How would earth be with 1 race?

[Mephisto91]

Bad choice of words on my part I guess, but as a whole I still don't think very highly of what people can do to each other.

Harmony, huh? I'll believe it when I see it. History tells a very different story.

Really? History tells me that human rights are improving every day and we are moving closer and closer towards global harmony as we speak.

[...Rousseau...]

the aristocracy will alter their genetic code and get brain implants that will make them 100x more intelligent. their will likely be a global holocaust/war

[shadowsfall19]

The rhinocerous is bigger and stronger, but Humans are still better. Humans had nothing to begin with, we were just like any other animal and had no tools to use, we managed to survive anyway even with our lack of defensive features. All we need is the world around us and we can figure out a way to accomplish anything. No other animal can. That's why I say humans are better than any other animal, other animals may have certain capabilities that are beyond human capabilities, but in the end we are beyond them.

All I'm hearing is conjecture and opinion...like I said, I'm getting the feeling that this whole conversation really is subjective.

You seem to think that humans are better on the whole as a result of our technological advancements...and I agree with you, only the difference is I think that humans are better in some regards, whereas animals are better than humans in other regards.

**** it, George Carlin put it best:



Fast Forward to about 5:00 to where he starts talking about "what beasts we humans are..."


This is essentially how I feel about humans in general.

[Mephisto91]

the aristocracy will alter their genetic code and get brain implants that will make them 100x more intelligent. their will likely be a global holocaust/war

New age hippy?

[Mephisto91]

All I'm hearing is conjecture and opinion...like I said, I'm getting the feeling that this whole conversation really is subjective.

You seem to think that humans are better on the whole as a result of our technological advancements...and I agree with you, only the difference is I think that humans are better in some regards, whereas animals are better than humans in other regards.

**** it, George Carlin put it best:



Fast Forward to about 5:00 to where he starts talking about "what beasts we humans are..."


This is essentially how I feel about humans in general.

Well it is conjecture and opinion. There is no way I can obtain proof that humans are superior to all other animals, but I believe we are, and I also said that some animals have capabilities beyond ours, but in the end I think the intelligence humans have makes us the superior race. I can't see the vid cuz my comp is all screwy, but how do you feel about humans in general?

[East1600plus]

****ing goobacks

[shadowsfall19]

You believe all races are exactly the same other than physical features?

First of all, when using the word "race", there is only one "race", homo sapiens sapiens.

What you're talking about is a matter of culture and sociology, ergo (the REAL term for it) "ethnicity".

I believe that there are most certainly cultural and social differences between people, but genetically? Nope.

And besides, as I posted earlier, it's not like I'm talking out of my ass or blowing off steam, there's evidence to support my claim:

7. Ask students what their estimates indicate about the extent of human genetic variation at the molecular level.

Students should recognize that at the molecular level, humans are far more alike (about 99.9 percent of the bases are the same) than they are different (only about 0.1 percent of the bases are different). Students should also realize, however, that even a small percentage difference can represent a very large actual number of differences in something as large as the human genome.

If students have difficulty reaching these conclusions, help them by asking questions such as, "Based on this comparison, do you think that at the molecular level, people are more alike than they are different or vice versa?" and "How can a difference of only 0.1 percent (1 in 1,000) result in such a large number of differences (3 million differences)?"

8. Explain that the rest of the activity focuses on this 0.1 percent difference between people. Ask students questions such as, "Do you think these differences matter? What effect do you think they have? What might affect how much a specific difference matters?"

These questions focus students' attention on the significance of the differences, instead of the number of differences. Remind students of the differences among people that they observed in Activity 1 and point out that most of these differences have their basis in a difference in the DNA sequence of particular genes (probably pierced versus non pierced body parts do not). To help them understand the magnitude of the number of differences between their DNA and that of another person, ask students if they think there are 3 million differences in appearance and biological functions between themselves and the person sitting next to them.

9. Explain that studying the beta globin gene more closely will help students begin to answer these questions for themselves. Direct students to examine the sequences on Beta Globin Gene?Person A and Beta Globin Gene?Person B again. Explain that the regions that show bases grouped in triplets are from the coding regions ("exons") of the gene, while the other regions are from the noncoding regions ("introns"). Then ask students which of the two base differences in bold is most likely to matter, and why.

Most eukaryotic genes are composed of both coding and noncoding regions, which are transcribed into an initial messenger RNA. The noncoding introns are then spliced out of the RNA; other processing steps ultimately result in the mature messenger RNA that is translated into protein. Students should realize that the second base difference occurs in a noncoding region of the gene and is unlikely to have an impact on individuals. The first difference occurs in a coding region and is more likely to matter.

