Well, the discussion so far sounds distinctly like a Scientologist or a Jehova’s Witness desperately trying to elicit a conversation as a means to promulgate his or her belief system.
And the web page rings of pseudoscience and amateur advertising gimmickry… to paraphrase just the first section: “This site is all about our heretofore unexplained theory, which we have labeled with this scientific-sounding jargon. To learn the definition of the jargon, please follow this link deeper into our site.”
I could go on, but since this is nothing great about this debate, I’ll just jump straigh into applying a plywood grading scale to crackpot theories (with apologies to Mr. Bircham):
I give “human branching” a B/C rating, where on the face it is mostly presentable although some minor splits may need to be filled and some final sanding applied, the back side is completely unfinished, full of knotholes and in need of some major putty fill or resin casting in order to be useful for anything as a full sheet. Better off used as scrap material or for jr. high wood shop newbies to practice their bandsaw skills making a stepstool for mom’s kitchen. Don’t forget the red spraypaint.
(Hey, it could have been worse. I could have used Bircham’s X-rated movie grading scale.)
You seem slightly less apt at reading as you are at writing.
Your link essentially boils down to neo-eugenics, which is what was discussed (at some length) in the above links. Here at the SDMB, we believe in a few things, including crosslinking related conversation, and, you may be surprised at this, stating opinions and supporting evidence, not spamming links.
When you wish to comply with either of these, please let us know. Until then, have fun playing with yourself.
I once read an anecdoate about an urban machine politician who boasted that his administration was following a “golden mean” between absolute corruption and absolute honesty. Trying to find a mean between “absolute racism” and “absolute multi-racialism” is exactly the same kind of thinking.
Each race has a right to exist. Multi-racialists are working, through a vast conspiracy, to destroy that group right of god-given existence. By interbreeding, we destroy the ethnic and cultural diversity, thus dooming our planet to bland neutrality (as opposed to a strictly segregated, abeit very diverse, collection of mini-societies who would live in blissful utopia because racism couldn’t exist within a homogenous racial group… until someone does something and they start fighting over something else, anyway).
Okay, I can follow that line of thinking, but consider this: Race-mixing adds to diversity. Even if we drop all political and social barriers to breeding between races, we’ll never have a world where everybody’s the same color (or whatever characteristic you want to fix on). We’ll have a world where the “pure” racial phenotypes still exist, to some extent, supplemented with an endless variety of hybrids of different races mixed in varying degrees.
Besides, why does a “race,” assuming it exists in the first place (which is a controversial question itself), have a collective “right” to go on existing in undiluted form? In America, we think of rights as something individuals have. Insofar as we recognize group or collective rights at all, we think of them as attaching attaching to cultural groupings – e.g., Indian nations, Hassidic Jews, Mormons – whose relationship to racial groupings is far from simple.
Woah. I may make some stupid arguments, but never anything that stupid. I am whole-heartedly a multi-racialist. I fully believe that ethnicities and cultures live and die like humans, and will be replaced by future generations, and the best way to preserve them is through a detailed historical record (hence my chosen profession). I also don’t see anything so bad about everyone melding equally, and I think the crackpots who believe in this kind of stuff are closet racists. In fact, I am a result of mixing of the races, being something of a Hispanic mutt, and I’m damn proud of it.
I knew that, I just felt like picking it up and running with it. – Unless you mean the “whoosher” here was not Zadagka, but the OP? That’s harder to swallow.
Actually, it is hard (or rather, sad) to believe that ANYONE could follow that reasoning… but then, you still have people on the planet who think that blacks are a different species more closely related to gorillas than humans.
I think you have just provided a good example of multi-racial extremism. You state that you are whole-heartedly a multi-racialist, understandable since you are multi-racial just like Vin Diesel. The site defines multi-racial like this:
Multi-racialism: Well, the first problem some people might have with the term “multi-racialism” is that it presumes that many different “races” exist. The term race, itself may no longer be used to describe different human populations for various political reasons so we would have to use another term - perhaps “multi-ethnic.” When we talk about specific branches of the human race, we are discussing how much genetic distance exists between one branch and another. There is a fluid spectrum of genetic distances when we compare all the different branches of the world, so any discussion of multi-racialism is relative to “how much” genetic distance existed between the parents. Vin Diesel made a short-film called Multi-Facial and it was just a play on the word “Multi-Racial.” People understand what is meant by the term multi-racial, and thus it is a useful term to describe the combination of two branches that are many thousands of years apart in genetic distance. It is just semantics.
Then, Zagadka, you state: “I also don’t see anything so bad about everyone melding equally, and I think the crackpots who believe in this kind of stuff”
You are, right now, inciting racial “hatred” of a kind by suggesting that anybody who thinks about the most natural of all things, branching genetic life, is a crackpot, and then you go on to call them racists…
How is that racial hatred? I never targetted a race. I targetted a way of thinking that happens to be racist.
At least you did more than parrot a URL this time. Impressive. Maybe you can stop defining things based on your site, and recognize a snarky comment for a snarky comment now. C’mon, you can try!
I think we’re talking about “extreme” multiracialism of the kind that Zagadka shows and I doubt any of those 3000 resources say anything about that - because nobody identifies it as an issue. I’m not picking on you Zagadka and I respect you completely. I just think that you need to have a bit more respect for people who, relatively speaking, are not “multi-racial.” Branches recombining and mixing and branching off again - it’s all part of genetic life. No big deal.
You are more than welcome to be racist. You can raise racist kids, live in a racist commune in Montana, and bar off all the icky dark people. You can home school your kids. You can believe anything you want, but your right to be a racist does not override anyone else’s right to be protected under the law against racist behavior.
If you would like to change the laws to allow discrimination again, you are more than welcome to try. Until then, I will follow the law to the letter.
Nothing on that link is authored by the site (accept a brief paragraph at the top). It provides links to other people’s research on the branching human race. It provides “mainstream” scientific thought on the matter.
How do you refer to that as psuedoscience? Doesn’t do you much credit.
No, of course not. It happens all the time. So what exactly is the issue for debate? You don’t exactly seem to arguing for the value of artificially preserving the “genetic distances” between racial groups – or are you?
This comparison is not good. Absolute honesty is good. Absolute corruption is bad. A mean between the two is not good…
Racism is bad, multi-racialism can be good or bad depending on whether it’s done in an extreme way - kind of like islam or Christianity or any extreme position anybody takes in a religion.
The “STOP” in the center of the pendulum is not a “mean” between the two extremes, it is where the truth of the matter lies. It is the “absolute honesty” and on either side of absolute honesty are two types of extremes - we could easily construct a multi-dimensional pendulum which would have many extremist positions of many different kinds - religions for example. The purpose here is to suggest that honesty is the goal.
Extreme multi-racialism: Please examine the definition of multi-racialism to avoid confusion here. Following is a list of items describing multi-racial extremism, and you’ll discover that it mirrors extreme racism.
Expressing negative, or hateful thoughts and words towards somebody from any of the classic branches of the human race. The thoughts are expressed in a way suggesting that because this person does not fall into the broad category of “multi-racial,” there is something wrong with them, they are somehow “lesser,” they are without “flavor,” etc…
Expressing the notion that nobody should even think about human genetic branching and population diversity, and that we should all exclude those thoughts from our minds. This then leads to direct verbal hatred expressed towards people who do enjoy, accept and understand human genetic branching.
Calling people from an existing branch of the human race, racists, simply for thinking about and wanting to mate within their branch. Doing that is pure and simple minded hate.