I used to think referring to calipers all the time in discussion of Quillette was a bit obscurantist and an exaggeration and a step too ironically removed from their actual beliefs but then "researchers can classify human variation by continent quite accurately using only data from the human skull."
(https://quillette.com/2019/06/05/superior-the-return-of-race-science-a-review/)
posted on June 14, 2019 05:44 AM by
u/dgerard
53
u/stairway-to-kevin46 pointsat 1560491366.000000
The best part is that paper and even the abstract explicitly disagree
with the claim they’re trying to make
No it doesn't
>DFA using just two variables, basion-nasion length
(BNL) and basion-prosthion length (BPL), separates
American blacks and whites about 80% correctly, and
using more variables improves classification accuracy
(Jantz and Ousley, 2005). A discriminant function using
19 measurements magnifies the differences and can classify the same samples into social race 97% correctly.
Using stepwise variable selection, only seven variables
(BNL, BPL, biauricular breadth (AUB), nasal breadth
(NLB), palate breadth (MAB), orbital height (OBH), in
order of selection) are necessary to classify blacks and
whites 95% correctly, and these variables are ones that
can be visually appreciated by forensic anthropologists.
The twitter replies are funny, but that 80% number was in the paper.
Yes it does. Here:
>We also confirm significant geographic patterning in human variation
but also find differences among groups within continents.
As a result, if biological races are defined by uniqueness,
then there are a very large number of biological races that
can be defined, contradicting the classic biological race
concept of physical anthropology
Here:
>Sauer’s (1992) additional suggestion that differences in American blacks and whites did not validate the traditional biological race concept is likewise supported by our results.
and the pointlessness of that 80% can be found with this comparison
>In Europe,
DFA applied to Howells’ Berg and Norse groups classified them about as well (83% correct) as DFA applied to
American blacks and whites
The 80% number is not some exceptional feat only capable with racial classification, it is not evidence in support of race,
To add on, the identifications can only be done with a database or reference collection. You can't just look at a skull and identify race. If you take away the reference collection, [the predictions become useless](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19226642).
(Incidentally, the paper I link here is in the same issue of AJPA as the above paper, and the [entire issue](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19226646) is dedicated to debunking scientific racism. The racists continue to misrepresent the same three or four forensics studies repeatedly.)
Ah, but they really mean race because, you see, they have to stay within the bounds of political correctness to appease the cultural Marxists, er, peer reviewers.
Sometimes. A while back I was arguing with someone over different variants of 19th c. racial theories and then I stopped and realized how much I've rotted my brain with this stuff.
Nah, it's a market that's starting to get almost as oversaturated as creationism debunking books. Just in recent years there has been Marks' Is Science Racist?; Saini's Superior; Tattersall and DeSalle's Race?; Jackson and Depew's Darwin, Democracy, and Race; Fuentes' Race, Monogamy, and Other Lies They Told You; and probably stacks more.
Ohh I thought you were holding they explicitly disagree with the claim about skull identification in the OP. Yeah the authors aren't with Quillette on biological race.
[Why, I highly doubt this so-called “journalist” knows his yellow bile from his black bile!](https://mobile.twitter.com/pattymo/status/1139292851928522752) lmao
Unrelated to that, the first part of the article (which i only
skimmed) is clearly being pedantic about the word ‘race’. Guess
steelmanning is only for what you agree with.
E: looked at the other discussions tab, seems the jordan peterson
subreddit is firmly in the race realism camp, and they agree (without
evidence) jbp would also be a race realist (‘which is different from
white nationalsm honest’ (‘not that white nationalism is bad, no lefties
can argue against it!’)). I’m not surprised.
Fun sideshow: whenever one of the article's authors gets challenged, he [literally retreats to "let's discuss this on my podcast!"](https://twitter.com/EPoe187/status/1137398480312385536).
I wonder if he thinks he's being subtle in his grift.
He did that to me at least 5 times, and when I proposed a LetterWiki, he said he'd "think about it". I talk to the LetterWiki staff, and they say he hasn't contacted them 🤡
> Unrelated to that, the first part of the article (which i only skimmed) is clearly being pedantic about the word 'race'. Guess steelmanning is only for what you agree with.
The newest advance in scientific racism is allegedly an "anti-essentialist" definition of race wherein, on the surface, they water it down to the point where it is practically indistinguishable from "population" but they want it to do the same work as the classical race concept in distinguishing the superior Nordic stock. Then they get angry when you point out it's still the same rancid vinegar in new wine bottles.
Look, man, if you’re going to keep posting things from the sad alt
right thread here, you’re going to make me question why I even paid
:bux: in the first place.
!It was for the FF7 LP.!<
But also fucking lol at this, I love the ban on the motte contents,
this broader net of self important idiocy is so much more enjoyable than
another angry TPO post.
I agree, but for those watching: stick to the programme and don't cast the net too wide
We don't have a written script for what to post but the basic principle is like pornography versus sculpture
I've already had to remove some stuff that was just blatant "look at this asshole who has nothing to do with the sub"
The best part is that paper and even the abstract explicitly disagree with the claim they’re trying to make
[deleted]
Unironically defending Mengeles experiments…
Unrelated to that, the first part of the article (which i only skimmed) is clearly being pedantic about the word ‘race’. Guess steelmanning is only for what you agree with.
E: looked at the other discussions tab, seems the jordan peterson subreddit is firmly in the race realism camp, and they agree (without evidence) jbp would also be a race realist (‘which is different from white nationalsm honest’ (‘not that white nationalism is bad, no lefties can argue against it!’)). I’m not surprised.
Look, man, if you’re going to keep posting things from the sad alt right thread here, you’re going to make me question why I even paid :bux: in the first place.
But also fucking lol at this, I love the ban on the motte contents, this broader net of self important idiocy is so much more enjoyable than another angry TPO post.
Foppington’s Law strikes again!