When was scientific racism debunked?
>>673830
When the jews won the war
>>673830
Around the time we started sequencing various African subpopulations and discovered there was more diversity within Africa than outside of it, making statements such as 'Africans are genetically less intelligent' nonsensical, since Africans do not have homogenous gene pool.
>>673860
I fail to see what makes it nonsensical. Even if you show that there will be many exceptions to the rule, the rule still exists.
>>673830
It wasn't
This branch of science was practically outlawed when SJW took over
Is it true that African civilisations weren't advanced before the Europeans showed up?
>>673830
Never
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/689689065621491714
Science shouldn't appease the feel good SJWs
Also, modern people use racialism. Racism is rather belief of superiority of races over others.
>>673885
you can't even sensibly ask that question without an underlying assumption that history has to follow a very specific path. Just what the heck do you mean by "advanced"?
>>673877
It's scientifically nonsensical because 'blacks' aren't a true clade, in the phylogenetic sense.
>>673885
>African """""civilisations"""""
>>673894
I think the advancement of civilization strongly correlates with the ability to wreck other civilization in war
>>673904
That should warrant further investigation then, rather than dismissing the subject altogether.
>>673894
But I heard on here that africans didn't have any education, medicine or anything resembling civilization.
They just lived in mudhuts.
>>673916
>The mongols were more civilized than the Chinese or Arabs
>>673922
Obviously the whole "lel niggers mudhuts xD" shit you see is a retarded oversimplification, and yes Sub-Saharan Africans had more complex social and political structures than a bunch of savages in mud huts.
That being said, I doubt you'll find very many people who would prefer to live in the 18th century Congo over 18th century Boston.
>>673887
AFAIK Lewontin's fallacy was only half a fallacy. His data was sound but some of the conclusions he drew were flawed.
Then again I don't know shit about genetics so
>>673925
i said correlates, not equals.
And as far as I know, mongols had a pretty impressive skills in administration and logistics
>>673917
What's the point of launching investigations to find shared traits among members of an biologically obsolete classification? Do you also think we should pour research dollars into finding differences between Aquariuses and Pisces?
>>673830
Well the fact the non-white skulls in your pic are fake kind of shows it always was built on lies and forgeries. It not really that it had to be "debunked" as it is society had to reach a point were it would admit the truth. No real real work had to be done to debunk it, all it took was society allowing people to point out the obvious without being immediately ostracized.
>>673958
Because while the classifications may be genetically meaningless, socially and culturally they have very real effects.
>>673959
The non-white skulls aren't fake.
Asians and blacks have different skulls from whites
>>673958
You must have misunderstood. Clearly if there are many different groups among "blacks" that are not related to each other, we should launch investigation to categorize those groups, and do away with the "black" category.
Instead the entire subject has been more or less banned.
>>673958
Why do we call them black people anyways?
They seem to come in different skin types, hair, noses and body types.
Is "black" really the proper name for their race?
Same for white people.
>>673970
Genetic differences between various populations are very real, but racial categories are still very much social constructs. How do you decide "this dude's white, everyone past him isn't" or "this guy's black, but just barely".
It's entirely arbitrary.
>>673979
Oh, yeah, then I agree that that's valuable research. Genetic antrhopology is still alive and well though. Here are a few recent papers I found interesting.
http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1005602
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v512/n7513/full/nature13408.html
The last one is particularly interesting, as it suggests in influx of Denisovan DNA into the tibetan gene pool was partly responsible for their altitude adaptation. These aren't second-rate journals either. Genetic anthropology is hardly suppressed.
>>673982
you forgot yellow and red races
i hate that PC "asian" term
>>673830
It was dismissed without being seriously debunked because the incentive to study it ceased to exist. Scientific racism was the underpinning philosophy for the losing side in WWII. The winners labeled it a disgusting and abhorrent philosophy responsible for the atrocities of the bad guys. At that point, the incentive in academia was to debunk it, not to give it an evenhanded analysis, so they attacked specific, weak theories that were constructed within the framework of scientific racism, debunked them, and declared victory. These days, anyone reasonably intelligent knows that not every ethnic group has equal capabilities and potential in every field, but it's important to politely pretend that it is the case to avoid being affiliated with unpopular ideologies.
>racism ~ noun
>1. the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races
>2. discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race
#1 could never be true because 'intrinsically' is an inaccurate word to use whenever the subject of discussion depends on your ethical or aesthetic values/criteria
#2 was debunked whenever people decided it failed to satisfy their ethics, most likely, although the ethics of le /pol/ bogeyman are probably fine with scientific racism.
The subject is a tricky one with so many varying definitions and values at play. So a skeptic will probably find either side of the discussion problematic; fuck partisans.
>>673982
Is there any black people in the world with naturally straight hair?
>>673830
I've always wondered what autistic secular humanist "science has answers for everything" proponents would answer to this.
How can scientists not take responsibility for the transformation of religious antisemitism into national/racial antisemitism?
Dawkins and such like to pretend that scientists making mistakes has never been of a detriment to society but is that really so?
>>674041
I don't know, does European admixture preclude them from being black?
When everyone decided that evolution applied to every other species apart from humans, who don't pass on any hereditary traits, especially those relating to cognitive ability.
