it exists

"maybe if I say this thing 5 times people will believe it the 5th time"

'it exists' but colour is the division of this cie chromatography chart.

so how would you objectively divide it

It is tho @DA GOMMIE JOO color is light

into groups

fuck you nigger, what's different is how people categorize it
people still see the same fucking colors

'colour' isn't light

Lmao yes it is

Yes it is

colour is a perception of light but isn't in itself light

whats going on in here lads

our eyes not being real because mirrors aren't real

that's what

color is human visual perception

It's a type of light 'visible light'

naming red red or red green matters not

@Gustavus the Thiccus how do you define color
if color is light, then is radio a color?

Commies trying to say colour is a social construc @Deleted User

but i'm talking about how they are physically divided

yes a radio is color

that's the social construct

'radio waves' don't have colour because we can't perceive that

Just because there was the fat guy wearing a red Beret

It can be if you can see it

No radio waves are light @DA GOMMIE JOO

also

radio waves =/= radio

light is misleading electromagnetic emission

@Gustavus the Thiccus so where on the spectrum of light is color?

Light has no color. There is a link between light of a certain frequency and the perception of color. But color exists exclusively in the brain and light exists exclusively outside the brain.

^

By the way not all races have a continuum like colors do

What does that have to do with grouping colours

okay here we go
mark off where one color ends and another begins here

they do, they have continuous gene flow. y haplogroups and K bucket grouping clusters show that

Not all

Like africans and non africans

Guys should I join a new party to be not super mega gay?

They have very recent mixing but that relationship itself is highly bimodal

you're now basing off the assumption that Africans are a consistent genetic cluster.

which is unfounded

Africans and non africans are

@DA GOMMIE JOO you'd need an infinite amount of dots lmao

"africans are one genetic group lol"
absolute state of the right

that's like saying mark off all the numbers

you have to prove that unfounded assumption that there is objective evidence that show they are a consitent genetic clustering

@Adoring Fan so how do you define colors then

what separates one from another

This is what a pca is like

One looks diffent from another

When you group races

The property possessed by an object of producing different sensations on the eye as a result of the way it reflects or emits light.

You can easily go in further and find places to draw more lines

@Adoring Fan what makes them look different?

and this is Y haplogroups

Oof

different eyes lmao

Like thie

This

Shit oops

so the only reason we can tell red from blue is different eyes?

Ethnostates are supreme

You can go deeper and deeper

it is the reason dogs dont see what we see

To the individual if you wanted

And make very clear distinctions between groups

but just because we cant see something, does not mean it isnt real

no not really

You can and self identified race matches with genetic race anyways

i cant see my neighbour

he doesnt exist

again

To an extreme accuracy

self identified race shows 'ancestry'

but that doesn't show consitent genetic clustering

@Adoring Fan You cannot see your penis but according to your mother it's real.

to define an 'entire race' by the continent

Based

high intellectualism

oof

in fact medicine has realised this problem that race is at best a crude approximation of ancestry and has gone more into indepth highly specialized specific genetic testing

Race is not a biological category

peace peace peace

where did you go

@🌼Kalina🌹🌸🌹Zay🌹🌸🌹Scott🌼 whats the source for that color grouping pic btw

in fact we could produce any number of genetic cluster for any number of political reasons

I'm homeless

Will Communism help me?

Fegget

Is "White" meant to be a racial group that has a basis in biology? If so, why is it defined as "Europe"?

Okay but with traditionally recognized races we still get a pretty good amount of genetic variation covered

Just a question for my nazi friends

@Sarge if you're willing to work

what do you define as define

you make me work anyways

what are definitions

you send me to gulag

there;s another graph it's based off

http://www.scs.illinois.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf

at least i get my monthly slice of bread

@🌼Kalina🌹🌸🌹Zay🌹🌸🌹Scott🌼 color grouping by culture pic source. go

Whats the point of that

@Sarge gulag will strengthen you and make you useful
toughen up

at least im not fascist

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/298/5602/2381.full

not sure if its already been argued but what about clusters and self identification

This isnt hard

I also stepped down from Party Leader

Easily definable

@svpreme you do know who actually did that right?

@Sarge gg

Luigi Luca Cavali Sforza

Planned to leave but I like to sit and watch debates

Okay and what

I know he did that

literally what he wrote in his book about it

I am @Sarge

Stephen Harper

@svpreme what about Middle-Easterners, along with North Africans and some Indians they're are all classified along with Europeans under the label of the Caucasian Race, thereby assigning them as one and the same in terms of race under that system.

the only good canadian prime minister

so you're quoting the source of luigi luca cavalii sforza and even he agrees races don't exist scientifically 😆

We dont need to include them

Log in to view full text

ecks dee

I already showed a genetic distance chart, and i would draw the line at greeks and iranians

What do you do about that?

pay $50 for the proof, goys

btw abolish money

Lol

Ok

So it's the "European" race now?

Luigi Luca Sforza explains literally right there his groupings don't legitimize any 'racial' ideology and they're limited in the realm of understanding the ancestry of the human race.

"hey guize da jooz amirite"

he literally pioneered genetic distance charting

you've deviated from your principles now

@🌼Kalina🌹🌸🌹Zay🌹🌸🌹Scott🌼 he writes about it

doesnt prove it

your Race-O-State is now actually not a biologically, racially grounded state at all, rather an arbitrarily geographic

With some very blurry boundries

because you don't need to 'disprove' race you need to 'prove' it and nothing there he wrote about in his 1994 book even legitimizes racial theories.

@When Things Aren't Right Go Left tell that to the russians who hate chechens

@Adoring Fan Ok

what the fuck

You're really just excluding along cultural lines, not truly "racial" ones.

