It's not that you have to be of the same race to have a bone marrow transplant. What your source says is that people who are more similar genetically are more likely to have the same tissue type allowing for a match.
There are genetic differences between populations so population-based medicine is a reality. That doesn't mean that the concept of race is applicable to humans. Read this study for more detail:
quote:There are genetic differences between populations so population-based medicine is a reality. That doesn't mean that the concept of race is applicable to humans. Read this study for more detail:
How so lol? If humans are all the same why would trivial phenotipic traits dictate one's bone marrow being so different? This doesn't make sense unless there is Race.
Posted by Morpheus (Member # 16203) on :
quote:Originally posted by The_Killer_Wolofi: How so lol? If humans are all the same why would trivial phenotipic traits dictate one's bone marrow being so different? This doesn't make sense unless there is Race.
Noone said humans were all the same nor do phenotypic traits have anything to do with bone marrow. There are variations in gene frequency that may lead to different health risks for certain populations but that doesn't mean that breeding populations are defined by anatomical trait complexes.
Again read the paper I posted. It outlines how human variation is structured and why race is not a valid concept for describing this structure.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Whether or not Race is a valid scientific concept is not germane to our casual conversations. None of us are on this forum to discuss our latest experiments. We are here to "DEFINE" the various activities and accomplishments of the "SOCIAL" groupings of people whom the White man has defined as races.
It seems to be disingenuous by some, to suddenly, after hundreds of years of the cruelest misdeeds in the name of race, decide that race no longer exists. The fact is that it is way too late for a do-over. Race is what we have, race is what has defined us, race is what has defined our place in the world, and race is what we STILL must deal with. So enough of this fairy tale revisionist bullsh1t.
Posted by Morpheus (Member # 16203) on :
Your anger is misplaced, Mike.
Noone is saying that racial issues disappear because race itself is not a scientifically valid concept. This is purely a scientific discussion and you should not feel threatened by such a debate.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
Indeed. Mike and definitely Marc who dares use the term "subspecies" are doing nothing but perpetuating what white supremacists have begun in the first place. Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
I am not threatened by conversation, I was merely stating the facts as they exist. But I am mindful that there are some who would say, "race does not exist" therefore your complaints about racism, and your remedies for the same, are invalid because racism does not now exist.
The meaning of all of that is "let us keep all that we have gotten in the name of race" and then lets all just start over again from there, but without race this time. I for one, am not that stupid. Lets play the hand out, as is.
Of course, the alternative is to give back all that you took. But I don't think that anyone is really interested in that, after all, then it's about REAL stuff, not just high-sounding talk.
Posted by Morpheus (Member # 16203) on :
Look at the Box 1 Summary for the article I linked to. It clearly states that the absence of race does not mean the absence of racism.
I have never encountered a person who is educated on what anthropologists say about the non-existence of race who in turn say that racism is not a problem that needs to be addressed nor do I know of any anthropologists who say this. If someone does make such a comment we can set them straight but you need not be concerned about such a thing as that is not what is being stated by any of us.
Posted by JMT2 (Member # 16951) on :
As I was watching ABC News with Charles Gibson, they had a segment on the new experimental AIDS vaccine. During the segment Gibson said scientist were unsure if the potential vaccine could work in certain populations such as those in North America or Africa in comparison to Asian populations. My question is if race does not exist why would this vaccine work in Asia but not N. America or Africa? Perhaps somebody with insight in biology can clarify this matter, or perhaps Dr. Winters and Marc are correct with their theory.
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Morpheus says:
''I have never encountered a person who is educated on what anthropologists say about the non-existence of race who in turn say that racism is not a problem that needs to be addressed nor do I know of any anthropologists who say this.''
..and just what is it an anthropologist might say is the cause of racism? And if they do address racism what exactly can they offer as to why it even exists?
