Australian Politics Forum - Australia Grows More "Asian"

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42329

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #255 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:58pm

Sparky wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:39pm:

No we aren't. Why don't Asians have blue eyes? Because there's a gene that Caucasians have that the other races don't for coloured eyes. So we aren't all the same. Why say things that aren't true. Now if you said the races have slight genetic differences that determine some behaviours and physicality but we are basically the same animal then we'd all agree.

*SIGH*, Sparky it's obvious you know SFA about genetcs. We all have the same genes. It is what makes us human, as against say Chimpanzees or other primates or other animals which have different numbers and types of genes compared to humans. It is the combinations which produce differences such as the colours of eyes. However, to further disprove your point, I believe Ian (?) posted something in this thread which pointed out that indeed, many inhabitants of the continent of Asia (ie "Asians") do indeed have blue eyes.

Quote:

"In Denmark 30 years ago, only 8% of the population had brown eyes, though through immigration; today that number is about 11%. In Germany, about 75% have blue eyes."[33] Blue eyes are also found in southern Europe, Central Asia, South Asia, and West Asia, especially among the Jewish population of Israel.[34][35][36] Many modern Israeli Jews are of European Ashkenazi origin, among whom this trait is common (A study taken in 1911 found that 53.7% of Jews in Galicia in Eastern Europe had blue eyes).[37][38]

Y-Chromosome DNA testing performed on ancient Scythian skeletons found that light eye colors were already present during the Bronze and Iron Ages in the Siberian Krasnoyarsk region.[39] 10 out of the 11 subjects carried Y-DNA R1a1, most commonly found today in Eastern Europe and South Asia.

[Emphasis added]
[Source]

If blue-eyed people had different or extra genes, they would be a difference species and unable to interbreed with other humans without some difficulty. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Sparky

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1338
Gender: male

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #256 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:07pm

It's not extra genes Brian, it's variation in genes. This is what happened. Big groups of humans lived isolated from other groups of humans and evolved in certain ways (races). All humans , but just slight differences. The world has gotten smaller so theses distinct groups are changing. The overlap areas that border these distinct groups are a mixture e.g Indians. Race is all about isolation and evolution because of this. That's it.

Back to top

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42329

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #257 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:15pm

Sparky wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:07pm:

It's not extra genes Brian, it's variation in genes. This is what happened. Big groups of humans lived isolated from other groups of humans and evolved in certain ways (races). All humans , but just slight differences. The world has gotten smaller so theses distinct groups are changing. The overlap areas that border these distinct groups are a mixture e.g Indians. Race is all about isolation and evolution because of this. That's it.

So, you're no longer claiming, "Because there's a gene that Caucasians have that the other races don't for coloured eyes."?

BTW, last time I checked, India is in South Asia and that is the region specifically mentioned in the quote that I provided. Roll Eyes

Oh, and the only "big group of humans" which lived "isolated from all other groups of humans" were the Australian Aborigines and the Native Americans. All other groups had interaction and interbreeding. Even with that isolation, those isolated ones still had the same number of genes as all other humans and could interbreed with them, despite their extended periods of isolation... Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Sparky

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1338
Gender: male

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #258 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:29pm

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:15pm:

Sparky wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:07pm:

It's not extra genes Brian, it's variation in genes. This is what happened. Big groups of humans lived isolated from other groups of humans and evolved in certain ways (races). All humans , but just slight differences. The world has gotten smaller so theses distinct groups are changing. The overlap areas that border these distinct groups are a mixture e.g Indians. Race is all about isolation and evolution because of this. That's it.

So, you're no longer claiming, "Because there's a gene that Caucasians have that the other races don't for coloured eyes."?

BTW, last time I checked, India is in South Asia and that is the region specifically mentioned in the quote that I provided. Roll Eyes

Oh, and the only "big group of humans" which lived "isolated from all other groups of humans" were the Australian Aborigines and the Native Americans. All other groups had interaction and interbreeding. Even with that isolation, those isolated ones still had the same number of genes as all other humans and could interbreed with them, despite their extended periods of isolation... Roll Eyes

First point- the gene for eye colour is different for Caucasions than other races. It's caused by lack of UV. Blonde hair comes from the same scenario. No extra gene it just contains a different sequence of proteins. Secondly India is in Asia but are not Mongoloid. They are a mixture. When I say Asians I mean East Asians (Mongoloids). It's my mistake. Now on to Isolation are you talking 100 years, 1000 years or 100,000 years. Because obviously when you look at the races there must have been great isolation for evolution to change appearance. I'm talking 100,000 years ago. Germany is a long way from China you know. 100,000 years ago it may as well have been Mars. Race are an old form of modern man.

