# Chen019, you are a liar. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 9, 2012, 9:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246 "2012-03-09T09:43:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/281 "2012-03-15T05:58:00Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > You could say the same about various species, let alone races. > > Sesardic is a philosopher, but read the paper. Let me know what you particularly disagree with. The issue of “where to draw the line”, [continuum fallacy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy) and the sorites paradox are all issues within the realm of philosophy. So the simple answer remains, no, you can not find a scientific group with all members agreeing to use that peculiar terminology with humans. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/282 "2012-03-15T07:13:21Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > So the simple answer remains, no, you can not find a scientific group with all members agreeing to use that peculiar terminology with humans. You’re a very simple minded character aren’t you **GIGObuster**. You need some special higher authority to give you a gospel black and white answer. If you haven’t grasped that there is room for debate about terminology not only with human races, but races in other species or even whether certain groups are separate species then I’d recommend you stick to less abstract discussions. I’ve put forward why I think Coyne & Risch are right above. If you disagree that’s fine, but I suspect our differences are more to do with the fact the word “race” has baggage. That’s understandable - what I’m saying though is that the concept as applied in other species can also be applied in the species homo sapiens. If you don’t want to use the word itself that is fine. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/283 "2012-03-15T07:19:54Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > You’re a very simple minded character aren’t you **GIGObuster**. You need some special higher authority to give you a gospel black and white answer. If you haven’t grasped that there is room for debate about terminology not only with human races, but races in other species or even whether certain groups are separate species then I’d recommend you stick to less abstract discussions. > > I’ve put forward why I think Coyne & Risch are right above. If you disagree that’s fine, but I suspect our differences are more to do with the fact the word “race” has baggage. That’s understandable - what I’m saying though is that the concept as applied in other species can also be applied in the species homo sapiens. If you don’t want to use the word itself that is fine. Meh, you are deluded, it is not my problem that you are an incompetent on finding other support rather than your same old same old. What you are showing there is the same pathological moves of creationists that have to rely now on misrepresentations and odd scientists that have very little support where it counts. To put it in other words, wake me up when most experts are convinced and agree with your proposed nomenclature. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 8:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/284 "2012-03-15T08:52:25Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Meh, you are deluded, it is not my problem that you are an incompetent on finding other support rather than your same old same old. What you are showing there is the same pathological moves of creationists that have to rely now on misrepresentations and odd scientists that have very little support where it counts. No, you are simply too thick to follow any argument that requires a level of complexity beyond yes/no answers. Whether you agree with the idea of races or not, as Coyne notes - the morphological features of groups with different geographic ancestry are [palpable](http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/02/28/are-there-human-races/). If they were another species which didn’t have the whole taboo around the idea of race there would be no issue in labeling them as different races. Again, a point that you are too thick to comprehend. Nonetheless, whether you call them races, ancestral groups, continental populations or otherwise, the reality is that those groups and their diversity is real. Just as mountains would still be real even if you decided to call them hills or molehills. ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 9:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/285 "2012-03-15T09:22:30Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > odd scientists I know you don’t read, but the 2004 Curt Stern Award winner (Risch) and the Chief of the Laboratory of Genomic Diversity at the National Cancer Institute (NCI),(Dr Stephen O’Brien) and Jerry Coyne (to name some of the figures I’ve cited above) are hardly fringe figures. Also, your comment about creationists is particularly ironic given [Coyne’s d](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Coyne)ebates. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 9:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/286 "2012-03-15T09:57:16Z")
Hey, Chen, we are still waiting for your evidence over in the GD thread. I asked for your evidence for your claim that [Andamanese](http://sawbonessurio.