Simply saying that humans are the same biologically, or nearly so, doesn't address anything. It says to me they know nothing about what makes a person tick... even after conversing with neuroscientists all day; and probably don't want to to know for that matter.
So then, since there are ''no races,'' at least not now, this then should cure everyone of their ''unnatural predisposition'' to racism and prejudice because of that false clinging to the ''concept'' of racism based solely on phenotype, which should be debunked by now because of what anthropologists are saying, or, think, what they are saying is the truth within their limiteed understanding of the human condition. Yet not to many people I suspect believe the anthropologists' interpretation because of ''simple'' biology.
Speaking of neuroscience, is anyone prepared to say there may be neurological references to racism? Isn't that biology? Also nueroscientists will say everyone is wired differently. Is that where racism comes from?
Let me ask you guys a question. Why is it you think people like Dirk8, Afrocentricsmasher, Bigmo, and a host of others carry on the way they do? Is it all because they know there are no differences biologically? They undoubtedly recognize there are no lung/heart/stomach differences. So, why are they up in arms with most of the folks on this site? With the current ''there are no differences'' approach shouldn't flowers be falling all over the place?
Posted by Morpheus (Member # 16203) on :
quote:Originally posted by JMT2: As I was watching ABC News with Charles Gibson, they had a segment on the new experimental AIDS vaccine. During the segment Gibson said scientist were unsure if the potential vaccine could work in certain populations such as those in North America or Africa in comparison to Asian populations. My question is if race does not exist why would this vaccine work in Asia but not N. America or Africa? Perhaps somebody with insight in biology can clarify this matter, or perhaps Dr. Winters and Marc are correct with their theory.
I heard something similar on CNN in a conversation between Anderson Cooper and Sanjay Gupta but they didn't say Asian they said people in Thailand. Go back and read the article I posted particularly the section titled Human genome variation, demographic groups and disease.
There is substantial genetic variation that may be localized to regions or populations. This means that population-based medicine (some say "race") is a reality because variation in gene frequency may mean that there are health disparities between populations that are related to their genetics. That doesn't mean that the human species is divergent enough to warrant classification of populations into sub-species as the article clearly explains.
quote:Originally posted by Grumman: Morpheus says:
''I have never encountered a person who is educated on what anthropologists say about the non-existence of race who in turn say that racism is not a problem that needs to be addressed nor do I know of any anthropologists who say this.''
..and just what is it an anthropologist might say is the cause of racism? And if they do address racism what exactly can they offer as to why it even exists?
That question is more relevant to the field of psychology which specializes in studying human thoughts and behavior. But as for why there are still racists despite the fact that mainstream science does not favor racist theories that is a simple question to answer. People have opinions and some will stick stubbornly to them even if they are fringe. Mainstream science accepts evolution and has alot of scientific evidence to back it up while Creationists rely primarily on faith for their belief in human origins.
Likewise even though mainstream anthropologists, geneticists and Psychologists have refuted ideas about intelligence and behavior being genetically determined by race there are still fringe theories out there promoted by agenda driven scholars who support racist theories which become the heroes of racists like the trolls you mentioned on this board.
There is obviously something psychologically wrong with many of them. Psychiatrists have actually pondered whether extreme (pathological) bias can be considered a mental illness.
I do believe there is something wrong with the mind of a person who trolls an internet forum day in and day out because they can't stand the fact that people of a certain skin color are capable of building an advanced civilization despite all the evidence that proves it. Some of these people you can tell from their writing are not quite right in the head. What is the cause of this? Upbringing? Brainwashing? Genetics? All of the above? I do not know but I do know that many of them give the impression that they are crazy and you often cannot reason with someone who is crazy nor do their views have to be mainstream for them to strongly support them.
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
Yes, race exists.
It's a sociological mechanism based on aesthetics -- physically and culturally perceived indicators of geographical origin and population affinity -- which, when a subject perceives any degree of socio-racial discord (most people today), often comes with some shape or form of insane moralistic baggage since it's personal (old people i sware... especially Uncle Ruckus's .. seriously -- how the fcuck did some of these people make it thru 2 today psychologicallY? God knows..).
