[Svartalfiar]

How can anyone deny the existence of race in humans while acknowledging the legitimacy of animal husbandry and developing breeds, a process used for thousands of years? I mean would these same scientists say there was no difference in a Great Dane and a Rat Terrier or a Leghorn Hen and a Buff Orpington?

Ah, finally! Someone who can actually define "race" and explain the clear differences between each one! You can do that, right?

I assume by your dog/chicken analogy that you'll define 'race' as equivalent to subspecies? What are the human subspecies? How many are there?

[Phoenix8]

First I assume you are denying the existence of race, subspecies?

On animal husbandry I am referring to breeds or animals that when mated with each other produce offspring which are remarkably similar and have the same identifying traits of that group.

Example. A Border Collie when mated with other will almost always produce a certain medium sized dog with general color patterns and has an inherent instinct even untrained as a pup to “herd”. They were acquired after untold generations of selectively choosing traits.

Human races or “breeds” developed over enormous periods of time by natural selection and when mated with each other produce children with remarkable similarity of said identifying traits. According to all substantive and academic schools (scientific) there have long been 4 identified races:
Caucasoid
Negroid
Mongoloid
Aboriginal (some say not)

New races or breeds could be developed either naturally or selectively (example as some are now identifying Hispanic as separate).

Good god man I’m speaking of basic scientific and accepted common knowledge that has been recognized for thousands of years.

Source, including identifying characteristics:

https://www.umsl.edu/~naumannj/culture%20and%20cultural%20geography/articles/How%20many%20major%20races%20are%20there%20in%20the%20world.docx