Ok /pol/, I unironically dont consider myself racist. I've never honestly looked down on a person because of their race. But I dont deny that FACT that races do exist, and that we are different. /blog
Now lets discuss the Wikipedia entry for "Race":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28human_categorization%29
"Race, as a social construct"
"biologically distinct races were isomorphic with distinct linguistic, cultural, and social groups ... a practice that is now called scientific racism."
>scientific racism
>scientific racism
>SCIENTIFIC
>RACISM
>SCIENCE IS RACIST
>FACTS ARE RACIST
KEK
How can this be real?
>ONE RACE: DA HUMAN RACE
>Now look at all these subspecies of cat
Also if Race is a social construct, how can someone be racist?
Fuck this planet
Just take us Lord Kek
Cast us into oblivion
FUCKING BUMP YOU NIGGER LOVING KIKES
>>73167726
It's da jooz m8
>>73168309
Seriously, if race isnt real then how can someone be racist?
>Race is a social construct
>TRUMP IS SUCH A RACIST OMFGGGGG
What is this turbocunt logic?
>>73167726
You misunderstanding it man.
If there was a spectrum of 'genetics' you can't draw a definite line around a certain set and say 'These are the black people'.
Because inevitably there will be a lot of white characteristics in some black people, and a lot of black genetic characteristics in a lot of white people.
Now things like wide noses, dark skin and protruding jaws are easy to identify... But what about things like intelligence?
If there's no distinct line between blacks and whites... There could be some whites with the black 'low intelligence' gene...
And there could be some blacks, with the white 'intelligence gene'.
So that turns our whole game into a probabilistic crap shoot. We really can't judge based on one set of phenotypes with certainty.
So the practice of making that judgement would be racist. Scientifically racist. To accuse someone who has the dark skin phenotype to also have the low intelligence phenotype simply because of probability.
Ofcourse it's a lot more complex than that still, with no 'distinct' genes for color of skin or intelligence.
>>73169255
>>73169550
I don't think you're refuting my point.
Have a look at the 23 and me results people post.
A lot of people in the world are very mixed. They have a certain appearance. That's a set of dominant phenotypes that we can identifiy.
But their actual genetics is a cocktail of god knows what.
When you say someone is 'black' what are you saying?
Are you saying that they have the black skin phenotype?
Black features phenotypes?
Are you saying they have the 'low intelligence gene"?
How do you tell which ones they have which ones they don't have, especially when there are things like recessive sets that don't show up on the actual individual?
It's extremely difficult to get a formal genetic definition of what 'black' actually is, and then take that definition and match it with statistics....
and then translate that into a day to day philosophy on how to interact with other people, and not make moral mistakes about it.
Can you get skulls to show there are genetic clustering on races so that we can identify a large subset of where they came from and what other physical genetics they have based on the skull. Yes.
Can you then translate this to a sure fire judgement about another person, completely ignoring their environment, upbringing, social status, life experience... No. That would be racist, morally questionable, and objectively not a complete solution.
Sure if you were playing the odds you could. But then you'd be playing Russian roulette with the life experience of others.
Criticizing a group that just happens to be predominantly constituted by a certain race is not racism, it's just criticism. When people say they hate niggers, everyone knows they mean the black trash, but those grasping at straws or with a victim complex don't understand this.
If Hood Rats ∩ Black Americans equals a percentage of Black Americans, doesn't mean a Black American is part of that "culture". There's a reason actually self respecting blacks feel embarrassed when associated with that trash.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIpluPuq68I (skip first 20 seconds of cancer)
I believe the potential varies not only in race and gender, but really from person to person. Cultures like black american culture just deny potential through victimhood and/or ghetto pride, turning possible normal people into the ratchets we see today.
>>73170115
what about this?
answers most of your questions I think.
>>73170115
Straya, you're making it way too complicated. No matter how deep you look there will never be a naturally occurring marker for race.
In the end we would have to choose where to draw the line, we would have to choose our definition of race. Therefor we could also choose not to.
Race exists if we want it to just as it does not exist if we do not want it to.
>>73172410
50000 niggawatts
>>73172788
It means that no matter how different separate human populations are race will always be a social construct. There is no natural definition, we would always have to choose one. As such we can choose not to.
It is the same with species. Naturally they do not actually exist, we just use it because it brings some order to chaos.
>>73173169
>race will always be a social construct
>There is no natural definition
t. Tyrone
What is >>73169550
>>73169255
So basically, Europeans fucked up by getting involved with Africa. Now both gene pools are mingled to the point where any scientific discussion about race will be shut down by leftists because nobody can realistically prove that a person's intelligence comes specifically from white genes.
>>73173323
That is a picture demonstrating the different cranial structures between individuals with different ethnic backgrounds.
This currently has nothing to do with races. It could if general consensus asked for it, as of now though, it doesn't.
>>73173595
Literally what in the literal fuck are you saying man!
Are you delusional?
>>73173464
That is not the problem.
The problem is that there is no currently accepted scientific definition of race.
Nor can this be done in a rational way.
>>73172410
>never a biological marker for race
Skull structure
Sickle cells
Bone marrow
>>73173595
YEAH MAN WE IZ ALL ONE HUMAN RACE AND SHEEIIT
*sucks air through teeth*
*smacks lips*
>>73173670
I'm convinced that you're trolling but i am going to respond anyway.
You can not in an unambiguous way define race. It is scientifically impossible.
>>73173845
And which one, dear anglo, is the one defining race?
Do you see the problem?
We have to make a choice, there for it is pseudoscience.
>>73174020
Ya, race is a social construct.
>>73174002
That there is a 'human race' is as much pseudoscience as human races. Difference is that this one is accepted.
>>73174211
This is irrelevant.
>tfw look white af
>tfw primarily Eastern European Jew and Sicilian
>tfw great great grandma was half Cherokee, half nigger slave
>tfw a secret nigger and everyone expects you to be able to act like a competent aryan
RACISM IS WORST FOR WHITE PEOPLE
>>73173595
When there is actual scientific evidence showing substantial differences between groups of similar ethnic groups, from intelligence right down to bone structure and make-up, how can you say race doesn't exist??
