Cool we agree.

I miss read what yo said earlier.

i dont think dyslexia is your only mental issue if your only way to define something you care so much about is to repeate over an over the same nondefintion as "races are just a term for the races of human populations"

how could you misread "define what a race is"?

nigga ive defined what a race is more than you have today

No I miss read synonym for symptom.

oh

well then give me a definition without synonyms

I made a mistake.

its fine, im patient

I think race is just the subspeciation of human populations.

do you know what that means? if you do then say it becuase what THAT means is the actual definition of race not "just the subspeciation of human populations"

Yes it just means that different populations were separated for a long time and evolved in different environments.

what emperical values is evolution messured by for human populations in different environments?

doesent seem practical

they should learn about the bottle gourd

Human populations migrated from Africa and lived in sperate environments for thousands of years and they evolued be able to live in different environments (Europe is different to Africa for example).

aussie thats not an answer to my question

What exactly are you looking for?

the answer to my question, i was very exact with it

Holy fuck. Go get a PM, you two. THis is shitposting.

how is evolution of humans within the last 100k years messured?

you must be new here zeta

The differences are enough to show the evoulation.

what are the differences?

In IQ, bone structure, brain size, ect.

you mean averages correct? and you messuring phenotypical and psychological traits there. are those the only traits?

There are physical differences to.

phenotype is a scientific term for physical traits

My bad.

@Arch-Fiend I sure am. New enough to know that y'all are dumb.

we do this shit all the time

I noticed.

anyway aussie if phenotypical differences define race, and psychological differences define race, on averages within populations then couldent i just take any population on earth, then messure its phenotypical differences against those of any other group and extrapolate race from them? and if not why?

I know there are phenotypical differences but phenotype isn't race it tends to be more ethnic than racial.

ethnicity is defined as the following An ethnic group, or an ethnicity, is a category of people who identify with each other based on similarities such as common ancestry, language, history, society, culture or nation.[1][2] Ethnicity is usually an inherited status based on the society in which one lives. Membership of an ethnic group tends to be defined by a shared cultural heritage, ancestry, origin myth, history, homeland, language or dialect, symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, art, and physical appearance.

sounds a shit ton like race dont it?

you realize that bone shape and brain size are phenotypical and thats how you were defining race earlier right?

I mean biologicaly speaking. For example the differant European phenotypes are mostly on ethnic lines.

no they arnt, ethnicity isint scientific

its not biologic

I gess we will have to disagree.

nigga this is how things are actually defined

if you dont like it maybe YOUR not a race realist

facts dont care about your feelings

I am a race realist which is why I think ethnicity is different to race.

what would you call a race realist thats only that because its "cool". like trans-trender

ethnicity isint a scientific definition

its a social construct

Ok then phenotypes are not races if you profer.

ethnicity is as scientific as patrearchy

nigga phenotypes ARE races

thats what im trying to tell you

ethnicity is just how people define themselves

its like religion

Humans are a patriarchal species.

*faceplam*

Can you give me some evidence to prove what you are saying.

this is reminding me of when i was in an ancap server

think once in a while aussie, sometimes its better than feeling like you know everything

ill leave you with that

So you claim ethnicity isn't biological and race is based on phenotypes not speciation and don't provide any evidce to back up those claims so why shouuld I believe what yo are saying?

I don't claim to know everything your making a claim, why won't you prove it if you are right?

"the fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition."

no where in there does it say biological. you are making the extraordinary claim here.

speciation is an observation of phenotypical and behavural traits that eventually lead to 2 creatures no longer genetically able to breed with eachother

often they are unable to breed with eachother long long before they are geneticly unable to

I want a paper or something that proves what you are saying.

Come on give me something.

well aussie the only way we know the different species of the dinosaurs are looking at their physical differences

that and when they show up in different layers of rock

Not about the differences in species I want proof for what you are saying about race and ethnicity.

but even then we KNOW they are different species when they are physicaly different to an extent weve hypothosized they are likely no longer breeding

Here is something yo could take a look at to prove what I'm saying. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqLLYlJt0io&t=2s

"Race refers to a person's physical characteristics, such as bone structure and skin, hair, or eye color. Ethnicity, however, refers to cultural factors, including nationality, regional culture, ancestry, and language."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_group#Terminology

Thank you.

personally i would also cover things that fall under ethnicity into race because cultural factors which are predicated on psychological and behavural tendences effect isolational tendences in large groups of people

if race is to be used as subspecies or beed

breed*

the fact it is not biological is simple. Two Germans can move to America. They can have a kid in America, their child would not be a different race, however his ethnicity could easily be American depending on how his parents raised him should he later move to Germany.

