| >I think you’ll find that’s strictly an American definition of “Asian”. No, that's just colloquial usage of the term "Asian" in America. The official definition we use in America is the same as the UK version. >Also your claims about genetic similarities and differences between races will need some supporting evidence as they sounds very much like personal opinion. This is pretty common knowledge. "Mongoloids" branched off on a different ancestral line somewhere during the migration out of Africa. It happened roughly around the middle east with "mongoloids" migrating east on the north side of the himalayas and Indian people moving east to the south. The genetic markers when sampled from populations actually display this genetic separation geographically. In fact the grouping of Indians and "mongoloids" is far more natural and appropriate than the term "Asian" This is pretty common knowledge from different facial features between Indians and Asian people. But if you want to get technical there are actually genetic markers that correlate geographically with racial physical features. The marker for "mongoloids" is called Haplogroup C-M217, also known as C2 (and previously as C3). It is a Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup. It is the most frequently occurring branch of the wider Haplogroup C (M130). It is found mostly in Central Asia, Eastern Siberia and significant frequencies in parts of East Asia and Southeast Asia including some populations in the Caucasus and Middle East. The haplogroup C-M217 is now found at high frequencies among Central Asian peoples, indigenous Siberians, and some Native peoples of North America. In particular, males belonging to peoples such as the Buryats, Evens, Evenks, Itelmens, Kalmyks, Kazakhs, Koryaks, Mongolians, Negidals, Nivkhs, Udege, and Ulchi have high levels of M217. I want you to take a look at this picture: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Haplogru... The picture represents the frequency of the historic appearance of Haplogroup C-M217 among native populations with white representing very very low frequencies and the legend in the picture representing higher frequencies. You will note that C-M217 is basically almost never shows up in India and is highly correlated with the geographic distribution of "mongoloid" facial features found from China going all the way to Native Americans in North America. Now examine Haplogroup L-M20. Haplogroup L-M20 is also a human Y-DNA haplogroup, which is defined by SNPs M11, M20, M61 and M185. As a secondary descendant of haplogroup K and a primary branch of haplogroup LT, haplogroup L currently has the alternative phylogenetic name of K1a, and is a sibling of haplogroup T (a.k.a. K1b). The presence of L-M20 has been observed at varying levels throughout South Asia, peaking in populations native to Balochistan (28%), Northern Afghanistan (25%) and Southern India (19%). The clade also occurs in Tajikistan and Anatolia, as well as at lower frequencies in Iran. It has also been present for millennia at very low levels in the Caucasus, Europe and Central Asia. The subclade L2 (L-L595) has been found in Europe and Western Asia, but is extremely rare. The picture of the haplogroup linking Europe and India is illustrated here: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Distribu... You will note that this haplogroup extends from India across the middle east into Europe which is consistent with the ancestral migrations of prehistoric humans and also with the caucasian features that Indians and Europeans share. The story is more complex than this however. These Haplogroups only represent frequencies of two genetic markers. In reality what we interpret as race is an amalgamation of many many genetic and physical features. An individual needs to only have an average amount of these features for our visual cortex to recognize someone as "mongoloid" or "indian." Because I chose to use a singular genetic marker to show the correlation between physical features, genetic features and geographic distribution you can actually find a flaw that arises from the use of a single genetic marker: Although japanese people and chinese people look alike, they do not share Haplogroup C-M127. Go ahead and look at the picture again above... you will see that japan is white, indicating a very low frequency of haplogroup C-M127 despite physical similarity. The reason for this is outside of the scope of this topic. That being said it is still possible to find correlation between genetic similarities, physical features and geographic distribution with just two haplogroups because the correlations are very very high. This response serves as proof to show that what I said isn't my opinion. It is more representative of your lack of knowledge misleading you to believe that I am stating my opinion rather than a commonly known fact. Most people know how use vision and sight to identify these genetic similarities just by looking at faces. It's totally obvious to normal people. However,some people get so politically correct that they lose the ability to to use common sense to see these similarities. People like you... For these people we need to use raw science to show you just how misguided your thought process is. |
I’m not sure there’s any need to cheapen your point by making personal attacks.
I’ve made no mention of political correctness anywhere.
My flawed argument was based on India and China sharing a land border and that shared genetic markers are found on both sides of it.
I’ve been shown convincing evidence elsewhere in the discussion and I’ve conceded that I was wrong.
I’m quite happy to be in the group that takes “raw science” over “common sense” as you put it.