Also why are some people so offended by the concept of races anyway? What's wrong with that? Why is it fine that there are races in every species in the world, but somehow it's wrong when it comes to the human races.
Because it is a useless concept that has fallen out of use in most scientific discourse since its proposed distinctions are never accurate. Honest question - what do you think "race" even means?
If you want to use it as a taxonomical classification, a classification of "race" is used when there is no sufficient difference between the members of a species. Taxonomy doesnt really use a concept of race for classifying organisms.
So let's look at the human classification. Race was first used to refer to speakers of a common language (and then for national affiliation). Clearly that's not useful in any real way. Then it was adopted for related physical characteristics which gave rise to the wonderfully specific groupings like Caucasian (which includes such similar peoples as all Europeans, North Africans, Arabians, "the 'stans," Indians, Nepalesians, Iranians, Sri Lankans etc...). In fact, the first use of this classification separated humans into only two categories: the Caucasians and the Mongolians. Apparently, the only distinction between the two was by how physically appealing they were to the person making the classification (see Cristoph Meiners). Maybe, we want to use it as a genetic classification then except there is no genetic basis for races as the gross morphological features traditionally defined as race are determined by non-significant and superficial genetic alleles with no demonstrated link to intelligence, athletic ability, talent or what-have-you. Race has been socially and legally constructed without any scientific evidence to create meaningless social distinctions based on non-existent generalized genetic meaning.
Maybe that is why some people object to its use.