• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does race actually exist?[W:115]

Does race actually exist?

  • Yes, humans are divided into different races (white, black, mixed, etc.)

    Votes: 21 46.7%
  • No, we are all the same race

    Votes: 20 44.4%
  • I don't know/other

    Votes: 4 8.9%

  • Total voters
    45
Re: Does race actually exist?

And your 'credibility' is affected accordingly...along with the chances of me wasting my time further with you on this subject.

Whatever, dude, I stand to my words. Whether you like it or not, that's your business. :)
 
Re: Does race actually exist?

I see so many people here that don't recognize races just because they fear of being labelled "a racist"! :boohoo:
When I hear "race", I think "why is someone trying to group people again, damnit".
 
Re: Does race actually exist?

When I hear "race", I think "why is someone trying to group people again, damnit".

Because that's how the mind works - it classifies, sorts, analyzes and recognizes different people and different situations. Trying to lump everything (they are all people or they are all animals or they are all creatures) doesn't help the mind at all.
 
Re: Does race actually exist?

Because that's how the mind works - it classifies, sorts, analyzes and recognizes different people and different situations. Trying to lump everything (they are all people or they are all animals or they are all creatures) doesn't help the mind at all.
I try the third option, if I think about it.

Everyone is a group.

Only do it with humans though, I group animals and such all the damn time.


OF course that doesn't always work - the natural mental path is to group people. Have to think about it to avoid that. Or modify previous erroneous conclusions.
 
Sure race exists, to keep race baiters like Sharpton, Jackson and Obama in the social justice business.
 
Re: Does race actually exist?

So again, my divergence starting 50,000 years ago is quite a decent estimate, even conservative.
That's 4 errors ...

Apparently you believe a wave from Africa just quit ****ing other humans once it left Africa.
:lamo
You really should get your facts straight.


And not that 10,000-15,000 years wouldn't be enough to develop subspecies.
You didn't cite those populations that were separated less than 50,000 years as a different species. No previous mention of North American or Australian natives at all. The other populations you cite as "subspecies" have intermixed so much it takes genetics to tell the difference, not just facial recognition, which is why I qualify any statement about race. It may be useful for biologists and others (like doctors) in relating biological structure but as a general term used by the public it's crap.


As for your quote you really should read Out of Africa Again and Again.

Analyses of recently derived human genetic trees by Alan R. Templeton, Ph.D, of Washington University in St Louis, show that there were at least two major waves of human migration out of Africa. DNA evidence suggests also that these wanderers bred with the people they encountered, rather than replaced them, in a "make- love-not-war,"scenario.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/03/020307074956.htm

Pictures: http://cogweb.ucla.edu/ep/Templeton_02.html
 
Last edited:
Re: Does race actually exist?

Because that's how the mind works - it classifies, sorts, analyzes and recognizes different people and different situations. Trying to lump everything (they are all people or they are all animals or they are all creatures) doesn't help the mind at all.
Not yours, clearly.
 
Re: Does race actually exist?

MoSurveyor said:
There's nothing to debate - I'm just pointing out errors.
With this post you've made three, now.
mbig said:
Wrong/Lie
I made NO error. I did not say which Gorillas were which species/subspecies.
I Merely elucidated a List of them to show they existed Despite never having left Africa.
My POINT/The Context you don't get and dishonestly Mischaracterized, being a refutation of Bod's claim. His stating that because humans evolved in Africa as a single subspecies/race, that they couldn't later have subspecies!
A Ridiculous premise easily Busted by me BY Showing that even if they never left Africa they could easily evolve into different subspecies, even species, as Gorillas did. Humans geographical divergence only making easier/More likely.
THAT was the context and 100% coherent and correct point.
You have shown ZERO Error as all I did was list some of those species/subspecies, NOT claim which any of them were.

Mo said:
I haven't been addressing those issues, so your whining about it in response to my post is uncalled for.
I have not stated any position except to say I disagree with your position, which doesn't mean I'm diametrically opposed to it.
mbig said:
IOW you have ZERO Rebuttal and Cannot address THE issue at hand, just don't like it/Disagree withOUT cause/Cannot debate merely are desperate to find something/anything to nitpick cause you want a piece of me.
What transparent and admitted Ignorance!
You admittedly just want to find something/anything to pick at because you "disagree" (it offends your Unthoughtout position) but you CANNOT elucidate it! so try tangential means.
Sad.
Let us know when you DO have something to say on the String Topic eh?
Mo said:
Since you haven't been using Australian or North American natives as two distinct races in your arguments, your claim (my supposed "self-impeachment" ) is shown to be false once again.
That's three strikes - you're out ...
mbig said:
So you have No answer to your Self-Impeaching "COUPLE of Exceptions".
OUCHER.
A "Couple" is plenty to make the point.

