"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
news:6hdopugu5a72haeg2fnt8au7835jegtpfr at 4ax.com...
> "Parse Tree" <parsetree at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >"Dan Holzman" <holzman at panix.com> wrote in message
> >news:andh5v$1hm$1 at panix2.panix.com...> >> In article <Nypm9.3430$zz2.779420 at news20.bellglobal.com>,
> >> Parse Tree <parsetree at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >There's caucazoid, mongoloid and such. And it certainly is
> >> There is no scientific basis to those categories. To the extent that
> >> they were once presented as "biological," they have been debunked.
> >Isn't that like essentially stating there is no biological basis for
> >different skin colour and different facial structure?
>> No it isn't. Not all people with a particular skin color are of the
> same race, and not all of the same race have that skin color.
> Likewise, any particular facial structure feature is also found in
> multiple races, and no race has all of its members with the same
> facial structure.
You don't judge it simply by skin colour. You judge it based on genetic
> The best we can say about racial features is that people of the given
> race "usually" have one or more of them, and "often" have several in
> combination - the latter being the reason they are classified by
It is as probable that the people that don't have these features really are
of a different race, or a mix.