Understanding pol

Why are you racist when race doesn't exist?

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/dBehg
archive.is/VZEeQ
biologyofbehavior.wordpress.com/2014/02/09/are-dogs-and-wolves-the-same-species/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albinism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neocortex#Evolution
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

but race does exist, user
who told you It didn't?

Why are you faggot trying to get a rise out of men on Sup Forums?

The universe.

Shut up idiot.
Niggers, Muslims and Slanteyed Chinks need to be euthenised.

Im just freeing my brothers from the matrix. From the bonds of Satanic Zionist Indoctrination. Free your mind Neo.

you can't just post albinos and arrive at the conclusion that race isn't real user. thats shits ridiculous

saged

They have cucked your souls with pride and made you sin against your brothers and sisters.

If you actually want to have a debate post some actual proof of something as opposed to just trolling with retarded pictures, you just make yourself look like a moron.

Race doesn't exist?
Therefore nobody's a racist.

Your a bit slow op.

Define it scientifically.

It's pretty much the point where other species would have sub-species. Race is where a group has a significant genetic disparity and by extension look different in a consistent manner.
Even the Irish are another subspecies compared to the Brits if we use actual scientific terminology.

Sounds good in theory.
So define it specifically lad.
Where is the divergence and which parameters did you use to deduce that?

Go on.

so now aryans poo in the streets too?

I just said the same as animals mate. If it looks different that's enough. Do you even science?

No taxonomic categories "exist". And they're damned useful.

Aye.

Well if it's
>the same as animals.

then lube me up with all your science and denote where in our human species the clear divisions are.

So far you've talked the talk and yet the only parameter has been
>Muh Irish vs Muh Brit.

I'm sure the scientists would love that.

The racists have already come up with clear lines. We can split humans into several races straight off the bat such as European, African, Arab, Indian, American Indian, Aboriginal, East Asian and Turkic. It can be further split into Southern and Northern European or Germanic, Latin and Slav.
Of course there are absolutely tons of mongrels in this world which makes defining humans like defining dog breeds but the obvious ones are still obvious.
In the case of Africans they are so divergent that they could be classed as having 6 or so different species while the rest of the world are the final species.

You don't want me to right a book to respond to a Sup Forums post do you?

If you want Money, go work for it, dont call me a brother just to sponge some cash you Mong

Why no other than blacks can win a 100m race?

oh boy

>The racists have already come up with clear lines.
Ah yes, racists BTFO of scientists. Well done. It is all clear now.

>We can split humans into several races straight off the bat such as European, African, Arab, Indian, American Indian, Aboriginal, East Asian and Turkic.
Really? Cool categories, so now define what they mean?

>It can be further split into Southern and Northern European or Germanic, Latin and Slav.
Again that is well neat, please define what they mean empirically please?

>Of course there are absolutely tons of mongrels in this world which makes defining humans like defining dog breeds but the obvious ones are still obvious.

Proper science there laddo with all those tons of exceptions.
Human sub-categories are like dog breeds? Cool. How now science?

>but the obvious ones are still obvious.
Again, which ones and how are they defined?

>In the case of Africans they are so divergent that they could be classed as having 6 or so different species while the rest of the world are the final species.

Which species are those? On what basis?


>You don't want me to right a book to respond to a Sup Forums post do you?

Aye, please do user, or just a peer reviewed paper would do or a pdf of your book possibly titled:
>The empirical evidence that categorically defines
>the races
>in a concise, logical, scientific and measurable
manner.

race doesn't exist

or multiculturalism is necessary
pick one

>Europeans have white skin.
>Africans have black skin.
That is the meaning. Why are you looking for some deeper meaning in something so simple?

so if race doesn't exist, why do you import migrants?

...

Racism is a social construct

Murdering people is a social construct. There's no such thing as murder

The 67 genders are social constructs

Race exist alright. But it exist as a mind-depended concept in our mind. And the demarcating lines are subjective. Race does not exist biologically though. There are no DNA test that can differentiate between "races". Biologically we one race and a very homogeneous one compared to other species actually.

Why am I called racist if race doesn't exist?

what about dark skinned europeans ? where do you draw the line

There are all kinds of lines depending on how specific you are being.
Of course if you mean 'tanned germans' then no, they aren't European at all.

no i meant southern euro
some of them are more tanned than middle easterner

Refer to for race 101.

Isn't that a proof? As is the list of Nobel prizes? Accepting differncies keep my away from being a straight nazi fag or a total libtard. Most problem comes from cultular differencies tho.