At this point

again you're starting from the assumption that race is a real thing but in the scientific world we start from no assumptions and that it must be proven.

culture yes

checnya is a cultural boundary, not a genetic one

clearly the chechens only have different culture

and biologically have no differences

look at the caucasus region in general

this is a motte and bailey argument

it's all cultural differences

disagreeing that races exist doesn't mean that genetic variation doesn't exist i.e in the case Y haplogroups

@Adoring Fan Guess who's actually so close to the Greeks and Tuscans ( Fabled sources of "White" civilization ) to the point of almost overlapping with the Greeks moreso than almost any other European?

and if you really want a racial mindfuck
look at the difference between north and south ossetia

this is like when the fash acted me on colour. Disagreeing objective categorizations of colours exist doesn't mean disagreeing that electromagnetic emission spectrums exist or chemical compounds that absorb certain wavelengths of electromagnetic emission exist

it's like they only read what they want to in our posts

The answer is Ashkenazi Jews

and let me make that clear PIGMENTS have no colour they have atoms and molecular structurewhich absorb and reflect specific WAVELENGHTS of electromagnetic emission.

"I like vanilla ice cream"
"oh, so you hate every other flavor?"

If you accept Greeks you have to accept Jews as well

^

what about genetic cluster and self identified race

didn't scott already spend like 10 minutes on that?

I wasnt here probably

genetic clustering and self identified race is due to ancestry but doesn't prove that races exist as it starts from the assumption races can be neatly genetically clustered in the first place

genetic clusters don't prove race

genetic clustering would have to show nice discrete groupings and not the potential for all levels of taxonomic examination from individuals to large continental groups to be correct for race theory to be coherent.

if it does show that it then puts the question on the examiner if they choose one analysis what exterior reasons they have for this. In the field of medicine it can help as a crude approximation but they've realized that's not entirely helpful anymore so are moving towards specific genetic testing for individuals. Hence all the advertisments for 23 and me and all those genetic testing programs, companies want your genetic data to make more money lol.

I'm not quite getting what youre saying here.

if all the answers to 'how many races there are' are correct then picking one answer over another shows some bias the spectator has instead of strictly scientific inquiry.

genetic testing may point to possible diseases, which may be found useful for insurance companies is what Im thinking

@Mr.AnalTwister4000 If we're going for genetic cohesion, why are Greece and Sardinia included but not others? Why eject Ashkenazi and Sephardi Jews instead of Russia and Finland?

I never understood that

races have always been inconsistent and nothing based in science the biggest blow is that in other socities they don't even have the same 'racial' groupings.

Jews can be white they will still be deported tho

I thought the argument surrounds regarding wether race is real and not a definitive amount of races. rather they ask the person tested what race they identify with and then procede to tell a computer to group the genetic clusters into x amount of groups

It seems to me like you're deciding more with a "Just so" distinction than along racial lines

but if races were real and not just humans trying to find patterns in data to support their biases

then they would be clear and discrete

picture unrelated

ethnicity has what to do with race again?

did he ever say anything to that effect?

i never brought ethnicity into this i just pointed to other cultures disagreeing on racial categorization

@DA GOMMIE JOO

>main ethnic groups

but how do these ethnic groupings arise?

if you looked further down

they're racially motivated

>when you read the title and then ignore everything else

he brought up something titled ethnicity which was pretty irrelevant. I do not know enough about brazil to know regarding what lines they consider races or in general.

but think about this, in a world where there are international organizations that standardize the production of tea for research wouldn't they standardize the racial groupings across borders for scientific research?

>when the other guy cites a diagram disproving you so you focus on the title of the diagram

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3103

but it didnt disprove me lmao

if racial groupings are objectively scientific then why isn't there an international standard in the science community for what racial groupings there are 😆

kek

Because thats not politically correct

BecAusE ThAt'S Not POlITcAlLY cOrRECt

but the medical benefits behind it would be vast

Muh scientific authorities isnt an argument

I thought we were arguing wether race exist not where the specific line goes between races and how many there exist

"the scientific community censors things based on whether they're PC or not"
>completely misunderstands how science works

but races are literally the categorizations of human genetic variation

if there is no clear specific line than there is no true 'objective' grouping of races it's a pointless and futile endeavor.

it suggests our current understanding of race is motivated by something else other than science

Because those lines arent officially drawn

'because they aren't officially drawn'
because there's no scientific reason to do so

We can still make distinctions between groups

which are unscientific

so are useless and pointless

and politically motivated

so why can't anyone agree on where the lines even are if they exist

and social constructions

Muh scientific authorities

It doesnt matter that its socially constructed

it does

social constructs by definition do not exist

because it throws a lot of fascist theory out the window if races aren't things that are truly objective

it's like

feels

over facts

Categories dont exist unless humans make them

which i thought the right-wing was against

Its a retarded point

perhaps in origin, but as I have pointed to genetic clustering compared to self identification. its quite the jump to say because we dont have the specific line for it that race doesnt exist? the reason we do this top-down approach with testing is because we are not able yet to do the bottom up by pointing to specific genes.

so I guess the four fundamental forces didn't exist until humans discovered them
👏

genetic gene clustering comes from genetic samples bottom up 🤔

I mean as in pointing to specific genes.

"pointing at specific genes" this falls into the issue that there is more variation with individuals in the genetic cluster than between genetic clusters overall

but i guess

MUH SCIENTIFIC AUTHORITIES

guess we should just stop all science because they're just appeal to authority.

"the scientific community has said that race exists"
"no they haven't"
"wtf stop appealing to authority"

^this is a problem we have to address too

either you disagree with all scientific research because it's all an appeal to authority which means even articles that support your 'race' theory cannot be used

the destiny of humanity is black

@Deleted User yeet

or you agree with scientific research and have to individually criticize each study.

Conservatives do you want this retard leading the party?