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/andaman-islander.jpg) are closely related to [Pakistanis](http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2250/1763435404_ee989ad5ec.jpg) and share the same morphological features. I riased four hours ago, and in that time you have made two posts in this thread and a post in the GD thread, two hours apart. And yet you somehow have failed to provide evidence that the [Andamanese](http://sawbonessurio.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/andaman-islander.jpg)are closely related to [Pakistanis](http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2250/1763435404_ee989ad5ec.jpg) and “patently obviously” share the same distinguishing features. You weren’t talking shit when you made that claim, were you? Of course not. It’s patently obvious to everyone that Pakistanis and Andamanese are similar and share the same distinguishing features, and hence are part of the same “Caucasian Race” that you have told us inhabits South Asia. We just need you to explain to us what those similarities are. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/287 "2012-03-15T13:36:11Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > If they were another species which didn’t have the whole taboo around the idea of race there would be no issue in labeling them as different races. Yes, **Gigo**. You _know_ taxonomists have been classifying [Bulldogs](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-T3LW3JlSFb4/TXDN9RmpQAI/AAAAAAAAFqQ/caOG2FMKHEE/s1600/bulldog.jpg) and [Afghan hounds](http://mydoggys.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/1600x1200_afghan-hound.jpg) as separate subspecies for years now… …oh, wait, that’s - that’s _not_ enough morphological difference? You say they’re both _Canis lupus familiaris_? You shitting me? But here I thought a different skin colour, different hair and a wider nose were enough… wait, don’t tell me - I bet the difference is in the fact that dogs have been purposefully bred - as if that matters to the genetics ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/288 "2012-03-15T13:42:28Z")
(On a side note, doesn’t that Afghan just look _so_ fucking _Caucasian_!) ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/289 "2012-03-15T14:16:55Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > I know you don’t read, but the 2004 Curt Stern Award winner (Risch) and the Chief of the Laboratory of Genomic Diversity at the National Cancer Institute (NCI),(Dr Stephen O’Brien) and Jerry Coyne (to name some of the figures I’ve cited above) are hardly fringe figures. . …and Crick is a eugenicist who also thinks our DNA was seeded by aliens, and Watson thinks blacks are stupid and more melanin makes you sluttier. What’s your point? That it’s impossible to be a geneticist and a racist? As if! The fucking _founders_ of the branch of study are a hard act to follow. … …and you realise odd =/= not respected, right? It means “scattered, few, not a quorum” ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/290 "2012-03-15T15:49:46Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > …and Crick is a eugenicist who also thinks our DNA was seeded by aliens, and Watson thinks blacks are stupid and more melanin makes you sluttier. What’s your point? That it’s impossible to be a geneticist and a racist? As if! The fucking _founders_ of the branch of study are a hard act to follow. … > …and you realise odd =/= not respected, right? It means “scattered, few, not a quorum” Yep, the fact is that if Chen09 was correct it would be a slam dunk to convince all experts to follow the wishful tinkling of a few researchers, the only difference I have with you is that modern proponents of continuing to use old definitions do not need to be racists, they are first and foremost crackpots when they concentrate on pushing for definitions that many scientists dropped before and not just because of any PC or moral considerations, but because geneticists found out that our differences do not justify the continued use of definitions that were and are not well supported. Looking at the history of this I already know that in the past many supported the race separations, genetics did show later that it is silly to talk about human races when their DNA differs very little and that humans can have healthy offspring regardless of where they are from. When I have no trouble finding current researchers that drop groupings by race and tell you that the reasons have more to do with science than PC, then our old pall Occam’s razor does enter the picture, it is more simpler to see that extraordinary evidence is needed to return to the old use of race definitions in science, the say so of some researchers is not good enough. > **[What Our Genes Tell Us About Race](http://www.science20.com/adaptive_complexity/what_our_genes_tell_us_about_race)** > > Which species is more diverse, humans or chimps? Most of us would be tempted to answer 'humans'. Unless you're a primatologist or you work at a zoo, you would likely have trouble telling one chimp apart from another, not to mention distinguishing... > [@](#): > > By the measure of genes though, humans are amazingly uniform. Humans are genetically less diverse than chimps, and both chimps and humans are much less diverse than a common species of fruit fly. Given our species’ long history of racial conflict, our genetic uniformity may come as a surprise. Not too long ago people in polite