That concept of race is outdated. DNA evidence shows there is much more variation with other factors than skin colour. As far as US census and law enforcement goes, Hispanic is a race, whereas Hispanic is actually a combination of a variation of population. Race can be synonymous with ethnicity but from an anthropological point of view, skin colour is a very small factor in DNA variation.
2006-11-11 13:57:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by dunc1ca 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
That would be exact if we could trace people's origins from ancient times. Caucasian, for instance is a theoretical simplification, if you consider the different people who inhabited Europe with such different traces.
What would be the difference between what you call black and brown? Dark skin can be characteristic of people in Africa and India. Arabics also have dark skin and they vary pretty much in tone. The Arabics once were masters all over Mediterranean Europe, and they left their inprint there. Asians are recognized by their eyes features, but they have different traits, how would you classify them?
Unless you are studying humans according to the outcome of the interaction of their inherited DNA and the environment, what's the need to divide human beings into categories?
2006-11-11 21:56:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by eliana s 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
1. Mongoloid:Chinese, Mongolians, Koreans, Japanese, Vietnamese, Eskimos and the like
2, Aryan: Indian, European, Persian (some say Jews and Arabs are different but I can't see why so I would include them here0
3. *******; All black and dark brown African people and their descendants in the Americas and elsewhere.
4. Pacific Islanders: from Hawaii to New Zealand
5. Native Americans: the look like a different race regardless of the small numbers.
Yes, there is one human race, but I think we should be proud with our heritage and celebrate diversity. With the present rate of international exchange and the breaking of racial prejudice and interracial marriages this racial distinction will prove more and more superfluous and incorrect.
2006-11-11 22:30:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by Alex G 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
This is an archaic notion dating from "scientific" findings a very long time ago describing people as mongoloid (Asian) caucasoid (White) and ******* (African). The factual accuracy of this has been disputed, and with the global mixing of races that was not possible before (without means to travel to different areas of the world) race is merely a social construct.
2006-11-11 21:57:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by cudancegirl1 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
there are 3. Monkeys, Apes, and mixed. the mixed are superior because natural selection will weed out undesirable genes, thats why you see mixed people who are generally more prettier and just as smart as there makers. the monkeys and apes are divided into sub-families. there are subtle anatomical differences between the two. The apes are larger and have a shoulder that rotates more, the monkeys are better ground walkers and are faster. All belong to one race that probably split up around 20 million years ago. latins or la raza are mixed with caucaszoid and asian ancestry, the anglo-saxon are apes(chimps,Orangutans, Gibbons), the asians are monkeys(mandrill), most middle easterns are mixed, the nose comes from the (probiscus monkey)africans are just black people of all races. The monkeys are genetically dominant to the apes, the apes are smarter. Open your eyes, notice the last names of peoples, we are able to mix because like I said because originally we come from the same family, this is known as the missing link which we have yet to fully understand. The polynesians have been genetically linked to the peoples of south asia, who have left on boats they believe 3 to 5 thousand yrs ago. These original asians have mixed with the melanesians, which are known to be of ***** stock, then mixed with the europeans that invaded starting about 500 yrs ago, hence the title Poly(many)asian=Polynesian= many asians
2006-11-11 22:10:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think early anthropologists tried to sort people into "races" according to physical characteristics, but they've now proved that there is no such thing as a pure race - even the fairest, blondest Scandinavian has the same ancestors as the darkest person in Africa.
2006-11-12 01:08:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by damselfly 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
There use to be three main classes. Caucasoid, ******* and Mongoloid. I can't remember much else , but Polynesian, I believe, as a smaller sub group. This is all academic as these classifications are quite refuted, genetically.
2006-11-11 21:59:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Thanks for the interesting question - I don't believe any specific 'race' exists anymore - we have just blended so much that a pure race no longer exists. That's fine with me as my Mother was reared believing in Hitler's concept of needing a "perfect" race (blonde hair & blue eyes which I do have), and trust me - I don't want anything to do with that!!!
2006-11-11 21:52:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
there is only 1 human race, but if you're looking for skin color variations ,the caucasians are generally white; black generally from africa; brown, there are the malays, incas & mayas; yellow are the chinese, japanese, koreans; and red are the american indians.
2006-11-12 00:53:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by junior 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Human Race is the only one.
2006-11-11 21:56:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