Neither is ethnic genocide.

The Russians did lots of that.

"Those dirty Fascists call you names and have no arguments!"

"You dipshits!"

And you say ethnic genocide is as well.

Also insulting.

That is a joke right...

Last time I checked there was no restrictions on who can be genocided.

It's really not.

It's observable taconomy.

taxonomy*

Prove it?

Physically look at the different between Whites and Ethnic Armenians.

Whites and ethnic bantu.

Whites and ethnic malayans.

@Deleted User Tell that to the scientists who classify other species by the smallest detail.

Sub-species can be very similiar.

And even procreate together.

So sub-species of sub-species.

I never said humans were simply.

simple*

No true.

No, because that's "waycis"

Kek

To call whites and blacks different species entirely is a huge stretch.

The academics have their own motives and biases towards their research. When you have a community that generally agrees on one thing, going against them is an ultimate death sentence for your career.

You call the Fascist party a larping shitshow, and yet, here you communists are, acting like children in a debate.

```The academics have their own motives and biases towards their research. When you have a community that generally agrees on one thing, going against them is an ultimate death sentence for your career.```

Or because of their personal bias and expectation.

You cannot say that Science is 100% accurate without some bias added.

@Deleted User It was until someone actually went against the grain and said it wasn't.

Do you have sources for that?

Like an actual link?

I can observe on some trusted site?

@Deleted User Stop sperging you child.

You're annoying, and this is a debate room.

Take your jokes elsewhere.

I literally just joined, and all you've done is accuse me of things I haven't done, and then proceeded to do that shit yourself.

Let me fucking examine the data first.

Yeah?

So I can actually talk about it.

I don't argue from ignorance.

I'm actually a monarchist.

The actual party is too small.

Monarchists are not just CK2 larpers.

Those there are plenty of those.

@🌼Kalina🌹🌸🌹Zay🌹🌸🌹Scott🌼 Your data just proves what I'm saying. What those bars represent is the deviation from or away a specific group of genetic clusters. So, indeed, there are large genetic differences betweent he analyzed African and American populations.

There are 6 distinct K groups there.

At least colored.

It shows there are thousands of samples, which are all divided in to colored K groups. Those colored K groups represent a genetic cluster. As you can see, each region has a different cluster, as the Eastern Asiatic is different from the Southern African regions.

That is your data.

There are 6 colors, you can deduce the differences from all 5 of the bars presented.

Sure.

So you only prove my point, and your evidence does little to back up your claim.

But according to another they're not.

4/5 shows deviation.

So why'd you use that as evidence if it didn't help you?

As you stated, it doesn't do anything.

So this, again, doesn't help you.

It doesn't take much genetic deviation to be classified as different subspecies of a subspecies.

"Similiar" is not the same.

No.

There is no "basically."

Chose one.

But you can't just look at one.

As you said, you can't cherry pick.

Nope.

I'm looking at all 5.

I see deviation in every single one.

Then why'd you use that as some kind of proof for your argument?

Because now it's just semantics.

Is scientific data not influence by political movements either?

Can you say that one study from a very outspokenly liberal college is enough?

Do you not agree this is something that, bipartisanly, needs to be look upon?

Because there is always bias in data.

The specifics of the study in regards to human migration, and they implimented an algorithm to help them, the specifics of which are not mentioned.

It says what it does, but it's not very specific.

Unfortunately, when you look into such a complicated topic, there are always holes and posibilities for error in your study.

They also don't give a percent possible error for their data.

You're ignoring me.

They don't give a percent error for their data, nor do they give the specifics for the algorithm they use to get the data.

_That is a problem_

As you can imagine.

"Log in to view full text"

Was that a sample of the study you provided?

Not the whole one?

Because I'm pretty sure that study you gave me was 5 fucking pages.

@leprechaun If you don't want the Fascies to win, then get more members in your part or vote for the opposition, at least the Fascist party is generally anti-capitalistic.

The conservatives though...

"For as little as 50$"

No.

And you continue to ignore me.

We're done here.

Have a good day.

@Deleted User I don't want to get worked up by someone who continuously ignores my points about the integrity of his sources.

I'm sorry.

I'm sure you're much more reasonable MLDK.

Are the communists seriously voting conservative?

Does their hate of Fascism exceed their hate for capitalism?

Let it be known what economic system caused the sufferings of the proleteriat.

Let it be known who is the common enemy of country and worker.