<:REEEE:640033860067000350>

the groups are already chosen

lol, pretending we don't have groups is silly

what does that even mean 'justify pre-existing categories'

you are already using them..

I am addicted

they don't need to be 'justified'

they emerged naturally

if they weren't valid, you couldn't be

they are confirmed as being distinct in significant ways by further study, but it was already something that everybody knew

we're talking about a difference, blond and black hair are not the same

>shitting up general

what else is going on in general

you can group it as you want, and we already ahve groups

right now

lol

easily recognizeable

clearly there are groups, and clearly there are genetic differences between them

what more do you want

@Nerthulas categories not substantiated in the studies. for example, comparing human fst to the fst of different subspecies like wolves, zebras, buffalo, etc.

"you can't group them" clearly we can

what about it?

all they're saying is that ***if*** fst were to be accepted as a standard for the presence of subspecies classification, then humans would meet that standard

its not a complicated argument

like 80% of the genes are for our brains, think about that

just think abou tit

if we can sperate by the exterior

"clearly there are groups, and clearly there are genetic differences between them"

Science isnt intuitive. Not saying there isnt genetic variation between populations, but the markers that are "easily recognizable" are actually adaptation phenotypical traits that account for little of the genetic variation between humans.

so what?

lmao

I JUST SAID THE OPPOSITE

it's 80% in the brain

you donkey

actually you're saying the same thing

race denial is denial of evolution

we sperate races by FAR less in other speices

yes, that's true

FAR less

the thing with these people

is they are confused by the word race

they think it's something magical