I often hear racialists use archiac admixture in populations as "proof" of races being heavily different (like Asians and Europeans having 1-4% Neanderthal DNA but Africans having none). The recent discovery of a "ghost" population contributing DNA (about 8%) into the African gene pool has caused some debate as well. Anyone care to elaborate on that? — Unsigned, by: 188.8.131.52 / talk / contribs
Usefullness of this text sadly not given
Intention should be to point out weak points of racialists.
As such, it would be more useful to bare out common ground, i.e. 1. behavior or skills are genetical inherited by parental lineage (but it is disputed on how much) 2. environment shapes our skills (and it is disputed on how much).
In biology races are animal types that can mate with another.
-> Racialists extend this definition of possible matable subtypes by either 1. bla, 2. bla, 3. bla
It might be more useful to sum up that racialism as weak concept gives less accureate assumptions and may only be useful for simplistic overviews when the measured differences are big enough (taking other causalities into effect). — Unsigned, by: 184.108.40.206 / talk 10:13, 15 January 2019
|Obvious concern-trolling strawmen that are not even wrong|
The most important thing is to not reference anything the racists are saying. Racists must not have the oxygen of a platform. Also it's easier to refute them if we make up their position. They'll probably whine about "tl;dr moronic strawman arguments" but we can just call them racists and delete their comments. I fucking love science. Fedora Wearing Midwit (talk) 09:53, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Where do you even draw the line?
I think it was important to repeat this point around twenty times. Where do racists even draw the line? But of course if any racists come here and tell us where they draw the line we should delete their comment. Fedora Wearing Midwit (talk) 10:16, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
The definition section is in the right place, buried under some waffle about "demes". How do racists even define race? Hairstyle? Nobody even knows. Fedora Wearing Midwit (talk) 10:19, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
How many races even are there?
"To argue otherwise..."
I removed this sentence as it appears to be a straw man: "To argue otherwise is to argue that all required mutations magically appear in all social living beings as soon as they develop social intelligence." Most importantly, the implication's unsourced. 2601:4B:400:760:1C3E:D92B:BF80:67F8 (talk) 01:48, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
"Racialism is the idea that humanity can be easily divided into well-defined biological categories ("races")"
What is the definition that this article argues against? Without a clear statement of the view you purport to refute, this article is nothing but one long strawman. Albert Green (talk) 11:04, 23 October 2021 (UTC)