@APESinPYRAMIDS Phwahahahahahahaha ahahahahahahahahaahahha Phwahahahahahahahaahahah AVERAGES ARE NOT USED MUCH. THEY ARE TOO BASIC TO IN USE TO DESCRIBE VARIANCE SO WE USE STATISTICS YOU TWIT. Phwahahahahahaaahahahhaahahha ahahahahahahahahahahaahahhahahahahahaaaaaaa
@DEFACTO9 Averages are part of statistics you utter ignoramus. In fact you cannot calculate the variance without calculating the average. Your self promotion far exceeds your abilities. Why not google "Dunning-Kruger effect"? Also "Solving The African IQ Conundrum : “Winning Personality” Masks Low Scores". Obviously you don't have a winning personality, but it's still interesting.
On the issue of education, it is surprising to me that we don't put forth more effort into acknowledging our differences, in order to more effectively teach our children in the ways that they require. I'm on the "high" end of the IQ spectrum, yet I was put into special ed classes at age four. The reason given was that I could not color the same apple picture all week long, and I was asking to be taught how to read books on "microbes". I "dropped out" at 14. My nails are purple from hunger now.
@SuperJabbar99 Actually through a process known as introgression, the beneficial neanderthal alleles were kept and the harmful ones selected out. In fact, everyone but africans has significant neanderthal admixture. East Asians may also have admixture of a pre-sapien hominid known as the denisovians.
In fact, everyone but africans has significant neanderthal admixture"???
this is outlandish foolishness. if you use maths, every subsequent generation prior to you increases by a square. this means even just 500 yrs ago you were genetic fragment in over 50million people. now, when you extrapolate that back to at least 100,000 years this figure is SO LARGE, it tells us that it is IMPROBABLE that such genes WOULD NOT have propagated through all communities Im afraid.
@fringeelements Wow, are you now trying to infer that that the genes for skin pimentation expression behave like binary numbers? Is this honestly what you are trying to imply with that incredibly wayward statement? Are you for real when you make the claims that you do or in fact are you completely extended beyond yr own knowledge grasping for branches that are breaking under your weight? yes melanin expression is propagated through all communities , are all swedes blond? cmon
"Wow, are you now trying to infer that that the genes for skin pimentation expression behave like binary numbers?"
No, neither does height. In neither of my two recent comments did I even mention skin color, there is zero reason for you to have brought up skin color. It seems to me that it's you who doesn't know what is being talked about.
@SuperJabbar99 I respect your opinion..Im lying...I cant take someone seriously who while attempting to make another race seem "inferior" doesn't have the intellect to even spell the word correctly...So i'll say it...FUCKING RETARD!
@NiggerBabble90210 Phwahahahahahahhahaaa whats that then like youre 25th account because you keep getting banned by Youtube for hate speech? lmfao! the gibon jubjub is back.. protesting about my blackness and yet paradoxically addicted to all issues involving black people on Youtube despite all that "white culture" available to you. This tells me you have a crap life and shit thinking. This gives me comfort. It makes me chuckle to myself about you.
@RaybansGoneApeshit then explain why elsehwere I challenged you to understand that AVERAGES are not used in science much because Standard error and deviation are more accurate statistical tools to explain divergences you low IQ white Nigger Gibbon.jub jub.
@DEFACTO9 Actually averages are used in biology for classifications. It's inadvisable to use averages in exact sciences chemistry or physics. But because living organisms vary between individuals due to gene mutation, heredity, and environmental effects in the field of biology averages do get taken into account as there are differences in every population but averages do hold true.
@kubaniski You have contributed little to the discussion. AVERAGES are a very BLUNT tool and they are not used much in BIOLOGY. It is astonishing that you are now trying to tell me, a BLACK BIOCHEMISTRY Graduate, that averages somehow figure heavily in biology as a blunt tool, when actually for genetic variance we heavily use statistical relevance MORESO to extract meaning from data. Yes averages are used, but let me inform you respectfully that on its own its far too weak
@DEFACTO9 There are some lions that like to swim, but biologists will tell you that that is not true of the lion population as a whole. Because biology is deals with large numbers of individuals that form a population averages are important, otherwise the entire field of biology would be at a standstill if they had to deal with nothing but absolutes.
There are many smart blacks but then aggain you can find blacks at all levels of intelligence. The issue where the majority of blacks are.
@kubaniski the problem here is that you believe from your position that averages can be used in such a situiation but they cannot because averages will tell you the lions DO NOT SWIM, however statistical variance will inform you of the likely PROBABILITY OF SWAY FROM THAT "AVERAGE" &use of the deviation from that issue "standard Error). Average SI TOO SIMPLISTIC and is used for basic pre university education. & by the way you can find blacks AT ALL LEVELS, its U who r not thusYOU dont believe!
Right. Some women are stronger than the average man too. Environment can also influence strength and athletic ability, as do genetics. We know what averages are, and we know that when there are population-wide average differences in some metric, the null hypothesis needs to be genetics UNLESS you can point to some systematic environmental difference and show it's effects are likely to cause the average population gaps. This has yet to be done.
@fringeelements largely incoherent Im afraid. The main issue is that a simple distribution curve for genetic variance remains true for genetic distribution over time, its only the short term that these differences manifest and deviate from this model, The genes for curly hair exist in most populations but the EXPRESSION may be more finely controlled by as yet unknown factors. You imply huge differences where they simply dont exist, or youre prone to massive leaps of faith
"You imply huge differences where they simply dont exist"
What does "huge" mean in this context? I believe I just presented the raw numbers compiled by other researchers, and said that there were noticeable differences that make races identifiable and semi-discrete. Identifiable + semi-discrete = huge? I don't think you know what I'm saying, so you're putting up a general wall of flak that is mostly irrelevant in the hopes that something you say will be relevant and will hit.
@fringeelements Phwahahahhaahahaa you have compiled nothing regarding other researchers, and your claims of raw data mean PRE-analysis, and I do not believe you academically competent to perform such a task.. that is extreme unbalanced arrogance on display.. Your family is distinct and identifiable, this is EXACTLY the same issue between races. I know what youre saying but it is u who are lost & behaving like a clown. I am a Biochemistry graduate & I just ran rings around you
@DEFACTO9 A non-White cannot be more successful than a White because it is guaranteed that the White race created virtually everything that could possibly define the non-White's perceived 'success' in today's world.
This can include: His luxurious, modern lifestyle and the conveniences he can purchase with organised currency; his limitless choice of vocations sourced by White knowledge and the White education standards that realise such ambitions.
@DEFACTO9 Unless a non-White is completely severed from modern society from life until birth, he is born into this world with a near-permanent debt to the White race by default. He inherits all opportunities at the continued, indeed irreparable, expense of his benefactor. And yes, I'm talking about non-Whites in their own (White-)developed countries too, not just those who enjoy the fruits of White genius through more blatant means (invading our civilizations directly).
@fringeelements ultimately the problem with youre thinking will not explain well why it is that a donor for a tissue transplant can be found from ANY race. Youre trying to curve fit science to your beliefs.. your approach should be to defer to science rigour 1st . This means letting go of the "race issue" because race isnt even a taxonomic subclass valid for discussion in a scientific context.. as different as Africans may lok to you from whites, but Asians are "black and white"
"ultimately the problem with youre thinking will not explain well why it is that a donor for a tissue transplant can be found from ANY race."
You can also use some organs from pigs.
This doesn't address anything though. For example, two individuals could have all organs transplantable, but one has 2x as many cortical neurons and is overwhelmingly "smarter", and this gap need not be a result of environment. Similarly, two populations, we'll call them races, could be the same way. Maybe not 2x
@fringeelements Please dont try to tell me an organ from a pig is a great fit over an organ from a human. dont even go there.
It is unlikley any functioning human being would exhibit x2 cortical neurone density. That is OUTLANdISH, infact the likely result of such a pathology would be fits, over-activity and gross mental retardation.. more is not necessarily better. where do you obtain such nonsense?
"Please dont try to tell me an organ from a pig is a great fit over an organ from a human. dont even go there."
Sorry to upset you, but it has been done.
"It is unlikley any functioning human being would exhibit x2 cortical neurone density."
No, 2x as many cortical neurons. Could be mixture of a larger brain and more density, and another person with very low density. Besides, it was a hypothetical. Say 1.1x as many neurons. The point is that transplanability =/= equal cognitive function.
Define breed. And of course it is. Categories are constructed. You can say "hills don't exist" or "wolf breeds don't exist" or "african blacks don't exist", and that can be your categorization system. I can classify east asians as closer to europeans based on phenotype. Lighter skin, quieter, calmer, straight hair. You can classify europeans as closer to africans based on some genetic data. You can classify europeans as closer to africans in terms of body musculature.
@fringeelements so now you are trying to rewrite textbook science? Race does not exist because race is a Psychological construct that has no scientific taxonomy. You are trying to curve fit science to your racist bigotry and it simply isnt working. You fail on so many levels but you will talk the ignorant around to your unscientific view of science issues. Humans go shopping and ride bicycles efficiently, there nothing you can do I cant, and I date all races, get over that.
All categories are psychological constructs. Textbooks are written by mortal men.
I never said you ought only to mate with your own race. Where on earth did that come from? Actually, I have a general idea of where you heard it from. Not from me.
Perhaps use proper grammar and spelling? Aside, this is just a restatement of the central dogma. An incantation, and you're trying to personalize it by making me the embodiment of the opposition. I get it, I'm the foil. I'm for banning race mixing and this whole nebulous cloud of "racist" (never defined) and bigoted positions.
You want to play your identity-games, fine. But not on my channel.
@DEFACTO9 A forensic Anthropologist can identify the race of human remains by studying the Bones, or Semen, or Hair left behind. If race were some construct this wouldn't be possible. If race were some imaginary construct you would see parents giving birth to random-race babies.