Your argument is that we've racemixed so much that were all fucking universal babies and theres not enough to differentiate us from one another, correct? You're saying its "fluid" just like your gender is listed as on Tumblr.
A whitey might have negriod genes so therefore there is no such thing as nignogs.
GENES, HOW DO THEY WORK?
>>73174020
>You can not in an unambiguous way define race. It is scientifically impossible.
You can, it has, and it is.
>>73174284
I'm going to need more evidence than just "Nah mane science is wrong", sorry.
>>73174244
THAS RIIITE
Can't we just burn anyone that's darker than peach?
>>73174438
Don't you see?
No matter what we do we will always have to CHOOSE a definition of race. The differences you have shown are factual and unambiguous but the concept of 'race' is not. Nor is the concept of 'species' or biological 'family'.
>>73174211
>Average Math SAT score is ~530 for whites
Come on people, the SAT Math section is fucking Algerbra. It's not even hard Algebra, it's basic Algebra. It's not that difficult.
>>73174709
Just like we chose a definition of every word in the english language, you mean?
>>73174805
Exactly
>>73168567
so is trump a social construct?
>>73174833
So you shot your own argument in the foot, flawless
>>73167726
Race is a social construct because the concept of race implies biologically separate populations with significant functional differences, and that's just not what's going on in reality. It's a bankrupt concept, it just confuses people because it doesn't accurately reflect reality, but it does seem quite plausible at a glance, and indeed it took centuries of work before scientists started to realize it was wrong.
'Scientific racism' refers to scientific theories based on race that were quite common before that realization.
If race is a social construct how can one be a racist? Well if atheists are right then G-d is only a social construct, that wouldn't make it impossible to be a theist would it? To be a racist means to believe in races. To believe that there are really *biologically* separate, *biologically* defined races of humans alive today.
It's not an absurd belief, and many many people hold it in fact, but it does turn out to be factually incorrect, that's all.
>>73174930
How?
>>73167726
join the club, not racist, but race definitely exists. u have mongoloid,negroid and Caucasian, and under them a bunch of sub divisions. and who knows, with homonid dna such as neadtherthal, isolated evolution and the thing that is epigenetics, some races might possess very marginal genetic advantages. (nothing to the point where whites are le master race and niggers are apes) but they're could be minor variances in 1 races favor. to deny its even possible is unscientific
>>73174955
This is a slight misunderstanding. These differences doesn't actually matter unless we want them to.
>>73167726
Because leftism is a mental disorder.
>>73167726
>But I dont deny that FACT that races do exist, and that we are different
That makes you unironically racist.
>>73175247
And the cause is the jew.
Kill every jew before they kill you.
>>73169255
>If there was a spectrum of 'genetics' you can't draw a definite line around a certain set and say 'These are the black people'.
There is. Niggers are genetically closer to bonobos, than to humans.
Fuck niggers
>>73174990
It doesn't fucking matter if you call it race of bulmblelumpfkin, its a term to describe a group of people with a certain genetic makeup, which still exist, we are not an interbred superspecies of interracial fuckery (yet).
How is having a name for an ethinic group with alternate genetic makeup from the rest of its species a social construct?
In case you dont know what a social construct is: "a social construct is an idea or notion that appears to be natural and obvious to people who accept it but may or may not represent reality"
So calling race a social construct implies that it doesn't exist. There is no such thing as race. There is no reason to apply terms to describe a subspecies of humans.
This is absolutely fucking retarded.
Your argument makes no sense, its not even an argument.
>>73175182
>nothing matters unless we want it to
What are you a fucking nihilist?
>>73175294
Difference does not equate to better/worse
>>73175479
or*
>>73174709
>there are so many differences we're having trouble deciding which to base it on
>>73175479
It is not the word that matters, it is the concept.
The concept of race can not be scientifically defined.
I agree that it is retarded not to have a definition of race as it would not having a definition for species.
This, though, can't be backed by science.
>>73174909
He is a thoughtform, so yes
>>73169255
>>73170115
Well said.
>>73170617
>Criticizing a group that just happens to be predominantly constituted by a certain race is not racism, it's just criticism.
Right. Criticizing Israel is not necessarily anti-semitic, for instance, no matter how much *some* jews will try to claim it is.
But when someone is spouting off in typical /pol/troll fashion about the 'the jews' they clearly cross that line. And once you cross that line, even if there is a very good point somewhere in your verbiage, you just lost it when you crossed that line.
>When people say they hate niggers, everyone knows they mean the black trash
Really? I'm not sure that can be assumed quite so cavalierly. Context is important.
>There's a reason actually self respecting blacks feel embarrassed when associated with that trash.
Absolutely no disagreement there. But don't you think it's also important to avoid even accidentally implying that the hood rat/ghetto culture is somehow tied to 'blackness?' The based american black man that works a job and takes care of his kids has one of the most difficult and most honorable roles in our society today, I don't want to diss him but even more importantly I don't want to say something that's going to tell his kids that their skin color and being a hood rat have anything to do with each other. Both because it's not true and because it's not helpful.
It's not just 'white' racists that are guilty of this, btw. Pic related. But it's hypocritical to criticize blacks for doing this then turn around and do it yourself.
>>73174955
>Well if atheists are right then G-d is only a social construct, that wouldn't make it impossible to be a theist would it?
No but it would mean that God doesn't exist. Which nobody knows, as nobody has actually met "God".
>To be a racist means to believe in races.
Top fucking kek what?
To be a racist means to look down on an ethnic group as lesser beings.
If the modern definition of racism is acknowledging the fact that one person can have different bone structure from another based on the gene pool they were shat out of, then just fucking end us. Nuke it.
>>73167726
>two humans with different amount of melanin
>different race
I don't judge people on their race, it just happens that most Latinos and blacks I meet tend to be violent and/or smelly.
>>73167726
I would even argue that we are not different races even..
We are different species.
>>73172410
>race is a choice
If it's a choice, why are all the rapefugees claiming they're Syrian instead of British diaspora?
Better start that blood sacrifice again to keep the Sun from permanently turning into the Moon.
>>73175155
>some races might possess very marginal genetic advantages.
Being able to maintain civilization or not is a "marginal advantage"?
Being able to maintain a civilization that isn't an autocratic and corrupt shithole is a "marginal advantage"?
