All memes aside, how can you define a race? It's hard to stay consistent with calling people white or black or latino when skin colour ranges from pale white to pitch black in a spectrum-like manner.
How dark must a person's skin be to be considered black? What would be the exact shade where the classification changes? What other things than skin color can define an individual's race?
Notable examples:
1) Are slavs a distinct race from other "whites"? Why? Why not? What characteristics set them apart?
2) How do you define a latino? Is it based on a certain skin colour or rather the location of origin?
3) Are gingers the purest form of whiteness since cross-breeding them with lesser whites causes ginger-specific traits to vanish (compare to white/black breeding)
Scientific studies seem to indicate that genetically races are very unlikely to exist. Is there no point in classifying people by race, then? Are we all just people with different looks?
Help me out, /pol/. My race-based world view is crumbling. Surely there's facts to back it up?
You can't even define the things you constantly talk about?
C'mon, you're better than this.
>>76440268
>skin color
Skin color is a single trait, man.
>scientific studies seem to indicate that genetically races are very unlikely to exist
No, they don't.
>>76440268
>colours don't exist cause it's a spectrum
This is how retarded you sound OP. Certain medications can actually KILL those of certain ethnic heritage.
But medicine and biology is just a social construct after all.
>>76441184
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)#Biological_classification
>A consensus consequently developed among anthropologists and geneticists that race as the previous generation had known it – as largely discrete, geographically distinct, gene pools – did not exist.
Also later on there is more evidence that the variance within each "race" is bigger than that between "races".
Did you even read all of my post? Skin color is a single trait, yes, yet the one most commonly used to specify a race. What else is there to set a race apart?
What races are there and where do we draw the boundary between them?
>>76441730
So every shade is a different race then? How dark must a skin be to be black? Or do you just make it up on a case by case basis?
>Memes aside
Get out kiddo
>>76440268
Facial features and skull structure are everything.
You can be a very dark skin caucasian or a white negroid.
>>76440268
>All memes aside, how can you define a race?
Scientifically, you can't.
>>76441184
>No, they don't.
Yes they do
>>76440268
DO YOUR HOMEWORK AND EAT SHIT AND FUCK OFF YOU SMUG LITTLE RETARD
http://humanbiologicaldiversity.com/
>>76441913
>appeal to nebulous authority via wiki
>Lewontin's fallacy
Nice.
>What else is there to set a race apart?
Genetics, and thousands to tens of thousands of years of history. That only sounds like a vague cop-out because you're ignorant.
>Skeletal structures
>Facials features
>Natural skin pigmentation
>Hair texture
>Any genetic advantages one race has over another
>>76441913
nigger lips
jew nose
There are many traits.
>>76440268
If you have pink nipples your white
If you have brown nipples your not white
>>76442684
No, they really don't. That's just a meme you people like to play with because you read it on the internet.
>>76440268
>as largely discrete, geographically distinct, gene pools – did not exist.
You cannot define the color red or yellow, because there is a continuum between the colors, so colors don't exist.
Try to ask a coroner if he can distinguish the race of a person based only on the bones.
They do all the time.
>>76440268
>how can you define a race?
Subgroupings of genetic haplogroups.
It's not hard for the educated to comprehend the division of race and how it functions.
Skin color + culture seems appropiate.
>Are slavs a distinct race from other "whites"?
No, they're a different KIND of white, but they share the common characteristics of white civilization
>How do you define a latino?
European + native american mix AKA Mestizo
>Are gingers the purest form of whiteness since cross-breeding them with lesser whites causes ginger-specific traits to vanish
Pure or whatever i don't know, they're definitely white tho.
>Is there no point in classifying people by race, then?
I like to use "cultural demographics" with race as an important indicator. That your skin is black doesn't say anything about you, but it does say a lot about your parents being black, and that you were raised in an environment surrounded by blacks, and those things stick with you forever whether you want it or not.
>SLAVS
>NOT WHITE
fags believe this
>>76442884
http://humanbiologicaldiversity.com/#RealityofRace
HURRRRR
Well white people are subhumans, you know the whole neanderthral thing as for everyone else is an offset of the original men and women. That look similar to Ethiopians since they were the only people to not have been fucked by some outside group of people.
>>76441913
frankly I don't get why they focus on genetics so much. If a monkey has less than 2% genetic difference between humans, I don't know how they can call a .1% genetic difference between two humans "almost nothing"
>>76442452
The thing is that you should understand is that culture is the main problem, not race. Liberals are to stupid to look past skin color and /pol/ glorifies race because they are failures and need a way to put down people that are superior them. Though I'm not saying every nonwhite is superior.
>>76442884
No. Scientifically there is no race in human beings. Doesn't mean that there are no differences betwenn races.
> That's just a meme you people like to play with because you read it on the internet.´
lol, no. It's a consensus amoung the sientific community.
>>76441913
Check the methodology. Half jews from around the world are very similar to eachother genetically.
>>76441913
This desu.
We haven't been isolated long enough from each other to be split into different races - of course there are genetically differences, but where you put the line for what is considered X and Y race is blurred. For example some white peoples may carry a gene that is more common among what we define as black people while some black people carry a gene that white people typically have. This is especially true in countries with a history of mixing such as the US.
>>76442592
There's a lot of variance in facial features and skull shapes inside populations though.
If there exists an european with facial features or skull similiar to an african individual, would they be of the same race? Are they both then of an european race or an african race?
>>76442684
The Chinks all seem to agree that common phenotypes are easy to identify with common groups and geographical regions. For all intents and purposes, why can't that be labeled race?
