Yes, Race Is Real
by John Alexander
THIS PAPER WILL start by making an assertion that many politically correct academics would consider frustrating, alarming and infuriating: “Race exists as a biological concept.” Despite the unpopularity of the idea that race exists, slightly over half of all biological/physical anthropologists today believe in the view that human races are biologically valid and real.
Although the simple statement “race exists as a biological concept” might make many feel uncomfortable and want to bury their heads in the sand, this paper will attempt to prove that the statement is true. Before doing so, however, it should be noted that this paper focuses only on the question of whether there is such a thing as race. It will not discuss concepts of racial inferiority or superiority and nor will it even attempt to examine the scientific utility of classifying humans by race. The focus of this paper, as stated upfront, is entirely limited to whether race exists as a biological concept.
Definition of Race
First, there are easily-perceived traits such as hair and eye color, body build, and facial traits which vary among human population groups; these differences are easily perceived by the layman; and these traits are determined at least partially (and perhaps wholly) by ancestry (genetics). Race then is simply the label given to that human population grouping. In other words, as population geneticist Steve Sailer has put it, race is a lineage; it is a very extended family that inbreeds to some extent. Under this definition, race and ancestry are synonyms. Other synonyms for race are cluster, population, statistical collections of alleles, cline, clinal grouping, lineage, and regional pattern. The aforementioned are all terms that many population geneticists use instead of race; however, these terms all mean the exact same thing as race.
Note that race does not mean the same thing as “species,” if the word species is defined as a biologically distinct breeding unit. Because it is possible for members of different racial groups to breed with one another, the races are not separate species. Also, it is not possible to take any given human and unambiguously classify him or her as belonging to one particular race (as would be required with species classification). Race in the biological sense therefore is more a statistical concept. It is, to put it plainly, simply a major division of the human species grouped by ancestry.
Race is distinguished by a particular combination of inherited features. Anthropologists such as University of Wyoming Professor George Gill — who, as a forensic anthropologist, determines race scientifically by analyzing the bone structure of skeletons — recognize three major discernable racial groups: Caucasoid (White), Mongoloid (yellow), and Negroid (Black). Basically, all people on Earth can be classified into one of or a mixture of these three ancestries (races).
Skin color is only one of many phenotypic traits that make up the three major racial groups. Stanford University Professor Luigi Cavalli-Sforza describes those of the Caucasoid ancestral group as having a strong chin, light to dark hair that can be straight or slightly wavy, blue to brown eyes, thin lips, and a pasty white to tan complexion. Geographically, Whites are native to the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe. One of the other races, the Negroid ancestral group, is characterized by a prominent jaw, broad nose, curly to frizzy hair, dark brown eyes, generally large lips, and a yellow-brown to bluish-black complexion. Black Negroids are native to Africa. In the words of Cavalli-Sforza, “There are clear biological differences between populations in the visual characteristics that we use to classify races.”
Classification of humans into different racial groups is essentially arbitrary, since the lines can be drawn anywhere. However, when humans are grouped into the traditional Caucasoid- Mongoloid-Negroid classifications, it can, as J. Philippe Rushton has concluded based on the hundreds of inherited clusters that are unique to each group, have much predictive and explanatory power.
These inherited features run deep. No one can seriously deny that there is great diversity within the human genome, and differences are significant enough that the term “race” can be used to describe the different ancestral clusterings of populations. Below is a listing of some racial differences between just the White race and the Black race. In delineating these differences, this paper focuses only on physical biological differences. The question of differing intelligence and psychology between the Black race and White race is beyond the scope of this paper, and will be intentionally ignored.
It should also be noted that race is based on ancestry, not on any arbitrary combination of traits. A White person is racially similar to another White person simply because the two of them have a great deal more recent ancestors in common than they do with Blacks. As geneticist Steve Sailer noted, “Race starts with boy meets girl, followed by baby.“ However, implicit in discussions of whether there is such a thing as race is the question of whether racial differences are merely skin deep; therefore, this listing will show that racial traits include far more than superficial skin color. The listing is not intended to define race by traits; it is instead intended to show ways in which two of the three main ancestral groups- – the Black race and White race — differ genetically.
Nicotine processing differs in Blacks and Whites. Blacks appear to absorb 30% more nicotine from each cigarette than Whites do. 