Fck! Isn't that a proof? As is the list of Nobel prizes? Accepting differncies keep my away from being a straight nazi fag or a total libtard. Most problem comes from cultular differencies tho.

your "clear lines" are of the level of a 3 year old kid
you don't havescientific discipline to talk about the subject
you start mixing genetic with culture trying to define lines that don't make sense in a purely racial basis
t. medecine student

Quiz: What is his race?

So the fact a nigger has an IQ of 67 is a social concept?
Fuck you kike.

I'm a fuckin racist because i done like running competitively ok snowflake

>Really? Cool categories, so now define what they mean?
Well for example the australian aboriginals have evoled isolated from the rest of mankind for 40.000 years. 100% pureblooded australian aboriginals can't build a modern house without the help of other races or hybrids and they can't be taught.
A wolf and a border collie can breed, one has the genetic inclination to herd sheep, the other will never learn no matter the training.
>Again that is well neat, please define what they mean empirically please?
Simple genetic testing you idiot.

"In the 2007 paper "Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations",[21] Witherspoon et al. attempt to answer the question, "How often is a pair of individuals from one population genetically more dissimilar than two individuals chosen from two different populations?". The answer depends on the number of polymorphisms used to define that dissimilarity, and the populations being compared. When they analysed three geographically distinct populations (European, African and East Asian) and measured genetic similarity over many thousands of loci, the answer to their question was "never". "

It sure is. Just as Greyhounds are the fastest dog in the world and while some dog breeds may run faster then some greyhounds, when you pick the best greyhounds they always win.

>Europeans have white skin.
>Africans have black skin.

There you have it; Science according to BASED Anons. WEW
You best make sure you include those fair Himalayans and Pashtuns with their glistening white skin.

>Why are you looking for some deeper meaning in something so simple?

Because it shows how science-ey you truly are. There we have it. Well done. I look forward to the paper:
>White, Black, Brown, Yellow, Red: Classifications of Human sub-species.
What a scientific work of high intelligence that is.

Also
Of course, getting these low-IQ inbreds to define who is white or what levels of whiteness would be hilarious IRL with the re-enactment of the pre-EU wars beginning once again.

>Student.
>Can't even spell medicine.
>Doesn't know that sub-species are defined by how they appear in the real world rather than what % they are divergent from each other.
Checks out.

Lots of whites have low IQ. If IQ is the criterion for race then most burgers should be categorized as black even thought their skin is pale white. Is that what you are implying?

abomination

Yes, even your paper cited is about
>Variation.
Which can be grouped.

So now try to define those clusters and which definitions they signify vis-a-vis
>a race.
Go on lad, I want to see.

I just made a definition for you.It is right there.

Brilliant.
Now let's delve into exactly what that paper and the groupings of clusters of genes were identified and these
>Genetic profiles

Also note the study was carried out specifically in the US. Very thorough indeed.

Abomination huh? He is a greek MP of a nazi party btw. He considers himself super-white ubermensch

>>The empirical evidence that categorically defines
>>the races
>>in a concise, logical, scientific and measurable
Here. I just did it for you.Why do you ignore my post when I gave you excactly what you asked?

archive.is/dBehg
Here, just for fun I also prove the fundamental difference between men and women. Pic and essay related.

>Murdering people is a social construct. There's no such thing as murder

Strawman, but If we wanted to be pedantic we could say that statement is true as murder is defined by it's nature, by ethics which are variable. One man's murder is another man's
>Cleansing
or
>Punishment

Can you think of any moments in history where murder was classified differently?

Ah yes, when will you bow down to the superior IQ of the Ashkenazi Jew and the East Asian?

You dumb white IQ American. Remember IQ trumps everything according to you. Why you so dumb?

>>The empirical evidence that categorically defines
>>the races
>>in a concise, logical, scientific and measurable
I give you what you asked for. You shouæd be thrilled, any scientist would be. So why do you just ignore me? Are you to dumb to understand my post or do you think I'm wrong?
Or do you just not care about facts and you are just sperging out?