Sub-saharan Africans as a group will never be able to achieve things that other races have. This is why they need people to stop thinking in terms of race and start thinking in terms of single person.
"Youre trying to curve fit science to your beliefs.. your approach should be to defer to science rigour 1st"
You're a big, stupid doo doo head!
But more seriously, theory precedes facts. What "facts" are relevant depends on what you choose to examine, and that depends on your theories. For example, the theory of evolution created a revolution in what facts scientists chose to gather and view as important. Of course fact and theory interact.
So I don't see as important the same things you see as important. You're confusing my different theoretical starting point for stupidity and "trying to fit science to my beliefs". Classic example: people from poorer families have lower IQs.
Right, since IQ variation in the US is primarily genetic and predicts for income, this is what you would expect.
Right, since IQ variation in the US is primarily environmental and a result of "socioeconomic status", this is what you would expect.
@DEFACTO9 Also I don't particularly care what is the average IQ of Blacks. I wish blacks all the best and hope they advance economically, I'm just against Affirmative Action.
@kubaniski understood, that is better qualified. but if your father and brother were denied a job because of thier ethnic origin wouldnt you want that issue redressed if it kept on happening? and let me also add, affirmative action never completed a single job, or passed an exam for anybody.. plus it never stopped you getting anywhere because black people are not responsible for your inadequacies or failures r they? Is that why u are trying to say? that they are the reason you didnt progress?
Lets say you want to get a job for the US postal services. Say there's a test with a max of 1000 points. Say that if you're black, that's the equivalent of getting 50 points right away. What does the unfairness of this have to do with blacks not being responsible for someone's inadequacies? Nothing, your remark merely obfuscates the issue and pathologizes the opponent in an irrelevant manner.
Right, AA is a policy. Policies don't complete jobs, yet people are opposed to all sorts of policies.
@fringeelements WRONG, the incredible faux pas in your supposition is that blacks get an advantage in the test of 50points. That is just foolishness. They get to the TEST ONLY. the advantage isnt gifted in point applied in the test, the advantage is gifted ONLY in GETTING ACCESS to the test. Your thinking is like a bucking bronco, please learn to stick to relevancies. "Policies don't complete jobs, yet people are opposed to all sorts of policies."?? Make sense please
@APESinPYRAMIDS Ohh thats because as a graduate I AM.. whats hilarious is that if you were youd use manners and science to contradict me but I whip your ignorant racist ass every single time. Even feel sorry for you from the embarrassment. Tell me hows your quality of life with that clownish white hood you put over your head?
Baby dick, Baby dick, fat ass fat ass- mmmm, tastes good. Brass---knuckles. Shove it up yo anus whole. Pass me da bowl---cereol. Applejack, hell yea, das a fact
An Ad baculum? You think something is going to control people from fucking each other? I'm just saying it for what it is so I don't know how you can conclude that I am in defense of mixing. It's already been done thousands of times since the beginning of life. Who's "fighting" for this mixing future?
I'm not fighting for anything I am just implying bigotry is wasteful and unproductive. Mixing is just as pointless and dumb like any form of reproduction, especially on this planet full of unintelligent, bigotted humans just simply chasing their tail.
And that same circumstance and I know you implied it can be said for any type of social problems even in the same ethnic group, like religion, generation gaps, laws/culture, opinions, and so forth.
It's even seen among children and their innate human greedy, selfishness and look what it caused throughout history. And most of it is usually very irrational and stupid, let alone creates more waste than good.
It looks like more of a bigotry/idiot problem than a racism problem not that I am saying I know what's happening between the Swedish and Finnish, and African American in general, but that's beside the point.
Well, I don't know what you mean by "dumb bigotry", that sounds like a soundbite brainwashed people say, and I don't know what it has to do with anything anyone is saying. You SEEM to value the well being of all humanity. Family A has 2 kids, family B has 5 kids. Thus family B would be more valuable? I don't know if that's your base value, or if you even know what your base value is.
@fringeelements Then you`re doubting for instance slavery happened, the Holy Crusuade/Spanish Inquistion and other religious conflicts happended, greedy monarchies, corporations and even common people and its outcomes existed and so forth. You doubt for one moment that our savage, animalistic, subjective nature as humans has nothing to do with those events even for racism? Why do I need to state a base value when it's fact, why should I be more specific than that?
@Tetzukai You're not conscious so there is no point in arguing with you and I do not mean that in an offensive way. It is clear that you are typing programmed responses from a programmed position.
@Tetzukai You're not conscious so there is no point in arguing with you and I do not mean that in an offensive way. It is clear that you are typing programmed responses from a programmed position.
@Tetzukai You're not conscious so there is no point in arguing with you and I do not mean that in an offensive way. It is clear that you are typing programmed responses from a programmed position.
@Tetzukai You're not conscious so there is no point in arguing with you and I do not mean that in an offensive way. It is clear that you are typing programmed responses from a programmed position.
@Tetzukai You're not conscious so there is no point in arguing with you and I do not mean that in an offensive way. It is clear that you are typing programmed responses from a programmed position.
I don't know what you're talking about, and I don't recall the context of this comment, and I don't care. The main threat to civilization as we know it is large numbers of congenitally uncivilized races preventing civilized races from having their civilization. Not the ghost of christmas past, not boogeyman klansmen.
@fringeelements YOU ARE A SERVANT OF MRLOWIQ, YOU ARE EVEN DUMBER THAN HE IS.SERIOUSLY FRINGE, YOU ARE A LESS INTELLIGENT VERSION OF NICK BRAVO THE AUTISTIC, LOLBERTARIAN, PLEASE TAKE YOUR RACIST HEREDITARIANISM AND SHOVE IT UP YOUR ILLITERATE ASS.
@Tetzukai WEll Imo off topic, just sayin slavery still happens in Africa, read Francis Bok's story. Countries should have acted way more hastily to the things going in Darfur.
Being against separatism - means different races will occupy the same political units. By and large, they don't mix, and people who race-mix don't tend to have many kids anyway.
This is causing, and has always caused, immense conflict. Whether you think this conflict is "dumb" is inane because we're dealing with base values. Also we're dealing with voting wars, group A voting itself money from group B. To be against separatism is to be for integration and the conflict and unhappiness it causes.
Your understanding of the benefits of genome mixing is simplistic. The benefit comes from introgression - introduction of new alleles into a population that are then selected upon. If there is no selection upon the new genetic material, then all you get is intermediate organisms - hybrids.
Stagnation like what?... I"m pretty sure the the whole world in general is mostly stagnate, regardless. To say it will to something relative like mixing is myopic to what's really stagnating humans.
@cleopatrajones90 Smartest pure blacks have a IQ around 113, and they are a very small number of blacks. So to talk about some imaginary black with a IQ of 150 is stupid. Its like saying there might be a philipino that is 7 feet tall... Hmmm how about NO! xD And even if there was a philipino that tall he whould be the only one, making it irrelevant.
@HotNationalist With 50 years of Affirmative action black cardiologists make up 2% of the total in America. And that's with deteriorating medical standards.
Hello, in your debate with theskepticalheretic he referred to Tizard paper published 1972 which he said showed a correlation of .2 in the IQ of MZ twins raised apart. I could not find this paper after looking quite a while. He said that he got it from you as one of your source materials for the debate but I didn't see it in your list. Could you please resolve this if possible? I am kind of skeptical that this is what the paper says and really would like to see it, thanks!
@153370371 In my research I have only found an analysis of this particular study which states that there was a .75 correlation between twins in intelligence testing when controlled.
Why do you applaud Sophia Roon [spelling?]? Hers sounds like a completely silly argument.
I'm no scientist, no biologist, but saying you need "exact genes" for intelligence sounds like a probable non-starter. Like saying you want the exact paints for a master art work. Knowing the colors and their quantities tells you very little about the inherent quality of the work.
Surely both are about the "expressions", not the genes/paints, environment/canvas, life-force/artist?
@fringeelements Consistently stupid. What if there are no "genes" for intelligence, period, that it's the configuration that counts? Moreover, what if, as seems highly probable, those configurations vary so much as for there to be no consistent "intelligence template" (no "biological" metric)?
Her position is a complete logical fallacy if, as I suspect, there is no such thing as "genes for intelligence". "Applauding her consistency" lends credence to her position whether intended or not.
"Men created equal" dogma is not what egalitarians think it is. It doesn't mean men are equal in their physical natures, which is absurd, and which, for example, America's Founding Fathers fully refuted, but rather relates to the fact that no one man was to be the "ends of another", that no man should have a "greater right" to their liberties than any other.
It's a cornerstone of Christianity and of law; but easier said than done in practical human application for those subscribing to it.
Note on cited hate crime at 53.50. I read that the racial slurs were an attempt at misdirection from the 4 black accused (saying "nigger lover"). It was THEM that made it racial, in this cynical way at least if not probably also the intent behind the crime.
I guess it is up to the listener to decide for his or her self whether this was a racially motivated "hate crime". Hours of rape and torture lead me to suspect it was. Harder-hearted observers may prefer the three-letter acronym explanation.
@cleopatrajones90 Well that's one way to look at it. Really this stuff is defensive. It's about arguing against attacks on whites. This was made quite clear in the video.
@cleopatrajones90 Perhaps in the sense that everything is subjective, but no, saying that egalitarian predictions are based on assumptions of equality, and if those assumptions are wrong the predictions are also probably wrong, is not very speculative.
@MrHerrIQ2 - Wrong. "You did and it's irrelevant because no animal species is comparable to humans. Animals selectively breed while humans do not. I already told you that." --A86
@MrHerrIQ2 - I mentioned other animals besides dogs too. Go back and re-read my post.
