Human populations are genetically distinctive in ways that correspond to self-identified race and ethnicity

Monday, February 24th, 2020

Charles Murray suggests (in Human Diversity: The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class) that it’s plausible to expect phenotypic differences among races, based on discoveries made in the last 30 years since the genome was sequenced:

It was discovered that human populations are genetically distinctive in ways that correspond to self-identified race and ethnicity.

Advances in the ability to date evolutionary changes have revealed that evolutionary selection pressure since humans left Africa has been extensive and mostly local to the different continents.

Raw race differences in genetic material related to cognitive repertoires are common, not exceptional.

Murray then moves on to what the orthodoxy gets right:

Franz Boas and Ashley Montagu were right to say that many nineteenth-century conceptions of race were caricatures divorced from biological reality. Richard Lewontin was right that race differences account for only a small fraction of the biological variation existing among humans. Stephen Jay Gould was right to reject the once widely held belief that humans evolved independently in Europe, Asia, and Africa for hundreds of thousands of years.

[...]

Scientifically, it is an error to think of races as primordial.

Comments

  1. Sam J. says:

    “…Scientifically, it is an error to think of races as primordial…”

    Says who and with what evidence? Sure humans have mixed but this is like one of those situations where you say Ben Carson is a brain surgeon so all Blacks are capable of being brain surgeons.

    I think Boas purposely lied and buried the study of the different skeletal characteristics of different human groups. Maybe you can guess why.

    Let’s change this up a little.

    “race differences account for only a small fraction of the biological variation existing among [dogs]“.

    Yet we can readily tell the difference between a pit bull and an Irish Setter. We can also tell they have an immense difference in temperament. To disagree would be foolish. Those that do, like the fools who get a pit bull after being told, “it’s all in how you raise it”, and then get the skin of their kids head torn off by the pit bull learn the lesson the hard way.

    It’s not good enough to say that some things thought long ago were all wrong. These ideas came from many years of observation.

    There’s a Women who was a sex slave. She survived by being bought by a guy within the group that liked her. She was sent to a school where she said that the sexual proclivities of Men could be ascertained by the way they looked. She had to learn fast as any mistakes would bring on torture. I expect that there are groups with very advanced studies of how structure and looks mean a great deal to them in categorizing people.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdWiS1W27W4

  2. Adar says:

    “Stephen Jay Gould was right to reject the once widely held belief that humans evolved independently in Europe, Asia, and Africa for hundreds of thousands of years.”

    Gould was capable of allowing his politics to rule his scientific judgments.

  3. Sam J. says:

    A large part of Stephen Jay Gould’s reputation was built on the book The Mismeasure of Man which has been proven to be one big lie. A fabrication. Think for yourself, who was Gould? What groups was HE apart of? Why did he write this fabrication? This wasn’t just an error that he committed because he was blinded politically. He deliberately fabricated a mass of evidence and measurements that did not exist or that he deliberately changed.

Leave a Reply