How do we still have people who believe in "scientific" racism?

I've seen many people post questions on online forums that ask if black people are more closely related to Apes then are other races of people

#facepalm Humans (whether they'd be white, black, yellow, brown, red or any combination of the above) are apes. That's like asking if rats are more closely related to mammals than other species of rodents or if Ohio is closer to the US than other parts of the US.

Now many would argue that black people are less evolved then white people and share more in common with other species of apes and even Darwin believed that (a point which I'll adress later). But t'aint no such thing as a more or less "evolved" organism within the same timeframe because all organisms on Earth are equally "evolved" because they've all been evolving for 4 billion years. Nor are there more "primitive" or "advanced" organisms because "advanced" implies an advancement towards an ultimate goal as opposed to an entirley temporal one of adaptation. Now there are more basal and more derrived organisms meaning more and less similar to the common ancestor of both but one or the other won't necessarily imply a survival advantage. Darwin may well have believed that black people were more basal than other races (which has no evidence backing) but that's not to say that he thought they were "inferior". So even if someone were to measure the skulls and facial features of a population of Africans and compared it to other populations and ran it through a statistical analysis and proved beyond a reasonable doubt that black people had more in common wiht apes than other races of people, you've still got all of your work ahead of you before you show that they are somehow "inferior" to other races of people.


Most Helpful Girl

Most Helpful Guy

  • Well, the fact is that Nature does not give a rat's ass about political correctness. Indeed, there are differences between the races that make some races better than others in various ways. If you don't believe that Nature can be racist, ask yourself how come Sickle Cell Anemia is dominant in blacks or how come most far-east Asians have epicanthic folds or how come blue eyes, ginger hair, and skin cancer is more prevalent in caucasians (whites)?

    Each of us has genetic distinctiveness and the distinctiveness of ethnic groups is due to evolutionary pressures. For instance, in Europe, white people are white because they lived in northern latitudes which get less sunlight than in equatorial latitudes. And notice that the more north you go, the whiter the native ethnic group gets. This is because the body needs vitamin D and for the body to make vitamin D, it needs sunlight. The further south you go, the darker people become and there's a reason for this: those people get enough sunlight to manufacture vitamin D, but they need more melanin to avoid skin cancer and melanin is what causes skin to become dark. This is why white people are more susceptible to skin cancer - they have much less melanin.

    The point in all of this is that Nature definitely is "racist". As to a race or ethnicity being better than a different race or ethnicity, that may actually be so, but that depends on what "better means". Many African men are tall so they'd make good basketball players, but many Latin American men are rather short and they make better horse racing jockeys. So which race is better?

    • Personally I think the pale skin was passed through the Neanderthal genes as they would have had much longer to adopt the white skin. Interesting to note scientists have also identified two genes that relate to adult lactose tolerance that effect skin color as well. Just don't know if I buy the sun thing

    • @cjmtherfcker The sun thing is basic metabolic science.

      "The two main ways to get vitamin D are by exposing your bare skin to sunlight and by taking vitamin D supplements. You can’t get the right amount of vitamin D your body needs from food.

      The most natural way to get vitamin D is by exposing your bare skin to sunlight (ultraviolet B rays). This can happen very quickly, particularly in the summer. You don’t need to tan or burn your skin to get vitamin D. You only need to expose your skin for around half the time it takes for your skin to turn pink and begin to burn. How much vitamin D is produced from sunlight depends on the time of day, where you live in the world and the color of your skin. The more skin you expose the more vitamin D is produced."


Have an opinion?


Send It!

What Girls Said 1

  • I agree. The people that use pseudoscientific theories about racial differences that have long been falsified just want an excuse for their racism. They just want to be able to say: 'LOOK, science is on MY side!1!1!!!'. But people who are actually clued up with a modern understanding of evolution would know that all humans share 98-99% of each other's DNA. So if I'm an ape, they're as much of an ape as I am.


What Guys Said 4

  • AMEN to that :-)

    P. s. As a historian, I also get bothered about the idea of being "advanced" in a civilizatory sense. For example there was a guy on here the other day who claimed that black people must be inferior because "look at the people in Africa, they're just running around in the bush while we live in this highly technologized country". Now, apart from the fact that this way of thinking is of course incredibly dumb and ignorant because there are also large cities and technology in Africa, it brings up another widely believed misconception. EVEN IF people in Africa would still live like some remote tribes in the Amazon jungle, why does that make them less advanced or more primitive? It's a very interesting question and rather profound question: has stuff such as wealth and technology really made us "advanced" in the first world? I mean, sure, it's nice to own a toilet where you can just flush, an electric stove, a cell phone and a computer. But has this stuff really made us "advanced"? We first world people might be able to do all kinds of crazy stuff with our technology and resources but we've also pretty much destroyed the planet. Unlike us, the few native tribes in Africa and South America that still live like their ancient ancestors live in close contact and harmony with mother nature. And though there lives are shorter than ours on average, I doubt they are less happy. In fact, they are probably more happy than many of us with our stressed lives. So even historically speaking, I think it's rather questionable to consider Europe and America particularly "advanced". You could also argue that WE are the primitive ones because we're on the fast lane to self-destruction.

  • Some people are assholes who need justification for being assholes

  • Thats so ridiculous that its almost funny that some people really believe in that.

  • That's why you white wash history and make anything advanced done by black people as something done by white people. Egypt, or Babylon founded by the son of cush Nimrod