"So again, why would bring up an extreme example like that"
Like what? Humans are the only species I can think of that interbreeds as much as it does and is the only species I can think of (in terms of mammals) that is as genetically homogeneous as it is other than, maybe, the platypus.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "This was during the last 60 000 years when the humans migrated and populated different parts of the world"
During that time humans were constantly moving back and forth and different populations were constantly interbreeding with each other and warring with one another. All modern ethnicities are the result of two or more ancient or prehistoric ethnicities that interbred.
"are about 1% non-white in ancestry" Where are you getting this figure from?
@MrHerrIQ2 - "Yes, an animal that changes drastically because their genomes allows for it"
That's due to a process called "differentiation" where cells in the body gear for specific processes. That's not an example of genetic diversity in a population.
@MrHerrIQ2 - No. it's a historical fact. You need to read up on some basic world history. Ex: the history of Britain; the history of "Scythians", etc.
@MrHerrIQ2 No, they could not. An allele frequency difference is a genetic difference. What I think you mean to say is that they don't have to be type-different - that is you don't have to have specific genes for populations, just clustering differences in frequencies in the genes the entire species shares.
@MrHerrIQ2 That's actually wrong. You can have manifest trait differences based on gene activation (see puberty in humans). But that gene activation is caused by genes. The caterpillar is just a butterfly at a different stage. They're not two different overall populations.
@A86 I would recommend a book called "The 10,000 year explosion" which talks about extremely rapid, extremely recent human evolution, including the results of breeding with neanderthals and the advent of agriculture. No, if the selective pressures are there, then geographically-bound (boundaries to interbreeding) trait differences can and did manifest.
@fringeelements - Religious concepts are not falsifiable. All of these facts are falsifiable and can be supported or debunked by data.
"if the selective pressures are there"
The fact that humans likely bred with Neanderthals shows that humans are not at all a selective species. Lol If humans were selective then it should be possible to name some ethnicities that are monophyletic and not the result of several past ethnicities breeding. Can you name them?
You're erecting unnecessary standards. For example, east asians have the epicanthic fold. That's one population difference. That alone would be enough to distinguish two different populations. That would be trivial, but it's plenty to set a category. We can then analyze the brain, and see that these superficially distinct populations are also different in terms of, for now, total brain size.
That's a phenotypical thing that not even all East Asians have (for instance, 75% of Koreans do not have one), not a genetic trait.
"distinguish two different populations" Distinguishing a population =/= Race The term "race" doesn't simply mean "any population that can be discerned from another".
@A86 Okay then, being afraid to go against the Lysenkoists in Russia and actually practice real genetics because of political pressure. That's a better analogy to what's happening in the US today with the human-creationists.
@fringeelements - "being afraid to go against the Lysenkoists in Russia and actually practice real genetics because of political pressure."
We're talking about scientific facts and data. If you want to disagree with me you have to have data to back it up. Because a person disagrees does not mean their viewpoint is equally valid.
@MrHerrIQ2 - The Witherspoon article specifically says, "caution should be used when using geographic or genetic ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes."
@MrHerrIQ2 - "an answer to how there can, theoretically, be phenotypical differences between the races of man"
Phenotype is not the same as genotype. Geneticists specifically warn against using phenotypical differences as a proxy for genetic ones.
Phenotypes aren't even shared in continental populations. There are several different phenotypes in African. The only thing shared is the fact that they all have "dark" skin. Sharing skin color does not mean two people are closely related.
@MrHerrIQ2 - Because it's the same damn animal totally.
"for there to manifest differences between populations"
Agreed. But you're talking about RACE which is different from mere "populations". A "race" is a grouping that many populations belong to. There is no such thing for Africans or Europeans or anyone else.
@A86 Race and population are virtually synonyms in common usage.
For example, we can trace Germans, Frenchmen, Hungarians, Lapps, and many other populations within the meta-population of "White Europeans", which has a fuzzy historical boundary with the "Brown Caucasians" somewhere in the southern balkans or Turkey.
@fringeelements - A "common usage" is not a "scientific usage". That's a really, really poor argument to base things on "common usage".
"we can trace Germans, Frenchmen, Hungarians, Lapps"
You can trace any population. However, all those populations you listed are the creation of several ethnicities mixing. There is no prehistoric "French" or "German" or "Hungarian" population.
Okay, you don't know how science works. Before a scientific definition for lightning existed, there was a common one. The scientists explained the commonly-seen phenomena.
Today, scientists aren't doing this with race. They should be explaining what race is, instead they are saying it doesn't exist because of Lysenko-esque dogmatism, resulting in a clash between reality and the musings of academics.
Scientists have already explained what the contradictory definitions of "race" are and have concluded, based on current evidence, that no human populations meet any of these definitions. You don't now how science works if you don't know this simple fact. Scientists can't categorize something in nature that doesn't exist in nature with humans.
Except that they actually have categorized them. They call them "populations", and they recognize trait distributions between these observed races, and these self-reported races correspond 99.9% with genetic cluster, we know of evolutionary mechanisms that can create these slight average differences that have profound effects in an industrial economy, and even a simple darwinism would dictate that the zero-geographic-genetic-clustering hypothesis notion would be a cosmic fluke.
@fringeelements i don't really get why people pretend they don't know what race is. various climates produced various people with various features, it's quite simple.
@A86 There doesn't need to be a prehistoric "French" population for it to show up in genetic clustering. They could have different traits that result by the limiting of gene flow that occurs from political and linguistic borders, and by that I mean it's a virtual certainty that they do to some extent. This is so stupid. It could be one trait. For example, Hungarians have a higher prevalence of Type O blood.
It's pretty simple. Humans have not selectively bred while animals do. Dogs have been bred into specific breeds and polar bears only get to mate with other polar bears. Dogs can breed with dogs of other breeds but the breeds still exist due to eugenics experiments.
@MrHerrIQ2 - A caterpillar is just a baby butterfly. Of course it has 0% genetic difference. It's like a 6 month old human and that same 6 month old human 20 years later.
You did and it's irrelevant because no animal species is comparable to humans. Animals selectively breed while humans do not. I already told you that.
You're moving the goalposts. Now it's no longer about total genetic difference (which I would agree is useless, since chimps and humans are very very close), but whether the selection was natural or "artificial". Anyway, I would recommend the paper "Is homo sapiens polytypic", shows up in a pdf when you google it. It shows that the degree of heterozygosity in homo sapiens is similar to chimpanzees and many other species.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "and irrelevant point to the point I was making"
You claimed my statement was a "lie". "More misinterpretations, like, this wonderfull statement & lie here; "if we use tens and thousends of loci, no two individuals look similar at all" --MrHerrlQ2
I just proved that it was not. If you think the fact I disproved you is "irrelevant" then you're retarded.
"if we use tens and thousends of loci, no two individuals look similar at all"
Not a lie at all. See Lieberman, Leonard; Kirk, Rodney (1997). "Teaching About Human Variation: An Anthropological Tradition for the Twenty-first Century". In Rice, Patricia; Kottak, Conrad Phillip; White, Jane G.; Richard H. Furlow. The Teaching of Anthropology: Problems, Issues, and Decisions. Mayfield Pub. pp. 381.
Because you don't like something doesn't mean it's a "lie". Look up the definition of "lie".
Thanks for linking sources you saw on some other site or book instead of what you actually read or saw, as a way to source-pound instead of actually arguing for you absurd position.
Races can be told apart genetically. I don't know what you mean by "genetically proven". A degree of variation exists, you can categorize this as a race or not, that depends on your personal, subjective definition of race. Cavalli-Sforza calls races "populations", for example.
@A86 You've found some academics who agree with you. That's not the same as "scientific sources" backing you up. If it was 1970, the majority of academic sources would say that the USSR was going to pass the US in standard of living in about 40 years.
"For instance, you could see by YT's "new comment" indicator"
Only if I stay on this page. You know damn well it doesn't show up in your account though. You claimed you were leaving earlier because you still wanted to comment with no rebuttals from me. This was your passive-aggressive way of doing so. We both know the reason why your posts no longer begin with "@A86". Stop bullshitting us.
"then you later state, in that same comment, that you could use less loci to expand outwards to include many clusters and that you could foccus in on a specific individual"
Your problems with comprehension show. That's not what I said. I said if you use even more loci (more than several thousand) no two individuals look alike. People become more and more unique the more loci you use. By your logic that means each man is his own race since each person eventually becomes discrete.
That's what I just said. Nowhere have I rejected anything because it's vague. If you insist otherwise then quote me.
"you were rejecting the concept of race or the terms Europoid"
I rejected them because they don't exist, not because they're vague. It's a rather specific idea, it just does not exist biologically. Europeans don't share most of their genes in common among other Europeans.
These are not "misinterpretations", these are you not knowing what you're talking about and several resources from various geneticists and biologists have shown as much.
Understanding and agreeing are two separate things. I understand your argument, I simply do not agree with it because it's wrong. You also obviously don't know what "continuum fallacy" means because I never rejected any claim on the grounds of it not being as specific as I wanted it to be.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "and then you said I named drop, as if that somehow equalls me not providing a reference"
It's not a reference when you just mention a name and not the name or page number of a specific study. That's called a "name drop".
And dude, if you have something to say to me have the balls to address it to me directly. Don't be a coward and just post it on the general wall where I won't be notified of the response. But I don't blame you for being cowardly, you don't really have an argument
@MrHerrIQ2 - "That members of different populations are NOT more similar to members of other groups"
Nor are they more similar to members of their own "group" if certain loci or enough loci are used. People look like they belong to whatever loci you use because of the general homogeneity of humanity in general. If you used only Ethiopians and Italians everyone else in the world looks like some admixture or overlap of Italian and Ethiopian.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "Then I said, well no shit Sherlock, we would you only use a hundred loci for?"