the american race will eventually evolve

it will most likely be tan, and send race realist into a tizzy.

it will, not because of race mixing though

more likely redish skinned

sunburn is not a race

red skin isint sunburn

although if it was, it would highly prone to melanoma

To bad race mixing will just make you guys mutts. https://mic.com/articles/87359/national-geographic-determined-what-americans-will-look-like-in-2050-and-it-s-beautiful#.nDYsCTfyT

thooough technology may also shape the american race evolution

mutts usually live longer and are less prone to disease.

most european races are mutts

in fact, they are usually healthier all around.

around the edges atleast

something about inbreeding not being good and thats the only way to keep something "pure

@Grenade123 Sorry but that isn't true.

im sorry you dont think its true but youve already shown the african mixing. the middle eastern mixing is even more drastic, there is even some far eastern mixing in finland

Most human populations have enough people to prevent inbreeding so inbreeding isn't a problem.

and i mean middle eastern mixing before this last century too

greeks are VERY different than germanic peoples

theyve been fighting and fucking with anitolia and egypt for thousands of years

why do racists always link to poorly labeled charts?

why cant racists actually argue?

or know what a race is

who the fuck wrote this formal?

(1/(mixed))/(1/(not mixed))

that is so pointless, fucking simplify

if thats mathmatic its autistic af

[1-race]/[1-mixed] ffs.

a mixed race will eventually be its own race at some point too

that is why there is an other column

evolution doesent stop

given time any group of people is a group of people. thats why calling african americans "african" isint really a scientificly honest catigorization

it defines some of their origins, ignoring other origins

wait....

so, that chart aussie linked, is single race / mixed race

which means a number > 1 means single race is more

so, for whites vs mixed:
the only < 1 number is gun easily available.

although, its [1 - rate for one race] / [1 - rate for mixed race]

or is that just for home interviews

fucking hell this is missing some much context

its literally just a chart with random numbers and declared to support not race mixing

to be honest i didint even look at those

fuck, is this what they classify as valid citation in aussie schooling? shit, and i though the US system was failing.

SJWs must have taken over there to classify shit this removed from context as valid

if a picture is just a bunch of words someone needs to tell me WHY i need to spend my time looking at it

i'm looking at the chart

which really is nothing more than a punch of numbers

oh im not blaming anyone for doing so. just explaining why im not

since [1 - rate for one race] / [1 - rate for mixed race] was specified just for the home interview

i don't know what these numbers mean

seriously, looking up odds ratio to try and get all the context explains to me that they use (a/b) / (c/d) rather than (a*d)/(b*c) which is much easier

this is why i hated statistics

bunch of people trying to sound smart when really they just liked things being needlessly complicated

at some point ill just be able to ignore aussie franticly posting billions of images of bullshit without any context or reason for it without actually a legitament care if anyone actually looks at them (and he should know that no ones going to look at all that bullshit if he spams 40 pages of it at once) and then i wont have to waste my time anymore

well this is interesting, one is more likely to skip school more yet less like to repeat a grade....

ive noticed this is a trend for white nationalists

repeating a grade?

posting tons of images of shit they saw on 4chan reguardless of if anyone will talk to them about it or not and with complete indecency consitering they are always screen grabs of huge walls of text in great succession

there should be an internet rule against that

spamming is already an internet rule, but spamming images of textblocks is gay as fuck

"[a study] that assessed substance use and violent behaviors among 2,082 students in Seattle public middle schools"

what fucking middle schools needed that study? Seattle, get your drug addicted violent preteens under control

xD seattle is pretty fine from what i hear

though evergreen is there

"its worth noting anecdotally that..."

that anecdotes are not science? seriously.

so i supose that might be a problem

aah, well that study was in 2006 so

i guess we found out where all t he violent and drug addicted middle schoolers ended up from that study.

technically all science is anecdotal, just peer reveiwed

emperical evidence requires observation

its not anecdotal if you can replicate the test. If you are citing anecdotal evidence, it means YOU can't replicate the test.

unless were using 2nd hand sources in our scientific papers in which case fuck that shit

"Self-Identification of Race/Ethnicity, Race/ethnicity is a social construct and thus can be imprecise and unstable"

oops, guess that invalidates the study according to him. this is the Seattle one https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3292211/

they were asking 13yos "In the past year, how often did you use crack or cocaine?"

oh, and this is all survey data

13yo, answer these questions

and we are citing this for how adults do?