Really, the whole notion that obvious genetic similarities and differences aren't indicative of certain groups of people is just a play of semantics by people trying to appeal to feelgood idealism.
>>76440268
Race can easily be defined. Go and get a bone marrow transplant and they will define race fucking clear as day for you.
>>76443107
You obviously meant to respond to someone else.
>>76443147
This is ignorant as fuck.
>>76443195
>Scientifically there is no race in human beings. Doesn't mean that there are no differences betwenn races.
>there are no races
>but there are differences between races
Ok.
>>76442452
It's not shades or colours. It's clusters of certain genetic markers specific to that ethnicity. In the same way different electromagnetic waves aren't specific to that wave(where does green start and blue begin?) neither are these genetic markers.... But only a autist would disband colour as a actual useful, substantial thing, that helps guide people through the world.
>>76440268
>bow can you define a race?
Easy, the one drop rule
One drop of dirty water spoils a whole bucket
One drop of nigger blood means you are in fact, a nigger
>>76440268
If you view a person's genetic makeup, you can determine their race, or their racial makeup if they are mixed racially.
You can even determine their nationality, or ethnic composition within that nationality, all genetically.
White is a concept from my side of the world. We needed a concept to describe people of European stock, or mostly European stock. Skin color isn't that relevant. White = European/Mediterranean/some of western Asia. Black = Sub Saharan African.
You're trying to reduce it to phenotype, which isn't its intended purpose.
>>76440268
>Are gingers the purest form of whiteness since cross-breeding them with lesser whites causes ginger-specific traits to vanish
yes
reserch the way ginger's bodies work that they are more resistant to cold only species in the world to self produce vitamin D all other humans need sun for it but not the ginger
the ginger is the purest form of whiteness genetically
>>76443242
>The Chinks all seem to agree that common phenotypes are easy to identify with common groups and geographical regions.
Yes, but it doesn't make a race, because the genetic differences inside those populations are enourmous.
>>76443452
>>but there are differences between races
Bad wording. I meant "no differences betwenn populations"
>>76443249
Does blood type define your race as well? After all, blood compatibility is also dependent on similiar factors (proteins).
Stop being retarded. Of course it blurs when people mix and along geographic borders. The differences between Africans and Europeans and East Asians and Aboriginals are still plain as day. And not just skin deep, obvious differences in skeletal structure, especially the face. Genetic diseases like sickle cell. That's adaptation, natural selection. There are countless examples that the differences are more than skin deep, but no one wants to say that because it's a career killer. Anthropologists will talk about how we're all exactly the same in one breath and in the next start comparing skulls. It's a joke.
It doesn't matter what you choose to call it. Race, sub-species, breed, ethnic group. They all have the same implications for mankind. We ARE different, it's in our blood, it's heritable, and many of these differences are undesirable. Don't get caught up in a semantics war with jews, they'll always win.
>>76441913
How about this. We stop arguing over definitions and differences and get straight down to business.
If you weren't born on the European continent within the last 100 years, you should either get the fuck out, or be terminated. And if you were born in this time, yet aren't part of any of the predominant European haplogroups after all the kebab, chink and nignog is removed, you should be sterilized.
Bonus: Islam is banned across Europe & "refugees" shot on sight / left to drown.
An idyllic scenario.
>>76443663
>that relevant. White = European/Mediterranean/some of western Asia
wrong
what you are describing is caucasian not white there is a difference
>>76442983
>David Simon
>hmmm, names sounds pretty Jewish
>google'd him
>yep, he's a kike
/pol/ is right again. I assume he loves when goyim racemix and delude their own cultures and nations, but still wants Israel to be a Jewish ethnostate.
>>76443215
They aren't the same. You can often determine race by skull as well, with each broad racial group having distinct characteristics.
>>76443200
Yeah we never had milleniana of strict eugenics policies imposed by law. Totally didn't happen.
>>76443682
> only species in the world to self produce vitamin D
Do you have anything to back that up with?
>>76440268
Genes.
>>76443606
That's a load of shit. Given enough generations all the nigger traits can be bred out.
My family claims we have injun blood somewhere along the line(like a lot of stupid people do) but my nose is narrow, my skin is white and my nipples are pink. I was born with blonde hair and light colored eyes. So if there is injun blood in me its long gone by now.
>>76443703
Ok. Let's throw the word "race" out for a moment.
With a bit of spit or blood, your ancestry can be determined in a lab. We can determine which population groups you descend from. This wouldn't be possible if the genetic differences between population groups didn't exist.
Now realize that "race" just means "population group" in a macro sense. All ethnic Europeans are more closely related than they are to Africans, as an example.
When you can literally math it out, it's real.
>>76444069
Redheads can't absorb sufficient Vitamin D due to low concentrations of eumelanin in their body. This may sound like bad news, but this lower melanin-concentration means that gingers can cleverly produce their own Vitamin D within their body when exposed to low light conditions
you can find this kind of info anywhere they are also harder to sedate requiring i believe its around 40% more anesthetic than other humans
>>76443703
So a Han Chinese man could possibly have more genetic similarity to a sub-Saharan pygmy nigger than another Han Chinese? I don't think so.
I feel as if geneticists make nitpicky references that ignore the mean average; because not doing so would be politically incorrect and bad for their career. Chinese scientists are free from modern Western moral obligations, so they often publish more striking articles about "race" or differing phenotypes, or whatever faggots like you want to call it.
>>76444218
It's a nice story but where are your sources?
