THE FST (Fixation index that measures genetic difference/divergence ) proves it.
The FST between Whites (British) and Blacks (Bantu) is 0.23: www.genetics.org/content/105/3/767.abstract
The FST between the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) and the bonobo (Pan paniscus) is 0.103 which is half the White-Black difference despite the two being classified as separate species: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018442X04700335
The FST between two gorilla species, Gorilla gorilla and Gorilla beringei is 0.04 or 1/6 the difference between Blacks and Whites: www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/bioc/2005/00000014/00000009/00004781;jsessionid=ebk3f9ja9mb61.alexandra?format=print www.berggorilla.org/fileadmin/gorilla-journal/gorilla-journal-20-english.pdf
The FST between humans and Neanderthals is less than 0.08 or about 1/3 the Black-White difference: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018442X04700335 www.pnas.org/content/100/11/6593.abstract mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/8/1359.full
The FST between humans and homo erectus is 0.17 which is ¾ the Black-White distance: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018442X04700335
Thus, whites and blacks are more genetically distant than two different chimpanzee species, two different gorilla species, humans vs. Neanderthals, and humans vs. homo erectus.
The average FST between different dog breeds is 0.154 which is nearly identical to the average FST between human populations at 0.155: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11773246 www.pnas.org/content/94/9/4516.abstract
Jacob Williams
Who makes a genetic analysis of Europe without Italy and Greece? Truly baffling
Hudson Allen
interesting
Joshua Stewart
Although wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) are a different species (lupus) than coyotes(Canis latrans): “there is less mt-DNA difference between dogs, wolves, and coyotes than there is between the various ethnic groups of human beings.” books.google.com/books/about/The_Domestic_Dog.html?id=I8HU_3ycrrEC
Dr. Stanley Coren, professor of psychology at the University of British Columbia, argues in "Do Dogs Dream that “Different breeds [of dog] obviously have different types of instinctive intelligence:”
TL;DR: Blacks and whites are different species, even though Haldane's rule is in effect.
Jayden Price
Pretty sure offspring have to be infertile in order for taxonomists to decide there's a species differential. Mulatto kids are fertile, so black and white humans are the same species.
Researchers from University of Michigan studied more than 200 adult howler monkeys (mantled howler monkeys and black howler monkeys) that were captured and released in Mexico and Guatemala between 1998 and 2008. These two different species diverged from a common ancestor three million years ago. They differ in appearance, behavior and number of chromosomes they possess. Whilst both the groups live in separate habitats, howler monkeys in the Tabasco state of Mexico live in a hybrid zone, where they coexist and interbreed.
The research team collected blood samples, hair samples and morphometric measurements from the anesthetized animals before they were released in their habitats again. Based on nuclear and mitochondrial DNA analysis, experts detected 128 hybrid individuals that were most likely the product of several years of interbreeding between hybrids and pure individuals.
Statistical analyses on body measurements revealed large amounts of differences in the structure (morphology) of individual monkeys belonging to the mixed ancestry. But researchers found that the individuals of mixed ancestry who shared most of their genome with one of the two species were physically indistinguishable from the pure individuals of that species.
"The implications of these results are that physical features are not always reliable for identifying individuals of hybrid ancestry. Therefore, it is possible that hybridization has been underestimated in the human fossil record," Liliana Cortés-Ortiz, from University of Michigan, said in a statement.
Alexander Thompson
Literally none of that excerpt contradicts anything I said.
All breeds of howler monkeys produce fertile offspring, hence all breeds of howler monkey are members of a common species. All races of humans produce fertile offspring, hence all races of humans are members of a common species. It's not difficult logic to follow.
Chase Taylor
interesting
Asher Long
hmm if only there were a less compact version of the OP picture.
Landon Parker
This is false. There is not one definite species definition. Bio 101 will tell you that
Carson Hughes
What does this mean then?
Give me a QUICK (but thorough) rundown.
Charles Cruz
It's not false, it's a commonly used approximation that only fails to differentiate lions and tigers and a couple of other species.
Bio 101 will also tell you that the concept of a "species" is an outdated quirk of terminology thanks to our more advanced knowledge of genetics, but OP seems to insist on clinging to the old words so I'll happily remind him of the old definitions that apply to them.
Wyatt Lopez
>Italy and Greece >white
Julian Morris
Let me burst this bubble for you all.