Being able to maintain a society of low levels of crime and ingroup violence is a "marginal advantage"?
>>73176224
Yes. Same species, different race. Or subspecies. Whatever you PC kiddies want to call it.
>>73176273
What does it matter what name you give it?
>>73176313
Because they want to.
Also nationality is not really relevant regarding race.
>>73176224
It is alot more than that.
It is different Cranial structure.
It is different vocal cords.
It is different also different smells that are emitted from our glands.
And last but not least.
Our IQ levels are completly different which is 80 % inherited.
We are not the same Race, As a matter of fact we are different species.
>>73176349
>What does it matter what name you give it?
Because Race is minor differances (Southern European/Northern) Species = Different homonoids we don't share enough DNA to be considered to be of the same race.
>>73175968
>muh exceptions don't prove the rule!
>muh anecdotes beat statistics
why don't white people get sickle cell anemia? are you sure race does not exist
>>73176657
Not following you now senpai, sounds like you're agreeing with me.
>>73176520
Species is generally defined by ability to interbreed though, not appearance.
>>73176765
>>73176657
NVM I mixed you up with the other Swede
>>73176425
There's so many people here trying to explain why races certainly are a legitimate definition and all you do is say it's irrelevant, it doesn't matter, even in response to a low-quality gut reaction.
What makes the scientific theory work is evidence. Proof of concept. So far you have denied all of ours, but that's okay. Do you have any hard proof of your own theory?
>inb4 a feeling
>inb4 public consensus
>>73176520
We are the human species, homo sapiens. "Races" are different sub-species that are capable of interbreeding but are fundamentally different.
>>73176792
Yet my cock can't interbreed with an amoeba, despite us both being species.
Species refer to the genus, sub-species are the breeds/races.
>>73176829
It does not matter how different populations are. Race can not be unambiguously defined. We can still do it, we can still divide humans into races but it would not be scientifically supported.
Just as we divide organisms is different species without unambiguous scientific support.
>>73176520
Wow, how's your PhD in Biodiversity and Evolutionary Biology coming along?
>>73176871
Well true but we have different admixture for instance Aboriginals have high % Denisovan admixture which by my definiton makes me class them as a seperate species.
And me as a White has Neanderthal admixture which is nonexistent in subsaharan Africa.
>>73167726
being racist means simply that you recognize the differences between races, any further tainting of the word is leftist bullshit
>>73176792
Salmon and trout are considered different Species yet they can interbreed.
>>73176948
This is not the general consensus.
Species is generally defined by a population being genetically similar enough to produce offspring.
>>73177120
This is where i study so you must take me 100 % seriously.
>>73177092
WHY would it not be scientifically supported when gene studies imply race does indeed exist?
The reason race is a social construct, is because sociologists are afraid it will promote racial stereotypes and lead to discrimination. Which is fair enough, but outright denying its existence?
>>73177232
Case and point. 'Species' is merely a construct, it is a way of simplifying nature.
>>73177205
>Being considered a horrible person for accepting facts
>Not leftist bullshit
>>73175783
I'd bet any amount you are a student
>>73177379
>any further tainting of the word is leftist bullshit
did you miss this line Bruce? I sincerely doubt that you've ever been called a racist and card.
>>73177365
Alright i see your point, thank you for clarifying.
>>73175783
>The concept of race can not be scientifically defined.
The concept of race, when we attempt to define it scientifically, evaporated before our eyes.
>>73176088
That's not the point. Whether G-d exists or not, theists certainly do.
>>73176714
>why don't white people get sickle cell anemia?
:facedesk:
They do, anon, they do.
Sickle cell is most common in those of west african origin but also occurs independently in populations from other areas where malaria was historically a big problem, including parts of southern Europe where it was only eradicated in the middle of the last century.
>>73177308
How does these studies define race?
At how many base-pair differences do they draw the line? 10? 50? 1 million?
It is always ambiguous. Races does not exist in nature.
Smart Arabs
>>73177609
what the fuck is wrong with greece
>>73174284
How can it be irrelevant when the cognitive abilities of the different race are so different.
>>73177365
"Nature" is simply a construct. It's a way of simplifying the human cognitive conceptualization of external non-ego derived reality.
Don't be daft you fucking swedebitch.
>>73177609
Yet sub-saharan Africans are black and north europeans are white. This alone can be a definition of race. We just do not like it, still exists though.
>>73177679
You know that the Cranium's or the Brain's volume doesn't affect intelligence, right?
Please tell me you aren't this dumb
>>73167726
nice cherry picking
Facts are racist.
deal with it liberal cucks
>>73175517
>Difference does not equate to better/worse
Different race have evolved differently. Some race have evolved to be more intelligent, some race have evolved to run faster.
>>73177679
Because we don't want it to.
>>73177609
>That's not the point. Whether G-d exists or not, theists certainly do.
You're missing the point, god does not certainly exist.
By saying race is a social construct you imply that race doesn't exist. By saying god is a social construct you are implying god doesn't exist. A theist is someone that believes in a higher power, there is no factual evidence to show god exists at all. A racist is apparently someone who believes in race, we have actual scientific studies that strongly suggest it exists.
Its an unfair comparison, and the argument doesn't make sense anyway.
>>73177767
Fair enough. But we do not want that, do we?
>>73177365
Constructs of nature, defined on their own and catelogued by us for both the sake of convenience and to make scientific discoveries more abstract.
Very much the same as astronomic discoveries, you will find. That we choose to decide that the Sun isn't a superheated sphere of atoms being fused together and instead is a rainbow on steroids does not mean that it actually is a rainbow on steroids.
The closest that funding has allowed science to progress towards hard racial differences is the study on haplogroups. Mine are very different from that of a native man from India, Africa and Oceania and the same goes for them.
What I want to see is hard evidence that refutes racial distinction or confirms it beyond question. So far it's looking like the latter, even if cultural marxism chooses otherwise.
>>73177679
>>73177813
Yeah, first off cranial capacity and IQ are not linked, second that graphic is bullshit anyway.
