The Reality of Racegreenspun.com : LUSENET : 3D_Floyd : One Thread
The Reality of Race
by Dr. V.S. Herrell, Ch.D.
[Like most Americans, I was recently bombarded with the Jewish propaganda that the idea of race no longer exists. This absurdity appeared in the form of Morgan Freeman, the mulatto or quatroon (or should I just say mongrel?), who the world knows as a third rate Hollywood personality and now as a first rate spokesman for Jewish lies. Freeman brazenly spoke the Communist line when he said on television in so many words that science was no longer recognizing racial distinctions. What the half-negro failed to mention is that the science he is referring to is the pseudo-science of Jewish sociology. Today, so-called negro movie stars are repaying their Communist Jew movie friends by seeking to rewrite history, claiming that all the Communists of even 50 and 60 years ago were really saints and not the Bolshevik-inspired enemies of America that the FBI had at that time labeled them to be. Well, is this lying actor negro or half-negro right or wrong? - The Editor, M.R.]
The Jewish lie of "the brotherhood of all men" is becoming more and more popular today thanks to the Jewish controlled media and their mulatto, Communist, lying spokesmen. Even as we learn an ever-increasing amount about genetics and the scientific reality of race, we are being told by the genocidal race-murderers and a select group of Jewish pseudo-scientists that the concept of race has no biological or scientific validity. Various scientific organizations have published official position statements stating that race is nothing more than a social construct, rooted not in biology but in sociology. Many, such as the American Anthropological Association, go on to say that this social construct is relatively recent. They claim that the concept of "race" was created in the 18th century, and most point to Johann Friedrich Blumenback as the originator of the idea of "race." Anyone with even the least amount of common sense can see the absurdity of these statements. If anyone is responsible for the modern concept of race, it was Carolus Linnaeus, who created the modern system that biologists use to group animals and plants into different categories. The same biologists who would group very similar animals, such as dogs, into distinctly different genuses given very minor differences, refuse to group people into different genuses or races (the two terms are equivalent, as the Latin word genus merely means race). However, as we shall see, much greater differences exist between, for example, blacks and whites, than between some dogs or birds or other animals who are classified into distinctly different genuses. One common misconception should be refuted before proceeding: just because two animals, or people, can breed does not mean that they are in the same genus. Again, different genuses of dogs and birds can breed, as anyone who owns dogs knows. Moreover, we shall see that miscegenation does not result in successful offspring with long-term viability.
But returning to the origin of the concept of "race," it is by no means a recent development. All ancient cultures that have left a written record clearly show a knowledge of not only their own race, but other races. We have already mentioned the Latin word for race, genus, and the Greeks also had the word genos which means race. This word shows a very early Indo-European origin, making the concept of race one of the most basic and oldest concepts in civilized society. Ancient writers such as Herodotus described race and racial characteristics numerous times. Pliny the Elder devoted a whole chapter of his Natural History to describing different races. The Greeks also had a word which clearly shows that they distinguished between different races, the word allogenes (other race). Interestingly, this word appears first in the Greek Old Testament, the Septuagint, where it is used more than 45 times. Thus, we see, not only did the concept of "race" exist in ancient societies, it was a predominant fixture of ancient thought even though most of these societies were racially homogenous.
What is truly astounding is the ever-prevalent claim today that race has no biological or genetic basis. The following statement by Sylvia Spengler, a geneticist at U.C. Berkeley, has become often-repeated among those touting this latest Jewish lie:
"I have no question, given what we know about human genetics, that the tall person and the short person are significantly more different than the black man and the white man of similar height Trying to mix genetics with race is, to my mind, inappropriate; it cannot be done. Race is something we do to each other; it has nothing to do with what our DNA does to us."
The utter lies in this statement are almost unbelievable. Spengler attempts to back up her statement by pointing out that the production of the protein melanin, which makes the skin of blacks black, is controlled by only six genes, whereas height is controlled by several more. But her absurd statement assumes that the only difference between blacks and whites is skin color; again, the old lie that "race is only skin deep" is now being used to say that race doesn't exist at all. As we shall see, however, there are easily hundreds of additional differences that we could list between blacks and whites, each one genetic and each one, therefore, a product of our DNA. For Spengler to say that DNA does not produce racial characteristics is a slap in the face of all modern genetic and biochemical science.
Before we begin to look at some of these genetic differences in more detail, however, we must first discuss the "numbers" game that is played by many who would deny the reality of race. This "numbers" game attempts to discount the reality of race by convincing people that the percentage differences between blacks and whites is so small that it doesn't matter. However, when it comes to genetics, even the slightest difference can have profound effects. The human genome has some three billion base pairs that code for about 20,000 to 50,000 different genes. But a single deletion of one of those three billion base pairs could drastically alter the entire genome, creating a baby with major defects, retardation, or even the inability to survive. To put this in percentages, the genetic difference between a healthy baby and a baby unable to live or a baby born with severe retardation or other physical problems could be as little as 0.000000033%.
