Human Races

Hello, this is my first post and I'm more of an astronomy guy than a biology guy, but I was just wondering how evolution explains the different races of humans (like African, Asian, Hispanic, etc.). How do different races come about? Were there different races of primitive man? I've read that Africans can naturally jump higher (in general, of course) than most other people because of the way their lower legs are constructed, but that this also causes them to have to put more effort into swimming. Is there any validity to this? If so, are there are any more differences like this between other races?Basically, I'm just kinda looking for a run down on the different races of humans. Sorry if any of this sounds stupid; I just recently became interested in science and even then I find astronomy to be the most interesting, not biology. Thanks!

So, since we're so mixed up at this point in time, it's pretty much impossible to determine individual characteristics of a specific "race" if there are any at all? According to our evolutionary studies, were most forms of primitive man clumped together in the same area or not? For example, let's say Species X evolved in Egypt. Did Species X stay only around the Abydos region or were there clumps of Species X at Giza, Cairo, and Abydos? Or was Species X evenly scattered throughout a region with no central point of high population density?I'm just trying to understand why people of different races are concentrated in certain areas of the globe and when primitive species of man started to be broken down into significant racial groups. Is it climate that affects the level of melanin and facial structure? In which case, racial groups were formed when a species of man started to spread out into significantly different areas of the globe. Do different types of dogs run parallel to different types of humans? Is collie, chihuahua, and German shepherd (as dogs) parallel to African, Caucasian, and Asian (as humans)?NOTE: I'm not racist, by the way, and I'm not trying to bring on some idea of one pure race being better than another, I'm just interested in what makes us different and how we grew to be different.[This message has been edited by Tsegamla, 10-18-2003]

quote:

---

In the basic sense of natural selection, yes, probably. Africans have near-universally dark skin because it's so sunny where they are, and too hot for clothing. Therefore persons with extremely light skin did not leave as many children as dark-skinned folk.

​

So, yes, the climate did influence which traits are more likely to be prevalent in a given geographical area.

---

But I thought that things like tanning weren't hereditary. If I got a good tan and got a girl with a good tan pregnant, the child wouldn't have a good tan, right? But I suppose that would be different if a group of people consistently stayed in a particular climate for their whole lives. Why is facial structure different? You couldn't give a black man white skin and successfully pass him off as a Caucasian (well, you could, but he'd look weird).

That's not fair though, we all know that Halle Berry doesn't have that regular African styled facial structure. Her's is more Caucasian. Here, I just searched "black male" on Google image search and I'm using first page results: If they simply had white skin, they wouldn't just blend right in. Generally, most of the black men I've known, including my best friend in 8th grade, have had wider noses (and somewhat larger lips, now that I come of it). Halle Berry isn't really a fair example, in fact, I think she's half and half to begin with (might be wrong though).EDIT: Actually, Halle Berry's nose is plenty wider than Natalie Portman's and looks like her lips are bigger, but that could just be the angle. Still though, I can't pick out all the things that make the traditional African facial structure the way it is, but it exists and it's noticeable regardless of skin color.There's also other physical characteristics like Koreans and other Asian groups have the slanted eyes. It's not really just the skin color; eyes, facial structure, and maybe more.[This message has been edited by Tsegamla, 10-18-2003]

I understand what you're saying, and I agree that at this point in time, we've mixed so much that any real distinctive qualities are gone as far as absolute means of identification goes, but I'm talking about the core characteristics of each pure race. It's just like if we have a million shades of gray, we can still define 100% black and 100% white. Let's say man evolved as one species in Kansas and then broke off into 5 groups: (1) Canada (2) Mexico (3) Ecuador (4) Northern Argentina (5) the southern tip of South America. Then alien ninjas from the planet Zaptron came to Earth and made laser walls to permanently separate the different groups. Would these different groups eventually develop their own qualities similar to our races due to their different environments?I understand that realistically there is no deciding factor on race, but if it weren't for interracial mating, would different races develop certain undeniable characteristics that are pretty much exclusive to that race?EDIT: Also, I'm not saying that all people in Africa or all people in Asia or all people in Europe look the same. There seems to be a spectrum of race and we draw the lines at different points. Sort of like the middle east being a middle-man between white Europe and black Africa. I also get how there is a certain level of variety among humans, but certain features are still pretty much exclusive to certain races. I've never seen a white person with slanted eyes like a Korean guy I know at school.[This message has been edited by Tsegamla, 10-18-2003]

All right. I agree with you on the realistic use of such information. There isn't really much of a use for defining a pure race except just for the sake of doing it. It's just something to think about it. Sort've like absolute zero, I suppose. There's also really no way to attain racial purity, and that's a good thing, because if there was then there would probably be wars between different races (or ultimately species if it had a chance to go on long enough). Basically, I understand that it doesn't work this way, but it's still interesting to think about. Just like how if a penny doubled its size every second for Avogadro's number of years, how big would the penny be? Same idea. Impossible, but interesting to think about.Hypothetically, if you did apply reproductive isolation to separate groups of modern humans, is there any calculation on about how long it would take to significantly evolve each group into a separate species?

quote:

---

Yes, but human nature can't really be altered by choice to any great extent, so it doesnt' make any difference. The best we can hope for is to keep social and world economics in the "cooperatation" mode and keep it from slipping into a perception of "zero sum" as best we can. When it does slip into a zero sum condition, that's when all hell inevitably breaks loose.

---

A little off topic, but...
I'm reading Nonzero right now. Neat book. Are there any other books you know of that carry a similar viewpoint on "the arrow of human history?"

I agree that race is pretty insignificant today (or should be), but that doesn't mean we shouldn't study it. I'm sure others disagree, but I don't think that things should be ignored just because they aren't useful. Granted, a good deal of the science involved in race goes right over my head (as I'm new to all of this stuff), but I'm sure a decent amount of it is valid and true. If we have the means to investigate something, we might as well do it just for the sake of knowing more about it. English classes are pretty much useless, but a lot of people study the material just because they find it interesting. If certain results popped up that gave racists more ammunition, we shouldn't waste our time worrying about what they might say. We all know that you can teach a black man, white man, or any man how to build a rocket with the proper training. Let them get off on it if they want, but their bigotry shouldn't hinder studies of the subject.

Well, a black guy is obviously different from a white guy. It's not an imaginary difference; they obviously have different skin colors. There has to be some sort of scientific explanation for that. So, whether it's only skin deep or if it goes further, we should still study various physical differences of different races. Race definitely exists to some degree. Asian, African, European, whatever. We should study any existing differences, no matter if it's a big deal or not.