Let's say racism is right

Let's say racism is right.

How many different Races are there???

Other urls found in this thread:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC281893/pdf/pnas00295-0252.pdf
therightstuff.biz/2015/05/18/the-rational-view-on-race/
therightstuff.biz/2015/09/30/human-races-exist-refuting-eleven-common-arguments-against-the-existence-of-race
time.com/91081/what-science-says-about-race-and-genetics/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Four: Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid, and Australian Abos.

Where do mayans and incans fall?
even tho they are extinct..

Mongoloid

Caucasian
Asian
Mediterranean (French, Italian, and Whtie hispanics like Spaniards)
Black
Arab
Indian (Brown Hispanics like Mexicans)

How do you draw those artificial boundaries between groups of people. What about people who are mixed race?

Mongoloid. Unless you mean Indians from India, they're caucasoids.

checkem

Abos aren't human

Look up "genetic clustering", that's the closest thing we have to race. There's essentially 14 clusters of races and 9 of them are in Africa. Everyone outside of Africa (except abbos) are very closely related, Africa has the most genetic diversity by far

>extinct
american education

not even close

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC281893/pdf/pnas00295-0252.pdf

So where does one race end and another begin? Who determines that and why?

Caucasian, Mediterranean, Arab and Indian are all the same race

But it's not right.
There's only one human race.
The white race.

Whatever arbitrary subdivision you want to create.
Its like asking how many colors there are, theres an infinite amount but some are very similar and some very different.

Let's just say racism is right...

>How many colors are there?
>How can red be a color if crimson and scarlet are colors?

Didn't explain anything about my question of race mixing. Doesn't explain where one race ends and another begins, doesn't explain what defines one race vs. another besides geographic location.

>pureblood mayans and incans are still around
>they haven't all been raped out of existance by the spanish to create the peso counting wall jumpers left in mexico

so between 4 and 42?

Who's to say where red ends and crimson and scarlet begin?

ainu are austroloid you mongoloid

3 races:
whites
chinese
niggers

I used to have the map of gene clusters but I deleted it. Essentially it's just arbitrary circles drawn around 'clusters' of genetic similarities and there are 14 distinct groups. It's the closest thing we have to human "races", but we aren't really different races, just different clusters of genetics.

Relative to the immense genetic variance in sub-sahara africa, everyone outside of Africa is so closely related they're essentially a single group.

A mixed person will have a mixture of both of their parent's genes, you can't really group them into a single race because one half black-white could have one set of genes that are specific to an african race and another specific to europeans, and his own brother could have the complete reversal just by chance. Race's don't end and begin they transform. Genetics define a race, a white person born in south africa is still a white person despite their geographic location.

>How many different Races are there???
Hundreds!
Foot races, car races, marathons, 3-foot races, chariot races. Look it up man.

japs are master race bro. keep living in fairy tales

So that's why American crime reports list Mexicans as white.

This macro image answers most of your questions.
Also these:
therightstuff.biz/2015/05/18/the-rational-view-on-race/
therightstuff.biz/2015/09/30/human-races-exist-refuting-eleven-common-arguments-against-the-existence-of-race
>inb4 source bias, the site cites scientific studies for all its claims for you to read

Six

1.Negroid:
Jungle Negroid:
All of West/Central/South Africa
Basically the ancestors of American niggers
The most apelike negroid subrace
Every nigger in the Caribbean

Savannah Negroid:
North East Africans
Somalis
Ethiopians
Eritreans

Desert Negroid:
The Caucasoid looking niggers found in Saharan african countries
The original natives of Northern Africa before North African Caucasoid took over
Possible relatives of the ancient egyptians
Possible builders of the Nubia civilization

2.Pygmoid:
African Pgymies

3.Caucasoid:
Europeans
Middle Easterners
Indians
North Africans
Central Asians

4.Mongoloid:
East Asians
Pacific Islanders
American Natives of both continents in the New World

5.Australoid:
Abos
Indonesia/Papuan natives
Negritoes of the Phillipines
Any shitskin natives in the smaller Pacific Islands
Sri Lankan Natives
The things that gave Indians their shit colored skin by racemixing
Tasmanian natives

6.Capoid:
San Bushmen of Southern Africa

Trying so hard. Still so far away.

...

every ethnic group.
and racism is critical theory, it isn't a true observation or it's true property to be classified as.

I think it's literally a kind of continuum where "races" are a kind of genetic cluster.

If genetics define race then where do you draw the line between different races? Whites and Blacks are genetically similar, and so if you slowly move across the spectrum from the average European to the average African, when do you stop calling him white?

