Comments on: Interracial Couple Denied Marriage License

By: Global Voices dalam bahasa Indonesia » AS: Izin Menikah Pasangan Beda Ras Ditolak

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:33:03 +0000

[...] Racism Review membalas alasan Bardwell akan “khawatir akan nasib anak” dengan bukti anak-anak dari hubungan antar ras: Dan, untuk membahas bukti lebih lanjut, anak-anak dari [...]

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Global Voices in Swahili » Marekani: Wanandoa wa rangi tofauti wanyimwa cheti cha ndoa

Sun, 25 Oct 2009 04:44:22 +0000

[...] ya Racism Review ililichachafya suala la Bardwell “ kujali watoto” kwa ushahidi wa watoto waliotakana na uhusiano wa rangi [...]

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Darin Johnson

Darin Johnson — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 02:59:57 +0000

Ellen, I agree that sociology and psychology can be treated scientifically — along with other “soft” fields such as economics, political science, anthropology, and so on. My problem isn’t with the field per se, it’s with the way sociology is practiced or at least presented here. What we see, other than strained discussions about confronting black teenage vandals, is a whole bunch of disparate impact studies that fail to account for politically-incorrect but relevant parameters. The reason, of course, is that when you’re a “white ally” it won’t do to find that racism is not a powerful explainer of differences in outcomes between races.
.
If you’ve never read as study suggesting that races differ in ways other than appearance, then you’re reading very, very selectively.
.
Actually, this is a little exasperating. I’ve written paragraphs about the biology, anthropology, and economics relevant to the discussion. I’m far from an expert, but I know the basic facts. All I get in response is a bunch of people, including you, Ellen, saying, “That’s your opinion.” No it’s not.
.
Actually, I’ve done my best to present my point based on logic, not preponderance of evidence. The reason should be obvious: if I’m wrong, any of you can presumably identify the flaws in my logic and point them out, without knowing a great deal about evolutionary biology for example. I’m still waiting. I know Distance88 is “agreeing to disagree,” although other than my conclusions I don’t know what he disagrees with. No1KState seems to mostly be having a one-man argument. Even you are telling me I’m just musing.
.
I don’t know. Sometimes it’s enough to make me think I’ve chosen the wrong line of work. Maybe I’ll go back to pro basketball. Less aggravation. Besides, there’s not as much money in this as you might think.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: ellen says

ellen says — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:39:57 +0000

@ Darin:
>I agree that Sociology and Psychology aren’t exact sciences like physics or chemistry. However, this does not mean that these fields of study are invalid. It simply means these fields are more dynamic and fluid than math or science..in that new information is constantly changing the landscape. In fact, new information is Constantly changing the numerous fields of science..so this holds doubly true for Sociology. Again, not a basis for dismissing its studies.
> That said, I don’t think Most People would have a problem with what constitutes Being a Racist. If you claim to know what a person will do {without even meeting them} based on his race..that’s racism. Racism is total denial of the individual’s worth or feelings or belief system or abilities. It’s treating them as A Foregone Conclusion.
> Additionally, no studies I’ve ever read have proven that human races differ in any other capacity except appearance. The precepts you are positing are your individual hypothetical musings. If this…then maybe that? If that…then why not this?
>Nice to cogitate over, but not really any scientific basis for. It’s like the UFO phenomena. Show me ET’s phone and I’ll believe. Otherwise we can just ruminate til the proverbial cows come home.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Mom @ Darin

Mom @ Darin — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 15:19:11 +0000

The person it hurts, however, is not me. It’s Darin said: Distance88, and it’s you. Rather than understanding my argument and accepting it or refuting in logically, you put your hands over your ears. The result is that, although I am fully aware of your position and its many weaknesses, you have no idea what I and people like me actually think. You have no idea whether science — real science, not the nonsense peddled by the so-called scientists on this site — supports me or not. And you have no idea how to actually debate me when the deck is not stacked in your favor.

JEEEEZZZZ!!!

