alt hype is great

@Yek Imagine using a citation of someone's research

He gave other examples not just Alt-Hype, nice leftist obfuscation as per norm @Yek

Slippery slippery

@David "Gaben" Cameron To be brief, The literature alt hype cites actually doesn’t support his claims. This is how people like @TheUserNameofPeace rationalizes his points.

@Yek Example please

@Yek Naked claim

What specific instance would be the strongest to support your argument?

@Yek you definitely can directly compare genetic variation in chimps and in humans, we can directly compare 99% of the two genomes. and there's more genetic variation within chimps and within humans than between them.

so clearly it means nothing as far as justifying whether or not to make a distinction between different races of people

@David "Gaben" Cameron read my counter to @TheUserNameofPeace , because he basically is making his arguement off the alt hype

And what part of it doesn't support his arguments? The Abstract, the data, or the conclusions?

I asked for a specific instance, I want to see your argument, not piece it together from all the way up there

more variation within than between just doesnt preclude the kinds of typological differences that would justify a racial categorization

@Yek His take on this study is objectively correct.
http://www.amerika.org/politics/subspecies-and-classification/

@David "Gaben" Cameron you definitely can directly compare genetic variation in chimps and in humans, we can directly compare 99% of the two genomes. and there's more genetic variation within chimps and within humans than between them.

Wait...what? Are you saying that theres more genetic variation between two different species than a population within a species?

@SMIÞAZ https://ethnicelebs.com/sacha-baron-cohen

If someone else states a~~~n accurate~~~ fact. You verify that fact and restate it. You are not basing your argument on their initial statement of the fact. But rather the fact itself

Alright, define genetic variation--as what you exactly are referencing by that and how it would tie in to whether racial categories are justified

@Trommm still a good meme to make fun of @Hexrow, also known as Fagrow, the 56%er NEET who likes to sit on discord allday, and gets bullied by someone younger than him online kek

are we talking about the number of genetic deviations strictly, as by quantity alone?

@David "Gaben" Cameron Basically, genetic variation is the difference in dna between individuals or populations.

So much appeal to authority itt

so its quantity of genetic differences?

Or the sum quantity?

there are different ways of measuring genetic variation. heterozygosity is a popular one. it's the probability that two random individuals in a population will differ in a gene at a random gene location

1. Divided into the observable and historically consistent groups we know as races, humans have a fixation rate higher than many other species which we recognize as containing sub-species.

2. We don't need to rely on fixation rates to establish or validate sub-species. This has been done by observable differences in features, environments, and behaviors.

On both counts, humans are properly divided into sub-species, aka races.

Someone's been listening to Vox Day.

Who is vox day

@JFGariepy hi

Hello mr jfg

Straighten him out , JF

bring back blood sports

Sad woman

14.6k tweets

Blood sports are not intellectually stimulating

yek vs jfg on the morning kumite

lets do it

@fuguer i know

JFs guest tonight was great