/fa/ - Fashion

>>10479131
get the hair of that one ginger black singer

Your dada got cuck'd

>>10479161
who is that lol

>>10479131
Time to dread that shit up, fam

>>10479203
dont i need really long hair for that?

>>10479131
Post rest of face and stuff. If you truly are a purely white man with a full on afro it's a medical phenomenon.

get dreads and dye them black

>>10479131
Have you tried a hair straightener? Or really strong gel?

>>10479221
Not really, it will get longer over time, you have enough hair for it and you could be one of the 5 white guys in the entire world with nice looking dreads

Dye skin black

>>10479231

>>10479231
fine, here

>>10479234
no idea how dreading works really,i also doubt that i can find someone to do it.Lets say i did it,can i get rid of it quickly if i dont like it? Like wash it up and fix etc

>>10479233
it looks terrible when i comb it so straightener would look awful,every bit of hair is visible so fucking bright.

>>10479322
Well your skull, ear and face shape isn't Germanic (Germanics have vertical, very tall foreheads, hard features and long, rectangular faces), and that looks more like a jew-fro than an afro, so there might be some natural source to it rather than a rare mutation.

Anyway I'd recommend using a good shampoo/conditioner to make it more wavy/the curls bigger (so "straighten" it), moisturise with oil, and see if you could pull off something like that meme picture that keeps getting posted in every hair thread...

>>10479131
are you me

try rounding your hair it a sphere

if you REALLY wanted to you could try straining your hair a bit just to mess around

conditioner is important, coco butter should be good

>>10479231
we're all mixed fam

noone is a single anything

>>10479381
>Well your skull, ear and face shape isn't Germanic (Germanics have vertical, very tall foreheads, hard features and long, rectangular faces)
No. They don't all look like that. That's the stereotype and not every ''germanic'' man looks like the one you posted. You're delusional. Also, white =/= ''germanic''

>>10479421
>There are people who believe this

Maybe in the mongrelised state of america :^)

>>10479431
>They don't look like that

The Nordic (Scandinavian) Germanics do, but more tutonic germanics like English and Germans have broader, less angular features

>>10479448
They don't all look like that. You're delusional.

>>10479437
where do you think the Europeans got their dark curly hair

Were all human's fam

>>10479415
coco butter won't have all those harsh chemicals all conditioner have

>>10479464
The dark curly hair in europeans is different from the dark curly hair in africans

>We're all humans fam

maybe if you're native to the continents of either europe or asia, but even asia is pushing it

>>10479421
Uhm... This depends on your perspective. Europeans were originally three waves of human migration so in that regard they're mixed. However, Germanics have a distinctive look, traits, and history, as does most human racial clusters.

If you mix blue and yellow, you get green. If a large area is green, it is green. It's not "all mixed". You could still easily tell this man is not purely Germanic, hence his hair is not a medical phenomenon but rather just an inherited genetic feature.

>>10479431
I don't think you know what the word means. And yes, they do look like that. If they don't, it's because they had sex with someone who isn't Germanic, which means they are not purely Germanic. Using Germanics to define Germanic racial characteristics is basically saying "people who look like this and have these genes and features are racially Germanic" "no lol ur delusional xD" What? I'm not talking about German citizens, I'm talking about racially Germanic peoples.

>>10479448
Angles mixed with picts and romans so yeah they look different. The continental saxon Germanics are also mixed somewhat with Slavs and alpine peoples so they too can deviate a bit in looks yes... What I described was basically someone so Germanic their curly hair couldn't have been inherited but rather a medical oddity.

>>10479464
>where do you think the Europeans got their dark curly hair
Schlomo please.

>>10479472
>Angles mixed with picts and romans

there wasn't any romans there and they genocided the native britons and pushed them west into cumbria, wales, and cornwall

>>10479471
we got a /pol/ cluck here

enjoy your neanderthal rapist dna, Saharan African has none, they are the true human's

>>10479472
europe gets dark curly hair from africans

lets end this derailing and get back to his hair

>0.01 percent diff

now then op you have great hair

>>10479482
>human's
nigger detected

also we raped the neanderthals, not the other way round.

Neanderthals were pretty based; the only reason they died out was because they didn't act like niggers who raped and killed every other human in their path

>>10479484
If they are no different to whites, why do blacks act differently, look different, score lower on IQ tests, live in mud huts, and find it impossible to build a country that isn't fucking shit

>>10479492
0/10 all of that could be said about whites when you compare them to asians

>>10479485
no Neanderthals raped you

they were bigger than you, you are making things up, The Neanderthals actually look giant apes in the snow

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZbmywzGAVs

you project them as human when they are literally snow apes! video is proof, snow ape.

>>10479472
>"no lol ur delusional xD"
Who the fuck are you quoting? I simply stated the fact that not all people who are ''racially germanic'' look like that >>10479381
and all have the features that you've described. I've seen plenty of patato nosed, chinless, shitty jawed people in Northern Europe, stop pretending that they all look like the muscled strong jawed men in nazi propaganda posters. You're delusional.

>>10479492
clearly your propaganda is silly projection your yourself, someone so weak they have no self confidence and need to resort to name calling like a 5 year old retard.

die out cluck pale cancer

>>10479475
When the first Angles and Saxons settled in the mid 400's there were still a significant "British" population (Britannian Romans). Sure a lot fled to Bretagne in France but many stayed and integrated into Anglian (English) "society". The Angles didn't "genocide" (which is not a verb) the natives, although they did wage several wars and caused several migrations. They replaced them culturally and ethnically and bred the last few out, so that Celtic culture and language is now mostly restricted to the areas you mentioned, where people are indeed slightly shorter, more red in their complexion, have rounder faces, and darker (often red-ish) hair.

