I find it funny how little white supremacists know their biology.
Their claims that white phenotypical traits are somehow superior are utter bullshit.
As you probably know atavistic traits are almost always genetically dominant, while newer traits are almost always recessive. Humans originate from Africa, which means traits that allow you to adapt to Africa are the most atavistic, and thus the most dominant.
Which means that black people have the most dominant genetic setup on Earth, followed closely by the various Semitic and Hamitic peoples originating from the Middle East (Arabs, Jews, Palestines etc. though a bit less in the case of Jews since they have been mingling with Europeans for hundreds of years).
While the traditional "pure Aryan" genes are almost all weak-ass recessive genes.
How ironic
>>72639976
Then why do niggers risk drowning to live in white countries?
go to bed lakatos
>>72640275
this
>>72640123
You ought to learn some basic reading comprehension my man. I didn't say shit about countries. It sucks crusty whale balls to live in Africa, yeah, but literally nobody was talking about that.
All I'm saying is that white people ain't superior genetically.
>>72639976
Dominant and recessive has nothing to do with what is superior or inferior.
Genetic variants that confer higher fitness on an individual can be said to be superior, those that confer lower fitness inferior.
Given that nigger genes don't allow them to build societies where life expectancy is much higher than the teenage years, yeah, I'll say they are inferior.
>>72639976
>Humans originate from Africa, which means traits that allow you to adapt to Africa are the most atavistic, and thus the most dominant.
>Which means that black people have the most dominant genetic setup on Earth
That's a lot of mental gymnastics.
>>72640699
You think the ability to build functioning societies is genetic. Mmmmmmkay.
>>72639976
t.magyar
>>72639976
>newer traits are almost always recessive
So more evolved peoples are recessive.
>>72641024
this
OP won't answer to this post
>>72639976
they are still not adapted to our enviroment and thus "inferior"
>>72641024
> implying that newer traits are necessarily better
> implying that there is such a thing as "more" evolved
There is more complex and less complex in evolution but not even that applies here. Equal complexity, different traits.
>>72640899
Yeah, I think there is a very high likelihood that genetic factors do influence the ability to build functioning societies.
Just alone for the fact that intelligence is highly heritable.
>>72641131
Whoops.
>>72640899
>Bird's nests
>>72640899
It really is. There are genetics linked to the evolution of the brain (like microcephalin) that are absent among nigs
>>72639976
>Hence primates have even more dominant genes than blacks.
>>72640899
iq is
and a high iq is a must for societies
>>72641144
White people and Asians are newer genetically than niggers. Guess which ones built civilizations?
It's not the niggers, I can tell you that.
>>72641144
There is such a thing as more evolved
A bacteria that has developed a defense against a new drug is by any definition better adapted to survival and thus more evolved
Claiming that there is no such thing as more evolve is a silly sophism
>>72641189
Birds' nests are inherited behavioral patterns. Societies are not.
>>72639976
If you have a bottle of fine wine and then you piss in it, the piss dominates.
What's your fucking point?
>>72641292
Shaka Zulu might want a word with you.
And yet they lived in mud huts until whitey came.
Niggers can't even take advantage of their superior genes.
>>72641344
Who said that socities are not created around inherited behavioral patterns?
Do you really think that gorillas are going to staret creating cities if given the right tools?
>>72640434
>All I'm saying is that white people ain't superior genetically.
>whites invented a fuck ton of modern technology, more than any other race
>black Americans get handouts, preferential treatment for universities, jobs, etc. and are still eons behind the average white man in terms of intelligence and economic success
>Africa is still a caveman tier shithole and the only development/gentrification happened because of whites
Explain this shit
>inb4 muh racism, muh slavery, muh WE WUZ
>>72641144
>newer traits are necessarily better
Well the country's populated with people who carry newer traits seem to be doing better then the country's populated by people with older traits.
>>72639976
cigány
>>72641384
You may as well say that emus have a civilization because they defeated australians once
>>72641344
>Birds' nests are inherited behavioral patterns. Societies are not.
Of course they fucking are; humans are societal animals much like many primates but we are far more intelligent and able to build large groups with functioning social cohesion.