>>673952
They were literally house wreckers who looked with envious eyes at the empires of civilization builders (Persia, the empires in china at the time) and decided to chimpout to take that from them.
>>674041
Lots of very dark skinned people in India with straight hair
>>674056
Then they're not black, they're mullatos
>>674063
How much european blood does one need before they cross the mulatto/black threshold?
Does anybody actually know anything about modern genetics or are y'all basing your opinions on outdated 19th-early 20th century anatomy?
>>674041
Not all blacks have the same hair sonny
>>674068
I'd say 50%.
Any more and he's white, less and he's black
>>674075
I base my opinions on research papers that i barely skim through and also things that other people tell me they have read in research papers
>>674068
2.3 pints.
>>673830
Never.
>>674083
same could be said of white
>>674082
So then there are pretty much no mulattoes? I doubt very many people land right about the 50/50 point.
This is why racial classifications are an arbitrary pain in the ass.
>>674062
I think he's referring to Africans specifically.
The premise he's attacking, (unsuccessfully in my opinion,) is that because there are so many racial groups in Africa, categorizing them all according to any shared traits is useless.
Just because straight hair evolved outside of Africa does not make all Africans a single clade.
>>674094
And every racial category really.
>>674068
it's all just gradients anyways
>>674095
> I doubt very many people land right about the 50/50 point.
Well obviously you'll never be exactly 50%, but I'm talking about a margin of 5%
>>674061
Thats a rather simplistic view on Mongol society
>>674068
One drop. Once any interbreeding occurs the process of separate evolution has been disturbed.
>>674097
I'm just saying that literally no other race has kinky, dry hair like black people
That's what make them a group. They also have dark skin, full lips and flat noses.
>>674116
>1/32 black person
>Go back to Africa you goddamn nigger
>>674116
Uh really? My best friend is white but his great-great-great grandmother is black on his mom's side.
>>674111
Doesn't mean its not generally true. It also explains why Mongolia is an ex-soviet satellite state and more mongolians live as sinicized chink citizens than in mongolia proper. Nomads gonna nomad.
I mean name some contributions by mongolians to human advancement that weren't incidental transmission of technology from east to west.
>>674145
He means that there is now gene transfer between the populations so allopatric speciation has been disturbed.
>>674119
that doesn't prove anything
it's all just gradients from geography and history
>>674158
>into ze chamber, negroid
>>674180
>tfw i've got brown hair and brown eye phenotype, but a copy of the blond hair and blue eye allele.
>>673830
>Most scientists stopped
1950's
>Beyond any doubt
1990's
>>674046
Social Science mistakes hit much harder then you think anon
>>673830
Still very much alive, OP.
>Analyses revealed that African-American males who carried the 2-repeat allele were, in comparison with other African-American male genotypes, significantly more likely to be arrested and incarcerated.
>The effects of the 2-repeat allele could not be examined in Caucasian males because only 0.1% carried it.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912004047
>The finding that the Europeoid haplogroups did not descend from “African” haplogroups A or B is supported by the fact that bearers of the Europeoid haplogroups, as well as all non-African haplogroups do not carry either SNPs (...)
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=19566
>The Common Chimpanzee is divided into five different subspecies based on genome sequencing.
>Fst value for an Eastern Chimpanzee and a Central Chimpanzee is 0.07. An Nigerian-Cameroonian Chimpanzee and a Central Chimpanzee have an Fst value of 0.16.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0021605
>Europeans & Yoruba people have an Fst of 0.153.
>Cavalli-Sforza et al., 1994 puts African & European at a 0.205 Fst
>The brain volumes of 8 male Australian Aborigines and 11 male Caucasians were determined. Total brain volume was significantly smaller for Aborigines
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1261675/
>Statistical comparisons between the brain weights of the Caucasians and Aboriginal subpopulations show that Aboriginals had smaller brains than Caucasians.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6926391
>The White brain has a high degree of fissuring (higher complexity) and the Black brain has a lower degree of fissuring (lower complexity) in the cerebral cortex of their brains, where abstract and conceptual thought is performed.
Race (John R Baker), Race, Evolution, And Behavior: A Life History Perspective by Professor J. Philippe Rushton
>>674180
I don't know why but this shitpost made me laugh more than usual
>>674146
horse archery
>>674063
So horners are mullato?
>>674119
Actually negritos and melanisians have similar hair and skin tone.
>>673877
Compare that map to quality of life and education, you'll be surprised at the similarities you note.
If IQ is based on race then why is there discrepancy between the South American counties, and even more between them and their former colonial overlords, considering natives are a small minority in the Americas now and Latin America is largely populated by descendants of Portuguese and Spanish settlers
>>674230
What?
>>674221
Assyrians
>>674257
>Compare that map to quality of life and education, you'll be surprised at the similarities you note.
Assuming that correlation implies causation here, causation could go either way.
In South America, there was a great deal of interbreeding with the local population, hence the term "hispanic." If we accept the premise that IQ is related to genetics, this makes sense as the disparity is greater between Europe and Africa than between Europe and SA.
Are you suggesting that IQ is more a product of environment than it is inherent? If you've got evidence for that I'd love to see it, it would add to the discussion.
>>674269
mongols perfected it
>>674269
kek. The Assyrians got consistently rekt when they fought horse nomads.
