when analyzing very large populations, one’s personal observations and experiences hardly count. i’m surprised mods are letting this thread go past page 1.
Factual answers have been provided to those questions so far.
how factual? because a written piece of work says so? a quote from a “leading authority?” i try to go beyond those. i know from direct experience that i can’t come up with a representative character trait for a people in a big city using the most thorough survey methods you can think of.
This forum is for factual answers to questions. We’re not really interested in your “direct experience” when dealing with questions of science.
Eh. If you have some data concerning the issue, then bring it. I’m not a biologist, but I am a scientist by training, and I know enough about biology to not be surprised that we don’t have any data on this subject.
Laudenum posed some unestablished background, then asked some questions. His questions have been answered with facts. There are some opinions posted here too, and those have been addressed factually also. Some unsupportable anecdotes were posted, and some contradictory anecdotes were posted in response, demonstrating that the original anecdotes were non-representative, and that anecdotal evidence cannot be used to prove a general hypothesis. As usual there’s a modicum of humor thrown in too, there’s no reason fighting ignorance can’t be entertaining.
well, seven blind men groping and describing an elephant could each give their own “factual” descriptions.
Which answers do you have a problem with?
Well, yes.
basically all anecdotal ones (and we won’t even factor in things like individual bias.)
Then respond to the specific answers by pointing out that they are anecdotal. There different ways to do that. For instance I could ask you “Are you Armenian”? Then follow it with one of these smiley things 
That’s an odd thing to say when you just told us your anecdotes are better than what experts have to say:
thanks for that reminder. 
safe, because my anecdote concerns population survey and data gathering; not the OP. that’s one instance wherein an off-topic post is neither bad nor deconstructive.
going back, anecdotes are at best cross-sectional at present time context. not that historical ones are useless, they just can’t post and argue here.
And dogs have fleas.
And GQ has trolls,
Who come to cajole.
DNFTT.
I’m not sure if English is your first language or not, but that post make no sense at all.
I already explained only three posts above yours why human variation does not lend itself the categorization of subspecies (or races). If you’re not going to read what people post, why bother participating in this thread?
Dogs are not a good example at all, because their different forms are breeds created and maintained by artificial selection by humans. They are not in the least comparable to subspecies (or races) that occur in nature.
You must be joking. Your description doesn’t have much to do with the actual reality of populations living in Latin America. Characterizing biracial groups like mestizos and mulattos (which make up majority or at least a large percentage of the population in most Latin American countries) as “stable endogenous groups” doesn’t make any sense. In any case, while there may be some social barriers to intermarriage, there continues to be a large amount of mixing of all groups, including those of European, African, or Amerindian ancestry are in the majority.
there, that’s what’s wrong with your english. now what’s wrong with mine?
I have to admit that I don’t really get the gist either.
the first paragraph says my own use of anecdotes was not in direct reply to the thread question, but rather to qualify so-called “expert findings” and assertions.
the second paragraph simply states some (not all) limitations in the use of anecdotal evidence.