Is race real?

Discuss various aspects of ancient civilizations and humanity in general.

Moderators: Calilasseia, amok, ADParker

Re: Is race real?

#3561  Postby Tiel » Aug 16, 2011 6:32 pm

pinkharrier wrote:Hmmmm. Anyone disagree? Tiel? Lyingcheat? Galaxian? No social constructing for H.nea?

I don’t disagree but I also don’t formally agree at most I would agree by default.

Why?

Well in one hand we have very interesting data about the anatomy of Neanderthal man. We know that this man had remarkably distinct features such as his skull, his strength and perhaps even his growth. We even have today a part of Neanderthal genome and know there were probably interbreeding between Neanderthal and some modern humans.

In the other hand we have no complete data about genetic diversity and population structure of various Nanderthal populations and so no enough data to compare those population structures with those of modern humans who were contemporaneous to Neanderthal.

Did Neanderthal and modern human form a cline? Perhaps but were not sure, were the situation of modern human and Neanderthal analogous to the situation of brown bear and polar bear? That’s a possibility but again we’re not sure. However consideromg some important morphological difference and more phylogenetically distant compared to modern human populations we place Neanderthal in a different taxonomic unit, sometimes as a different species and sometimes just as another subspecies of Homo sapiens.

pinkharrier wrote:Oh, and Tiel, there is a good reason to undo your changed Galaxian quote. It is called being gracious. Do you know the word (BTW your English is pretty damn good)?

My english is not perfect at all so I have a little excuse.

So perhaps I was not particularly gracious but it will certainly be exagerate to say I was dishonest (seriously only one litte post between his and mine) or nasty. :roll:

And so nothing serious, I understand the moderator the essential point being that somebody has understood the point behind the picture with Danny De Vito.

Galaxian wrote: Now, we learn (as you & me always knew, since it is common sense) that up to 4% of European & Mid Eastern genes are Neanderthal.

And we found this “Neanderthal contribution” among East-Asian and Papuans in fact probably in all non-african populations (not in concordance with traditional racial classifications).

Galaxian wrote:So the coupling produced fertile hybrids. There is no neanderthal content in native sub-Saharan genes.

That’s not a certitude at all considering the small sample that was use to detect some “Neanderthal contribution” among subsharian africans, in fact the contribution is perhaps simply uncommon but not totally absent.

Galaxian wrote:Making a mockery of "mosaic" theories of human genetics.

No you just give a good reason to making a mockery of you!

The term “mosaic” doesn’t mean that we have to find absolutely every allele in every human population. But even considering the last point we can verify the mosaic character of human diversity when we see alleles or haplogroups (and so traces of maternal or paternal extra-continental contributions) who are common outside of Africa but curiously also common in some subsaharian populations and uncommon in others.

In fact this type of “mixtures” seems in fact to be more common in recent human evolutionary history that we commonly think (remember this recent paper).
User avatar
Tiel
 
Posts: 95

Switzerland (ch)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Is race real?

#3562  Postby mcgruff » Aug 16, 2011 7:04 pm

Tiel wrote:I don’t disagree but I also don’t formally agree at most I would agree by default


Yes: I think it's a best guess given what we've discovered so far, but not a certainty.
I'm not a c*nt!
User avatar
mcgruff
Suspended User
 
Posts: 2186
Male

Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3563  Postby pinkharrier » Aug 16, 2011 9:23 pm

So races have existed, but not now. Okay-ish. Hmmmm. So why isn't H.nea a "social construct" if he/she was still around?

As usual, I'm confused.
I'm a rational skeptic. Touch wood.
User avatar
pinkharrier
 
Posts: 797

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3564  Postby Tiel » Aug 16, 2011 10:56 pm

pinkharrier wrote:So races have existed, but not now. Okay-ish. Hmmmm. So why isn't H.nea a "social construct" if he/she was still around?

As usual, I'm confused.