>>673830
Scientific racism refers more to people using data and theories to justify their bigotry towards different ethnicities, rather than a cogent and falsifiable set of beliefs. Most of the data and theories which were used in the 19th century to justify racism have been disproven, but lots of people (especially on the internet) still use more recent data like crime stats to justify their racism while appearing to remain objective.
Scientific racism simply fell out of fashion as folks realized that subtle genetic differences between groups of people shouldn't make a difference in how they treat people of particular phenotypes or ethnicities. The Holocaust played a big role in that. Scientists have shifted their focus to environmental and social factors to explain differences between various ethnicities.
Obviously there is a genetic basis for IQ. It kind of bothers me that White Nationalists tend to downplay the evidence suggesting that East Asians and Jews are genetically superior, intellectually.
>>674058
They didn't they just found that the categories you want to exist so you can get off your persecution complex don't. Because I know you're trying to imply through your comment that "blacks" are evolutionarily stupid, when in fact great studies in human evolution have been undertaken that show an Ethiopian and a Zulu have no more genetically in common with each other than they do a German does a Chinese. So trying to group various African races together as "Black" has been abandoned in legitimate human evolutionary research.
>>674309
>lol white people have high IQs no wonder we've achieved so much
>then why do Jews have higher IQs and also rule us all from the shadows
>THAT'S DIFFERENT THEY'RE PARASITIC VERMIN
Okay turner
>>674313
But both Ethiopians and Zulus are less intelligent than the many ethnicities in Europe or East Asia. You will find the same pattern for all major ethnic groups in Africa, no matter how different from each other they are.
How do you explain that?
>>674307
Parthians then
>>674308
>A single nucleotide polymorphism practically dictates whether you go to jail for murdering a family and dancing in their blood
>One lone SNP is a subtle difference and we shouldn't treat people differently because of it
>>674279
https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/haprinderm.pdf
>hese findings, using a conservative estimate of evolutionary
influences, provide support for a mixed influence on national cognitive ability stemming from
both current environmental and past environmental (evolutionary) factors.
when creating a new market became more important
>>674332
Don't like 50% of Chinese guys also have that gene? They don't really come to mind when you hear "deranged killer"
>>674340
>50% of Chinese guys also have that gene
>>674323
>I've never been to grad school in the hard sciences
Nigerians are over-represented. Smart people.
>>674344
Are we talking about the MAOA gene?
>>674355
2R specifically.
>>674323
Because regardless of actual genetic similarity, the whole continent was buttfucked to a degree no other continent can even hope to match, and people living in wasteland tend to be poor and poor people tend to be stupid and ignorant. Add to tis fact that the African climate and geography is at the best of times unsuitable for human life and well developed industrial civilizations, Africa won't be getting any smarter anytime soon.
>>674332
If you read the paper, you'll find that only 5% of Blacks have the allele. So how are you going to treat all Blacks differently because of that?
>>674360
Oh, I was thinking of 3R.
In the case of 2R, you've got a better...case, since blacks definitely carry that gene in far higher numbers than whites or asians. Still, it's only 5%. Could that really account for all of the violent crime?
Never, and it never will be, but discrimination based on race, for most people anyways, is morally wrong.
>>674385
>Could that really account for all of the violent crime?
What percentage of blacks do you think commit violent crime? If anything 5% seems like an overestimate.
>>674078
that's an australian aboriginal, not an african, you disingenuous fuck
>>674323
historical and environmental factors which would take hours to discuss for each and every ethnicity in Africa. Among these factors are abundant deadly parasites, poisonous snakes, and blights that made agriculture difficult and food storage even moreso.
Attributing the relative primitivity of African civilizations to innate intelligence is the wrong way of looking at it. IF (and it's a pretty big if) Africans are less intellectually endowed on average, it's because their ancestors were from environments which did not favor the passing down of intellectual traits. White people, with all of their superior communication, armaments, and transportation technology, had a hellacious time trying to settle most of subsaharan Africa before quinine was discovered.
>>674417
he said black, not African. And I'm pretty sure that's a Melanesian.
>>673830
It never actually was, research into races became taboo so it just stopped
>>674355
the chairman MAOA gene
>>674433
Read the thread you stupid fuck.
>>674031
Both of those definitions are wrong
Racism is simply the belief that all people of a race posses certain traits
>>674447
You've described racialism, which is popularly confused with racism.
>>674443
He's right though.
>>674443
Where are the posts about scientifically debunking it?
People just don't think about race like that anymore
African children as old as 6 still fail the mirror test.
American and European children typically pass the mirror test by 18 months old.
>>674457
Racism is popularly confused with racial prejudice because they go hand in hand
>>674471
It's called genetics, because >>674447
>all people of a race posses certain traits
Is plainly not true (possibly excluding some sexually selected phenotypic traits).
>>674479
He said research stopped.
It was 'debunked' once Whites realized the jig was up and people were starting to realize they weren't the smartest race.
>>674490
>African children as old as 6 still fail the mirror test
Wait is this true? As a black mann this is very unnerving.
>>674374
1. It was buttfucked only in the last 500 years or so. Before that, it had all the time in the world to develop civilizations, but with the exception of a few Islamicized medieval societies, Africa was stone age barbarism through and through.
