It's done through a freezing cold water experiment

There is no biological race, it would seem, by the way this way of thinking.
This nationalism, as I put it, is not trying to say you and I are special, necessarily, of any worth by our very genetic composition. It is, however, a recognition of the different blood, races, and your own and seeing that there is more than just some RNA coding there, that there is more than the void of meaning blankness of electrical impulses we receive, at least as we are able to live in our experience.

I am aware of that

By the way i am perfectly comfortable of race as a biological concept

It is, at the natural conclusion of globalism, quite hedonistic and self centered, and therein we can find irreconcilable differences in world view.

With contrast to nationalism

Why is globalism hedonistic

And by the why

Hedonism is just maximizing pleasure

If you like utilitarianism, then hedonism is essentially hedonism on a grand scale.

GG @Revolutionaryarmchair, you just advanced to level 7!

Biological race doesn't exist. Race is a social construct. To argue otherwise is to deny biological anthropology and human genetics.

Forte58

I am really still stuck on the subject

It is materialistic and always centered on your wants without taking in to account the irreparable harms that can come from the ideals of globalism. In that video he dismisses the English blood because what is more immediate to his needs are his materialistic needs, which is understandable, but he inserts this internationalism without thinking for a second of any alternatives to the situation that wont ignore biological realities.

I can perfectly understand your opinion, but learning some more demographics and genetics I am getting exposed to the idea that genetics are real

@Revolutionaryarmchair its not about opinions

GG @Forte58, you just advanced to level 2!

let me post the facts

@Forte58

That would be consolidating

Thanks

If race were more than just a social construct, the genetics of race should show differences strongly associated with the definitions of race. The easiest distinctions come from things like skin color, hair, and eye shape which, yes, are genetically based, but the surface commonality is not enough to justify racial stereotypes. For those stereotypes to be true, the genetics of race have to extend deeper. However, modern genetic data has demonstrated the vast majority of variation (>85%) is found within populations, rather than between them (<15%).

http://www.pnas.org/content/94/9/4516.full
http://www2.webmatic.it/workO/s/113/pr-465-file_it-Current%20Genomics%204.pdf
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=tlSspaBLkhoC&oi=fnd&pg=PA19&ots=WJHCYRHu5I&sig=9pZlbgPeDdjHwGvE5eOTofn6hTM#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://beck2.med.harvard.edu/week4/lewontin_feldman_sm.pdf
https://www.academia.edu/5017557/Genetic_Basis_of_Human_Biodiversity_An_Update

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajpa.20900
"[B]oundaries in global variation are not abrupt and do not fit a strict view of the race concept; the number of races and the cutoffs used to define them are arbitrary. The race concept is at best a crude first-order approximation to the geographically structured phenotypic variation in the human species."
—biological anthropologist John Relethford in 2009

thank you very much

https://web.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/minorities.shtml
"DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans. While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another. There also is no genetic basis for divisions of human ethnicity."
—Human Genome Project

https://www.americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=2583
"With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them. In neighboring populations there is much overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions. Throughout history whenever different groups have come into contact, they have interbred. The continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species."
—American Anthropological Association

http://pages.ucsd.edu/~jmoore/courses/anth42web/CartmillRaceConcept1998.pdf
"If human races are geographically delimited populations characterized by regionally distinctive phenotypes that do not occur elsewhere in significant numbers, then races no longer exist and have probably not existed for centuries, if ever."
—Cartmill 1998
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/
Racialism relies upon the idea that large clusters of people who are homogeneous within the cluster and heterogeneous between clusters in terms of genetic similarity exist. However, this idea has no scientific basis and in fact there is evidence against it, as Witherspoon et al. concluded in their 2007 paper "Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations".

and I have a few more I dont want to spam too much

but this is scientific consensus for like 30+ years

send them on the dm

facts and statistics are always welcome

As an aside, consensus can get convoluted and should not be taken as the one word, regardless of the topic at hand. Thinkers throughout history have been persecuted though out history because they contradicted the prevailing concensus. There are factors at play which can influence any consensus.

good point

but what about your evidence

?

consensus on the idea perhaps but I think genetic statistics speak for themselves

@Ano , you need evidence to back up your claim

also, there are still race realist researchers, that get published. their publications are just riddled with holes and thus justly picked apart by academia

@Forte58 , I've seen some already

e.g the bell curve