I have the unpleasant feeling that you want to be confused.

There's not certitude about the "taxonomical status" of Neanderthal but the classifications proposed for Neanderthal are mostly not based on social prejudice or "ideal types" but on morphology and even today of phylogenetic reconstruction with the sample of Neanderthal DNA. But to be fair it's true that some social prejudice have involved in some Neanderthal reconsturctions, at least in the past when a lot of people, even scientists, seen Neanderthal as a stupid simian beast. But for the question of modern human populations we have to consider the present data about diversity and its mosaic And the problem with "racial classifications", is that they misrepresent the human diversity.
User avatar
Tiel
 
Posts: 95

Switzerland (ch)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3565  Postby Galaxian » Aug 18, 2011 4:16 pm

So, here is the latest finding about the part of the human family tree that we've been discussing. From the journal; "Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia". Reprinted in the latest New Scientist magazine:
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images ... -2_550.jpg
Image

It shows clearly that there is no such thing as a 'mosaic' structure to humanity. The subsaharan African branch has been seperated from the European, Chinese, & Papuan branches for well over 100,000 years.
Biowatch & Galaxian have linked other tables & graphs earlier in this thread showing the distance between various local humans populations. They also showed that mosaic is a political confabulation to serve a social agenda.
No doubt there are some genes that are found in well separated populations. That's not a big deal. Spontaneous mutations are allowed to happen all over the world; downs syndrome, huntingtons chorea, sickle cell, hemophilia, UGT1A1, etc. And for whatever reason, some become established (such as sickle cell's advantage in Malarial areas).
But before the age of air travel distant populations had very little interaction for several tens of thousands of years. The reason for the lack of interaction was;
a) Difficulty & long duration of travel.
b) Dying from foreign diseases if travel was attempted by the foolhardy.
c) Being killed for invading other's territory. Only local mating transfers were acceptable.

These factors of isolation made racial differences significant enough that two more factors became important;
d) Significant cultural & language differences creating further dislike & suspicion.
e) Further genetic divergence so that races looked different & then became actual subspecies.

Which created yet more divergence, leading to;
f) 'General' reluctance to interbreed (except for fetishists).
g) Actual cross-sterility, tending to full speciation (ie; hybrids are unlikely, & have high incidence of dying).

So we have some 7 points, starting from the trivial & developing to the major & insurmountable.
It is only in recent decades that safe travel by air, sea, rail, & highways, have enabled some interbreeding. And then, it is only by high tech medical intervention that a lot of cross sterility has been over come...but needs to be repeated generation by generation, because the sub-species divide is so persistent.

Speciation is a law of Nature. I mentioned before that even if we seed an empty world with a totally homogenous population of absolutely identical clones, & we have perfect travel & communication between them. So long as there is no medical intervention, & forced eugenics programs, & forced social control; the population will fragment into different cultures & phenotypes & subspecies, then species. And that is with the above perfect scenario.
Therefore, given the above 7 points operating in an imperfect world, not seeded by clones, the fact of present human subspeciation is an absolute reality that can NOT be denied by truthseekers
. :book:
The true seeker looks for the truth wherever it may be and readily accepts it, without shame, without hope for reward and without fear of punishment_Sam Nejad


This world of sheeple has no hope .... Nor does it deserve any! -Galaxian
User avatar
Galaxian
Suspended User
 
Posts: 1238

Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3566  Postby Tiel » Aug 18, 2011 8:47 pm

Galaxian wrote:It shows clearly that there is no such thing as a 'mosaic' structure to humanity. The subsaharan African branch has been seperated from the European, Chinese, & Papuan branches for well over 100,000 years.

No, you just ignore what your opponents said.

You’re human family tree is oversimplified because its goal it to be focalised on the past mixing between Neanderthal, Denisova Man and non-africans populations. But as I said before with references there were far mor recent mixing between African and Non-African populations.

