Hi JR A.] Thanks for the kinder language and overall respect this time around. No need to disrespect eachother simply because we have different views. i) Well if you're so determined that you are willing to delete my posts in order to prove your theories, what can I say; feel free. ii) Our debate was always unfair and one-sided (you ignored my pic links and used bad language from the very start itself), because you CONTROL THE THREAD. iii) I already said that my qualifications don't matter ( can claim anything on the internet. For all what I know you might be Indian! You posted many pics of Indian beauties for comparison). iv) I have nothing to prove to anyone here. B.] Some quick points : 1.) Please don't [b]assume[/b] the concept and then try to [b]fit [/b]the data. It is very obvious that you are a supremacist w/ an agenda to prove your assumption that [b]"[u]whites" are a race apart from all other races.[/u][/b], and that you are trying hard to FIT/BEND available scientific data to PROVE your theories/concepts. Please take a cue from R. McCullough who though an acclaimed white nationalist, was fair enough to classify Indians and Whites under Caucasoids (whether right or wrong), based on whatever data/evidence that was available to him at the time. 2. [quote] You will obviously not accept any evidence... [/quote] I accept evidence... only saying it is [u][b]insufficient [/b][/u] to prove your point. Must I accept whatever data that you believe to be good evidence? 3. [quote]Nothing called genetic classification? You ignoramus, all evidence does not necessarily point to the same taxonomical unit.[/quote] Confused again. All sci. evidence including genetics and morpho' etc. must be pooled to specify one racial unit such as Caucasoid ( as opposed to Mongoloid etc.). That is what I meant. 4. [quote]And your view counts? [/quote] Neither mine nor yours counts. Majority opinion is what counts when it comes to who looks what etc. [quote]A half-blind person such as you cannot even see that Nordic women have finer facial features than Indian women and thinks that the Nordic women shown here all look the same![/quote] See I have already shown that whales and elephants don't look the same but classify together. So why can't Nordic and Indian women not look the same and classify together? 5. [quote]However, the Fst values between the North and South Caste groups and Western Europeans were 0.26 and 0.29,[/quote] These Fsts are not cut off values for these two groups. You tend to get mired in details and display an almost childish fascination/obsession w/ maps, charts, tables etc. and seem to believe that these high-sounding details prove your point. These are details rather than finalities/fundamentals. Thousands of papers are written daily. Only a few make a difference. 6. [quote]Conclusions and Methodology... etc.[/quote] If you were a scientist you would know this. First the conclusion and then the methods in terms of importance. We read the conclusion ( part of title ) and decide whether the substance is important enough to read. Hence biological abstracts etc. 7. [quote]Textbooks etc...[/quote] Journals are not accepted either. There are journal papers that support both views. Hence the widely accepted 3 races currently stand. If it were disproved [b]Nature, Science [/b]etc. would publish a huge article on this : eg. " a new human classification etc." 8. [quote]To say that there are at least 5 races is not to be comprehensive because not all populations have been studied, [/quote] Right. Therefore, it is a [u]tentative[/u] suggestion of 5 races. Not complete or confirmed and therefore incomplete to say the least. Also lead to clashes w/ other works which reach different conclusions ( Re : my posts ) 9. [quote]Cluster analysis based on craniofacial measures and genetics will assign Nordics and Indians to separate major clusters in the world only if there are significant genetic and craniofacial differences between these groups, [/quote] You seem to clearly lack an understanding of cluster analysis. It is an exploratory method ( Re: my earlier posts ), that indicates [u]trends in affinity[/u] rather than proof of affinity or proof of differences (ANOVA). [quote]if it is clear that Nordics are Caucasoid and Caucasoids are a race, [/quote] True only if Nordics are a race. They are actually a sub-group of the Caucasoid race. 10. [quote]There is no white race? This is news to me and also to others associated with this blog. [/quote] That says a lot about this blog, doesn't it? [quote]Reveal an European racial cluster etc...[/quote] As I said, the study concerned was tentative and incomplete ( large sections of H. sapiens were not 'classifiable' under this study. Where is the Indian racial cluster of 1 billion? ), and therefore debunked. Part two 11. [quote]I am well aware of the concept of cluster analysis.[/quote] And I have conducted a project study on numerical clustering of taxonomic units in insects. You don't seem to understand the concept of association ( Re: the Brit vs. German vs. French example in my earlier posts ). 12. [quote]Thus, whereas the American Anthropological Association denies biological races in humans, there is plenty of data to support it, and I have cited the data. [/quote] Above you seem to be saying that there are races... and here, you seem to be saying that there are no races. [quote]Just because someone uses the term Caucasoid does not mean that he believes that there is a Caucasoid race. [/quote] Show me a single reference to the term Caucasoid in citation of Cavalli ( he is not the principal author anyway), who seems to be just discussing the difficulties of seperating humans into individual races ( Re: his last sentence ). That's all. 13. [quote]state of the art and current research, cited old stuff, made arguments by authority, and displayed dual standards whereby someone who is half white-half black or half white-half Chinese is not a Caucasoid but a half Negroid plus Mongoloid person by your own classification standards is nevertheless a Caucasoid if he is a South Asian. [/quote] Science is common sense backed by valid scientific methodology. Does an Indian look more like a Negro or a Chinese, or does he look more like a Caucasoid? Anyone can see that both white dogs and brown dogs are dogs regardless as opposed to brown dogs and white cats. This is common sense that needs no additional proof from genetic evidence or anything else. 14. I am not about my privacy by citing publications they don't matter anyway, do they? I am not a geneticist as already confirmed. I am not Indian. I am a scientist with more than 25 years in lab and field and also worked for the UN ( Phillipines and South Asia ). Mostly worked in the field of integrated pest management ( population modelling in cotton and rice pests, establishment of economy injury levels etc.). 15. The beauty of women discussion was just the ' fun' part for me. I don't take your personal views on the beauty of Indian vs. Nordic women too seriously as personal opinions are very subjective. However, right now many international judges/panels seem to hold a view opposite to that of yours. But, as they say " to each his own". The rest is up to you. If you do not wish to answer I shall not respond either. Take Care. To whom it may concern, A rather important correction in my post that appears above this [quote]I am not about my privacy by citing publications they don’t matter anyway, do they?[/quote] Should read as : I am not about to compromise my privacy by citing publications (which give my personal information) on the net. They don't matter any way, do they? To Anon and Anjali, Hey... Thanks for the kind comments.