If you could alter genetic makeup of your baby would you do it?

[Deleted member 848]

I exaggerated that it's scientifically proven. It's a theory.

The race construct as siro points out makes sense, because race is far too broad of a term.

I think colton makes a great point about DNA having traits that point to the probability of where our ancestors are from. That stuff is absolutely traceable. For instance, the dude rhey found frozen in a glacier in the italian alps, they tracked his DNA to match that of modern day Sicilians, pointing to the probability that Sicilians are a genetic holdout from a much broader ranging European people of about 5000 years ago. Either that or this dude built a boat and went to the italian alps to do some climbing and died as an outlier of sicilian heritage.

Right, your genetics can 100% trace you to geographic regions from EONS ago.


But could you use "genetics" to determine what Sicily was/is? No. You can certainly point out genetic imilarities among people who emerged from Sicily but it ends there. The idea of "Sicily" doesn't have a genetic component. If it does, care to explain what it is?

 

[Siro]

Ok.. but I guess you're not really interested in creating ANY kind of humans....No???

I'd like to have children.

 

[Siro]

It's all good.

Now, kindly dismount from your need to be loved....Could it be, a horse?? perhaps??? another MAN????

Or possibly,,,,, a,,,K-9????..hell, even one that forgives your jackassivity????

perhaps

Too fighty and I don't really wanna fight.

 

[BYE]

Right, your genetics can 100% trace you to geographic regions from EONS ago.


But could you use "genetics" to determine what Sicily was/is? No. You can certainly point out genetic imilarities among people who emerged from Sicily but it ends there. The idea of "Sicily" doesn't have a genetic component. If it does, care to explain what it is?

To my knowledge, there are very few scholars in any discipline from literary theory, to history, or to molecular genetics who espouse that race is genetically based. Almost every single scholar/scientist out there holds that race is a cultural construct. I'm with you on this 100%, and if people think that it is any other way, they need to do a lot more research.

 

[Siro]

To my knowledge, there are very few scholars in any discipline from literary theory, to history, or to molecular genetics who espouse that race is genetically based. Almost every single scholar/scientist out there holds that race is a cultural construct. I'm with you on this 100%, and if people think that it is any other way, they need to do a lot more research.

You don't need academic understanding to realize this. It's a matter of simple logic.

 

[BYE]

You don't need academic understanding to realize this. It's a matter of simple logic.

Agreed. Just tryin' to direct those who think otherwise to more scholarly publications if they're still unconvinced.

 

[b_line]

Right, your genetics can 100% trace you to geographic regions from EONS ago.


But could you use "genetics" to determine what Sicily was/is? No. You can certainly point out genetic imilarities among people who emerged from Sicily but it ends there. The idea of "Sicily" doesn't have a genetic component. If it does, care to explain what it is?

So why do black people remain black from generation to generation? It certainly isn't becsusr they are in the sun all day any more (at least bit in the US ).

If being black or yellow or red or white has nothing to do with our genetic heritage, then why are my kids so damn pale?

You are acting like there are no such things as heritable traits that exhibit themselves over a broad pattern.

Sure, melanin content can be random at times, but the extremely overwhelming majority of children are not going to be albinos.

It may not be race, but acting like these things don't exist is extremely odd.

Tell me how you define a genetically similar group of people if not by using the word race?

 

[babe]

Didn't read this thread. . . .Don't wanna play God.

Don't want people blaming me for stuff.

I know people who stop believing in God tend to become the worst conceited go-gooders with all kinds of superior notions nobody has any right to criticize. . . .government bureaucrats, corporate cronies, and such. . . .

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Tell me how you define a genetically similar group of people if not by using the word race?

Population.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

No one is saying heritable traits don't exist.

What we're saying is that the genetic information of two people many of you guys would attribute to be of a singular race can, and often do, have more divergent genetic information from each other than either could have from someone you would attribute to a different race. This has been documented. Thus, race can't exist. When you get into genetic information that is shared among a population that you can attribute to that specific population, you'd have millions of different races, which then doesn't work either since the description would have to be so specific as to lose all meaning in the first place and could still exist in people outside that population, making that distinction impossible.

 

[Siro]

Tell me how you define a genetically similar group of people if not by using the word race?

Genetically similar to what extent? Why not make all red haired people into a race? They're more similar to one another than non-red haired, but fair skinned, people. More importantly, why is the current classification any less silly than my redheads example?

I feel that Dalamon would make his points better understood if he used a simpler style. He is not doubting that phenotypes exist. Like duh!

However, group phenotypes are AVERAGE. For example, Germans are on average lighter skinned than the Chinese. But that's not always the case. I've seen many Chinese who are lighter skinned than many Germans. Similarly, more Irish people have blue eyes than Greek people. But I've met Greeks with blue eyes, and Irish with brown eyes. However, phenotypes can be useful. If I learn than someone is from a Congolese or Norwegian or whatever ethnicity, I'd picture a certain look. I'd likely to get at least some of it right.

But race is a genetically arbitrary GROUPING of phenotypes. It only exists because we said it is so. If everyone's memory is wiped out overnight (and people were scrambled randomly across the planet), the concept of race wouldn't develop the same way it is now, if it developed at all. The historical circumstances behind its development would not exist, and others would take their place. That is not the case with natural distinctions between humans. Even with wiped memories, we would still recognize that some people are shorter, others taller. Some are lighter while others darker. Some have blond hair while others have black hair. But the racial groupings would change. Middle Eastern people might be grouped with Indians or Baltic people or Southern Europeans or Latin Americans. Sri Lankans might be grouped with Sub-Saharan Africans. And so on.

So ya, race is a cultural phenomenon, and one that I find useless and would rather do without.

 

[Hotdog]

Genetically similar to what extent? Why not make all red haired people into a race? They're more similar to one another than non-red haired, but fair skinned, people. More importantly, why is the current classification any less silly than my redheads example?

I feel that Dalamon would make his points better understood if he used a simpler style. He is not doubting that phenotypes exist. Like duh!

However, group phenotypes are AVERAGE. For example, Germans are on average lighter skinned than the Chinese. But that's not always the case. I've seen many Chinese who are lighter skinned than many Germans. Similarly, more Irish people have blue eyes than Greek people. But I've met Greeks with blue eyes, and Irish with brown eyes. However, phenotypes can be useful. If I learn than someone is from a Congolese or Norwegian or whatever ethnicity, I'd picture a certain look. I'd likely to get at least some of it right.

But race is a genetically arbitrary GROUPING of phenotypes. It only exists because we said it is so. If everyone's memory is wiped out overnight (and people were scrambled randomly across the planet), the concept of race wouldn't develop the same way it is now, if it developed at all. The historical circumstances behind its development would not exist, and others would take their place. That is not the case with natural distinctions between humans. Even with wiped memories, we would still recognize that some people are shorter, others taller. Some are lighter while others darker. Some have blond hair while others have black hair. But the racial groupings would change. Middle Eastern people might be grouped with Indians or Baltic people or Southern Europeans or Latin Americans. Sri Lankans might be grouped with Sub-Saharan Africans. And so on.

So ya, race is a cultural phenomenon, and one that I find useless and would rather do without.

When seperating out each trait such as red heads, your explanations make more sense, but people of different race arent just defined by one characteristic. Its a whole assortment of things. Take albino africans for example. They have white skin, but there is no mistaken what race they are. Those traits dont change until you introduce a new race. Why is that?

Red heads should be there own race btw.