🧵 Untitled Thread
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 19:18:15 UTC No. 16204985
Soience doesn't have an answer for this one
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 19:20:35 UTC No. 16204990
>>16204985
*Soience can't have an answer for this one
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 19:47:38 UTC No. 16205050
It's true, but useless.
What exactly do you want? For us to start sterilizing blacks/browns? No matter what you say, no matter how much evidence, studies, etc. showing blacks are low IQ it's never gonna convince liberals of anything, and that's 50% of the voting population. It's like trying to convince a christian fundamentalist of evolution, or even if they do believe it they'll always deny it.
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 19:53:08 UTC No. 16205059
>>16204985
>Putting white women on the wrong end.
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 19:59:01 UTC No. 16205069
>>16204985
Definition of subspecies is artificial
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 20:12:27 UTC No. 16205096
>>16205069
>dividing rainbows into colors is artificial
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 20:45:19 UTC No. 16205149
>>16205096
colors are subjective
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 20:52:20 UTC No. 16205157
>>16205069
This
>>16205096
This too. Someone else can talk about the evolution of color in language. Very interesting and relevant to this discussion.
For this example, ur animals can interbreed, but they basically have zero contact with each other. They also all have physical differences in size, temperament, etc. They also live in different areas. Humans on the other hand, through engineering and science, all are basically in contact. The biggest differences between groups of people are culture (language, religions, etc etc). We already differentiate by race, religion, language, by culture. There's little meaning to differentiate by species - I can go around the world and fuck a girl who can't speak english and we can raise a child who can have their own family and so on.
Dogs, being domesticated, do not act nor tend to live with wolves. But also, dogs derived from the grey wolves.
Humans and neanderthals and other Homo descend from a common ancestor. It is in this sense they are grouped together. All land animals come from fish - everyone is a fish. But more can and should be said than to call a pitbull a type of fish.
It's not a science question. This is more of a communication between humans question. Nature doesn't care about grouping stuff. Science doesn't need to answer this question - people do. Labels are meant to be informative to the human scientists that use em, meant to show the similarities and differences. There's no rigorous definition of species or any group. It boils down to stuff like "this guy has this type of tail bone, where this guy doesnt" type shit. No rigor, but as long as there are agreements of the differences and similarities, that's all that matters. Subspecies is transitively similar. We already have species down, but what if someone wants to go "one level lower". Then they use subspecies. To go lower, you get basic stuff like color or shape or habits, which is the same as people being different by race, and so on.
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 21:10:24 UTC No. 16205172
>wolf
>coyote
>dog
>different species
They aren't.
Also, yes, subspecies can exist. They can also not exist. And two animals being morphologically distinct doesn't make them different species, as you see with dogs themselves.
Anonymous at Sat, 1 Jun 2024 21:19:42 UTC No. 16205177
>>16205059
Whites are barely better than nigs, and that is a fact. That is why jews do whatever the fuck they want in Europe and the US.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 01:38:08 UTC No. 16205552
are pugs and huskies not in the same species because they look different
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 01:41:14 UTC No. 16205553
>>16205050
>MUH SLIPPERY SLOPE!!!
What if we just stopped lying to everyone about race? It IS real. It is EASILY identified. There ARE differences.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 01:48:44 UTC No. 16205558
>>16205172
>They aren't.
You should read a book, ass-pirate.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 01:49:56 UTC No. 16205560
>>16205177
By similar reasoning, we know thieves are superior to working people because they break into working people's homes.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 01:50:11 UTC No. 16205561
>>16204985
Youve made this shill thread before and I btfo you then, why bother posting again? All you did was call me jewish and that was your only argument.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 01:51:47 UTC No. 16205562
>>16205157
>I can go around the world and fuck a girl who can't speak english and we can raise a child who can have their own family and so on.
>Wait, maybe I should look up whether mixed-race people generally have any known medical complications before I end up sounding retarded in front of thousands of people.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 01:52:48 UTC No. 16205565
>>16205561
That's now how I remember it. I remember that he humiliated you with objective data and you called him a racist and ran away to dilate your fake pussy.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 02:17:45 UTC No. 16205591
>>16204985
Dogs are wolves though
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 02:32:45 UTC No. 16205605
>>16204985
Yes we do. A subspecies is a species with members who do not naturally produce offspring because they are separated by either geography or time (one mates in spring and the other in fall for instance). At no point in all Earth's natural history have humans been separated by geography or time. Humans have intermixed for tens of thousands of years.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 02:47:52 UTC No. 16205622
>>16205553
Nobody said it's a slippery slope or that racial difference aren't real. Read the fucking posts you're replying to instead of just defaulting to your programming, you retarded drone.