2. The idea that African climate and geography is unsuited to human life and industrial civilization, but Europe isn't is completely ridiculous.
>>674500
>all people of a race posses certain traits
But they do Anon. Are you retarded?
>>674528
It isn't if you're Jared Diamond
>>674529
>There is no variation within races or genetic transfer between races.
>>673830
It's literally never been debunked
Leftists have never even tried, they just throw out illogical nonsense like "Some black people are smart", "White people have black ancestors", or "Black people are genetically diverse" and pretend like it's been debunked
In reality, all scientific evidence shows that blacks (the negroid people originating in sub-Saharan Africa) have on average genetically lower intelligence and higher predisposition to violence than whites (the caucasoid people originating in Europe)
>>674529
>>674500
That anon is being pedantic and demanding standards for human subspecies that no other animal would have demanded of its categorization. Anti-racialists always do this.
In the world of taxonomy, the standards for a subspecies is generally that the traits of the population are common enough in the population that they can be readily identified against other populations.
But the second humans are the beings being analyzed, people go full Plato and demand to know the Essence of Asian-ness down to the exact gene, before they'll admit humans can be divided into subspecies.
So by all means listen with wide open ears as he explains how Africans have tons of genetic diversity and how a single albino or oddly shaped skull makes all attempts at human taxonomy worthless because we're all the same!
Meanwhile, we'll classify birds as different categories because they have different beaks.
>>674539
>This meme
>muh zebras
>>674548
How many seconds of research is behind this post?
>>674551
>being pedantic
Were talking about technical terms, not colloquial meanings.
Taxonomists just go autistic about muh subdivisions.
>>674548
Yes, and Whites are inferior to Asians. Learn your place whitey.
>>674562
Not inferior. Just different.
Africans are not inferior to us either. Just different. The problem is that nobody wants to recognize that races are different at all.
>>674558
True, but even taxonomists don't use the kinds of standards these people demand.
In the real world, a sub-species is
"a category in biological classification that ranks immediately below a species and designates a population of a particular geographic region genetically distinguishable from other such populations of the same species and capable of interbreeding successfully with them where its range overlaps theirs"
That is literally the human races, and yet these people still demand to know what exact genes make someone white. Its a distribution. Its not a hard concept to grasp.
>>674570
Come on. If Africans really are inherently less intelligent and more violent than whites, then they're inferior by most any metric. And by the same token, whites are inferior to asians.
I'm a member of an 'inferior' race and I don't really give a shit.
>>674500
Man, fucking chinese dont like to mix do they
>>674553
I based it on various articles and papers I've read over the years that I remember. Am I expected to include a bibliography? This isn't a formal paper. You're free to google "heritability of IQ" or "IQ race differences".
>>674562
(East) Asians are more intelligent on average than whites, but have fewer extremely intelligent people. Which is why they've invented less compared to whites. So in one sense we're inferior, in another we're superior.
>>674528
>The idea that African climate and geography is unsuited to human life and industrial civilization, but Europe isn't is completely ridiculous.
Europeans didn't have to deal with tropical climates or the infectious diseases, blights, and other problems created by those. They didn't have to deal with innumerable parasites and poisonous snakes thwarting theirs attempts to domesticate animals. They also didn't have giant deserts separating them from each other, allowing for the relatively easier spread of important innovations like writing and certain crops from the middle east.
>>674579
That second idea is relevant to my interests, do you have a source on that, preferably modern?
>>674573
I think subspecies in general are autistic, look at European and American Bison, they're classified as completely different species, yet are able to interbreed.
>>674548
That blacks are generally more violent and less intelligent than most other races is indisputable.
This is indisputably true. The only remaining question is whether it's totally inherent or at all malleable. I'd like to think it is, but maybe that's just me being optimistic.
Question:
When did the word "racism" start being used and in what context?
>>674587
You do realize that Europe had its own swathe of problems standing in the way of civilization, as did the Near East, as did Asia, as did everywhere else, and yet civilization prospered there in one form or another?
The things you're describing would be engineering problems at best if any other race inhabited that continent. Furthermore, that assumes those conditions reign universally over all of Africa. Which is hardly the case. We should expect far more pockets of civilization then we actually found.
>>674579
I googled "inheritability of IQ", and it instead searched for "heritability of IQ"
I corrected it, but every single scholarly paper was about heritability
The burden of proof's still on you
>>674587
African's didn't have to deal with snow.
>>674595
>inb4 someone blames trotsky
>>674594
If you doubt that environmental factors play a significant role you are an idiot.
>>674603
If environmental factors were a significant role then the IQ difference wouldn't be universal and apply across socio-economic lines.
The richest blacks in this country do just barely better on standardized testing than the poorest whites.
Saying its not all genetics is fine, but genetics is almost definitely the basis for most of the difference we see.
>>674599
Homo erectus was able to handle Europe 1 million years ago.
>>674593
So can Polar Bears and Grizzlys.
So can Dolphins and False Killer Whales.
So can Cattle and Wisent.
So can Coyotes and Wolves.
So can Europeans and Africans.
The blowout of the Nuremberg trials basically made people stop supporting racism altogether, regardless of any debunking.
>>674551
>That anon is being pedantic and demanding standards for human subspecies that no other animal would have demanded of its categorization. Anti-racialists always do this.
