[CaliBlk4U]

Here's the long answer... I've actually studied much of this, in college and in my professional life.

I actually agree with some of what you've said, though I'm not onboard with your perspective on this particular thread. Discussions about the differences inherent within the respective "races" is not something I'd discourage... Assuming that intellectual conversation was not broached specifically based on (as stated by the OP) the general "superiority" of one race (even my own) over another. That is not a discussion of genetic variation, based on familial heredity or environmental influences -- that's just race-baiting.

On another point... Just because you can point out general (mostly esthetic) distinctions between people based on their "race", that does not exclude the idea that there really is only one race of human on this planet (personally I believe that the distinction of "race" is better applied to distinguish us from other hominids, like Neanderthals). After all, the differences you mentioned can be found in individuals within the same immediate family. Remember that more than 10% of relationships in the US are interracial. So distinctions based on "pure race labels" are less and less relevant these days.

One last thing genetic note -- and this is a fact by the way. If you compare the genetic differences between a white [native] man from Norway, with that of a man from deepest, darkest Africa, you would be surprised at just how insignificant those differences actually are. In fact, studies have shown that two chimps, from the same family group, will actually show LESS genetic variation. That is why the concept of "race" is questioned, from a genetic perspective. According to the very technology that lead us to be able to amplify DNA (as with the PCR process), and to track mitochondrial DNA down through the ages, we are all basically one big family.