Race and Genetics - SDMB Links


Feel free to move this to the appropriate forum.

As promised, I have created a site that lists the threads relevant to the previous discussions/debates regarding race and genetics. It’s rather crude right now, but I hope to make it a bit more user-friendly over the next few weeks. Rather than having users wade through every SDMB thread I have listed, I intend to pull out the relevant links/sources/commentaries and create a kind of “Frequently Asked Questions” page on race and genetics.

The page can be found temperarily at http://www.eponymous.50megs.com. The page will be transferred over to a permanent site in the next few days.

The page includes my e-mail address, and I heartily welcome any suggestions. E-mail your suggestions on how to make the page more user-friendly, additional sources/links to incorporate that might be relevant, or comments. I especially welcome comments from Collounsbury, edwino, tomndebb, Gaspode, Duck Duck Goose, and others who have provided their expertise/knowledge/comments, etc. on the issue of race and genetics.


Thanks for this resource. I think I might, if I can control my argumentitive nature, write some little commentary --promsing to be nice-- for this so people know what’s in each thread etc. I also may have more online links.


Thanks. Any additional sources/links will be much appreciated. Also any suggestions on making the page more user-friendly is also welcome. You (or anyone else) can e-mail me at eneubaue@cscc.edu.

I just saw this article on the new multiracial category in the Census in my hometown newspaper, and I thought I might as well post a link here rather than start up another annoying race thread.

Um, or it could reveal that the previous monolithic statistics were throwing out information. Sure, it would be simpler statistically if everyone were forced to report one race. Unfortunately human beings don’t work that way.

Ah, I just had to complain a little about his article. They do get most things right, but this bit annoyed me. Carry on…

OK, I’ve made some slight modifications to the Race and Genetics page at http://www.eponymous.50megs.com.
It’s still a long way from being resonably complete, but you can get the general drift from the first FAQ. Feel free to make comments, suggestions, etc.

I hope to have the page uploaded on my permanent site at http://www.eneubauer.com in a few days - the permanent site is taking a while to propigate.

The Race and Genetics FAQ page is now located on my permanent site at http://www.eneubauer.com. Again, feel free to make any suggestions or comments.

In your religious zeal to stamp out “race” , you should at least get your facts straight. In your site you said

Common sense dictates the error of this statement. Now had you said the genetic variablity causing the obvious phenotypical differences for which we commonly ascribe a “race” is less than the overall genetic variablity within " individual races" then we all might have a better understanding of what you are trying to say. Presumably this means that any attempt to assign more value to one population over another based on any arbitrary phenotype is completely meaningless.

*Originally posted by grienspace *

I don’t know where you’re getting the impression I have some “religious zeal” to stamp out race. As stated in the introductory paragraphs from the Race and Genetics FAQ page, I’m just trying to help make things simplier for the more knowledgeable members of this board. Rather then having them post endless sources and citations, they can refer others to the page if they want. I’m not an expert on involving race and genetics and I fully expect others to point out errors, omissions, and the like.

That being said, however, I do appreciate you making comments on the following:

My wording is proabably not the greatest of clarity, but I was trying to convey in my own words the following excerpted from Cavalli-Sforza, et al (1994) “The Scientific Failure of the Concept of Human Races”):

I’ll go back and try to reword the sentence so as to convey closer what Cavalii-Sforza, et al. stated in the above excerpt. Again, thanks for your comments.