I feel the need to preface this: Socks, i know we are not on the same team - but i really do appreciate you coming here and taking a swing. You dont look like a shill to me and you are actually willing to go to bat against White Nationalists and put yourself out there - which is more than can be said for 99.99% of our opponents. Your courage is commendable, i salute you for that

That being said, reading this again, it looks like some NPC fritzed out and vomited every MSM talking point on race they've ever heard of, with no regard to coherency or consequence. In fact, it is so incoherent and non-sequitor that I dont even really know how to respond to it. But i'll try

There is no scientific way of determining race or ethnicity.

Have you ever heard if 23&Me? How can there be "no scientific way" of knowing someone's ethnicity or race when a private company just needs you to spit in a tube and will do it for you for like, $50? That makes no sense

Assumptions about this scientific basis were debunked in the early 20th century

When/where was racialism "debunked?" This is literally just a thing "people say" but has no real backing to it. At least provide some kind of reference when making such a claim

whereas journals on eugenics truly believed in this so-called science in the 19th century, some of which was called Social Darwinism

Ignoring what "journals" at any given time "believed in" - this is a total non-sequitor. "Race" is just about classifying different groups of humans into "subspecies," basically. This has nothing to do with "social darwinism" since the objective acknowledgement of human "races" does not necessitate that certain races be better/worse than others or that public policues must reflect these. Races are just "different"

toward the late 19th century, but even that was unrelated to Darwin's research.

"Social Darwinism" wasnt related to Darwin's own research, per se - but its obvious (to us now and people at the time) that the same concepts of natural selection etc. that apply to animals also apply to humans, because we are also animals.

Saying that you know what "social darwinism" is or its history as a term is not a novel or interesting thing to say to anyone here. Whats more obvious is your (seemingly accidental) conflation of the idea of scientifically-recognized "race" and public policy. "Social darwinism" is just a term that people use to describe certain points of view or public policies (sp. eugenic policies) that were/could be enacted irrespective of "race." In theory, a society could practice "social darwinisim" but not even acknowledge the existence of something called "race" at all. Our society also actively practices eugenics (or "dysgenics", rather) when it comes to welfare, public healthcare, and other policies. So anyone who is a proponent of welfare or public healthcare in any way and does not also employ some kind of reproductive restrictions or eugenics (likley, "you") is engaging in a negative kind of "social darwinism" (dysgenics). But "social darwinism" has nothing to do with "race," necessarily

In short, it is not possible to scientifically determine a single race or ethnicity with the help of science or gene analysis, mainly because we're all mixed.

This is just totally false. Self-described "race" and genetic cluster corresponds basically 100% of the time. OP already mentioned the practical relevancy of race in medicine. So wtf are you trying to say?

Even those of us with ancestors known for consanguinity have mixed ethnic genes.

Even that is untrue, as this study shows even self-identified hispanics (very mixed) actually cluster very well (80%)

A lot of white americans also like to pretend they are part "native american" or something - but 23&Me invalidates even this. Using data from 23&me, researchers found that European-Americans had genomes that were on average 98.6 percent European, 0.19 percent African, and 0.18 Native American.. Especially when we consider people who dont know their ethnic background are more likely to take a 23&Me test, and that this study was done in the US and not Europe, we can conclude that the vast, vast majority of "whites" are only white and nothing else of practical consequence

There are no bundles of genes for only whites or blacks or whatever.

Yeah, no, we have the cluster analyses, this is just wrong, sorry

One can find more by searching:

No one cares what a bunch of psychologically-damaged cat ladies or malevolent jews in the MSM have to say. Make the arguments yourself here, where they can be responded to in context

This is a popular subject recently because extremist groups want to promote racism and division for political and financial gain (for the .01%).

Thats dumb since we (DAR) have no obvious way to make money out of our beliefs and are censored/suppressed relentlessly by the elite, and the idea of "race" is just manifestly obvious to anyone who has lived to see other races. Studying race should be of legitimate scholarly interest and is of consequence to a mutliracial society. Instead, the establishment devotes a ton of resources and money into propaganda saying "race isnt even reall!!1!" so they can continue to import cheap labor and ruin white countries and make them easier to control. The evidence for this is ubiquitous - in education, in media, etc. You are the one doing the bidding of the establishment, not us. And you are doing it for free. Go to a BLM protest and tell them "race isnt real" and let us know how that goes