Steve King wants to know what "sub groups" contributed as much as Whites have

[*bfine32*]

(07-24-2016, 11:53 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: It was from Zelda and the answer you sought had been answered long before. When we repeat arguments and you ask a question you already know someone's answer to, and they know you know the answer, do not expect serious answers since it's a not a serious question.

At this point our discussion should have moved on to you providing scientific evidence to support your argument while we supply scientific evidence to support ours. 

A very legitimate question is: why are there no common gene clusters between these so called races?

As I mentioned earlier my answer lies in Anthropology and more specifically Forensics; as it searches for physical evidence.

I have further stated that even in the scientific field there is dispute; sometimes you just have to have faith to believe in certain aspects of science. Somewhere along the way it became bigoted to acknowledge there are physical differences between black, white, and yellow so we have steered away from the terms, the genetic make up of humans has not changed. 

Attached is a study that goes along with my way of thinking:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=98485&page=1

Anthropologists Disagree About Race and Bones

 

Quote:Forensic anthropologists, experts in skeletons that do work for law enforcement agencies, say they are extremely accurate at deciphering the signs that identify a dead person’s bones as African, Caucasian, Asian or American Indian.

“We produce as much accuracy in race as we do with sex and age,” says George W. Gill, a forensic anthropologist at the University of Wyoming and one of the eight anthropologists who are suing the federal government in the Kennewick case.


Distinguishing Characteristics
Gill is one of about 60 certified forensic anthropologists in the U.S. and Canada to assist in the detection of crime through evidence found on human bodies. He is also an expert in assessing race from skeletons. His methods for combining several skeletal traits to evaluate ancestry are widely used in the field of forensic anthropology.


Using measuring tools called calipers — with adjustable pieces that slide or spread apart to measure length or thickness — forensic anthropologists take hundreds of measurements from a skeleton to assess race. The measurements include length, width and projection of the nasal bones, the form of the chin, the shape of the skull and brow and the way bones have fused together, among dozens of others.


These measurements are compared to the indexes made from thousands of measurements of major population groups, which can tell scientists generally where a person’s ancestors came from. 

I can only assume that Forensics is this "junk science" you keep referring to. As I have said I am no scientist; I can only go by what I was taught and I was taught that a person with minimal protrusion of the lower, retreating cheekbones, a narrow nose, and skin a various hue of tan is a Caucasian regardless of his social construct.

That may make me bigoted or "wrong" in the eyes of some, but it is not the first time and I doubt it will be the last.