>>73170115
>Are you saying they have the 'low intelligence gene"?
there isn't a low intelligence gene, yes your gene determine your appearance but other characteristics are more easily explained by exposure to specific environment,
low IQ people tend to come from a caste society where the worker class have their pregnant women intentionally deprived of protein,
this guarantees certain results, for every generation the practice is continued it will take an equal number of generations to reverse the effects
science isn't racist unless measuring shit and writing it down is now racist, fuck this place you just have to ignore most of this nonsense before it contaminates your thought process which is likely already skewed unless you come from a very specific group of certain people with very specific traditions
>>73177981
To say that race is a social construct does not mean that it does not exist, only that it is ambiguous. Therefor i cant be supported by science,
>leftists elevate themselves because they don't believe in God and instead believe in "science"
>in spite of this they still believe that all human genetic populations evolved to be the exact same in cognitive abilities
...
>FDA mandates that clinical drug trials must record a patients race
>Human Genome Project (which has existed for 13 years) proves distinct racial populations exist
>>73177853
>gr8 b8 m8
>I've never honestly looked down on a person because of their race.
>>73177679
What a YUGE difference!!!!!
/s
>>73178059
I am not saying that it is practical or that we should always deny race. I am saying that we can if we want to.
That about the sun is different. The sun is an actual object, not a concept.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_adaptation_in_humans
>>73178182
>leftists elevate themselves because they don't believe in God and instead believe in "science"
>in spite of this they still believe that all human genetic populations evolved to be the exact same in cognitive abilities
Leftists find what suits them the best for the moment to be the truth.
>>73177813
Dolphins are among the world's smartest species. Compared to a typical animal of the same size, dolphin brains are 4-5 times bigger than expected, and ours are 7 times bigger than expected.
>>73177611
>Races does not exist in nature.
According to you. According to me, they do. Race is a word in the english language and it has a definition. We have defined what race is, you just deny that definition has any basis because.. well I dont know why I'm trying to figure that out.
race
reJs/
noun
noun: race; plural noun: races
Each of the major divisions of humankind, having distinct physical characteristics.
>>73178167
No, social construct implies that its not real. Its a fabrication out of misinformation. But its not, there are studies that show it exists, there aren't studies to prove otherwise, yet it is widely accepted to be otherwise.
>>73178482
I agree with you, though this can not be empirically supported by science.
>>73178840
I am still waiting for you to explain how this can not be empirically supported by science when there is scientific evidence that supports it.
>>73178460
This does not apply within species.
>>73178482
it's all semantics really.
Sure race by definition exists, ie. there are populations of people sharing common genes, leading to similar physical attributes.
That can not be denied.
The problem really is not the definition of race, but definition of races.
the white/black/asian grouping is largely arbitrary and has too much grey area.
>>73178932
Because that evidence only shows differences, not races.
Race does not have a empiric definition.
>>73178940
People like you would rather bury your head in the sand, when all evidence out there indicate what you believe is wrong.
In 2016 people have become so idiotic, that even when the evidence is apparent they will not accept it if it's not conducive to their PC world view.
Dogs for example are some of the most diverse creatures on the planet. Each breed has it's own personality, intelligence, and physical attributes, yet they are all able to interbreed (except in cases where the fetus would outgrow the womb...big dog, small dog)
It should be obvious, that although we're all human beings, our unique genetic differences give us mental and physical traits that separate us from each other.
If there were no distinction between the races, and it were, "only skin deep", scientists would not be able to use blood and bone to determine our race.
...Besides you have eyes don't you?
>>73177611
the length that the double helix DNA is varies from ethnic group to ethnic group. east asians and south east asians have the longest DNA
phenotypes exist and some are exclusive to 1 ethnic group
bone structure differences exist between ethnic groups. modern forensic's can use a leg bone to determine if a individual is black or white and its done all the time in america
genetic predisposition for high blood pressure and hyper tension is higher in blacks than whites
specific east asian groups and native american groups which are related lack a enzyme that helps deal with alcohol
a couple of genetic disorders only exist for some ethnic groups like sickle cell or crohns disease
and finally race doesnt exist in nature thats true. we call it subspecies. virtually identical species of birds are categorized as a different sub set of animals for instance
>>73179116
Different sub-species of homo sapiens emerged from different parts of the world. These humans bore strikingly different features from one another and had different genetic makeup. Race is a word to describe people of those groups who bear those features and have those genetics. How is using the word race not appropriate? What would be more "scientific", having a word for every single possible genetic makeup? All 2^40,000 of them?
>>73179116
Race can be measured and determined with objective accuracy. With modern methods of DNA analysis, not only can we now trace the continent of one’s ancestors but even determine the location within that continent.
Race is an important concept because it has been found that different races respond in different ways to drugs and medical procedures. Drugs that have been found very effective in one race can be completely ineffective in another. This is not something that we can ignore in our efforts to be politically correct.
>>73179491
systemic racism!!!11
>>73179116
Race being a social construct is a social construct.
This statement is equally valid.
I hate those two words so much.
never forget guys
>>73179627
>calling other people idiotic
Dogs have much more tandem repeats, so it's easier to play around with their genes to breed the desired dog.
Humans and dogs aren't comparable.
>>73167726
In terms of taxonomy there is the Homo Sapien. However, there are a variety of different species under this.
You wouldn't call a German Shepherd an English Bulldog would you? No, you'd call them a dog but they're clearly different.
It's the same with blacks and whites as well as asians. We are different and there really isn't a way to trick your eyes. Your gut instinct is usually correct if you aren't brain damaged.
Everything has strata. It doesn't matter if it is a social construct. In history, the whites and Asians were alphas.
>>73167726
cherrypicking swings both ways OP
>>73180471
What race are arabs/middle-easterners?
Aren't they the same race as europeaans?
"White" and "Black" are social constructs, not human biodiversity.
The term subspecies could easily be applied to humans, it's just that biologists themselves use this classification with not much rigor.
Judging by what passes as subspecies in the animal kingdom, "blacks" as in sub-saharian west africans could be considered a different sub-species from the tightly clustered Europeans.
>>73177853
>>73180471
those examples look mixed-race though.
>>73178139
>low IQ people tend to come from a caste society where the worker class have their pregnant women intentionally deprived of protein,
+1 unPC not widely known and quite true.
>this guarantees certain results, for every generation the practice is continued it will take an equal number of generations to reverse the effects
This is not true however, it's muddled. Culturally, left to themselves, that could be true.
