O

I like biostatistics.

Oh wait ethos is appeal to creditability

My b

@agag **By the mid‐20th Century, the views of Clausen (1951) and Dobzhansky (1951) appear to be very similar. Dobzhansky, like Clausen, was focused on the evolution of widespread races in the formation of species. Dobzhansky defined races here as ‘Mendelian populations of a species, which differ in the frequencies of one or more genetic variants, gene alleles, or chromosomal structure’ (Dobzhansky, 1937: 138) and noted that ‘most races are ecotypes in the Turesson's sense’ (Dobzhansky, 1937: 147). For Dobzhansky, races were also stages of speciation: ‘the evidence for continuity between races and species is overwhelming’ (Dobzhansky, 1940: 314) and ‘a race becomes more and more of a “concrete entity” as the process goes on; what is essential about races is not their state of being but that of becoming. But when the separation of races is complete, we are dealing with races no longer, for what have emerged are separate species’ (Dobzhansky, 1951: 177). However, Clausen's (1951) views did differ from Dobzhansky's (1951) in that he felt many of the genecological categories beyond ecotype were of importance to understanding the process of speciation. This difference may reflect the fact that Dobzhansky saw speciation as the end of the process, whereas Clausen was concerned about reversibility after speciation through the breakdown of ecological reproductive isolation.**

Genetic diversity is important in nature.

Indeed it is

funny

joke

laugh

by fellow hhh umans

*laugh*

run laugh.exe

@Azrael Is a bomb

😂😂😂

😂😂😂

😂😂😂

human dialog

@agag if they deny the meta analysis of all dna variation data they are a meme

and no those aren't their backgrounds

Okay, letting the retard back in so he will stop messaging me

hover your cursor over their names

@Kierketard much older studies that pre-date Templeton and Lewontin's work, I'll look at this more later on

it says their backgrounds

<:dynoSuccess:314691591484866560> Removed Pepe#2564 from Cuckold

@Vril-Gesellschaft look up their names

they have more extensive profiles elsewhere

Your genetics don't really define your culture, no.

yes they do

fucking civnats I swear to God

you stupid obstacles

@LaCraig the only retard is the one who mutes people for simply questioning

Lol

fear not we will reform you

fuck off nigger enabler @UNITE THE RIGHT

h h holo ca ust i s is rrreal

@agag Predation does not negate value.**We are currently in the third wave of interest in studying stages in the evolution of species (Schluter, 2001; Wu, 2001; Mallet, 2008a, b; Hendry et al., 2009; Nosil et al., 2009; Smadja & Butlin, 2011). This renewal has been brought about by new ideas regarding the role of ecology in speciation (Schluter, 1996, 2009; Rundle et al., 2000; Lexer & Fay, 2005; Rundle & Nosil, 2005; Smadja & Butlin, 2011) and the widespread identification of partially reproductively isolated ecotypes and host races within species (Schluter, 2001; Dres & Mallet, 2002; Rundle & Nosil, 2005; Egan & Funk, 2009). A recent review by Nosil et al. (2009) laid out the third wave's argument for studying speciation as a process involving stages: ‘Notably, different species concepts can disagree on when speciation starts and when it is complete, while still sharing the characteristic of having stages of divergence’ (Nosil et al., 2009: 145–146). The above quote echoes the views of Dobzhansky (1937) from the second wave: ‘Species is a stage in a process, not a static unit. This difference is important, for it frees the definition of the logical difficulties inherent in any static one’ (Dobzhansky, 1937: 312). **

You said several very low IQ things

It was not for one question

like what?