i suppose so

that information is over a decade old.

how about while and asian ?

I actually have a cousin who was born with a rather life threatening birth defect on his neck. He was mixed. White mother, black father. They operated on him, but, he also ended up with a mild form of Autism known as Aspergers.

a decade is not a very long time

Plus, I am mixed race and I have no "identity issues"

So does the information change just because it's old?

white and asian mixes are way too glorified in media

Well, that depends on the information, really.

I hate it

^^

no but there are discoveries in medicine all the time

And this is from a period of time with much less racial tension in the US

a lot of those sources in that paper

guess what

over 20 years old

why don't you post something that's more recent instead?

I wish there was more representation of mixed couples and children who neither are part white

information changes and we learn more about ourselves as time passes

welcome to reality

I can't because it's racist to study race

that's a very broad statement

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3146070/Mixed-race-relationships-making-taller-smarter-Children-born-genetically-diverse-parents-intelligent-ancestors.html

as are your views, vik

last time i checked, if you drop an apple it still hits the ground

let me know how that's relevant

take your time

I learned recently that I don't have a lazy eye. But a rare condition called HyperEso Deviation. I went to the eye doctor last year, and heard nothing of the sort. But after a year and a half or so, they discovered this new condition, apparently.

the difference being is that my views apply to a broad set of things, wheras yours do not. information chagnes, not very often, but it may. God does not.

Things are always changing. That's a fact. If enough people race-mix, the genes will eventually evolve to handle that.

if you have you ever tried to write a research paper on anything or know anything about how medical journal articles are publishes you'll know that old information

just like you have, right?

@Spirit so a government study isn't a valid source, but Dailymail is?

ESPECIALLY information that is 20+ years old at this point

KEK

is outdated

I gotta give that to Spad tbh

Good one

I just was trying to find multiple articles to prove my point

depends on what kind of information

the article is more than likely a summary of a published journal