>>76443195
>No. Scientifically there is no race in human beings.
so the black niggers that robbed me don't exist?
niggers that call me branquela are just sorely mistaken i guess, poor little motherfuckers
>>76443895
I disagree. I would classify most of these groups, even if they do have a more bronze complexion as white. I wouldn't say the majority of Turks were white, but I would say some groups in said areas are considered white.
>>76444444
wasted you fucking nigger
>>76444444
kek demands sources
>>76444444
wasted you fucking sandnigger
>>76444444
In those juicy sexts.
>>76444444
BROOF A DOODLE DOO :-DDDD
>>76444444
http://news.health.com/2012/11/09/redheads-gene-cloudy-climates/
>>76440268
You have caucasoid, mongoloid (you) and negroid.
>Scientific studies seem to indicate that genetically races are very unlikely to exist.
Kek, genetically, a Poodle has more in common with a Bulldog than a Caucasoid and Negroid.
What science are you speaking about?
>>76441913
>What else is there to set a race apart?
Their genes
>>76440268
Race meme is a kike ploy, pic related.
So fucking obvious.
>>76444444
Witnessed
>>76444444
>wasted on a Mongolian
wew
>>76443900
he married a wealthy jewish writer like himself
i dont know his views on israel though
>>76444835
So they can't self-produce it after all, but require sunlight?
>>76444190
>All ethnic Europeans are more closely related than they are to Africans
Nope bro. Do your research
>>76445400
Yes they are. The fst score between different European populations is going to be smaller than that between Europeans and Africans.
>>76444884
This one also lacks sources. Sounds to me like you're just pulling facts out of your ass.
>>76440268
Races do exist and are a scientifically viable method of classifying people. The left has fought hard in the past few decades to change the definition of the word and refer to what was formally called "race" as "ethnicity" to trick people into thinking that it doesn't exist or is invalid. They also try to encourage race mixing as a way to muddy the gene pool and act like no trait is specific to any racial group, especially ones related to intelligence.
>>76445400
How about you post sauce?
>>76440268
Whites = Europeans
Blacks = Africans
Yellows = Asians
etc
>>76443682
>tfw ginger
Feels good man
>>76445245
>>76445636
shut the fuck up you get waster
>>76445400
Yes, genetic distance is roughly congruent with geographic distance. (except in cases of recent immigration obv, eg America)
>>76446091
>roughly
Scratch that, very.
>>76443200
That's not how it works.... educate yourself
>>76445245
they do they from very low levels of sun light problem with human research is no one wants to do it cause of racism it would be nice if we could examine the real differences between races of which there are many
Here is the 100% accurate test for Whiteness.
Both of the following apply to the person in question:
1. Lactose tolerant into adulthood
2. Pink nipples
>>76445636
Google retard
I don't sit on these sources.
Do you deny that the average IQ in Africa is 70-80 too?
If the difference in IQ, looks and behavior (much more aggressive) is so different, it's more than just skin colour.
>>76445400
He is correct actually. Its a principle of genetic distance that what he said is true.
>>76440268
>how can you define a race?
science uses haplogroups
but /pol/acks can't agree which are "white"
R1 invented railroads and have subjugated the majority of the planet throughout recorded history so I would argue that they are the "master race"
>>76440268
Read Razib Khan's blog at Unz.com.
>>76446197
Self-production =/= production from low levels. We all know that less melanin = more d-vitamin production. It's high school -tier information.
I'm just upset that you tried to push your self-production bullshit in the beginning instead of saying it like is is.
>>76445400
Yes, bro. Do yours.
Stay Strong Europe, you are all closely related.
Except for Finns.
>>76445636
>>76446642
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ1hK5WsHZ4&list=PLd9_g7lAICxtlGbxh4_z8ik178o8CDPnv&index=6
Watch this faggot, program sent on the STATE CHANNEL here.
there is more genetic variation within races than between them. race is basically culture. thats why a light skinned red head mexican like canelo alvarez is seen as representing mexico and mexicans, because he talks like a mexican, raised by mexicans, does mexican things.
>>76446642
theres all kinds of shit from the differences in pain that they feel the requiring more anesthetic the heightened resistance to cold related afflictions the difference in the way they feel pain there is alot of differences in gingers and normal whites i miss spoke my bad
>>76447184
>Lewontin making yet another appearance
>>76446770
I'll be sure to take a look at this later.
>program sent on the STATE CHANNEL here
That by itself doesn't give the documentary much credibility.
>scientific article not written by jews
The proportion of human genetic variation due to differences between populations is modest, and individuals from different populations can be genetically more similar than individuals from the same population. Yet sufficient genetic data can permit accurate classification of individuals into populations.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/
>>76447184
I tip my fedora to you, senior Lewontin.
>>76447273
Source you presented says nothing about anesthetics though. Only D-vitamin production.
And what of this frost and pain resistance bullshit? Where are the sources for those?
>>76447184
He acquired his hair color and lighter skin because the part of Mexico he is from had a lot of Irish soldiers who came to fight, I think in the Mex/Amer war but I'm not sure.
I've seen Spanish redheads but he got that hair from genes, passed down from Irishmen a long time ago. And its not typical. He got picked on a lot for being different when he was a kid.
>>76447414
No, but you know it's not just some Nazi right-wing shit.
There IS genetic difference. Scandinavians (and Finns/Icelandic people) have genes that do not historically exist in Kongo or Japan.
The genetic difference between a human and a chimpanzee is about 1,5%. The difference between one group of humans to another can easily be 0,5%.