If you use tens of thousands of loci eventually no two individuals look similar at all. Thus, the logical conclusion of your "logic" is that everyone is their own race. Why use only several thousands of loci when you can use tens or hundreds of thousands?
@MrHerrIQ2 - "I said what they produce, correspond to the categorization."
Either way, show me said papers and show how they not only correlate with such categorizations but show the causative relationship between the two. One of the first things you learn in science is that correlation is not causation.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "about the validity of the categorization of Europoid, Mongoloid, etc."
And I challenged you to quote some peer-reviewed studies which prove that such things exist. You never responded. You just dropped several names (like Sforza) and claimed they agree with you without ever linking to one of these supposed studies where they echo your beliefs. Of course, we both know this is because you're making stuff up and are incapable of showing where they agree with you.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "when have I indicated that I do not understand that clusters depends on how many loci you are using"
Because you kept holding up that one section about no two individuals from different pops being confused when you use several thousand loci as "proof" that there are discrete groups. Any geneticist knows people look less and less alike the more loci you use because all groups of humans are polyphyletic. The more loci you use the more you can isolate their specific lineage.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "You also misinterpreted what I meant by genetic-frequency"
No, you were just flat out wrong in what you meant by it. It NEVER, EVER refers to entire genomes, only to specific alleles. Your "interpretation" was nothing more than a pathetic attempt to redefine the word for your own convenience. You can't just redefine a word when its definition does not suit you.
@MrHerrIQ2 - " what they were referring to was not only populations but what we referr to by races"
No, they were not. If so they would have said so because that's a specific concept. Europeans and white Americans are "geographically separated populations", would you consider them different "races"? Your "logic" is mind-numbingly stupid.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "Races are included in "geographically seperated populations"
They're also included in geographically close populations because some people who live close to each other are not considered to be part of the same "race" by racialists. For example: Filipinos of Chinese descent and Filipinos of Austronesian descent.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "attempting to get you to understand"
I understand your argument, the problem is that it's simply incorrect. It's a simplistic, scientifically inaccurate argument from a scientifically illiterate person (yourself) with a political agenda who is willing to willfully misinterpret things in a desperate attempt to make them part of his agenda.
If you can't understand that clusters are defined by which loci you're using and that population =/= "race" that's not my problem.
Clusters do indeed exist but clusters are not races. Two very different things. Learn to read and learn what a "continuum fallacy" is the next time you blurt out the term. Learn what a "gene frequency" is while you're at it, yet another thing I had to meticulously correct you on.
@MrHerrIQ2 - A continuum fallacy means rejecting something because it's vague. No one has done that here except possibly you. I specifically said your argument is silly because by your argument every person is their own "race" since you use population as a proxy for "race" and your argument is that a "race" can be defined by using enough loci (though the authors never say "race", they said "population" which use as a proxy).
@MrHerrIQ2 - "You attempt to rebute the "loci argument""
Your argument is based on a misunderstanding of what you read. The authors said populations (not "races") can be very specifically identified the more loci you use. If you use even more loci even more groups are needed. By your "logic" not only would each person be their own race many people would belong to several redundant races.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "I have numerous times given you well known names of people who has conducted several studies as sources for my claims"
You haven't listed a single quote from any of these sources that verified what you are claiming. You're simply engaging in name-dropping. On the other hand I've actually linked my sources.
@MrHerrIQ2 - No, bad analogy. A loci is not a man-made tool to deal with a specific thing (such as a car).
"inter-continental genetic diversity"
The problem is in your own zeal to prove your ideology that one quote you keep repeating from the Witherspoon paper says "populations" not "races". Two very different things.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "How often is a pair of individuals from one population genetically more dissimilar than two individuals chosen from two different populations?"
It said "populations", not "races". The Nigerian and Cameroonian populations are two different populations and, according to this article, if you use enough loci two individuals from these two populations wouldn't be more similar. According to your logic that means they must be different "races".
DOI: 10.1525/aa.1998.100.3.632 (the one A86 just posted)
"I've said that those categories, Negroid, Mongoloid, etc do correspond to genetic-clusters and cranial maps and thus do correspond to something real."
Yes, and I agree. I'm saying that A86's (which he or she claims to show otherwise) is a piece of shit and doesn't actually refute you or me.
@MrHerrIQ2 - No such thing as a "continuum fallacy". Stop making shit up.
"loci argument is not irrelevant"
Look at my quote from Weiss & Fullerton below. When you look at particular loci everything seems to be comprised of them and everyone seems to be a member of these loci. If you look at enough loci everyone appears to be their own clinal group.
@MrHerrIQ2 - Also, what I was talking about earlier is that if you look at certain loci EVERYTHING seems it fits into the grouping of loci that you're looking at. Read Weiss KM and Fullerton SM (2005) Racing around, getting nowhere. Evolutionary Anthropology 14: 165–169. If you look at only the genetic clusters for Icelandic people, Mayan and Maori people everyone on Earth looks like they're a composition of those clines.
@MrHerrIQ2 - "when I said that the anthropological categories of negroid and mongoloid does correspond to their genetic data?"
What takes away from it is the fact there are no sources to back up this assertion and you haven't linked any. Link where any of those authors specifically claim this.
Neil Risch's (e.g. Tang et al 2005) studies show you to be wrong, unless you want to claim cranial-morphology doesn't match up with self-identified race.
@APESinPYRAMIDS Phwahahahahahahaha ahahahahahahahahaahahha Phwahahahahahahahaahahah AVERAGES ARE NOT USED MUCH. THEY ARE TOO BASIC TO IN USE TO DESCRIBE VARIANCE SO WE USE STATISTICS YOU TWIT. Phwahahahahahaaahahahhaahahha ahahahahahahahahahahaahahhahahahahahaaaaaaa
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
@DEFACTO9 Averages are part of statistics you utter ignoramus. In fact you cannot calculate the variance without calculating the average. Your self promotion far exceeds your abilities. Why not google "Dunning-Kruger effect"? Also "Solving The African IQ Conundrum : “Winning Personality” Masks Low Scores". Obviously you don't have a winning personality, but it's still interesting.
DungFlingingInRAYBAN 3 days ago
On the issue of education, it is surprising to me that we don't put forth more effort into acknowledging our differences, in order to more effectively teach our children in the ways that they require. I'm on the "high" end of the IQ spectrum, yet I was put into special ed classes at age four. The reason given was that I could not color the same apple picture all week long, and I was asking to be taught how to read books on "microbes". I "dropped out" at 14. My nails are purple from hunger now.
benskin79 1 week ago
Asians are smarter
Blacks are faster
Natives wiser
Caucasians creative
Dolphins swimmers
The eagle can soar
In the end, I am nothing but ordinary. If I had your powers combined, however, I would move mountains for giggles ^_^
7princessful 1 week ago
@kubaniski Whites have Neanderthal blood,which means their infurior,iq test is just a social issue,nuff said.
SuperJabbar99 1 week ago
@SuperJabbar99 Actually through a process known as introgression, the beneficial neanderthal alleles were kept and the harmful ones selected out. In fact, everyone but africans has significant neanderthal admixture. East Asians may also have admixture of a pre-sapien hominid known as the denisovians.
fringeelements 1 week ago 2
@fringeelements So what does this mean exactly? lol
shaddowmoses91 1 week ago
@fringeelements
In fact, everyone but africans has significant neanderthal admixture"???
this is outlandish foolishness. if you use maths, every subsequent generation prior to you increases by a square. this means even just 500 yrs ago you were genetic fragment in over 50million people. now, when you extrapolate that back to at least 100,000 years this figure is SO LARGE, it tells us that it is IMPROBABLE that such genes WOULD NOT have propagated through all communities Im afraid.
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
@DEFACTO9 Right, just like the genes for skin color propagated through all communities. Oh wait... there are blockages to gene flow.
fringeelements 3 days ago
@fringeelements Wow, are you now trying to infer that that the genes for skin pimentation expression behave like binary numbers? Is this honestly what you are trying to imply with that incredibly wayward statement? Are you for real when you make the claims that you do or in fact are you completely extended beyond yr own knowledge grasping for branches that are breaking under your weight? yes melanin expression is propagated through all communities , are all swedes blond? cmon
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
"Wow, are you now trying to infer that that the genes for skin pimentation expression behave like binary numbers?"
No, neither does height. In neither of my two recent comments did I even mention skin color, there is zero reason for you to have brought up skin color. It seems to me that it's you who doesn't know what is being talked about.
fringeelements 3 days ago
@SuperJabbar99 I respect your opinion..Im lying...I cant take someone seriously who while attempting to make another race seem "inferior" doesn't have the intellect to even spell the word correctly...So i'll say it...FUCKING RETARD!
shaddowmoses91 1 week ago
@NiggerBabble90210 Phwahahahahahahhahaaa whats that then like youre 25th account because you keep getting banned by Youtube for hate speech? lmfao! the gibon jubjub is back.. protesting about my blackness and yet paradoxically addicted to all issues involving black people on Youtube despite all that "white culture" available to you. This tells me you have a crap life and shit thinking. This gives me comfort. It makes me chuckle to myself about you.
DEFACTO9 1 week ago
@DEFACTO9 LOGICAL FALLACY: Ad hominem
Youtube nigger cannot do the math as he claimed, so diverts the discussion to personal comments on his opponent.
RaybansGoneApeshit 1 week ago
@RaybansGoneApeshit then explain why elsehwere I challenged you to understand that AVERAGES are not used in science much because Standard error and deviation are more accurate statistical tools to explain divergences you low IQ white Nigger Gibbon.jub jub.
