Huh? He quoted you and then asked if, based on what you had said, his conclusions were correct.
Lol, I quoted you. Here’s what you said:
(my bolding)
Any reasonable person reading this would understand that according to you, passing your variation test is necessary for a category to be scientifically valid.
Anyway, this exchange illustrates my point very well. You are perfectly content with the category of {people with hypertension} even though it (apparently) fails your variation test. It’s not until race is being discussed that the variation test becomes critical.
Lol, you are weaseling. You used the word “must” and I interpreted it in a reasonable way.
I asked you a simple, reasonable question. Which question again illustrates (or at least suggests) your double-standards.
Yes, as mentioned above it’s pretty easy to demonstrate that my assertion was correct.
Wow! DocCathode ran away like a West African sprinter.
Too bad. I thought he and brazil were having an interesting discussion.
What do you mean by useful information about genotype? It basically just reflects geographic ancestry/evolutionary history. Also, see Risch’s article above regarding medical and pharmaceutical utility.
Brazil, is Will Smith obese?
Magellan, is Will Smith black or white?
I’m not going to read all the racist drivel here in order to be sure whether or not this has been mentioned, but I’ve read enough of the thread to note that some of these idiots seem to think that “black” is a valid racial grouping. So in case no one has pointed it out yet: black Subsaharan Africans are a more genetically diverse group than all non-African populations combined. Those people who are not black Subsaharan Africans are essentially a branch of a branch of a branch of the human family tree; it’s obviously true (if you’re not engaged in reasoning motivated by racism) that you can’t rationally consign the great majority of human genetic diversity to one single “race” or subspecies of humans; any approach informed by genetics (rather than racism) would obviously involve examining genetic markers and dividing Subsaharan Africans into several smaller groups.
True. And it’s worth noting that Magellan is far too much of a coward to even define what a “white” person is.
I do not engage with this poster.
Well, we can start here, where you claimed that I “just asserted that ‘heavy smoker’ is a valid scientific category if the term is defined very precisely”.
Of course I never made any such assertion. You outright lied about it.
Claiming that you misunderstood or some other hsit does not change the fact. I never made any such assertion. You knew full well that I never amde any such assertion. And you lied and claimed that I did.
You are a liar.
**Magellan **, if you wish to actually discuss this subject, then post in the GD thread.
I don’t shit in the swimming pool, and I don’t swim in the toilet.
Why not? Is there some rule which says that if you are dividing people into groups, each group must be roughly equally diverse by some measure?
Here is the exchange:
brazil84: Would you say that “The South” is a scientifically valid category? . . .What about “heavy smokers”?
Blake: Definitely not, unless you define the term very precisely.
The reasonable interpretation of your statement is that if “heavy smokers” is defined very precisely, then it is a valid scientific category.
Looks to me like you are trying to weasel out of what you said.
ETA: But if I somehow misunderstood you, now’s your chance to clarify:
If “heavy smokers” is defined very precisely, then is it a valid scientific category? Why or why not?
In my experience, people on the other side of the debate tend to get very angry when confronted with “lies,” i.e. evidence, argument, and conclusions showing that their position is inconsistent.
Really, why’s that?
Did I somehow embarrass you or something, because I don’t remember you?
Anyway, it should be a simple question, but I’ll repeat it.
Is Will Smith obese?
And of course nobody has made such a claim. And once again, you will coyly claim that you never suggested that such a claim has been made, that you were “just asking questions”.
Lying weasel.
There is of course a rule which says that if you are dividing people into groups, the groups can’t be paraphyletic. A group called “Black Subsaharan Africans” that includes all of humanity, except for those ancestors of Black Subsaharan Africans that left Africa and formed a a branch of a branch of a branch of the human family tree, is paraphyletic and utterly invalid. It has nothing to do with fucking diversity. It has everything to do with the last common ancestor of all “Black Subsaharan Africans” also being a common ancestor of all Germans.
That is what mister nyx quite clearly said, not the strawman that you “just asked questions” about.
Lol, all I did was ask him a question. See, you are engaged in “strawmanning,” i.e. you are imagining a position which you think or wish I had taken and attacking that position.
If you actually want to know my position, you could simply ask in a civil manner.
I’m skeptical of this claim. Please give me a cite.
Also, it looks to me like the poster said nothing about any group being paraphyletic. It looks to me like his point was solely about the degree of diversity of “blacks” and “non-blacks” But maybe I missed something . . . can you quote him where he references (or makes an implication about) any group being paraphyletic?
I think we should allow black comedians to define racial categories. I mean, they’re always talking about how black people do X like this, but white people do X like this. AmIrite?
Jeez, try to insert a little levity into the conversation…
:rolleyes: no, not racist at all. Just sorry he can’t say “Like a nigger from a watermelon patch”…out loud.
The statement, “in order for a scientific category to be valid, there must be greater variation between two categories than within a category” is exactly as obvious as the statement “shitting in my hand makes it dirty”. I don’t know how anyone who has the mental capacity to understand the latter cannot understand the former.
Do you agree that the difference in BMI between the most and least obese people (among the obese) is far more than the difference in average BMIs between obese people and non-obese people?
Do you agree that among {people with hypertension}, the difference in blood pressures between the most and least hypertensive is greater than the difference in average blood pressures of {people with hypertension} and {everyone else}?