Source? The vast majority of people do not use that definition. Ask the average person for a list of races and they will easily answer with something like: African, Asian, European, etc.
And by your definition, many humans don't even have a race.
If you asked them to list races, they might give those out of some habit, though I doubt anybody seriously considers those to be races.
I mean, do people really think that the Han Chinese, the Persians, the Hindu Indians, etc., are all of the same race? No. People are aware there are various African, European, Asian, etc. races.
Why do you want a source? Just think about it. How could race be anything else?
Yes, many humans cannot be sorted into any one race. They have ancestors of various races.
Race not being well defined is part of why this discussion is fraught.
If you were to ask Winston Churchill about race he’d define it as something closer to what most people now would call nationality (e.g. he’d say that the Boers were a different race than the English even the ones who’d long lived in South Africa). An Idaho white nationalist on the other hand hyper focuses on skin color (with perhaps some religion thrown in if they are a traditionalist).
I acknowledge that the word 'race' is used in many ways. But in the context of HBD we can probably limit ourselves to those definitions rooted in biology.
I did not invent the definition I gave, though it is written by me. I suppose it is closely related to the standard definition of race in the sense we are discussing it.
Here's the first definition of the word "race" in the 1979 New Zealand English dictionary I have on my desk in front of me:
>a group of people having or supposed to have common ancestors and with similar physical characteristics
Which is close enough to my definition, albeit more general and less descriptive.
You may find that definitions similar to this are rarer these days. This is because there was a massive push in the late 20th century against race being a biological reality. A social understanding of race was promoted in its place. This push was based on such wild and undeniably false claims such as:
> data also show that any two individuals within a particular population are as different genetically as any two people selected from any two populations in the world
These claims have evolved since then, but as far as I can discern are roughly equally (though less obviously) false.
P.S. I'm not trying to retain your interest. If you don't find the subject matter of our conversation interesting enough of itself (as I do), then I don't want you to go out of your way to continue this conversation.