No, because the categorization promoted by racialists are based on unscientific standards. At what point does someone decide there are European or Asian subspecies when comparing French, Polish, Georgian, Iranian, Turkic, and Chinese populations when each one overlaps considerably with their neighbors? We can say there is a Bengal and a Siberian tiger subspecies because of several thousands of miles isolating the two, but that doesn't work for human populations that have been migrating and in relative constant contact.
>>674640
Then these classifications aren't an accurate description of the biological reality.
>>674595
Here's the best explanation I could find:
https://chechar.wordpress.com/2015/07/30/on-the-origin-of-the-word-racist/
Racism is just like any other ideology, - nationalism, anarchism, communism. It's not inherently derogatory.
>>674645
>Animals are different because of geographical distance
>Orientals and Iberians are exactly the same
>>674640
And using Caucasian and Negroid and other retarded terms is literally trying to spoon-feed retards.
>>674597
>You do realize that Europe had its own swathe of problems standing in the way of civilization, as did the Near East, as did Asia, as did everywhere else, and yet civilization prospered there in one form or another?
Because these regions were not isolated from one another and were constantly receiving migrations of people and technology and livestock from elsewhere to help them develop.
What do you think would become of Northern Europe without any contact with the Near East and Central Asia and the cattle, agriculture, and cultural developments that came from it?
>>674597
>You do realize that Europe had its own swathe of problems standing in the way of civilization, as did the Near East, as did Asia, as did everywhere else, and yet civilization prospered there in one form or another
Every place has its unique challenges which shape the growth and development of societies. The challenges on the African continent towards developing societies with the characteristics of Eurasian civilization were greater than those on all others except Australia.
>The things you're describing would be engineering problems at best if any other race inhabited that continent
Europeans didn't develop the technology to adequately invade and settle most of subsaharan Africa until the 19th century. Without things like quinine, horses, railroads, air conditioning, sterile insect techniques, maize, potatoes, wheat, guns, writing, etc (all invented on other continents thousands of miles away) Africa could not have created populous cities like Europeans did in the 19th century, and it's absurd to think they could have done so with their relative state of isolation.
>>674599
Intense cold can be warded off by the most primitive of technologies: fire and clothing. You can't ward off tropical diseases or droughts with such basic inventions.
>>674666
If there was a wasteland between Orientals and Iberians where no humans roamed naturally, yes, they'd be comparable to subspecies.
But they're not. Don't be stupid. Their unique genes are diffused across Eurasia in a spectrum with no clear and easy division between these intermediaries except the ones we impose through culture.
>>674682
Not stuck in the stone age, that I can guarantee.
>>674645
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negroid
Is a basic model, but we could probably do better. The overall idea of 'racialism' is that genetic differences in human beings exist, and that these differences stretch across populations as distributions.
In the face of that, the exact taxonomy isn't as important, and is something that could be left to later researchers. If not for the fact that our culture's blind devotion to tabula rasa makes genetic research of any kind controversial.
>>674712
>that I can guarantee
There is no possible way you could.
>>674710
>There are groups of people between the two, and thus the two aren't different at all
I hope I'm being trolled, because it's working.
If Ireland was raided and raped by Moors does that mean that Irish are niggers and thus be wiped out for not being pureblood white?
>>674719
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_metallurgy_in_Africa
kek. It's too easy
>>674724
You know yourself better than anyone, so it wouldn't be hard. Maybe quit putting words in people's mouths and you'll feel better. I never said "are the same" or "aren't different at all." I said there's a very clear reason why the usual method we use to classify a subspecies doesn't work with humans.
>>674677
Hence, these are social constructs.
>>674735
How is this supposed to be a guarantee?
>>674750
Not the other guy. Point is Africans weren't in the stone age.
>>674738
See the greentext of >>674724
I honestly can't tell if you're fucking with me, or retarded. Your reasoning for why we can't classify Orientals as different from Iberians is because there exists groups of people between them.
>We can't classify x dolphin/bird as a subspecies, because y dolphin/bird sits between it and z dolphin/bird.
If you were being retarded on purpose, it worked, I give up here, you're welcome to the last word.
>>674666
The fuck is an Oriental?
>>674765
>Your reasoning for why we can't classify Orientals as different from Iberians
Stop. Just fucking stop.
>quit putting words in people's mouths and you'll feel better. I never said "are the same" or "aren't different at all." I said there's a very clear reason why the usual method we use to classify a subspecies doesn't work with humans.
Spend less time melting your brain collecting reaction images and start improving your reading comprehension above the average shitposter. As if an idiot like you could ever have the last word in an argument.
>>674790
The people who occupy the area east of the Occident.
>>674765
>>We can't classify x dolphin/bird as a subspecies, because y dolphin/bird sits between it and z dolphin/bird.
To piggyback off the anon's tiger metaphor, we classify Siberians and Bengals as separate subspecies because they're geographically isolated with no in-between population that would muck with this distinction. We don't classify Sundarban Bengals or even White Bengals as a different subspecies of tiger however despite some unique traits because, as with humans, these tigers are not isolated and there's no clear way to distinguish, say, off-white tigers and kinda-pale tigers as one or the other, or their own subspecies.