A CPR Chicago Project study published in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that the Black community was at higher risk for cardiac arrest and subsequent death than the White community, even after controlling for other variables. [Note: there are a couple ways to interpret this disparity. It might be caused by nothing more than racism (as the race deniers would point out), and/or it might be caused by genetic differences in the way heart attacks affect Blacks vs. Whites.] 
Elderly Blacks have a lower life expectancy than elderly Whites, even after researchers controlled for significant factors such as educational status. 
In a study comparing birthrates of Blacks (both American-born and African-born) and American-born Whites, slight differences were found. [Note: this indicates that differing birthrates might be caused at least partially by genetics.] 
White patients who receive kidney transplants have a higher survival rate than Black patients. 
Black men and women with the highest body-mass index have a much lower death rate than White men and women with the highest body-mass index. 
Treatment with the drug Enalapril results in a significant reduction in the risk of hospitalization for heart failure among White patients with left ventricular dysfunction, a heart ailment, but no such reduction among Black patients with the same disorder. 
“Black Americans and Africans have a high frequency of a CYP2D6 allele that encodes an enzyme with impaired activity. This allele is virtually absent in whites.” 
“There are marked differences between whites and blacks in the frequency of polymorphisms of adrenergic receptors, including the (beta)1-, (beta)2-, and (alpha)1-adrenergic receptors.” 
The distribution of drug receptor polymorphisms differs among populations of different racial backgrounds, which causes people of differing racial backgrounds to have different responses to drugs. 
Although Blacks tend to receive lower doses of hemodialysis kidney treatment than Whites, their survival when receiving dialysis treatment is better than that for Whites. 
Breast cancer mortality is higher among Black women than among White women in the United States, even when controlling for socioeconomic factors. 
Black patients and White glaucoma patients respond differently to different surgical treatments. 
One in 400 Blacks inherits sickle cell, versus only 1 in 1,000,000 Whites. 
Physicians tend to prescribe more calcium channel blockers for Blacks than Whites because studies have indicated they work better to lower high blood pressure in that racial group. 
For Blacks with mild kidney disease linked to hypertension, the drug Ramipril, an ACE inhibitor (the most commonly prescribed blood pressure medicine) is not the best at protecting against kidney failure as it is with Whites, a new study has found. 
Blacks are more sensitive to pain than Whites. 
Blacks respond more poorly to certain chemotherapy drugs than Whites. 
Compared to Whites, Blacks have narrower hips. 
Blacks have wider shoulders than Whites. 
Black athletes have less body fat than Whites. 
Black athletes have more muscle than Whites. 
Black males have 3% to 19% more testosterone than White males. 
Black babies are born on average one week earlier than White babies. 
Black infants, although born on average one week earlier than White babies, are more mature than White infants are when born, as measured by bone development, amniotic fluid and other indices. 
Black children physically mature faster than White children, as demonstrated by the fact that Black infants hold their necks erect earlier by an average of two weeks, walk an average of one month earlier, and enter puberty an average of about one year earlier. 
Brains of Whites are on average five cubic inches larger than brains of Blacks. 
White men have brains 8.2% larger than Black men do. 
Twenty percent of Whites have a gene that prevents their bodies from producing alpha-actinin-3, a muscle protein that provides the explosive power in fast-twitch muscles. Only 3% of Blacks have that gene. 
Blacks have a longer arm span than Whites, and the hand of a Black is relatively longer than the forearm, compared with a White. 
Teenage Blacks demonstrate a significantly faster patellar (knee) tendon reflex time than White teenagers. 
In 1999, even though they only made up 12% of the total US population, Blacks accounted for 47% of all new AIDS cases in the United States. [This indicates that either Blacks are more biologically susceptible to HIV, they are more sexually active, or both. Even the latter explanation, however, arguably is based on biology.] 
Forensic anthropologists can identify the racial origin of a skeleton with a higher degree of accuracy than an eyewitness looking at the living person. 
To a trained osteologist, the bone traits of the nose, mouth, femur, and cranium can reveal a person’s race just as well as skin color, hair, nose form, and lips can. 
When the gene that controls production of thrombomodulin — a protein found in the walls of blood vessels — mutates, it causes Blacks to have six times the risk of developing heart disease than for Whites with the exact same gene mutation. This means that the gene may act differently in Blacks than in Whites. 
