English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I mean, compare say an Inuit to a tall Nordic Swede.Don't U thunk maybe a few things have changed in the course of human evolution,yes in the risk of being politcally incorrect,even mental attributes as well.

2007-08-13 03:09:37 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Biology

3 answers

No. The tricky part is defining the word "subspecies". It generally refers to a group that has the potential of becoming a separate species (i.e. they can still technically interbreed, but with more time, would lose this capability, and become officially two separate species).

For this reason, two criteria are needed:
1. Members of each group must be reliably distinguishable from members of other groups.
2. Members of each group will tend not to interbreed with members of other groups, even if they come in contact. (This criterion is important because it is what enforces the genetic isolation that can in further time become *permanent*, resulting in completely separate species.)

For example, a dog is a subspecies of the wolf. They are reliably distinguishable. And given the choice, wolves will prefer to mate with wolves and dogs with dogs. However, since they can interbreed (and produce fertile offspring) if given no other choice, they are technically the same species.

However, by this definition, human races are NOT separate subspecies. They are NOT reliably distinguishable (sometimes they are, but not *reliably* ... there is no dividing line between, say where northern asian "races" begin and southern asian "races" begin, or between northern asian and inuit, or inuit and native american "races", etc.).

But even more clearly, all humans will *gladly* interbreed (and produce fertile offspring) if given the chance.

2007-08-13 06:36:15 · answer #1 · answered by secretsauce 7 · 0 0

Unless you're making your own definitions, probably not. Of course, the whole basis of traditional Linnean classification is a bit arbitrary, so if you want to take that position, go right ahead. It's no more foolish than most of the other things that people believe.

2007-08-13 13:15:29 · answer #2 · answered by John R 7 · 0 0

No, the isolation wasn't long enough for real subspecies to develop.

I believe, but without evidence, that there aren't any significant racial mental differences. Various populations all over the world had religion and agriculture.

2007-08-13 13:12:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers