Don't like the implications?

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The question is: there ARE more exceptions than examples.

Which exceptions? Examples please.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So, tell me why is east Asia different from France. I asked this question just a while ago and no one can answer it.

Different ecosystems.

There's different plants to digest. My digestive system, for example, REALLY doesn't agree with Indian food.

Different animals to deal with. Unlike in certain parts of Australia, I don't need to check my choose for any poisonous spiders. And I also don't need to get a bunch of preventive shots when I take a stroll to the next village. I only have to do that when traveling to some other continent.

And many other differences.... altitudes, general climate / weather things, humidity, presence and relative location of seas and the effects thereof,... Different places are different places juve....

And, as has been repeated so very often... even if the eco-systems were the exact same, they would inevitably diverge over time anyway because they are genetically isolated from one another.


Meaning that the evolution that happens in a population, stays in that population.
If there is no interbreeding between these populations, then there is no exchange of genetic material.

What is so hard to understand about that?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It is easy, but is not enough.

What's missing?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Sorry, no patient for doing that.

lol, owkay then.

 

[Gene2memE]

I can't. I don't have time.

Yet, you have the time to make ~22,000 posts on this forum, many of which are plainly wrong on the facts of evolutionary biology.

And, I don't have to. I am sure the study of this question must have been done.

Search engines exist. Libraries exist. Perhaps the answer you seek lies there?

It would have taken just as long to type "I am sure the study of this question must have been done" into this forums, as it would have to typed "geographic variation in skin tone" into google

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Geographic+variation+in+skin+tone

 

[juvenissun]

No they aren't. East Asia is noticeably warmer than France.

That is "south"-east Asia.

 

[juvenissun]

LOL! "East Asia" is a geographical region which contains the countries of China, Mongolia, the Koreas and Japan. Now you assert that all of these countries have the same climate as France?

Some places have.

 

[juvenissun]

Which exceptions? Examples please.

Same climate/environment, different race.

 

[juvenissun]

Different ecosystems.

There's different plants to digest. My digestive system, for example, REALLY doesn't agree with Indian food.

Different animals to deal with. Unlike in certain parts of Australia, I don't need to check my choose for any poisonous spiders. And I also don't need to get a bunch of preventive shots when I take a stroll to the next village. I only have to do that when traveling to some other continent.

I can find these differences in central Africa. Why is there only one race?

 

[juvenissun]

What's missing?

A lot.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I can find these differences in central Africa. Why is there only one race?

Genetic isolation.

What part of it don't you understand?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

A lot.

For example?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

If so, why do you say that evolution is true instead of being probably true?

Because the evidence shows it is so far beyond reasonable doubt that for all practical purposes it can be considered true.

The only adequate alternative scientific hypothesis is that all the evidence we've found corresponds to the ToE just by chance. This would mean that not only were the original observations that led to the natural selection hypothesis simply a bunch of unrelated coincidences, but that the hundreds of thousands of observations in many different fields that have been made since, and are also consistent with it, are all coincidental too - if any one of these observations had been different, the theory would fail.

It only takes a moment's thought to see that the chances of this - of fossil finds covering two billion years, of the anatomy, biochemistry, embryology, geography, distribution, genetics, etc., etc., all corresponding to the ToE purely by chance - are impossibly remote (the probabilities of each observation having the value it has purely by chance are multiplied together to give the overall probability; the number of observations involved means you don't need to know the probabilities accurately - for example, even if every observation had a very conservative 50% chance of being coincidental, twenty such coincidences would be a one-in-a-million chance, 30 would be 1-in-a-billion, and hundreds of thousands of such observations being coincidental would be as near infinitely improbable as you can imagine).

Spoiler: statistical significance

This calculation of the probability of the results of observation being due to chance is regularly done when analyzing scientific experiments so as to give an estimate of the confidence we can have that those results are significant (i.e. did not occur by chance) - it's known as the p value. A typical significance level for a p value is 0.05 or 1-in-20. If experimental results have a less than a 1 in 20 probability that they're due to chance, they're taken to be significant.

For crucially important fundamental physics experiments, such as the Large Hadron Collider, the criteria are stricter - they use what they call '5-sigma', which corresponds to a p value of about 1-in-3.5 million. Another way of looking at it is that if the results were due to chance alone, you'd have to do the experiment 3.5 million times on average before you'd see the results you actually got.

You may say that you have an alternative hypothesis - that God put all that evidence in place in such a way that it all corresponds with the ToE. From a scientific point of view, there's no evidence to suggest that this is the case - and it's not a falsifiable claim - so the scientific response is that we can only draw conclusions based on the evidence available, which is that the ToE is, beyond any reasonable doubt, the correct explanation for our observations.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Same climate/environment, different race.

OK, I thought this had been covered. When populations are reproductively isolated, they start evolving independently. Since mutations are random in the individuals of each population, over many generations, the genetic make-up of the populations will start to drift apart due to the accumulation of different neutral or nearly neutral mutations (i.e. ones that have little or no effect on fitness), even if all selection pressures are identical. This is known as 'genetic drift' and will cause the populations to slowly diverge over time in many small ways, including appearance.

In practice, when populations are sufficiently separated geographically to be reproductively isolated, they are likely to experience different climatic conditions, and so have slightly different environmental selection pressures acting on them as well as background genetic drift.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I can find these differences in central Africa. Why is there only one race?

Which race is that? and do the Aka, Efé and Mbuti (groups of unusually small stature, often called 'pygmy peoples') belong to it?

If you count ethnic groups as races (and, Central Africa being a large area, many of them have been relatively isolated from each other for thousands of years), there are multiple races in Central Africa.

How similar does a group have to be to another group, and in what ways, before they're considered the same race?

 

[juvenissun]

Genetic isolation.

What part of it don't you understand?

The part of convenience.

 

[juvenissun]

Because the evidence shows it is so far beyond reasonable doubt that for all practical purposes it can be considered true.

What practical purpose? The idea of evolution has no practical use.

 

[juvenissun]

OK, I thought this had been covered. When populations are reproductively isolated, they start evolving independently. Since mutations are random in the individuals of each population, over many generations, the genetic make-up of the populations will start to drift apart due to the accumulation of different neutral or nearly neutral mutations (i.e. ones that have little or no effect on fitness), even if all selection pressures are identical. This is known as 'genetic drift' and will cause the populations to slowly diverge over time in many small ways, including appearance.

In practice, when populations are sufficiently separated geographically to be reproductively isolated, they are likely to experience different climatic conditions, and so have slightly different environmental selection pressures acting on them as well as background genetic drift.

These are all textbook talks. No practical use. When it hits real data, the theory collapsed.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

That is "south"-east Asia.

No, the whole of East Asia. In fact, East Asia as a whole has more extremes of temperature than France.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

These are all textbook talks. No practical use. When it hits real data, the theory collapsed.

Juvenissun, just state simply what you are getting at. What do you mean by throwing out phrases like 'practical use'?