i'm french so we spell it medecine and i don't give a fuck about small details such as spelling

let me drop you some redpill
race is not a scientific term because it refers to an empirical line drawn to differentiate sub groups
you can talk about races of horse or dogs because they have been bred in a way to create very different (but empirically not quantitatively) genetic pools which can be seen as the fact that some dog breed have very specific disease that they can deelop due to certain shitty genes being bred into the pool

humans haven't had any process of specific artificial breeding that aimed to isolate a certain groups of characteristics into a group
but they still had a selection due to environement but that isn't enough to determine groups that can be called races (natural selection is a loosely process that allow loose tolerances in the selection process in other words you isolates a few genes while the rest aren't subject to natural selection)
so we cannot talk about races in the human species unless we have groups that undergo an artificial selection process (or eugenism in other words) that will isolate and breed a new generation significantly different than the previous (but again the line between same race and different race is blurry because it's an empirical factor)
african american are the closest thing that could be qualified as race because of the breeding selection made by the slave owners

homo sapiens and homo neanderthalensis could interbreed but were significantly different to be called different species

so to sum this up
inbreeding>homogenous groups (islander japanese etc)>human ""races"" (negroid caucasoid mongoloid>races (different dog breeeds horse breeds)>different species that can produce a sterile offspring>different species that cannot interbreed
we don't belong to the same groups but we aren't different enough to be called different races we're one step behind that level

Racists point out their notion of what race is as they see the world through what they perceive as denoting "a race" in crude terms.
>Muh colour. Muh features.

Then they search frantically for science that backs this up.

With race not having concrete linear empirical lines that fit in with a race based view of humanity, it becomes subjective to what degree you divide humans.

It becomes therefore stupid to say:
>Muh black and Muh whites are totally different in colour therefore that's race and i will treat people based entirely on their phenotype expressing themselves through melanin or their inherent genetic lineage and IQ scores without dealing with any socio-economic factors or other parts of the world.

If you want to see what racism looks like within people who a racist would consider the same race group, then study class.

>in b4 muh marxism.

Race exists and it plays a huge part in genes and IQ, however it's culture that matters more. I rather have a shia mudslime with white culture than a white with nigger culture.

>calling someone racist when race doesn't exist
>pol
get sage

>Race does not exist biologically though. There are no DNA test that can differentiate between "races".
WRONG.
Also, try and get a bonemarrow transplant from a african when you are a european or vice versa. Race is real.
archive.is/VZEeQ
Race matters when a patient needs a stem cell or marrow transplant
Home Page
Politics 
Opinions 
Sports 
Local 
National 
World 
Business 
Tech 
Lifestyle 
Entertainment 
Video 
Real Estate 
Photography 
Live Chats
Marketplaces 
WP BrandConnect
Partners 
washingtonpost.com
© 1996-2015 The Washington Post
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy
Submissions and Discussion Policy
RSS Terms of Service
Ad Choices
Ad

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google Plus Share via Email More Options
Health & Science
Race matters when a patient needs a stem cell or marrow transplant
Resize Text Print Article Comments 10
By Arthur Allen August 5, 2013
If you become ill with a blood cancer or other disease that requires a stem cell transplant, here’s an uncomfortable fact: Your race matters. Diversity is a strength in much of life, but it’s a curse when finding a stem cell donor match.
For a successful transplant, donor and recipient must have nearly identical genes regulating certain immune cells. These genes evolved in response to the disease threats people faced long ago. “Tell me where your ancestors lived 500 years ago, and I’ll tell you who your potential donors are,” says Jeffrey Chell, an internist who leads the National Marrow Donor Program, also known as Be The Match.

So, you are wrong. Also.>we don't belong to the same groups but we aren't different enough to be called different races we're one step behind that level
No we are not. There are different human races just as there are different dog breeds. And the difference can between humans can be big. See this post.

Wait until you give them the scientific red-pill about the horrors of a 100 percent pure race that they cherish so dear (because of the emasculation they feel at a terribly fucked world), which would mean inbreeding.

Also the red-pill about how genetic variation is key to the survival of a species in an increasingly global world.

>Based white (according to some user's classificationsin this thread) Freddie Mercury.
or should that be
>Indian Parsi Farrokh Bulsara get the fuck out of muh white country and let yokel Cletus stay as he is racially pure white.

>Race exists and it plays a huge part in genes and IQ, however it's culture that matters more.
WRONG. Culture exists because of the races that inhabits the society. You fuckers are checkmate! See this post.

>BASED post.

I would add that black people descended from the slaves taken to the US are now genetically (according to a paper published a few years back) far far removed from their ancestral homelands genetic populations.

>With race not having concrete linear empirical lines
So you just ignore reality?