>>73178167
It 'exists' as a human concept, not as an objective property of the natural world.
>>73178482
>Each of the major divisions of humankind
Thank you anon, exactly what is needed for clarity here. Let us return to definitions. You have provided the definition for race. And science took that definition and tried very hard for many years to then determine exactly how many races there are and what their characteristics are and you know to do what science does. To accurately map the natural world. And after all that work and all that thought, you know what we found out?
That there actually is only one 'major division of mankind' at the biological level in existence today.
That's why we say we are all one race.
>>73180865
google is your friend kiddo, you can cherrypick as many examples as you want.
stay in school, OK?
The nonsense that race doesn't exist is Boasian, leftist crap.
>>73180895
>That there actually is only one 'major division of mankind' at the biological level in existence today.
Prove it. I dont see proof, I see sociologists denying races exist, or did exist, because it might lead to discrimination.
There ARE different sub-species of humans. Just because over the thousands upon thousands of years we have interbred to a certain degree doesn't make this any less valid. Crossbred dogs still came from two distinct breeds of dogs, which might have slightly different genetic makeups between other dogs of the same breed, but they are still the same breed.
>>73177923
Blacks are putting white people down, preventing them from part taking in the 100 meter dash.
>>73180895
>There are no bright lines
All that means is the races have mixed - there are striking variations which would separate out if we reduced miscegenation.
>>73174955
So subspecies don't exist?
>>73178439
Atheist scientist here. I consider Christianity a form of progressivism and cuckoldry.
>>73180895
>That there actually is only one 'major division of mankind' at the biological level in existence today.
That isn't true, though - there are several major ones agreed on once you look past the political repression of the idea - Caucasian, Negroid and Mongoloid are the most agreed on, then you have Australoid, Pygmoid and some other small ones.
>Right: 100% African
>Left: 100% Aryan
Check m8, /pol/
>>73181369
>Compare mixed blacks to an obese white and a mixed "white".
>think you are making a point
>totally fail to address my post
lol kill yourself
>>73172410
Oh, Sweden.
>>73167726
>>73167726
Except for /pol/ spouting inconclusive statistics nothing has given me the impression that black Central-Africans are dumber than white Western-Europeans.
Most of the """arguments""" about human biodiversity boil down to the idea that since we use real numbers in our measurements, we cannot pinpoint races exactly in a binary manner. This is as much as retarded as claiming that colors aren't real because the spectrum of frequencies is often described as a continuum.
In reality it is a non-issue if you want to, you can talk about percentages if you are uncomfortable with monolithic definitions.
>>73181757
Berbers are basically paleoMediterraneans, north Africans in general are heavily admixed with actual negroes.
>>73181939
t. Ahmed
>>73181939
>inconclusive statistics
i.e statistics you are going to ignore since you can't disprove them
>>73181757
you are dumber than what your flag says you must be..
>>73181833
You can use google to come up with as many cherrypicked examples on both sides as you want. Thanks for demonstrating that you are a 15 year old kid though.
>>73182037
The point is that the morphological differences are huge. The more examples you choose, the more that point will be reinforced.
>>73181946
>This is as much as retarded as claiming that colors aren't real because the spectrum of frequencies is often described as a continuum
This.
>>73179908
Language is a social construct.
Guess I just proved that everyone who uses words is just wasting their breath.
>>73182116
Right, and my point is they swing both ways. There are plenty of deformed, retarded white kids. Just look at the American bible belt.
And yourself, apparently.
>>73169255
Races are distinct and notable genes and the likely hood of finding them in a human.
Medicine teaches that race exists. Get over it.
>>73172410
>>73178139
>yes your gene determine your appearance but other characteristics are more easily explained by exposure to specific environment,
IQ has a heritibility of .75
You're just a delusional idiot who doesn't want to face the reality of genetic determinism.
>>73182187
You still seem not to get it. The point is that the morphological differences correspond to species level in the animal kingdom. We are not debating which race is better looking, but if there is enough variation to warrant racial divisions.
>>73182341
This.
Races exist and so does racism. What's interesting to me is the fact that blacks appear to be the most racist of all. They act like the people of today owe them for what happened to their ancestors. They use this as ammunition to get their way. Blacks seemed to be entitled to racism while white people must face punishment for something that began centuries ago. It is a load of shit. WE OWE THEM NOTHING! Not happy? Go back to Africa bitches.
>>73182007
You know what inconclusive means right? There is no proof that says Central-Africans have lower intellectual capabilities than Western-Europeans.
There is also the fact that /pol/ usually sucks at interpreting statistics because otherwise it wouldn't fit their beliefs.
>>73181757
Are you happy now?
>>73182556
>> U deny realiti an U sux at stats
> No U
Grow Up Ital and Belg
>>73182341
Sure, if you want to move the goalposts and agree that black people look different then white people, then we are in agreement. But if you think you are superior to anyone for being white, I will laugh heartily at you for being the epitome of a beta cuckold posting on a japanese image board made for weebs.
>>73182666
Show me the reality swiss bro
>>73182556
>proof
confirmed for knowing fuck all about how scientific inquiry works
stop posting
>>73182556
>no proof
>>73182811
It's complex, both of you have a point and you wouldn't understand it. Paradox of Sorites: "intellectual capability" is a fuzzy concept.
>>73182906
rich parents ================
poor parents ==
(made up but you get the ID)
What now?
>>73182985
Especially since IQ tests are useless.
Look, I want to clarify my main issue here. The words "Social construct".
If race is a social construct, and by race I mean words used to describe people of a certain genetic makeup who bear a certain resemblance to other people from their region of the world, then breeds of animals are a social construct, the 50,000 or whatever subspecies of birds are a social construct.
Where do we draw the fucking line? Why is simply acknowledging genetic differences and applying a word to save yourself some time when describing them (i.e. "Black" is generally used to describe a person of Sub-Saharan African descent) considered racist?
If basically fucking everything is a social construct, why does it being a social construct even matter?
There are roughly 2^40,000 different possible gene combinations. Should we name them all?
>>73182906
Yeah sure, because descendants of West-African slaves with white admixture who were continuously and systematically oppressed are totally representative for the whole Central-African population.