5 races of Human:
-Negroid
-Caucasian
-Mongoloid
-Australoid
-Native American
There are many breeds of each:
-Negroid:
>Congoid
>Capoid
-Caucasian
>Indian
>Arabic
>Mediterranean
>Iberian
>Celtic
>Germanic
>Slavic
There are more, but those are the ones I know of.

>white
>wrong

White or not white.

They are mixed race. They are percentages of each.

Where does the image stop being black and start being white? If you can't find the boundary, does that mean the image is a uniform colour?

You are confused by race mixing, race mixed people don't belong to either one but can be closer to one.

Capoids are the oldest race of humans on earth and thus cannot be negroids since they predate negros by many tens of millenia dumbass.

If we zoom out we can see the boundary

I think you're right in theory but, as I said , there allegedly exists clusters that allow you to differentiate.

Then apply the same process to race? There's no problem.

There's this "we wuz kangz" type African yelling at me in the YouTube comment section that they are the true humans and we are just literal Neanderthals, and I keep telling her that that would mean Neanderthals are superior to Humans, but she doesn't seem to get it.

I can't zoom in on your image because it's in .gif format and I'm on my phone, but the articles you linked still don't explain where on race begins and another ends. While it points out averages in groups of people, is doesn't create definitive borders for race

A fucking ton

There are 4 "great races" like said but they can be divided even further

Caucasoid:

True caucasoid - all Europeans and their descendants minus some Sami who are mixed race. I think Georgians also belong here too

Middle Eastern - Arabs, Mizrahi jews, generally all afroasiatic speakers minus the Chadic branch and the horn of Africa with Iranians and Turks added.

Horn of Africa - Many Ethiopians, Eritreans and Somali, usually the ruling and upper classes

Indian - Many of the inhabitants of the subcontinent also often the ruling and rich class


Negroid:

standard negro - Basically all black people, could be even further divided but i don't know

Bushmen - i have no idea but they have slanty eyes and look different than normal blacks. Also may be the origin of the black women's big ass feature


Mongoloid:

East Asian - the snow niggers in Siberia, many Mongols, Chinese and almost all Japanese and Korean

Central Asian - they appear to show massive caucasoid influence but still look mongoloid

Southeast Asian - Asians but with possible australoid substratum. Majority of southeast asian countries and a lot of Chinese

American - the injuns of north and south America. Might have influence of some other race but nobody knows

Pacific - i have no idea, probably a combination of East Asian, Southeast Asian and Melanesian etc


Australoid:

standard Australoid - Abos, not much to say

Melanesian - Sort of like Abos but better looking. Their kids are known to develop blonde hair due to early malnutrition

Indian - stereotypical Pajeet, mostly australoid and with some caucasoid admixture

Racism is about a superiority of a race which is a different subject matter then your actual question.

We know there are different races.

Its hard to point a finger at how many because as you draw closer to the epicenter of each they mix and blur.

There are about 3 to 4 major ones.

Africans
Europeans
Asians

You can easily take the skulls of each place them down and see the difference.

The fourth would be native north and south Americans which have been mixed or wiped out.

There are some minor sub groups like Abbos etc but I really don't want to get into the details of any of this.

>Let's say racism is right.

Wow, wait a minute.

Separating humans into sub-species is not racist, it's biological taxonomy.

Racism is the implication or belief that one of these groups is genetically superior than another

Not saying race doesn't exist. It's just lll defined.

The San are not niggers you fucking retard. The San have shown to have empathy for the animal they kill which is something that negros lack.

You are both right, Africans are more human then anyone outside of Africa (which makes everyone not African a subhuman). But Neanderthals were superior to homo sapiens in many ways, but not in the way that allowed them to survive.

Two.

White and Non-White

genetics determine race, mixed are inbetween the genetics.

Congoids are also one of the oldest breeds of Human on Earth, since they are significantly closer to African than even Arabic peoples. Although since we are all constantly independently evolving, which is why we have races in the first place, so they would be a significantly different form of "Capoid" then they were before we left African. Besides, if you are correct, we are ALL descended from the original Capoid anyways.

Too many.

...

To recognize a difference is to admit to a superiority. The only way that things can be equal in merit is for them to be equal in character.

Not even that.
Recognizing that different races have different traits (e.g. Blacks are more athletic, Asians have better capacity for math) is just seeing reality for what it is.
Racism is taking these small, statistical differences between races and deciding to treat human different based on it.

>How many different Races are there???

Well, there's MY race, and then there's everything else that sucks, which is good enough for me.

If a lion fucks a tiger the baby is neither a lion or a tiger. it is a liger. Both the tiger lineage and the tiger lineage is gone forever. It is a mixed animal.

So the value of 100 pennies is different than the value of 1 dollar?

Are Abos really a race, are they not just Negroid?

And the liger is unable to breed. So lions and tiger's are not the same race.