DEFACTO9 1 week ago
@DEFACTO9 Actually averages are used in biology for classifications. It's inadvisable to use averages in exact sciences chemistry or physics. But because living organisms vary between individuals due to gene mutation, heredity, and environmental effects in the field of biology averages do get taken into account as there are differences in every population but averages do hold true.
kubaniski 1 week ago
@kubaniski You have contributed little to the discussion. AVERAGES are a very BLUNT tool and they are not used much in BIOLOGY. It is astonishing that you are now trying to tell me, a BLACK BIOCHEMISTRY Graduate, that averages somehow figure heavily in biology as a blunt tool, when actually for genetic variance we heavily use statistical relevance MORESO to extract meaning from data. Yes averages are used, but let me inform you respectfully that on its own its far too weak
DEFACTO9 1 week ago
@DEFACTO9 There are some lions that like to swim, but biologists will tell you that that is not true of the lion population as a whole. Because biology is deals with large numbers of individuals that form a population averages are important, otherwise the entire field of biology would be at a standstill if they had to deal with nothing but absolutes.
There are many smart blacks but then aggain you can find blacks at all levels of intelligence. The issue where the majority of blacks are.
kubaniski 1 week ago
@kubaniski the problem here is that you believe from your position that averages can be used in such a situiation but they cannot because averages will tell you the lions DO NOT SWIM, however statistical variance will inform you of the likely PROBABILITY OF SWAY FROM THAT "AVERAGE" &use of the deviation from that issue "standard Error). Average SI TOO SIMPLISTIC and is used for basic pre university education. & by the way you can find blacks AT ALL LEVELS, its U who r not thusYOU dont believe!
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
Right. Some women are stronger than the average man too. Environment can also influence strength and athletic ability, as do genetics. We know what averages are, and we know that when there are population-wide average differences in some metric, the null hypothesis needs to be genetics UNLESS you can point to some systematic environmental difference and show it's effects are likely to cause the average population gaps. This has yet to be done.
fringeelements 3 days ago
@fringeelements largely incoherent Im afraid. The main issue is that a simple distribution curve for genetic variance remains true for genetic distribution over time, its only the short term that these differences manifest and deviate from this model, The genes for curly hair exist in most populations but the EXPRESSION may be more finely controlled by as yet unknown factors. You imply huge differences where they simply dont exist, or youre prone to massive leaps of faith
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
"You imply huge differences where they simply dont exist"
What does "huge" mean in this context? I believe I just presented the raw numbers compiled by other researchers, and said that there were noticeable differences that make races identifiable and semi-discrete. Identifiable + semi-discrete = huge? I don't think you know what I'm saying, so you're putting up a general wall of flak that is mostly irrelevant in the hopes that something you say will be relevant and will hit.
fringeelements 3 days ago
@fringeelements Phwahahahhaahahaa you have compiled nothing regarding other researchers, and your claims of raw data mean PRE-analysis, and I do not believe you academically competent to perform such a task.. that is extreme unbalanced arrogance on display.. Your family is distinct and identifiable, this is EXACTLY the same issue between races. I know what youre saying but it is u who are lost & behaving like a clown. I am a Biochemistry graduate & I just ran rings around you
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
@DEFACTO9 A non-White cannot be more successful than a White because it is guaranteed that the White race created virtually everything that could possibly define the non-White's perceived 'success' in today's world.
This can include: His luxurious, modern lifestyle and the conveniences he can purchase with organised currency; his limitless choice of vocations sourced by White knowledge and the White education standards that realise such ambitions.
lakewood425 3 days ago
@DEFACTO9 Unless a non-White is completely severed from modern society from life until birth, he is born into this world with a near-permanent debt to the White race by default. He inherits all opportunities at the continued, indeed irreparable, expense of his benefactor. And yes, I'm talking about non-Whites in their own (White-)developed countries too, not just those who enjoy the fruits of White genius through more blatant means (invading our civilizations directly).
lakewood425 3 days ago
@fringeelements ultimately the problem with youre thinking will not explain well why it is that a donor for a tissue transplant can be found from ANY race. Youre trying to curve fit science to your beliefs.. your approach should be to defer to science rigour 1st . This means letting go of the "race issue" because race isnt even a taxonomic subclass valid for discussion in a scientific context.. as different as Africans may lok to you from whites, but Asians are "black and white"
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
"ultimately the problem with youre thinking will not explain well why it is that a donor for a tissue transplant can be found from ANY race."
You can also use some organs from pigs.
This doesn't address anything though. For example, two individuals could have all organs transplantable, but one has 2x as many cortical neurons and is overwhelmingly "smarter", and this gap need not be a result of environment. Similarly, two populations, we'll call them races, could be the same way. Maybe not 2x
fringeelements 3 days ago
@fringeelements Please dont try to tell me an organ from a pig is a great fit over an organ from a human. dont even go there.
It is unlikley any functioning human being would exhibit x2 cortical neurone density. That is OUTLANdISH, infact the likely result of such a pathology would be fits, over-activity and gross mental retardation.. more is not necessarily better. where do you obtain such nonsense?
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
"Please dont try to tell me an organ from a pig is a great fit over an organ from a human. dont even go there."
Sorry to upset you, but it has been done.
"It is unlikley any functioning human being would exhibit x2 cortical neurone density."
No, 2x as many cortical neurons. Could be mixture of a larger brain and more density, and another person with very low density. Besides, it was a hypothetical. Say 1.1x as many neurons. The point is that transplanability =/= equal cognitive function.
fringeelements 3 days ago
Define breed. And of course it is. Categories are constructed. You can say "hills don't exist" or "wolf breeds don't exist" or "african blacks don't exist", and that can be your categorization system. I can classify east asians as closer to europeans based on phenotype. Lighter skin, quieter, calmer, straight hair. You can classify europeans as closer to africans based on some genetic data. You can classify europeans as closer to africans in terms of body musculature.
fringeelements 3 days ago
@fringeelements so now you are trying to rewrite textbook science? Race does not exist because race is a Psychological construct that has no scientific taxonomy. You are trying to curve fit science to your racist bigotry and it simply isnt working. You fail on so many levels but you will talk the ignorant around to your unscientific view of science issues. Humans go shopping and ride bicycles efficiently, there nothing you can do I cant, and I date all races, get over that.
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
"race is a Psychological construct"
All categories are psychological constructs. Textbooks are written by mortal men.
I never said you ought only to mate with your own race. Where on earth did that come from? Actually, I have a general idea of where you heard it from. Not from me.
fringeelements 3 days ago
"there nothing you can do I cant"
Perhaps use proper grammar and spelling? Aside, this is just a restatement of the central dogma. An incantation, and you're trying to personalize it by making me the embodiment of the opposition. I get it, I'm the foil. I'm for banning race mixing and this whole nebulous cloud of "racist" (never defined) and bigoted positions.
You want to play your identity-games, fine. But not on my channel.
fringeelements 3 days ago
@DEFACTO9 A forensic Anthropologist can identify the race of human remains by studying the Bones, or Semen, or Hair left behind. If race were some construct this wouldn't be possible. If race were some imaginary construct you would see parents giving birth to random-race babies.
Sub-saharan Africans as a group will never be able to achieve things that other races have. This is why they need people to stop thinking in terms of race and start thinking in terms of single person.
lakewood425 3 days ago
@DEFACTO9 "Humans go shopping and ride bicycles efficiently, there nothing you can do I cant, and I date all races, get over that."
Your argument is that their are no racial differences because Africans can ride bicycles?
"You fail on so many levels"
*facepalm*
DungFlingingInRAYBAN 3 days ago
"Youre trying to curve fit science to your beliefs.. your approach should be to defer to science rigour 1st"
You're a big, stupid doo doo head!
But more seriously, theory precedes facts. What "facts" are relevant depends on what you choose to examine, and that depends on your theories. For example, the theory of evolution created a revolution in what facts scientists chose to gather and view as important. Of course fact and theory interact.
fringeelements 3 days ago
So I don't see as important the same things you see as important. You're confusing my different theoretical starting point for stupidity and "trying to fit science to my beliefs". Classic example: people from poorer families have lower IQs.
Right, since IQ variation in the US is primarily genetic and predicts for income, this is what you would expect.
Right, since IQ variation in the US is primarily environmental and a result of "socioeconomic status", this is what you would expect.
fringeelements 3 days ago
@DEFACTO9 Also I don't particularly care what is the average IQ of Blacks. I wish blacks all the best and hope they advance economically, I'm just against Affirmative Action.
kubaniski 1 week ago
@kubaniski understood, that is better qualified. but if your father and brother were denied a job because of thier ethnic origin wouldnt you want that issue redressed if it kept on happening? and let me also add, affirmative action never completed a single job, or passed an exam for anybody.. plus it never stopped you getting anywhere because black people are not responsible for your inadequacies or failures r they? Is that why u are trying to say? that they are the reason you didnt progress?
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
Lets say you want to get a job for the US postal services. Say there's a test with a max of 1000 points. Say that if you're black, that's the equivalent of getting 50 points right away. What does the unfairness of this have to do with blacks not being responsible for someone's inadequacies? Nothing, your remark merely obfuscates the issue and pathologizes the opponent in an irrelevant manner.
Right, AA is a policy. Policies don't complete jobs, yet people are opposed to all sorts of policies.
fringeelements 3 days ago
@fringeelements WRONG, the incredible faux pas in your supposition is that blacks get an advantage in the test of 50points. That is just foolishness. They get to the TEST ONLY. the advantage isnt gifted in point applied in the test, the advantage is gifted ONLY in GETTING ACCESS to the test. Your thinking is like a bucking bronco, please learn to stick to relevancies. "Policies don't complete jobs, yet people are opposed to all sorts of policies."?? Make sense please
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
@DEFACTO9 Averages are used all the time biology you ridiculous nigger.
