If race exists, why are we 99.5% the same genetically?

Think of the most ape-looking African. He is 99.5% the same as you. How can you say race is real when this is true? Race is undeniably a social construct, it can't be proven wrong.

Other urls found in this thread:

mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/humans-share-50-dna-bananas-2482139),
businessinsider.com/comparing-genetic-similarity-between-humans-and-other-things-2016-5/#a-2005-study-found-that-chimpanzees--our-closest-living-evolutionary-relatives--are-96-genetically-similar-to-humans-2
unvis.it/businessinsider.com/comparing-genetic-similarity-between-humans-and-other-things-2016-5/#a-2005-study-found-that-chimpanzees--our-closest-living-evolutionary-relatives--are-96-genetically-similar-to-humans-2
independent.co.uk/news/science/sex-for-meat-ndash-how-chimps-seduce-their-mates-1665356.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Idiot's argument... the differences are small, ergo the differences don't exist.

99.5% is more like chimp, if a nigger is really 0.5% different then there is a problem

why does art exist?

jews

Humans share 60% of their DNA with bananas and 80% of their DNA with cows.

Shitty bait. Sage.

>a lab and a chihuahua share 99.9% of their genetic information
>no one with a brain would doubt they are distinct races

do your fucking taxes

and you're 70% genetically the same as a pumpkin

Chimps are 98 humans are 99.5

We aren't. That's a myth.

Here's an actual chart.

sage
a
g
e

>OP talks about biology despite not knowing what the fuck he's talking about.
Hey, I can do that too! If we're all 99.5% the same, why isn't everyone inbred? checkmate atheists btfo

Don't we share 80% of our dna with bananas? Your argument is absolute shit, 0.00001% of your dna being corrupted is enough to create diseases, imagine how big the difference is with 0.5%

We share 50% our DNA with bananas (Source: mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/humans-share-50-dna-bananas-2482139), are you gonna start claiming banana racism now too? Fucking idiot.

>If race exists, why are we 99.5% the same genetically?

We share 98% of our DNA with chimps. Shut the fuck up.

You are so fucking retarded its unreal, literally kill yourself

businessinsider.com/comparing-genetic-similarity-between-humans-and-other-things-2016-5/#a-2005-study-found-that-chimpanzees--our-closest-living-evolutionary-relatives--are-96-genetically-similar-to-humans-2

We share 96 percent of our dna with chimps, therefore species is a social construct maaaaaannnnnnn.

we share 90% of our dna with cats, wow I guess we are also cats too right?

We share 60% of our dna with bannanas, which seems true in your case since you're a total fucking fruit you total faggot.

Do you understand that there is only 4 building blocks of dna? there are only so many components to construct sets of genes with. Its like if i gave you 4 different legos you can only arrange one way, of course there are similarities.

The importance here is not what we share, but what we dont share. You would think some faggot like you would appreciate that there are differences which make us special, you know "diversity"

kill yourself faggot, you cant even get your narrative straight.

Archived that for you
unvis.it/businessinsider.com/comparing-genetic-similarity-between-humans-and-other-things-2016-5/#a-2005-study-found-that-chimpanzees--our-closest-living-evolutionary-relatives--are-96-genetically-similar-to-humans-2

why arent we bananas, though, if we have like 90% the same dna

...

...the hero we need

Fake news. It's more around the 97/8% region.

Even if it was only 0.5% difference, that would be irrelevant. Genes don't have equal "values". Some produce minor difference, others produce more difference. We share 98% of our genes with chimpanzees, I guess we should just discount that 2% and treat chimpanzees the exact same way as we treat other humans. If it rips your face off, that's your fault because of the thousands of years of oppression and inequality.

This is the left's logic when it comes to racism.

Race is not used as a scientisific concept because ethnicity serves the purpose.

Well if you knew anything about genetics you wouldn't ask this retarded question because it isn't really a mystery how the cellreproduktion, gene regulations and their expressions work.

Genetics has nothing to with blacks being dumb and stupid. We all know that's because of Black Culture encouraging blacks to turn to drugs. And you might love drugs, but there is no doubt drugs fuck up your brain.