>>72639976
Really? Tell me how it is possible that two branches of a species, living in distinctly different environments for thousands of generations, could have evolved in the same way, and at the same rate? Learn some biology. Evolution either IS, or IS NOT. Humans are not immune to evolutionary pressures. White characteristics are better in the societies whites built for themselves.
An argument could be made that recessive genes are, as you stated, more rare and therefore more desirable. Just a thought
>>72641344
>Birds' nests are inherited behavioral patterns. Societies are not.
Of course they are.
Societies are the outward projection of the physical nature.
That's why African societies are are so tied up with animism and nature.
>>72639976
By extension of your own logic that would mean that white people are the most evolved.
Check em.
>>72639976
>implying it's 100% positive without a doubt proven we ALL started in Africa
Fuck off.
>>72639976
>Gene recessiveness an argument against racism
>Nigger genes are the "strongest" and yet they can't help it but behave like chimps
The skin color phenotype isn't what we hate, but the chimpout attitude and the intellectual inferiority of subhumans.
Hi newfriend :^ )
>>72640434
>implying out-of-Africa isn't constantly being challenged with every genome discovery
>implying social construct isn't integrated on a genetic level
>implying your argument, even if valid, isn't overtly narrow to fulfill your scope of debate.
We're done here, Sambo
There is no such thing as "more evolved". As someone who's actually studying to become a geneticist I would know.
>>72639976
Okay, Jared Diamond.
Isn't sickle-cell disease dominant too?
>>72641922
In the sense that there's no linear scale with which we can follow the progress of evolution to a finite goal you are correct.
But we can say that the genomes of whites are more recently evolved.
OP btfo as usual
>>72639976
Well then whatever pseudoscience you're quoting is wrong.
Reality has a white supremacist bias. ;^)
>>72641922
>no such thing as more intelligent
>>72641922
Your position has more to do with current PC orthodoxy than with anything related to reality
An organism that has undergone more evolutive pressure and changed the most as a result is by definition more evolved, more specialized
Given that evolution is adaptation through natural selection to a certain hostile environment, an organism can be more strongly adapted, more specialized to that environment than previous forms of its own clade
>>72639976
Thank you for demonstrating the uneducated masses interpretation of what "dominant" and "recessive" means.
>>72641384
>>72642077
More recently evolved =/= Better or more dominant
>>72639976
Where did you stole a potato to post this Rikárdó?
>>72639976
Having opposable thumbs is also recessive
>>72642486
Phenotypically dominance != Actual Superiority
>>72642486
>traits emerge in a population for no reason
>>72642584
Phenotypical dominance = Nonexistant
>>72642603
I never said that.
>>72642696
You certainly implied that a population that has evolved a certain trait more recently is not as well suited to their environment as a population that does not have that trait. So tell us, why would a population develop a trait that hinders its survivability?
>>72642584
Wait I just realized what you meant. Look pal, just because a trait leads to better fitness in one part of the world doesn't mean it leads to fitness everywhere else.
There is no such thing as worldwide supremacy of one race.
Did intelligence evolve?
>>72642655
> Phenotypical dominance does not exist
wat?
Do you know that things like brown eyes, black hair, certain diseases, etc... have phenotypical dominance right?
>>72642974
There is one trait that leads to better fitness everywhere in the world: it is called Intelligence
A trait so overwhelming that humans are the only animals that have ever landed on the Moon and have potential to colonize other worlds
>>72642888
Because evolution is about the then and there. It doesn't mean you'll do better around the world.
It's a constantly continuing cycle that will go on for eternity to help organisms adapt to new environments and new situations, but sometimes that requires the loss of old traits that were evolved for the old environments.
>>72639976
Let me just put it like this, whites are a glass of water, niggers are dirt. Dirt can easily polute and transform water by it voids most of the qualities it offered earlier.
Besides, it also means we are far away from apes. While blacks are pretty much just a step of evolution away from being a fucking baboon.
>>72643007
I actually took that back when I realized what you meant.
>>72639976
OP i know you are confused, but you must understand that the word dominant in genetics has very little to do with dominant as a trait describing behaiviour.
A gene being dominant has nothing to do with what having said gene will change in a human.
>>72643481
Trying to convince a cuckold is a joke.