In the 2000 Olympics, for the fifth consecutive Olympics, the eight men who reached the final of the 100-meter dash were all Blacks of predominantly West African descent. Given that Blacks of West African descent constitute only 7.5% of the world’s population, the probability of this occurring by chance is 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001%. Therefore, unless this phenomenon can be demonstrated to have occurred due to the social environment Blacks live in, the only explanation other than happenstance is that the races differ genetically (and thus race exists as a biological concept). 
Although they dominate at the 100-meter and 400 meter dashes, Blacks of West African descent are marginal at running races of 1,500 meters and higher. This is either a coincidence, is explained by social factors, or is caused by genetics. 
As of 1997, 134 out of the 134 times the 100-meter dash had been sprinted in under 10 seconds, a Black of West African descent did it. 
The sheer number of differences listed above shows that racial differences are profound; the existence of race is self-evident.
Of course, any racial differences are average. Individuals within races have their own traits, which can differ from the norm of their racial background. However, when one compares the racial groups with one another in each of the above traits, no purely cultural or society-based explanation suffices. Genetic and biological explanations are required; therefore, race must exist as a biological concept. Genes play a role in athletic ability, bone structure, susceptibility to various diseases, and even tolerance for pain — differences that go far beyond skin color.
Racial differences have an evolutionary explanation. According to the currently accepted theory of human evolution, Africans and non-Africans split about 110,000 years ago when non- Africans (the ancestors of Mongoloids and Caucasoids) left Africa. Yellows and Whites split around 70,000 years ago.  Natural selection then carried itself out over hundreds and thousands of generations.
Genetic Differences Between the Races
The Human Genome Project so far has shown that human populations (races) share 99% of their genes in common.  However (and ignoring the fact that this paper uses the word “race” as a synonym for “populations”), tiny genetic differences can translate into vast differences on the macro level. Human genes and chimpanzee genes are 98.4% similar,  yet any claim that there aren’t biological differences between humans as a group and chimpanzees as a group is absurd. Additionally, under the working definition of race used by this paper, any genetic difference whatsoever between the socially-defined races would imply that the races exist biologically.
There are 30,000 human genes, a number that includes 3.1 billion base pairs.  Population groups (i.e., races) differ in roughly 1 in 500 (or 60 million) of the base pairs.  When viewed in these terms, the genetic differences among the races are profound. It is therefore possible for a small number of genes to account for racial differences in looks, physical abilities, and perhaps even in such traits as personality.
According to one estimate, roughly six percent of genetic variation between any two human individuals on the planet is caused by known racial groupings.  The genetic code of Blacks and Whites differs by a full 3.2%.  Furthermore, population geneticists have demonstrated that even an infinitesimal bit of genetic variation can cause differences in traits such as skin color — indicating that even the slightest genetic variations between populations (races) can cause vast differences. 
To further illustrate the reality of race on the genetic level, population geneticists such as Cavalli Sfroza are able to calculate a person’s ancestry (race) from different parts of the world to the percentage point.  Forensic anthropologists can determine a suspect’s racial background from DNA evidence left at the scene of a crime. The Canadian Society of Forensic Sciences even has a web site at http://www.csfs.ca/pplus/profiler.htm which police can use to enter a suspect’s DNA data- – compiled from such sources as blood and hair samples — in order to figure out the suspect’s race.
Sometimes it is pointed out by race deniers that there is as much or more genetic diversity between people of the same race from different parts of the globe as there is between people of different races.  Although this statement is true, it is irrelevant to the question of whether race exists as a biological concept. To put it into perspective, as Florida State University Professor Glade Whitney has pointed out, this statement is also true when the subjects are humans and macaque monkeys, a close primate relative: “When comparing humans with macaque monkeys, there is as much or more genetic diversity between individuals of the same species as there is between humans as a group and macaque monkeys as a group.” 
Obviously, all the statement about vastly greater similarities among races than among individuals within races really means is that there is a wide amount of diversity within the human gene pool- – just as there is wide diversity within the macaque gene pool. Similarly, there is a vast amount of diversity within the gene pool of each of the racial groups. Genetic differences among racial and ethnic groups usually reflect differences in the distribution of polymorphic traits, which occur at different frequencies in different populations, rather than a trait unique to a particular racial or ethnic group. Overlap of many traits would obviously occur, then, and would not be relevant to the question of whether they tend to occur more in some groups than others.