>>76447764
http://sciencenordic.com/redheads-feel-different-kind-pain
>>76447658
>>76447408
>be me
>learn things
thank you. that's what i get for going to a liberal school in california. i had never been exposed to lewontin's fallacy.
>>76447841
not just irish places like arandas were french colonies
>>76448270
No problem bro.
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2008/11/human-genetic-variation-fst-and.html
>>76447841
interesting background. so he is cultually mexican. is he also racially mexican? that blending and biological ambiguity is ultimately what this thread is getting at.
>>76447959
>Scandinavians (and Finns/Icelandic people) have genes that do not historically exist in Kongo or Japan.
>Japan
East Asians and Caucasians both share Neanderthal genes
>>76440268
Race is skull shape. That is it.
Color is a separate system of classification.
As is species taxonomy.
As is regional heritage.
As is nationality.
Race is used erroneously with colors called races, and nationalities used as a ethnic group.
BTW ethnic group would be a sub-classification of race, or species.
To just jump in and give an idea:
Races:Caucasiod, Capoid, Malay, Mongoloid, Negroid
Ethnic groups: Hutu, Finn, Han, Pashtun, Maya
Colors: White black red yellow brown
Spanish: Negro, Mestizo, Mulatto, Castizo
American: Quadroon, octroon, whites, negro
Arabic has a system too
Species: Homo sapiens Homo erectus Homo floresiensis Homo habilis Homo heidelbergensis
Now, the genus Homo, literally means human and all those other species are as human as you or I. The reality is that different races should probably be classified as different species within the human genus, and tribes and ethnic groups should be classed as sub-species.
So for example an african could be classed Homo Africanus v. Hutu, and a white could be classed Homo Europei v. Welsh.
And all those fossils are extinct races. Blacks are simply a more primitive form of human, basically a paleolithic man in modern times.
>>76448568
>racially mexican
this doesnt exist thats like asking if someone is racially american south and central america were colonized by europe and asia they also didnt kill off all the natives like us so they are brown as fuck canelo has brown eyes and hes short cause hes a mudblood
>>76448632
yeah but caucasians have 2 or 3 times more neanderthal DNA than asians
>>76448568
>that blending and biological ambiguity is ultimately what this thread is getting at.
Look at >>76446762
Europeans, even if they won't admit, are ridiculously close to one another when it comes to genetics. When the Indo-Europeans arrived in Europe, it was one huge orgy with the natives.
Despite what some might tell you, Europe is not divided by genetics, but by culture first and foremost.
>>76448632
Yeah, that is another thing too
But we have other genes not relevant to Neanderthals.
Why american niggers get mad so easily? I mean they're always all: "MUH BLACK POWA, MUH MINORITY, MUH WELFARE CHECK, HEDINDUNUFFIN".
>>76448632
So?
>>76441414
>the abo looks like a legit monkey skull
Kek
>>76448684
>Race is skull shape. That is it.
bone structure differs very slightly, too, dood
>>76444444
GET
It was pretty good I think.
Alright, lads, here's the story so far:
>development of skeletal systems, central nervous systems and hair growth, along with skin pigmentation seem to be different from race to race
>the definition of "white" still eludes us
>multilocus statistics are able to point people in the right populations most of the time
>line between races is blurry
>there are races, but they don't really follow the narrative that the social narrative seems to think
>[spoiler]gingers are yet to be proven to have superpowers[/spoiler]
Am I right so far? Do forgive me if I missed something. [spoiler]It's 3am over here and I'm arguing about eugenics on /pol/, what have I become?[/spoiler]
There aren't really hard boundaries, that doesn't mean they don't exist as distinct entities. There isn't a hard boundary between red and orange either but that doesn't mean they're the same thing.
>>76442878
But Jews have pink nipples.
So do slavs and anglos.
>>76449028
higher levels of testosterone that make them more violent and more aggressive
>>76440268
In my experience its all about culture and its behavior. Those are more important than some evolutionary characteristic like skin colour
>>76442982
Protip: Biological things that "stick with you" define who you are.
>>76449254
>the definition of "white" still eludes us
Because it's a word borne from very shallow observation of the most obvious physical characteristics of a few races.
People refer to any fair-skinned race as "white." Just like they would refer to both Negroids and Australoids as black, because they both have dark skin.
The best word to describe the Caucasoid races that people normally think of when they think "white" would be Germanic.
>>76448568
I would consider him to be Mexican, Mexicans sure as shit do and its his nationality. I've seen Mexicans (especially from Mexico City) that are certainly white racially. It wasn't like thousands and thousands of Irish soldiers coming to that part of Mexico, but enough that the titan (red hair) gene can be expressed.
I don't know if he's of Euro or native descent in terms of genetic make up/haplogroup or anything. His last name is Alverez, so he's probably Spanish in that regard and I think he's white with a lot of native mix.
>>76449254
>gingers are yet to be proven to have superpowers
faggot
>>76449254
>the definition of "white" still eludes us
whites are the descendants of germanic and celtic tribes in northern europe used to be called aryan this became an unpopular term and you know why
caucasian encompases whites or aryans as well as hamitics and semitics this is why jews arabs and indians arent white but they are caucasian
You define race based on different dna. Duh, that was easy
Op is a baiter
>>76449254
>the definition of "white" still eludes us
Pic related is an interesting start, IMO.
>gingers are yet to be proven to have superpowers
They're usually super-hot or super-ugly. Is that a power?
>>76449784
Missed a post sry
>>76449797
You're a bit late to this party, leaf
>>76448787
yeah that was stupid of me to say. latino/hispanic/mestizo would be the word for it then.