10. Explain that although 3 million base differences sounds like a lot, most of these differences have no significant impact on individuals, either because they occur in a noncoding region or for another reason. Point out that most of these 3 million differences can only be detected by examining the DNA sequence.

Students should now understand that while some base differences occur in coding regions and may result in an altered amino acid sequence in the protein coded for by a gene, others occur in noncoding regions where they likely have no impact. Point out that only a small percentage of the DNA sequences in the human genome are coding sequences. Furthermore, only a small percentage of the noncoding DNA sequences are regulatory sequences such as promoters or enhancers that can influence the amount of gene product that results from a given gene. The remaining DNA sequences (the majority of the total DNA sequences in the genome) have no known function. Most of the variations in DNA sequence occur in these latter sequences and have no detectable impact.*

If you wish to offer your students a more sophisticated understanding of why most DNA sequence differences have no impact, extend the discussion to include the following ideas. Even many of the differences that occur in coding regions have no impact. Only those differences that result in a change in amino acid sequence in a critical region of the protein (one that affects the function of the protein), or that result in a premature stop codon in the RNA (and thus a truncated protein) have a significant impact on the individual carrying that variation. As students will see in Day 2, those few differences that do affect individuals often have devastating consequences.

*You may wish to clarify for students the reason that most molecular variation occurs in noncoding regions. It is true that there are more noncoding than coding regions. However, the fundamental biological reason for the increased variability of noncoding regions is that there is no selective pressure exerted on changes in these silent/nonfunctional regions. You also may wish to point out that some differences that occur in noncoding regions do have an impact. For example, several mutations within introns in the beta globin gene cause incorrect splicing of the messenger RNA, and as a result, several codons may be inserted into or omitted from the sequence, leading to nonfunctional beta globin polypeptides.

[Source]

[...Rousseau...]

New age hippy?

give it 50-100 years. lets see what happens.

[American_Maniac]

uhh, like what?

facial features and the amount of melanin in the skin are not "differences in races"

A difference in "race" would be a completely different human that could not breed with other humans.

no that would be a different species if you could not breed.

[shadowsfall19]

Well it is conjecture and opinion. There is no way I can obtain proof that humans are superior to all other animals, but I believe we are, and I also said that some animals have capabilities beyond ours, but in the end I think the intelligence humans have makes us the superior race. I can't see the vid cuz my comp is all screwy, but how do you feel about humans in general?

Damn, I wish you could have saw it, it would have heigtened the effect...in any case, he goes onto say that..."Human beings are ordinary jungle beasts...savages. No different than the cro-magnon people who lived 25,000 years ago in the Pleistocene forests eating grubs off of rotten logs. No different. Our DNA hasn't changed substantially in 100,000 years, we're still operating out of the lower brain, the reptilian brain. "Fight or flight, kill or be killed". Now, we like to think have evolved and advanced because we can build a computer, fly an airplane, travel underwater. We can write a sonnet, compose an opera, paint a painting...but you know something? We're barely out of the f*cking jungle. What we are is semi-civilized beasts...with baseball caps and automatic weapons. Did you ever stop and think about how fragile this civilization is that we're so proud of? How easy it is to break right down? All you would have to do is get rid of electricity."

That essentially sums it up...I accept that now this is a matter of opinion.

[Metal Jerk]

boring.

[SaniK]

If we were all the same race, then people would just bitch about some other random physical feature instead.

[Mephisto91]

First of all, when using the word "race", there is only one "race", homo sapiens sapiens.

What you're talking about is a matter of culture and sociology, ergo (the REAL term for it) "ethnicity".

I believe that there are most certainly cultural and social differences between people, but genetically? Nope.

And besides, as I posted earlier, it's not like I'm talking out of my ass or blowing off steam, there's evidence to support my claim:



[Source]

That's not proof. All other animals adapt to their environments and get different temperaments and stuff like that based on how their lives are lived, why would Humans be any different? Have you ever heard of Moken people? They are a culture that focuses on the sea, and they have been proven to have better underwater eye sight than the average person. Also, many asian people are lactose intolerant, aswell as many other ethnicities, white people have an unusually low lactose intolerant population than others. I think that is proof enough that we are genetically different in more ways than just physically.

[shadowsfall19]

If we were all the same race, then people would just bitch about some other random physical feature instead.

I agree. Different tribes in Europe, Asia, Africa, North and South America and the Middle East all fought each other and they (more or less) looked the same.