The point is that there are two kinds of people in the world: the people who are already in full agreement with you regarding race and the people who aren't. The latter will NEVER, EVER be convinced to change their minds no matter how many artifact-riddled jpgs you throw at them. The people you're raging against believe that race is literally just skin color and there are no other differences. Is there any amount of evidence of this they could show you that would make you agree with them? No? Well, they feel the exact same way about the evidence you're trying to present.
You have finite time and energy and you need to be smarter and stop wasting them on pointless battles.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 02:56:33 UTC No. 16205629
>>16205617
woah hey pal here's the problem with that not all africans are even the same subspecies as each other let alone whites
if we want to create a racial theory it'll be very strange and complicated and pointless
no animal mixes this much
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:00:27 UTC No. 16205631
>>16205149
Wavelengths are objective.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:02:43 UTC No. 16205639
>>16204985
>Soience doesn't have an answer for this one
>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11
>The common cuckoo Cuculus canorus is divided into host-specific races (gentes). Females of each race lay a distinctive egg type that tends to match the host's eggs, for instance, brown and spotted for meadow pipit hosts or plain blue for redstart hosts. The puzzle is how these gentes remain distinct. Here, we provide genetic evidence that gentes are restricted to female lineages, with cross mating by males maintaining the common cuckoo genetically as one species. We show that there is differentiation between gentes in maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA, but not in microsatellite loci of nuclear DNA. This supports recent behavioural evidence that female, but not male, common cuckoos specialize on a particular host, and is consistent with the possibility that genes affecting cuckoo egg type are located on the female-specific W sex chromosome. Our results also support the ideas that common cuckoos often switched hosts during evolution, and that some gentes may have multiple, independent origins, due to colonization by separate ancestral lineages.
Same Species, Same Subspecies, no clue how they managed their races to maintain a single Species/Subspecies genetic.
Guess there must be some liberal conspiracy theory going on.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:03:07 UTC No. 16205640
>>16205605
>Our species is only ten thousands years old. Wait, only twenty thousand. OK, I'm sure it's not more than fifty thousand.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:04:42 UTC No. 16205642
>>16205605
>At no point in all Earth's natural history have humans been separated by geography or time.
>The Americas didn't exist until Europeans went over there and flight was invented.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:05:11 UTC No. 16205643
>>16205622
>Is there any amount of evidence of this they could show you that would make you agree with them?
What "evidence" could they show me when all the evidence is on my side? Are we talking about them just making something up?
Also, defending the truth is NEVER a "pointless battle," you soulless coward.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:07:42 UTC No. 16205649
>>16205639
>Wait, I just realized I didn't address the OP's point even slightly.
You're probably too stupid to understand this, but you basically just showed us the equivalent of four White people with different colors of hair.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:21:23 UTC No. 16205681
>>16205622
>you can't discuss this topic because it triggers me emotionally and makes me cry
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:22:46 UTC No. 16205685
>>16205639
>I come to /sci/ to discuss politics
>>>/pol/
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:34:14 UTC No. 16205698
>>16205649
>white people can derive embryos/eggs that mimic multiple species embryos/eggs and trick said multiple species into raising them.
So you have poor reading comprehension, understood.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:38:51 UTC No. 16205701
>>16205698
>NO U!
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:40:36 UTC No. 16205704
>>16205701
>low IQ
It's okay to admit you don't understand anon.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:47:16 UTC No. 16205717
>>16205643
>>16205681
See, this is what I'm talking about. You're so hopelessly directionbrained that you don't even understand that I'm on your side. You hear something vaguely resembling criticism and your programming kicks in and you start attacking me without even understanding why.
>defending the truth is NEVER a "pointless battle
And you imagine that's what you're doing by making this thread for the 10,000th time on one of the most racist sites in existence? Everyone here either agrees with you or only comes here so they can fight with you and the people who come here to fight will never, ever be convinced, especially when the best you have to offer is low resolution jpgs and limp dicked personal insults.
