Originally posted by twhitehead
I don't know if there exists such a thing as a scientific consensus or official science dictionary. I suspect that the term 'face' is used in a biological sense differently by different scientist. However when a term like that is used scientifically one must specify roughly how specific it is. For example is a sub-species a group that looks different, loo mportant medically, and even for other reasons such as marketing hair products etc.
No, the scientific 'dictionary' is continually up for review. That is what science
is all about. However, in order for us to redefine the 'dictionary' we have to
use the current terminologies that we have.
In the case of race in a biological context, we have historically classified
human races by observable heritable phenotypes within geographicslly isolated
groups. Modern genetics has then allowed us to compare the degree of
similarity between DNA on a mathematical basis. However, we are still not
much closer to understanding how even the smallest base pair changes
translate into phenotypes. This would require mastering protein folding and in situ
computer modelling techniques. Both still a long way away ( a
little closer with thanks to the PS3 ).
Comparing races based on degrees of similarity of DNA base pairs
should taken with a pinch of salt as rather than adding to scientific definition, it
can distract from any formal taxonomy. Until such a time that we are able to
provide a concrete understanding of the molecular mechanisms involved,
we should stick with the definition that we have.
Scientists Find A DNA Change That Accounts For White Skin
Leaders of the study, at Penn State University, warned against interpreting the finding as a discovery of "the race gene." Race is a vaguely defined biological, social and political concept, they noted, and skin color is only part of what race is -- and is not.
In fact, several scientists said, the new work shows just how small a biological difference is reflected by skin color. The newly found mutation involves a change of just one letter of DNA code out of the 3.1 billion letters in the human genome -- the complete instructions for making a human being.
"It's a major finding in a very sensitive area," said Stephen Oppenheimer, an expert in anthropological genetics at Oxford University, who was not involved in the work. "Almost all the differences used to differentiate populations from around the world really are skin deep."
The work raises a raft of new questions -- not least of which is why white skin caught on so thoroughly in northern climes once it arose. Some scientists suggest that lighter skin offered a strong survival advantage for people who migrated out of Africa by boosting their levels of bone-strengthening vitamin D; others have posited that its novelty and showiness simply made it more attractive to those seeking mates.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/15/AR2005121501728_pf.html