Imported weed diversification supports macro-evolution

You seem to forget, though, that at one time that was taken as the framework with which we viewed the world, with the result that we didn't understand anything.I mean, you're sitting here saying "gosh, things would be so great if only scientists took genesis literally, we'd understand so much" butm being completely ignorant of history, you're ignoring the fact that for one thousand years we operated from those assumptions, with the end result that human technological progess was halted for centuries. It is, indeed, the most likely explanation.

How about a Norwegian whose father was Italian? Or the son of an Arab and a Mongolian? Or could you identify by sight a Jew? How is a religion a race?The problem with race is that it obeys none of the laws of genetics that you and I are familiar with. If a white person and a black person have a child, that child is typically described as "half-black"; if two half-black people have a child and that child is 1/4 "black", we're well beyond making any sense of race in a human species that has only two copies of every chromosome. As a diploid organism you're either full, half, or none.Sure, we would expect human evolution in varied remote geographies to result in semi-seperated populations of human beings identifiable by certain physical traits. But the cultural concept of "race", which conflates genetics, ethnicity, religion, and a host of other biases, has really no basis in physical reality. And it should be noted that the trend in humans now is one of decreasing genetic variability between groups, not increasing. If we ever were "raced", we're rapidly ceasing to be so.

That's why it's such a bad term; it comes pre-loaded with all that political baggage. It clouds the discussion and obfuscates meaning. Given that that's the case I don't understand why you're so adamant that this term be used.