>>76448684
And pygmies for example are DEFINITELY a old species of human, probably similar to Lucy or some of the fossils we've already documented.
This info is not connected however, and the pygmies have been quietly getting exterminated and will be extinct soon.
>>76449545
>I was raised a poor black child
>>76448554
Good lord. Need to tour Arandas soon.
>>76443183
Lol
>anyone being superior to whites
Top kek, call me when one of those shitskin races make a civilization worth immigrating to.
>>76449124
Take it up with the 1800's scientists who created the racial classification system. I'm just telling you what their system measures. They just treated fresh bones like a paleontologist treats fossils.
>>76450169
This, in australia the aboriginals genocided the pygmies and there is only a couple of tribes left. They are never talked about and no one addresses the fact that the abos stories have the pygmies here first.
>>76443833
Finally, a reasoned argument
>>76443833
Best. Fucking. Southern. Neighbor.
>>76450711
Imagine what a specimen of Homo Ergaster must have looked like and how he may have behaved.
Presumably they all had small tribal groups like chimpanzees have troops. I don't imagine they were all that different than say a Papua New Guinea native.
The only problem with my proposed new classifcations are the amount of admixing and hybridization. Most all Europeans have multiple tribes and ethic groups, even if they are all white. And if you factor in mixed race peoples, it could become extremely complicated and convoluted.
So the system would simply have to be for the building blocks and base ethnic groups. And it would break down if you tried to classify a mixed person.<<==happy jew
>>76450711
I'd never heard of this. You just blew my mind.
>>76441913
>Also later on there is more evidence that the variance within each "race" is bigger than that between "races".
This is mathematically meaningless. Anyone with genetic understanding knows that's a pop science phrase that doesn't say anything about whether there are meaningful differences between groups.
It's interesting—people like you have no problem saying "lol blacks are just more athletic!" or "East Africans are better at __"! Yet you feign complete ignorance about any sort of population difference outside of the context of black superiority.
Can you tell the difference between a typical ethnic Chinese person and a typical black? Yes? Race exists.
Just because a spectrum exists doesn't mean clustered don't exist.
>>76450169
Are you retarded?by definition there's only one human race alive today. If you can have sex with an aboriginal australian and have fertile offspring then you're the same species.
>>76440268
there are many 'races' of humans, many are 'black' many are 'white' many are 'yellow' or whatever but skin color is only one of thousands of differences
in reality just because 2 people are what you would describe as 'white' does not mean they are of the same race, and that goes for 'blacks' 'asians' 'hispanics' and everybody
>>76451558
Also I bet most or many blacks probably have other races besides negro admixed. That is probably a big factor in african tribal characteristics, and accounts for much of the racial variation in africa.
We all know how niggers love to rape women, especially of other tribes. I'm sure many tribes are the rape-baby progeny of negroids moving into the interior and southern africa, and the native more primitive species got raped and murderized into the present day tribes.
>>76451947
alot of species can do this though so that is pointless
>>76449895
Are there native dark skinned Europeans? I see that there are slices of the pie chart.
>>76452201
What the fuck are you saying???? JESUS CHRIST YOU ARE such a retarded piece of shit. the ability between two individuals to produce FERTILE OFFSPRING. that is the definition of species, look it up dumbfuck.
A HORSE and a DONKEY = mule, but a mule isn't fertile. god fucking damnit
>>76449895
>this map
>>76451947
>We're all one race the human race!!2!
If that is the case, how come modern humans have Neanderthal DNA?
Why can coyotes and wolves hybridize?
>>76452460
>>76440268
Let me ask you this OP. Why is Barack Obama or other mixed mutt considered black if the mom is white?
To your question, you are black if
the hair is curly and either black or brown
the skin is tan, brown, black, or purple.
>>76452460
Take horses and donkeys, which probably diverged about 2.4 million years ago. Horses have 64 chromosomes, while donkeys have 62, and when they mate, their chromosomes don't pair up properly, inhibiting meiosis in their offspring. As a result, mules are sterile. Brown bears and polar bears, by contrast, evolved from the same ancestor only about 150,000 years ago—a relatively brief period—and have not developed significant genetic differences.
The prevailing theory holds that polar bears diverged from brown bears at the end of the last ice age (the Pleistocene), when a population followed retreating ice northward. As they adapted to their new arctic home, the separated population lost the brown bear's hump and developed the polar bear's characteristic hair (which is actually clear), narrower shoulders, longer neck, smaller head, and partially webbed toes. Despite appearances, polar bears and grizzlies are still genetically quite similar. In fact, there are multiple instances of the two species successfully interbreeding in zoos.
>You're still not satisfied with your BTFO?
>an entire thread about how pol and their dated macros know more than modern scientists
>>76453067
>modern scientists
Do you mean the bribed shitheads who get leftist indoctrination for years, or those who get shunned for their work because it does not fit the narrative?
>>76440268
>are gingers the purest of the whites?
Yes
>>76444444
Gingers btfo
>>76453229
>Do you mean the bribed shitheads
>is be da joos bix nood
>>76453067
Refute it then.
It is basic and simple logic, if you think a congolese pygmy, a native american mayan, a japanese person, a nigger, and a Dane are all the same Species, group, and subgroup, then you should be able to account for all the morphological differences, and copiously documented differences.
>inb4 don't ask for an explanation racist goy!
Also, all the scientists up until the last 50 years agree more with me than you. What changed, and can you refute their data?
>>76453544
I'm sorry, I don't understand "brainwashed retard". English please, oder Deutsch!
