Until science threatens political correctness. Research into human dna…
… is slipping out of the laboratory and into everyday life, carrying with it the inescapable message that people of different races have different DNA. Ancestry tests tell customers what percent of their genes are from Asia, Europe, Africa and the Americas. The heart-disease drug BiDil is marketed exclusively to African Americans, who seem genetically predisposed to respond to it. Jews are offered prenatal tests for genetic disorders rarely found in other ethnic groups.
Such developments are providing some of the first tangible benefits of the genetic revolution. Yet some social critics fear they may also be giving long-discredited racial prejudices a new potency. The notion that race is more than skin-deep, they fear, could undermine principles of equal treatment and opportunity that have relied on the presumption that we are all created equal.
There isn’t an experienced domestic animal breeder on the planet who doesn’t acknowledge the profound influence of genetics on intelligence and behavior. Traits such as trainability, aggression, prey drive, docility, bite inhibition are highly heritable and difficult to modify. The realization that behavior could be selected for and fixed within a population is how breeds evolve out of species, and how identifiable family lines evolve out of breeds. It’s why retrievers retrieve, pointers point, border collies herd, and basenjis steal from the fridge. It’s why some family lines in Dobermans like to carry shoes in their mouths, generation after generation – and others don’t.
Yet, despite thousands of years of practical knowledge gained in the field of agriculture, despite mountains of published research generated in the lab, the very scientific community that accepts that animal sub-populations can be significantly distinct from one another is reflexively resistant to the possibility that that such differences may exist between sub-populations of humans.
And when the science finally forces them to face the evidence?
Although few of the bits of human genetic code that vary between individuals have yet been tied to physical or behavioral traits, scientists have found that roughly 10 percent of them are more common in certain continental groups, and can be used to distinguish people of different races. They say that studying the differences, which arose during the tens of thousands of years human populations evolved on separate continents following their ancestors’ dispersal from humanity’s birthplace in East Africa is crucial to mapping the genetic basis for disease.
Many geneticists are loath to discuss the social implications of their findings. Still, some acknowledge that as their data and methods are extended to non-medical traits, the field is at what one leading researcher recently called “a very delicate time and a dangerous time.”
“There are clear differences between people of different continental ancestries,” said Marcus Feldman, a professor of biological sciences at Stanford University. “It’s not there yet for things like IQ, but I can see it coming. And it has the potential to spark a new era of racism if we do not start explaining it better.” Feldman said any finding on intelligence was likely to be exceedingly hard to pin down. But given that some may emerge, he wants to create “ready response teams” of geneticists to put such socially fraught discoveries in perspective.
They should consider augmenting such teams with a dog breeder or two. We seem to have figured out how to identify and exploit genetic strengths and weaknesses “beneath the skin” without assigning global superiority to any one breed. We might be able to teach them something.

I suppose so if your religion is evilution.
Even so, Hoss, I fail to see where it is that the
Pentateuch says that God created Caucasians.
Probably because you’ve taken man’s word rather than God’s Word.
http://www.theseason.org/genesis/genesis1.htm
Ah well then. So here we come to a fork in
the road. Happy trails, sir, I wish you well.
I was just re-reading this excellent thread (thanks everyone
for the thought-provoking discussions), when I noted that at
11:14 above ET wrote: We are all ‘smart men’.
I nominate that for the wisest aphorism in this thread.
There are countless aspects of dogdom that don’t fly in PC human circles.
Eugenics is the name of the game in the dog world, and just like in the real world, most of the people who walk that path find ruin. Most dog breeds are a mess of inbred disease. Not because using genetics to improve breeds doesn’t work, but because the major tool of doing such is inbreeding!
I think most of us believe in self betterment by marrying and breeding with people who improve and complement us. But when one person with one vision gets to do that for multiple generations (a dog breeder) and choses to inbreed over diversify (how else can you concentrate the same genes to guarantee they get passed on to offspring), we end up with the rather poor state we are in today.
Sexism, Racism, Classism… all fly in dogdom.
Broad brush labels of intelligence and athletic ability are common, and unlike the OP, we do select uberbreeds. You will not find a smater or more athletic breed than the Border Collie. They are simply better in both areas that all other breeds and the combination is formidable.
Even expectations and acceptance of different levels of aggression and activity are common in dogdom. We allow certain breeds to be lazy and others to be violent, since it’s “their nature.”
These are all things that the PC movement attacks at every level, but which the dog world puts at the forefront.