Why are black people so angry?

[Daldolma]

kagafob and bard guy take opposite sides on divisive issue, somehow both completely wrong

[Glenzig]

''If you ask what percentage of your genes is reflected in your external appearance, the basis by which we talk about race, the answer seems to be in the range of .01 percent,'' said Dr. Harold P. Freeman, the chief executive, president and director of surgery at North General Hospital in Manhattan, who has studied the issue of biology and race. ''This is a very, very minimal reflection of your genetic makeup.''

Unfortunately for social harmony, the human brain is exquisitely attuned to differences in packaging details, prompting people to exaggerate the significance of what has come to be called race, said Dr. Douglas C. Wallace, a professor of molecular genetics at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta.

''The criteria that people use for race are based entirely on external features that we are programmed to recognize,'' he said. ''And the reason we're programmed to recognize them is that it's vitally important to our species that each of us be able to distinguish one individual from the next. Our whole social structure is based on visual cues, and we've been programmed to recognize them, and to recognize individuals.''

By contrast with the tiny number of genes that make some people dark-skinned and doe-eyed, and others as pale as napkins, scientists say that traits like intelligence, artistic talent and social skills are likely to be shaped by thousands, if not tens of thousands, of the 80,000 or so genes in the human genome, all working in complex combinatorial fashion.

The possibility of such gene networks shifting their interrelationships wholesale in the course of humanity's brief foray across the globe, and being skewed in significant ways according to ''race'' is ''a bogus idea,'' said Dr. Aravinda Chakravarti, a geneticist at Case Western University in Cleveland. ''The differences that we see in skin color do not translate into widespread biological differences that are unique to groups.''

Dr. Jurgen K. Naggert, a geneticist at the Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Me., said: ''These big groups that we characterize as races are too heterogeneous to lump together in a scientific way. If you're doing a DNA study to look for markers for a particular disease, you can't use 'Caucasians' as a group. They're too diverse. No journal would accept it.''

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Individual variation being more significant doesn't necessarily mean that .01% genetic variation has zero signifigance. That being said, individual variation is the difference between difference between Gandhi and Stalin. Between Hitler and Einstein. Between Jack the Ripper and MLK Jr.

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Individual variation being more significant doesn't necessarily mean that .01% genetic variation has zero signifigance. That being said, individual variation is the difference between difference between Gandhi and Stalin. Between Hitler and Einstein. Between Jack the Ripper and MLK Jr.

I guess it just means that when people try to group all people of one skin color together, or demand that races are genetically different that they're only 0.1% right. I'd rather be 99.99% right.
Also. Are you saying that Hitler, Stalin, and Jack the Ripper were all genetically predisposed to do what they did? As if they didn't have a choice?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I guess it just means that when people try to group all people of one skin color together, or demand that races are genetically different that they're only 0.1% right. I'd rather be 99.99% right.

Genetics isn't about "right and wrong" I don't understand this point in your post. Are you implying that bananas are only 30% wrong? What does that even mean?

Originally Posted by Glenzig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Also. Are you saying that Hitler, Stalin, and Jack the Ripper were all genetically predisposed to do what they did? As if they didn't have a choice?

Compare Hitler to Napoleon. Napoleon wasn't the nicest guy in the world, but he wasn't a genocidal maniac even though his rise to power and march across Europe was nearly identical to that of Hitler.

Compare Jack the Ripper to any modern day serial killer. More and more evidence is pointing towards genetic predisposition in virtually every case when you study sociopaths.

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Genetics isn't about "right and wrong" I don't understand this point in your post. Are you implying that bananas are only 30% wrong? What does that even mean?



Compare Hitler to Napoleon. Napoleon wasn't the nicest guy in the world, but he wasn't a genocidal maniac even though his rise to power and march across Europe was nearly identical to that of Hitler.

Compare Jack the Ripper to any modern day serial killer. More and more evidence is pointing towards genetic predisposition in virtually every case when you study sociopaths.

I think you are so obsessed with your own response other peoples posts that you don't even really read them. I didn't say genetics were right or wrong. I said people that insist that people of different skin color are genetically different are only 0.01% correct. In other words, they have no basis for their argument.

So you're saying that even if someone has never committed an act of violence, if they share certain genetic markers with serial killers that they are still predisposed to going on a murdering spree?

[JayN]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Lune]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[phacemeltar]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

drugs r bad

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yeah... I'm not freudian. Though I don't completely dismiss Freud's theories, I see cultural upbringing the greater factor by far. That's really where the problem lays here in this matter, being taught that they are victims, that other people owe them something even if they had no part in what may or may not have happened to their ancestors, or to themselves. Unfortunately, too many black people buy into it, a greater majority, though that too has no real bearing on skin color or whatnot, just as say many Germans followed hitler it's just the general flaw of human nature. Upbringing, passed from parent to child, and even from the state for their own purposes. People such as Al Sharpton is really no help to them, only progresses the problem creating greater divisions even amongst themselves.