Data distribution center

On his article To Classify Humanity Is Not That Hard (archive) at the Discover Magazine, Razib Khan, a Bangladeshi geneticist, makes several needed points.
For example, when talking about the SNP SLC24A5, one that accounts for ~35% of the variation in skin colour, he states "the variant is nearly fixed in Europeans, and another is nearly fixed in Africans. In other words the component of genetic variance on this trait that is between population is nearly 100%, not 15%", answering the claim the human variation between individuals is 85% and only 15% between groups. "This illustrates that the 15% value was an average across the genome, and in fact there are significant differences on the genetic level which can be ancestrally informative." The point he makes here is evident, otherwise forensic anthropologists wouldn't be able to make out someone's race by looking at the bones, and companies such as 23andme would not be able to do their job. You can identify someone's racial group by looking at their genes.
He points with enough genetic markers such as SNP SLC24A5 it is possible to "to obtain a fine-grained picture of population structure", right away he provides a PCA of world populations, showing how different human populations can be put on discrete instead of continuous classifications.
"I do not believe that the fact that mixed-race people's real problems obtaining organs with the appropriate tissue match is a trivial affair. Human genetic differences have plenty of concrete impacts which are not socially constructed". A topic covered here: t.me/oneredpiller/274.
The last three bullet points in the article are almost surely an addition by an editor, as it reproduces the same tired fallacies and talking-points that the author refutes in the rest of the text.

A. W. F. Edwards is the man who in 2002 pointed out the fallacy in Lewontin's 1972 paper. He states in an interview with David B: "Others might have noticed Lewontin's 1972 paper but I had stopped working in human and population genetics in 1968 [...]. In the 1990s I began to pick up the message about only 15% of human genetic variation being between, as opposed to within, populations with its non-sequitur that classification was nigh impossible, and started asking my population-genetics colleagues where it came from. Most had not heard of it, and those that had did not know its source[...]. I have had no adverse reaction to it at all [regarding his 2002 paper], but plenty of appraisal [so] from geneticists, many of whom told me that they too had been perplexed [by Lewontin's claim]."

Alan R. Templeton in 4.2 of Biological Races of Humans commits both the Lewontin's fallacy and the "the existence of martini refutes the existence of vodka and of vermouth" fallacy. Templeton also brings up the Rst value between different chimpanzee subspecies. He points out that, even though they are considered different subspecies by today's taxonomy, P. t. troglodytes, P. t. schweinfurthii, P. t. marungensis have genetic differentiation between one another below the threshold which would qualify them as different subspecies. The Rst between blacks (which included Ethiopians, who are known to have Caucasoid admixture, see: t.me/oneredpiller/8) and European Caucasoids was found to be 0.042-0.064, which is twice as high as the Rst between two of chimpanzee subspecies reported by Mary Katherine Gonder & co (2011), which also reports that the evolutionary divergence time between those chimp groups (100ky) is about the same as the commonly accepted time for divergence between negroid and non-negroid humans.

Sorry attempts at biology by academic anthropologists, such as this, also blatantly and dishonestly lie about biological consensus by means of language manipulation, such as equating race to subspecies, or that all subspecies have Fst above 0.25; which is not the case as proven here t.me/oneredpiller/178.

The "Understanding Human Genetic Variation" article by NIH also commits the Lewontin's fallacy.

Tags: #genetics, #race, #black, #white

405 views17:10