If it's not skin color, it'll just be something else...humans will always create some sort of social barrier. =/

[Mephisto91]

Damn, I wish you could have saw it, it would have heigtened the effect...in any case, he goes onto say that..."Human beings are ordinary jungle beasts...savages. No different than the cro-magnon people who lived 25,000 years ago in the Pleistocene forests eating grubs off of rotten logs. No different. Our DNA hasn't changed substantially in 100,000 years, we're still operating out of the lower brain, the reptilian brain. "Fight or flight, kill or be killed". Now, we like to think have evolved and advanced because we can build a computer, fly an airplane, travel underwater. We can write a sonnet, compose an opera, paint a painting...but you know something? We're barely out of the f*cking jungle. What we are is semi-civilized beasts...with baseball caps and automatic weapons. Did you ever stop and think about how fragile this civilization is that we're so proud of? How easy it is to break right down? All you would have to do is get rid of electricity."

That essentially sums it up...I accept that now this is a matter of opinion.

Who created the definition of "Cilvilized"? We did. It's not something in nature, it's a man made concept. I believe most humans are violent and brutish by nature, but I don't really see that as a bad thing, it's what we are naturally because that's the way we would need to be to survive in the wild. Through evolution we will eventually lose that, but it's not really a bad thing.

[eLjay28]

We would just find another way to divide/classify each other.

[kobrien21]

everyone is supposed to be coffee colored by the year 3000. there are articles about it.

[shadowsfall19]

That's not proof.

Because you say so? Convincing.

All other animals adapt to their environments and get different temperaments and stuff like that based on how their lives are lived, why would Humans be any different?

And that's just it...we are no different. What's funny about that is, didn't you just say earlier that we were different from animals because we were more superior? o_o;

Maybe I'm reading a little too much into what you said there...

Have you ever heard of Moken people? They are a culture that focuses on the sea, and they have been proven to have better underwater eye sight than the average person.

Exactly, you just said it yourself...they have more than likely spent thousands of years near the water, and, as such developed better eye sight than most other groups.

Also, many asian people are lactose intolerant, aswell as many other ethnicities, white people have an unusually low lactose intolerant population than others. I think that is proof enough that we are genetically different in more ways than just physically.

You know what's funny, this is the same argument that people use to try to prove that Sickle Cell Anemia is a "black only" disease...and sure enough, they're wrong:

Sickle Cell Anemia: It's Not a ?Black Disease?

How Sickle Cell is Acquired - Inheritance

As we've become more knowledgeable about sickle cell anemia we've discovered that it is not infectious but rather genetic. In other words you can't get sickle cell from exposure to a toxin, infection, virus, or parasite. People with sickle cell are born with the disease. It is inherited when parents pass it on to their children.
Location of Sickle Cell Carriers
Sickle Cell in the United States

We've also discovered that sickle cell is, in the United States, very prevalent among dark skinned people and almost completely absent in "white" populations. This is why sickle cell anemia has been, for a very long time, associated with people of dark skin color. This association has been based on the partially correct assumption that sickle cell originates in Africa and those who are of African descent (and therefore very often dark skinned) are the only people who can carry the gene for the disease and pass it on genetically.
Sickle Cell in the World

While it is true that sickle cell is very prevalent in much of Africa it is entirely untrue that it is confined just to that region. In fact sickle cell is prevalent in parts of all of the following areas:

* Africa
* Mediterranean countries (such as Greece, Turkey, and Italy)
* The Arabian peninsula
* India
* Spanish-speaking regions (South America, Central America, and parts of the Caribbean)

In each region both dark and light skinned people have been found to be sickle cell carriers. The explanation for this particular distribution lies in explanation for the survival of sickle cell over time.
How Sickle Cell Survived

As has already been explained, sickle cell can for various reasons be a fatal disease. You may think, therefore, that over thousands of years most people without any medical assistance would not survive long enough to reproduce and pass on the sickle cell gene. If people don't live to pass on the gene for the disease wouldn't it disappear? The answer is yes, if there were no other factors, it probably would have. But somehow sickle cell has remained with us despite its self destructive nature. Scientists have discovered that it was another disease, malaria, which made way for the survival of sickle cell.
Malaria and Sickle Cell

You may ask ? how can one disease help another to survive? What we've discovered is that where malaria is prevalent in the world (in areas that are now or once were hot and humid ? ideal breeding grounds for malaria carrying mosquitoes), sickle cell is also prevalent. This is because people who carry sickle cell genes are more resistant to malaria.

Malaria has been around longer than humans have and has always acted on human populations. Therefore, since our beginning, malaria has been 'selecting for' the sickle cell gene (it kills non sickle cell/non malaria resistant people and leaves behind sickle cell carriers to reproduce and pass on the sickle cell gene). This explains why, despite our racial assumptions about sickle cell, the disease is for example rare in South Africa but prevalent in Greece. Sickle cell does not follow dark skin. Sickle cell follows malaria.