>>10479482
Don't you have anything better to do that shill for political agendas on a chinese menswear website?

>>10479484
Parts of southern Europe gets afro hair due to the Moorish expansion and Islamic conquests. Same goes for the Arabs. However, dark curly hair has existed in Europe long before any African admixture was present, and in areas with no such contact. Dark curly hair in not the same as african hair.

Also, the "no race" shills are hilarious. Does a Nordic man and an Aboriginal look the same? No? Then they're different races. That is the definition of race. Different population groups with different characteristics. That's it. That's all there is to it. And it's very easy to empirically prove that thesis.

Please stop shilling your political agenda when we were talking about hair and hair genes.

>>10479498
>White countrys
>Shit compared to asian countries like NK and the Phillipines
topkek

also

>Whites
>Worse living conditions than the chinese
what

Also white people are more independant and less likely to be a fucking ant colony than asians
try harder

>>10479499
if they were so much bigger and more rapacious and competitive why did they die out

>>10479485
You're insane.

pic related

>>10479492
>why do blacks act differently
You mean ghetto blacks? Look at their education, economic situation, upbringing, violent ghetto culture etc.

>le IQ meme
>le all africans are tribesmen who live in le savannah in le mudhuts near le lions meme
ebin
>I have no clue about the history of Africa
It shows

>>10479502
>patato nosed
potato* nosed

>>10479513
Yes, cherry pick the worse of asia with the best of europe. lmao come on fam.

>>10479509
0.01 percent

a hundredth of a percent is not worthy to be a race, you're just so barbaric you can't handle that you look different,

what if no melanin difference? you would say hair defines race. there is no line, its what you make us cus its Fake. but you are too barbaric to deal with small differences

>>10479498
"If there's no races, how come races are different"
"There is also an asian race, therefore you are wrong"

Man use your brain.

>>10479499
>keeps multiple "garnet knuckles" reaction pics

>>10479502
What the fuck are you talking about? "The indian elephant is generally shorter than the African elephant. It has a different ear shape, and back shape. However the two are usually considered the same species."

"lol ur delusional not all indian elephants look like that this is pro-indian propaganda"

The man in the picture is a great example because he has no excess fat, is physically fit, and has no environmental manipulations to his physique. If you'd want to study how human appearances differ across the globe, you don't use old fat people because it's difficult to tell what is nature and what is nurture in those cases.

Just because you've seen lots of not racially germanic people in Northern Europe doesn't mean that they are racially Germanic.

>>10479513
the climate changed, are you defending your family you Neanderthal

>>10479536
>comparing humans to elephants
You have no understanding of human biology. There is absolutely zero empirical evidence to suggest that there are any significant differences in the capacity for strength and intelligence between members of the human specie from different regions. In fact, there is less difference in DNA between two humans from the opposite sides of the earth, than two chimps living in separate groups within the same valley. Humans are one of the least genetically diverse species on the planet. The only differences are phenotypic (meaning bodily appearances) which have nothing to do with brain function.

>>10479521
But why is ghetto culture so violent when it was made by black people? Do you think it might because black people are violent by nature? If poverty causes crime why aren't people being killed in Appalachia at the same rate as they are in inner city detroit? Also why do black people who are adopted into white families have similar IQs to those from white families? How does poverty cause crime like rape, which blacks commit at a far higher rate than whites? How is it not the fault of Africa (the most natural - resource rich continent) if they got buttfucked by europe?

>>10479536
judging reaction pics

wow you have nothing you loser

>>10479536
what are you talking about... I didn't say any of that

>>10479552
>But why is ghetto culture so violent when it was made by black people?
So you also have no knowledge of the history of blacks in America? Stop posting already, you're embarassing yourself. Crawl back to /pol/

>>10479529
Would still rather live in belarus than malasia
>>10479545
>The climate changed
still doesn't account for the rate at which they died

if that was the actual reason the most hear - resistant neanderthals would have survived and passed on their genes, meaning they would still be alive; the climate didn't change that much in reality

>>10479529
The asian countries he cherry picked are those with the highest aboriginal admixture. The least mixed ones would be Japan, Korea and China. And wasn't this an argument whether or not there's races?

>>10479532
Races are not measured in DNA. They were invented as an empirical classification system before DNA was known to exist. DNA measures almost exclusively inactive genes that could be massively altered by a single mixed child if dominant genes come into play, hence it is not a relevant measure for racial classification. Racial classification is instead done by empirical examination of physical traits where natural parameters are taken into account.

Further, more recent studies show that different races are 95% alike on average in terms of the irrelevant measure of DNA. Which is a significant deviation given we share over 40% of our DNA with most plants. And no melanin difference? Pic related. Look pretty markedly different to me. Although in most taxonomy two groups with different melanin rates would be classified as different races. A single feather in a parrot is usually enough.

>>10479552
>If poverty causes crime why aren't people being killed in Appalachia

maybe cus there's not that many fucking people in the Appalachia mountains

you are such a troll, all these empty claims it won't matter how much you reply to this fag, he is a sick, delusional, barbaric neanderthal racist. >>>/pol/ GTFO

pale cancer

>>10479560
>The history of blacks in America

"we wuuz kings n sheeit til evil whitey took us to amerca n brought us down n sheeit"

A black american should be glad that their ancestors were slaves as they would be living in africa if they weren't

>>10479550
> There is absolutely zero empirical evidence to suggest that there are any significant differences in the capacity for strength and intelligence between members of the human specie from different regions.