African and Non-African Populations Intermixed Well After Migration out of Africa 60,000 Years Ago, Genome Studies Show

Inference of human population history from individual whole-genome sequences

And do you remember th Haplogroup T estimed between 19,000-34,000 Before Present?

Image

Well again human diversity is a mosaic whether you admit it or not.

So in fact you’re human family tree (such the others) ignores a lot of mixtures between African and Non-African populations. In fact I already explained those things in one of my previous post but naturally you’ve just ignored it.

Tiel wrote:I’m always amused by the attempts of «racial classification» of the various human populations. So what are the Caucasians? Are the Arabs Caucasians? If not are all the Spanish, southern Italians still Caucasians? If yes are the Indians Caucasians? And the Basque people are they also a race? Oh yeah you can define “sub-races” or more funny “sub-subspecies”. But according to some “phylogenetic/haplogroups markers” and the hierarchical model should we not define two, three or more races in African population and considers all the non-African populations as sub-races? And what about the fact that we have different phylogenetic markers so different ancestries within these “races”, “sub-races” or whatever?

As far I Know all racial classification simply give us a lame picture of the human diversity and recent evolutionary history!

Here I used google to translate from french a excerpt of a very nice summary of the problems posed by racial classifications

ImageImage
Image

A) Simplified tree of human populations, as a classic by clades. This tree is the synthesis of a genetic analysis of 120 polymorphic alleles among 42 populations. It presents the kinship / proximity between populations. (L. Cavalli-Sforza and A. Piazza, 1988). This tree is not false, it is scientifically correct as it represents the relationship and average distances it is asked to represent the criteria considered.

B) Based on the same tree were added (in red) part crudely sketched major exchanges of migrants between populations. More complete, this tree fills the gap in the graph A tree, that it is no longer a simple splitting of populations, valid to represent the relationships between taxa with reproductive barrier accomplished but little demonstration of the complexity of the genealogy human population - all the result of interbreeding and ongoing dialogue.

C) Always the same tree, but even more complete and sophisticated: we superimpose other interpopulation interbreeding and gene flow.

ImageImageImageImageImageImage
A) Simplified Migration / diversification of human populations.

B) and C). Here have been added, with spots of different colors, resulting in recombination / redistribution mean alleles / individuals respond to these population movements (flows, migration, separation, recombination, etc.). Colors mean giving more pronounced at the extremes - continuous flow going in different directions - which of course was very roughly illustrated.
Each small group of points in this graph can represent a family, a tribe, or an individual with its genetic pool. (A) to (C), are graphs showing the broad strokes of history and the situation of humanity (C) Aggregate number, from their past (A) at a time and location given.

D) From this diagram, starts the racialization of aggregates, ie the mental transformation of humanity and its people in combinations and ordered groups, with their share of artificial and arbitrary. From the diagram D, the scientific study of the phylogeographic is transformed and alienated.

E) The groups here are even more shoddy, and F). We just superimposed idealized racial types (color) and even more crudely symbolized (B / W) according to the 3-5 old traditional divisions. These groupings are races - at least we try to illustrate graphically here - a poor design, a contradiction, and a handicap to understand the history of our species and its present diversity.

A note in this graphic approach: for its manufacture using software for image processing fairly simple patterns D, E, and F were reconstituted by texturing a mosaic in which the pixel values are calculated and assembled into tiles average value. We realize here the extraordinary similarity between the way the software calculates the average of different colors of an image area into a flat pad with a single average color, and how humans are mentally with groups from artificial and arbitrary to individuals and / or small population aggregates (set of alleles / individuals and small populations / aggregates), to assign these individuals to a larger group. Photoshop then assigns the pixels of different colors in a color block averaged (D and E), and our brain is about the same, inviting us to forget the reality (A to C) of what is happening in this appearance " Racial "the ends of a continuous variation biogeographic transformed into idealized races or racial divisions.