Cavalli-Sforza in his The History and Geography of Human Genes compiled tables depicting “genetic distances” of the various sub-races around the world. The genetic distance between English and Danes, two populations that are part of the White race, is equal to 7 according to his classification system.  Then, Cavalli-Sforza’s team found, the separation between the English and the Italians, another White population, was 51.  The genetic distance between the Japanese (who are part of the yellow race) and the English was 1,244,  and the distance between English and Bantus (the largest population group of Sub-Saharan Africa that is part of the Black race) was 2,288. 
Irrelevance of Racial Purity
On the question of racial purity, Cavalli-Sforza has found, based on DNA studies, that none can be considered pure.  Race, then, exists as populations separated by intergrading zones instead of sharp lines. Racial groups are made by unique clusterings of gene frequencies and physical and other differences- – as one might naturally expect to find among geographical ancestral groups. As psychologist J. Philippe Rushton concludes, “Races are recognized by a combination of geographic, ecological, and morphological factors and gene frequencies of biochemical components.”  Under this definition, purity is irrelevant. Either there are inherited physical differences among peoples (whom we call “races“) around the world, or there are not. Saying that lack of purity nullifies the concept of race, as many race deniers do, is like saying that a border collie is not really a border collie because she has a poodle 10 generations back in her ancestral background.
In fact, though, recent evidence suggests that, at least with respect to the White race, the degree of admixture that race-deniers claim for human populations has largely not taken place. According to a genetic recent study of Britons, only 1% of the native British population has anything other than White ancestry. The remaining 99% of native Britons are “pure” White.  The study itself, however, begs the question of how the researchers could determine African or Asian ancestry if such a concept is a myth. (Remember that the basic definition of “race,” for purposes of this paper, is ancestry.) This lack of “negroes in the woodpile,” so to speak, among White people suggests that the White race might have been totally separated from the other races long enough for significant genetic differentiation to occur.
The Role of Hybrids in the Racial Model
A common argument put out by race deniers is that due to significant interracial breeding in the past, there are so many racially mixed individuals that different societies interpret race differently, and therefore race must not exist as a biological concept.  For example, there are people classified as “black” in the United States who can simply by virtue of getting on a plane and flying to Brazil, find themselves in a society where they are classified as “white.”  This is taken by race-deniers as proof that race cannot be rooted in biology, since it appears to render scientifically meaningless the question of who is Black and who is White.
However, this argument is fallacious because it confuses culture with biology. It is too much of a jump to say that race does not exist because certain societies have conflicting or “wrong” interpretations of it in their cultures. This argument boils down to saying that race doesn’t exist because no pure races exist — which in itself is a common tactic of race deniers.  But this is a strawman, because there is no such thing as a “pure” race anyway, as discussed above. Whether there are individuals who are hybrids or combinations of races or not, one can still make the true statement that various human populations are phenotypically and genetically (ancestrally) different from one another. Thus, they make up different races.
The idea that because there is hybridization — that the various races merge together instead of having distinct boundaries — begs the question. Suppose all mixed-race individuals were ferried off to another planet, in order to create a situation in which the human populations left on earth did not overlap. Would race deniers then acknowledge the existence of race? Using the criteria of, for example, the American Anthropological Association in its policy statement on race, if human populations, through the theoretical removal of racially mixed people from the equation, were unambiguous and clearly demarcated, then the existence of race (using the reasoning of the American Anthropological Association) must be acknowledged. 
Another way to look at this problem is to turn it around. Suppose there were a situation in which there were definable differences between definable populations and no interracial breeding had ever occurred. In this hypothetical situation, all individuals could be unambiguously classified as Caucasoid, Negroid, or Mongoloid. Then blend the populations at the edges. Would this then invalidate the theoretical truth that the populations could be classified by race? Obviously not. If someone had both Mongoloid and Caucasoid ancestry, then that would make him bi-racial, not a-racial.
There are several areas where significant racial mixing has occurred, such as India and Latin America.  The existence of racially mixed populations in those areas, however, in no way disproves the notion that the populations of Europe, East Asia, and Africa can be differentiated genetically and ancestrally. 
Calling a Race a Race
Ultimately, the question of whether race exists as a biological concept is little more than a word game. Race-deniers will claim some problematic definition for the word “race,” such as the untenable notion that race means a group of individuals that is biologically different from the rest (i.e., like a separate species).  Then, while trying as hard as they can to deny that race exists, the race deniers will come up with some other word that really describes the exact same thing that race-proponents mean when they use the word “race.” Cavalli-Sforza for example uses terms such as “population,” “clinal variations,” “collection of alleles,“ and “cluster,” all the while religiously avoiding the taboo word “race.” All throughout his monumental tome The History and Geography of Human Genes, Cavalli-Sforza examines racial groups, yet he simply refuses to call a race a race. Human beings, as described by Cavalli-Sforza, are a continuum of variations among “populations.”  If one substituted the word “race” for “populations,“ however, it would fit.