From this we might think that such a concept should never even be considered, especially when distant peoples will likely be so different in many ways albeit mostly taxonomically/scientifically-superficial ones. However, there is always a time and place, as race had and has use for the patronizing of institutional racial slavery and other socio-economic creatures of that nature:
Some of us tho are fly enough
and we don't take racial BS so serious
that we start looking to the world for wat we r 2 be [supposedly]
instead of looking in ourselves 2 find the world "God" put in we. Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
[@JMT2 -- that question is like asking why combing some people's hair out to fros works and why for others like KhoiSan it may not work, why some hair products work for people with straight hair and others for 1s with kinki hair, why i can hide in a sea of caramel better than a dark skinned or white guy, and so on. Essentially your question doesn't relay much of a point nor at all contradict race's biological and taxonomical in-existance.]
Posted by The_Killer_Wolofi (Member # 16624) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Whether or not Race is a valid scientific concept is not germane to our casual conversations. None of us are on this forum to discuss our latest experiments. We are here to "DEFINE" the various activities and accomplishments of the "SOCIAL" groupings of people whom the White man has defined as races.
It seems to be disingenuous by some, to suddenly, after hundreds of years of the cruelest misdeeds in the name of race, decide that race no longer exists. The fact is that it is way too late for a do-over. Race is what we have, race is what has defined us, race is what has defined our place in the world, and race is what we STILL must deal with. So enough of this fairy tale revisionist bullsh1t.
I agree with this, but I am talking about biology and not sociology.
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Posted by Grumman (Member # 14051) on :
Morpeus writes:
''That question is more relevant to the field of psychology which specializes in studying human thoughts and behavior.''
Then psychologists have the answer to racism, even though they specialize in it as compared to anthropologists who simply say race doesn't exist thereby distancing themselves from racism and an attempt to explain it?
''But as for why there are still racists despite the fact that mainstream science does not favor racist theories that is a simple question to answer.''
Are all mainstream scientists non-racists? There may be some but the stakes of revealing themselves is much too high.
''People have opinions and some will stick stubbornly to them even if they are fringe.''
Peoples opinion aren't 'necessarily fringe', just another way of looking at things; things that appear to be fringe because the opposing system has a lock on the non-fringe explanation. That said if the fringe position have any facts to support the position then it can't be labelled such.
So despite the horrors that racism has caused over the millenia can racism still be suggested as fringe? Since you aren't a racist then why are you comfortable in calling a racist fringe given that he or she may actually feel differently than you? And considering the weight behind racism and the ills that it has caused many people, are you still prepared to say, according to the psychological route, that it is still nothing more than a belief system? And what is your belief system? That all men are created equal?... something I innately ascribe to by the way, if given a level playing field.
''Mainstream science accepts evolution and has a lot of scientific evidence to back it up while Creationists rely primarily on faith for their belief in human origins.''
I've read a lot of mainstream scientists who accept evolution but can't see it happening without a designer behind it. And I agree creationists, or maybe most of them, see no need for a scientific explanation behind origins. That said can an evolutionary biologist explain the origins of life with a belief system devoid of facts, just like the creatonists? From my position it looks like both the evolutionist and creationist operate on a religious system of belief as it pertains to specifics of origin, not the relatedness of most living organisms on this planet.
''There is obviously something psychologically wrong with many of them [racists].''
Then you are suggesting there are some racists, just like I'm suggesting, whom are actually sound of mind and body?
''Psychiatrists have actually pondered whether extreme (pathological) bias can be considered a mental illness.''
And this pathological bias may manifest itself in the form of murdering another person. Seen another way, why is it a bank robber, black or white, can shoot a teller because the teller sees his face, and he isn't branded a racist, but he may be one after further investigation, yet a racist who murders because of race has a mental illness? So this simply means all racists aren't pathological in the sense you suggest.
