This article is somehow trying to say that race doesn't exist because we found the genes for skin color? What?
Article even says it:
>The dark-skinned people of southern India, Australia and New Guinea, for example, did not independently evolve their color simply because evolution favored it.
>They inherited the ancestral dark variants Dr. Tishkoff’s team found in Africans. “They had to be introduced from an African population,” said Dr. Tishkoff.
They even admit there's some aspects to skin tone that are still completely a mystery, there's no genetic marker(s) they can point to as the cause.
“If you ask somebody on the street, ‘What are the main differences between races?,’ they’re going to say skin color,” said Sarah A. Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania.
i suppose that Tishkoff is right, but to be a bit more rigorous about it, i would be curious to see the sociological research that demonstrates that "somebody on the street" actually thinks that "the main differences between races" are "skin color." maybe people don't think that. not really sure either way.
"dispels a biological concept of race" - as in, it dispels one concept
or
"dispels a biological concept of [human] race [because the genetics variants determining pigment predate humanity, therefore either human delineation of race predates humans, or is incoherent]"
i'm not trying to start an argument but i think i was saying pretty much the same thing you're saying.
i think we actually agree on this.