What? The slow-twitch fast twitch groupings are well known. West africans have more type 2B muscle fibres (fast twitch) east Africans the opposite, making west africans good at sprinting but with poor endurance, east africans the opposite. North Europeans are estimated to be the tallest and strongest genetically, finding it more easy to build muscle, which is why they win most strong man competitions. This has been known to the romans since before the birth of christ. Intelligence wise, there is much that suggests that while IQ is nowhere near a full measure of our intelligence, in what it measures, humans with the exact same upbringing tend to follow a racial average.

>>10479567
But poverty causes crime so people would be killing the few neighbors thsat they have, right?

In 1950, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) issued a statement asserting that all humans belong to the same species and that “race” is not a biological reality but a myth. This was a summary of the findings of an international panel of anthropologists, geneticists, sociologists, and psychologists.

A great deal of evidence had accumulated by that time to support this conclusion, and the scientists involved were those who were conducting research and were most knowledgeable about the topic of human variation. Since that time similar statements have been published by the American Anthropological Association and the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, and an enormous amount of modern scientific data has been gathered to justify this conclusion.

Today the vast majority of those involved in research on human variation would agree that biological races do not exist among humans. Among those who study the subject, who use and accept modern scientific techniques and logic, this scientific fact is as valid and true as the fact that the earth is round and revolves around the sun.

Also to all you shills who derailed the thread with your "no race neanderthal filth" when we were talking about hair, please stop posting, use sage, and make this thread 404 faster.

>>10479564
Oh yea the human's killed them out, cus the human's were smarter

why are you defending your Neanderthal family
>>10479566
>Races are not measured in DNA

you make yourself look more and more retarded in every post. Its an illusion you make.
I'm done with this troll

Yet as recently as 2010, highly acclaimed journalist Guy Harrison wrote:

One day in the 1980s, I sat in the front row in my first undergraduate anthropology class, eager to learn more about this bizarre and fascinating species I was born into. But I got more than I expected that day as I heard for the first time that biological races are not real. After hearing several perfectly sensible reasons why vast biological categories don’t work very well, I started to feel betrayed by my society. “Why am I just hearing this now? . . . Why didn’t somebody tell me this in elementary school?” . . . I never should have made it through twelve years of schooling before entering a university, without ever hearing the important news that most anthropologists reject the concept of biological races.

Unfortunately, along with the belief in the reality of biologically based human races, racism still abounds in the United States and Western Europe. How can this be when there is so much scientific evidence against it?

Most educated people would accept the facts that the earth is not flat and that it revolves around the sun. However, it is much more difficult for them to accept modern science concerning human variation. Why is this so?

It seems that the belief in human races, carrying along with it the prejudice and hatred of “racism,” is so embedded in our culture and has been an integral part of our worldview for so long that many of us assume that it just must be true.

>>10479564
I doubt you even know anything about Malaysia, seeing how you can't even spell the country.

>>10479566
I didn't read the argument I just saw his post on the main post and got baited

>>10479579
>United nations

Racism is a part of our everyday lives. Where you live, where you go to school, your job, your profession, who you interact with, how people interact with you, your treatment in the healthcare and justice systems are all affected by your race.

For the past 500 years, people have been taught how to interpret and understand racism. We have been told that there are very specific things that relate to race, such as intelligence, sexual behavior, birth rates, infant care, work ethics and abilities, personal restraint, lifespan, law-abidingness, aggression, altruism, economic and business practices, family cohesion, and even brain size.

We have learned that races are structured in a hierarchical order and that some races are better than others. Even if you are not a racist, your life is affected by this ordered structure. We are born into a racist society.

What many people do not realize is that this racial structure is not based on reality. Anthropologists have shown for many years now that there is no biological reality to human race. There are no major complex behaviors that directly correlate with what might be considered human “racial” characteristics.

There is no inherent relationship between intelligence, law- abidingness, or economic practices and race, just as there is no relationship between nose size, height, blood group, or skin color and any set of complex human behaviors.

>>10479502
>stop pretending that they all look like the muscled strong jawed men in nazi propaganda posters

This.
You're all fucking retarded. You guys spend so much time looking at Nazi propaganda that you honestly believe that all white people look like the ones in their propaganda posters.

Not saying OP is white btw

>>10479579
>>10479583
>keeps citing jewish shill anti-science
>UNESCO withdrew the 1950 anti-nazi report made by jews later
>keep spamming there is no race on a fashion board
>still hate the white race
wat

>>10479585

However, over the past 500 years, we have been taught by an informal, mutually reinforcing consortium of intellectuals, politicians, statesmen, business and economic leaders and their books that human racial biology is real and that certain races are biologically better than others.

These teachings have led to major injustices to Jews and non-Christians during the Spanish Inquisition; to blacks, Native Americans, and others during colonial times; to African Americans during slavery and reconstruction; to Jews and other Europeans during the reign of the Nazis in Germany; and to groups from Latin America and the Middle East, among others, during modern political times.

In my book, The Myth of Race: The Troubling Persistence of an Unscientific Idea, I have not dwelt upon all of the scientific information that has been gathered by anthropologists, biologists, geneticists, and other scientists concerning the fact that there are no such things as human biological races. This has been done by many people over the past fifty or so years.

What I do is describe the history of our myth of race and racism. As I describe this history, I think that you will be able to understand why many of our leaders and their followers have deluded us into believing these racist fallacies and how they have been perpetuated from the late Middle Ages to the present.

Well,what was i expecting when i post something race talk sensitive to 4chan, ty for turning the post into a /pol cluster fuck.

>>10479592
Many of our basic policies of race and racism have been developed as a way to keep these leaders and their followers in control of the way we live our modern lives. These leaders often see themselves as the best and the brightest. Much of this history helped establish and maintain the Spanish Inquisition, colonial policies, slavery, Nazism, racial separatism and discrimination, and anti-immigration policies.