The defining factor that separates a subspecies from an actual separate species, is whether two individuals from the different populations can have offspring with is fertile. In terms of subspecies (a la dog breeds) they can breed together and have fertile offspring, in terms of different species (a la chimps and bonobos) they cannot have a fertile offspring. This is why even though horses and donkeys can reproduce, we consider them different species, because Mules are infertile.
Blacks and whites can reproduce and have fertile offspring, therefore at the most they are subspecies of the same population.
Source: Not a fucking idiot.
Michael Allen
So, neanderthals weren't different species from homo sapians?
Easton Parker
Any two animals that can produce fertile offspring are considered the same species retard.
Jason Torres
The differences geneticlaly between whites and blacks is greater than the differences between two species of chimps. Ergo, whites and blacks would be subspecies of humans.
Josiah Sanders
HOLY SHIT IT'S ALMOST LIKE WE'VE BEEN SAYING THAT SINCE FOREVER.
Aaron Brown
But this is research that proves it. Which gives us a bludgeon.
Andrew Evans
plenty of different animal species can reproduce between them, retard, use fucking google
Source: biologist
John Garcia
GOOD point.
Oliver Smith
What is the FST between Whites and East Asians? What is the FST between Blacks and East Asians?
Gabriel Moore
inb4 lewontin's fallacy
Evan Wood
So Neanderthal, Denisovan and Erectus were all our species?
Luke Clark
It means very little. As has already been pointed out, the concept of a "species" is extremely nebulous in an age of modern genetic science, since it originates from a time when scientists were forced to measure physical characteristics and fertility to try and work out the evolutionary history of animals.
It's still used today because it's helpful to have word that indicates the difference between a horse and a donkey, but there are many, many flaws with the way the categories ended up being assigned. The classic example is that genetically, many species of bird should probably belong in the class Reptilia, or many species of reptile should belong in the class Aves; the whole thing is a giant clusterfuck because we had to differentiate them based on "scales versus feathers" instead of genetic similarities.
Since all races of humans can happily breed fertile offspring, are physiologically identical in all but the most superficial ways, and are as closely related to each other genetically as breeds of dog (all of which inarguably belong to the same species, canis lupus), there is literally no biological grounds upon which to base an argument that each race is a different species.
Benjamin Murphy
This has been obvious to us here in Sup Forums for a long time, scientists for some reason treat humanity as a single species as compared to any other creature on the planet, when the differences genetically are greater. and dont try to tell me it's just junk dna
Xavier Moore
Alright nerd, So basically niggers are sub-human?
Benjamin Nguyen
>tfw Europeans are more divided by culture than genetics Except Finngolians and Gypsies from Romania.
Owen Hughes
It appears that the FST between whites and native americans is ~1.3x the FST between whites and blacks.
Whites are closer to blacks than either native americans or east asians. Therefore black - white mixture produces offspring that are closer to their parents than any other interracial pairing.
Kevin Powell
Proofs?
Ayden Taylor
Basically, yes.
>Classifying the genus Homo into species and subspecies is subject to incomplete information and remains poorly done. This has led to using common names ("Neanderthal" and "Denisovan") in even scientific papers to avoid trinomial names or the ambiguity of classifying groups as incertae sedis (uncertain placement)—for example, H. neanderthalensis vs. H. sapiens neanderthalensis, or H. georgicus vs. H. erectus georgicus.[20] Some recently extinct species in the genus Homo are only recently discovered and do not as yet have consensus binomial names (see Denisova hominin and Red Deer Cave people).
Basically, terms like Neanderthal exist to describe large chunks of the fossil record of the genus Homo, they're not considered to be clearly defined species of their own accord, precisely because there is evidence of a great deal of interbreeding, along with basically identical anatomy and very close genetic similarity given the timescale.
Even when the classification systems were first being brought in, the scientists of the time were loathe to use the same kind of distinct categories for humans, because that was a direct slap in the face to Genesis.
Jeremiah Fisher
The qualitative distances between the groups in the figure.
Thomas Brown
No. Every living human is exactly as human as every other living human, and pretty indistinguishable from every other kind of human that's ever lived for at least the last 200,000 years. For reference, civilisation as we know it is about 10-15,000 years old.
Lil' Wayne is as human as you, user.
Isaac Adams
That's not proofs.