personally i woudlent go through the effert of arguing different case studys with someone about a topic as broad as race. if we cant even argue the spirit of the topic then theres no hope in finding ground on the nuances

i'm reading this because its funny as fuck

sure

this is what happens when you let scientists to their thing, they think asking kids these questions is not odd

there needs to be white nationalists rekt compolation videos

all this data is from like 1990s for a study done in 2006

made by people who actually know what rekt means mind you

oh hey, this is the table he was referencing

neat

"The hypothesis that a strong sense of ethnic identity is likely to decrease the probability of problem behaviors was supported for crack or cocaine initiation and the frequencies of substance use and violence. "....in 13 yos

13 yo smoking crack.

gotta add that to "This is America"

admitedly i knew alcoholics in middleschool

fucking hell

crack is a bit out there though

i guess i got lucky going to a small school in the middle of the mountains

in extreme ghettos i can imagine it, but there arnt any of those in washington

i went to a small school in the middle of the forest

interesting

all i remember in middle school was them trying to ban dodge ball.

which we all rebelled against because fuck pussy parents

i come from the state that a small group of people were so imbred they turned blue

ummm wut

sure that was inbreeding and not meth cooking?

not that those are not often found together

" Last, the respondents were mainly from one geographical location; thus, we advise readers to use caution in generalizing the findings to youths in other geographic regions."

oops

https://owlcation.com/humanities/Blue-People-in-Kentucky-A-True-Story-of-a-Family-with-Blue-Skin

oh right, those people

natsocs are gay as fuck

Well lads all I see is you bitching that you can't argue against my points so you just retreat into race denial you neo lysenkoists.

@Deleted User na I just think your childish

I think someone who believes something without evidence and then claims that they are an empiricist is stupid.

I have seen your point, but sadly you forgot a key point, we can change and become better. to reduce ourselves be dividing into bullshit groups is stupid

Dividing into groups is a survival tactic, because it's harder to distory a group than an individual, what do you think divide and conquer means?

what... dude. that is the worst understanding of divide and conquer I have ever heard?

I see it in the modern context as (((them))) dividing a group into atomized individuals.

yes, but your point was "Dividing into groups is a survival tactic" I.E it is good to divide into groups for safety aka fracturing the whole, than you said"because it's harder to *destroy* a group" aka the whole "than an individual"aka a group, which is wrong in the context of divide and conquer because its whole point is to divide a whole into groups because they are easier to destroy

Dude, dont call people retarded just because they dont see how you do Aussie

I think his point is that if the only thing holding a group together is a common look, then the group isnt strong to begin with.

You need something stronger than skin color or blood.

Yes My point is that (((they))) have devided white people in their own countires against each other with communism, feminism, multiracialism, multiculturalism and libertarianism.

haha

And I think its just assholes in general that happen to be mostly jewish

The people behind Libertarinism.

aa @GingaBomber you guys and the hatred for arbitrary groups

So its jewish = bad then?

Personal freedom is a jewish construct so its horrible

Marx and Engels were both Jews.

So whats the problem here?

@Deleted User they were human

You gonna list down a list of jewish inventions and not use them then?

People behild multiracialism.

People behind feminism.

Look man, I usually like discussing with you, but until you get to the point, I cant understand you

You always do this, you start spamming your "facts". Like you do have a statement, but what does it contribute?

I dont think like you do.

You say jews make something, what does that make it then?

My point is that Jews are a foreign group which distorys host couuntires for their benefit.

What I post is to prove what I'm saying.

You could have started with that instead

Of just spamming shit like that, most people would have shut off by then

ANd you have achieved nothing

would have

If someone makes a claim they shold back it up which is what I was doing.

you haven't made a claim

No, you make a claim or a statement

THEN you put up the evidence

My clam was "that (((they))) have devided white people in their own countires against each other with communism, feminism, multiracialism, multiculturalism and libertarianism." Which I proved.

haha no

Okay, lets start on that then

You only proved that they created them, not that they did it cause they were jewish

Or their reasons besides the statement of one person

@GingaBomber what? you are giving up way too much saying that

Well should I have put quotes?

first that white people are divided by a group

Everyones divided up by groups irespective of race

yeah but not by someone

I think that they created these destructive movement to distory the west as they have admited. MaxHorheimer has admited to the fact that they want to distory society.

the illuminate aren't fucking real man

Technically the machinations of a group do create these divides, ourselves or people included

Like for example, govt institutions define which parties we join

Unless you mean it happen against our wills then well, thats true as well.

I'm not claiming the Illuminati are real I'm pointing out what (((they))) have done.

Dude, its Subverse, just say jews man

@Deleted User it "We" have done not they you silly man, stop acting like you are separate from humanity

Also, whats with them and baggy eyes actually

I only just notice