Possibly, opponents of the idea of race might argue, there is no good that can come from even discussing the realities of race, and a great deal of harm. This, although it may be true, has no logical bearing whatsoever on whether concepts surrounding race are true or not. Only evidence and reason, not right or wrong, can determine the truth.
If differences among populations are small, yet still there, then they are open for further examination. If racial differences in athletic ability exist, for example, then might there also be racial differences in intelligences and emotion, and/or in behavior and temperament? How deep racial differences go, as well as their implications for society and the future, must be confronted.
Indeed, if it is acknowledged that race exists, then some earth-shattering questions might pop up. Does the existence of race as a biological concept mean that racial harmony is impossible without complete racial separation? And is complete racial separation also the only way to maintain the rich diversity contained in the human genome? Or is there some other solution? Those questions, and many more, will no doubt be discussed in upcoming editions of Racial Dialectics.
To sum up, there is indeed such a thing as race. Race exists not only as a social and cultural concept but as a biological one as well. The basic reasoning, as demonstrated above, begins with the premise that certain biological traits exist in human populations (e.g., skin color). These traits manifest themselves in a statistical collection of alleles, which are caused by ancestry. The label given to this collection is “race.” Therefore, race, by that definition, exists as a biological construct. One’s race is no more, and no less, than one’s very extended family.
1 Gill, George W., “Does race exist? A proponent’s perspective,” http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/gill.html
2 L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Paolo Menozzi, Alberto Piazza, History and Geography of Human Genes, Princeton University Press, 1994: 3.
3 Sailer, Steve, “Cavalli-Sforza’s Ink Cloud”, http://www.vdare.com/sailer_may_24.htm
4 See, e.g., CAVALLI-SFORZA, et al.: History and Geography of Human Genes
5 See, e.g., Mayr, Dr. Ernst, “What is a species, and what is not?”, PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, VOL. 63, JUNE 1996: 262-277.
6 Gill, George W., “Craniofacial Criteria in the Skeletal Attribution of Race.” In Forensic Osteology: Advances in the Identification of Human Remains ed. by Kathleen J. Reichs. Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Ltd., 1998: 293-317.
7 Gill, George W., “Craniofacial Criteria in the Skeletal Attribution of Race.”: 293-317.
8 CAVALLI-SFORZA, et al.: History and Geography of Human Genes: 266-267.
9 CAVALLI-SFORZA, et al.: History and Geography of Human Genes: 161-168.
10 Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca, Genes, Peoples, and Languages, North Point Press, 2000: 9.
11 Cavalli-Sforza, Genes, Peoples, and Languages: 9.
12 Cavalli-Sforza, Genes, Peoples, and Languages: 29.
13 Rushton, J. Phillipe, Race, Evolution, and Behavior, Transaction Publishers, 1995: xiii.
14 Sailer, Steve, “Making sense of the concept of race: A race is an extremely extended family,” 1998: http://isteve.com/makingsense.htm
16 Becker, Lance B., Han, Ben H., Meyer, Peter M., Wright, Fred A., Rhodes, Karin V., Smith, David W., Barrett, John, The CPR Chicago Project, “Racial Differences in the Incidence of Cardiac Arrest and Subsequent Survival,” N Engl J Med 1993 329: 600-606
17 Guralnik, Jack M., et al., “Educational Status and Active Life Expectancy among Older Blacks and Whites,” The New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 329, 1993:110-116.
18David, Richard J., et al., “Differing Birth Weight among Infants of U.S.-Born Blacks, African-Born Blacks, and U.S.-Born Whites,” The New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 337, 1997: 1209-1214
19 Wolfe, Robert A., Ashby, Valarie B., Milford, Edgar L., Ojo, Akinlolu O., Ettenger, Robert E., Agodoa, Lawrence Y.C., Held, Philip J., Port, Friedrich K. “Comparison of Mortality in All Patients on Dialysis, Patients on Dialysis Awaiting Transplantation, and Recipients of a First Cadaveric Transplant,” N Engl J Med 1999 341: 1725-1730
20 Calle, Eugenia E., Thun, Michael J., Petrelli, Jennifer M., Rodriguez, Carmen, Heath, Clark W. “Body-Mass Index and Mortality in a Prospective Cohort of U.S. Adults,” N Engl J Med 1999 341: 1097-1105.