Jeremiah Peterson
So to summarize, Aborigines are just as white as the people who made the Crystal Palace at the worlds fair 100 years ago.
Thanks (((Doctor)))
Lincoln Murphy
That's all I got. I'm not a biologist, but OP's numbers appear to be sourced from the figure.
Wyatt Parker
Well ur dumb. Quadroons and assorted mixed negroes aren't near as well off as Whasians.
Cooper Baker
No. Aborigines are not white, and nobody is arguing that they are.
Cultural differences are not the same as biological differences. There is no way that the Aborigines would have built Crystal Palace, but that's because they were never part of the PIE linguistic group, never got access to the Mediterranean trade ships of the Bronze Age, never got annexed by Rome, never got access to the Silk Road, never colonised the Americas and never joined the Industrial Revolution.
Instead, they washed up on the shores of an enormous hostile desert and spent 50,000 years trying to eke out a living without ever making contact with a single foreign culture.
Cultural diversity and conflict are the engines that drive technological and artistic progress forwards, isolated cultures literally always stagnate and then struggle to compete once they're contacted by the outside world.
Bentley Bell
Not what I was implying but it does appear that the offspring of Asian - White pairing will be closer to their parents than the offspring of White - Black pairing since the FST between Whites and Asians is lower than the FST between Whites and Blacks. Whites are closer to blacks than Asians are to Blacks though.
Jonathan Cooper
>Instead, they washed up on the shores of an enormous hostile desert and spent 50,000 years trying to eke out a living without ever making contact with a single foreign culture.
HUH, It's almost like whites didn't spend the same amount of time living in a BARREN wastleland of snow during an Ice age.
Kys with your bullshit jewish science.
Matthew Howard
Well you're retarded then. There's no way whites are more similar to niggers than Asians are.
I bet this is the same (((science))) that says mixed kids are healthier.
Michael James
Where do you see that? OP's picture implies East Asians are closer to Whites than Whites are to West Africans.
Jaxson Wright
Agreed. My wording was probably misleading. FST_White-Asian < FST_White-Black FST_White-Black < FST_Asian_Black
Hunter Campbell
It's almost like you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, put post like you do.
Kill yourself.
Isaac Diaz
Got it.
Cooper Howard
You are a spectacular dunce. The last Ice Age ended about 12,000 years ago, at a time when European culture was essentially on a level with Aboriginal Australian culture. Stone tools, wearing primitive skins and furs, basic wooden technologies like huts and throwing spears.
It's not "jewish science", it's a basic summary of rigorously researched history, archaeology and paleontology that has taken mankind hundreds of years to accumulate and fact-check. For a goodly portion of those hundreds of years, Jews weren't even generally allowed to be a part of the upper echelons of academia in the western world.
You're so, so stupid. Any of the great European minds of the past that you so desperately want to latch yourself onto would be sorry to call you their descendant, and I think that deep down you know that, which is why you channel so much hatred into this particular topic.
Robert Davis
Seems to me you're the one channeling hatred. Are you a Jew?
Dylan Jenkins
Hatred, nigger you're talking about a people that knew how to farm while Aborigines didn't know how to make fire.
I suggest stop being such a butthurt abo and improve yourself. Lift weights and go to school. Dumbass.
Colton James
Yeah its pretty incredible to think that civilization basically emerged in
Zachary Watson
>he doesn't know about the Finno-Korean hyper wars 20,000 years ago
lol
Lincoln Watson
>they are subspecies of the same population.
This is the whole point of the OP's post, dipshit. Nobody ever posited the point that blacks are a completely separate species.
John Turner
I maybe could have been more clear about it being specifically in relation to human sub species. Thanks for understanding it
Cameron Lee
Ice Age Europeans didn't know how to farm. The earliest evidence of recognisable agriculture is ~11,500 years old, about 200-500 years after the end of the Ice Age, and it first appeared in the Levant, which likely had a climate similar to modern Italy at the time. Farming was invented by the ancestors of ISIS in a lush, temperate Iraq, while the ancestors of Charlemagne were still roaming the frosty forests of the Rhine Valley scrounging for berries and migrating away from the glaciers every winter.
Also, the Aborigines absolutely knew how to make fire at that point, it has basically always been a part of the way they cultivate the Australian landscape, since many edible plants here bloom after a fire and can be caused to bloom artificially by deliberately lighting said fire.