On an unrelated note Chimps are highly intelligent creatures they even have prostitutes. independent.co.uk/news/science/sex-for-meat-ndash-how-chimps-seduce-their-mates-1665356.html

Also I'm new here so could anyone explain why I can't identify my flag as the anti-Christ?

Race isn't used in science because there's a lack of consensus on the definition and where the cut-off point is. This doesn't mean race doesn't exist full stop. Think of race in a similar way to the colour spectrum . There's no definite cut-off point, but that doesn't mean the colour red isn't real.

Most DNA is here to make your cells function.
Small gene differences can lead to huge behavior differences.

Humans are like 70% water. We wuz oceans and shit.

>Genetics has nothing to with blacks being dumb and stupid.
Where are you imbeciles coming from?

>He is 99.5% the same as you.
That's one of the biggest lies ever told. There is more genetic difference between European Caucasians (not the modern refugee trash) and pure African Homo Sapiens vs the genetic difference between Europeans and Homo Neanderthals.

Let that sink in. White people of European origin are genetically similar to Neanderthals than we are to African Homo Sapiens.

and we are 95% the same as a chimpanzee or how much is it? i think our dna is 90% the same as any mammal actually...

oh and yes race doesn't actually cut it, it should be different species

>Think of the most ape-looking African. He is 99.5% the same as you.
so is a carrot, fuck off

Because most genes are standard stuff that keep a cell running. That stuff is mostly the same across all kinds of eukaryotic cells (cells with a nucleus, no bacteria).

And ... we are only that similar when it comes to proper "genes", meaning stretches of DNA which may be translated into a protein. However, the most important stuff for complex life may be the stretches of DNA which DO NOT code for a protein. This stuff is responsible for regulating when, where and how much of a proper gene is produced. And here, the differences are quite huge. There is one problem however ... this non-coding stuff is much less "accessable" for decoding. You may "read" the sequence of genes quite nicely with current technological methods but the non-coding stuff is still problematic to read.

>lab
un laboratorio y un chihuahuita?

most of our DNA is junk

Worst b8 I've seen in a while

you think non coding regions might be responsible for IQ differences?

The "junk" does most of the cool stuff though ... would not believe how crazy this non-coding stuff may get.

Found the nigger.

There is a lot of information in the .05%. But you are right in a way. Genetics really doesn't mean a hell of a lot when you can look at people with vastly different genetics who are just as capable as each other at pretty much everything.

If a glass of apple juice has 0.5% urine in it would you still drink it?

we share like 84% of our dna with dogs or something faggot. Small differences big change

It may be possible. As mentioned before, non-coding regions most often have binding sites for regulating elements. Even if this regulating element is thousands of base pairs away from the actual gene it may regulate it because DNA organized as loops hanging from a "backbone". So if one distant loop with a regulator binding site may touch another loop with an actual gene it may control its expression. If you imagine DNA as a linear thing this may look impossible.

Also, copy number of certain genetic elements may strongly regulate IQ. One candidate is a stretch of DNA coding for part of a protein. This DNA stretch has amplified like crazy during our evolution. This element is known as "DUF1220". Go google it if you are interested...

>1 post by this ID

.5% makes a big difference in genetics

>70% genetically the same as a pumpkin
>60% of our dna with bannanas
wtf? Really? That's fucking mad. So do fat people have more pumpkin dna, or people with big dicks have more banana genes?

Did you niggers skip biology at school?
The differences between races and species are mostly due to gene SEQUENCES, not to singular genes. Yes, you possess the same genes as an abo, but due to their different sequence and order in your DNA you have different traits.

>Bonobos are 98%!
>Bananas are 50%!

It's almost like the amount of genetic material is not so important if it combines in radically different ways!

Many non-coding sequences are the "remnants" of old retroviruses btw ... viruses like HIV which may insert a copy of their genome into yours. These things have run rampant during our evolution and have mostly produced one big mess. However, our cells have quite sophisticated measures to deal with those viruses ... they shut them down and then their genes slowly degenerate over generations by simple random mutation.