Galaxian wrote:Speciation is a law of Nature. I mentioned before that [b]even if we seed an empty world with a totally homogenous population of absolutely identical clones, & we have perfect travel & communication between them. So long as there is no medical intervention, & forced eugenics programs, & forced social control; the population will fragment into different cultures & phenotypes & subspecies, then species. And that is with the above perfect scenario.

And so mixtures is a law of nature just as Speciation and in fact there’s were a lot of mixture in the history of human populations.

And historically there were much forced social control to prohibit some unions and impose segregation and so go against what you have logically to call a “law of Nature”.

But perhaps will you say that these people are the result of the violation of the “law of Nature”?

I don’t think so! :roll:
User avatar
Tiel
 
Posts: 95

Switzerland (ch)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3567  Postby Biowatch » Aug 19, 2011 12:29 am

But as I said before with references there were far mor recent mixing between African and Non-African populations.


Yes, that is mentioned by Risch in his paper I cited earlier. It doesn't prevent categorization of groups into continental clusters that reflect their ancestral background.

By contrast, Pacific Islanders are those with indigenous ancestry from Australia, Papua New Guinea, Melanesia and Micronesia, as well as other Pacific Island groups further east. Native Americans are those that have indigenous ancestry in North and South America. Populations that exist at the boundaries of these continental divisions are sometimes the most difficult to categorize simply. For example, east African groups, such as Ethiopians and Somalis, have great genetic resemblance to Caucasians and are clearly intermediate between sub-Saharan Africans and Caucasians [5]. The existence of such intermediate groups should not, however, overshadow the fact that the greatest genetic structure that exists in the human population occurs at the racial level.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC139378/
Biowatch
 
Posts: 308

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Is race real?

#3568  Postby Galaxian » Aug 19, 2011 2:24 pm

Tiel wrote:
Galaxian wrote:It shows clearly that there is no such thing as a 'mosaic' structure to humanity. The subsaharan African branch has been seperated from the European, Chinese, & Papuan branches for well over 100,000 years.

No, you just ignore what your opponents said.

When my opponents spout PC bullshit, then of course I ignore them. Because they can't be taken seriously, since they've exchanged dispassionate scientific inquiry for passionate agendas.
Tiel wrote:You’re human family tree is oversimplified because its goal it to be focalised on the past mixing between Neanderthal, Denisova Man and non-africans populations. But as I said before with references there were far mor recent mixing between African and Non-African populations.

As Biowatch pointed out above (yet again) some mixing, especially at the boundaries, such as E. Africa, does NOT mean that the races are a mosaic, where anything goes: an Eskimo born to a Masai, or a Congo Pygmy born to a Chinaman....that is simply delusional, no matter what pretentious "authority" it comes from. That in itself is concrete evidence that there is no significant mosaic at the racial/subspecies level. Pretending otherwise is like saying that we are a mosaic genus with canines, because we both have eyes & ears & legs. If you're taking the mosaic concept up to the core, the 'type specimen' of distinct races, you may as well go the whole hog & say we're a mosaic with every living organism on earth, because we all have DNA. It makes the word 'mosaic' meaningless.
The population of England is a mosaic of Celts, Saxons, & Normans. But when you venture much further, the mosaicness diminishes, till you come across geographical boundaries such as mountains, large rivers, seas, deserts, dense jungle & such. At those barriers subspeciation is accelerated. The barriers are catalysts to the natural phenomenon of evolutionary divergence of competing organisms.