KEK

screen cap it and spread it on 4 chins

...

re read my post you pseudo scientist retard

>so we cannot talk about races in the human species unless we have groups that undergo an artificial selection process
That is the dumbest thing ever. You are wrong wrong wrong.
archive.is/VZEeQ
"If you become ill with a blood cancer or other disease that requires a stem cell transplant, here’s an uncomfortable fact: Your race matters. Diversity is a strength in much of life, but it’s a curse when finding a stem cell donor match.
For a successful transplant, donor and recipient must have nearly identical genes regulating certain immune cells. These genes evolved in response to the disease threats people faced long ago. “Tell me where your ancestors lived 500 years ago, and I’ll tell you who your potential donors are,” says Jeffrey Chell, an internist who leads the National Marrow Donor Program, also known as Be The Match."
We can use the word sub-species if you prefer that. Would that suit you better? Humans have different sub-species? In danish, we use the word race for different dog-breeds. It is just semantics though.
biologyofbehavior.wordpress.com/2014/02/09/are-dogs-and-wolves-the-same-species/
"Dogs, Science, and the Biology of Behavior
Are dogs and wolves the same species?
by prescotthbreeden

The question of whether dogs and wolves are members of the same or different species is a controversial one. To begin with, species classification is a convention used to help aid in our ability to organize nature and it is anything but definitively objective. This should not decrease the importance of classifying species, but before we begin to try and understand the question, we will benefit from understanding that the nature of the question is very philosophical"
However. The fact about australian aboriginals is not philosophical.

I know it's bait but all this does is reinforce the notion that race is more than skin deep.

Race goes right down to our bones (literally).

...

REVISED VERSION

let me drop you some redpill
race is not a scientific term because it refers to an empirical line drawn to differentiate sub groups
you can talk about races of horse or dog because they have been bred in a way to create very different genetic pools which can be seen as the fact that some dog breed have very specific disease that they can develop due to certain shitty genes being bred into the pool (thats what empirical selection does to you)

humans haven't had any process of specific artificial breeding that aimed to isolate a certain groups of characteristics into a group
but they still had a selection due to environement but that isn't enough to determine groups that can be called races (natural selection has loose tolerances in other words you isolates a few genes while the rest aren't subject to natural selection thats very important to preserve genetical variety in order to ensure survival of at least a portion of the specie in case of catastrophic event)
so we cannot talk about races in the human species unless we have groups that undergo an artificial selection process (aka eugenism) that will isolate and breed a new generation significantly different than the previous
african american are the closest thing that could be qualified as race because of the breeding selection made by the slave owners

homo sapiens and homo neanderthalensis could interbreed but were significantly genetically different to be called different races

so to sum this up
inbreeding>homogenous groups (islander japanese)>human "races" (black white)>races (different dog/horse breeds)>different species that can produce a sterile offspring>different species that cannot interbreed

cont.
we don't belong to the same groups but we aren't different enough to be called different races we're one step behind that level
also the line to determine species is very precise (can they produce a fertile offspring or not) but the one to determine races is blurry because there isn't a line in how much genetic difference to call a group a different race

>That is the dumbest thing ever. You are wrong wrong wrong
you speak like someone that dropout of highschool
you don't deserve my time you pseudo scientist retard

How can we be racist if races don't exist?

...

>but they still had a selection due to environement
WRONG.
>"In the 2007 paper "Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations",[21] Witherspoon et al. attempt to answer the question, "How often is a pair of individuals from one population genetically more dissimilar than two individuals chosen from two different populations?". The answer depends on the number of polymorphisms used to define that dissimilarity, and the populations being compared. When they analysed three geographically distinct populations (European, African and East Asian) and measured genetic similarity over many thousands of loci, the answer to their question was "never". "

Do you feel like you are winning because you define race in some specific way? LET ME ASK YOU THIS? Is there sub-species in humans? Are the australian aboriginals a sub-species? And from what species would that be? What about europeans? What about asians? You define race in your own way, with no sources to back it up, and then feel like you made some contribution. It's just semantics. Get over it.
>also the line to determine species is very precise
LOL, then why this article and several others like it?
biologyofbehavior.wordpress.com/2014/02/09/are-dogs-and-wolves-the-same-species/
"The question of whether dogs and wolves are members of the same or different species is a controversial one. To begin with, species classification is a convention used to help aid in our ability to organize nature and it is anything but definitively objective. This should not decrease the importance of classifying species, but before we begin to try and understand the question, we will benefit from understanding that the nature of the question is very philosophical"
hmm? You dumb fuck? Because it is a fact that wolf and dogs can breed, so why all the articles that debate if they are the same species?

