl, "The New Race Consciousness: Race, Nation and Empire in American
                  Culture," JOURNAL OF WORLD HISTORY, Vol. 10, 1999, pp. 307-352.

                  Kramer, "Empires, Exceptions, and Anglo-Saxons: Race and Rule between
                  the British and United States Empires, 1880-1910," JOURNAL OF AMERICAN
                  HISTORY, Vol. ?, 2002, pp. 1315-1353.

                  Gerstle, AMERICAN CRUCIBLE, Princeton Univ. Press, 2001.

                  And for the British defining "race" in the past, see:

                  Hutton, "Race and Language," INTERVENTIONS, Vol. 2, 2000, pp. 53-72.

                  Winlow, "Anthropometric cartography: Constructing Scottish racial
                  Identity in the early 20th century," JOURNAL OF HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY,
                  Vol. 27, 2001, pp. 507-528.

                  So, it comes down to how we are defining these groups and really if our
                  definitions will stand the test of time..

                  Best, Mark Hall
                  Niigata Prefectural Museum
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.