>>76453918
>that fucking image
>>76453067
[citation needed]
>>76446770
The Jews are the most intellect!?
>>76453918
>>A consensus consequently developed among anthropologists and geneticists that race as the previous generation had known it – as largely discrete, geographically distinct, gene pools – did not exist.
It's the 5th post in the thread. But I'm sure they're are jew goyim etc and you know best.
>>76440268
>All memes aside, how can you define a race? It's hard to stay consistent with calling people white or black or latino when skin colour ranges from pale white to pitch black in a spectrum-like manner.
Don't fuck yourself up with semantic. The idea is that behavioral and intellectual characteristics are broadly correlated with certain phenotype for which the concept of "race" is a good proxy, the idea being that the cause of these differences is biological.
Now, that's the theory and I don't know whether or not it's adequate or substantiated.
>>76455098
>they're are
lol
>>76452989
If they can interbreed and create fertile offspring = same species
If not they are not the same species. end of story.
where is this BTFO you're talking about? >>76452757
it says subspecies on the picture, try harder
>>76450464
China's a nice place. Japan too. Singapore's pretty okay, so is Thailand.
>>76455606
Breeding means creating fertile offspring in case you were wondering.
>>76455606
This is beside the point. You're just arguing semantic.
Call them species or whatever else, if there exists meaningful statistical differences between them and if "race" loosely construed is a good enough proxy to explain those differences, then the racist thesis is validated.
>>76455827
>This is beside the point. You're just arguing semantic.
No, I'm giving you the explanation on why you're wrong. There is only one human species, but there very well may be subspecies of human.
You trigger my biotech degree
>>76455098
>scientists say race doesn't exist.
>don't ask me to explain why their bone structure is different
>people say it so that ends the dabait
I think you're on the wrong board pal, you must have been looking for politically correct >>>/lgbt/
All of you are so fuckin dumb. Every single one of you is a different race from the other, no two humans, unless they're a genetic anomaly (twins etc [and even then]) share the same "race". HOWEVER, before I get the Star of David thrown at me, these "different" people often identify with a single nation because they share vastly similar attributes to one another, through language, culture, genetic similarity etc, than potential other people. Nations of people share a sense of solidarity and compassion between members who identify as such, and live and breed together, creating a supposed race. Do you fools honestly think that a Greek and a Turk are more genetically different to each other than a Greek and a Finn? Cos they're not. However, Greeks and Finns identify as white through a common European history and heritage, and have helped in the creation and maintenance of a proud white culture which has its basis in Christianity. Race is defined not only by skin color and bone differentiation, but also through a common history and culture. TLDR we created race but belonging and identifying as part of a race is not a bad thing fuck you all
>>76455606
>>76455803
why can dogs inter-breed they can do so with wolves too what your saying may add up with horses but it doesnt with other things
>>76452443
Certainly. They get thrown up all the time on "X aren't white" threads, just like the white-looking Uighers or whomever occasionally appear.
>>76455606
>>76456050
Then how did neanderthal DNA get into modern humans? Aliens?
Don't you think closely related species who diverged within the last 100K years, who have the same number of chromosomes, might have some interbreeding?
I mean come on, how do you think new species arise even? You don't even think a recent new species could breed with the species it split off from?
>>76456327
>we created race
>race is a social construct
what are you doing off tumblr?
>>76456050
>There is only one human species, but there very well may be subspecies of human.
Isn't that precisely just semantic? You're telling me we're misusing words, which I'm fine with but the racist thesis never the less corresponds to what I've said no?
>>76456091
>>people say it
>geneticists and anthropologists
>i'll just say "people". he wont notice.
cute.
>>76455606
It does not matter if you call it sub-species or race.
Human species consists of different races.
>>76443200
It's not only temporal separation, it's differences in population size and selective pressure. If an agrarian society can support ten times the population of a hunter-gather society while deterring the proliferation of negative mutations and spreading positive mutations, than the rate of evolution for an agrarian population is effectively accelerated.
>>76456869
>doesn't believe what he sees with his own eyes
>argues like the typical leftist prick
>thinks he is right
>mfw
>>76456869
So, if we are all the same species and subspecies.
Why did every other species vanish of the face of the planet all of a sudden?
We have fossils of other human species from everywhere on earth.
What caused them to all vanish, leaving only Homo Sapiens Sapiens v. Sapiens?
>>76456437
Are you retarded? A chihuaha is a modified wolf.
>>76456687
Race is created by nations, human beings around the world have created race as a social construct to strengthen the bonds between members of that nation, in order to remain cohesive and create a sense of solidarity and responsibility. You and I are both American but identify as white, as part of the white nation inside the U.S. However, I'm mixed European, as I'm sure you are. Imagine if we were born(somehow) in Europe and came of age 100 years ago with the same genetic lineage in the glorious self-destructive days of WW1, who would we fight for? My last name is German but I've got French and English heritage too. All considered themselves white but fought for their racial nations. Even Hitler liked Indians better than Slavs, but who is more similar, a German and a russki or a German and an Indian?
>>76457153
Yes, you're correct. Just not different species.
>>76456640
The genetic differences weren't big enough between Homo neandertalensis and Homo sapiens for there to be infertile offspring.
Archeologically, Neandertals and Humans are different species, this is of course to ease anthropological classification.
If a neandertal were alive today, and we could create fertile offspring, biologically it's the same species.
>>76457827
>neandertals and humans are two different species
>one line later
>if it was alive today it would be same species!
wow
>>76457636
replace leftist with retard, and that's everyone else in this thread. except the "leftist pricks" happen to be siding with the "educated scientist."