At this point I'm pretty sure you're trolling.
I'm not channeling hatred, I'm literally just saying it as I see it. Our friend is either stupid or pretending to be stupid, and insists on trying to be as racist as possible as a way to deal with his frustration over his own stupidity. It's clear as day from the way he refuses to acknowledge literal facts and chooses instead to sling racial slurs.
And no, I'm not Jewish, I'm Celtic as they come.
Michael Nelson
Well the niggers you got in Tasmania didn't know how to make fire until Ubermesnch whites got there.
I bet you read "guns germs and steel" every night before you go to bed don't you faggot?
Brody Nelson
In the Levant many of the worlds naturally occurring productive grains were already growing there as well, ripe for domestication. That was a real advantage they specifically had.
Asher Wood
>The Tasmanian Aboriginal people extensively used fire for cooking, warmth and clearing vegetation to encourage and control macropod herds. Their capacity to create fire via the friction method had been questioned by authors in the 20th Century,[20] though a document from 1887 clearly describes fire-lighting techniques used among Tasmanians.[21] The historical evidence indicates their fire making ability, even though they preferred to bear coals when travelling between campsites - a consequence of Tasmania's wet maritime climate.
I read whatever I want to read, but normally I try and make sure that it's up-to-date if it's pertaining to scientific or historical facts.
Eli Kelly
>1887
Huh it's almost like that's not when whites discovered the place.. woah, made me think.
Henry Nguyen
>mfw id trade fire on a stick for sparkley stones
Jeremiah Taylor
The first British colonies on Tasmania appeared circa 1803
Zachary James
Do I have the sparkly necklace for you!
But wait, according to this aussie massive faggot, we're all the same!
Colton James
Yep. There's a reason it's called the Fertile Crescent, it was basically a crucible containing all the necessary ingredients for a successful sedentary civilisation. Society as we know it basically spread on horseback from Ur, somewhere around modern Nasiriyah in Iraq.
Tyler Wood
Physically no, but technologically, approxmately 10000 years ago yeah we are all basic shit eating savages. Thats just how it is. Now if we're talking about societies over the last 2000 years thats a very different story.
Oliver Campbell
Someone took a high dimensional distance metric and distilled it into a single number to show how genetically divergent different subjects are. There is no inherent real meaning in any of these distance metrics.
James Garcia
That's what jewish science wants you to believe.
Isaiah Jones
Thanks for the info.
Noah Flores
Hey no problem man.
Matthew Watson
Why would there be English-language documents dating from before European settlers arrived?
What's your point? There aren't any documents from 1803 remarking on the Aborigines' inability to master fire, which would have been notable.
We are all the same species. You've yet to provide any reasoning or evidence to support claims that we aren't.
Lucas Miller
meant to reply to this guy
Dominic Foster
And yet niggers can breed with white women, but not with chimpanzees or gorillaz. Really activates the almonds
Austin Bell
Could you please define "jewish science"?
You haven't provided any info. Literally zero informative posts with your ID.
Ethan Gutierrez
Yeah the Sumerians are arguably the most impressive civilization to ever exist in my opinion.
>invented writing >invented math >invented astronomy >invented beer >invented trade >invented the urban center and was unrivaled in its urban density for millenia >invented irrigation
Im sure some of these are arguable but I have nothing but the utmost respect for the ancient Sumerians. Absolutely amazing.
Cameron Cruz
>You haven't provided any info. Literally zero informative posts with your ID.
And you have? You haven't cited a single paper either.
Why do I get the heat? You're the one saying that Abos could be as succesful as whites. I'm not making ANY assumptions unlike you.
Jaxon Gonzalez
If you find an abo with a decent IQ and give him an education id say hes capable of anything a white person is.
Or is that absurd?
James Butler
or offspring (liger) but not really accurate. The ability to produce offspring is not what defines a species. A species is an arbitrary term used to categorise animals into identifiable groups
Adam Price
That's pretty fuckin absurd, reddit. If you take a knuckledragging abo and magically he had similar IQ (impossible, but for the sake of argument let's say he did) he still must be gassed as the subhuman vermin he is.
For a twentieth century citizen to be suddenly confronted with a man from the Stone Age would be an ex- perience sufficiently piquant. But suppose, faced with the Stone Age man, he addressed you in cultured tones and proceeded to discuss the harnessing of gravity and the poetry of Milton? Your feelings would be probably somewhat similar to those of the reporter who interviewed David Unaipon on his visit to Adelaide this week.
