There's only the homo sapiens race, but there are a milliard different cultures. An example would be the proportion of blacks and Hispanics in jail as compared to the the Caucasian whites. Poverty? I don't think so, as they have the same opportunity as anyone else. Except that they think the world owes them a living. Here in Australia the indigenous number of incarceration is more than 4 times the number of, dare I say it, whites.

There are primitive and modern homo sapiens, like the pygmies of darkest Africa or Borneo, but all are still humans.

IF you study comparative religions you learn that there is a basic philosophy among world religions of what is right and what is wrong as these texts were written to give cultures and societies a guide for moral life that helps sustain them and prevent anarchy. THIS is what the left wants to destroy because at bottom they are ANARCHIST.

Why would anyone make the statement that there are no races?

Language, all language including mathematics is abstract. Race is an abstraction and as such exists. Race is as real as any other abstraction. It's as real as zero or infinity. The question is how is it defined.

Whenever you have this kind of discussion what you will find is a bit of post modernists philosophy. Most people don't even realize they have taken on philosophical concepts because by time the concepts seep into the general population they are so diluted and distorted they are almost useless. This seems particularly true of post modernism. For are purposes here we can just identity "post truth" as a post modernists concept. From a scientific perspective we can redefine the concept as there are no non trivial absolute truths.

In science we deal with facts in terms of precision and accuracy. Everything is an approximation, the speed of light, the distance between wave forms, so on and so forth. Many of our facts are very precise and accurate. Those that are are generally restrained to the hard sciences. The social sciences on the other hand are less precise and accurate.

Statistics play a major role in all the sciences but most social science "facts" have fairly low p values compared to the hard sciences. The concept of a controlled experiment is just one explanatory reason for this phenomenon. Race as a statistical concept follows this pattern. Scientifically race means that people that come from various geographical regions will be more statistically likely to share certain characteristics.

There are some common arguments against the idea that race is a scientifically valid concept. The one that scientists find most convincing is that their is more genetic diversity among "Africans" than outside Africa. Unfortunately that is exactly what you would expect if small groups left Africa fairly recently. Within Africa there has simply been more time for non-selective evolution such as genetic drift to create genetic diversity. The other argument is interesting opposite in that there is more difference between individuals within a race than between individuals from different races. If this was a meaningful argument then it would be impossible to breed traits.

There are many things about race we do not know. But we do know that it is a medically useful concept. For example people with light skin are more likely to get skin cancer and certain African races are more likely to have sickle cell anemia. This illustrates the importance of remembering that science is largely about probability. Any strict definition of race based on superficial characteristics in fact dilutes it's utility.

The problem is not that race is a useless concept the problem is in how it is defined and how it is put to use.

false

[bjs.gov]

[vox.com]

That is a nice warm fuzzy sentiment, but is not steeped in reality. There are cultures which dictate that women are nothing more than property and should be treated as such. I will "judge" people who follow such a culture based on their cultural beliefs, and will not be a warm fuzzy judgement either.

Geneticists do not have a very good history as they were the ones who started such beliefs that certain people of a specific heritage were less than human and should be taken out of the equation, as well as certain people with "genetic" abnormalities not being worthy of living. So please understand why I do not bow to the statement of some geneticists because they said something warm and fuzzy.

This reminds me of a meme that shows for skeletons and asks the person to identify which is a white guy, a black, a hispanic guy, and an oriental guy. Forensic science can actually determine such traits from the skeletons. So this idea we are all exactly the same under our skin is not actually all that accurate.

That said I do hold the idea Martin Luther King Junior expressed in his I Have A Dream speech. the best measuring stick by which to measure another person is by the content of their character, sometimes that content is driven by the culture in which they choose to live.