Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 94:
Line 94: + + + + + + + + + +
Human evolution
::[[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Race&diff=prev&oldid=162595 This] edit doesn't seem to improve the article, and I concur with its removal. Perhaps it belongs in an article on racism instead. [[User:HeartOfGold|HeartOfGold]] 23:53, 15 May 2007 (EDT)
::[[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Race&diff=prev&oldid=162595 This] edit doesn't seem to improve the article, and I concur with its removal. Perhaps it belongs in an article on racism instead. [[User:HeartOfGold|HeartOfGold]] 23:53, 15 May 2007 (EDT)
:::Yes it does. And unless Speaker wishes to take on the whole LDS Church in the LDS entry, I'm not certain we should use it as an example in the [[Racism]] entry. What is clear is, this article in its present structure needs to be reevaluated. The intro says "scientifically", notions of "race" are bunk. The legal subsection says the law recognizes bunk, to wit, Affirmative Action laws, or as anybody who holds a drivers license knows. Then the Religion section is simply a hit on Religion because supposedly Religion is the source of racism, yet this claim is made with no foundation, and doesn't belong in this article anyway. The whole thing needs study and discussion. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 00:00, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
:::Yes it does. And unless Speaker wishes to take on the whole LDS Church in the LDS entry, I'm not certain we should use it as an example in the [[Racism]] entry. What is clear is, this article in its present structure needs to be reevaluated. The intro says "scientifically", notions of "race" are bunk. The legal subsection says the law recognizes bunk, to wit, Affirmative Action laws, or as anybody who holds a drivers license knows. Then the Religion section is simply a hit on Religion because supposedly Religion is the source of racism, yet this claim is made with no foundation, and doesn't belong in this article anyway. The whole thing needs study and discussion. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 00:00, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
== Human evolution ==
Cut from article:
:Since the beginning of mankind, human populations have gone through periods of isolation and intermixing which lead to differences between groups. [[Scientists]] now believe that these are largely a matter of different statistical frequencies of variations from an agreed-on standard, rather than racial differences as was once thought. Modern [[Homo sapiens|humans]] share approximately 99.9% of their [[DNA]]. Of the .1% that does vary, 85% of the observed variation is unconnected to membership of any particular group of people.
This implies that human beings have evolved. Is there any scientific evidence for this?
If the point is not [[Human evolution]] but just the idea that skin color might change over periods of thousands of years due to [[natural selection]], then say it that way. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 08:30, 16 May 2007 (EDT)