www.slate.com/.../
In a nutshell
"Anthropometric measurements of large populations show that systematic differences exist among blacks, whites and Asians. The published evidence is massive: blacks have longer limbs than whites, and because blacks have longer legs and smaller circumferences (e.g. calves and arms), their center of mass is higher than that in other individuals of the same height. Asians and whites have longer torsos, therefore their centers of mass are lower.
These structural differences, they argue, generate differences in performance. Using equations about the physics of locomotion, they analyze racing as a process of falling forward. Based on this analysis, they conclude that having a higher center of body mass in a standing position is advantageous in running but disadvantageous in swimming."
Parents
Former Member
according to UNESCO...... en.wikipedia.org/.../The_Race_Question
That, to the best of my knowledge, is the most up-to-date position adopted by Unesco.
The Race Question is a UNESCO statement issued on 18 July 1950 following World War II. The statement included both a scientific debunking of race theories and a moral condemnation of racism. It suggested in particular to "drop the term 'race' altogether and speak of "ethnic groups."
So again, find a scientifically recognized list, and your persistence in trying to make your semantic point will makesense. As simple as that.
Again, the basis on which we argue with you makesense isn't even a discrimination one. I coudn't care less about this, although some might though.
The basis on which Gull, I and several scientists are arguing with the concept of human race is that it tries to oversimplify something that is far more complex than skin color, or curly hair etc... In Rwanda alone (my girlfriend is Rwandaise), there are two very distinct ethnic groups probably displaying scientifically significant genetic differences (my girl is by far the shortest of her family, at 5'9. My mother in law is 6', sis in law is 6'2, brother in law 6'3. The avg Tutsi being probably little over 6feet tall).
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler (A. Einstein). What this great scientist meant in issuing this quote, is that it's fun and practical to simplify stuff into categories, but if you try to simplify it past a certain point, you're loosing some meaning, some precision, some accuracy, some usefulness....
according to UNESCO...... en.wikipedia.org/.../The_Race_Question
That, to the best of my knowledge, is the most up-to-date position adopted by Unesco.
The Race Question is a UNESCO statement issued on 18 July 1950 following World War II. The statement included both a scientific debunking of race theories and a moral condemnation of racism. It suggested in particular to "drop the term 'race' altogether and speak of "ethnic groups."
So again, find a scientifically recognized list, and your persistence in trying to make your semantic point will makesense. As simple as that.
Again, the basis on which we argue with you makesense isn't even a discrimination one. I coudn't care less about this, although some might though.
The basis on which Gull, I and several scientists are arguing with the concept of human race is that it tries to oversimplify something that is far more complex than skin color, or curly hair etc... In Rwanda alone (my girlfriend is Rwandaise), there are two very distinct ethnic groups probably displaying scientifically significant genetic differences (my girl is by far the shortest of her family, at 5'9. My mother in law is 6', sis in law is 6'2, brother in law 6'3. The avg Tutsi being probably little over 6feet tall).
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler (A. Einstein). What this great scientist meant in issuing this quote, is that it's fun and practical to simplify stuff into categories, but if you try to simplify it past a certain point, you're loosing some meaning, some precision, some accuracy, some usefulness....