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
Naturally race exists as that is all many of you here ever think about.
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
Hore i didn't know you believed in the human power of manifestation, even when it comes to circumventing the ways God designed the nature of the universe.
Posted by The_Killer_Wolofi (Member # 16624) on :
I am starting to believe the only reason the people on this site don't want to believe in race is because of how race was classified with skull appearance. Since Ancient Egyptians didn't have skulls that clustered with Sub-Saharan Africans the people on this site are begging for there to be no race so they can lay claim to Ancient Egypt.
This is rather petty in my opinion.
I am starting to believe in race AGAIN as I did before I came to this site due to my knowledge of specific donor bone marrow transplantation. It makes no sense to say there are no races when certain people need bone marrow from only a select people, sorry. If our organs are different as well as appearance then race DOES exist.
Maybe the problem is the word "RACE" and we need to change it to different "BREEDS" of humans.
Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
^^^ The thing is race doesnt exist biologically , and as proven time and time again, Africa and in this case elongated Africans such as Sudanese, Tutsi, Ethiopians, Somalians etc...can and do possess features that were once thought to be due to non African admixture...
quote:I am starting to believe the only reason the people on this site don't want to believe in race is because of how race was classified with skull appearance. Since Ancient Egyptians didn't have skulls that clustered with Sub-Saharan Africans the people on this site are begging for there to be no race so they can lay claim to Ancient Egypt.
Of course they do...Sub Saharan Africans such as Sudanese, Ethiopians, Somalians etc....
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by The_Killer_Wolofi: I am starting to believe the only reason the people on this site don't want to believe in race is because of how race was classified with skull appearance.
I agree with this notion, but "breeds" is bunk.
Since AE (especially early on) clearly clustered with other Africans in certain contexts (language, morphology, culture, etc) this has upset some who are not confortable with things like the fact that skull shape ties ancient "egyptians" to Africans even as far off as the equatorial Atlantic coast and the Southern Bend before classifying them with certain other "Middle Eastern" groups. Similarly with skeletal morphology, eumelanin levels, religion, etc.
But science isn't dictated by how some sad cases may feel. Or some happy cases, like me .
I guess in my mind i can't help thinking of Km.t Nw.t vs Western Civilization in terms of some racial feeling i get (and also identify with Kemetians, feel where they were coming from and even get how they could have been "perfectly sane" functioning human beings and could've done some of the more grotesque things they might have done).
However i am mature and can seperate my own abstract feelings based on observations / perceived reality from the actuality.
Posted by The_Killer_Wolofi (Member # 16624) on :
Funny how the last two posters are talking about Ancient Egypt but not the topic lolol I am proven correct once again. This is about RACE
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
The_Killer_Wolofi - Sooner or later, it ALL comes back to race. That's why to me the "no race" crowd are as simple as children.
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by The_Killer_Wolofi: Since Ancient Egyptians didn't have skulls that clustered with Sub-Saharan Africans
As others here have said, it depends on what sub-Saharan Africans you're looking at.
Our position is not that most ancient Egyptians looked like Congolese or Nigerians. Living in a desert climate, their morphology would have evolved to be different in appearance from that of Africans native to wetter regions. What we argue is that they were biologically African, as opposed to migrants from western Eurasia, and that they were tropically adapted. That makes them black.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
It has been explained ad-naseum in this forum now, that 'race' does NOT truly exist because biology and overall science has disproven its existence! 'Race' by definition is a sub-species or genetic population isolate usually marked by distinct physical features or phenotype. Humans phenotypically are diverse. So diverse, that one cannot hope to seperate populations from each other on the basis of traits like skin color and especially facial features which are the most diverse traits of humanity! Yet despite all this phenotypical diversity we are much more closely related to each other genetically than chimpanzees are related to each other since the article Mind cited specically pointed out several genetic varieties or breeds of chimpanzees in Africa despite looking virtually no different.