Let me add to my point/Your being Porked with this...

http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/objects-through-time/essays/50000-years-before-present/

Our species evolved in Africa over 200,000 years ago. The Genographic Project has found that people spread out of Africa in at least two migratory waves. The first wave travelled from eastern Africa into the area of the east coast of the Mediterranean known as the Levant about 100,000 years ago.

The later second wave moved from Africa into the Arabian Peninsula and continued eastward following the coast of South Asia about 70,000 years ago.

This southern wave kept rolling along reaching Southeast Asia, where one branch of people migrated to Australia and New Guinea, while other branches moved along the coast of east Asia. A branch of this second wave migration moved north into the central Asia and spread west into Europe and east into Siberia about 40,000 years ago. Eventually humans made their way to the American continent about 15,000 – 20,000 years ago.

The actual timing of the southern wave of humans is hard to ascertain because it appears to have moved along the coast, where after the end of the last Ice Age 12,000 years ago the melting glaciers drowned large stretches of coastline so the evidence is now under the ocean. The fossils we have of these migrants offer few clues as to what sparked their spread.​

Damn good!
So again, MY divergence starting 50,000 years ago is quite a decent estimate, even conservative.
And not that 10,000-15,000 years wouldn't be enough to develop subspecies.

THAT time period Previously Elucidated by me/my links as well.

Again, do chirp in when you have something on the string topic you admittedly/pathetically do NOT have now.
Too bad Mo, I brought them forward for all to see.
Then the new Dropped-it-all addition from Last-wording Mo_Surveyor from this page:

That's 4 errors ...
Apparently you believe a wave from Africa just quit ****ing other humans once it left Africa.
:lamo You really should get your facts straight. You didn't cite those populations that were separated less than 50,000 years as a different species. No previous mention of North American or Australian natives at all. The other populations you cite as "subspecies" have intermixed so much it takes genetics to tell the difference, not just facial recognition, which is why I qualify any statement about race. It may be useful for biologists and others (like doctors) in relating biological structure but as a general term used by the public it's crap.
As for your quote you really should read Out of Africa Again and Again.Humans Emerged "Out Of Africa" Again And Again -- ScienceDailyPictures:From Alan Templeton, "Out of Africa again and again."
So as well as dropping EVERYTHING else/Everything else You were Wrong about except the dates, you now revise that to Agree with ME Too, but claim it as your discovery

ALL the strikes were your Ignorant Whiffs.
ALL Of them.
You had to drop Everything you Lied, were wrong about, and Misread above.
Every single Item:
My mere list Gorilla species/subspecies,
Your Ignorance and Admitted Inability to discuss or even take a position on THE topic!
and now the Emigration/Emergence dates TOO....
You Wrongly claimed had Only a "Couple of Exceptions" is NOW Both OLDER AND "Again and Again", Agreeing with ME but Dishonestly and Childishly now taking it as Your original position.
What Rank DIShonesty while YOU got Porked.

You have not only been Gutted on every point, but shown Juvenile/dissociative posting in service of your blind politics and wittle ego having been Busted.
 
Last edited:
Re: Does race actually exist?

Too bad Mo, I brought them forward for all to see.
Then the new Dropped-it-all addition from Last-wording Mo_Surveyor from this page:
Not even close - but considering your other errors I don't expect any more than this kind of response.

:lamo :lamo :lamo


/thread
 
And you Disingenuously feel completely free to reiterate your goofy/politics-as-fashion position DESPITE my two postings at the top of page 6 making mincemeat of it.
A Page YOU posted on Twice afterwords but Couldn't/didn't touch.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/187676-does-race-actually-exist-6.html
No response by you or any other of contrary position to undeniably serious/significant opinion.

Politics-as-fashion? What the hell does that mean?

...and I didn't realize that if you posted something one was REQUIRED to respond or else be relegated to the category of "disingenuous". :roll:

And race is hardly just skin color. Races can be identified from skeletal remains alone.
We have different size, bones, musculature, facial features, hair coverage/texture, even pharmacology and disease proclivities.

So my daughter is a different race from me? That is simply ****ing retarded. :lol:

And Gorillas "originated in Africa" too and even though they Never left/didn't get help from the environment in forced adaptation as Homo sapien did, [even] they DO have Different Species, Subspecies/Race.
There are Mountain Gorillas, Eastern and/or Western Lowland Gorillas, etc, etc, you could Not tell apart. Same for other Flora/Fauna.
"Originating in Africa" or anywhere else doesn't preclude further adaptation/Evolution; and Didn't.
Humans have avoided these taxonomic classifications for Political reasons.

So gorilla's are homo sapiens?

What's most galling is all these partisans just reiterating there nonsensical political stances.
When I go into a string to make a point, I try and Tackle the most difficult conflicting-idea posts, Not Evade/avoid them.
Avoiding them is being Dishonest in debate and to one's self.

