Whoa, that started off with a doozy!

Your “race” is a non-issue, since race as a scientific category has been completely discredited. It is as scientifically sound as believing in Unicorns, or believing that elves and fairies exist. If you examine the DNA differences between a tall Swedish male and a short Pygmy woman from the Congo, there is only a .03% difference. They would share 99.7% of the same genetic profile.

And, depending on type of measurement, don't humans and chimps share roughly that same amount?!

Tiny, tiny differences make up huge differences. It's always tiny percentiles.

You could take that same argument, and say that a pygmy woman from the Congo is, assuming the differences broke in the same directions, as close to a chimp as she is to a big bad White Male Human. She is become monke.

But even if the differences don't line up exactly, saying there's almost as much difference (even if they aren't so close to chimps, which is the most hilarious outcome) between two human groups and humans and monkeys...kind of blows the whole sham argument out of the water, doesn't it?

Again, before anyone calls me out, it all depends on how you measure DNA; the 98%/99% similarity between chimps and humans isn't set in stone and, if you measure differently, can get much - much - less similar. The point remains though, that a tiny difference in, you know, genetics, you know, the building blocks of life, do make huge, huge differences.

It would be more shocking if a pygmy Congolese woman and Hwite Man had more genetic difference, honestly. Because at some point you would just be talking completely different species. So if you believe in a human race (which I assume this "race debunker" still does), of course they will be similar, genetically.