>>73183174
Paradox of Sorites
Races are fuzzy
Species are fuzzy
Colors are fuzzy
Language/Dialect
Large/small
Many/few
...
Yet we still draw the line, agreed.
>>73183100
That argument is very weak. Blacks in the US are far from poor and they still perform poorer than people with less than them.
Does relative poverty make people less intelligent?
>>73183100
What now?
>>73183349
If I were you I would prepare for sodomy, most African countries are shit at standardised inteligence tests anyway.
>>73183174
Medicine recognizes race. They dont pass judgement on which one is better than the other but that is all you need to know. The people who are qualified to judge and who matter think race exists. No one cares what SJWs think.
>>73183100
In any socioeconomic class, blacks are 15 IQ points lower than whites.
>WHAT NOW?!
>>73183509
But everywhere I look on google I see the same shit, "race is a social construct. there is no difference between us, we are all da same"
Even the dictionary definition of racism is simply acknowledging "race"
I guess the American political system is racist because they record a "Black vote"
>>73173464
No, because the races didn't start out as originally separate entities.
>>73183100
With you logic, how do you explain latinos that are dirt poor that cross the border illegally do better academically than blacks that have live in America for generations???
>>73167726
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TrovtcNhpQ
>>73182866
Oh god, you know that in casual conversation most people call it proof. Scientific evidence then. Talk about being insufferable.
>>73183696
Sociology is a joke. Pretending race doesnt exist is convenient for the US because they have so much racial tension.
>>73181757
>using a berber as an example of an african
God, I hate you so much, Sweden
>>73183765
Yes they did.
The common ancestror argument falls extremely flat.
>>73183386
>>73183421
>>73183563
Poverty makes it harder to break through. Quality of life and upbringing don't only depend on cash tho: you could be a bit poor, but live in a farm in the Swiss countryside with fresh air, not too much work because of machines, and no need to commute twice a day. You'll be both happy and hard-working, and your children will be too. Now compare to a wagecuck who surely makes money but isn't ever there for his children...
But yeah, deep down I agree with you. Even if we strip off every explaining-away factor one-by-one, blacks are probably intrinsically underpreforming. Not sure, but maybe. Or maybe permanent victimhood mentality is what makes them underperform... Never know.
>>73183773
Probably something like "oppression", which we know is bullshit.
>>73174709
Isn't this true of any useful concept? They are all somewhat arbitrary and involve viewing the world through one factor rather than others. But if you can't do that then you can't think at all.
Some concepts are better than others but none are ordained by God or nature.
>>73167726
is "unironically" the new "literally" or "legitimately"?
>>73183174
>Why is simply acknowledging genetic differences and applying a word to save yourself some time when describing them (i.e. "Black" is generally used to describe a person of Sub-Saharan African descent) considered racist?
because if no-one did that racism would no longer exist - and that's what a lot of people are aiming to make happen.
it isn't only a matter of ideas since racism includes violence, segregation, discrimination etc.
>>73183889
see >>73183421 >>73183563 for examples of data supporting the hypothesis that nigs are basally dumber than Euros or Asians
or open a history book even
>>73183947
Deletion why?
>>73184053
Then racism will always exist because unless you tear out your eyes you will always acknowledge people who look different to you.
Racism will only stop existing if people stop getting offended by literally everything.
Policing speech isn't going to fix anything. The fact that you think prohibition fixes anything is bizarre.
>>73183509
>No one cares what SJWs think.
anthropologists have internalised this "race is not real" idea.
>>73169255
Why are you basing this on one gene (i.e. low intelligence)?
>To accuse someone who has the dark skin phenotype to also have the low intelligence phenotype simply because of probability.
You're implying that they people, or scientists, actually accuse blacks, rather they would say that since the person in question is black, and since blacks have a higher change of having the 'low intelligence phenotype', that person would have a higher chance of having said phenotype. You're oversimplifying it so that it's easier to attack, typical strawman.
Scientific racism would be allowing for differences between races, and since there are factual differences between races (blacks have a higher bone density, different skull structure, melanin difference, etc. in comparison to whites) the term racism would be incorrect. Distinctions are being made, but no race would be necessarily considered inferior.
>So that turns our whole game into a pobabilistic crap shoot
You're exaggerating. Just because there are blacks who do not have the 'low intelligence' gene and whites who do not have the 'high intelligence' gene, doesn't disqualify that there are differences in general between the races. Your whole argument is basically 'just because some aren't, we should consider none of them as such', which would be judging the majority by the exceptions. The fact that you need to exemplify 'black genes' and 'white genes' would indicate that those 'white genes'-blacks are the exception to the rule.
>>73184028
Not new just a different buzzword
I am literally unironically serious right now
:^)
>>73182690
You are the one moving the goalposts. Race has always been about physical differences. People didn't have genetics back then. It is the leftists that are coming up with new standards.
>>73184259
My definition of racism* I should say
>>73181264
>Prove it.
At this point the burden really goes the other way.
> I see sociologists denying races exist, or did exist, because it might lead to discrimination.
I'm not a sociologist so I can't and wont answer for them. Biology says otherwise.
>There ARE different sub-species of humans.
Sub-species is the most loosely defined taxonomic term at the bottom of the scale of abstraction in zoology, and it has to be stretched a bit too hard to split humans that way. Subspecies have real, firm, solid, objective boundaries. The supposed human races simply do not. Not at the genetic level.
>Crossbred dogs still came from two distinct breeds of dogs, which might have slightly different genetic makeups between other dogs of the same breed, but they are still the same breed.
That's confused. Breeds themselves were created by selective inbreeding for thousands of years, something that hasn't occurred in any human population on anything like the same scale.
>>73181359
>All that means is the races have mixed - there are striking variations which would separate out if we reduced miscegenation.
Incorrect. This is still the result if you exclude everyone but the deepest aboriginals available from each area . So what this means is that 'the races' never actually formed.
>>73181568
See above.
>>73181633
Those *were* typically agreed on 100 years ago, on the basis of broad morphology and other unreliable criteria.
The mapping of human DNA was fatal to the idea however.
>>73182128
No, but you just proved anyone that says 'I can't learn Chinese as easy as you because I don't have any Chinese grandparents' is full of shit. Assuming you didn't actually get to grow up with said Chinese grandparent and learn it from them, of course.
