Re: Those Eyes! (Was: Intelligence by Race)
Richard Spear (rspear@primenet.com)
Sun, 15 Jan 1995 15:18:33 PST
In article <tlathropD2Gu7M.2Dv@netcom.com> tlathrop@netcom.com (Tom Lathrop) writes:
>From: tlathrop@netcom.com (Tom Lathrop)
>Subject: Those Eyes! (Was: Intelligence by Race)
>Date: Sun, 15 Jan 1995 21:26:10 GMT
>In article <D2AMM1.KGC@attatl.atlantaga.ncr.com>,
>Mark.O.Wilson <Mark.O.Wilson@AtlantaGA.ncr.com> wrote:
>>In article <3evbq5$64c@news.service.uci.edu>, gvargas@meded.com.uci.edu
>>says...
>>>The differences that you refer to are basically adaptations that
>>>enabled those who possesed them to have a higher fitness in their
>>>surroundings (ie:increased melanin, epicanthic folds,
>>I'm not disputing any of your other points, but what evolutionary
>>advantage does the epicanthic fold provide?
>This is actually a very good question. When the anti-racists deny that
>there is "such a thing as race", what they are at bottom saying is that
>there has been no real genetic separation between what we usually think
>of as the different races. That although we appear different on the
>surface, this is only superficial, and underneath the genes have been
>zipping back and fourth like mad between the different populations.
[the rest of a trivial attack deleted]
Tom - from the Jan 16 issue of Time Magazine beginning on p. 54) - a review of
a new tome by Cavalli-Sforza, Minozzi and Piazza states that " ... once the
genes for surface traits ... are discounted, the human "races" are remarkably
alike under the skin. The variation among individuals is much greater than the
differences among groups ... the whole concept of race becomes meaningless at
the genetic level."
How many nails are needed to seal up this coffin? Looks like *science* agrees
with the "anti-racists", huh?
Regards, Richard
rspear@primenet.com
|