Yes, I'd much rather carry around 1 lump of metal than 100 tiny lumps of metal. And someone looking for copper would much prefer to have 100 bits of copper than one lump of whatever loonies are made of.

Abos have a different cranial structure from niggers.

They seem less developed than sub-saharans and other african negros.

I don't see how this holds up

What if a person is literally half Caucasoid and half Negroid? Or 1/4th of each?

Theres more than that.
Middle easterners can hardly be called the same race as white people anymore.
there are Whites, Asians Arabs, Negroes, indians, Native Americans and latinos and aboriginals. Aside from Aboriginals each group has sub groups of different races.

Then they would be a mutant new race entirely.

American niggers are a mutant new race.

>While it points out averages in groups of people, is doesn't create definitive borders for race
thats all I wanted to hear. Sup Forums usually likes to talk in AVERAGES. In science there are few things that are so clear cut. Sure, there are exact things like Avogadro's constant or other laws in physics but in biology there is a wide range of options.
>I can't zoom in on your image because it's in .gif format and I'm on my phone
OK then save it and put it on your computer. then look at it.
This image also gives an idea(and its a .jpg).

Middle easterners are the same race as whites because whites and middle easterners both have the caucasoid skull shape you dumbass. White is a subrace of Caucasoids idiot.

It cannot be "defined" due to the constant nature of evolution, however it is the grouping together of common relatives with simular features. Unless by shear luck they evolve the same characteristics of other races independently, it is a good way to define their abilities.
Since there is no known purpose in life, it is impossible to be good at life. This means that you cannot measure a person based on how "good" they are at life, thus there is no superiority, nor equality. Only differences and similarities.

So which race do North Indians and South Indians belong to?
Assuming you don't believe in the aryan invasion theory. If you do and then say 'the aryan blood has been lost' explain how.
Also keep in the mind about the caste system.

If they're significantly far enough from any one race, like if 50% or 75% of their genes specific to racial groups don't belong to a single group, then they can either be considered a race with a single member or a member of no race at all.

Here we have a kikes failed attempt at sliding a thread.
The post guesser doesn't always work, shlomo

But with races it's different. Different features of different groups of people are combined and considered racial features. If middle easterners have big noses, black hair, and tan skin, then does that make everyone with those features middle easterners or not. If there's a child of mixed race has those features without being middle eastern himself then what is he if he shares all the genetic features of a middle easterners?

Caucasoid you indians look like white people with dark skin.

Australoids and Native Americans evolved from Mongoloids.

>being this new
Click the file newfag

You are Caucasians, but you are more closely related to Arabics than to Europeans.

only two that matter
white
non-white

No. "Subhuman" implies worse. If everyone not African isn't human, then we are all superhumans.

Read this you leaf
This is a great article too OP.
time.com/91081/what-science-says-about-race-and-genetics/

how many shades in the rainbow?


The people who originally pushed anti-racism knew this. They knew it would cause chaos in the minds of debaters.
that's the point...

>hating science this much
>not wanting to measure the abilities of each race

Well, that follows, doesn't it? Equality doesn't exist in nature, so if you separate humans into groups, one group will be superior, and will dominate the others should they come into contact.

In the case of a scale of judging an entire race based on its averages, yes, but on the bases of individuals there will always be a black man smarter then a white or white guy who will be faster then black.

We have just come to the point in societies where intelligence is the most desired of traits because it equals a huge bonus in benefits for a society.

So yes blacks are inferior on a broad scale in the environment we created.

A wolf and a dog can produce fertile offspring, are they the same species?

No Australoids evolved separately fro Mongoloids. Native Americans ARE MONGOLOIDS.

Any part of India isn't mixed with Arabs.

2
Human race and the rest of us.

See? Easy. Unless you're a nigger.

You see, the thing about that is that the word "human" is Latin(Caucasian), and would have been used to describe themselves..

>no race at all

That's impossible, because they exist, there must be an appropriate name for them, one of scientific basis

It sort of sounds like racists are creating a gender identity campaign except for race instead of gender

But when we talk about race I'm society we generalize everybody into categories because they are closer to a certain "average" than another. This concept ignores all of the features that the individual may possess or the combination of features that make him or her different from anyone else in his or her supposed "race". So the idea of categorizing someone based off of only some of the features they possess into a race is taking something like human diversity, which is extremely broad, and creating groups based on average features averages of certain peoples. This is also why races are poor indicators of personal traits because of how loosely we use the terms to describe certain peoples.

>Let's say racism is right.
Racism isn't really right or wrong, because which racial groups are 'better' or 'worse' is pretty subjective. Race itself is very real though, don't listen to any social constructionist nonsense.

>How many different Races are there???
There are six major racial bloodlines, check out this handy chart to see the different racial admixtures around the world.