Re: What Are the Race Deniers Denying?

Bob Whitaker (bwhit@conterra.com)
Fri, 22 Nov 1996 13:20:14 -0500

Peter Nosko wrote:
>
> frank@clark.net wrote in article <572hcs$mjp@clarknet.clark.net>...
> > Peter wants to know the name of the anthropologist who dug up the
> skeleton
> > found by the Columbia Rive in Washington state. I can't place my hands on
> > the Oct. 11 issue of _Science_, but last week's issue (Nov. 15) says that
> > on Oct. 19 the Army Corps of Engineers, who have jurisdiction over these
> > matters, told the anthropologists at UC at Davis to stop their work and
> > hand over the sliver of a bone they took and their lab notes. I recall
> > reading that one anthropologist thought the skull looked quite distinctly
> > Caucasoid but wanted to *confirm* it with DNA analysis. Anyhow a date of
> > 9300 years old is what the Nov. 15 _Science_ says. It also reports the
> > Davis lab director as saying, "the results are inconclusive until we can
> > do [at least] another sample."
>
> Hmmm. Interesting how "facts" seem to change. Here's the article to which
> I responded.
>
> > : >On Sun, 3 Nov 1996 flashm19@mail.idt.net wrote:
> > : >>
> > : >> I believe it is time for the whites in america to take thier
> rightful place
> > : > as
> > : >> native americans.
> > : >
> > : >funny you should say that. In Nevada, they recently dug up a
> 10,000+yr
> > : >old body of a native American and it turned out to be European
> genetically
> > : >rather than the Asian-Indian...


You know damned well you're quoting an entirely different person. I
just thought I would tell everyone else that you are.

> > : >
> > : >The scientists said that this body predated the Indian migration here.
>
> So we go from a 10,000+ body found in Nevada and "genetically" determined
> to be European, to it being found in Washington, younger, and apparently
> subjected to only a visual inspection. This anthropologist must have good
> eyes to have made this genetic determination. Perhaps that's why the
> results became "inconclusive?"
>
> So let's assume every statement you claim in your version turns out to be
> true. What does determining the geographical origin of someone's remains
> have to do with attempting to prove that ::race:: is a scientifically
> meaningful concept?
>
> > Some good news: "Last month, anthropologists won a court order blocking
> > the corps from returning the skeleton before scientists can argue for a
> > chance to study it."
>
> By all means, keep us posted on their findings.
>
> > Now may we please stop all the attacks on Bob and get back to the subject
> > of this thread. Even if the argument "Bob Whitaker is a bad man;
> therefore
> > racists do not exist" were valid, we would still not know what it is that
> > does not exist!
>
> I might have missed some articles in this thread, but I never saw anyone
> deny that race exists. One look at the racism that runs rampant in the USA
> (my point of reference), and one can see that the concept of race-- the
> underlying basis of racism, is alive and doing well. I believe the race
> deniers are denying that race is anything more that a social concept based
> on insignificant physical attributes.
>
> Re: Bob; if you're tired of seeing Bob get shot at all the time, you might
> want to ask him to stop providing the ammo.

I cewrtainly don't mind getting attacked by you PC clones. A man is
known by the enemies he makes, and I'm proud of your enmity.
I've been taking that crap for decades. You Politically Correct clones
seem to think that proving I'm bad is important to proving your
political ideas.

>
> --
> Peter Nosko
> pete@technologist.com
> Race is a Pigment of the Imagination
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Be advised; I will discuss/debate only via
> the newsgroups. All replies emailed to me
> will be promptly posted.
> ---------------------------------------------------------