"response-locked grand mean responses"
"Mean lifespan was also increased in the knockout mice"
"mean magnitude and variance in fitness changes"
"and comparing the mean lifespan by stratified log-rank test ( p ≤0.001)"
"Figure 2 The Mean Lengths (±s.e.) of Ovules"
"In an average-weight individual, the metabolic"
"autophosphorylation occurs at an average rate of one per 3.5 h"
SILLY NEGROID
APESinPYRAMIDS 6 days ago
@kubaniski DEFACTO9 is a retarded nigger posing as a scientist.
APESinPYRAMIDS 6 days ago
@APESinPYRAMIDS Ohh thats because as a graduate I AM.. whats hilarious is that if you were youd use manners and science to contradict me but I whip your ignorant racist ass every single time. Even feel sorry for you from the embarrassment. Tell me hows your quality of life with that clownish white hood you put over your head?
DEFACTO9 3 days ago
Baby dick, Baby dick, fat ass fat ass- mmmm, tastes good. Brass---knuckles. Shove it up yo anus whole. Pass me da bowl---cereol. Applejack, hell yea, das a fact
CaptainOmarful 2 weeks ago
@fringeelements When Barack Obama was born there were around 60 race mixed couples in all of America.
Luigi84289 3 weeks ago
An Ad baculum? You think something is going to control people from fucking each other? I'm just saying it for what it is so I don't know how you can conclude that I am in defense of mixing. It's already been done thousands of times since the beginning of life. Who's "fighting" for this mixing future?
Tetzukai 3 weeks ago
I'm not fighting for anything I am just implying bigotry is wasteful and unproductive. Mixing is just as pointless and dumb like any form of reproduction, especially on this planet full of unintelligent, bigotted humans just simply chasing their tail.
And that same circumstance and I know you implied it can be said for any type of social problems even in the same ethnic group, like religion, generation gaps, laws/culture, opinions, and so forth.
Tetzukai 3 weeks ago
It's even seen among children and their innate human greedy, selfishness and look what it caused throughout history. And most of it is usually very irrational and stupid, let alone creates more waste than good.
It looks like more of a bigotry/idiot problem than a racism problem not that I am saying I know what's happening between the Swedish and Finnish, and African American in general, but that's beside the point.
Tetzukai 3 weeks ago
That's just what the general problem is in the end of the day - dumb bigotry that really doesn't need to exist, objectively.
Tetzukai 3 weeks ago
Well, I don't know what you mean by "dumb bigotry", that sounds like a soundbite brainwashed people say, and I don't know what it has to do with anything anyone is saying. You SEEM to value the well being of all humanity. Family A has 2 kids, family B has 5 kids. Thus family B would be more valuable? I don't know if that's your base value, or if you even know what your base value is.
fringeelements 3 weeks ago
@fringeelements Then you`re doubting for instance slavery happened, the Holy Crusuade/Spanish Inquistion and other religious conflicts happended, greedy monarchies, corporations and even common people and its outcomes existed and so forth. You doubt for one moment that our savage, animalistic, subjective nature as humans has nothing to do with those events even for racism? Why do I need to state a base value when it's fact, why should I be more specific than that?
Tetzukai 3 weeks ago
@Tetzukai You're not conscious so there is no point in arguing with you and I do not mean that in an offensive way. It is clear that you are typing programmed responses from a programmed position.
Luigi84289 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tetzukai You're not conscious so there is no point in arguing with you and I do not mean that in an offensive way. It is clear that you are typing programmed responses from a programmed position.
Luigi84289 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tetzukai You're not conscious so there is no point in arguing with you and I do not mean that in an offensive way. It is clear that you are typing programmed responses from a programmed position.
Luigi84289 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tetzukai You're not conscious so there is no point in arguing with you and I do not mean that in an offensive way. It is clear that you are typing programmed responses from a programmed position.
Luigi84289 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tetzukai You're not conscious so there is no point in arguing with you and I do not mean that in an offensive way. It is clear that you are typing programmed responses from a programmed position.
Luigi84289 3 weeks ago
I don't know what you're talking about, and I don't recall the context of this comment, and I don't care. The main threat to civilization as we know it is large numbers of congenitally uncivilized races preventing civilized races from having their civilization. Not the ghost of christmas past, not boogeyman klansmen.
fringeelements 3 weeks ago
@fringeelements YOU ARE A SERVANT OF MRLOWIQ, YOU ARE EVEN DUMBER THAN HE IS.SERIOUSLY FRINGE, YOU ARE A LESS INTELLIGENT VERSION OF NICK BRAVO THE AUTISTIC, LOLBERTARIAN, PLEASE TAKE YOUR RACIST HEREDITARIANISM AND SHOVE IT UP YOUR ILLITERATE ASS.
GiganticSausage 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from fringeelements
@fringeelements Wow... congenitally uncivilized races ? are you serious?.. no you cant be this must surely be a comedy.
DEFACTO9 2 weeks ago
@DEFACTO9 That was just me being a dick. Relax.
fringeelements 2 weeks ago
@Tetzukai WEll Imo off topic, just sayin slavery still happens in Africa, read Francis Bok's story. Countries should have acted way more hastily to the things going in Darfur.
Mogzyx 2 weeks ago
Being against separatism - means different races will occupy the same political units. By and large, they don't mix, and people who race-mix don't tend to have many kids anyway.
This is causing, and has always caused, immense conflict. Whether you think this conflict is "dumb" is inane because we're dealing with base values. Also we're dealing with voting wars, group A voting itself money from group B. To be against separatism is to be for integration and the conflict and unhappiness it causes.
fringeelements 3 weeks ago
Your understanding of the benefits of genome mixing is simplistic. The benefit comes from introgression - introduction of new alleles into a population that are then selected upon. If there is no selection upon the new genetic material, then all you get is intermediate organisms - hybrids.
fringeelements 3 weeks ago
@Tetzukai lol you just don't get it. Do you understand the definition of the word or is that beyond you?
Luigi84289 3 weeks ago
@Luigi84289 What word and what do I not get?
Tetzukai 3 weeks ago
Stagnation like what?... I"m pretty sure the the whole world in general is mostly stagnate, regardless. To say it will to something relative like mixing is myopic to what's really stagnating humans.
Tetzukai 3 weeks ago
@HotNationalist IQ of a genius starts at 160. Philip Emeagwali is considered a genius and is from Africa.
DevilMayhem666 4 weeks ago
@cleopatrajones90 Smartest pure blacks have a IQ around 113, and they are a very small number of blacks. So to talk about some imaginary black with a IQ of 150 is stupid. Its like saying there might be a philipino that is 7 feet tall... Hmmm how about NO! xD And even if there was a philipino that tall he whould be the only one, making it irrelevant.
HotNationalist 4 weeks ago
@HotNationalist With 50 years of Affirmative action black cardiologists make up 2% of the total in America. And that's with deteriorating medical standards.
Luigi84289 3 weeks ago
Can you tell me where the quote started around 13:00 comes from? (About the bias of scientists)
Americaleb 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Asia for the Asians
Africa for the Africans
Mexico for the Mexicans
White Countries for EVERYBODY?
They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.
Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white
culturalhonesty 1 month ago 2
Hello, in your debate with theskepticalheretic he referred to Tizard paper published 1972 which he said showed a correlation of .2 in the IQ of MZ twins raised apart. I could not find this paper after looking quite a while. He said that he got it from you as one of your source materials for the debate but I didn't see it in your list. Could you please resolve this if possible? I am kind of skeptical that this is what the paper says and really would like to see it, thanks!
153370371 1 month ago
@153370371 In my research I have only found an analysis of this particular study which states that there was a .75 correlation between twins in intelligence testing when controlled.
MkUltraviolet 3 weeks ago
Why do you applaud Sophia Roon [spelling?]? Hers sounds like a completely silly argument.
I'm no scientist, no biologist, but saying you need "exact genes" for intelligence sounds like a probable non-starter. Like saying you want the exact paints for a master art work. Knowing the colors and their quantities tells you very little about the inherent quality of the work.
Surely both are about the "expressions", not the genes/paints, environment/canvas, life-force/artist?
thespacialone 1 month ago
I applaud her consistency. She applies it to animals.
fringeelements 1 month ago
@fringeelements Consistently stupid. What if there are no "genes" for intelligence, period, that it's the configuration that counts? Moreover, what if, as seems highly probable, those configurations vary so much as for there to be no consistent "intelligence template" (no "biological" metric)?
Her position is a complete logical fallacy if, as I suspect, there is no such thing as "genes for intelligence". "Applauding her consistency" lends credence to her position whether intended or not.
thespacialone 1 month ago
@thespacialone By consistently applying her position, the reveals her stupidity. That's why I'm glad she does it.
fringeelements 1 month ago
@fringeelements Well, that I applaud :)
thespacialone 1 month ago
"Men created equal" dogma is not what egalitarians think it is. It doesn't mean men are equal in their physical natures, which is absurd, and which, for example, America's Founding Fathers fully refuted, but rather relates to the fact that no one man was to be the "ends of another", that no man should have a "greater right" to their liberties than any other.
It's a cornerstone of Christianity and of law; but easier said than done in practical human application for those subscribing to it.
thespacialone 1 month ago
Note on cited hate crime at 53.50. I read that the racial slurs were an attempt at misdirection from the 4 black accused (saying "nigger lover"). It was THEM that made it racial, in this cynical way at least if not probably also the intent behind the crime.