Back to top

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #259 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:50pm

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:58pm:

If blue-eyed people had different or extra genes, they would be a difference species and unable to interbreed with other humans without some difficulty. Roll Eyes

A large-scale study of the variability in the human genome by Genaissance Pharmaceuticals, a biotechnology company in Connecticut... shows that while humans have only 32,000 genes, there are between 400,000 and 500,000 gene versions. More specifically, they found that different versions of a gene are more common in a group of people from one geographical region, compared with people from another.

As sparky said - variation, not extra genes. Maybe saying others "know SFA about genetics" isn't the best approach, when you're clearly struggling yourself.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42329

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #260 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 8:39pm

Sparky wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:29pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:15pm:

Sparky wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:07pm:

It's not extra genes Brian, it's variation in genes. This is what happened. Big groups of humans lived isolated from other groups of humans and evolved in certain ways (races). All humans , but just slight differences. The world has gotten smaller so theses distinct groups are changing. The overlap areas that border these distinct groups are a mixture e.g Indians. Race is all about isolation and evolution because of this. That's it.

So, you're no longer claiming, "Because there's a gene that Caucasians have that the other races don't for coloured eyes."?

BTW, last time I checked, India is in South Asia and that is the region specifically mentioned in the quote that I provided. Roll Eyes

Oh, and the only "big group of humans" which lived "isolated from all other groups of humans" were the Australian Aborigines and the Native Americans. All other groups had interaction and interbreeding. Even with that isolation, those isolated ones still had the same number of genes as all other humans and could interbreed with them, despite their extended periods of isolation... Roll Eyes

First point- the gene for eye colour is different for Caucasions than other races. It's caused by lack of UV. Blonde hair comes from the same scenario. No extra gene it just contains a different sequence of proteins. Secondly India is in Asia but are not Mongoloid. They are a mixture. When I say Asians I mean East Asians (Mongoloids). It's my mistake. Now on to Isolation are you talking 100 years, 1000 years or 100,000 years. Because obviously when you look at the races there must have been great isolation for evolution to change appearance. I'm talking 100,000 years ago. Germany is a long way from China you know. 100,000 years ago it may as well have been Mars. Race are an old form of modern man.

So, you're no longer claiming, "Because there's a gene that Caucasians have that the other races don't for coloured eyes."?

There may be different combinations. I think you've realised that but different genes? Nope. So, until you admit your original statement was wrong, I'll keep banging away at it. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42329

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #261 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 8:41pm

... wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:50pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:58pm:

If blue-eyed people had different or extra genes, they would be a difference species and unable to interbreed with other humans without some difficulty. Roll Eyes

A large-scale study of the variability in the human genome by Genaissance Pharmaceuticals, a biotechnology company in Connecticut... shows that while humans have only 32,000 genes, there are between 400,000 and 500,000 gene versions. More specifically, they found that different versions of a gene are more common in a group of people from one geographical region, compared with people from another.

As sparky said - variation, not extra genes. Maybe saying others "know SFA about genetics" isn't the best approach, when you're clearly struggling yourself.

I refer you back to Sparky's original statement, Honkey.

"Because there's a gene that Caucasians have that the other races don't for coloured eyes."

So, you agree that this is incorrect? It indicates that either Sparky knows SFA about genetics or he doesn't know what he's typing or there are several different personalities typing under the one username, "sparky".

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #262 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 9:12pm

I think the big question here is why is bwian such an idiot.

Race exists bwian.
It is a term used to describe the results in the classification of and grouping of, certain biological aspects of humanity.

You may be a racist and deep down see superiority and inferiority in races... well that's something I've never done so don't start slinging that poo at everyone else.

You may be so demented, so PC, so LW, so Progressive... you've lost all sense and see everyone who can identify racial attributes as racists.

You may be so far off beam bwian you deny there are races and racial markers.

That's your problem.
Denial of reality has always been one of your many problems.

bwian is an obfuscating pedant of the worst variety... in all honesty he isn't worth the effort debating with.

Back to top

IP Logged

Datalife

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2405
Gender: male

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #263 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 9:30pm

Grendel wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 9:12pm:

You may be a racist and deep down see superiority and inferiority in races... well that's something I've never done so don't start slinging that poo at everyone else.