21 Exner, Derek V., Dries, Daniel L., Domanski, Michael J., Cohn, Jay N. “Lesser Response to Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme Inhibitor Therapy in Black as Compared with White Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction,” N Engl J Med 2001 344: 1351-1357.
22 Wood, Alastair J.J. “Racial Differences in the Response to Drugs — Pointers to Genetic Differences,” N Engl J Med 2001 344: 1393-1396.
23 Exner, Derek V., Dries, Daniel L., Domanski, Michael J., Cohn, Jay N. “Lesser Response to Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme Inhibitor Therapy in Black as Compared with White Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction,” N Engl J Med 2001 344: 1351-1357
24 Wood, Alastair J.J. “Racial Differences in the Response to Drugs — Pointers to Genetic Differences,” N Engl J Med 2001 344: 1393-1396.
25 William F. Owen, Jr; Glenn M. Chertow; J. Michael Lazarus; Edmund G. Lowrie; “Dose of Hemodialysis and Survival: Differences by Race and Sex,” Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 280 No. 20, 1998: 1764-1768.
26 Donald R. Lannin, Holly F. Mathews, Jim Mitchell, Melvin S. Swanson, Frances H. Swanson, Maxine S. Edwards; “Influence of Socioeconomic and Cultural Factors on Racial Differences in Late-Stage Presentation of Breast Cancer,” Journal of the American Medical Association, 279, 1998: 1801-1807.
27 Doctor’s Guide, “Blacks, Whites Benefit From Different Surgical Glaucoma Treatments,” 1998: http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/8CC7E.htm
28 Gary Sumner, “Eckman makes sickle cell disease a top priority,” Atlanta Business Chronicle, 1998: http://atlanta.bcentral.com/atlanta/…7/focus10.html
29 Susan Duerksen, “Study touts ACE inhibitor for blacks,” San Diego Union Tribune, June 6, 2001: http://www.uniontrib.com/news/metro/…7m6kidney.html
30 Susan Duerksen, “Study touts ACE inhibitor for blacks,” http://www.uniontrib.com/news/metro/…7m6kidney.html
31 Robert R. Edwards, Daniel M. Doleys, Roger B. Fillingim, and Daniel Lowery; “Ethnic Differences in Pain Tolerance: Clinical Implications in a Chronic Pain Population,” Journal of the American Psychosomatic Society, Vol 3 Number 2, 2001: 316.
32 Washington University School of Medicine, ScienceDaily, 2001: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases…0327080620.htm
33 Jaques Samson and Madeline Yerles, “Racial Differences in Sports Performance,” Canadian Journal of Sports Science 13, 1988: 110-111.
34 J. Jordan, “Physiological and Anthropometric Comparisons of Negroes and Whites,” Journal of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation 40, 1969: 93-99.
35 Stanley M. Garn, “Human Biology and Research in Body Composition,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 110, 1963: 429-446
36 Garn, “Human Biology and Research in Body Composition,” 429-446.
37 J.A. Cauley et al., “Black-White Differences in Serum Sex Hormones and Bone Mineral Density,” American Journal of Epidemiology, 139. 1994: 1035-1046.
38 Holly M. Cintos, “Cross-Cultural Variation in Infant Motor Development,” Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 8, 1998: 1-20.
39 Holly M. Cintos, “Cross-Cultural Variation in Infant Motor Development,” 1-20.
40 J. E. Kilbride et al., “The Comparative Motor Development of Baganda, American White, and American Black Infants,” An Anthropologist, 72, 1970: 1422-1428.
41 Ho, Khang-cheng, Roessmann, U., Straumfjord, J.V., & Monroe, G. (1980), “Analysis of brain weight,“ Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, 104, 635-645.
42 Ho, Khang-cheng, Roessmann, U., Straumfjord, J.V., & Monroe, G. (1980), “Analysis of brain weight,“ Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, 104, 635-645.
43 Kathryn N. North et al., “A Common Nonsense Mutation Results in a-actinin-3 Deficiency in the General Population,” Nature Genetics 21, 1999: 353-354.
