True enough...and according to some of them, that is 100% a result of "genetics" (;
I think we can all agree that's environment. Lol
Referencing nationality also gives us an idea of geography. You will notice transitions in many different phenotypic traits based on equatorial proximity, for instance.
Also, I at no point said
"I've met a lot of people who said this so I don't need to read it in a book"
Feel free to go back and reread. I haven't edited.
I'm simply indicating the difference in the sources from which I glean what I know.
I'm glad we're (finally) on the same page about race vs. ethnicity.
Until I come across materials or experiences that tell me otherwise, all I can go off of are my personal observations and discoveries, no matter what avenue. This is how the scientific process works on a large and small scale. Thank you for contributing to my knowledge of a specific set of ethnic groups. I wonder what tribe all the Ethiopian and Eritrean folks I've met come from since they share so many distinct facial features within the groups they identify with. You seem to be very familiar with the tribes, based upon my description, what do you think?
"White people have the most colourful variety of hair."
Define" white people " there is a wide variation in tones within other ethnic groups. You clearly haven't noticed.
" White people have the most variety of colourful eyes." see above.
"Every other race does not have the same variety of colour that is common." see above
"Black people, and East Asian's by default have black coloured hair. This by no means suggests they look the same." define "black people" define "East asians" and "asians" and see above.
"Simply put, white people have the most polygenic traits. This is by no means a comment in support of white supremacy."
Incorrect. We all have the same amount of polygenic traits. You are referring to variation, and there are different levels of variation in all ethnic groups.
"I did read it. But it still occurs to me that the attributes resident to colour are in fact real. Black people don't burn in the sun all that easily, white people do. I also mention other attributes that are common with their own uniqueness."
Alright. Please define "black" for me, and tell me what qualifies. The Fitzpatrick scale is no longer accepted as scientific or effective in reference to origin. It is solely used for dermatology now.
"Today, the number 1 news feed is Twitter. It's only normal for those who would get excited about something like this, to be the first.
Also to have a closed mind and filled with conclusion and doubt for something you have no clear answer to, makes you a pawn of you field, not a pioneer. In other words, it will be real when you are told it is."
The burden of proof is not on me, it's on you. All I need is absence of proof in order to disprove something, and reliable scientific proof is absent. Rumors, gossip and Twitter are hardly empirical evidence. If I based all me beliefs and decisions on those sources I would be a very confused individual, as it sounds you are.
"The truth on how the 3 buildings collapsed on 911 is also questionable, but mainstream science lies about the obvious."
Oh boy, a conspiracy theorist. I'm not going to waste too much of my time, then.
No clue. Like I said before, I can generally distinguish between dominant East African and dominant West African features, but I wouldn't be able to pinpoint ethnic heritage to that level of specificity from a photograph, much less a description. Generally speaking, if they lived near the border with Eritrea, they're most likely Tigray, if they lived near the border with Somalia, they're most likely Somali, etc. My comments were mostly to point out the effects of colonialism and artificially imposed national borders on the ethnic makeup of African states.
I'm not quite sure we're on the same page regarding race and ethnicity. I'm wondering what the difference is between saying "Ethiopians tend to have high, domed foreheads," and saying "East Asians tend to have straight, black hair." To me, it's just a matter of the scale of geographically based classification, "East Asian" is a more broad term than "Ethiopian" is, so "Ethiopian" would just allow for a higher number of potentially shared traits.
by ParanoidilutionUntil I come across materials or experiences that tell me otherwise, all I can go off of are my personal observations and discoveries, no matter what avenue. This is how the scientific process works on a large and small scale. Thank you for contributing to my knowledge of a specific set of ethnic groups.
As per my previous post, I'm changing how I'd classify Continental African ethnicity. I would become more specific if I knew more about tribes . As far as "East Asians" go I would disagree with that generalization. There are high levels of variation with tone and texture of hair within geographic East Asia. Same with eye shape/color and skin color.
by Paranoidilution"White people have the most colourful variety of hair."
