What if race wasn't fictional?

Post Reply New Topic

Scientists have been researching human populations for many years. That isn't being censored.

Unfortunately, most people don't talk about this research. Some liberals seem to think that we don't need to prove racial egalitarianism because you are supposed to believe in it because of faith alone ... or something.

I've noticed that modern liberals will obsessively rant about racial stereotypes in the media (even if they clearly aren't being used seriously) and rant about how all white people are white supremacists deep down. Maybe people are thinking racist things because we never talk about why we believe in racial equality. If people are having trouble believing in something, perhaps they just haven't seen the evidence. Perhaps this is also the real reason why so many minorities have "internalized racism".

That's one of the major things killing leftism. Leftism isn't a religion and it isn't supposed to behave like one.

Unfortunately, political correctness has given modern leftism a very religion-like exterior. This makes the logical foundation of leftism more difficult to see.

Again gone too far. Multiregional hypothesis is just

Nothing of "never setting foot" in Africa.


The multiregional hypothesis was revised in 2003 and the revised version has not been debunked.
It's a pity the question seems political. Politics so often messes up what science is trying to figure out.

The revised theory still sounds basically racist, according to Milford Walpole (the father of multiregionalism)

The evolutionary patterns of three different regions show that the earliest ‘modern’ humans are not Africans and do not have the complex of features that characterize the Africans of that time or any other... There is no evidence of specific admixture with Africans at any time, let alone replacement by them... There is indisputable evidence for the continuity of distinct unique combinations of skeletal features in different regions, connecting the earliest human populations with recent and living peoples.

Multiregionalism in 2018 is an futile attempt to turn back the clock

Walpole's assessment has been enthusiastically take up by the Chinese looking for any evidence in fossil records they are not African. This seems to be where the politics enters the arena (not from a left wing agenda)

Walpole's comments on recent skulls found in China -archaic and modern human skulls from China spanning approximately 500 000 years: Series of Chinese skulls shows continuity in form (so called Peking man with it's suture bones) without evidence of a replacement by African characteristics.

The problem with archaeology is skull phrenology is largely subjective and unscientific...there is of course no evidence the skulls are even Homo sapiens

You could as well quote original Darwin's claims to disprove evolution. The theories are formulated, criticized, reviewed, reformulated, criticized again, etc. The modern evolution model barely resembles the original Darwin's works.

Science is not ideology. You shouldn't follow Holy Founders. You pick ideas and examine them.
So lots of original Wolpoff's claims from the 1980s have been disproved. Yes. This is why the hypothesis has been very seriously revised. Multiregional hypothesis in 2018 is not about agreeing to anything the founders of the hypothesis said.

It's a pity people so often want to bend science to support this or that ideology. And I attribute it to both Chinese nationalists and political correctness warriors.

I strongly encourage scrutiny of all theories whether it be paleoanthropology, archaelogy, physiology or genetics

According to the American Institute of Biological Science educators - American kids are taught the following as part of their curriculum in highschool biology

For the moment, the majority of anatomical, archaeological and genetic evidence gives credence to the view that fully modern humans are a relatively recent evolutionary phenomenon. The current best explanation for the beginning of modern humans is the Out of Africa Model that postulates a single, African origin for Homo sapiens.

There has only been minor revision of "out of Africa" to account for sideways gene flow from Neanderthals and Denisovans. This only accounts for around 1% of the genome for non-Africans and even then the populations that made up Neanderthals and Denisovans were originally from Africa so nothing special there. .

I am not sure therefore what "revision" you are referring to?

Beyond anything mentioned here there is no "magic" genes that entered Caucasians or East Asians which gives us special powers. Historically Europe and Asia believed in the concept of manifest destiny. European colonial powers legitimately believed gun powder and advanced technology reflected superiority and Darwinism provided the proof that only "the fittest" genes survive. This is (of course) all largely accidental based on environment factors.

The East Asian's cultural beliefs stem from being a "celestial race" and fossils are used to reinforce some these kooky ideas.

Last edited by cyberdad on 17 Mar 2018, 7:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The multiregional hypothesis is nonsense.

Most proto-humans couldn't even speak as we do because their throats were not the right shape. If the multiregional hypotheses was correct, black people would not be capable of speaking in a modern American accent.

Some Afro-American communities do have their own version of English, but this is purely a cultural thing. English-speaking black people are capable of speaking standard American English whenever they want to.

Additionally, no living humans have a "bun" in the back of the skull like a Neanderthal.

Additionally, modern humans are very genetically similar to one another. We could not possibly have diverged more than a million years ago.

Those proto-humans, like Homo erectus were not "extinct races". They were bipedal apes and they were not fully human. Real humans didn't exist until 300,000 years ago.

This one?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occipital_bun

There are still some human populations which often exhibit occipital buns. A greater proportion of early modern Europeans had them, but prominent occipital buns in modern populations are now relatively infrequent.

They are still around on some Europeans.

I wouldn't get too excited

Like suture bones on Peking man, the occipital bun is just an extension of bone that has no impact on brain function

I'm not sure how you got "excitement" from my post.

Race isn't real.

I love a good detective story...

Damn!! !
Pesky research and scientific methodology so often gets in the way of political correctness!! !

except this one is a red herring...

It is, but correcting DarthMetaKnight has become one of my favourite pastimes in the last few months, perhaps that was the excitement you detected.

You and me both, bro...