Although policies related to racism seem to be improving over time, I hope to help clarify why this myth still exists and remains widespread in the United States and throughout Western Europe by describing the history of racism and by exploring how the anthropological concepts of culture and worldview have challenged and disproven the validity of racist views.

Over the past 500 or so years, many intellectuals and their books have created our story of racism. They developed our initial ideas of race in Western society and solidified the attitudes and beliefs that gradually followed under the influence of their economic and political policies.

>>10479582
>races were a taxonomical system put in place long before DNA was used
>most of DNA is inactive and affected only by what genes are recessive and dominant
"races are DNA, Dr. Steinberg-Schlomoman said so as a political statement in the UN in 1950 as a response to the nazis, even though DNA could not be measured in the 50's"

>>10479582
The humans weren't smarter, they were more violent; they were at a similar technological level because they just copied the neanderthals
>Ad hominem
>>10479584
Nah mate i'm drunk

I know its a shithole full of short murderers

>>10479583
screen capping this

it only takes 1 racist retarded barbarian, to derail a thread

Then, approximately 100 years ago, anthropologist Franz Boas came up with an alternate explanation for why peoples from different areas or living under certain conditions behaved differently from one another. People have divergent life histories, different shared experiences with distinctive ways of relating to these differences. We all have a worldview, and we all share our worldview with others with similar experiences. We have culture.

It took many years for Boas and his few followers to develop this idea and pass it on to others. However, over the past fifty or sixty years, anthropologists, biologists, and geneticists have written many articles and books explaining why biological race in humans is nonexistent.

At first, scientists attempted to classify human races based on variations in characteristics such as skin color, hair color and form, eye color, facial anatomy, and blood groups. In the recent past, various scientists, such as Franz Boas, have divided us into anywhere between three and more than thirty different races, without any success. Most of these hypothetical “races” were developed using assumptions about genetic relationships and distributions among different human populations.

>>10479598
>militant anti-racist shills start spamming cause I said his hair was probably inherited
thanks /pol/!

In 1942, Ashley Montagu, a student of Franz Boas, claimed that “there are no races, there are only clines.” Traits considered to be “racial” are actually distributed independently and depend upon many environmental and behavioral factors. For the most part, each trait has a distinct distribution from other traits, and these traits are rarely determined by a single genetic factor.

This type of distribution of a biological trait is referred to as a cline. For example, skin color is related to the amount of solar radiation, and dark skin is found in Africa, India, and Australia. However, many other genetic traits in peoples of these areas are not similar. Furthermore, similar traits such as skin color are convergent; different genes can cause similar morphological and behavioral characteristics.

For example, genetic pathways to dark skin are different in Tamil Nadu and in Nigeria. Genetic traits usually do not correlate with one another and are not distributed in the same place or in the same way over time.

Race is supposed to tell us something about our genetic history. Who is related to whom? How did populations evolve over time and how isolated were they in the past?

Recent studies have shown us that humans have been migrating since Homo sapiens evolved some 200,000 years ago. This migration has not been in one direction but had happened back and forth. Our genes have been mixing since we evolved, and our genetic structure looks more like a complex, intermixed trellis than a simple candelabra.

It is very difficult to tell what our particular genetic background is over human historic time. We humans are more similar to each other as a group than we are to one another within any particular racial or genetic category. Many anthropological books have been written to explain this phenomenon.

Our view of genetics has also changed in recent times. Although many people still believe that genes, or a series of genes, directly determine some of our most complex behavioral or cognitive characteristics, the reality is more complicated.

Studies now show that each gene is only a single player in a wondrous, intricate drama involving non-additive interactions of genes, proteins, hormones, food, and life experiences and learning that interact to affect us on different levels of cognitive and behavioral functions. Each gene has an effect on multiple types of behaviors, and many behaviors are affected by many genes as well as other factors. The assumption that a single gene is causative can lead to unwarranted conclusions and an over- interpretation of any genuine genetic linkage.

Before beginning this story, however, it is important to understand how scientists define the concept of race. How is race defined in biological terms? What do we mean by the term race when describing population variation in large mammals such as humans? Do the criteria used in describing these variations hold when we examine human population variation?

In biological terms, the concept of race is integrally bound to the process of evolution and the origin of species. It is part of the process of the formation of new species and is related to subspecific differentiation. However, because conditions can change and subspecies can and do merge, this process does not necessarily lead to the development of new species.

In biology, a species is defined as a population of individuals who are able to mate and have viable offspring; that is, offspring who are also successful in reproducing. The formation of new species usually occurs slowly over a long period of time.

For example, many species have a widespread geographic distribution with ranges that include ecologically diverse regions. If these regions are large in relationship to the average distance of migration of individuals within the species, there will be more mating, and thus more exchange of genes, within than between regions.

Over very long periods of time (tens of thousands of years), differences would be expected to evolve between distant populations of the same species. Some of these variations would be related to adaptations to ecological differences within the geographic range of the populations, while others might be purely random.

Over time, if little or no mating (or genetic exchange) occurs between these distant populations, genetic (and related morphological) differences will increase. Ultimately, over tens of thousands of years of separation, if little or no mating takes place between separate populations, genetic distinctions can become so great that individuals of the different populations could no longer mate and produce viable offspring.

The two populations would now be considered two separate species. This is the process of speciation. However, again, none of these criteria require that speciation will ultimately occur.

Since speciation develops very slowly, it is useful to recognize intermediate stages in this process. Populations of a species undergoing differentiation would show genetic and morphological variation due to a buildup of genetic differences but would still be able to breed and have offspring that could successfully reproduce.

They would be in various stages of the process of speciation but not yet different species. In biological terminology, it is these populations that are considered “races” or “subspecies”. Basically, subspecies within a species are geographically, morphologically, and genetically distinct populations but still maintain the possibility of successful interbreeding.