Define" white people " there is a wide variation in tones within other ethnic groups. You clearly haven't noticed.
You clearly haven't heard me the first time I wrote about it. Do you really need a definition of white people, cause to me that seems like a waste of time, or you're baiting me to see if I'll say something for you to tackle since you already like to assume my ethnicity and who I hang out with. Which to me sounds kinda racists.
" White people have the most variety of colourful eyes." see above.
"Every other race does not have the same variety of colour that is common." see above
"Black people, and East Asian's by default have black coloured hair. This by no means suggests they look the same." define "black people" define "East asians" and "asians" and see above.
"Simply put, white people have the most polygenic traits. This is by no means a comment in support of white supremacy."
Incorrect. We all have the same amount of polygenic traits. You are referring to variation, and there are different levels of variation in all ethnic groups.
Yes I already suggested there are variations in all of those that were mentioned. By example a polygenic trait is skin colour, hair colour etc. There are those who have grey eyes, or blue, or green or brown. Brunette hair, blond, silver/white, black, red, and each polygenic trait mentioned has even more variations of it's degree. Again for non Caucasian groups to display a wide variety of eye colour, is unusual The same goes for hair.
I swear, telling people I even had to debate this with an anthropologist would make for the disappointment of the day.
"I did read it. But it still occurs to me that the attributes resident to colour are in fact real. Black people don't burn in the sun all that easily, white people do. I also mention other attributes that are common with their own uniqueness."
Alright. Please define "black" for me, and tell me what qualifies. The Fitzpatrick scale is no longer accepted as scientific or effective in reference to origin. It is solely used for dermatology now.
"Today, the number 1 news feed is Twitter. It's only normal for those who would get excited about something like this, to be the first.
Also to have a closed mind and filled with conclusion and doubt for something you have no clear answer to, makes you a pawn of you field, not a pioneer. In other words, it will be real when you are told it is."
The burden of proof is not on me, it's on you. All I need is absence of proof in order to disprove something, and reliable scientific proof is absent.
I can assure you there is no burden of proof on me simply cause I'm not responsible for your, in my opinion, poor intuition. You're free to believe whatever you wish. You're free to call it a hoax. Without proving it is.
In the medieval days, there were so many things that couldn't be proven. I think because people had that same mentality in regards to, as you say, "absence of proof". I'm positive if we were in those days, you wouldn't exactly be the required revolutionary type, as you are now.
But yes, absence of proof, science hasn't all the answers. Yet we have men donating their ego's to it and are willing to argue and debate things they were fed. Until an intelligence they submit to changes their mind.
By the way. Pluto is a planet again. It's a dwarf planet now and will remain so until further notice.
Rumors, gossip and Twitter are hardly empirical evidence. If I based all me beliefs and decisions on those sources I would be a very confused individual, as it sounds you are.
I personally never used twitter, but it is what it is, the number 1 news feed. Even you're so called reliable old media turns to twitter. Rumors and gossip come from old media. Take away the fear of ridicule and loss, and I'm sure we'd be more advanced.
The most reliable media, is the new media. It is of the many, not the few. If I were to mention, if mainstream science were to broadcast these skulls, they would be crossing their superiors. Of course that's my perspective on that matter but those kind of realities are too far off your course for you to digest. I understand, you need something you can trust, and who you trust is up to you.
"The truth on how the 3 buildings collapsed on 911 is also questionable, but mainstream science lies about the obvious."
Oh boy, a conspiracy theorist. I'm not going to waste too much of my time, then.
911 is not a theory, it's common sense. Mainstream media will never tell you that.
I wish we were. Im not so sure were you get this self righteous thought of me trying to be profound in everything I say, majority of the time I just let stuff flow, glad to hear it sounds smart though. Im glad you seem so eager to generalize people by age especially in a place like this were such a thing is of no worth.