But the viruses were "smart". The insertion and replication within our genome is a messy thing and sometimes they accidentially rip some part of our genes out and incorporate them. Through this mechanism some retroviral elements have "hijacked" stuff like partial protein building plans or genetic control elements .... and than they have shat those sequences all over our genome when they reinserted. Most of the times this lets the cell go haywire but SOMETIMES this genome shuffling becomes useful or even produces something totally new. And here is the thing ... by carrying some useful gene element and then inserting in a way that proves "useful" theses viruses have come under positive evolutionary pressure. They were useful so they tend not to be mutated to "death" but their information is retained. They are kind of like genetic parasites driving our evolution by shuffling around DNA like crazy...

> "If chipms are 98% the same as us. How can you say we are not the same species?"

Yep, many differences are due to simple polymorphisms, slight varitions which however may have a huge impact on phenotype.

If species exist, why is that we and the chimps have 96% similar DNA? this is why we should bring in millions of chimps, and let them fuck our women.

Cats share 90% of our genes

I'm not a fucking cat though am I

99.5% of the solar system is devoid of life, therefore the population of mercury, venus, earth and mars is basically zero.

Logically it's cool to murder minorities since basically no one lives in this solar system anyways.

Gotcha

>nothing to with blacks being dumb and stupid
>blacks to turn to drugs
When whites blot out their misery with consumable hedonism like alcohol, weed, heroin, crack and nicotine they don't magically drop 15 points in IQ as a demographic, do they? Look back at the Dutch Cheap Gin Crisis a hundred and fifty years ago: if any mass adoption of drugs was going to fuck up entire nations it was that, and it didn't.

Africans are fucked up because of their piss poor IQ spread. On average they can manage about half the amount of work Europeans can, which means they are forever playing catchup. Similarly, Japs as a group can manage about 20% more work than thicko IQ100 Europoors.

>hurr durr we're the same
the difference is stark and unavoidable.

Small changes in genetics have huge effects in the final product. Like a tiny change in a virus game or a small addition or subtraction in a function can lead to a wildly different graph.
The culture/behavior/customs of a people (an even normal animals) reflects its nature. A people that are significantly more aggressive and less empathetic on average will have a much more violent culture.
In the West, for centuries now, success has largely been determined by how productive you are, how much you invent, create industry, how much money you make through voluntary transactions. The long term effect has been a population largely genetically conditioned to be more industrious and more empathetic, more sensitive to others' needs because fulfilling those needs in voluntary exchange leads to the creation of wealth.
But that empathy has gone way too far and now we're importing millions of people from civilizations where success is determined by how brutal you are to people. And this will have a real effect on the texture of our cultures. The elite think that our institutions will "civilize" these foreigners, but they will fail, these people care nothing for our beliefs or values, they are here only to get money and dominate, which they will easily do since our social ties are already so fragmented by race struggle and our values so tenuous because of postmodernism.
What you are witnessing today is civilizational suicide. And it will not be pretty.

Like 98% of our genes are junk from the last 1000 steps of evolution it took to get here you fucking idiot. You are only 2% different to a chimpanzee.

um if a 2% difference in DNA is the difference between a human and a chimp, then a 0.5% difference is still pretty fucking significant, it's a quarter way to being a whole different species

so I'm going to assume your math is wrong but if it isn't, you're really undermining your own point

Stop insulting whites by comparing them to filthy niggers. We can see with our own eyes they uglier and more stupid than whites. Give it a rest.

Labrador

If "species" exists why are we 98% the same genetically?

Oh hark at the Sun being planetist again.

this

>cancer cells are 99.99% the same as your other cells
>cancer doesn't exist

In OP's case it's closer to 99% pumpkin

Bait or circlejerk thread. No one Sup Forums understands genetics, they only pretend to and then make fake infographs. The only fallback they have is "science is a conspiracy and all the geneticists are lying!"

>jews
unironically
>(((lewontin's))) fallacy

We also share 99% with a chimp and 70% with a banana.

I think you have pretty much destroyed your own point there, well done.