[Source]

It's CLEARLY a case of environment, rather than genetics...which you said yourself, no less:

All other animals adapt to their environments and get different temperaments and stuff like that based on how their lives are lived, why would Humans be any different?

If it was a case of genetics, then wouldn't these things be determined from birth, rather than through the course of their lives, or through culture? From what you told me, the group of people you mentioned before obviously weren't BORN with the ability to see better underwater, they adapted (which meant it probably took a VERY long time)...which isn't genetic. o_o;

[Mephisto91]

everyone is supposed to be coffee colored by the year 3000. there are articles about it.

That will never happen. Two white parents can have a black child if they have even a small amount of black DNA in their genes, and vice versa. There will always be separate skin colours, whether they are subtle or not.

[get.set.go]

even if there is only one race, only a tiny amount of tension and conflict would be resolved

the problems arising from differing religions, cultures and political ideologies even now, far outway the conflict from different races

[shadowsfall19]

Who created the definition of "Cilvilized"? We did.

Thereby proving just how subjective this really is...what's "civilized" to us, is different from what's "civilized" from a pack of Lions.

It's not something in nature, it's a man made concept.

Proof?

I believe most humans are violent and brutish by nature, but I don't really see that as a bad thing, it's what we are naturally because that's the way we would need to be to survive in the wild. Through evolution we will eventually lose that, but it's not really a bad thing.

The more you talk, the more and more I believe that this is all a matter of subjectivity.

[Mephisto91]

Because you say so? Convincing.

Where does it prove that humans are all genetically identicle?

And that's just it...we are no different. What's funny about that is, didn't you just say earlier that we were different from animals because we were more superior? o_o;
If we are no different than we also change to adapt to our surroundings, therefore all ethnicities are NOT genetically identicle

Maybe I'm reading a little too much into what you said there...



Exactly, you just said it yourself...they have more than likely spent thousands of years near the water, and, as such developed better eye sight than most other groups.
Yes, they have. Which makes them genetically different in a way that isn't physical. That's my point.


You know what's funny, this is the same argument that people use to try to prove that Sickle Cell Anemia is a "black only" disease...and sure enough, they're wrong:



[Source]

It's CLEARLY a case of environment, rather than genetics...which you said yourself, no less:



If it was a case of genetics, then wouldn't these things be determined from birth, rather than through the course of their lives, or through culture? From what you told me, the group of people you mentioned before obviously weren't BORN with the ability to see better underwater, they adapted (which meant it probably took a VERY long time)...which isn't genetic. o_o;
They are determined from birth. What you are saying here does not make sense. "They adapted (which meant it probably took a VERY long time)" That's evolution. That IS genetic.

Read bold.

Also, it's naive to think that all people are the same mentally yet we can be so different physically.

[Mephisto91]

Thereby proving just how subjective this really is...what's "civilized" to us, is different from what's "civilized" from a pack of Lions.



Proof?



The more you talk, the more and more I believe that this is all a matter of subjectivity.

"Civilized" doesn't exist to a pack of Lions. I don't need to prove that being "civilized" is a man made concept because no other animals have created language, that's proof enough. And I already said it is subjective, this is like debating God's existence, until there is rock solid evidence, debating will never bring us to a conclusion, and because of that I'm going to call it a night and put an end to my miscing for today. I enjoyed the debate though.

[shadowsfall19]

Where does it prove that humans are genetically identicle?

Here:

Students should recognize that at the molecular level, humans are far more alike (about 99.9 percent of the bases are the same) than they are different (only about 0.1 percent of the bases are different). Students should also realize, however, that even a small percentage difference can represent a very large actual number of differences in something as large as the human genome.

And here:

10. Explain that although 3 million base differences sounds like a lot, most of these differences have no significant impact on individuals, either because they occur in a noncoding region or for another reason. Point out that most of these 3 million differences can only be detected by examining the DNA sequence.

Students should now understand that while some base differences occur in coding regions and may result in an altered amino acid sequence in the protein coded for by a gene, others occur in noncoding regions where they likely have no impact. Point out that only a small percentage of the DNA sequences in the human genome are coding sequences. Furthermore, only a small percentage of the noncoding DNA sequences are regulatory sequences such as promoters or enhancers that can influence the amount of gene product that results from a given gene. The remaining DNA sequences (the majority of the total DNA sequences in the genome) have no known function. Most of the variations in DNA sequence occur in these latter sequences and have no detectable impact.*

If you wish to offer your students a more sophisticated understanding of why most DNA sequence differences have no impact, extend the discussion to include the following ideas. Even many of the differences that occur in coding regions have no impact. Only those differences that result in a change in amino acid sequence in a critical region of the protein (one that affects the function of the protein), or that result in a premature stop codon in the RNA (and thus a truncated protein) have a significant impact on the individual carrying that variation. As students will see in Day 2, those few differences that do affect individuals often have devastating consequences.