Thus, using this biological definition of race, we assume that races or subspecies are populations of a species that have genetic and morphological differences due to barriers to mating. Furthermore, little or no mating (or genetic exchange) between them has persisted for extremely long periods of time, thus giving the individuals within the population a common and separate evolutionary history.

Given advances in molecular genetics, we now have the ability to examine populations of species and subspecies and reconstruct their evolutionary histories in an objective and explicit fashion. In this way, we can determine the validity of the traditional definition of human races “by examining the patterns and amount of genetic diversity found within and among human populations” and by comparing this diversity with other large-bodied mammals that have wide geographic distributions.

In other words, we can determine how much populations of a species differ from one another and how these divergences came about.

A commonly used method to quantify the amount of within -- to among -- group genetic diversity is through examining molecular data, using statistics measuring genetic differences within and between populations of a species. Using this method, biologists have set a minimal threshold for the amount of genetic differentiation that is required to recognize subspecies.

Compared to other large mammals with wide geographic distributions, human populations do not reach this threshold. In fact, even though humans have the widest distribution, the measure of human genetic diversity (based on sixteen populations from Europe, Africa, Asia, the Americas, and the Australia-Pacific region) falls well below the threshold used to recognize races for other species and is among the lowest value known for large mammalian species. This is true even if we compare humans to chimpanzees.

Using a number of molecular markers has shown that the degree of isolation among human populations that would have been necessary for the formation of biological subspecies or races never occurred during the 200,000 years of modern human evolution.

>>10479464
>>10479482
>>10479484
>>10479498
>>10479499
>>10479502
>>10479508
>>10479513
>>10479521
>>10479532
>>10479550
>>10479579
>>10479583
>>10479588
>>10479596
>>10479600
>>10479608
>>10479610
>>10479618
>>10479622
>>10479627
>>10479631
>>10479634
Reported for racism/incendiary content/shilling/not board topic spamming

>>10479638
No shilling or racism in posts, just confronting Paul with facts, continued:

Combined genetic data reveal that from around one million years ago to the last tens of thousands of years, human evolution has been dominated by two evolutionary forces: (1) constant population movement and range expansion; and (2) restrictions on mating between individuals only because of distance.

Thus, there is no evidence of fixed, long-term geographic isolation between populations. Other than some rare, temporary isolation events, such as the isolation of the aborigines of Australia, for example, the major human populations have been interconnected by mating opportunities (and thus genetic mixture) during the last 200,000 years (as long as modern humans, Homo sapiens, have been around). As summarized by A.R. Templeton, who is among the world’s most recognized and respected geneticists:

Because of the extensive evidence for genetic interchange through population movements and recurrent gene flow going back at least hundreds of thousands of years ago, there is only one evolutionary lineage of humanity and there are no subspecies or races. . . . Human evolution and population structure has been and is characterized by many locally differentiated populations coexisting at any given time, but with sufficient contact to make all of humanity a single lineage sharing a common, long-term evolutionary fate.

>>10479642
>in posts
in my posts*

continued:

Thus, given current scientific data, biological races do not exist among modern humans today, and they have never existed in the past. Given such clear scientific evidence as this and the research data of so many other biologists, anthropologists, and geneticists that demonstrate the nonexistence of biological races among humans, how can the “myth” of human races still persist?

If races do not exist as a biological reality, why do so many people still believe that they do? In fact, even though biological races do not exist, the concept of race obviously is still a reality, as is racism. These are prevalent and persistent elements of our everyday lives and generally accepted aspects of our culture.

Thus, the concept of human races is real. It is not a biological reality, however, but a cultural one. Race is not a part of our biology, but it is definitely a part of our culture. Race and racism are deeply ingrained in our history.

For about a half-century, a consensus among specialists--biological anthropologists and evolutionary biologists--that biological races do not exist in the human species. The scientific consensus stems from overwhelming and convergent evidence from genetics and archaeology documenting the actual history of the human species.

Anatomically modern humans originated in East Africa about 200,000 years ago, having diverged from earlier forms. Their initially small numbers grew over time, but were reduced to near extinction about 70,000 years ago, perhaps as the result of a global climatic catastrophe following the eruption of the Toba supervolcano in Indonesia. At that relatively recent date in human evolution, the great bulk of whatever genetic variability had developed by then was wiped out.

While new research is constantly revising the dates for the first human migrations out of Africa, it does appear that it was not until after that catastrophe that the first humans left for Eurasia, taking with them much less genetic variability than the reduced amount then extant in Africa. Thus, African populations contain 200,000 years of human genetic variability, while Eurasians, with less variability to start with, have had less than a third of that time for it to increase.

About 15,000 years ago during an ice age, much of the Earth's water was in the form of ice, leaving ocean levels substantially lower. As a result, there was a land bridge where the Bering Strait now separates Alaska from Siberia. A small number of humans crossed it into the New World. They brought with them a small proportion of the limited genetic variability that then existed in Eurasia.

Thus, instead of the supposed existence of different races on different continents, we see that there are actually three regions of differing genetic variability. The great majority of human genetic variability is in Africa, where we have been evolving for 200,000 years. There is some genetic variability in Eurasia, where we have been evolving for less than 70,000 years. And there is relatively little genetic variability in indigenous populations of the New World, where we have been evolving for about 15,000 years.

If the human species did have biological races, they would all be in Africa. It is easy to see biological variability in Africa--for example, the Mbuti pygmies are very short and the Masai are very tall. Despite these obvious differences, Americans classify them both as belonging to the same "race" because they have dark skins. This is an illustration of the way "race" is cultural classification masquerading as a biological one.