Because the percentage of identical DNA isn't actually so much responsible for the differences. Imagine you had two computer codes that share 98% of the same lines and functions. But if each program calls those functions in a completely different order, the resulting programs are going to be a lot less than 98% similar.

>i dont understand genetics the post
>1 post by this id
mods will do nothing

I'll explain the whole "percent shared with x species" concept. The idea is not to say we similar to other species. You could say you share a high percent of DNA with a banana but you are not similar to a banana. The idea is to show that we have a shared evolution. Most of that DNA similarity would be in 'housingkeeping' genes that can be found in all cells and/or eukaryotes.

Taxonomy now depends on genetics for its definition of subspecies, and not by vague statements like "we share x% DNA" or "x% of own DNA isn't similar." We can look at chromosome count, number of genes, and how varied the mutations are within and between populations.

There is no real lewontin's fallacy. This is just a garbage mantra retards use when confronted with evidence they don't like.

For one, the person that criticized lewontin never said lewontin's data was wrong. That data is reproducible and verifiable. The person tried to say race still existed despite that data, but he was still wrong.

>He is 99.5% the same as you.
Chimpanzees are 99% the same as us

How much genetically different is a healthy person to a person with terminal cancer? Or between you and a dwarf? How close are the DNA structures? I guess you could just take either DNA strand and be happy eh? Thr difference is so infinitesimal

96%

If species exist, why is 95% or more of our DNA shared by Chimps?

It's not the genotypical variation itself that is interesting. It's the phenotypical variation.

>We share 60% of our dna with bannanas, which seems true in your case since you're a total fucking fruit you total faggot.
lol

I may be 99.999% genetically the same as Swede, but I consider them a different species tbqh desu

One of the most overexposed factoids in modern science is our genetic similarity to the African apes, the chimpanzees and gorillas. But how do we know just how genetically similar we are to them? What is that estimate based on?

Comparisons of DNA sequence ignore qualitative differences, those of kind rather than amount. To take the smallest case, consider a different sequence of twenty DNA bases from the same region: CCTTGGGCCTCCCGCCAGGC in the baboon and CCTTGGGCTCCCGCCAGGCC in the orangutan. If you stack them, one above the other, and compare the sequences you'll notice that they actually differ substantially. Molecules have complex ways of generating insertions and deletions in DNA, which we are only beginning to understand. For example, a stretch of DNA from a ribosomal RNA gene is forty bases long in humans and fifty four bases long in orangutans. The sequences on either side match up perfectly. How do we know what bases correspond between the two species, how do we decide how many substitutions have occurred, when obviously some have been inserted and deleted as well?

While we might choose the alignment with the smallest numbers of mutational events, we still have to decide whether a gap “equals” a substitution, or whether a gap should be considered rarer and, therefore, worth, say, five substitutions.

The problem is that we cannot tell which DNA sequence alignment is right.

Another misleading area of DNA sequence comparisons entails a consideration of the other end of the scale. The structure of DNA is built up of four simple subunits: adenine, guanine, cytosine, and thymine, or A, G, C, and T. Since genetic information is composed of DNA sequences, and there are only four elements to each DNA sequence, it follows that two DNA sequences can differ, on the average, by no more than 25 percent and this creates a statistical oddity.

If you believe humans and apes are similar you are a moron.

>Why are we 80% banana?
Gee, I dunno, lol, hurr.
Fucking sage.

...

but do not deserve

That post would be cute if you weren't a 30-something neckbeard weaboo neet.

Chimpanzees and Humans share 98 % of their genetics. So humans and apes are the same.

To communicate ideas, desires or feelings.

83 replies by 70 unique ID's to an OP that has made 1 post itt.
Our mods might be faggots by so are the faggots who don't at least sage slide threads.

is species exists, why do we have 90% genetic similarity with cats?
specialists btfo

How many base pairs is 0.5% of human DNA ?

enough to conclude, it's a pretty big difference.

idunno of its that simple anyways

some people are saying its 0.5% difference, other are saying its 2% difference. The real question is, where did the white and black dna samples come from.

Its kinda silly to think all whites have the same DNA, same for blacks

And if the focus is on genetic superiority, then what genes, result is superior genotypes?