I guess it is up to the listener to decide for his or her self whether this was a racially motivated "hate crime". Hours of rape and torture lead me to suspect it was. Harder-hearted observers may prefer the three-letter acronym explanation.
thespacialone 1 month ago
@cleopatrajones90 Well that's one way to look at it. Really this stuff is defensive. It's about arguing against attacks on whites. This was made quite clear in the video.
fringeelements 1 month ago
@cleopatrajones90 *However this and judging an INDIVIDUAL on the basis of race (which isn't common sense obviously) are 2 different things.
cleopatrajones90 2 months ago
wow, it started off good, but then you just kept throwing some subjective claims
cleopatrajones90 2 months ago
@cleopatrajones90 Perhaps in the sense that everything is subjective, but no, saying that egalitarian predictions are based on assumptions of equality, and if those assumptions are wrong the predictions are also probably wrong, is not very speculative.
fringeelements 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrHerrIQ2 - "and there could still be alot of differences between the species sub-groups"
Agreed, that's still not the same thing as a "race". I have a lot of difference from my family members. Doesn't mean we're different "races".
Difference =/= Race
A86 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrHerrIQ2 - Wrong. "You did and it's irrelevant because no animal species is comparable to humans. Animals selectively breed while humans do not. I already told you that." --A86
Notice I said "animals"?
"are more homogenous than we are" Source?
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "It is not a historical fact"
Then list the ethnicites that are monophyletic. Go ahead.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - I mentioned other animals besides dogs too. Go back and re-read my post.
"So again, why would bring up an extreme example like that"
Like what? Humans are the only species I can think of that interbreeds as much as it does and is the only species I can think of (in terms of mammals) that is as genetically homogeneous as it is other than, maybe, the platypus.
A86 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrHerrIQ2 - "This was during the last 60 000 years when the humans migrated and populated different parts of the world"
During that time humans were constantly moving back and forth and different populations were constantly interbreeding with each other and warring with one another. All modern ethnicities are the result of two or more ancient or prehistoric ethnicities that interbred.
"are about 1% non-white in ancestry" Where are you getting this figure from?
A86 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrHerrIQ2 - "Yes, an animal that changes drastically because their genomes allows for it"
That's due to a process called "differentiation" where cells in the body gear for specific processes. That's not an example of genetic diversity in a population.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - No. it's a historical fact. You need to read up on some basic world history. Ex: the history of Britain; the history of "Scythians", etc.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 No, they could not. An allele frequency difference is a genetic difference. What I think you mean to say is that they don't have to be type-different - that is you don't have to have specific genes for populations, just clustering differences in frequencies in the genes the entire species shares.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 That's actually wrong. You can have manifest trait differences based on gene activation (see puberty in humans). But that gene activation is caused by genes. The caterpillar is just a butterfly at a different stage. They're not two different overall populations.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "For the longest time, humans didn't interbreed"
When was this? Humans have always moved across the planet and interbred. There was no time of isolation for any group.
A86 2 months ago
@A86 I would recommend a book called "The 10,000 year explosion" which talks about extremely rapid, extremely recent human evolution, including the results of breeding with neanderthals and the advent of agriculture. No, if the selective pressures are there, then geographically-bound (boundaries to interbreeding) trait differences can and did manifest.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@fringeelements - Religious concepts are not falsifiable. All of these facts are falsifiable and can be supported or debunked by data.
"if the selective pressures are there"
The fact that humans likely bred with Neanderthals shows that humans are not at all a selective species. Lol If humans were selective then it should be possible to name some ethnicities that are monophyletic and not the result of several past ethnicities breeding. Can you name them?
A86 2 months ago
You're erecting unnecessary standards. For example, east asians have the epicanthic fold. That's one population difference. That alone would be enough to distinguish two different populations. That would be trivial, but it's plenty to set a category. We can then analyze the brain, and see that these superficially distinct populations are also different in terms of, for now, total brain size.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@fringeelements - "epicanthic fold"
That's a phenotypical thing that not even all East Asians have (for instance, 75% of Koreans do not have one), not a genetic trait.
"distinguish two different populations" Distinguishing a population =/= Race The term "race" doesn't simply mean "any population that can be discerned from another".
A86 2 months ago
@fringeelements - Nor is the epicanthic fold particular to East Asians. Many SE Asians also have it and so do some Africans (such as Khoi peoples).
"We can then analyze the brain, and see that these superficially distinct populations are also different"
Brain size varies according to region. There is no brain size all Europeans or all Africans have.
A86 2 months ago
@A86 No, and there's no height all Europeans or East Asians have, therefore neither population is innately taller than the other. HERP DERP
I have been more than patient, but you are fucking incorrigible.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@A86 Okay then, being afraid to go against the Lysenkoists in Russia and actually practice real genetics because of political pressure. That's a better analogy to what's happening in the US today with the human-creationists.
fringeelements 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fringeelements - "being afraid to go against the Lysenkoists in Russia and actually practice real genetics because of political pressure."
We're talking about scientific facts and data. If you want to disagree with me you have to have data to back it up. Because a person disagrees does not mean their viewpoint is equally valid.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "Now you're talking about dogs again"
Because you mentioned dogs. I also mentioned all other animals and said NO animal is like the human species or has our unique evolutionary history.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - The Witherspoon article specifically says, "caution should be used when using geographic or genetic ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes."
A86 2 months ago
@A86 That's nice. Atheists were also cautious when their ideas went against the church.
fringeelements 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrHerrIQ2 - "an answer to how there can, theoretically, be phenotypical differences between the races of man"
Phenotype is not the same as genotype. Geneticists specifically warn against using phenotypical differences as a proxy for genetic ones.
Phenotypes aren't even shared in continental populations. There are several different phenotypes in African. The only thing shared is the fact that they all have "dark" skin. Sharing skin color does not mean two people are closely related.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - Because it's the same damn animal totally.
"for there to manifest differences between populations"
Agreed. But you're talking about RACE which is different from mere "populations". A "race" is a grouping that many populations belong to. There is no such thing for Africans or Europeans or anyone else.
A86 2 months ago
@A86 Race and population are virtually synonyms in common usage.
For example, we can trace Germans, Frenchmen, Hungarians, Lapps, and many other populations within the meta-population of "White Europeans", which has a fuzzy historical boundary with the "Brown Caucasians" somewhere in the southern balkans or Turkey.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@fringeelements - A "common usage" is not a "scientific usage". That's a really, really poor argument to base things on "common usage".
"we can trace Germans, Frenchmen, Hungarians, Lapps"
You can trace any population. However, all those populations you listed are the creation of several ethnicities mixing. There is no prehistoric "French" or "German" or "Hungarian" population.
A86 2 months ago
Okay, you don't know how science works. Before a scientific definition for lightning existed, there was a common one. The scientists explained the commonly-seen phenomena.
Today, scientists aren't doing this with race. They should be explaining what race is, instead they are saying it doesn't exist because of Lysenko-esque dogmatism, resulting in a clash between reality and the musings of academics.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@fringeelements - "They should be explaining what race is"
Scientists have already explained what the contradictory definitions of "race" are and have concluded, based on current evidence, that no human populations meet any of these definitions. You don't now how science works if you don't know this simple fact. Scientists can't categorize something in nature that doesn't exist in nature with humans.
A86 2 months ago
Except that they actually have categorized them. They call them "populations", and they recognize trait distributions between these observed races, and these self-reported races correspond 99.9% with genetic cluster, we know of evolutionary mechanisms that can create these slight average differences that have profound effects in an industrial economy, and even a simple darwinism would dictate that the zero-geographic-genetic-clustering hypothesis notion would be a cosmic fluke.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@fringeelements i don't really get why people pretend they don't know what race is. various climates produced various people with various features, it's quite simple.
cleopatrajones90 2 months ago
@A86 There doesn't need to be a prehistoric "French" population for it to show up in genetic clustering. They could have different traits that result by the limiting of gene flow that occurs from political and linguistic borders, and by that I mean it's a virtual certainty that they do to some extent. This is so stupid. It could be one trait. For example, Hungarians have a higher prevalence of Type O blood.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "Wtf are you talking about now"
It's pretty simple. Humans have not selectively bred while animals do. Dogs have been bred into specific breeds and polar bears only get to mate with other polar bears. Dogs can breed with dogs of other breeds but the breeds still exist due to eugenics experiments.
A86 2 months ago
@A86 Humans bred with neanderthals, and dolphins can breed with some species of killer whale. What's your point?
fringeelements 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - A caterpillar is just a baby butterfly. Of course it has 0% genetic difference. It's like a 6 month old human and that same 6 month old human 20 years later.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "did I also show you more than dogs"
You did and it's irrelevant because no animal species is comparable to humans. Animals selectively breed while humans do not. I already told you that.
A86 2 months ago
You're moving the goalposts. Now it's no longer about total genetic difference (which I would agree is useless, since chimps and humans are very very close), but whether the selection was natural or "artificial". Anyway, I would recommend the paper "Is homo sapiens polytypic", shows up in a pdf when you google it. It shows that the degree of heterozygosity in homo sapiens is similar to chimpanzees and many other species.
fringeelements 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrHerrIQ2 - "I can either give you links"
Please do so. I've been waiting for hours. I've been courteous enough to do that for you with my sources, you can return the favor.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "I can either give you links"
Please do so. I've been waiting for hours. I've been courteous enough to do that for you with my sources, you can return the favor.
A86 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrHerrIQ2 - "the misinterpretation was that, if we use tens and thousends of loci, no two individuals wont look any similar"
That's not a misinterpretation, that's a FACT:
depts (.) washington (.) edu / omca / dev / ccprime / images / Article / 90c444c0e6002ba166636af76b6b15e3 (.) pdf
Can you read? Bueler? Bueler? Anyone home?