A full-blooded aboriginal, Mr. Unaipon presents in physical structure an unmis- takeable resemblance to those reconstruc- tions of the older human types which scien- tists have sometimes supplied with the help of a tooth and a mouldering jawbone. Only the eyes, flashing with quick thought, lim- pid, friendly, give the lie to your impres- sion. In manner, he is courteous and dignified, and an almost English purity of accent characterises his cultured voice.
Born at Point McLeay, David Unaipon soon passed far beyond the limits of mis- sion education. Through the kindly in- terest of an Adelaide family, he was given the password to the magic land of books, and developed a passionate interest in the wonders of science. A little coaching and much private study developed in him a truly remarkable intellect, and to-day he displays gifts which many Europeans might envy.
''What has been your favourite line of study?" asked the reporter after a pre- liminary chat. "Oh, physics — physics," drawled Mr. Unaipon, with a self-deprecating gesture. He admitted modestly to having done some original research in connection with the problems of gravity, a study which has long intrigued him.
Elijah Mitchell
They were without a doubt one of the greatest cultures the world has ever seen,
What's really spooky is the that their myths attribute the gifts of wisdom and astronomy to half-fish alien gods who came from the stars and demanded worship in return for the knowledge. They were given the power of digits by aquatically-inclined divine beings...
Aaron Evans
its about the entire genetic expression of an individual. its not an "IQ gene" its a massively complex web of genes that interplay. there are also genes for creativity, visual spacial, verbal, short term, long term and working memory. you can have intelligent individuals that aren't very creative and vice versa.
Wyatt Jackson
Huh, an abo that is such an abnormality you remember him still to this day.
Thanks for proving my point lmao.
Jeremiah Hughes
This is simply disinformation, there are very real differences between us. Kenyan children cant even recognize themselves in a mirror for fucks sake.
Anyone who thinks that blacks have never achieved anything ever, during the entire history of human civ, just by coincidence is deluded.
>The guy who discovered the shape of DNA >Fired short after
Caleb Hall
if a black individual has a similiar genetic distribution to a white individual (similiar markers for intelligence, low expression of the MOAO-1 gene, etc.) what determining factor would you use to seperate that individual into a sub category.
Aiden Morgan
>Kenyan children cant even recognize themselves in a mirror
You can look at the Chinese Golden monkeyage and its obvious to anyone who isnt blind, that it has the same features as chinks.
You can do the same when you look at African chimps and see how they resemble niggers.
The "Out of Africa" theory is bullshit and anyone with eyes can see that niggers evolved seperately in their isolated jungle in Africa just based on the fact that they look EXACTLY like chimps.
You then look at monkeys in Asia and see they resemble chinks and it becomes obvious where chinks evolved from.
Im not sure about whites because there arent any European monkeys, but its obvious that chinks and niggers are on completely opposite sides of the evolutionary spectrum and you can see that simply by looking at the primates in the regions they are from.
Of course (((science))) will never point that out for obvious reasons, but anyone with half a brain can see this.
Andrew Flores
>But a 2004 study published in Child Development called that idea into question. Researchers found the widely accepted finding only applied to kids from Western nations, where most of the previous studies had been done. Now, a study published September 9 in The Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology is reinforcing that idea and taking it further. Not only do non-Western kids fail to pass the mirror self-recognition test by 24 months—in some countries, they still are not succeeding at six years old.
There's my sources for quotes, everything else I've stated as fact is easily verifiable with a quick Google search.
It's not an assumption to say that Aborigines can be as successful as whites, because they sometimes are, just not when they're born into a poor single-parent family of 20 on a reservation in Buttfucknowherebilly, NT.
I agree that you've barely made any assumptions, since all you've done is throw about a few easily-falsifiable claims about the supposed biological superiority and incompatibility of various races and insult other people in the thread who've corrected OP's false assertion.
Easton Rogers
Another view.
Obvious that it has mongoid features.
Julian Scott
so individual blacks objectively more intelligent than you are dumber than you are by default.
i didn't say we're all the same you quintuple nigger kike shit pushing mongloid child fucker.
Robert Rodriguez
> supposed biological superiority
Tasmanians didn't know how to make fire...Europeans went to the moon.