Race doesn't matter. In fact, it doesn't even exist in humans. While that may sound like the idealistic decree of a minister or rabbi, it's actually the conclusion of an evolutionary and population biologist at Washington University in St. Louis.

Alan R. Templeton, Ph.D., professor of biology in Arts and Sciences at Washington University, has analyzed DNA from global human populations that reveal the patterns of human evolution over the past one million years. He shows that while there is plenty of genetic variation in humans, most of the variation is individual variation. While between-population variation exists, it is either too small, which is a quantitative variation, or it is not the right qualitative type of variation -- it does not mark historical sublineages of humanity.

Using the latest molecular biology techniques, Templeton has analyzed millions of genetic sequences found in three distinct types of human DNA and concludes that, in the scientific sense, the world is colorblind. That is, it should be.

>>10479657
I like this anon

Learning is fun

"Race is a real cultural, political and economic concept in society, but it is not a biological concept, and that unfortunately is what many people wrongfully consider to be the essence of race in humans -- genetic differences," says Templeton. "Evolutionary history is the key to understanding race, and new molecular biology techniques offer so much on recent evolutionary history. I wanted to bring some objectivity to the topic. This very objective analysis shows the outcome is not even a close call: There's nothing even like a really distinct subdivision of humanity."

Templeton used the same strategy to try to identify race in human populations that evolutionary and population biologists use for non-human species, from salamanders to chimpanzees. He treated human populations as if they were non-human populations.

"I'm not saying these results don't recognize genetic differences among human populations," he cautions. "There are differences, but they don't define historical lineages that have persisted for a long time. The point is, for race to have any scientific validity and integrity it has to have generality beyond any one species. If it doesn't, the concept is meaningless."

Templeton's paper, "Human Races: A Genetic and Evolutionary Perspective," is published in the fall 1998 issue of American Anthropologist, an issue almost exclusively devoted to race. The new editor-in-chief of American Anthropologist is Robert W. Sussman, Ph.D., professor of anthropology in Arts and Sciences at Washington University in St. Louis.

Sussman and his guest editor for this issue, Faye Harrison, Ph.D., professor of anthropology at the University of South Carolina, have enlisted the talents and expertise of anthropologists across the discipline's four subdivisions -- biological, socio-cultural, linguistics and archeological anthropology -- plus Templeton and literary essayist Gerald L. Early, Ph.D., Merle Kling Professor of Modern Letters in Arts and Sciences at Washington University in St. Louis, to provide a renewed perspective on race, a topic that historically is linked closely to anthropology.

"The folk concept of race in America is so ingrained as being biologically based and scientific that it is difficult to make people see otherwise," says Sussman, a biological anthropologist. "We live on the one-drop racial division -- if you have one drop of black or Native American blood, you are considered black or Native American, but that doesn't cover one's physical characteristics. Templeton's paper shows that if we were forced to divide people into groups using biological traits, we'd be in real trouble. Simple divisions are next to impossible to make scientifically, yet we have developed simplistic ways of dividing people socially."

Templeton analyzed genetic data from mitochondrial DNA, a form inherited only from the maternal side; Y chromosome DNA, paternally inherited DNA; and nuclear DNA, inherited from both sexes. His results showed that 85 percent of genetic variation in the human DNA was due to individual variation. A mere 15 percent could be traced to what could be interpreted as "racial" differences.

"The 15 percent is well below the threshold that is used to recognize race in other species," Templeton says. "In many other large mammalian species, we see rates of differentiation two or three times that of humans before the lineages are even recognized as races. Humans are one of the most genetically homogenous species we know of. There's lots of genetic variation in humanity, but it's basically at the individual level. The between-population variation is very, very minor."

Among Templeton's conclusions: there is more genetic similarity between Europeans and sub-Saharan Africans and between Europeans and Melanesians, inhabitants of islands northeast of Australia, than there is between Africans and Melanesians. Yet, sub-Saharan Africans and Melanesians share dark skin, hair texture and cranial-facial features, traits commonly used to classify people into races. According to Templeton, this example shows that "racial traits" are grossly incompatible with overall genetic differences between human populations.

"The pattern of overall genetic differences instead tells us that genetic lineages rapidly spread out to all of humanity, indicating that human populations have always had a degree of genetic contact with one another, and thus historically don't show any distinct evolutionary lineages within humanity," Templeton says. "Rather, all of humanity is a single long-term evolutionary lineage."

Templeton's analysis gives impetus to the trellis model of evolutionary lineages, as opposed to the candelabra model, still popular among many anthropologists. The candelabra model generally holds that humanity first evolved in Africa and then spread out of Africa into different populations in Europe and Asia. Picture a candelabra, then imagine three distinct populations emerging from a single stem, each of them separate genetic entities that have not mixed genes, and thus are distinct, biological races.

The trellis model pictures humanity as a latticework, each part having a connection with all other parts. It recognizes that modern humans started in Africa about 100 million years ago, but as humans spread, they also could, and did, come back into Africa, and genes were interchanged globally, not so much by individual Don Juans as through interchanges by adjacent populations.

"If you look down at any one part of a trellis, you see that all parts are interconnected," Templeton explains. "Similarly, with modern molecular evolutionary techniques, we can find over time genes in any one local area of humanity that are shared by all of humanity throughout time. There are no distinct branches, no distinct lineages. By this modern definition for race, there are no races in humanity."

Out of Africa

The candelabra model often is used to justify the "out of Africa" replacement theory, whereby modern humans descended from a single African population, expanding out of Africa and replacing the less advanced Old World humans in Europe, Asia and Africa.

Templeton's analysis suggests a less hostile scenario. "Traits can spread out of Africa to all of humanity because all of humanity is genetically interconnected," he says. "Spreading traits doesn't require spreading out and killing off all the earlier people. They're spread by reproducing with people -- it's make love, not war."