>>673887
Races exist biologically, but the idea that they have anything but the most tenuous connection to overall intelligence in a conscious, sapient species is ridiculous. Furthermore, biological disparities do not lead to some form of "superiority" in one race over another, because
a) Any definition of superiority in this context is arbitrary, and
b) Biologically speaking, special proclivities and skill sets in a certain ethnic demographic are incredibly varied to the point where naming a group as particularly superior/inferior is pointless.
Neonazis support the idea of racism because it seems a convenient way of justifying their (completely, objectively amoral) political position. In reality, race is a completely and utterly unsatisfactory means of classification. Socioeconomic demographics have a much, MUCH greater impact on things like IQ and the likelihood of committing crimes, etc.
The modern racist phenomena are perpetuated by ignorant classicists who are still running on Victorian-era propaganda, trying to institute political reform that became outdated and irrelevant over a century ago. If these morons devoted themselves to any even slightly serious research beyond shitty anecdotes on 4chan and news from the past 2 years they would see just how flawed the whole concept is.
>>674832
>amoral
you mean immoral.
>>673877
IQ can be (and usually is) influenced by education. Since africa has shit schools, they have shit IQ.
>>673958
There should be money to fund studies to see how being born at different times of the year affects your development.
Six months old is very different from one year old; so what difference does it make if you are six months old in winter, and one year old in summer, or the other way around?
>>674843
There have been studies on this
http://www.iflscience.com/brain/does-season-birth-affect-personality
>>674765
not him, but you seem to be under the impression that just because there are differences between people from different areas that they should be classified as a different subspecies.
Taxonomic differentiations between subspecies are already imprecise and controversial for many animals because there can be lots of genetic variation within a species from any one region. Trying to place the majority of humans into subspecies is almost impossible due to the relatively recent origins of anatomically modern humans and significant degrees of mixing with people from other continents due to migrations. The only ones you could really make a decent case for being different subspecies would be some isolated groups like Pygmies that genetically diverged from their closest neighbors 60,000 years ago.
>>674116
>the process of separate evolution has been disturbed
There are people who think that we made a mistake when we moved to sexual reproduction?
That's about as reactionary as I can imagine.
One of the biggest reasons I'm convinced that race exists is that I think that the increase in neuroplasticity in our brains has increased the rate of our evolution rather than decreasing it.
People say that "It was only 10,000-100,000 years of separation, that's not enough time to evolve!" But that couldn't be further from the truth. Human sexuality is a downright phenomenal selective pressure, and I believe that the increase of neuroplasticity in our brains directly relates to it. If anything, we have been very active in controlling our evolutionary paths.
Combine this with geographical obstacles like the Mediterranean sea, the Alps, and the red sea, and you've got a case where humans have been selectively breeding themselves for their environments for a while over many generations.
>>674875
The Mediterranean isn't an obstacle, it's an asset you dumbass. It created a near-perfect climate for people to live in and grow crops and develop civilization and encouraged them to develop boats and connect with non-neighboring peoples.
>>674574
>If Africans really are inherently less intelligent and more violent than whites, then they're inferior by most any metric.
Being more violent is probably an advantage in survival, and their intelligence is where it needs to be to survive in Africa. That's what evolution is all about isn't it? To adapt to be able to succeed in your environment?
>>674888
You're an idiot.
Stop pretending that bodies of water are not obstacles that inhibit gene flow. If it were a giant plains instead, there would be far more gene flow between these regions.
This discussion is going to get very embarrassing for you if you pursue this.
>>674875
>geographical obstacles like the Mediterranean sea, the Alps, and the red sea
You said it yourself, human sexuality is amazing. As fucking if a few hills and puddles effectively stopped humanity from getting some exotic poon from the other side.
>>674896
You're an idiot.
Learn the difference between "inhibiting" and "stopping".
I did not say that the Mediterranean stopped access to foreign poon. I said it limited it.
>>674908
No, you said obstacles, which are
>thing(s) that blocks one's way or prevents or hinders progress
And I only said it didn't effectively stop the flow of people, and it didn't.
From similar discussion on /pol/, their position is predictable
>>674832
>but the idea that they have anything but the most tenuous connection to overall intelligence in a conscious, sapient species is ridiculous
Why though? If we evolved differently physically, why is it ridiculous to think we evolved differently mentally?
>>674913
Yes.
The Mediterranean sea effectively hindered gene flow.
Thank you for agreeing with me.
>>674913
>hinders
Learn to use a dictionary
>>674875
The neuroplasticity argument is pseudoscience bullshit and you know it. It's just the same old dumbfuck rhetoric torn from a crappy unsourced essay that you people use to "justify" what is an undoubtedly unjustifiable position. The racists and nationalists are always conjuring up these shitty little scraps of data to lean on, arguments that don't hold up for more than a few years before being empirically disproved, hoping that they can somehow use them to defend against a mountain of contrary evidence and logical observation.
>>673830
Basically when Franz Boas BTFO'd Anglosphere phrenologists by proving that skeletal differences are rarely accurate for predicting race.
>>673854
Explain yourself, shitheel
>>674895
Giant plains regions are, historically, a far greater obstacle to migration than large, easy-to-navigate bodies like the Med. If anything, waters usually make travel way, way easier.
But please, I would LOVE to hear your logical, empirical argument that handily contradicts thousands of years of historically observable phenomena.