>>76457665
what
Race is a real thing, mmmkay
>>76457990
>>76456327
Race is a social construct in the same way that mathematics and governments are social constructs.
Yes every single person is a unique animal, different from every other one on earth. That's why I judge every human and animal on it's own merits, while taking into account trends and patterns that may be relevant.
Classification systems just aggregate probability and such. There can be pale skinned blacks, and tall chinese, and genetic outliers, but it's also important to look at the group x organism belongs to, to look at what non-pronounced predispositions it may have, genetic compatability(particularly for marrying and having kids). So race, or more importantly ethnic group do factor in and are useful.
--you can have an ethnic group of one race/species be superior to another ethnic group, even if the species are normally vastly different(roma/tutsi f/e)--
And lastly, even though it IS a social construct, it is important to realize that the rest of society and you're social groups DO value race and ethnic group, often more than I do, but it is another factor to take into account.
I treat all people and animals the same, I leave them be and don't bother them, until I need something or they disturb me, then I take into account all the factors I have at my disposal and react and act accordingly. It's served me well so far.
>inb4 autistic
>>76458623
Archeological and biological classifications are different, retard.
>>76457636
>>thinks he is right
not to mention, I dont think I'm right. I havent made an argument. I simply pointed out that the people most knowledged on the subject happen to disagree with you and your degree in dank maymays
>>76459131
>real scientists didn't invent genomic testing that can distinguish between population groups
>that shit's just voodoo, you retards
>all the scientists say so
Ok.
>>76459621
>population groups
is this what you think race is?
>>76459844
Considering how the relevant literature has generally replaced "race" with that and similar terms, yes. It's the same concept with a less politically-charged label.
>>76459210
>Race is a social construct in the same way that mathematics and governments are social constructs
i would say race and mathematics are discoveries where as government is a social construct
>>76459844
It basically is. More specifically, allele clusters.
>>76458209
So is it impossible that "The genetic differences aren't big enough between caucasians and negroes for there to be infertile offspring."?
And do you think they would be classified as different species "archaeologically" if they were held up to the same standard of scrutiny as extinct human species?
It seems silly to have neanderthals suddenly become a separate species only after they go extinct, when they are proven to have mixed with modern humans.
>asking /pol/ a question requiring more than parrotry or meme-flinging
it's threads like these that really drive home just how retarded 90% of people on this board really are
>>76459131
>>76457665
To explain and simplify the question:
What happened to all the Human species that are PC documented?
Did they all just go extinct?
>>76460128
>>76460401
hey, it can be whatever you want it to be. but if you define as
>as largely discrete, geographically distinct, gene pools
then i got bad news for you
>>76460439
They are already classified as different subspecies anthropologically as pointed out by >>76445715 >>76448684. I'm sure they would be classified as different species, but they can't be classified as different species now, because we have the entire genomes of black men and white men, and they are very much the same. If you just had the bones you wouldn't be able to tell, so they'd be classified as different species theoretically making up that they would not have been able to have fertile offspring.
If neandertals mixed with homo sapiens and created fertile offspring, then it was the same species. case closed. they were probably smarter than niggers
>>76460934
>An actual politically incorrect discussion, and reasonable civil debate is condemned
How about you REFUTE IT then if it is so retarded?
It should be easy!
>>76461001
>PC documented?
personal computer? politically correct? who's extinct?
im not memeing when i say your posts confuse me.
>>76461197
Okay, now we're getting somewhere.
You admit there are different standards for dead humans vs alive humans.
Now, lets look at the standards for living animals!
>>76459210
I agree with you yea but trends and patterns are both a racial thing (ie Africans have higher testosterone, harder to control emotions) and also cultural. There are superior cultures that are superior because they are designed by and take advantage of genetic attributes from those who identify with it. There are pale Africans and tall Chinese, but most of the blacks in the U.S. have upwards of 20% European blood. The same way that many supposed white Americans have maybe just a little inkling of African (or Native American or Asian or what have you), the thing is it is so minuscule it is generally impossible to see. People cling to ethnic groups because it gives them a sense of security and it's also what they know. Which can also mean that when a member of that group is attacked in any way, no matter how deserving or non -deserving they are, it feels like an attack on the entire group, especially amongst minorities. All people take advantage of race and can be sucked in by it, yet it can also be a net positive depending on the circumstance
>>76461453
Documented and admitted, even by the politically correct rubric of today's scientists. Sorry that was bad syntax.
They say there were Human species in china and south east asia for example. So what happened to them, did they ALL go extinct, or did they magically become Homo Sapiens Sapiens v. Sapiens.
Do you think all of the human species besides one just disappeared.
>>76440268
race doesn't matter, or atleast it does but not as much as people think. it's all about the cultural and social fabric in which an individual is raised that matters.
>>76461710
Top is different species because they cannot interbreed but look very similar
Bottom is subspecies, very different from each other (chihuaha and wolf are the same species),one is ugly as fuck the other one isn't, one has created civilization, the other one hasn't. Still the same species although one subspecies is definitely better at creating communities. Surviving in the wilderness though? I'd go with the negro
>>76461776
Generally genetics determines your potential and your maximum capabilities. Culture and upbringing either nurture and preserve it, or else damage and hurt it. Most black behavior is the result of their culture and upbringing, but for an outsider it doesn't really matter what the reasons are, they are functionally the same.
Blacks could easily be peaceful and good people, there is nothing in genetics that forces people to commit acts. That said I don't think they have the upper limit potential to reach the heights that whites do, at least at any rate that is comparable, I think it's lile 1/10,000,000 million blacks are genius'.