Little differences are huge in nature. Another example involves certain bacteria plasmids, which are circular DNA molecules. A plasmid with a size of 3,000,000 Daltons can be made resistant to antibiotics by the addition of two methyl groups weighing only 30 Daltons. In other words, the genetic difference between a bacterium that would die and one that would live if exposed to an antibiotic is only 0.00001%. Another amazing fact that illustrates this point is that the difference between a man and woman is only one gene which causes a hormonal cascade in the embryo that leads to sexual differentiation. So out of 50,000 genes, a man and a woman are only 0.002% different, yet we haven't yet seen people rushing out to claim that gender is only a social construct with no basis in science or in DNA! That difference of one gene leads to all the many different obvious sexual characteristics, plus hundreds more not so obvious differences between a man and a woman.
Of all the genes in a white man or woman, far less than 1% account for all the variation seen between different white men and women which include not only superficial things like eye color, hair color, height, weight, facial and body features, etc., but also less obvious things like susceptibility to heart disease or high blood pressure, intelligence, genetic factors in personality, etc. The reason that more than 99% of those 50,000 genes show no variation is because those genes code for things that are absolutely essential to life, whatever its form. Variation would not be viable. This also explains why there is less than 1% difference between a white man or woman and a chimpanzee. But anyone can look at a white man or woman and a chimpanzee and see how much that very slight genetic difference makes. People are also remarkably similar to pigs and cats, but all this demonstrates is that nature has thousands of well-designed biochemical processes which are central to and common to all zoological life. But it also shows us that even the slightest difference is of the utmost importance.
Thus, when we examine the genetic differences between blacks and whites, we find a difference of about 0.02%. Those who play the "numbers" game try to act like this number is insignificant, but remember that 0.02% represents almost 200,000 base pair differences in DNA. So this difference is more than 10 times the difference between a man and a woman of the same race. If gender is a reality, then race must certainly be a reality.
One of the most powerful tools of modern genetics in analyzing how different animals or people are related to one another is mitochondrial DNA. This is DNA which is in the mitochondria of every cell and has no relation to the nuclear DNA, which is the DNA we have discussed thus far. Comparing all white populations, the mitochondrial DNA among whites is found to differ by less than 0.2%. However, comparing the mitochondrial DNA of black and whites, a difference of 0.6% is found, more than three times the difference! Similar percentages are true for other mongreled races, such as Jews. In other words, if you find the two most different white people you can find, the difference between either of them and a black person will be at least 3 times as much as the difference between themselves. In a world where one base pair difference can have enormous effects, these percentages of difference are truly astounding.
The more we learn about genetics, the more traditional anthropological information is confirmed. The differences between races has been approached throughout the years in a variety of ways, comparing everything from physical features to intelligence. But as we learn more about genetics, we find out that these differences are rooted in DNA. Intelligence is a good example. The difference in intelligence between racial groups has been demonstrated at great lengths by hundreds of scientists in the past one hundred years. Everyone freely admits, for example, that the average IQ of blacks is approximately 15 points lower than the average IQ of whites; that is, the average IQ of whites is approximately 100 while the average IQ of blacks is approximately 85 (an IQ of 70 or lower is considered to be retardation).
But while everyone has freely admitted that this difference exists between blacks and whites, many are quick to claim that genetics has little if anything to do with this difference; rather, it is argued that this difference is environmental. Nevertheless, we know today from genetics and from various other forms of research, such as studies involving identical twins separated at birth, that intelligence is at least 80% rooted in genetics, with the other 20% from environmental factors. The controversial but well-researched and well-documented book The Bell Curve also shows that the gap between black and white IQ remains consistent despite similar environmental factors. A related subject and one which has been often studied by racial anthropologists is brain size. The average brain of a white person is 10% larger than the average brain of a black person. This difference in brain size is genetic, and genetics is today proving that brain size is in fact correlated to intelligence.
Dr. J. Philippe Rushton, in his book Race, Evolution, and Behavior (1995), documents major differences between blacks and whites in dozens of areas, including skeletal, motor, and dental development, and hormone levels. He also documents in detail differences in blacks involving age of first intercourse (earlier), number of sexual partners (higher), age of first pregnancy (earlier), lifespan (shorter), aggressiveness (higher), cautiousness (lower), impulsivity (higher), mental health (lower), marital stability (lower), law-abidingness (lower), administrative capacity (lower), and sexually-transmitted diseases (higher). Again, most recognize that these differences exist but deny a genetic factor. However, each of the above characteristics are today being traced to genetic sources.