Your haplogroup map actually supports the fact of NO notable mosaic effect. Did you notice that it simply dies away within a few thousand kilometres of Djibouti & makes little inroad into Africa?
The map strongly supports what I wrote in my last, & previous posts; that an advantageous or neutral gene will propagate under the right environmental conditions. The fact that over these tens of thousands of years, that haplogroup T has only diffused strongly within just a few hundred km is a rebuttal of mosaic. By the time it gets to Europe we're talking of just 1 to 3%. The distant isolated cases are either by ancient trade routes, or from independent mutations, just as happened with some other genes, especially at fragile points of the DNA.
You should know by now that what I've said is correct, even if you have a cock-eyed view of that map; another indicator is that at the port towns of Eastern India, which did trade with Aden & Djibouti over hundreds of years, the haplogroup has stayed fixated on the coast at the contact points. In other words, it was quarantined by the Indian population. How? (they didn't know about haplogroups at the genetic level). They quarantined it subconsciously, due to the different appearance of those affected...they did not approve of the liaison between Arab traders & local prostitutes with the occasional half-breed. So the hybrids had a difficult time dispersing into the community; they were generally ostracised. That's why, over hundreds of years, there's bugger all to show for the contact; only local effects & little to no mosaic diffusion.
Tiel wrote:
Galaxian wrote:Speciation is a law of Nature. I mentioned before that even if we seed an empty world with a totally homogenous population of absolutely identical clones, & we have perfect travel & communication between them. So long as there is no medical intervention, & forced eugenics programs, & forced social control; the population will fragment into different cultures & phenotypes & subspecies, then species. And that is with the above perfect scenario.


And so mixtures is a law of nature just as Speciation and in fact there’s were a lot of mixture in the history of human populations.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :cheers: Yes, you have that correct. It is, as Professor Sumner Miller said, "A balance of forces" That's why, if there are no races on the planet, then they WILL develop. And if there are too many races, too close together, then some will be subsumed, some mixed, & some murdered....Unless they continue to develop on into a different species. Surely you're aware that closely related species generally are reluctant to inhabit the same ecological niche...they either fight to the death, disperse, or continue to diverge until they're no longer closely related.
On ALL planets of the Galaxy which have life, there is an OPTIMUM range of varietal density. It differs from planet to planet depending on the conditions. In severe environments, the varietal density is low, in verdant places it is high.
Tiel wrote:And historically there were much forced social control to prohibit some unions and impose segregation and so go against what you have logically to call a “law of Nature”.
But perhaps will you say that http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... family.jpg these people are the result of the violation of the “law of Nature”?

The social controls & the cute photo, like the Danny De Vito one before, are irrelevant to the discussion :book:
The true seeker looks for the truth wherever it may be and readily accepts it, without shame, without hope for reward and without fear of punishment_Sam Nejad


This world of sheeple has no hope .... Nor does it deserve any! -Galaxian
User avatar
Galaxian
Suspended User
 
Posts: 1238

Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3569  Postby pinkharrier » Aug 19, 2011 3:42 pm

Tiel wrote:
You’re human family tree is oversimplified


OK Tiel, I may disagree with you but I will, as an aside, give you something: your English is good enough that you may as well perfect it.

you're = you are.
Your = possessive adjective as in your house, argument, thing


Only exception if you can't be buggered changing it. That's what I do.

"ur" is making inroads unfortunately, replacing both. And it is helped on its way by the fact that so many people misspell and misread and misuse "your" and "you're" so often, context is used to sort it out. And context is usually right. Bye bye a bit more punctuation.

By the way, who are those people in that picture? It is a fascinating guess. Do you know?
I'm a rational skeptic. Touch wood.
User avatar
pinkharrier
 
Posts: 797

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3570  Postby Dudely » Aug 19, 2011 6:43 pm

Galaxian wrote:
Speciation is a law of Nature. I mentioned before that [b]even if we seed an empty world with a totally homogenous population of absolutely identical clones, & we have perfect travel & communication between them. So long as there is no medical intervention, & forced eugenics programs, & forced social control; the population will fragment into different cultures & phenotypes & subspecies, then species. And that is with the above perfect scenario.


No, mixing is a law too and you'd have to prevent the mixing from happening somehow. This usually happens through geography. Obviously a group of lizards on a small island are not ever going to split into two different species (assuming they have no trouble traveling anywhere on said island). You need to move some to another island or something similar for that to happen. This is a really simple concept with some pretty easy math behind it.