company would debate whether different human races really all belonged to one species. Our DNA tells us that our genetic differences don’t even come close to matching the variety found within a single, apparently monotonous fruit fly species. > > **Measuring Genetic Diversity** > > How do we measure genetic diversity? The basic concept is simple. Pick a few dozen or a few hundred genes and tally the differences in those genes in a sample of a few dozen or a few hundred people. Thus at gene A, person 1 and person 2 may differ at 5 DNA bases, while person 1 and person 3 may differ at 7 bases. After making all of the possible comparisons for gene A, you compute the average number of differences - in the case of gene A let’s say we find an average of 6 differences between any two people. If gene A is 6000 bases long, we say any two people would differ on average once in every 1000 DNA bases. > > But when we look at gene B, we may get a different answer - maybe only an average of one difference every 2000 DNA bases. To get a good measure of how genetically different humans tend to be, it’s obviously best to get results from many different genes, or even entire genomes. Most recent studies have found that humans differ on average once in every 1000-1500 DNA bases. Given that we have 3 billion DNA bases in our genome (just counting one copy - either your maternal or paternal version), any two people are likely to differ at about 2-3 million positions in their genomes. That number applies to differences within yourself as well - there are about 2-3 million differences between the DNA you inherited from your mother and the DNA you inherited from your father. > > (There exist more sophisticated ways of measuring genetic differences, and we could include genetic variants that involve more than just a difference at a single DNA base pair - we could count segments of DNA that have been inserted or deleted, called copy number variants. However the basic approach to measuring genetic difference that I’ve described is all we need here.) > > How does this genetic variation stack up against variation in other animals? While we tend to differ at 1 position in every 1000 bases or so, chimps differ at about 1 in every 750 bases, and gorillas differ at roughly one in every 650 bases. The fly species D. melanogaster is much more genetically diverse, and tends to differ at one out of every few hundred bases. Keep in mind that these estimates are just averages - genetic variation is not spread out evenly across an entire genome. Some portions of our genomes are highly variable, while others are relatively uniform. > > The bottom line is this: although fruit flies and gorillas may look largely the same to us, they beat us hands down in genetic diversity. > **Genetic Differences Among Human Populations** > > Of course the genetic differences that do exist among humans are enough to generate much of the biological diversity we see around us - differences in skin, hair, and eye color, our voices, our physical stature, and our personalities. Obviously environment plays a big role in many traits, but as the differences between Samoans and Japanese illustrate, genetics can account for a great deal even when there is a large environmental influence. > > At first guess, you might think that most of our genetic diversity would fall along racial lines. Race differences often seem to be the most obvious differences among different human groups, so it wouldn’t be surprising if genetic differences fell along racial lines as well. Genetically, a white guy like me should be much more similar to my white neighbor than my black one, right? > > Before we get to the answer, let’s fill in some background. In any discussion of genes and diversity, it is critical to keep in mind one obvious but nevertheless subtle point: only genes that exist in different versions are responsible for our biological diversity. There may be a gene that is critical for intelligence, but if that gene is absolutely 100% identical in all humans, then it does not account for differences in intelligence among humans. We may one day identify all of the genes involved in producing intelligence (defining intelligence may actually be a harder problem), but we won’t understand the genetic basis of differences in intelligence until we discover the human genetic variation in the genes responsible. This narrows our species’ genetic palette - not all of the genes responsible for a particular trait will be a source of diversity in that trait. > > With the availability of genome-scale tools, researchers have devoted a significant amount of effort in the last eight years to finding those genes that exist in different versions among humans. We haven’t mapped all of this genetic diversity yet, but there is enough to start looking at genetic variation among humans in different parts of the world. With this new data, we are developing a much more detailed picture of how races differ genetically. > > **‘Race’ though, is a horribly sloppy term. Geneticists prefer to speak about populations, not out of political correctness but because race is extremely imprecise. We’ve all filled out some form or another asking whether we are Black, White, Hispanic, or ‘none of the above.’ It’s obvious that this is much less informative than knowing whether someone’s ancestry is African, Australian Aborigine, European, or East Asian.** ---
