There's been some interesting discussions in this sub-forum on IQ, intelligence, the g Factor, races, hereditability, a nation's wealth, eugenics, and other things. One thing I found particularly interesting in this discussion is the work of Cavalli-Sforza into pre-1492 population groups and the genetic distance between them (although I haven't found an answer to the question why the largest population group on Earth - the Han Chinese - don't appear in the list of 42 population groups). Since 1492, the 5,000 km limit (Jensen? hitssquad posted it, but I can't find it just now) for a race (Jensen) or group (Cavalli-Sforza) has become a whole lot less important. Indeed, according to Lynn and Vanhanen (and the authors they quote), the following 'races' are to be found in Africa: - Colored - Creole (black-white hybrids) - Mixed black-white and in the US, "blacks" are in fact comprised of groups whose "white" ancestry ranges from ~4-10% to >40% (Jensen). The US Census Bureau gives population estimates for the following 'races': - White - Black or African American - American Indian and Alaska Native - Asian - Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander - Some other race In 2000, ~2.4% of those surveyed 'reported more than one race' Regarding Hispanics, the Bureau said: "The Census Bureau also reported that Hispanics, who may be of any race, totaled 35.3 million, or about 13 percent of the total population." Since 1994 (when Cavalli-Sforza et al published the results of their study, including the genetic distance tree and 1st PC vs 2nd PC plane) our ability to determine genetic difference between individuals has improved dramatically. What does a 1st PC vs 2nd PC plot of residents of the US look like now? How different is the "English" population group in Cavalli-Sforza's tree from today's inhabitants of the England? Where in Cavalli-Sforza's tree do African Americans, Creoles, coloreds, and Hispanics fit?