Well, .4% is of course just about 1/256. I believe the 23andMe result. I believe that the Cherokee thing was just a cover story concocted at some point to hide the fact that one of my family's ancestors was an African slave. And I think the outcome demonstrates that the 23andMe analysis is, in fact, pretty accurate.
So when I read that some guy came out a whopping 14% African and wants to put it down to statistical error, I just laugh.
>J. Scott Roberts, an associate professor at the University of Michigan, who has studied consumer use of genetic tests and was not involved with the study, said the companies tend to be reliable at identifying genetic variants. Interpreting them in terms of health risk or ancestry, though, is another story. “The science is often murky in those areas and gives ambiguous information,” he said. “They try to give specific percentages from this region, or x percent disease risk, and my sense is that that is an artificially precise estimate.”
I assume you're comfortable with the idea that you're descended from a slave and thus have chosen to override prior evidence to the contrary. But if you weren't comfortable with the idea, you can say the test is flawed and have just as powerful an argument.
Unless 23andMe can show statistical rigor behind their methods, everyone is going to see what they want in the results.
The other interesting scientific result I've read is that there's more genetic variation within the traditional "races" than between them. I put "races" in quotations at this point because the whole concept is somewhat meaningless.
There are certain genes that are more common in different groups. But if I understand it correctly, you'll be able to find people from a different "race" who are more genetically similar to you than some people from your own "race".
Not really; sure, having some kind of superficially objective criteria to wave was important, but having it be scientifically valid (or even particularly rigorously applied) wasn't all that important.
We've been a multiethnic society since the first European boats landed and have redefined who counts as which race several dozen times since then. Even if there were some not insane standard for a "purebred" white person, it would be incredibly unlikely for any arbitrary bigot to happen to meet that standard.
We're talking about white nationalists, people who base their identity and self-esteem on a belief in their own racial purity. They wouldn't be seeking out these tests to validate something they already know to be untrue, or even suspect could be untrue.
I think that the racial discourse is not just unfair and smelly, but also unfruitful. You ought to really look at culture. This won't help the right with the left, of course, because they hate to admit cultural differencies either.
Worldview and religious differences also lead to disagreements about fundamental values. And among other concrete examples that I personally think are important: how much respect should be given to religious/spiritual/supernatural beliefs, what rights are inalienable human rights, how people with various illnesses should be treated, how resources are distributed, what behaviour is acceptable during disagreements (on large scales and small) and what subjects/ideas/beliefs/actions are taboo seem like the big ones.
Some other cultures got there mostly.
When these cultures meet and interact, the former just become stronger in their misgivings.
https://www.txbiomed.org/news-press/news-releases/inuit-diab...
Yes, the remarkable aspect of this whole debate is how easy it is to feel superior to both sides ( https://xkcd.com/774/ ).
I don't think you went back far enough, keep going and you are likely to find your Eastern European ancestry migrated out of Africa.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-the-out-of-afr...
Africa -> ... -> Europe
Africa is still where it started.
If we're going to speak meaningfully about where Europeans come from, we need to include wherever they picked up Neanderthal DNA (hint: not in Africa; no African population has it).
http://www.unz.com/isteve/nyt-white-black-a-murky-distinctio...
http://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(14)00476-5
tl;dr: the average "white" American is of 98.6% European ancestry, contrary to what this thinkpiece suggests. And on Cobb's much-publicized result:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/11/white-suprema...
When an article so clearly plays into what we want to hear, or so clearly confirms our beliefs, we should be more skeptical, not less.