**Author:** ![mister\_nyx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@mister\_nyx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mister_nyx)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/291 "2012-03-15T20:12:46Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > As I’ve said, and something that Cavalli-Sforza & Walter Bodmer have discussed, it depends whether you’re a lumper or a splitter. And as I responded, that rationalization doesn’t actually hold water. The fact that you can’t respond to a point doesn’t mean the point doesn’t exist. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/292 "2012-03-15T21:00:21Z")
. Look, ogdammit, there’s only one question I have fucking _got_ to have answered: **Who won the 2004 Curt Stern Award???** . ---
**Author:** ![mister\_nyx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@mister\_nyx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mister_nyx)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/293 "2012-03-15T21:10:05Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > Hey, Chen, we are still waiting for your evidence over in the GD thread. > > I asked for your evidence for your claim that [Andamanese](http://sawbonessurio.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/andaman-islander.jpg) are closely related to [Pakistanis](http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2250/1763435404_ee989ad5ec.jpg) and share the same morphological features. I riased four hours ago, and in that time you have made two posts in this thread and a post in the GD thread, two hours apart. > > And yet you somehow have failed to provide evidence that the [Andamanese](http://sawbonessurio.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/andaman-islander.jpg)are closely related to [Pakistanis](http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2250/1763435404_ee989ad5ec.jpg) and “patently obviously” share the same distinguishing features. > > You weren’t talking shit when you made that claim, were you? > > Of course not. > > It’s patently obvious to everyone that Pakistanis and Andamanese are similar and share the same distinguishing features, and hence are part of the same “Caucasian Race” that you have told us inhabits South Asia. > > We just need you to explain to us what those similarities are. > > 😃 Did he actually say that?! Lol, maybe he’s just doing a parody of someone who’s totally uninformed about population genetics. ---
**Author:** ![orcenio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/orcenio/32/1036_2.png) [@orcenio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/orcenio)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2012, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/294 "2012-03-15T21:15:47Z")
> [@andros](#): > > . > Look, ogdammit, there’s only one question I have fucking _got_ to have answered: > **Who won the 2004 Curt Stern Award???** > . 😃 I spit my tea. Damn you. ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2012, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/295 "2012-03-16T00:12:03Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > … Sesardic did not publish that on a genetics journal as he is a philosopher. > > [http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/GeneWatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=384](http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/GeneWatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=384) It doesn’t help your argument to criticize one guy because he’s a philosopher and then quote another who’s a PsyD quoting a ‘science writer’. The PsyD program does not emphasize research, and a science writer can almost be from anywhere. Behavior genetics is filled with replicable findings and any good behavior geneticist is absolutely paranoid of environmental influences on behavior. The writer is almost entirely criticizing association studies and those criticisms may be legit due to issues with repeatability. On the other hand, behavior geneticists are aware of such problems and attempt to make databases such as these to get a better understanding on what research is replicated across populations and labs: [http://www.szgene.org/](http://www.szgene.org/). Environmental influences will always be a problem with gene association studies. That’s why we have laboratories, experiments and attempts at replication. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2012, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/296 "2012-03-16T00:32:57Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > It doesn’t help your argument to criticize one guy because he’s a philosopher and then quote another who’s a PsyD quoting a ‘science writer’. The PsyD program does not emphasize research, and a science writer can almost be from anywhere. He is referring to real research and he cites it. The philosopher did not publish on a genetics journal, as my experience with scientific sources showed me, this is very important on weighting the evidence and the reliability of sources. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2012, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/297 "2012-03-16T01:13:51Z")