For those of you who believe in 'race' tell me what 'race' is the boy below??
Essentially what we call 'race' is nothing more than a subjective social category that is NOT dependent on objective or any quantifiable parameters but solely on one's or a society's perception.
I've advertised this many times before on this forum, but again PBS aired a show some years back called: Race: The Power of an Illusion Posted by MindoverMatter718 (Member # 15400) on :
quote:Originally posted by The_Killer_Wolofi: Funny how the last two posters are talking about Ancient Egypt but not the topic lolol I am proven correct once again. This is about RACE
You doofball, you mentioned ancient Egypt in your post I replied to, didn't you notice that?
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: The_Killer_Wolofi - Sooner or later, it ALL comes back to race. That's why to me the "no race" crowd are as simple as children.
Of course for people like you can't coprehend why there is no such thing as "race", it is YOU who will forever remain like a child who lives in the land of make-believe.
quote:Originally posted by BrandonP: Our position is not that most ancient Egyptians looked like Congolese or Nigerians. Living in a desert climate, their morphology would have evolved to be different in appearance from that of Africans native to wetter regions. What we argue is that they were biologically African, as opposed to migrants from western Eurasia, and that they were tropically adapted. That makes them black.
You're forgetting that West Africa has dry regions too like the Sahel and especially the western Sahara. Thus, let's not forget that some populations in West Africa because of their cranial features are also grouped as "caucasoid" or called "cacasoid-mixed"!
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
quote:Originally posted by The_Killer_Wolofi: Funny how the last two posters are talking about Ancient Egypt but not the topic lolol I am proven correct once again. This is about RACE
In an ideal world, people would just take it for granted that the ancient Egyptians were black, just as we currently take it for granted that the ancient Greeks were white and the ancient Mayans were Native American. The only reason there's still any controversy about this issue is because there's a long history of very influential people denying ancient Egypt's black African identity.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Originally posted by BrandonP: Our position is not that most ancient Egyptians looked like Congolese or Nigerian
Alot of Kemeties did look like Congolese or Nigerians Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Now the following study was done at the hight of Hametic theory in 1947... of Black-skinned Cacaucasiod. and still this is what they found,keeping in mind this would represent your Congo~Nigerian very sub-Saharan image of what a true "Negro" supposed to be.
Statistics by Falkenburger, an anthropologist, distributes the races of predynastic skulls as: -36% Negroid, 33% Mediterraneans, 11% Cro-Magnoids, 20% others, but related either to Cro-Magnoids or Negroids Statistics by Elliot Smith, anthropologist, claim: -more than 1/3 Negroid, 1/3 Mediterranean, 1/10 Cro-Magnoid, 1/15 individuals more or less mixed
The author then says that these statistics are incompatible w/ the belief that Blacks did not filter into Egypt until later(some say at the end of Ancient Egyptian history). Also, Mediterranean is not synonymous w/ "White", as Eliot Smith refers to Egyptians as a branch of the "brown race, which is none other than Sergi's Mediterranean or Eurafrican race". From African Origin Of Civilization. beliefnet.com/boards/message_list.asp?boardID=5821&
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Killer Woof: Funny how the last two posters are talking about Ancient Egypt but not the topic lolol I am proven correct once again. This is about RACE
^I was only agreeing with your notion that people base their racial feelings on their opinions of the AE.
Infact, WoofWeef aka VidaDaWhiteBoy, i'd missed that you said:
quote: Originally posted by The_Killer_Wolofi: Since Ancient Egyptians didn't have skulls that clustered with Sub-Saharan
the above which is not only a bold faced lie on several counts but gives YOUR very own racial motive away -- in attempting to accuse us of something YO dumbass psychologically projects that you have that same exact intention. Wanting to believe in race as you choose to label every phenetic classification racial.
Still the same ol' weefwoofie i see.