But that can change. Whites came from primitive man, we used to be savage and violent. Over time things can and will change.
>>76463020
the world is going to shit when resonans are almost up.
The white man falls back to his primitive instincts when all hop is lost
>>76463803
>when resonans are almost up
What? I don't understand that.
I think you're English was off?
>>76462810
You're stuck on that interbreeding.
First of all, you must bear in mind that clear-cut definitions do not exist in nature - they are man-made. We classify things for our own convenience, and try to make those classifications solid, but animals don't care how we classify them. They do as they will, regardless of what we think should or shouldn't work.
In order for two species to be able to interbreed, they must be closely related. Just being in the same family does not necessarily make two animals closely related enough to be able to breed - for example, you couldn't cross a lion and a domestic cat (both in the family Felidae), or a wolf and a fox (both in the family Canidae), as they are too distantly related. Generally, animals within the same genus can interbreed, like lions and tigers (both in the genus Panthera) and horses and donkeys (both in the genus Equus). What this basically means is that they diverged from each other relatively recently in evolutionary terms - they share an ancestor with each other more recently than with other species, and therefore share much of the same genetic material. Whilst this allows them to produce hybrids, in many cases those hybrids will be sterile because the parents have different numbers of chromosomes - this means that the hybrid cannot produce functional sex cells.
Inter-genus hybrids are rarer, because animals of different genera are more distantly related, but they do occur. Once you get beyond family level, two animals have so little genetic material in common that interbreeding becomes impossible. This is why you can't breed, say, a dog and a cat. A dog sperm simply wouldn't be able to fertilise a cat egg, and vice versa.
>>76464146
sry, Resource
>>76464885
Where two different species can interbreed and always produce fertile offspring, it is an indication that they are very closely related. For example, members of the genus Canis can all interbreed and produce fertile young - this includes wolves, coyotes, jackals, dingos and domestic dogs. According to the old system, which classifies any two animals that can interbreed and produce fertile offspring as the same species, this would make a wolf and a jackal the same animal, which is clearly not the case - this classification is too simplistic. Physically, behaviourally and genetically, these are different animals, but they are related closely enough to be able to produce fertile young.
I get that the official definition of a species means they can't interbreed. I see you just repeat that over and over. I just think that is too restricting, especially around near relatives and new young species.
Don't you agree?
Do you think the definition should be a little more nuanced? Especially with all these exceptions.
I don't really believe in race.
However if a bunch of darker skinned people *ahem* are fat lazy retarded slobs and can't get their shit together they don't deserve shit.
>>76463020
Let's not forget that Europe was the most violent continent on earth for centuries, great but violent. But hardship breeds creativity, and weapons can be used for good too ie German v rockets in WW2 being the basis for US and USSR space programs. Which also came from a result of German culture and discipline being utilized during conflict. Whites generally have enough discipline to forge a great society, like East Asians, yet enough to testosterone to use their skill and creatively apply it in the real world.
>>76466461
When I said savage and violent I meant more 10,000 years ago, not recently.
I'm saying that every person on earth came from primitive man at one point. We evolved and got better, and so can they. Especially now with all the knowledge and resources at hand.
We shouldn't say they are worthless and all need to die, like some fags here. They need to act civilized, get their birth rates under control, and improve their lot. Otherwise they will just stay in their present state.
>>76441913
>Also later on there is more evidence that the variance within each "race" is bigger than that between "races".
You mean that one geneticist that had that was pushing that idea before he "found" that it was more likely for any two individuals to share a single specific allele when they weren't in the same subpopulation. Logically, this could make sense in some situations. If there are 1 billion white people, the odds of finding a rare allele within the white group could potentially be less than finding it in other 6+ billion individuals (especially if the allele is rarer in whites than in the rest of the world). However, this doesn't take the fact that the inverse is usually true. Additionally, when you take it to two or more alleles, the comparison doesn't work at all.
>>76443200
What the fuck do you think a race is? There are distinct ethnogroups of humans that were isolated for thousands of years. The genetic differences between populations is well known. We aren't talking some Tolkien-esque 'we wuz elvez n shieeet' races.
>>76444444
>It's a nice story but where are your sources?
NOICE
>>76466949
On computer now but I think there will always be a need for a super-high testosterone basic primitive human culture because sooner or later a pandemic or catastrophe will completely obliterate the human race, and we will need to repopulate. If the grid went down, then Africans would fill that void, for better or worse. Not that there aren't a variety of different African cultures here or whatever. But blacks in the US gave us the best music, even if it was using instruments created by whites that they learned how to use from them. Like everything in life, balance is key, and too much of either is a bad thing. It's best not to be too Japan and also not to be too Congo, a balance is necessary for progress and cultural achievement. The funny thing is that people don't realize that in 500 years the racial makeup of the US, even if it exists somewhat in the same form it does today, will be completely different. The black population of the South, the nation's largest, will be lighter skinned but still visibly African, while the North will be still visibly European but a bit darker. Obviously the West will be much more Hispanic and Asian. I feel interracial relationships are pushed so much through the media these days because the "elites" desperately want to stop a race war from ever occurring, and the only way to do that is to have more interracial children, so identities are broken down and competing sides are confused and divided. It will happen anyway, a racial evolution in the US, but they are trying to make that as voluntary as possible rather than a race war and an evolution through rape. Imagine less Michael Jordans and Steve Nashes and more Steph Currys.
>>76469618
in Africa*, not "here"