@Darin0 LOL Understanding your argument or refuting it logically? LOL More like listen too me and accept what I’m telling you is law. Darin, apparently, somebody differs with your opinion. The only time that we attack another person’s credibility is when our ego in under attack. Maybe there’s a little truth in what everybody is saying, but to out and out tell people that their field of study is BS is like saying they are full of BS.. That’s not very nice and to be completely honest, I have enjoyed everybody’s comments, except the “meanies”, and your personal attacks are a sign of weakness on your part. Play nice:)

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Darin Johnson

Darin Johnson — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 15:09:40 +0000

Well, I guess we’ll let anyone who’s interested judge for himself who’s using “supposition and conjecture” and who’s using facts. I don’t think there’s much question about it, but I don’t expect to convince you. You’ve got your mind made up already.
.
I don’t think I’ve complained about you ignoring me.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: No1KState

No1KState — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:01:09 +0000

Sorry, Darin. Didn’t realize you had more to say. But it’s hard to refute what’s not there. I’ve engaged you before. I guess a person could argue you have a certain kind logic. But you ignore points that nullify your logic or responde with suppositions and conjecture. There is absolutely no scientific basis for the notion that there’s any difference between “races.” I know that for a fact. So don’t think of me as ignoring you. Think of me as being more responsible with my time. Besides, you used to ignore me, right?

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: No1KState

No1KState — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 23:54:25 +0000

I wasn’t rebutting you, Darin. I was addressing 88.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Darin Johnson

Darin Johnson — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 23:00:03 +0000

You’re definitely paying attention. I’m impressed. Let’s tackle these one at a time.
.
First — Significance of Variations in Genes
.
NIH is quite right that most genetic variation is insignificant. The reason is that most genes have literally no effect on how you are built or how you operate. They are genetic dead-weight. Since these genes are in the majority, most mutations will occur in them, and thus have no effect. Furthermore, since these mutations don’t affect the “person,” they have no adaptive benefit. (Perhaps somebody with a stronger background in biology can explain this better.) Hopefully you can see how this does not contradict my argument at all.
.
Second — Variations in Genes Among Humans
.
The statement that humans share the majority of their genes is true, but not particularly helpful for our conversation. Humans share the majority of their genes with chimps, too, but you wouldn’t confuse a human with a chimpanzee. Of course, the reason humans genes are close is that humans are all part of the same species; and the reason our genes are close to chimps’ is that we’re genetically close to chimps — closer than to, say, fruit flies. So genetic closeness is relative. We’re close to chimps compared to dogs, but not close to chimps compared to other humans.
.
Even when intra-group variation is larger than inter-group, the difference between the groups can still be significant.
.
You should not confuse the percentage of genes that are shared with what we’re talking about: whether there are meaningful differences between groups of people based at least in part on genes. Even if only one gene out of millions were different, that may be all it takes. We’re interested in a tiny number of mutations; only those that affect the person, and only those whose effects are meaningful.
.
Third – Continuously Variable Population
.
Again, this is true, but not important. Picture your 128-crayon box from first grade. It could be a little difficult to tell exactly when you moved from the blues to the greens, but nobody ever confused goldenrod with burnt sienna. Furthermore, you can make statements about the crayons such as, “The reds are to the left of the blues.” Sure it’s possible that barn red is actually to the right of plum, but the general point is still valid. It’s probabilistically true, not absolutely true.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: distance88

distance88 — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 20:35:56 +0000

Darin, you said, “Some (genetic differences) are highly significant in terms of explaining differences in outcomes between groups.”
.
NIH said, “Almost all human genetic variation is relatively insignificant biologically— that is, it has no apparent adaptive significance…Differences that occur elsewhere in the DNA—in the vast majority of the DNA that has no known function—have no impact.”
.
You said, “So people who lived in, say, Central Asia tended to mate with other people from Central Asia. Over the long haul, that made people from Central Asia a genetically distinct bunch” and “Persians, East Indians, and Chinese are all “Asian,” at least in one sense, but you’d have to be blind to think they’re particularly close cousins genetically speaking.”
.
NIH said, “all humans have a great deal of their genetic information in common… genetic variation around the world is distributed in a rather continuous manner; there are no sharp, discontinuous boundaries between human population groups. In fact, research results consistently demonstrate that about 85 percent of all human genetic variation exists within human populations, whereas about only 15 percent of variation exists between populations . That is, research reveals that Homo sapiens is one continuously variable, inter-breeding species.”
.
These sure seem like examples of contradiction to me, but I’d be willing to soften my stance and say that they ‘don’t support’ the points you make.

Like or Dislike: 0 0