>>674922
>blocks
>prevents
>hinders
You can't pick and choose without clarifying.
>>674921
Oh, so I guess those periodic migrations and colonization events between all shores of the Mediterranean never happened. Romans and Greeks never spread their genes into Egypt and Syria, North Africans and Levantines never influenced any genes in Spain and Southern Italy. And if they did, it must have been someone jerking off into the ocean and a few surviving sperm swimming up the leg of a girl bathing on the other side.
>>673877
East Asians and Native Americans are incredibly close genetically, so why should their IQs differ so greatly?
>>674936
Do you actually know what gene flow is and how it relates to evolution, or are you just kinda posting for the sake of it?
>>674924
>The neuroplasticity argument is pseudoscience bullshit and you know it.
I strongly disagree.
>>674937
>so I guess those periodic migrations and colonization events between all shores of the Mediterranean never happened.
That is not what I said at all.
READ, MY BROTHER,FOR THE LOVE OF GO, READ!
>>674937
>on /his/
>literally can't understand the word "obstacle"
Since when does obstacle only mean something that stops progress completely? It's anything that presents challenges to progress.
>>673860
>Around the time we started sequencing various bacteria subpopulations and discovered there was more diversity within bacteria than outside of it, making statements such as 'bacteria are genetically smaller' nonsensical, since bacteria do not have homogeneous gene pool.
Heterogeneity in general doesn't imply heterogeneity in all traits.
>>674955
>Around the time we started sequencing various bacteria subpopulations and discovered there was more diversity within bacteria than outside of it, making statements such as 'bacteria are genetically smaller' nonsensical, since bacteria do not have homogeneous gene pool.
Fucking savage
>>674951
Or it blocks them. I'm not sure you understand the word 'or' here.
>>674937
>You can't pick and choose without clarifying.
You're a learned and literate adult.
Maybe utilize critical thought for once and pick up context clues.
>>674078
Yes, such a surprise you can change your hair color by using cow piss to dye it
>b-b-but Africa isn't inferior all that cannibalism, child rape, mud huts, cow piss, etc
Come on. When our ancestors were savages they were way better. They were pagan vikings and they didn't do shit like that.
>>674948
>The Mediterranean effectively hindered the flow of genes and alleles from one shore to another
>Except all those times it didn't.
I don't think you understand what the word effectively means.
>>674917
It isn't ridiculous: some minor differences in the average mind are assuredly present between different genetic demographics. But the fact that humans are self-aware and can already make conscious decisions means that those differences are so minutial that they aren't even scientifically observable.
If humans were guppies, a handful of differences in synaptic makeup MIGHT make a very slight change in ecosystem, but a large complex mammal that is SELF-AWARE and able to gather new information regardless of physiology wouldn't be affected in the slightest by varying patterns, whatever those patterns are.
>>674545
>implying implications
>>674933
>skeletal differences are rarely accurate for predicting race
but that's not true, it's a prevalent aspect of forensics.
>>674963
You're not going to win this argument by being coy and clinging to semantics.
>>674963
Yeah, but when someone says "the Mediterranean presents an obstacle to migration" you can't then go "hurr durr people still crossed it" and then act as if you've disproved them. You're the only one here that doesn't understand the word 'or.'
>>674322
It's not the high IQ that's the reason for the Caucasians achieving so much. It's their particularly high abstract intelligence that's the reason for making up near 100% of all classical composers, artists, inventions, etc. We have a perfect system where whites create things and Asians improve them.
>>674964
Thank you, but there have to be some in the first place. I'm not a child anymore than can parse the whimsy of an actual child with a poor vocabulary.
Debating whether there are differences in intelligence between races in the current west is like debating whether mankind evolved from the ape in medieval europe. It's not a free and fair debate when one side is considered to be heretics.
>>674965
Thats a Melanesian anon.
>>674973
That's why I won it already with a direct dictionary quote. If you're looking to try for a rhetorical victory, you'll have an even worse time.
>>674967
No, I definitely used the term correctly.
The reason these are recognized as events to begin with is because the gene flow between these regions is relatively low to begin with because there is a body of water between them causing relative isolation.
This is not complete isolation. It simply means it is hindered, and the reason we recognize these migrations in the first places is because they are compared with the normal rate of gene flow to begin with.
This isn't a hard concept. You don't need to be so difficult about this.
>>674574
Why do you assume that? Clearly not to the gene pool which is the only thing that matters. The difference between white and Asians society is virtually non-existent compare that between Europe and Africa.
>>674972
False positives are exceedingly common
>>674982
>a direct dictionary quote
A direct dictionary quote which disproved you
>>674965
Only 1 ethnic group did that
That kid is naturally blonde and vikings were pretty shitty and I don't know why people admire them over those many other times the Nordes did cool shit.
>>674975
Yes you can, because the Mediterranean did not present an obstacle at all. It's been crossed so often, so readily, and so constantly for as long as humans inhabited both sides of the sea that it's barely an obstacle at all.
Now the Sahara, that's a fucking obstacle.
>>674989
>So far
I don't care about backpedaling. I take idiots at their first word. If you wanted to clarify your already poor position, do so from the start instead of playing games.
>>674988
It's okay, English can be a difficult second language for many.