>>73183349
>systematically oppressed
You think
>>73184268
Whatever pays the bills right? In medicine if you pretended race doesnt exist you would possibly kill someone and get sued. So it doesnt pay the bills there and doctors recognize race.
>>73177813
It is related when you measure it relative to total body mass.
>>73167726
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28human_categorization%29
The largest issue concerning this topic is purely communicative.
People say "black", what they mean is African or Haitian descent.
People say "white". what they mean is Euro or Icelandic descent.
People say "yellow", yatta, yatta, yatta.
There are distinct phenotypical differences in these peoples. There certainly had to be, because these different terrains that these peoples lived required different biologies and mental processes to survive.
It is completely understandable that in a society that is mainly dominant, and continues to dominate, the practices of that society will become the overbearing rule of the land.
This is why "Western World" laws are almost universal, the Euros that migrated to the Americas made the largest impact on the world and have the largest continued impact.
This all being said, what you need to concern yourself with is not whether or not these individual groups of peoples are different, for they most certainly are. What you need to concern yourself with is why the opposition, that we are all the same, is a contemporary question.
The reality behind it is that even in our dominance, there are certain sympathetic and empathetic values we've held on to.
This is what we literally call "being human".
But there are societies that don't have this, normally due to warring factions within the people that never have allowed any sort of growth.
What these means is that even though in Western cultures we've seen the ability and worthiness of other subsidized cultures, we take that and push it on to ~all~ cultures, feeling that simply because they exist there must be something about them that makes them worth as much as us.
This is however untrue.
TL;DR, Our holding onto our values enables these inferior peoples to continue to exist.
>>73167726
http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals/sequencing-neanderthal-dna
"
Svante Pääbo’s team from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany announced the sequencing of one million base pairs of nuclear DNA of a Neanderthal specimen in 2006 (Green et al. 2006). After a long search for specimens with a sufficient amount of undamaged DNA to sequence and for the ones with the least evidence of contamination, they focused on Vindija 80, a Neanderthal discovered in Croatia in 1980 that is approximately 38,000 years old.
They estimated that 7.9% of the changes in human DNA compared with that of the chimpanzee occurred after the split with Neanderthals.
Neanderthals have contributed approximately 1% to 4% to the genomes of non-African modern humans. "
>>73184259
you're mixing up xenophobia with racism - you're right it wouldn't remove xenophobia, but racism would be impossible that's why it's appealing. I'm not saying it makes sense I'm saying that's why the idea of race not existing is spread around.
>>73180242
Dogs are an example, dummy. Of course dogs and humans are different, but they are comparable.
>>73184404
>look at my intellectual picture! I'm so fucking smart!
Anyway
>That's confused. Breeds themselves were created by selective inbreeding for thousands of years, something that hasn't occurred in any human population on anything like the same scale.
Not the point, they exist. There are dog breeds, they look significantly different from one another.
If you think a sub-saharan african man looks the same as a northern european man then you need your fucking eyes checked.
>>Prove it.
>At this point the burden really goes the other way.
It really doesn't since I was the one who asked you to prove it. You're making an argument by claiming your position is an objective one, so prove it with facts.
>I'm not a sociologist so I can't and wont answer for them. Biology says otherwise.
Again, [Citation Needed]
>>73178167
No more ambiguous than medical diagnosis. If you have 5 of the following 7 symptoms, your doctor may prescribe welfare, affirmative action, and mass incarceration.
>>73183174
I don't think it's racist to notice what complexion someone has and be able to describe them.
It's racist if you think 'black' means 'has genes that cause low IQ and a propensity towards violent and criminal behavior.' Can you see the difference?
>>73183386
Blacks in the US were destroyed from the 60s onwards. Look up COINTELPRO. Large majority black areas were virtually emptied of fathers. Several generations were raised in poverty, by single mothers or worse yet fosters. Then on top of that we're sending them to public universities where marxists teach them to hate whites on top of it. You can't see how those environmental factors explain all the negatives you are attributing to genetics?
>>73178344
What makes the sun one thing instead of many?
We grasped it as a concept.
>>73173169
This guy lol
>accuses someone of being a troll
>uses phrase "natural definition"
What in the actual fuck could that possibly mean?
I asked google, it told me, "Go fuck yourself, who even asks that retarded of a question?! Also, die in a fire!"
Pretty sure it's not a thing.
Good luck redefining English with nonsensical phrases.
>>73184404
>Subspecies have real, firm, solid, objective boundaries.
As I understood it even species itself wasn't that solid, hence the "species problem" in biology ie. that no-one is able to settle on what makes something a species.
>Those *were* typically agreed on 100 years ago, on the basis of broad morphology and other unreliable criteria.
What else is there to identify other than morphological differences? When I say race all I mean is morphological differences.
>>73173169
>"It is the same with species. Naturally they do not actually exist, we just use it because it brings some order to chaos."
Welcome to science class? lol
>>73177609
>They do, anon, they do.
>implying he meant 'all white people'
>using a bullshit chart
fuck off retard, sickle cell frequency is not that high in europe, you're just baiting.
Anon meant 'white people' in the sense that 'white people in general', which is correct in the sense that Arabs, africans, indians are statistically much more likely to have this gene. Race is built on statistics of gene prevalence, like skin colour.
>>73177853
It's about medians. Whites have an extremely small floor. Only a small number are that ugly. Normally, barring drug use and randomly selecting different races about age 20, you'd choose the white as the most attractive. All this cherrypicking is unnecessary, basic dating facts prove this. If someone wouldn't mind posting the reply data concerning dating sites, I'd be grateful, but in any circumstance, the average niggra is bottom dollar.
>>73167726
damn, i don't like niggers, they look just too creepy. One time i was going home by bicycle in the night. Suddenly i see someone without head and only white teeth in air. That was very dark nigger. It was so scary.
>>73178139
>there isn't a low intelligence gene
Proofs? If there are chinks searching for them, I believe you are wrong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEbkgGlBLF8
>>73185276
epic, simply epic post nippon
>>73183946
You realize almost all life has a common ancestor somewhere...
>>73185276
>That was very dark nigger. It was so scary.
Nippon actually managed to hoist the level of discussion with such a post. Genius. All hail the Japanese Empire.
