B...b...b...b...but... I thought race was a social construct?
Four genes that shape a Han Chinese face are identified in study
-
Uh, do these people think the proposition that race is a social construct is contingent upon hair and eyelids popping out of a conference or something?
Do they not know it’s how adaptive traits are categorized not that they exist o.O
I’m a bit bewildered by this one.
-
Anyway, I would indeed say the Han Chinese are basically a race, in that they're basically the representative "pure type" of the East Asian race/species, viewed from most angles in principal component analysis in which the Han appear as an extreme end in human genomic space.
-
Lol at "most angles in principal component analysis". What a low I Q statement.
Anyway, I would indeed say the Han Chinese are basically a race, in that they're basically the representative "pure type" of the East Asian race/species, viewed from most angles in principal component analysis in which the Han appear as an extreme end in human genomic space.
-
Word "race" is not mentioned once in the article. Genetics!= Race.
Yes or no: Do you accept that Han Chinese is a coherent biological category?
Lol at "most angles in principal component analysis". What a low I Q statement.
^ Explain what you mean by this.
One can view 3d (or effectively 4d) PCA visualizations that can display very many different components overall. You can, yes, even rotate 3d visualizations and view from many different angles. Most humans fall along continuums somewhere outside what we could thing of as, relatively, "pure types" that are endpoints of genomic diversity; what's generally clear is that Han Chinese represent one extreme endpoint of genomic diversity in most PCA visualizations of all humans. -
Lol, that's so du/md. You are describing some UI visualization of a simple matrix decomposition. I wonder where in the genomic spectrum you fall, probably closer to an ape.
Word "race" is not mentioned once in the article. Genetics!= Race.
Yes or no: Do you accept that Han Chinese is a coherent biological category?
Lol at "most angles in principal component analysis". What a low I Q statement.
^ Explain what you mean by this.
One can view 3d (or effectively 4d) PCA visualizations that can display very many different components overall. You can, yes, even rotate 3d visualizations and view from many different angles. Most humans fall along continuums somewhere outside what we could thing of as, relatively, "pure types" that are endpoints of genomic diversity; what's generally clear is that Han Chinese represent one extreme endpoint of genomic diversity in most PCA visualizations of all humans. -
Lol, that's so du/md. You are describing some UI visualization of a simple matrix decomposition. I wonder where in the genomic spectrum you fall, probably closer to an ape.
Explain how your statement in any way contradicts anything I said or disputes the validity of PCA as a way to analyze genomic relation between organisms.
Your statement about certain people in the genomic spectrum falling closer to apes is interesting, as that applies only to subsaharan Africans who are more closely related to chimpanzees than are other humans.
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2011/10/24/1108181108.full.pdf -
Try explaining what a PFA is in your own words.
Lol, that's so du/md. You are describing some UI visualization of a simple matrix decomposition. I wonder where in the genomic spectrum you fall, probably closer to an ape.
Explain how your statement in any way contradicts anything I said or disputes the validity of PCA as a way to analyze genomic relation between organisms.
Your statement about certain people in the genomic spectrum falling closer to apes is interesting, as that applies only to subsaharan Africans who are more closely related to chimpanzees than are other humans.
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2011/10/24/1108181108.full.pdf
http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Anthropogenesis-SkoglundPCA2.jpg -
You can't find this information yourself?
Here's a place to start:
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2015.0202
https://builtin.com/data-science/step-step-explanation-principal-component-analysis
https://towardsdatascience.com/a-one-stop-shop-for-principal-component-analysis-5582fb7e0a9c -
The fact that you, or I, can find this information online doesn't tell me if you understand it. I know that you don't and I just want to humiliate you for not knowing. And you are making it so easy.
You can't find this information yourself?
Here's a place to start:
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2015.0202
https://builtin.com/data-science/step-step-explanation-principal-component-analysis
https://towardsdatascience.com/a-one-stop-shop-for-principal-component-analysis-5582fb7e0a9c -
Just to be clear, I have no problems with PCA, it's one of my favourite matrix transformation. My problem is with your low I Q interpretation of it.
You have not stated even one substantive dispute regarding any point I've made.
What is the specific "problem" you have with what you describe as my interpretation? -
The concept behind PCA is rather easy to understand. Even an average sociologist seems capable of that, so this is not exactly arcane knowledge. You're sounding like DeRay claiming that leftists don't know what the word "neoliberal" means while himself seeming confused about the concept.