Also, if we went by our genes we'd actually be a subspecies of chimp along with bonobos and chimpanzees. Any proposed subspecies of humans would have to be subsubspecies (which, obviously, would be stupid).
This is what hydrogen atoms do given 15 billion years of evolution- Carl Sagan

Ignorance is slavery- Miles Davis
User avatar
Dudely
 
Posts: 1450

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3571  Postby pinkharrier » Aug 19, 2011 7:19 pm

BTW, how did the different Galapagos tortoises manage to separate onto different islands? Float? Swim?
I'm a rational skeptic. Touch wood.
User avatar
pinkharrier
 
Posts: 797

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3572  Postby Dudely » Aug 19, 2011 8:13 pm

pinkharrier wrote:BTW, how did the different Galapagos tortoises manage to separate onto different islands? Float? Swim?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gal%C3%A1pagos_tortoise#Evolutionary_history
This is what hydrogen atoms do given 15 billion years of evolution- Carl Sagan

Ignorance is slavery- Miles Davis
User avatar
Dudely
 
Posts: 1450

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3573  Postby Agrippina » Aug 20, 2011 5:37 am

:lol: pinkharrier's moved from parrots to tortoises now. Still no decision on the original question?
Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature.
Michael Faraday
User avatar
Agrippina
 
Posts: 33190
Age: 103
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3574  Postby Galaxian » Aug 20, 2011 6:42 am

General Broadcast: I wont reply to dumb-ass posts from those who haven't read/understood Galaxian's posts, or don't do 2+2=4. Or don't do research & deep thinking about topics. Lizard diversification included :coffee:
Last edited by Galaxian on Aug 20, 2011 8:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
The true seeker looks for the truth wherever it may be and readily accepts it, without shame, without hope for reward and without fear of punishment_Sam Nejad


This world of sheeple has no hope .... Nor does it deserve any! -Galaxian
User avatar
Galaxian
Suspended User
 
Posts: 1238

Print view this post

Is race real?

#3575  Postby The_Metatron » Aug 20, 2011 6:56 am

Galaxian will make his own dumb-ass posts.
My blog, Skepdick.eu

"If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another." - Carl Sagan
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 14383
Age: 51
Male

Country: Belgium
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Is race real?

#3576  Postby lyingcheat » Aug 20, 2011 12:21 pm

Galaxian wrote; On ALL planets of the Galaxy which have life, there is an OPTIMUM range of varietal density. It differs from planet to planet depending on the conditions. In severe environments, the varietal density is low, in verdant places it is high.

You have knowledge not only of life on other planets but also the various ecological conditions extant thereon?
Gosh, why don't you publish? Think of the fame and adulation...

Galaxian wrote; When my opponents spout PC bullshit, then of course I ignore them. Because they can't be taken seriously, since they've exchanged dispassionate scientific inquiry for passionate agendas.

That's rich coming from someone who claims knowledge of off-planet civilisations, who has previously revealed details of off-planet-life-form taxonomy, and who claims homo sapien sub-speciation is an established fact.

Galaxian wrote; Speciation is a law of Nature.

No it isn't. Speciation 'Law' isn't a, or the, cause that leads to speciation. Speciation is an effect brought about, given the right conditions, by natural processes, or 'laws' if you like.

Whether or not these natural processes impose themselves on homo sapiens to the same extent they do on less mobile, less adaptable, and less self-determinate species is part of the debate.
It appears however that it's part of the debate you either overlooked, or leapt right over in your haste to deliver your entirely speculative, and largely irrational, conclusions.
http://www.philosophyprofessor.com/phil ... theory.php
http://www.philosophyprofessor.com/phil ... theory.php
http://www.philosophyprofessor.com/phil ... ialism.php

Galaxian wrote; I mentioned before that even if we seed an empty world with a totally homogenous population of absolutely identical clones, & we have perfect travel & communication between them. So long as there is no medical intervention, & forced eugenics programs, & forced social control; the population will fragment into different cultures & phenotypes & subspecies, then species.

This ^^^ is merely a baseless assertion, coloured by your peculiar world view. It has no foundation in fact.
Such assumptions, used as the basis for a theory, inevitably lead to error. As you immediately demonstrate with the sentence following it in the paragraph it was lifted from.
Being this one -
Galaxian wrote; Therefore, given the above 7 points operating in an imperfect world, not seeded by clones, the fact of present human subspeciation is an absolute reality that can NOT be denied by truthseekers.

You seem to have a poor understanding of the meaning of the phrase "absolute reality".
Can you produce any respectable citations that support this revelation? Any evidence?

Answer - No.
> Insert Witty Signature Phrase Here <
User avatar
lyingcheat
 
Posts: 331
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3577  Postby Agrippina » Aug 20, 2011 12:33 pm

Whoa! I go away for a few days then come back to find that someone has not only found life on other planets but is able to describe it. Yay!!
Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature.
Michael Faraday
User avatar
Agrippina
 
Posts: 33190
Age: 103
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3578  Postby Galaxian » Aug 20, 2011 2:56 pm

Agrippina wrote:Whoa! I go away for a few days then come back to find that someone has not only found life on other planets but is able to describe it. Yay!!

It's UN-common sense. Evidently only the privilege of a few, such as Galaxian.
Have you been to the archipelago of tiny islands to the S-E of South Georgia & the South Sandwich Islands? No, you haven't have you? Don't fib...some of them no one has been to. So, according to your logic, there's no life there. Or at best, we just don't know.
But Galaxian KNOWS that there's life there, & plenty of it.
What about the water around it. YOU don't know if it's salty. But I KNOW that it is salty.
How do I know these things? It's called the "Principle of Mediocrity"; only the non-mediocre can understand it (look it up).
That is how Galaxian KNOWS, 100%, of life on billions upon billions of planets of other solar systems (that's not all by any means). That's how I know that billions of those are intelligent. How sooo many are peaceful & live with other sentient species. And it was Darwin who told me about how their life can be described.
I know of planets where not only do sentient species live side by side, but where some actually have 3 or 4 sexes. Amazing isn't it? I've even written published material about it & how to calculate their rate of evolution as compared with a 2 sex species such as ours (and yes, read by Richard Dawkins & applauded by him).
Now, you may mock it. I don't give a hoot. But it would be wiser to develop similar methods of thinking :coffee:
The true seeker looks for the truth wherever it may be and readily accepts it, without shame, without hope for reward and without fear of punishment_Sam Nejad


This world of sheeple has no hope .... Nor does it deserve any! -Galaxian
User avatar
Galaxian
Suspended User
 
Posts: 1238

Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3579  Postby pinkharrier » Aug 20, 2011 9:07 pm

Galaxian said "That's how I know that billions of those are intelligent."


Don't count on it. The odds of creating very intelligent, conscience life are one divided by all the variations of DNA that have ever existed (past and present).

The universe is 13+ billions of years old. As Fermi said, if it (intelligent life) is common and it has had billions of years to get around, where is it?
I'm a rational skeptic. Touch wood.
User avatar
pinkharrier
 
Posts: 797

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Is race real?

#3580  Postby mcgruff » Aug 20, 2011 9:19 pm

Remember how big the universe is. If we had a million scientists in teams of 12 who could travel instantaneously to each star and spend just thirty days studying it, it would take a hundred thousand years to explore our galaxy and ten million billion years to explore the universe. We'll never know what might be out there because we won't live long enough to find out.
I'm not a c*nt!
User avatar
mcgruff
Suspended User
 
Posts: 2186
Male

Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Anthropology

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 3 guests