Also Akihito is into taxonomy. How does he taxonomise humans and niggers?
>>73185136
hes right though, race is a social construct. most things are social constructs though so its a stupid thing to bring up unless you are a marxist trying to convince people that something isnt meaningful just because its decided on by humans
>>73185276
Are they common in Japan? The only ones I remembered seeing are those filthy Nigerians and some Military ones.
>>73176657
>Species = we don't share enough DNA to be considered to be of the same race.
Species is when we can't be the same race?
Wow... too many drugs or just not enough yet today?
>>73185569
around Tokyo u can find every scum of this planet
>>73184404
>Subspecies have real, firm, solid, objective boundaries.
haha, no.
>A taxonomist decides whether to recognize a subspecies or not. A common way to decide is that organisms belonging to different subspecies of the same species are capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring, but they do not usually interbreed in nature due to geographic isolation, sexual selection, or other factors. The differences between subspecies are usually less distinct than the differences between species.
>Members of one subspecies differ morphologically or by different coding sequences of DNA from members of other subspecies of the species. Subspecies are defined in relation to species.
>Morphology is a branch of biology dealing with the study of the form and structure of organisms and their specific structural features. This includes aspects of the outward appearance (shape, structure, colour, pattern,size), i.e., external morphology
First off, 'solid, objective boundaries' top fucking kek.
>>73170115
>I don't think
This is the only correct part of your post.
>>73185548
Its a stupid term since it describes practically everything, it should have no place in science at all.
>>73185653
You'll be seeing me soon too, prepare your womyn so I can race mix with them. :^)
>>73185219
Not statistics! You'll ruin their anecdotal evidence!
>>73184404
>Those *were* typically agreed on 100 years ago, on the basis of broad morphology and other unreliable criteria.
They are no less reliable than other scientific observations.
>The mapping of human DNA was fatal to the idea however.
Except it hasn't, in fact, it is not even known which genes code for morphology, pigmentation, etc. It is not know how significant the genetic differences among populations are either, because the function of most genes and their implications for human variation is not understood.
What has been shown is that genetic variation more or less correlates with the traditional delimitation of humans into races. Any form of "genetic standard" applied by the left on race is, by definition, an made up standard that can be easily manipulated for political purposes.
>>73167726
>I've never honestly looked down on a person because of their race
back to tumblr.
>>73185873
you can take all stupid bitches which will suck your cock back to australia
>>73167726
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_genocide_conspiracy_theory
>>73184000
>>73183100
>implying chinks and latinos didn't come to america dirt poort
>implying that they should be worse off aswell, yet they outperform 'blacks' easily
>>73186071
Gladly
>>73185181
>As I understood it even species itself wasn't that solid, hence the "species problem" in biology ie. that no-one is able to settle on what makes something a species.
Well, yes. That's my point. Sub-species is already a squishy enough concept some of us question whether it should be considered sufficiently objective as is. And racists are stretching well past it.
>What else is there to identify other than morphological differences? When I say race all I mean is morphological differences.
True biological divisions exist at the genetic level.
What you're seeing would only lead to a sub-species classification in a wild animal if the two populations had no natural way to interact, not even through intermediary populations, and would come into question should those facts change. That's not true for humans and it's NEVER been true for most of us.
>>73185653
Well I hope you stay safe Nippon. Keep an eye on your women too, one of the American ones that I saw over there was chimping out because he couldn't find a "good" girl who was interested in him. Of course being from America, he immediately jumped to the conclusion that all of them were racist.
>>73184404
>Subspecies have real, firm, solid, objective boundaries. The supposed human races simply do not.
comedy gold, a simple PCA will show absolute crystal clear boundaries at least between major historical "races" or subspecies if you will i.e Euros, Nigs and Chinks.
Of course it does get harder if you try to refine your classification even further as for instance west Eurasians will tend to get closer among each other, but it's piss easy to distinguish between populations that have been separated and had almost 0% to actual 0% gene flow in almost 100000 years.
Worth the watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9FGHtfnYWY
>>73186078
They were never slaves tho AFAIK.
But yeah, there's always another excuse to be found. Really I don't know what to beileve...
>>73186272
Please go away. You are that Sardinian who posts biased pictures to prove how unadmixed your people supposedly are.
>>73186401
nah you go away Suzuki or maybe contribute to the thread if you can
>>73186521
I can post pictures too which look unflattering to Sardinians and good for Finns.
>>73186169
>True biological divisions exist at the genetic level.
Race differences are genetic.
>>73186639
>unironically using good and bad when talking about science
someone is butthurt
I don't see why showing your higher affinity with the Siberian boys is supposed to be "good" for you
>>73186276
So basically liberals only argument is "we don't like the outcome of your study on race, so we shouldn't study or talk about it anymore"
>>73186802
The farther away from Sardinians, the better.
Oops, meant Arabs.
>>73186272
what the fuck are puerto ricans
>>73186920
butthurt confirmed, don't sudoku yourself over it though Mitsubishi
>>73185447
WE WUZ UNICELLULAR ORGANISM N SHIEEET
>>73186276
starts at 12:00
>>73186920
What the fuck is that image? 4chan doing the switcheroo again.
>>73186853
Yeah it's funny the chink who's supposed to be smart according to theory is such an idiot.
>>73186994
Pic related, black-haired blatte non-European i.e. you.
>>73186925
Growing up around Ricans I can tell you they are just as bad as niggers. The only redeeming quality is that the girls have fat asses. But that only lasts while they are in their primes. Once the reach their mid 20's they balloon up.
>>73183421
what the fuck does mexican american even mean? if its a high income mexican family its probably white too
shitty graph
>>73172410
Well, according to you since there is no natural occurrence of the number 1, "ONE", it doesnt exist...
Or any other concept for that matter and yes that includes science itself, we can't argue on this level of nihilism!
>>73187111
>a fucking Finn talking about Europeanness
my sides are in orbit, keep your eternally irrelevant blondism and slanty eyes for yourself while dark haired meds build European civilization
>>73187463
>arab refugees enter it*aly
>no way to differentiate them from the natives
Kek.
>>73186276
B-BUT ITS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT SHITLORD
BECAUSE I SAY SO