44 Jaques Samson and Madeline Yerles, “Racial Differences in Sports Performance,” 110-111.
45 J. Dunn and M. Lupfer, “A Comparison of Black and White Boys’ Performance in Self-Paced and Reactive Sports Activities,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 4, 1974, 25-35.
46 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “HIV/AIDS Among African Americans,” http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pubs/facts/afam.htm
47 Gill, George W., “Does race exist? A proponent’s perspective,” http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/gill.html
48 Gill, George W., “Does race exist? A proponent’s perspective,” http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/gill.html
49 “Black people vulnerable to heart gene,“ Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association, April, 2001.
50 Sailer, Steve, “Angier’s wager and the Olympics,“ http://www.vdare.com/sailer_olympics_2.htm
51 Sailer, Steve, “Angier’s wager and the Olympics,“ http://www.vdare.com/sailer_olympics_2.htm
52 Sailer, Steve, “Making sense of the concept of race: A race is an extremely extended family,” 1998, http://isteve.com/makingsense.htm
53 Rushton, J. Phillippe, “Race as a biological concept,” November 4, 1996, http://www.leconsulting.com/arthurhu…tonracebio.htm
54 Talbot, Chris, “Human Genome Project: First scientific milestone of the twenty-first century”, July 11, 2000, http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/jul2000/gen-j11.shtml
55 Talbot, Chris, “Human Genome Project: First scientific milestone of the twenty-first century”, July 11, 2000, http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/jul2000/gen-j11.shtml
56 National Center for Biotechnology Information, “Genes and disease,” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/disease/
57 CAVALLI-SFORZA, et al.: History and Geography of Human Genes: 7.
58 Blum, Deborah. “Race: many biologists argue for discarding the whole concept,” The Sacramento Bee, October 18, 1995, p. A12.
59 M. Nei and A. K. Roychoudhury. 1982. Genetic relationship and evolution of human races. Evolutionary Biology 14: 1-59
60 Steve Sailer, “We Know They Said ‘Created Equal.’ But They Didn’t Mean . . .” http://www.vdare.com/sailer_human_prop.htm
61 Gregory M Cochran, evolutionary biologist, quoted by Sailer, Steve, “We know they said ‘created equal.’ But they didn’t mean…”, http://www.vdare.com/sailer_human_prop.htm
62 See, e.g., Natalie Angier, “Do Races Differ? Not Really, Genes Show,” The New York Times, August 22, 2000: F1.
63 Michael Rienzi, “Race is a Myth? The left distorts science for political purposes,” American Renaissance, Dec. 2000
64 CAVALLI-SFORZA, et al.: History and Geography of Human Genes: 75
65 CAVALLI-SFORZA, et al.: History and Geography of Human Genes: 75
66 CAVALLI-SFORZA, et al.: History and Geography of Human Genes: 75
67 CAVALLI-SFORZA, et al.: History and Geography of Human Genes: 75
68 Cavalli-Sforza, Luigi Luca, Genes, Peoples, and Languages, North Point Press, 2000: 12-13.
69 Rushton, J. Phillipe, Race, Evolution, and Behavior, Transaction Publishers, 1995: p. 96.
70 Reuters, “DNA shows black genes in white Britons,” May 20 2001: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/2001…lack_dc_1.html
71 Charles Petit, “NO BIOLOGICAL BASIS FOR RACE, SCIENTISTS SAY – Distinctions prove to be skin deep,” The San Francisco Chronicle, Monday, February 23, 1998: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl…=special#The%20San%20Francisco%20Chronicle
72 Charles Petit, “No Biological basis for race, scientists say — Distinctions prove to be skin deep,” http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl…=special#The%20San%20Francisco%20Chronicle
73 See, e.g., Paur R. Spickard, “The Illogic of American Racial Categories,” PBS Online: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl…/spickard.html
74 American Anthropological Association, American Anthropological Association Statement on “Race”, 2000: http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm
75 Michael Rienzi, “Race is a Myth? The left distorts science for political purposes,” American Renaissance, Dec. 2000
76 Michael Rienzi, “Race is a Myth? The left distorts science for political purposes,” American Renaissance, Dec. 2000
77 See, e.g., Cavalli-Sforza, Genes, Peoples, and Languages, North Point Press, 2000: 25.
78 CAVALLI-SFORZA, et al.: History and Geography of Human Genes, Princeton University Press, 1994: 11-16.
* * *