@Ph1lMcCr4ck3n @ClownWorld_ https://t.co/QWspwJMzKY https://t.co/DFddzlpA5k https://t.co/36HpPcrCZQ also read the book Nature's Genetics The definition of race in the Britianica and there's multiples excerpts on the New England Journal of Medicine which
@adhdace @sadiepa9 @chicamarr @rehutrr @PopBase As I say dividing human in races is incorrect in every sense. Alas, you create a concept of alienation. Its use in genetics was formally renounced by the US National Academies of Sciences this year. Here Is a
@HannesSchuler @Dritte_VonLinks @ozaed @HGMaassen Tatsächlich haben Forscher gezeigt, dass genetische Unterschiede zwischen verschied. Populationen größer sind als in einer Population. (Statement 2: https://t.co/tjcuq9ZsIA) Genetisch können zwei Deutsche v
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
causality-paradox https://t.co/w98eLf5y0A
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
@Hohounk @EGL_rob @plentyofalcoves @patbumbo @YesYoureRacist haha, you don't know what you're talking about--you've just decided that some groups are inferior and went looking for the "proof" to validate it. Just be honest with yourself and admit you won't
RT @KirkegaardEmil: The double standard lives. https://t.co/2hQFjF18bi
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
The double standard lives. https://t.co/2hQFjF18bi
RT @Alrenous: Sedition is naive. Childish. Man up and bow to your masters. https://t.co/0HOueXV4Kn
Sedition is naive. Childish. Man up and bow to your masters. https://t.co/0HOueXV4Kn
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
RT @NSesardic: 1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare…
1. Why caution ONLY against a naive leap to a GENETIC explanation? (Why not also ENVIRONMENTAL explanation?) 2. Why compare contribution of "ANY ONE gene" (singular) with contribution of all "environmental FACTORS" (plural)? Stanford, we have a problem.
@Friended4Ever 1. No https://t.co/x61uJA6eA3 2. No (not a coherent statement, see #1) 3. No https://t.co/Ave4TIkRbZ
@A_P_S for intelligence https://t.co/jPRzXOJNjl https://t.co/ehdyOdoIyy for divisions https://t.co/nYmOnh8oO7
@IchabodFuxter http://t.co/c237evnKg4 "Statement 1: We believe that there is no scientific basis..." (scroll down) @JTBojanglesXXXL
@IchabodFuxter Ignoring this Genetics Research site? http://t.co/c237evnKg4 Looks like you have nothing else. @JTBojanglesXXXL
@IchabodFuxter AGAIN, Start here (MULTIPLES) Mr. Biology Degree - http://t.co/c237evnKg4 @JTBojanglesXXXL
@IchabodFuxter FINE, dumbass! Start here: http://t.co/snTSsgd47q @JTBojanglesXXXL
The ethics of characterizing difference: guiding principles on using racial categories in human genetics http://t.co/MmxOCMGO
種族或族群之間的對立往往引來悲劇。2008年7月,一群科學家在Genome Biology上發表公開信,提出十點聲明,要提醒所有科學家不要讓研究成果變成歧視的工具。(不知道有沒有中文翻譯了) http://t.co/JmiEjsiB
RT @PhilippBayer: You should read this: The ehics of racial categories in genetics http://t.co/KHcpTuuL #OpenLetter
You should read this: The ehics of racial categories in genetics http://t.co/KHcpTuuL #OpenLetter
RT @wesunruh: ARTICLE: The ethics of characterizing difference: guiding principles on using racial categories in human genetics http://t.co/SNejIfR
ARTICLE: The ethics of characterizing difference: guiding principles on using racial categories in human genetics http://t.co/SNejIfR