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "I've been giving you names you can google"
You're the one who claimed they agree with you. The burden of proof is on YOU to research them, not me.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "and irrelevant point to the point I was making"
You claimed my statement was a "lie". "More misinterpretations, like, this wonderfull statement & lie here; "if we use tens and thousends of loci, no two individuals look similar at all" --MrHerrlQ2
I just proved that it was not. If you think the fact I disproved you is "irrelevant" then you're retarded.
A86 2 months ago
"They dont."
What doesn't?
A86 2 months ago
"Yeah, because I was attempting to define race with that argument, mhm."
Then what have we been arguing about if you're not trying to prove that races are real, biological things that can genetically proven?
A86 2 months ago
"if we use tens and thousends of loci, no two individuals look similar at all"
Not a lie at all. See Lieberman, Leonard; Kirk, Rodney (1997). "Teaching About Human Variation: An Anthropological Tradition for the Twenty-first Century". In Rice, Patricia; Kottak, Conrad Phillip; White, Jane G.; Richard H. Furlow. The Teaching of Anthropology: Problems, Issues, and Decisions. Mayfield Pub. pp. 381.
Because you don't like something doesn't mean it's a "lie". Look up the definition of "lie".
A86 2 months ago
Thanks for linking sources you saw on some other site or book instead of what you actually read or saw, as a way to source-pound instead of actually arguing for you absurd position.
Races can be told apart genetically. I don't know what you mean by "genetically proven". A degree of variation exists, you can categorize this as a race or not, that depends on your personal, subjective definition of race. Cavalli-Sforza calls races "populations", for example.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@fringeelements - "Races can be told apart"
Such as how? And what sources have I listed that confirm this? Quote them.
Certainly not sources like this?
(.) ornl (.) gov / sci / techresources / Human _ Genome / elsi / minorities (.) shtml
A86 2 months ago
"This diarrhea of your lies"
If they're such lies why do virtually all scientific sources back me up? Hm?
A86 2 months ago
@A86 You've found some academics who agree with you. That's not the same as "scientific sources" backing you up. If it was 1970, the majority of academic sources would say that the USSR was going to pass the US in standard of living in about 40 years.
fringeelements 2 months ago
@fringeelements - "some academics"
That would be the vast majority. It's not because the academics themselves say so, they have genetic data to back it up.
And, at what point were most academics saying the Soviet Union was going to surpass the US in standards of living?
A86 2 months ago
"For instance, you could see by YT's "new comment" indicator"
Only if I stay on this page. You know damn well it doesn't show up in your account though. You claimed you were leaving earlier because you still wanted to comment with no rebuttals from me. This was your passive-aggressive way of doing so. We both know the reason why your posts no longer begin with "@A86". Stop bullshitting us.
A86 2 months ago
"then you later state, in that same comment, that you could use less loci to expand outwards to include many clusters and that you could foccus in on a specific individual"
Your problems with comprehension show. That's not what I said. I said if you use even more loci (more than several thousand) no two individuals look alike. People become more and more unique the more loci you use. By your logic that means each man is his own race since each person eventually becomes discrete.
A86 2 months ago
That's what I just said. Nowhere have I rejected anything because it's vague. If you insist otherwise then quote me.
"you were rejecting the concept of race or the terms Europoid"
I rejected them because they don't exist, not because they're vague. It's a rather specific idea, it just does not exist biologically. Europeans don't share most of their genes in common among other Europeans.
A86 2 months ago
These are not "misinterpretations", these are you not knowing what you're talking about and several resources from various geneticists and biologists have shown as much.
Understanding and agreeing are two separate things. I understand your argument, I simply do not agree with it because it's wrong. You also obviously don't know what "continuum fallacy" means because I never rejected any claim on the grounds of it not being as specific as I wanted it to be.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "and then you said I named drop, as if that somehow equalls me not providing a reference"
It's not a reference when you just mention a name and not the name or page number of a specific study. That's called a "name drop".
And dude, if you have something to say to me have the balls to address it to me directly. Don't be a coward and just post it on the general wall where I won't be notified of the response. But I don't blame you for being cowardly, you don't really have an argument
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "That members of different populations are NOT more similar to members of other groups"
Nor are they more similar to members of their own "group" if certain loci or enough loci are used. People look like they belong to whatever loci you use because of the general homogeneity of humanity in general. If you used only Ethiopians and Italians everyone else in the world looks like some admixture or overlap of Italian and Ethiopian.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "Then I said, well no shit Sherlock, we would you only use a hundred loci for?"
If you use tens of thousands of loci eventually no two individuals look similar at all. Thus, the logical conclusion of your "logic" is that everyone is their own race. Why use only several thousands of loci when you can use tens or hundreds of thousands?
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "I said what they produce, correspond to the categorization."
Either way, show me said papers and show how they not only correlate with such categorizations but show the causative relationship between the two. One of the first things you learn in science is that correlation is not causation.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "about the validity of the categorization of Europoid, Mongoloid, etc."
And I challenged you to quote some peer-reviewed studies which prove that such things exist. You never responded. You just dropped several names (like Sforza) and claimed they agree with you without ever linking to one of these supposed studies where they echo your beliefs. Of course, we both know this is because you're making stuff up and are incapable of showing where they agree with you.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "when have I indicated that I do not understand that clusters depends on how many loci you are using"
Because you kept holding up that one section about no two individuals from different pops being confused when you use several thousand loci as "proof" that there are discrete groups. Any geneticist knows people look less and less alike the more loci you use because all groups of humans are polyphyletic. The more loci you use the more you can isolate their specific lineage.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "You also misinterpreted what I meant by genetic-frequency"
No, you were just flat out wrong in what you meant by it. It NEVER, EVER refers to entire genomes, only to specific alleles. Your "interpretation" was nothing more than a pathetic attempt to redefine the word for your own convenience. You can't just redefine a word when its definition does not suit you.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - " what they were referring to was not only populations but what we referr to by races"
No, they were not. If so they would have said so because that's a specific concept. Europeans and white Americans are "geographically separated populations", would you consider them different "races"? Your "logic" is mind-numbingly stupid.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "Races are included in "geographically seperated populations"
They're also included in geographically close populations because some people who live close to each other are not considered to be part of the same "race" by racialists. For example: Filipinos of Chinese descent and Filipinos of Austronesian descent.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "attempting to get you to understand"
I understand your argument, the problem is that it's simply incorrect. It's a simplistic, scientifically inaccurate argument from a scientifically illiterate person (yourself) with a political agenda who is willing to willfully misinterpret things in a desperate attempt to make them part of his agenda.
If you can't understand that clusters are defined by which loci you're using and that population =/= "race" that's not my problem.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - " because clusters does not exist"
Clusters do indeed exist but clusters are not races. Two very different things. Learn to read and learn what a "continuum fallacy" is the next time you blurt out the term. Learn what a "gene frequency" is while you're at it, yet another thing I had to meticulously correct you on.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - A continuum fallacy means rejecting something because it's vague. No one has done that here except possibly you. I specifically said your argument is silly because by your argument every person is their own "race" since you use population as a proxy for "race" and your argument is that a "race" can be defined by using enough loci (though the authors never say "race", they said "population" which use as a proxy).
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "You attempt to rebute the "loci argument""
Your argument is based on a misunderstanding of what you read. The authors said populations (not "races") can be very specifically identified the more loci you use. If you use even more loci even more groups are needed. By your "logic" not only would each person be their own race many people would belong to several redundant races.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "I have numerous times given you well known names of people who has conducted several studies as sources for my claims"
You haven't listed a single quote from any of these sources that verified what you are claiming. You're simply engaging in name-dropping. On the other hand I've actually linked my sources.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - No, bad analogy. A loci is not a man-made tool to deal with a specific thing (such as a car).
"inter-continental genetic diversity"
The problem is in your own zeal to prove your ideology that one quote you keep repeating from the Witherspoon paper says "populations" not "races". Two very different things.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "How often is a pair of individuals from one population genetically more dissimilar than two individuals chosen from two different populations?"
It said "populations", not "races". The Nigerian and Cameroonian populations are two different populations and, according to this article, if you use enough loci two individuals from these two populations wouldn't be more similar. According to your logic that means they must be different "races".
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "The article that show that NEVER are two members of two different races more similar to eachother than to the members of their own race"
At no point did the paper say people are more similar to members of "their own race". Now you're adding stuff that isn't there.
A86 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrHerrIQ2
"What paper are you referring to?"
DOI: 10.1525/aa.1998.100.3.632 (the one A86 just posted)
"I've said that those categories, Negroid, Mongoloid, etc do correspond to genetic-clusters and cranial maps and thus do correspond to something real."
Yes, and I agree. I'm saying that A86's (which he or she claims to show otherwise) is a piece of shit and doesn't actually refute you or me.
TehClockwork 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - No such thing as a "continuum fallacy". Stop making shit up.
"loci argument is not irrelevant"
Look at my quote from Weiss & Fullerton below. When you look at particular loci everything seems to be comprised of them and everyone seems to be a member of these loci. If you look at enough loci everyone appears to be their own clinal group.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - Also, what I was talking about earlier is that if you look at certain loci EVERYTHING seems it fits into the grouping of loci that you're looking at. Read Weiss KM and Fullerton SM (2005) Racing around, getting nowhere. Evolutionary Anthropology 14: 165–169. If you look at only the genetic clusters for Icelandic people, Mayan and Maori people everyone on Earth looks like they're a composition of those clines.
A86 2 months ago
@MrHerrIQ2 - "when I said that the anthropological categories of negroid and mongoloid does correspond to their genetic data?"
What takes away from it is the fact there are no sources to back up this assertion and you haven't linked any. Link where any of those authors specifically claim this.
A86 2 months ago
@A86
Neil Risch's (e.g. Tang et al 2005) studies show you to be wrong, unless you want to claim cranial-morphology doesn't match up with self-identified race.
TehClockwork 2 months ago