On the epidemic of truth inversion - Page 15 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15312076
@FiveofSwords

How can you say we ignore variation?

Our argument is all about variation. The millions of genetic variants that don't fit your scheme.

An earlier post.

The All of Us Research Program (2024) identified more than 1 billion genetic variants, including more than 275 million previously unreported genetic variants, more than 3.9 million of which had coding consequences.

1 billion +, 275 million unreported, genetic variants - 3.9 million separate races?

This latest analysis from the NIH database of the genomes of a quarter of a million humans reaffirms that race is a social construct that does not have a basis in genetics.



:)
#15312078
Wellsy wrote:It doesn’t say pure because its about the relative homogeneity assumed previous in Europeans. Basically , Europeans are not seen as one homogenous group as before but are made up of different ancestral groups within Europe.
It’s relative to the previous data where we find 0.1% global genetic variety as a very homogenous species, homo sapiens.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.11.28.518227v2.full.pdf

Basically, they are improving upon the limitations of a principal component analysis. Something I criticized the limitations of earlier as producing models that are useful but not a biological classification. Basically it refines earlier methods to be more locally focused and created three subdivisions of European to Northern, South Eastern and Southwestern Europeans.

It just refined the geographic region associated with specific genes. Maybe these can be your races.


So basically you aren't addressing my point at all. I asked by 'admixture' woukd contradict homogeneity and gave the thoroughbred as an example and you reapond with this? What's the relevance?
#15312082
ingliz wrote:@FiveofSwords

How can you say we ignore variation?

Our argument is all about variation. The millions of genetic variants that don't fit your scheme.

An earlier post.

The All of Us Research Program (2024) identified more than 1 billion genetic variants, including more than 275 million previously unreported genetic variants, more than 3.9 million of which had coding consequences.

1 billion +, 275 million unreported, genetic variants - 3.9 million separate races?

This latest analysis from the NIH database of the genomes of a quarter of a million humans reaffirms that race is a social construct that does not have a basis in genetics.



:)


Actually you can't seem to figure out ehat your argument is. You just disagree with whatever I say. When I say there are genetic differences, you disagree.
#15312083
@FiveofSwords

We disagree because your genetic arguments are bollocks. You know where you want to end up, your destination so to speak, and ignore everything that doesn't get you there - The millions of genetic variants that don't fit your scheme.


:lol:
#15312086
FiveofSwords wrote:Dna is cultural?


You did not claim DBA made people white.

You said "European" which is cultural.

You do not seem to know what your argument about whiteness is, since you keep defining it differently.

Are you now changing your argument to say whiteness is based on DNA?
#15312089
FiveofSwords wrote: If you believed race existed, you might understand why black people are called black and white people are called white. For people who are intelligent enough to see racial differences, this is a pattern they have noticed in skin color.


FiveofSwords wrote:Skin color has nothing to do with who is white.


FiveofSwords wrote: I don't care about skin color and never did.
#15312091
Pants-of-dog wrote:You did not claim DBA made people white.

You said "European" which is cultural.

You do not seem to know what your argument about whiteness is, since you keep defining it differently.

Are you now changing your argument to say whiteness is based on DNA?

I said people of European ancestry happen to have very similar dna. Basically white people are a race that evolved in Europe. So yeah it is based on dna
#15312095
Fasces wrote:I think you struggle with writing comprehensibly.


He does. That is why he uses that crutch of you guys do not have reading comprehension. He is projecting.

What do I think of Fasces latest comment to Swordy?

#15312109
ingliz wrote:@FiveofSwords

We disagree because your genetic arguments are bollocks. You know where you want to end up, your destination so to speak, and ignore everything that doesn't get you there - The millions of genetic variants that don't fit your scheme.


:lol:


I'm just saying there is genetic differences. You are saying there isn't whole saying there is.
#15312110
FiveofSwords wrote:I said people of European ancestry happen to have very similar dna. Basically white people are a race that evolved in Europe. So yeah it is based on dna


How is their DNA similar?

You previously said it has nothing to do with skin colour. Are we to assume there is some other genetic “cluster” that is somehow not arbitrary and variable?
#15312120
Race exists. This is why Elizabeth Warren took a race test. :lol: Of course once she failed that race test, a lot of lefties were really angry at her both for exposing race exists and for her earlier false impersonation of a "Native American." Lefties try to claim that biological sex doesn't really exist, hence anyone can change their sex when ever they feel like it. but on the other hand they want to claim that race doesn't exist but it is at the same time immutable.