>you soulless coward
You "defend the truth" by doing it publicly, by doing it where these people actually congregate, by putting your personal status and reputation on the line. You don't do it by preaching to the choir on an anonymous website. What exactly do you imagine you're accomplishing by making a thread like this? Do you think we haven't all seen these exact same pics hundreds of times before?
If you're really this intent on wasting your time and energy on such a pointless topic then the bare minimum I expect from you is some original content and arguments. If all you have to offer is one of these endless reposted pics with no input of your own then you're not just wasting your time but you're boring us as well. At least put in enough effort for me to be able to confidently say that you're an actual person and not a bot. Right now I can't see a difference.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:51:08 UTC No. 16205720
>>16205704
It's OK to admit you don't understand fixation distance, anon.
Also, use a comma to offset a noun addressing someone. Most of us learned this in grade school, but I guess you didn't.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:52:55 UTC No. 16205722
>>16205717
>You're so hopelessly directionbrained...
Calm down. Calm down. Those aren't both me.
Also, I'm not the one who made the thread.
You're so touchy that you assume everyone who disagrees with you must be the same person.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:55:05 UTC No. 16205726
>>16205722
>Those aren't both me.
Yeah, no shit. My post was directed at and applies to both of you. If you can't tell which parts were intended for you and which weren't then you need to work on your reading comprehension.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 03:58:32 UTC No. 16205732
>>16205720
>doesn't want to engage in the conversation concerning common cuckoo bird since it obliterates op's post
It's bird or bust anon. Nothing else matters at this point.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 04:05:18 UTC No. 16205742
>>16205732
>doesn't want to engage in the conversation concerning common cuckoo bird since it obliterates op's post
I always like the irony of seeing the same people who spend all day raging about the jews turn around and use the most jewish debate tactics you've ever seen. You post something that they can't respond to or that invalidates their argument and they just flat pretend it doesn't exist. After a few more posts go by they'll stop ignoring it and start telling you that you never posted it even though the evidence is sitting right there for anyone to see.
Stare into the abyss and all that.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 04:25:34 UTC No. 16205762
>>16205558
Many people consider them the same species. Similarly, dingoes are inconsistently categorised.
>>16205552
I think keeping them as 'breeds' is much more useful. People are making distinctions between groups according to arbitrary criteria always in a specific context. Taxonomy largely does make sense and is useful, but it's not so simple and scientific. Going by physical traits alone is not a great way to do it since it doesn't reflect genetic or behavioural distance. Domestic dogs are as varied in appearance and behaviour (since they are bred AND trained for specific tasks) as the entire canid family, but in terms of genetics and lineage they aren't.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 05:40:42 UTC No. 16205806
>>16205642
So, you don't understand human migration.
South Americans bred with Central Americans, Central Americans bred with North Americans, North Americans bred with Asians. Asians bred with Middle Easterners and so on and so forth.
At no point in human history has any population been isolated from all others. You should know this but you're stupid.
1234721 at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 05:41:14 UTC No. 16205808
>>16205553
We found evidence of natural selection on height between group but not EA. So we have the statistical power to detect differences on height, but not EA. This makes it likely EA diffs are even smaller, and height differences are really not huge. Selection for "intelligence" is real and significant yet we can never detect it uh. How convenient for you
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 07:07:24 UTC No. 16205858
>>16205629
African women interbreed with chimps even up to the present day, thats why Africans share more characteristics with chimps than any other race
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 07:25:27 UTC No. 16205875
>>16204985
Tigers have subspecies such as the Bengal and Siberian tigers. Differences between groups can add up when they live in separate places for a long time. This means that we can sort some animals based on their appearance or their DNA. For us to pick out subspecies, we look at the differences in genes. Groups with enough gene variation can be considered distinct.
When we look at human genes we see little variation. Take a look at the photos below. There are three pairs of two members of the same species. Which pair do you think is more genetically similar?
Would you guess Taylor Swift and Kanye West are more alike, or two king penguins? What about Taylor and Kanye versus two chimps? It may surprise you to learn that this species of penguin has twice as much genetic variation as humans do. And this subspecies of chimp has more genetic variation than humans. In fact, when we look at gene differences among what we used to call “races,” we find more differences within a “race” than between two “races”.
Homo sapiens just haven't been around as long as other animals. We haven't had enough time to develop as much variation in our DNA. Humans also migrate and reproduce a lot. Different groups of humans are never apart long enough for genetic differences to add up. Human DNA is too similar to split us into subspecies, or into “races.” So we can't use biology to sort people into groups like we can with other animals.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 07:26:57 UTC No. 16205878
>>16205875
Even though our DNA is similar, humans look very different from each other. But the traits we use to guess someone's “race” don't always work well. Think about skin color. There aren't just a few colors: there are more shades than you can ever count. The traits we use are also independent of each other. For example, being tall doesn’t mean you’ll also have dark hair. No matter which traits we use, there is no good way to group humans using appearance.
Historically, “race” referred to groups of humans based on features such as skin tone or ancestry. You can think of these as black, white, Hispanic, Middle Eastern, South Asian, and East Asian to name a few. But we have found that there is no basis in biology for these divisions. Instead, people living in the same area and with a shared cultural heritage and language are an "ethnicity." For example, the people of Iraq and Turkey have often been viewed as Middle Eastern, but they are distinct ethnic groups.
Ethnic groups can sometimes help inform medical concerns. For example, a population in sub-Saharan Africa has a high rate of Sickle Cell Anemia. Knowing their location and heritage can help pinpoint if they are at risk, in some cases. If we heaped all African ethnic groups under the label “black” then we miss that information. So it is clear that we can’t group people into races, or any large subgroups. As more evidence has come in, we’ve moved away from viewing “race” as a useful term or grouping for humans.
Was that soiency enough for you, OP?
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 07:39:45 UTC No. 16205888
>>16205875
>>16205878
Wrong. Your claim has already been disproved, its the old lewonthins fallacy. You are never more genetically similar to someone from another ethnic group than someone from your own. Only by looking at small parts of the genome can you arrive at this fallacy.
So much word sallad for so much nonsense, almost schizo
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 07:45:33 UTC No. 16205891
>>16205875
>Humans also migrate and reproduce a lot. Different groups of humans are never apart long enough for genetic differences to add up.
This makes sense: animals don't reason that they have ti travel to trade. They also don't stop to wonder what is behind that one hill or where that or that valley leads to.
Humans do, they are curious and reason, and they set themselves out to reach goals of exploration and resource harvesting/trading. In that process, they keep mixing the genetic pools over the millennia. Tribes are always exchanging DNA, basically. The longer people have been doing this process, the more mixed up the result, and that is exactly what we see in Africa the continent with the most genetic diversity.
Animals don't do any of that in a rational way like humans do. For animals, it all happens haphazardly, at random. For this reason, animal populations, even of the same species tend to be affected by geography much more than humans do, and so they tend to have small groups that are isolated from one another, leading to more distinct genetic pools.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 07:58:57 UTC No. 16205896
>>16205891
Are you retarded? Africa is the most diverse precisely because they remained tribal and their populations isolated. The Audacity of soience lovers
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 09:50:38 UTC No. 16205972
>>16205896
>their populations isolated
>t. never heard of the bantu expansion
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 20:59:43 UTC No. 16206717
>>16205896
>Africa is the most diverse precisely because they remained tribal and their populations isolated.
isolated populations dont' get added in the variety brought in from other populations, anon.
Anonymous at Sun, 2 Jun 2024 21:44:39 UTC No. 16206807
>>16205972
This, africans are nearly all Bantus from the same region of Africa, if they were diverse then they'd look diverse, instead they all look the same
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 05:48:15 UTC No. 16207318
>>16204985
Wolves are so certain that they're not the same species as dogs that they regularly kills and eat dogs
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 09:58:58 UTC No. 16207533
>>16205639
Isn't it much simpler, and the female finds a nest with ehgs that are most like to the eggs that she lays?
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 10:00:29 UTC No. 16207536
>>16207533
>>>16205639 #
Isn't it much simpler, and the female finds a nest with eggs that are most similar to the eggs that she lays?
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 10:01:30 UTC No. 16207537
>>16205639
Isn't it much simpler, and the female finds a nest with eggs that are most similar to the eggs that she lays?
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 10:09:45 UTC No. 16207545
>>16205896
>Africa is the most diverse precisely because they remained tribal and their populations isolated.
it's a fine balance between enough isolation for some phenotypical traits to be more common in particular regions, and enough inter-tribe mingling to keep mixing in enough diversity between the populations, including form far-away regions, given enough time.
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 10:28:03 UTC No. 16207566
>>16205050
>start sterilizing blacks/browns
That's a good idea, maybe we could put them in camps. Do you have any other suggestions?
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 19:32:17 UTC No. 16208251
>>16207566
>camps
zoos
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 20:06:42 UTC No. 16208304
it would be nice to have a negress slave wouldnt it haha
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 21:00:38 UTC No. 16208372
>>16204985
>can interbreed
Then the error is in the classification of canines, not humans, subspecies don't matter.
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 21:34:21 UTC No. 16208423
>>16208372
breeding efficiency between different races is measurably reduced
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ar
>Fertility is generally lower among racially exogamous than endogamous unions
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 23:37:52 UTC No. 16208682
>>16208423
That pretty much proves that humanity is multiple different species, there wouldn't be the measurable disparity in breeding efficiency in mixed race couples if humanity were a single species
Anonymous at Mon, 3 Jun 2024 23:53:20 UTC No. 16208709
>>16208423
But it’s nowhere near as reduced as it would be between the tapanuli orangutan and bornean orangutan for example, who diverged from each other around 3 million years ago. That’s ten times as long ago as humans have existed, let alone diverged into different races
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 00:55:11 UTC No. 16208799
here's the biological truth -
human races do have distinct genetic traits - this can be especially useful when predicting or diagnosing illnesses
but assigning them subspecies would be meaningless in a scientific sense. humans are too varied, there would be effectively 1000s of subspecies. one could argue separating humans by culture would be more meaningful
how many humans are 100% a specific race? most europeans even have neanderthal DNA
humans have also been mixing for 1000s of years as your average haploautist well tell you
add to that politically its normally only racists with their own motives that want it, there really is no reason to do it.
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 02:07:01 UTC No. 16208939
>>16205726
>Yeah, no shit.
Calm down. No need to start cussing. It won't shore up a bad argument.
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 02:08:06 UTC No. 16208942
>>16205732
>>16205742
But it doesn't disprove the OP's argument.
If you were more intelligent, you would see that.
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 02:17:03 UTC No. 16208962
>>16208423
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/a
Whoever did this study should have their paper removed from print and their career destroyed.
Science isn't valid if it doesn't support equity.
RACE IS NOT REAL. Anyone who does a study saying otherwise is not welcome in science.
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 02:38:29 UTC No. 16208984
>>16204985
Are you actually daring to question science™?
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 09:32:32 UTC No. 16209471
Bump
Anonymous at Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:57:29 UTC No. 16210418
>>16208709
>That’s ten times as long ago as humans have existed, let alone diverged into different races
thats only true if you believe the disproved out of africa dogma.
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 05:03:27 UTC No. 16211086
>>16205875
>It may surprise you to learn that this species of penguin has twice as much genetic variation as humans do
Thats just made up soience dogma from the anti-racist political crowd. Its obvious that they're lying just from looking at the examples you posted.
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 05:03:53 UTC No. 16211088
>>16210418
If we didn’t come from Africa then it’d be even more than ten times as long ago
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 18:37:33 UTC No. 16212154
Niggers were separated from europeans for at least 10's of thousands of years, perhaps 100k or more
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 21:07:18 UTC No. 16212421
>>16208423
>breeding efficiency between different races is measurably reduced
Which is completely irrelevant. They have fertile offspring without reduced fertility.
Breeding efficiency between black bears and polar bears is measurably reduced, but a hybrid would have perfectly functional sperm/eggs.
Anonymous at Wed, 5 Jun 2024 21:32:11 UTC No. 16212480
>>16204985
>Soience doesn't have an answer for this one
Then it's philosophy and you're off-topic. Sorry anon.
Newton's Flaming Laser Sword
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 08:05:33 UTC No. 16213271
>>16212421
>Breeding between black bears and polar bears
thats never happened and you have no idea what you're talking about
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 08:08:11 UTC No. 16213274
>>16208799
>most europeans even have neanderthal DNA
More than niggers, btw
Lol
Anonymous at Thu, 6 Jun 2024 11:46:28 UTC No. 16213673
>>16213271
>thats never happened
Actually it has happened in captivity and you have no idea what you're talking about.