> [@mister\_nyx](#): > > Did he actually say that?! Oh yeah. He said it. As he initially wrote it, he was claiming that blonde haired, blue eyed Georgians are closely related to the Andamanese. When I called him on that he “clarified” and said that he only meant that \*all \*groups within South Asia were the same race and share patently obvious morphologies. And since Andamanese and Pakistanis are both indisputably South Asian… And at the moment over in GD he is steadfastly ignoring my multiple requests for evidence. IOW he was lying when he made the claim, and he knows he has been caught lying… again. But rather than be a man and simply admit it, he is going to be a weasel, and ignore my repeated requests for evidence for such a ridiculous claim. What amuses me is that he is doing his position far more harm by ignoring my requests. Every time he refuses to answer, a few more lurkers get the chance to see that he made the claim, and that he refuses to address it. Which is why I am encouraging him to do it. What little credibility he may have had when he entered that thread is now in shreds > [@](#): > > Lol, maybe he’s just doing a parody of someone who’s totally uninformed about population genetics. Ohhh I don’t think it’s a parody. A farce, certainly, but not a parody. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![mister\_nyx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@mister\_nyx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mister_nyx)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2012, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/298 "2012-03-16T01:40:57Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > Oh yeah. He said it. > As he initially wrote it, he was claiming that blonde haired, blue eyed Georgians are closely related to the Andamanese. When I called him on that he “clarified” and said that he only meant that \*all \*groups within South Asia were the same race and share patently obvious morphologies. And since Andamanese and Pakistanis are both indisputably South Asian… Wild. (For the benefit of the studio audience: the Andamanese inhabit some small islands in the Indian Ocean and genetic analysis has generally suggested that they are not very closely related to any nearby populations, and it’s generally thought that they may be one of the groups that has been largely genetically isolated from the rest of humanity for the longest period of time; they are not genetically or phenotypically similar to Pakistanis.) ---
**Author:** ![Chen019](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f19dbf/32.png) [@Chen019](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chen019)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2012, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/299 "2012-03-16T01:41:37Z")
> [@andros](#): > > . > Look, ogdammit, there’s only one question I have fucking _got_ to have answered: > **Who won the 2004 Curt Stern Award???** The “statistical geneticist of our time” [Professor Neil Risch](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Risch). Who has co-authored a couple of papers pointing out what the validity of race in the human species and [usefulness for medical research](http://genomebiology.com/2002/3/7/comment/2007). > [@](#): > > Effectively, these population genetic studies have recapitulated the classical definition of races based on continental ancestry - namely African, Caucasian (Europe and Middle East), Asian, Pacific Islander (for example, Australian, New Guinean and Melanesian), and Native American. (see also [The Importance of Race and Ethnic Background in Biomedical Research and Clinical Practice](http://bioethics.stanford.edu/events/documents/pdfs/burchard.pdf) @ **Mister Nyx** , > [@](#): > > I asked for your evidence for your claim that Andamanese are closely related to Pakistanis and As usual **Blake** , has ignored what was actually said. I specifically addressed the Andamanese in the other [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14869083&postcount=360). It was amusing though to see that even **Blake** could describe morphologically different and geographically separated populations. The guy is clearly a closet racist. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2012, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246/300 "2012-03-16T01:56:43Z")
> [@Chen019](#): > > T I specifically addressed the Andamanese in the other > [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14869083&postcount=360). Nowhere does that provide evidence for your claim that Andamanese are closely related to Pakistanis and share the same morphological features. Nowhere at all. So no, you didn’t address the issue. But it’s wonderful to see that you admit that you made the claim. That ought to get a few chuckles. After all the Adnamaese and Pakistanis just look so much alike. They clearly share the same morphology. It is, as you said, patently obvious. 😃 You are simply proving what a lying weasel you are. And that is a good thing, because nobody is going to believe a damn word you say after your behaviour in that thread. And rest assured, it will be brought up in any future threads on this subject. We will be able to pre-emptively discredit anything you say simply by linking to that thread and highlighting your behavior there. And by association we cna discredit any of this race-realist nonsense right out of the starting gate. So, thank you for your dishonest, hurtful, weaseling, incompetent behavior. You have done the world a favour. Please keep it up. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/chen019-you-are-a-liar/615246.md?page=16)