Medical science also shows the absurdity of denying the reality of race and its genetic basis. A large portion of medicine is directly concerned with racial differences and how these differences affect medical practice, ranging from the identification of racial genetic diseases to drug dosing, which often varies from race to race.
Pure blacks and pure whites show relatively few genetic disorders, but mongrel types, such as Jews, show many. For example, genetic diseases specific to Jews include: abetalipoproteinemia, Bloom's syndrome, dystonia musculorum deformans, familial dysautonomia, factor XI deficiency, Gaucher's disease, iminoglycinuria, Meckel's syndrome, Niemann-Pick disease, pentosuria, spongy degeneration of the brain, stub thumbs, Tay-Sachs disease, etc. The fact that genetic diseases exist which occur along racial lines, such as sickle cell anemia in blacks, shows that there are distinct differences between the DNA of different races. The fact that the majority of all genetic diseases affect mongrel racial types, such as Jews, shows that the mixing of races is not genetically successful.
Other diseases may not be the result of genetic mutations as are the above syndromes and disorders, but they are heavily influenced by genetics. This explains why, for example, blacks are much more likely to suffer from hypertension: it is because of a genetic difference. Drug dosages must be adjusted based upon race. For example, non-whites respond to lower doses of antipsychotic drugs than whites; this is a racial characteristic and is therefore inheritable and therefore genetic. Medical literature is replete with such examples and the race of a patient is extremely important for hundreds of diseases and drugs. Again, these facts only confirm the substantial differences which exist between the races and these differences are genetic in origin. Genetics is also shown to play a significant role in diseases which have many different possible causes, such as cancer. Different cancers can be caused by many different things, but generally environmental factors which can cause cancers equally affect different races who live in the same places. But a large portion of cancers are caused not by environmental elements but by poor genetics. This is demonstrated again among Jews, where, for example, Jewish women are at least ten times as likely to develop breast cancer as white women. Jews also have drastically higher rates of sterility as compared to whites. Again, the higher rates of these and other health problems as compared to whites is caused by genetics.
The dozens of genetic diseases, the extraordinarily high susceptibility to cancers, extremely high rates of sterility, etc. all demonstrate the numerous biological problems with race-mixing or miscegenation. The different races are genetically incompatible and the product of race-mixing is always genetically inferior to the original races.
Pure blacks and pure whites naturally segregate themselves and avoid any type of racial integration. Psychologists are aware that young infants, who have not been taught any "social constructs" by their parents, naturally are uncomfortable around people of a race other than their own. This natural tendency toward segregation has been long practiced. The fact that pure whites still exist demonstrates thousands of years of what Jewish Socialists would label "racism." Nevertheless, such natural instincts coupled with the strong religious background of the South, the so-called Bible belt, explains why the Southern states had laws forbidding race-mixing up until the late 1960s, when the Jew-controlled Federal Government violated the rights of the individual states and declared such state laws illegal, though the laws are still written into the constitutions of some states.
Still, science today has confirmed and is continuing to confirm the existence of different races and the incompatibility of these races. Nobel-prize winning physicist William Shockley, the inventor of the semiconductor, devoted the latter part of his career to the study of eugenics. His work and the work of numerous other respected scientists of the last forty years has proven that race-mixing is nothing but de-evolution which lowers and destroys both races. Those who seek to encourage such genocide are those who are already mongrels, the Communist, antichrist Jews.
-- AKOBADAGETH (KOBEHQ@YAHOO.COM), February 27, 2004
-- (AKO@Go to Hell.com), March 07, 2004.
hello AKOBADAGETH , i've read that scientists traced the origin of humans to one african female. What would you say to that?
-- معاویہ عسکری (qq@.cc.cc), March 11, 2004.
I have a theory. In the time of Noah, he had a wife and I think it was three daughters and three son and laws. Now theres three main colors of skin right? Black, yellow, and white. I think the three son-in-laws each represented a skin color. But then again I'm probably wrong like I always am.
-- Trowa (firstname.lastname@example.org), June 24, 2004.
I have carefully read your piece and have a quistion. students of asian origin almost always score higher than whites, is this due to genetics or envornment?
-- roy andrews (anonmous-acres @yahoo.com), July 04, 2004.
Studies also show that on average asians (Indians and chinease) have a large brain (less thsn one percent) that Europeans, does that mean we are the master race. It does not, brain size does not directly equate to intelligence. People who hate are depressed, you must be one depressed sad racist, I feel sorry for you.
-- V Krishna (email@example.com), August 17, 2004.
I think there are pros and CONS in every race. The ape mom to all theory is going out the window with a better understanding of DNA mapping. I don't think genocide is the right answer but segregation sounds good to me! http://www.martinlutherking.org Jimmy
-- Jimmy Malone (J_Samples@Excite.com), August 19, 2004.