I don't usually link to wiki, but please read it
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albinism

And if race does not exist, how come you can tell where a person originated from by their skeleton? And why can't organ-transplants be done cross races etc ? Don't worry, I'll wait.

>you don't deserve my time you pseudo scientist retard
Hey, female. Is my picture true or false?

If race "doesn't exist" why is ethnic diversity important?

God damn, just put the dude down already.

Wow, so Peterson was wrong on that one. I remember him saying that the differences between individuals are greater than those between groups

If whites come from albinos can you define ''white''? Is it only Nords? southern Europeans? Or even arabs?

are you the author of pic ?

That's for normative IQ distributions, not genetic alleles.

We know that IQ does have a large basis in genetics and appears to be heritable, but we actually don't have very much knowledge on specific alleles associated with greater or lesser intellegence at the moment.

Within bell curves for population intelligence, there are often spans of 60-70 points from lowest to highest, while the lowest mean IQ (74 for aboriginal australians) is only 38 points lower than the mean IQ of ashkenazi jews (108-110 depending where you look).

Dumb bitch, is it true or false?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neocortex#Evolution
"For a species to develop a larger neocortex, the brain must too evolve in size so that it is large enough to support the region. Body size, basal metabolic rate and life history are factors affecting brain evolution and the coevolution of neocortex size and group size.[18] The neocortex increased in size in response to pressures for greater cooperation and competition in early ancestors. With the size increase, there was greater voluntary inhibitory control of social behaviors resulting in increased social harmony.[19]

The six-layer cortex appears to be a distinguishing feature of mammals; it has been found in the brains of all mammals, but not in any other animals.[2] There is some debate,[20][21] however, as to the cross-species nomenclature for neocortex. In avians, for instance, there are clear examples of cognitive processes that are thought to be neocortical in nature, despite the lack of the distinctive six-layer neocortical structure.[22] In a similar manner, reptiles, such as turtles, have primary sensory cortices. A consistent, alternative name has yet to be agreed upon.

Neocortex ratio[edit]
The neocortex ratio of a species is the ratio of the size of the neocortex to the rest of the brain. A high neocortex ratio is thought to correlate with a number of social variables such as group size and the complexity of social mating behaviors.[23] (See Dunbar's number) Humans have a large neocortex as a percentage of total brain matter when compared with other mammals. For example, there is only a 30:1 ratio of neocortical gray matter to the size of the medulla in the brainstem of chimpanzees, while the ratio is 60:1 in humans."

I always imagine people saying race doesn't exist are trying to rationalize why as a white couple they have a black son.

>i..i..it's just a social construct man
>i..it doesn't my wife is a traitorous coalburner
>I'm not a cuck

thanks for confirming what i though you have no knowledge of the subject and you don't deserve my time
and i'm not refuting or confirming your points
pseudo scientist deserve to be excluded from scientific talks

>only 38 points lower
>only 38 points
>only 38
>only

It doesn't. Subspecies do exist however.

So fucking dumb. You can't answer a simple question about basic reality, and you call me, a man, a pseudo scientist.

>he thinks color alone dictates DNA

>monkey same color as niggers
hmmm

>niggers same color as shit

hmmm

it's not that i can't its just that i don't want because you don't deserve it
and no i'm not a girl
but you are a pseudo scientist

>those that dont poo in loo same color as their streets

genetic fecal evolution?
hmm

>it's not that i can't its just that i don't want because you don't deserve it
>and no i'm not a girl
You are.>but you are a pseudo scientist
I'm not a scientist at all. But basic reality is still reality no matter my credentials.

Why are you pro diversity when race doesn't exist?

you will never be white, rajesh

now go wipe your stinky ass with toilet
paper

dont forget to wash your hands because you wont be able to determine where the shit stains and your skin begin/end

You type exactly like a woman

you don't have the credential to fully understand any scientific research without it being dumbed down for your consumption
i fully despise pseudo scientist (in other word non scientist that try to get into scientist conversation, there i made it more understandable for you) because they slow down scientific discussion with their horseshoeing of their political agenda

this is why i'm not bothering to discuss science with you
you can't explain shit with proper scientific terms or references you always use metaphors and parable
this isn't literature where you make your point with hypothetical stories (the football stadium) instead of objective scientific facts

>No race is superior to one another

We can immediately see differences between different races, look at the White Western world (developed by Whites) and compare that to Africa (developed by blacks) and the Middle East (developed by shitskins)

Racial differences couldn't be any more apparent.