Sussman says one of his motivations in devoting his first issue of American Anthropologist to race was to show the relevance of anthropology both in the academic world and in our everyday lives.

"Historically, race has been a key issue in anthropology," says Sussman. "Since about 1910, anthropologists have been fighting this lack of understanding of what people are really like, how people have migrated and mixed together.

Anthropologists such as Franz Boas, W.E.B. Dubois, Margaret Mead, Ruth Benedict and Ashley Montagu were in the forefront of warning people about the dangers of Nazism during the '30s and '40s, yet the anthropologists' profile on key issues in America has been so low recently that when President Clinton appointed a committee on race in 1997, there wasn't a single anthropologist on it.

"Anthropology, in some ways, has become too esoteric. One of my goals with the journal is to show what anthropologists are doing and how they relate to how we think and how we live."

Few concepts are as emotionally charged as that of race. The word conjures up a mixture of associations—culture, ethnicity, genetics, subjugation, exclusion and persecution. But is the tragic history of efforts to define groups of people by race really a matter of the misuse of science, the abuse of a valid biological concept? Is race nevertheless a fundamental reality of human nature? Or is the notion of human “races” in fact a folkloric myth? Although biologists and cultural anthropologists long supposed that human races—genetically distinct populations within the same species—have a true existence in nature, many social scientists and geneticists maintain today that there simply is no valid biological basis for the concept.

The consensus among Western researchers today is that human races are sociocultural constructs. Still, the concept of human race as an objective biological reality persists in science and in society. It is high time that policy makers, educators and those in the medical-industrial complex rid themselves of the misconception of race as type or as genetic population. This is the message of two recent books: Race?: Debunking a Scientific Myth, by Ian Tattersall and Rob DeSalle, and Race and the Genetic Revolution: Science, Myth, and Culture, edited by Sheldon Krimsky and Kathleen Sloan. Both volumes are important and timely. Both put race in the context of the history of science and society, relating how the ill-defined word has been given different meanings by different people to refer to groups they deem to be inferior or superior in some way.

Before we turn to the books themselves, a little background is necessary. A turning point in debates on race was marked in 1972 when, in a paper titled “The Apportionment of Human Diversity,” Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin showed that human populations, then held to be races, were far more genetically diverse than anyone had imagined. Lewontin’s study was based on molecular-genetic techniques and provided statistical analysis of 17 polymorphic sites, including the major blood groups in the races as they were conventionally defined: Caucasian, African, Mongoloid, South Asian Aborigines, Amerinds, Oceanians and Australian Aborigines. What he found was unambiguous—and the inverse of what one would expect if such races had any biological reality: The great majority of genetic variation (85.4 percent) was within so-called races, not between them. Differences between local populations accounted for 8.5 percent of total variation; differences between regions accounted for 6.3 percent. The genetic divergence between geographical populations in the course of human evolution does not compare to the variation among individuals. “Since such racial classification is now seen to be of virtually no genetic or taxonomic significance either, no justification can be offered for its continuance,” Lewontin concluded.

>>10479662
>Washington University
literally where?

that was a lot of words to roll out the familiar, tiresome 'race is a social construct' bullshit.

seriously, nobody's buying that. it falls apart the instant you sit down to fill out a medical form at a clinic & realize it has questions pertaining to your racial background specifically because certain (real, distinct, human) ethnicities are more prone to particular illness than others. just one example: pacific islanders and heart disease.

another easy way to dismiss your long-winded argument is to compare physical features between the races. the shape of the skull alone is enough to demonstrate differences between ethnic backgrounds.

good try, but the science just doesn't support your fantasy.

>>10479688

Further research has supported that conclusion. In 2000, at a White House event celebrating their completion of the first draft of the human genome, Craig Venter of the Institute of Genetic Research and Francis Collins of the National Institutes of Health declared that the concept of race had no genetic basis. Genetics offered no support for those wishing to place precise racial boundaries around groups. Despite rebuttals and objections, no matter how one cuts it, the data have come out much the same: Between 5 and 7 percent of human genetic diversity is between subgroups within the classically defined races; 6 to 10 percent of the total human variation is between those groups that we think of as races in an everyday sense based on skin color. The remainder of the variation occurs at the individual level and cannot be categorized by group or subgroup.

Certainly some traits are more clustered in specific populations than in others, such as skin color, hair form, nose shape and blood type. But race is little more than skin deep in biological terms, and individuals are frequently more genetically similar to members of other so-called races than they are to their own said race.

Race?: Debunking a Scientific Myth is a beautifully presented book, elegantly reasoned and skillfully written. Tattersall, a physical anthropologist, and DeSalle, a geneticist, are both senior scholars at the American Museum of Natural History. Their aim is to explain human diversity in terms of human evolution and dispersal since our ancestors walked out of Africa some 100,000 years ago. The patterns of diversity, they write, reflect the processes of divergence and reintegration, the yin and yang of evolution.

>>10479683
i've been trying to screen cap this but this is going so fast, i'll just get it later when this is done

In biology, a grouping has biological meaning based on principles of common descent—the Darwinian idea that all members of the group share a common ancestry. On this basis, and on the ability to interbreed, all humans are grouped into one species as Homo sapiens, the only surviving member of the various species that the genus comprised. Species are arranged within the “tree of life,” a hierarchical classification that situates each species in only one genus, that genus only in one family and so on. Nothing confuses that classification more than the exchange of genes between groups. In the bacterial world, for example, gene sharing can occur throughout the most evolutionarily divergent groups. The result is a reticulate evolution—a global net or web of related organisms, and no species. Among humans, reticulation occurs when there is interbreeding within the species—mating among individuals from different geographical populations. The result of such genetic mixing of previously isolated groups—due to migrations, invasions and colonization—is that no clear boundaries can be drawn around the variety of humans, no “races” of us.