The left are racist all right. They don't think little brown are intelligent, can plan and strategise. To a lefty a brown person is helpless and must be assisted and is blameless and always a victim because they are childlike.

Back to top

"If they’re out there in the high seas, what you would do is seek to turn them back through the agency of the Australian Navy".

Kevin Rudd on 2GB, July 12, 2007

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 42329

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #264 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 11:25pm

Grendel wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 9:12pm:

I think the big question here is why is bwian such an idiot.

Race exists bwian.
It is a term used to describe the results in the classification of and grouping of, certain biological aspects of humanity.

You may be a racist and deep down see superiority and inferiority in races... well that's something I've never done so don't start slinging that poo at everyone else.

You may be so demented, so PC, so LW, so Progressive... you've lost all sense and see everyone who can identify racial attributes as racists.

You may be so far off beam bwian you deny there are races and racial markers.

That's your problem.
Denial of reality has always been one of your many problems.

bwian is an obfuscating pedant of the worst variety... in all honesty he isn't worth the effort debating with.

It is obvious that your views are so entrenched that you are incapable of seeing that in reality, the way in which "race" as a concept is promoted and used by racists such as yourself, has no basis in science. There is no superiority or inferiority, merely superficial difference. Differences that evolution has promoted as the best adaptation to living in a given environment. You may choose to judge or more likely prejudge your fellow human beings on the basis of the colour of their skin or the shape of their eyes or their ability to absorb alcohol, Beowulf but that is a social construction that you and some other human beings have created. Those of us who prefer to look at the science recognise that the differences between the so-called "races" are in reality insignificant in the grand scheme. Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 139232
Gender: male

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #265 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 11:36pm

Soren wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:15pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 5:07pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 3:06pm:

Pretending not to see evident, obvious difference is just plain stupid.

Indeed.

Which is why nobody has actually done that.

Except you (and Brain/Stavos/Tits and all the other indistinguishable, shocked and outraged aunties.)

Incorrect.

However, if you can find a post where someone says there is no "obvious difference", please provide the link.

Over to you my ignorant, lying little racist ...

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 139232
Gender: male

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #266 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 11:40pm

Soren wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:15pm:

You want to ignore the obvious differences ...

Nope. Wrong again.

Who, exactly, wants to "ignore the obvious differences"

The differences are there for everyone to see. Nobody is saying anything to the contrary.

What on earth are you talking about, you ignorant racist buffoon?

Back to top

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #267 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 11:50pm

... wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 4:42pm:

The reason I posted this, was because his description is well written for what was only ever going to be a game of semantics.

Quote:

What are races?

In my own field of evolutionary biology, races of animals (also called “subspecies” or “ecotypes”) are morphologically distinguishable populations that live in allopatry (i.e. are geographically separated). There is no firm criterion on how much morphological difference it takes to delimit a race. Races of mice, for example, are described solely on the basis of difference in coat color, which could involve only one or two genes.

Under that criterion, are there human races?

Yes. As we all know, there are morphologically different groups of people who live in different areas, though those differences are blurring due to recent innovations in transportation that have led to more admixture between human groups.

Can you contest this concept of race?

Of course, the author contradicts himself when he states there is no firm criterion on how much morphological difference it takes to delimit a race and then states that "races" of mice are described soley on the basis of colour. how on earth can that be a criteria to delimit different human "races" ? Would I somehow change race when I get a suntan? what about albinos?

Back to top

IP Logged

ian Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 9451	Re: Australia Grows More "Asian" Reply #268 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 11:53pm Sparky wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 6:39pm: No we aren't. Why don't Asians have blue eyes? some Asians do. Quote: Because there's a gene that Caucasians have that the other races don't for coloured eyes. Incorrect.
Back to top	IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: Australia Grows More "Asian"
Reply #269 - Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 11:57pm

Sparky wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2013 at 7:07pm:

It's not extra genes Brian, it's variation in genes. This is what happened. Big groups of humans lived isolated from other groups of humans and evolved in certain ways (races). All humans , but just slight differences. The world has gotten smaller so theses distinct groups are changing. The overlap areas that border these distinct groups are a mixture e.g Indians. Race is all about isolation and evolution because of this. That's it.

Not only do you know nothing about genetics but also nothing about Indians. Southern Indians are Austronesian mostly.

Back to top

IP Logged