More insults and baseless accusations from Maunus... And a ridiculous "possibility" raised by WeijiBaikeBianji.

Sources which acknowledge there is no worldly consensus on race and that the race concept is fully supported in China (which Maunus outright lied about it being because they have outdated information or some such crap, or maybe he simply misread it. Try reading the sources again, Maunus.):

On the Concept of Race in Chinese Biological Anthropology: Alive and Well. Author(s): Qian Wang, Goran Štrkalj, Li Sun, 2003
The race concept in six regions: variation without consensus. Author(s): Liberman et al., 2004
The Status of the Race Concept in Contemporary Biological Anthropology: A Review. Author: Goran Štrkalj, 2007
Forensic Anthropology: 2000 to 2010. Author(s): Sue Black, Eilidh Ferguson, 2011, quote: "while scientists in China fully supported race as a concept and integrated race into their research, acknowledging that there was still no real consensus with regard to the race debate"

Here are more studies supporting the race concept:

Genetic Structure of Human Populations. Author(s): Rosenberg, Feldman, et al., 2002
Here one of the scientists involved with the study says it clear that their usage of "populations" or "ancestry" instead of race is mere semantics (because I know you race deniers like to claim those are not the same), and that their study basically confirmed the conception of human races: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/20/us/gene-study-identifies-5-main-human-populations-linking-them-to-geography.html
Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease. Author(s): Risch, Burchard, Ziv, Tang, 2002
The importance of race and ethnic background in biomedical research and clinical practice. Author(s): Burchard, Risch, Ziv, Tang, et al., 2003
Human Population Genetic Structure and Inference of Group Membership. Author(s): Bamshad et al., 2003
Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies. Author(s): Tang, Risch, et al., 2005
Latino Populations: A Unique Opportunity for the Study of Race, Genetics, and Social Environment in Epidemiological Research. Author(s): Burchard, Risch, Kittles, et al., 2005
Race: a social destruction of a biological concept. Author: Neven Sesardić, 2010

The 2004 book by emeritus professor of anthropology Vincent M. Sarich, a "fringe lunatic" in the eyes of race-denying Lewontian ignoramuses:
Race: The Reality of Human Difference

Here's one where the majority of anatomists in South Africa support the race concept:
Anatomists’ attitudes towards the concept of race. Author(s): Goran Štrkalj et al., 2004

Here's one for medicine:
Pharmacogenetics and geographical ancestry: implications for drug development and global health. Author(s): Daar, Singer, 2005

Here's one which makes it clear race is biologically significant:
What we do and don't know about 'race', 'ethnicity', genetics and health at the dawn of the genome era. Author: Collins, 2004

Here's another one who affirms biological significance (but he is a race denier who plays the semantics game about how race has special social implications, and that one should instead use "populations" or "ancestry," blah, blah, blah...):
Is Race Still Socially Constructed? The Recent Controversy over Race and Medical Genetics. Author: John Hartigan Jr., 2008

Here a forensic anthropologists argues that the race concept is valid and that there is obvious political bias and suppression involved by the race deniers:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/does-race-exist.html

Here's one scientist that says that: "The idea that human races are only social constructs has been the consensus for at least 30 years." Referring to the Lewontian ignoramuses, of course. But then continues with: "Beneath the jargon, cautious phrases and academic courtesies, one thing was clear: the consensus about social constructs was unraveling. Some even argued that, looked at the right way, genetic data show that races clearly do exist." Referring to the studies by Risch, Tang, Ziv, et al.:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/14/opinion/14leroi.html

So cut the crap Maunus and others, there is clearly no worldly scientific consensus, especially with China, and China is a country with over a billion people, not some random "sh*thole" like North Korea that one can simply ignore.

Now, enough beating around the bush, let's see some ideas for changing the WP:NPOV-violating sentence. Who will start? Me again? BlackHades? Maunus?