"Birds are an entirely different species. "

and we base that on the physical expression of genetic differences between us and birds and the same thing applies to race

can you guess the physical differences we use to distinguish black people and white people?

"It is essentially a human construct in its modern form. "

if i took someone outside and asked them to distinguish between black and white people... they'd be able to do so right? why?

Except the genetic differences between birds and even differences between species of birds is far more different that the genetic differences between two races. Races are mixed these days and there is little genetic variance among them. Everyone is mixed. It is like asking why one mutt dog is brown and another is black.

Bats can fly.

'Flying' is not the charasteristic that defines birds, so your example doesn't even make sense. The dinstiction between animal classes is made by multiple charasteristics. These are selected in the most logical way possible, but they're still artificial. For instance: 'not being able to fly' is not a charasterictic of mammals, since bats can fly. But if bats didn't exist, scientists would consider 'not being able to fly' to be a charasteristic of the mammal class, since there wouldn't be any flying mammals. However, all the other mammals would still be the same.

Living creatures aren't inherently divided into strict groups. Scientists made these groups up, and adapted the definitions to their 'sources' ( = all creatures in existence).

"Except the genetic differences between birds and even differences between species of birds is far more different that the genetic differences between two races."

which does not impact upon my point, which was that there are differences, which become obvious based on the fact that black people and white people can be clearly distinguished

other than being incredibly delusional to deny obvious reality right before you... the thing is that you do people a disservice because there are, for example, medical problems that are more severe in one group over the other such as sensitivity to sun light and susceptibility to high blood pressure, which are important to note

what about sex? do you believe sex is a social construct as well?

"'Flying' is not the charasteristic that defines birds"

really? so lets say i gather 100 people and ask them to name a flying animal... what do you suppose the answer would be for 99% of them

now flying is not the main characteristic of birds sure, there are others such as being covered in feathers as opposed to fur, for example

"The dinstiction between animal classes is made by multiple charasteristics. These are selected in the most logical way possible, but they're still artificial."

so humans caused birds to grow wings? and fish to grow scales? are you fucking trolling?

" 'not being able to fly' is not a charasterictic of mammals"

yes but giving birth to live young is...

" However, all the other mammals would still be the same."

yeah... does this make a lion a cannibal when it eats a gazelle?

"Living creatures aren't inherently divided into strict groups."

so why don't tuna, elephants, lions and flamingos all swim in schools? 

"Scientists made these groups up"

scientists categorise and label phenomenon THAT ALREADY EXIST when it comes to biology

Let me ask you this: Why do you think race matters?

True, we can sometimes distinguish between races by physical characteristics (however, other times we can't), but we could also separate people by height or by hair color. Overall, the importance of race is a social construct, not something genetic or inherent.

While you can argue that race has a genetic component, however small, that doesn't explain its role as a point of division.

"the thing is that you do people a disservice because there are, for example, medical problems that are more severe in one group over the other such as sensitivity to sun light and susceptibility to high blood pressure, which are important to note"

"Overall, the importance of race is a social construct, not something genetic or inherent."

do you feel the same about sex?

Do you do people a disservice by not dividing by race? When I go to a doctor about, say, high blood pressure, he doesn't ask me where in the world my family originated from, he asks me if anyone in my family suffers from high blood pressure. The reason for this is because within-group variation is often much larger and more prominent than between-group variation. While broad patterns may exist, they often largely overlap between-groups and they say little about the situation of any one individual within that group.

Further, since when have we divided humans based on susceptibility to high blood pressure? I am white and I have no history of high blood pressure in my family. I have a white friend who does have a history of high blood pressure. I have a black friend who does not have a history of high blood pressure. If we are dividing based on medical characteristics, it would make far more sense to put me and hypothetical black friend in the same groups and hypothetical white friend in a separate group. Why would we use such broad brush divisions which serve poorly as a predictor?

And why are we dividing humans by susceptibility to disease? When I filled out forms on my SAT, I wasn't asked if my father suffered from male pattern baldness. Susceptibility to disease is more or less irrelevant to a school. That is something that should be discussed with a doctor (and again, if the first thing your doctor asks you when you go in talking about lumps in your breasts is whether or not you are white, you should probably find a new doctor). 

As far as sex, it is a significantly more prominent genetic factor than race, however, to some extent, the divisions we have created are social. That is what gender is. Gender speaks to the social constructs surrounding biological sex, and on that point, the importance of these divisions is a social construct. While genetic differences in sex are obviously real, they are also more complicated than a simple binary, and transgendered individuals are often a manifestation of one or both of these points. I'm not really sure what kind of answer you are looking for on this question, so I could elaborate if you ask me something in more detail.

It means variations in the human genome have changed our appearances and behaviour via natural selection depending on our environments over the last 50,000 years.