In Britain it is a crime to falsely impersonate a police officer. That is because a police officer is privileged with many powers, so it is crime to unjustly take those privileges. In America so called Blacks and Native Americans receive immensely preferential treatment in all sorts of places, hence it is a de-facto crime to falsely claim those racial privileges. These Liberal and Leftie scientists know full well that race exists.

Take Ketanji Brown Jackson. Did she get to her current position on the basis racial privilege rather pure merit. Its quite possible, But even if she's not the most capable candidate she's not that stupid she knows full well what a woman is. :lol: Its like when the Liberals wanted to conscript men for their hate war against Putin and Russia, they all conveniently suddenly remembered what the difference between a man and a woman was. Oh I did know after all. Irony seems to be lost on the Liberal. One of Putin's great crimes is refusing to pretend that he doesn't know the difference between a man and a woman. Few if any Liberals seem to have noticed the irony of the situation of them backing the sex based conscription regime in Ukraine.

Now note I have said "race exists". I haven't said "races exist". Mathematically race is a many dimensional space. Whether you analyse it genetically or phenotypically. "A race" is a partition of that space. There is not one true way to partition that space. There are many ways to partition that space that may be useful for investigation. This is not a problem for me as I have no wish to make race a basis for rights. Its a problem for the left as they're ones that want race based rights for Native Americans and race based reparations.
Last edited by Rich on 15 Apr 2024 10:29, edited 1 time in total.
#15312122
FiveofSwords wrote:You are saying there isn't a whole [lot there (?)] saying there is

Let's ask a PhD in Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology...

Exome variability

or

How many possible functional DNA sequences are there?

Most human DNA has little or no function, so mutations in these low-information sequences are inconsequential. The universe of genes that are expressed in humans—called the exome—is comprised of about 30 million bases of DNA. Sequence changes in this DNA are more likely to lead to an actual change in the functioning of genes and their expressed products.

One effort to quantify exome variability estimates that each human carries about 13,500 variants and that perhaps 300 of these affect gene function. You can multiply this number by the number of persons now living (7 billion), or the number that have ever lived (108 billion) to get another very large number. But that is the lower limit. The number of possible combinations is 1 x 2 x 3 … x 300 = 3 x 10^614, a number that is so large as to be meaningless.



:)
#15312139
Pants-of-dog wrote:How is their DNA similar?

You previously said it has nothing to do with skin colour. Are we to assume there is some other genetic “cluster” that is somehow not arbitrary and variable?

Keep working on that reading comprehension. I said skin color is a thing I just don't care about. Nut skin color is a genetic trait that is different among races.
#15312140
ingliz wrote:Let's ask a PhD in Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology...

Exome variability

or

How many possible functional DNA sequences are there?

Most human DNA has little or no function, so mutations in these low-information sequences are inconsequential. The universe of genes that are expressed in humans—called the exome—is comprised of about 30 million bases of DNA. Sequence changes in this DNA are more likely to lead to an actual change in the functioning of genes and their expressed products.

One effort to quantify exome variability estimates that each human carries about 13,500 variants and that perhaps 300 of these affect gene function. You can multiply this number by the number of persons now living (7 billion), or the number that have ever lived (108 billion) to get another very large number. But that is the lower limit. The number of possible combinations is 1 x 2 x 3 … x 300 = 3 x 10^614, a number that is so large as to be meaningless.



:)

Once again your reading comprehension is so bad you don't even know that this doesn't contradict me. In fact this is something I brought up myself earlier, when someone was talking about how much variation exists within sub saharan Africa (while pretending humans have no genetic variation)
#15312143
FiveofSwords wrote:Keep working on that reading comprehension. I said skin color is a thing I just don't care about. Nut skin color is a genetic trait that is different among races.


Perhaps you could simply define whiteness clearly, as you have been asked many times.

If it is genetic, then please list the genetic traits that only white people have.

Avoiding the question is nit an argument.
#15312145
@FiveofSwords

I would argue that the sheer number of possible variations in DNA sequences that alter gene expression makes your boast that you choose the important ones ridiculous on its face.

By what criteria do you decide importance?
#15312153
ingliz wrote:@FiveofSwords

I would argue that the sheer number of possible variations in DNA sequences that alter gene expression makes your boast that you choose the important ones ridiculous on its face.

By what criteria do you decide importance?


I would guess that most people have traits they care about. For example, in your case, you should be aware that you would be unable to insert your love digit into cays and chickens if they did not have the perquisite DNA for having an orifice. I have more refined taste so I may care more about cognitive functions and behavior. But whatever your pleasure is, there is DNA for it.
  • 1
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17

Allow me to remind you this war started precisely[…]

[T]he [N]orth did not partake in the institution […]

Who is? The protest at the U of A did not do tha[…]

Is it happening to you right now? Bring on the vi[…]