Are 'native' Irish and British the same race?

To answer your question, yes.

Universal phenomena like gravity, the speed of electromagnetic radiation or cell mutation. Mathematical formulae/scientific laws derived from these concepts are also objective, as they represent these natural phenomena in a completely unambiguous and definite manner. But this is just my opinion, and there is the school of solipsism and the observer effect that will argue nothing is intrinsically definite or objective. In respect to 'race' and 'species', the lack of consensus over whether something is in one group, another group or a new one entirely speaks for itself. Assuming all the various grouping systems are predicated on what is observed, it is apparent that reducing such substantial and overlapping variation into a single category is an arbitrary process; hence, the ongoing and historical attempts to redefine various standards or create alternative ones.

In spite of the discussion about the status of the concept of race, it is an open empirical question whether races are correlated with variations in mean I.Q. scores. I believe this has been found to be the case in statistical experiments. Admittedly, if race is a social construct it would make sense for this correlation to be due to social, not genetic, factors. Would you agree with this?

As to the usefulness, it isn't useful in assessing an individual, but I think it is important to take group differences into account when planning public policy.

I still fundamentally disagree with the process of grouping in this case so I cannot bring myself to agree with anything derived from such groupings to be of value. I simply do not believe a person's individuality should be subsumed into an average when they have no tangible affinity to the persons within that average.

If low intelligence is a social problem it would make sense to understand the things in common between those who are of low intelligence and those who are of high intelligence to isolate the causal* processes at play. Although I believe the individual's choice to nurture their mind plays a critical role and any unambiguous/standardisable quantitative causal processes will never be found, this both individualises people and undermines the generic and highly problematic grouping/averaging process on the basis of nationality/ethnicity/etc.; such things should not serve as the independent variables when they are not the important factor to consider.

*I still think assessing something as complex, mutable and multifaceted as intelligence is a deeply flawed exercise, but for the sake of this argument I'll go along with it. Furthermore, given the extensive social implications of declaring "persons with immutable X traits are necessarily less intelligent than those with immutable Y traits", I would hope IQ scores are not seen to define a person. If social/cultural traits—which are heavily mutable—are particularly influential I would have no ethical concerns with research of this nature.

Wikipedia which in turn quotes a physical anthropologist. You said "many Irish have brown eyes", which implies a significant proportion have brown eyes; which is false, or else the term "many" is redundant.

I collect old works, but have plenty of modern. Racial typology has not changed, modern science supports the old data we have - so the old texts themselves are still valid.

Crow, James F. "Unequal by nature: a geneticist’s perspective
on human differences." Daedalus, Winter 2002.

Dawkins, Richard. "Race and Creation." Prospect Magazine, Oct. 23, 2004.

Garfield, Kathryn. "Is There a Genetic Basis to Race After All?" Discover Magazine, May 2007.

Hsu, Steve. "Connect the Dots [The Reality of Race]." Information Processing, Aug. 24, 2010.

Hsu, Steve. "Rare variants and human genetic diversity." Information Processing, July 8, 2012.

Khan, Razib. "The Race Question." Discover Magazine, Feb. 23, 2012.

Khan, Razib. "Richard Dawkins accepts the usefulness of race." Discover Magazine, May 4, 2012.

Lahn, Bruce & Lanny Ebenstein. "Let's celebrate human genetic diversity." Nature 461, no. 35 (2009).

Leroi, Armand Marie. "A Family Tree in Every Gene." New York Times, March 14, 2005.

Mayr, Ernst, "The Biology of Race and the Concept of Equality." Daedalus, Winter 2002.

McAuliffe, Kathleen. "They Don't Make Homo Sapiens Like They Used To: Our species—and individual races—have recently made big evolutionary changes to adjust to new pressures." Discover Magazine, Feb. 2, 2009.

Miller, Geoffrey. "The looming crisis in human genetics." The Economist, Nov 13, 2009.

Mountain, Joanna L. & Neil Risch. "Assessing Genomic contributions to phenotypic differences among racial and ethnic groups." Nature Genetics 36, no. 11 (2004).

Race, Ethnicity, and Genetics Working Group. "The Use of Racial, Ethnic, and Ancestral Categories in Human Genetics Research." The American Journal of Human Genetics 77 (2005).

Risch, Niel, et al. "Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease." Genome Biology, July 1, 2002.

Rosenberg, Noah A. et al. "Genetic Structure of Human Populations." Science 298, no. 5602 (2002).

Sailer, Steve. "A Race Is An Extremely Extended Family." ISteve, 1998.

Sailer, Steve. "The Reality of Race." VDare, May 25, 2000.

Sailer, Steve. "Seven Dumb Ideas about Race." VDare, May 31, 2000.

Sailer, Steve. "Where Dawkins Fears To Tread: Ethnic Nepotism And The Reality Of Race." VDare, Oct. 3, 2004.

Sailer, Steve. "Race Does Exist--New York Times." VDare, March 20, 2005.

Sailer, Steve. "The Race FAQ." VDare, Dec. 16, 2007.

Sesardic, Neven. "Race: a social destruction of a biological concept." Biology and Philosophy, 2010.

Sarich, Vincent & Frank Miele. Race: The Reality of Human Differences. Westview Press, 2005.

Sewell, Martin. "Race: An Introduction." Martin Sewell Blog, March 4, 2010.

Wade, Nicholas. "Race Is Seen as Real Guide To Track Roots of Disease." New York Times, July 30, 2002.

Wade, Nicholas. "Gene Study Identifies 5 Main Human Populations, Linking Them to Geography." New York Times, Dec. 20, 2002.

Wade, Nicholas. "Humans Have Spread Globally, and Evolved Locally." New York Times, June 26, 2007.

Woodley, Michael A. "Is Homo sapiens polytypic? Human taxonomic diversity and its implications." Medical Hypotheses 74 (2010).

Xing, Jinchuan et al. "Fine-scaled human genetic structure revealed by SNP microarrays." Genome Research 19 (2009).

It's quite funny that you are linking to news websites, books and blogs to bulk out the amount of recent references you have. Peer-reviewed references that I haven't already refuted will be useful, especially since we're discussing science. Seriously, some of those articles (Risch, Rosenberg et al., in particular) have been ripped to shreds many times over and I have addressed them in my discussions to you on many occasions.

Racism, discrimination and categorising races doesn't come down to science.

Because they are imaginary social constructs? Cool.

No, not because of that.

Then what? If it is something objective it can be considered logically via science and philosophy, no?

Summarise and put it in the context of this discussion.

My point is their views of other races are not based on science, but sentiment.

So it's an imaginary social construct? Cool.

So what that it might be a social construct ? So ? It's more like a social reality since everyone is talking about it.

How is that an argument, for anything ?

It shifts into a question of its social value. Concepts like witchcraft, curses, and demons were once social realities, but upon being subjected to reason and sensible analysis, their prominence in social policy and the public psyche has been attenuated in this society. The same is happening to 'race', gender and eventually the concept of the nation.

It's only a matter of time.

It shifts into a question of its social value. Concepts like witchcraft, curses, and demons were once social realities, but upon being subjected to reason and sensible analysis, their prominence in social policy and the public psyche has attenuated in this society. The same is happening to 'race', gender and eventually the concept of the nation.

It's only a matter of time.

Religion is a man made social construct.

Racial differences in athletics, physical attractiveness, crime, creativity, sexual impulse,culture,intelligence, disease, biology,
are realities,
bound by the laws of nature.

What are you ? Some kind of hardcore communist ?