>>674994
Weak b8
>>674942
Do you actually know what fucking oceans are?
The Mediterranean is not the fucking pacific. It has been nothing but conducive to travel, migration, and, yes, gene flow. You seem to have forgotten that land migrations are not simple, short processes. They take far longer and are much more gradual than Mediterranean travels in even the first century after the widespread development of galleys.
>>674994
>If you wanted to clarify your already poor position, do so from the start instead of playing games.
Just ask, familam.
>216 replies and 20 images omitted
It won't be /pol/ 2.0 they said, it'll be fun they said.
>>674939
They're not though. You must be thinking of north Asians (Siberians).
>>675002
You need to get it out of your head that gene flow and migration are interchangeable concepts.
>>675005
Better than /lit/ 2.0
>>675010
>gene flow (also known as gene migration)
>>675005
>In a thread where Caucasian and Negroid were shown to be social constructs.
>>675002
>It has been nothing but conducive to travel
.... but it hasn't.
This is literally why they needed to invent boats in the first place.
>>675002
How did early humans cross the Mediterranean sea before the widespread development of galleys?
>>675021
That's like saying cars are a detriment to travel because they needed to be engineered. What the fuck sort of backwards thinking is that?
>>675040
How did Aboriginals reach Australia ~50,000 years ago.
>>673854
first post best post
>>675041
It's like you're intentionally trying to be dumb.
Cars are the solution. The fact that a solution is possible does not make a long distance not an obstacle.
>>675047
He's referring to after the ice age but before galleys were invented
I wonder how many times this argument has been held.
>>675048
>like 80% of them died
Hell of a win.
>>675010
You are an actual retard.
Migration is conducive to gene flow, and usually a prerequisite. You COULD make the argument that genes can play the telephone game, one person mating with someone slightly farther away and their offspring mating another person slightly farther away, but all evidence indicates that such a process is very uncommon and gradual to the point of irrelevance in the discussion of gene dispersal. MIGRATION is a far greater deciding factor.
>>675060
About 0 times in public since WWII
▲
▲▲
>>675059
I'm pointing out that we don't know how they did it, but it was certainly possible.
>>675055
Jesus Christ.
I'll try to make this simple: travelling over water, on a boat, is --FASTER-- and --EASIER-- than travelling on foot. There's nothing more to it.
>>675068
Rushton seemed to do okay for himself.
>>675075
>travelling over water, on a boat, is --FASTER-- and --EASIER-- than travelling on foot
What's your point?
>>675047
Yeah, and the Abbos have had little to no migration since then.
Are you trying to help his point or refute it?
>>675075
We are not talking about steamboats here, Tex. We are talking about divergences that predate sea travel.
>>675075
Except sea-faring boats were not around for the vast majority of human existence. And the few that were around were extremely limited in their scope.
Oh fuck. I accidentally used the word "limited". Do I need to spend another 6 posts explaining in-depth as to what this means?
>>675075
Yeah, except travelling by car is faster and easier than travelling by boat.
Check-and-mate.
>>675075
Then why were the Americas discovered so long after the first land trips across the Atlantic-dwarfing width of the Eurasian continent?
>>675094
Just saying that even pre-galley travel in the Mediterranean would certainly be possible, and not so great an obstacle as it was made out to be.
Also plenty of room to migrate to within Australia (and I suspect that some sort of coastal migration culture through the Indonesian 'archipelago' seems likely to have lead to the colonisation of Australia)
>>675104
>Glacier bruh.
>>675100
limited doesn't mean impossible!!!!!
they could still have crossed with them learn to speak english
>>675111
We are not arguing about whether it is possible or not.
That is not the discussion. That is not the point being made.
>>675088
If the Mediterranean were land, it would be harder.
Your idea: the Mediterranean is an obstacle
My idea: the Mediterranean is not an obstacle and is actually conducive to travel
By demonstrating that travelling on the Mediterranean would be faster and easier than travelling on foot, I have provided some form of logical rhetoric.
You shouldn't have to have the concept of arguing explained to you during an argument you fucking ADHD-afflicted twat.
>>675119
Over long time periods even one single population crossing could lead to significant genetic admixture.
>>675120
I understood perfectly, i'm just bringing it back to the basic premise rather than the convoluted clusterfuck it was previously.
Now: what if your ships suck?
>>675103
It actually literally isn't you moron.
Most shipping is still done by sea to this day, and for a good reason. Going by sea from New York to Cancun is a helluva lot easier than going by car.
>>675122
Again, that is not the argument being made.
The populations are still relatively isolated, and the idea that a single individual will change the allelic frequencies in a population enough that they are synchronized is fucking absurd.
Is it possible? Sure. Anything is possible. My cumshot could land on the fucking moon one of these days. Is it probable enough to even entertain? Not in the least.
>>675104
Because the atlantic requires sailing technology that is vastly different than the Mediterranean (the ocean we're actually talking about). Efficient travel across the Med was possible thousands of years before the same could be said of the Atlantic.
>>675132
Yeah, except my car can go in your freighter.
But your freighter can't go in my car!
Check and mate!
>>675136
>the idea that a single individual will change the allelic frequencies in a population
No one is suggesting a single individual.
And the original argument was actually about the Mediterranean being an obstacle, this is completely related.