Anyway thx 4 letting us know why some trolls have a bias towards belief in race.
Posted by Whatbox (Member # 10819) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Weefmo:
White man Apex of Evolution!!
quote:Originally posted by What! Okaaaay~:
Actually if you look, the black dude (the last guy) comes right after a certain white guy.
Speaking of race WannaBWolof-weefs have ya heard tha News?
quote:Originally posted by WhatB: Awesome.
quote:Originally posted by WhatB:
Here is some interesing data:
TABLE 4. Intra-limb bone length indices in US and Egyptian samples
************************** Crural index | Brachial index ********************** Males \ Females | Males \ Females ***************** Mean - SE \ Mean - SE | Mean - SE \ Mean - SE ** American Whites: 81.9 - 0.4 \ 82.0 - 0.4 | 74.3 - 0.4 \ 73.5 - 0.5 ** American Blacks: 83.7 - 0.4 \ 83.8 - 0.5 | 77.1 - 0.5 \ 76.5 - 0.5 Ancient Egyptians: 83.6c - 0.2 \ 82.8 - 0.3 | 77.9c - 0.5 \ 77.5c - 0.6
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ The problem is people like Woof, Mike, and Clyde are the simple-minded ones who just can't comprehend the science that debunks 'race' once and for all. They are also too ignorant to realize that their very racial notions came directly from white racists themselves.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: It has been explained ad-naseum in this forum now, that 'race' does NOT truly exist because biology and overall science has disproven its existence! 'Race' by definition is a sub-species or genetic population isolate usually marked by distinct physical features or phenotype. Humans phenotypically are diverse. So diverse, that one cannot hope to seperate populations from each other on the basis of traits like skin color and especially facial features which are the most diverse traits of humanity! Yet despite all this phenotypical diversity we are much more closely related to each other genetically than chimpanzees are related to each other since the article Mind cited specically pointed out several genetic varieties or breeds of chimpanzees in Africa despite looking virtually no different.
For those of you who believe in 'race' tell me what 'race' is the boy below??
Essentially what we call 'race' is nothing more than a subjective social category that is NOT dependent on objective or any quantifiable parameters but solely on one's or a society's perception.
I've advertised this many times before on this forum, but again PBS aired a show some years back called: Race: The Power of an Illusion
^ Any of the simple-minded folks care to answer??
Posted by The_Killer_Wolofi (Member # 16624) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ The problem is people like Woof, Mike, and Clyde are the simple-minded ones who just can't comprehend the science that debunks 'race' once and for all. They are also too ignorant to realize that their very racial notions came directly from white racists themselves.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: It has been explained ad-naseum in this forum now, that 'race' does NOT truly exist because biology and overall science has disproven its existence! 'Race' by definition is a sub-species or genetic population isolate usually marked by distinct physical features or phenotype. Humans phenotypically are diverse. So diverse, that one cannot hope to seperate populations from each other on the basis of traits like skin color and especially facial features which are the most diverse traits of humanity! Yet despite all this phenotypical diversity we are much more closely related to each other genetically than chimpanzees are related to each other since the article Mind cited specically pointed out several genetic varieties or breeds of chimpanzees in Africa despite looking virtually no different.
For those of you who believe in 'race' tell me what 'race' is the boy below??
Essentially what we call 'race' is nothing more than a subjective social category that is NOT dependent on objective or any quantifiable parameters but solely on one's or a society's perception.
I've advertised this many times before on this forum, but again PBS aired a show some years back called: Race: The Power of an Illusion
^ Any of the simple-minded folks care to answer??
Look woman, prove me to me there is no race when different races HAVE to be the bone marrow donor for specific races. It's a simple question that deserves a simple answer.
If there is no race then bone marrow should not be different from human to human. It is that simple. That's like saying I can't give you a heart transplant because you are some gook chick from the Philipines because I am an African male.