Race is a societal construct... not a scientific one. Your sources on page six list some factors that I don't consider relevant. Morphological, pharmacogenetic, behavioral, and cognitive traits are not as relevant as DNA...
 
... I'd reference you look at the rest of my comments why that's not true.

Yes, we're all the same species, homo sapiens, the only surviving hominids. Species, not race.

It is true.

In recent years, the associations of race with the ideologies and theories that grew out of the work of 19th-century anthropologists and physiologists has led to the use of the word race itself becoming problematic.

race: definition of race in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

As I said it is a societal construct designed to create differences based on out ward appearances instead of basic biological composition.
 
I have a new answer for the thread title question:

Yes.

And?
 
Politics-as-fashion? What the hell does that mean?
You might want to look at the Oxford dictionary you just selecta-quoted.
Aside from the First few and Most important definitions which a Agree with Me and You, of course, LEFT OUT...
YOU quoted a section that said "in recent years
".
THAT'S what "politics as fashion" is.
Ooops.

Bodhisatva said:
...and I didn't realize that if you posted something one was REQUIRED to respond or else be relegated to the category of "disingenuous". :roll:
When you post Just below another that shows you're wrong and post just your Empty opinion Despite it/withOut engaging it..
That's what I was referring to
Feel Free TO address it Any time.
Which, as we all know, means Never/you can't.

Bodhisatva said:

So my daughter is a different race from me? That is simply ****ing retarded.
:lol:
As to what's "retarded", I'll leave it to the board to decide if your Juvenile attempt to juxtapose Gender with race is.
It's Pure Baiting/Trolling on your part.
Join the rest of the crowd who also Cannot engage straightforwardly. (IOW, all)

Bodhistva said:

So gorilla's are homo sapiens?
Again Baiting/Trolling.

Bodhistva said:

Race is a societal construct... not a scientific one.
Your sources on page six list some factors that I don't consider relevant. Morphological, pharmacogenetic, behavioral, and cognitive traits are not as relevant as DNA...
My sources on page six DO point out is IS DNA which makes those differences.
I bolded the portions that did, Especially Coyne.

It's my sig as well!
Coyne I bolded on pg 6 - as well as being my sig said:
The subject of human races, or even the idea that they exist, has become Taboo. And this despite the palpable morphological differences between human groups — differences that Must be based on GENETIC differences and Would, if seen in Other species, lead to their classification as either Races or Subspecies. -Coyne
Anything?

And You think it's "Societal construct" that:
Pygmies/Bushmen are short and 'Black'?!?!

It's chance?
They could just as easily be 6'4 with pale skin Right?
It's Not DNA?!?!
East Asians have Straight Black Hair and distinct facial features?
"Social construct"?!?!

Any other "social construct" reality-deniers feel free to chime in.
 
Last edited:
You might want to look at the Oxford dictionary you just selecta-quoted.
Aside from the First few and Most important definitions which a Agree with Me and You, of course, LEFT OUT...
YOU quoted a section that said "in recent years
".
THAT'S what "politics as fashion" is.
Ooops.

Oooops? :lol:

Oooops what? You made up a term and think it applies? Good for you buddy...

When you post Just below another that shows you're wrong and post just your Empty opinion Despite it/withOut engaging it..
That's what I was referring to
Feel Free TO address it Any time.
Which, as we all know, means Never/you can't.

You say that I am wrong. Prove it. Just saying it is just darn silly...

As to what's "retarded", I'll leave it to the board to decide if your Juvenile attempt to juxtapose Gender with race is.
It's Pure Baiting/Trolling on your part.
Join the rest of the crowd who also Cannot engage straightforwardly. (IOW, all)

I did not juxtapose gender with race. I showed an example as to why your reasoning is flawed.
"We have different size, bones, musculature, facial features, hair coverage/texture, even pharmacology and disease proclivities. "

My child whether boy or girl WILL grow up to be of different size, different bone structure and have different facial features... hair coverage, resistance to disease, etc. Your idea of race is idiotic. Literally...

Again Baiting/Trolling.

Yeah... sure.

It's my sig as well!

Anything?

And You think it's "Societal construct" that:
Pygmies/Bushmen are short and 'Black'?!?!

It's chance?
They could just as easily be 6'4 with pale skin Right?
It's Not DNA?!?!
East Asians have Straight Black Hair and distinct facial features?
"Social construct"?!?!
Any other "social construct" reality-deniers feel free to chime in.

Of course it is genetic... so what? That does not negate that it is a social construct. They could have just as easily used that reasoning to say that men and women of the same ethnicity, etc. are different races... but they didn't and that is one primary reason why it is a social construct.
 
Back
Top Bottom