*You may wish to clarify for students the reason that most molecular variation occurs in noncoding regions. It is true that there are more noncoding than coding regions. However, the fundamental biological reason for the increased variability of noncoding regions is that there is no selective pressure exerted on changes in these silent/nonfunctional regions. You also may wish to point out that some differences that occur in noncoding regions do have an impact. For example, several mutations within introns in the beta globin gene cause incorrect splicing of the messenger RNA, and as a result, several codons may be inserted into or omitted from the sequence, leading to nonfunctional beta globin polypeptides.

Read bold.

Ahh, now I see the confusion.

Dude, genetic entails that you are BORN with it. How in the f*ck is evolution (at least in this regard) genetic, when the sole factor that determines HOW you're going to evolve, has nothing to do with you genetically anyway (environment)?

If the group of people you mentioned were BORN with the ability to see better underwater, then yeah, that would be genetic.

The fact that it took them a VERY long time to acquire that skill is NOT genetic, brah.

Genetic implies from BIRTH, evolution is environmental (at least as it regards humans).

I don't see how you came up with that conclusion..o_O;

Also, it's naive to think that all people are the same mentally yet we can be so different physically.

It's not naive...it's FACT. Plus, you've shown that you're getting cultural differences mixed up with genetic differences.

I never denied that there weren't cultural differences between people, that's as plain as day.

You think it's "naive", for whatever reason because you refuse to believe it...does it bother you or something? If so, why?

[shadowsfall19]

"Civilized" doesn't exist to a pack of Lions.

As it regards humans...no. Believe it or not, though, even animals have "rules" in their societies.

Wolves usually banish members from their troops if they're disobedient to the pack leaders. Any moron can see that even though it's not "civilization" as we humans define it there's definitely something going on there.

Why do you continue to try to make a completely subjective matter objective?

I don't need to prove that being "civilized" is a man made concept because no other animals have created language, that's proof enough.

Seeing as how no other animals communicate with each other then, what do you call mating sequences and territorial markings that many different species of animals (humans included) take part in?

What do you call it when certain birds call into the air to signal that it's time migrate or that it's mating season?

What do you call it when meerkats dip back into their holes to signal to the rest of the troops that danger is ahead (usually in the form of a predator)?

Not all language is verbal...to think that animals don't communicate (ergo, "language") is just downright ignorant. o_o;

Just because it may not apply to how we humans define it, doesn't mean that it's non-existent.

And I already said it is subjective, this is like debating God's existence, until there is rock solid evidence, debating will never bring us to a conclusion, and because of that I'm going to call it a night and put an end to my miscing for today. I enjoyed the debate though.

Same here.

Though I know that I may not change any minds, the most I can do is show someone a different side of the story. And I'm fine with that.

[Dom_88]

Really? History tells me that human rights are improving every day and we are moving closer and closer towards global harmony as we speak.

Uh huh...

Holocausts, genocides, religious persecution, castes, segregation, racism, anti-Semitism, anti-Christianity, anti-Islam, etc.

Still going on in modern history. I mean FFS 2 one black tribe in Rwanda tried to wipe out another equally black tribe, not even 15 years ago.

[voltio8836]

Let's put it this way:

When at home, you will argue with your brother/sister over the TV.

When at a extended family gathering, you will talk **** with your family about your aunt and uncle.

When at the mall with your family, you will talk **** about that other white dude who thinks he is all cool and whatnot

When in your class with your white friends, you will talk **** about those mexican immigrants

When debating on the internet with your fellow Americans (black, white, mexican whatever) you will talk **** about other countries.


Conclusion? You will always talk **** about something.

[nemesest]

if it isn't race, its religion....if its not religion, its class (lower, middle, upper)....if its not class its where you came from (country)....there will always be discrimination and prejudice, sadly, i am beginning to be believe its human nature

That is like saying we should abolish laws because people still manage to do crime.

Point is, just like laws, this will eliminate some discrimination.

[saeid x]

In the next 10 years with genetic engineering you will choose the features your children will have, they already have the technology (serious)

[tts0lid]

people will just find something else to discriminate against.. probably where you are born.. or what type of family you come from (which already happens)...