SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)
INTC 34.29-3.5%3:14 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Mary Cluney who wrote (129746)3/10/2001 6:26:32 AM
From: Eric K.  Read Replies (3) of 186894
 
Mary-- Re: The human genome studies confirm that there are no definition for race in terms of DNA

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The notion of a black or white race is indeed flawed, but, the notion that, over a period of tens of thousands of years, most people who are black lived in a similar environment and could have had a different set of attributes selected for and against than a group of people in China or Northern Europe, is not improbable. A thousand generations certainly isn't going to lead to massive genetic shifts (given that we're about 99% ape and there a couple million years separating us), but it could be enough to lead to small differences in different traits among people who lived in different environments (with which "race" could be correlated).

Obviously, in the context of one paragraph posts to SI, opinions will be reductionist and frequently involve over-generalizations.

As to gender differences, it's interesting that this topic came up when it did, as Salon has a quite interesting article on early developmental differences as related to gender. The link below connects to an article on Christine Hoff Summers (who is basically against almost all post-modern feminist theory on gender development), which in turn contains a whole bunch of interesting links to her opponent's articles:

salon.com

-Eric

Note: Scratch paragraph 1 if you accept punctuated equilibrium rather than traditional Darwinian evolution-- in that case tens of thousand years is sufficient for massive evolutionary change.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News