• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Human evolution and differentiation of races

But you could certainly say, "In my opinion, these groups commonly called 'races' are in fact sub-species" and describe them formally as such, and there would be nothing formally wrong with that

As pointed out, all humans are formally grouped into a single sub-species. If, race is simply a synonym for sub-species then we can end the discussion there because using that terminology there is only one race.
 
As pointed out, all humans are formally grouped into a single sub-species.

And this could be changed by anyone who wanted to go through the various phases of formally describing a human population as a new sub-species. These things are not natural constants, but conventions. Just because they are formally described as the same sub-species does not mean that this is the only taxonomically valid arrangement.

If, race is simply a synonym for sub-species then we can end the discussion there because using that terminology there is only one race.

Yes.
 
lolmiller said:
The post I was responding to claimed what qualifies as a sub-species is a matter of personal opinion, it’s not. Sub-species if a formally defined taxonomical ranking, you can’t suddenly say “IMO race is synonymous with sub-species” because this is not a matter of opinion.

We are confusing one another. My original post, 139, was supposed to be ironic. I was pointing out that people do indeed use these classifications differently depending on their background and POV. The fact that subspecies has a technical definition does not prevent people using the word differently. It's the "organic potato" phenomenon.

ETA- I actually heard breeders at a show in Brum referring to "Sub species of breeds". Work that one out!

They are clssed as "varieties" , or "sub-species", or "breeds", depending on the person doing the classifying.
 
Last edited:
Actually, I think it would prove that you were a lousy biologist.

Oh good. You got the point of my post.

The problem is that we've not been able to find any such distinctive differences among the various "races." If you think you can find an anatomical property that is shared by all and only "blacks," please name it (bearing in mind that "dark skin" won't work for reasons already outlined).

If you can manage it for races of Motacilla flava I'll have go at Homo sapiens.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom