🗑️ 🧵 /meta/
Anonymous at Sat, 12 Oct 2024 02:34:53 UTC No. 16422176
apparently pointing out taxonomical facts gets you warned (which let's be honest, puts you on the short list to be banned). so taxonomy is racist? i don't get it.
>The researchers discovered that humans and orangutans share approximately 97% of their DNA.
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih
the NIH is NOT racist. if you can find a single point of racism from any NIH link, please post.
> bonobo genome is 99.6% identical to corresponding sequences in the chimpanzee genome and 98.7% identical to corresponding sequences in the human genome.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nat
is this nature article racist? if so, please explain how. and if it is, please show me an email you've sent to nature explaining such disapproval of their published work.
>Genotyping and cluster analysis of 750 unique SNP loci discovered through this project support that the donor is indeed 99.5% similar to individuals of European descent
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiolo
this article is simple genome sequencing. it is NOT racist.
at this point, one merely cites simple taxonomical facts that genetic similarities between two different species (bonobos and chimpanzees) which, mind you is biological (scientific) fact compared to genetic similarities between two individuals of the same species (of humans), which mind you is again biological (scientific) fact.
when you start warning or banning people for discussing fucking science on a science board on 4chan, what the actual fuck is going on? jannies need to get cleaned out, because they clearly don't understand science.
Anonymous at Sat, 12 Oct 2024 04:07:14 UTC No. 16422266
>>16422176
day of employment soon for jannies
Anonymous at Sat, 12 Oct 2024 05:13:19 UTC No. 16422386
>>16422176
humans share about 99.9% of their DNA with each other, regardless of geographic or ethnic background. Thus, the remaining 0.1% accounts for a considerable amount of individual and population-level diversity.
The 99.5% similarity mentioned often pertains to specific genetic markers or SNPs and does not imply that one population is more genetically similar to another in the same way that two different species might be compared.
Anonymous at Sat, 12 Oct 2024 10:30:01 UTC No. 16422575
>>16422386
Your post contradicts the cited scientific papers and is therefore unscientific. Go back to /pol/
Anonymous at Sat, 12 Oct 2024 10:32:50 UTC No. 16422576
>>16422176
Election season is coming, they have to pre-emptively silence your kind so that Hitler doesn't win again.
Anonymous at Sat, 12 Oct 2024 10:39:42 UTC No. 16422582
>>16422176
Moderation on this site is inconsistent and often is infiltrated by people with agendas to push. There's not much you can do about it as it's been this way for a very long time and is unlikely to change. Just accept sometimes you'll get a random ban, especially when there's a new class of jannies and mods. They abuse their powers and eventually get filtered out, only to be replaced with a new crop of ideologues eager to impose their will on others through being a janny. It's the circle of life here. Since you can't do anything to change it, accept it or spend your time doing other things.