Posted by Morpheus (Member # 16203) on :
quote:Originally posted by The_Killer_Wolofi: Look woman, prove me to me there is no race when different races HAVE to be the bone marrow donor for specific races. It's a simple question that deserves a simple answer.
If there is no race then bone marrow should not be different from human to human. It is that simple. That's like saying I can't give you a heart transplant because you are some gook chick from the Philipines because I am an African male.
This is not true. I'm pretty sure we covered this in another thread. The research you are speaking of says that people who are more genetically similar are more likely to have a match, not that people MUST be of the same race to exchange bone marrow.
There are genetic differences between people. That doesn't validate the race concept.
quote:Originally posted by The_Killer_Wolofi: If there is no race then bone marrow should not be different from human to human. It is that simple. That's like saying I can't give you a heart transplant because you are some gook chick from the Philipines because I am an African male.
So East Asian people are "gooks" now?
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
You guys are race fanatics Morphus. All you talk about is race, race and race. If there was no such thing as race you would not be on here talking about the race of the AE over and over again. Again, due to a lack of education you misunderstand what the scientists are saying.
Posted by BrandonP (Member # 3735) on :
The only reason there is any controversy about the "race" of the ancient Egyptians is because Eurocentrists like you have denied the ancient Egyptians their black African identity. If it were simply taken for granted by everyone that the ancient Egyptians were black, no one would talk about it any more than any one talks about the Native American identity of the Mayans.
Posted by Hammer (Member # 17003) on :
You just made a race remark Brandon. You said "they were blacK" thus you distinguished them from others, ie a racial catagory. It is mental illness.
Posted by The_Killer_Wolofi (Member # 16624) on :
quote:Originally posted by Morpheus:
quote:Originally posted by The_Killer_Wolofi: Look woman, prove me to me there is no race when different races HAVE to be the bone marrow donor for specific races. It's a simple question that deserves a simple answer.
If there is no race then bone marrow should not be different from human to human. It is that simple. That's like saying I can't give you a heart transplant because you are some gook chick from the Philipines because I am an African male.
This is not true. I'm pretty sure we covered this in another thread. The research you are speaking of says that people who are more genetically similar are more likely to have a match, not that people MUST be of the same race to exchange bone marrow.
There are genetic differences between people. That doesn't validate the race concept.
The people that say there are no races are saying we are all the same and only .02 percent different. How can that small amount of difference effect bone marrow to such a degree that people that get bone marrow have to be genetically similar to the donor? Are not all humans genetically similar?
Posted by Morpheus (Member # 16203) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: You guys are race fanatics Morphus. All you talk about is race, race and race. If there was no such thing as race you would not be on here talking about the race of the AE over and over again. Again, due to a lack of education you misunderstand what the scientists are saying.
I don't misunderstand what the scientists are saying you are just trying to bait me into a long winded argument for the sake of arguing, Hammer.
I have other interests aside from the Biological Affinities of the Ancient Egyptians. Why don't you find a hobby besides heckling people?
quote:Originally posted by The_Killer_Wolofi: The people that say there are no races are saying we are all the same and only .02 percent different. How can that small amount of difference effect bone marrow to such a degree that people that get bone marrow have to be genetically similar to the donor? Are not all humans genetically similar?
As I said before there are biologically significant genetic differences. Instead of fixating so much on our differences why not think about what we have in common? The functioning of our bodily organs is the same. We are biologically similar enough that we can transplant organs in the first place. Take two people of different genders from any part of the world and they are capable of producing fertile offspring.
Scientists that support the no biological race position are not saying that there are no important human differences only that human populations are not structured into sub-species. There is no such thing as race genes.
Posted by SirInfamous (Member # 16497) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Indeed. Mike and definitely Marc who dares use the term "subspecies" are doing nothing but perpetuating what white supremacists have begun in the first place.
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
.. seriously -- how the fcuck did some of these people make it thru 2 today psychologicallY? God knows..).
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.