The data for tracking lineages come from genomics, DNA comparisons and the study of genetic markers. Tattersall and DeSalle argue that not only are the differences between the classically defined “races” very superficial, they are also of surprisingly recent origin; the variety of human populations seems to have both accumulated and begun to reintegrate within the past 50,000 to 60,000 years. The diversity among us has arisen in a blink of evolution’s eye. The process of relative geographic isolation of local populations into what might have been true races (genetically differentiated populations) during the last Ice Age began to reverse as formerly isolated human groups came back into contact and interbred. That reintegration, which has occurred intermittently throughout human history, is sped up today because of great migration and widespread mating of individuals from disparate geographic origins. The result is that individuals identified as belonging to one “race,” based on the small number of visible characters used in historical race definitions, are likely to have diverse ancestry. The distinction between ancestry and race has important implications, as the authors discuss.

>>10479691
>skin deep

it's clearly not. enjoy your sociological propaganda disguised as biology.

>>10479697
>sociological propaganda
you mean race

>>10479191
Jidenna.

- Our eyes tell us that people look different. No one has trouble distinguishing a Czech from a Chinese, but what do those differences mean? Are they biological? Has race always been with us? How does race affect people today? There’s less – and more – to race than meets the eye:

- Race is a modern idea. Ancient societies, like the Greeks, did not divide people according to physical distinctions, but according to religion, status, class, even language. The English language didn’t even have the word ‘race’ until it turns up in 1508 in a poem by William Dunbar referring to a line of kings.

- Race has no genetic basis. Not one characteristic, trait or even one gene distinguishes all the members of one so-called race from all the members of another so-called race.

- Human subspecies don’t exist. Unlike many animals, modern humans simply haven’t been around long enough or isolated enough to evolve into separate subspecies or races. Despite surface appearances, we are one of the most similar of all species.

- Skin color really is only skin deep. Most traits are inherited independently from one another. The genes influencing skin color have nothing to do with the genes influencing hair form, eye shape, blood type, musical talent, athletic ability or forms of intelligence. Knowing someone’s skin color doesn’t necessarily tell you anything else about him or her.

- Most variation is within, not between, "races." Of the small amount of total human variation, 85% exists within any local population, be they Italians, Kurds, Koreans or Cherokees. About 94% can be found within any continent. That means two random Koreans may be as genetically different as a Korean and an Italian.

>>10479221
It's definitely long enough now if you want them.

>>10479697
>sociological propaganda disguised as biology.
lol no. You can argue with biologists and anthropologists until your blue in the face but you won't change reality, sorry fam. Continued:

- Slavery predates race. Throughout much of human history, societies have enslaved others, often as a result of conquest or war, even debt, but not because of physical characteristics or a belief in natural inferiority. Due to a unique set of historical circumstances, ours was the first slave system where all the slaves shared similar physical characteristics.

- Race and freedom evolved together. The U.S. was founded on the radical new principle that "All men are created equal." But our early economy was based largely on slavery. How could this anomaly be rationalized? The new idea of race helped explain why some people could be denied the rights and freedoms that others took for granted.

- Race justified social inequalities as natural. As the race idea evolved, white superiority became "common sense" in America. It justified not only slavery but also the extermination of Indians, exclusion of Asian immigrants, and the taking of Mexican lands by a nation that professed a belief in democracy. Racial practices were institutionalized within American government, laws, and society.

- Race isn’t biological, but racism is still real. Race is a powerful social idea that gives people different access to opportunities and resources. Our government and social institutions have created advantages that disproportionately channel wealth, power, and resources to white people. This affects everyone, whether we are aware of it or not.

- Colorblindness will not end racism. Pretending race doesn’t exist is not the same as creating equality. Race is more than stereotypes and individual prejudice. To combat racism, we need to identify and remedy social policies and institutional practices that advantage some groups at the expense of others.

>>10479696
This is interesting and whatnot, but dumping some text isn't going to win a debate or spread the truth. You're not explaining this is layman's terms. You're not even explaining what the fuck you're dumping.

>>10479704
>Are they biological?

Yes. /thread

In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. 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.

Physical variations in any given trait tend to occur gradually rather than abruptly over geographic areas. And because physical traits are inherited independently of one another, knowing the range of one trait does not predict the presence of others. For example, skin color varies largely from light in the temperate areas in the north to dark in the tropical areas in the south; its intensity is not related to nose shape or hair texture. Dark skin may be associated with frizzy or kinky hair or curly or wavy or straight hair, all of which are found among different indigenous peoples in tropical regions. These facts render any attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations both arbitrary and subjective.

>>10479713
>You're not explaining this is layman's terms.
Paul won't listen, so I'm just shoving it down his throat.

>>10479710
sorry 'fam', you're only copy/pasting the politically-biased rhetoric of a few social scientist nobodies along with a lot of literal nonsense about how real, physical racial differences are actually an illusion. I don't see any science or biology in any one of your million shitty posts, & yes I read them.

just fuck off, you're clearly not going to succeed in pushing your agenda now that it's been shown for what it is.

>>10479727
Well "Paul" isn't going to listen to you when all you do is dump stuff. He's not even going to take you seriously.

>>10479735
>muh social science
>t-they're nobodies I swear!
>i-it's not science!
You're desperate. As I stated earlier, you can argue with biologists and anthropologists until you're blue in the face but you won't change reality.

>>10479704
Different breeds of dogs and cats despite belonging to the same species present different physical and psychological traits, as well as higher chances of specific diseases and deformities depending on the breed.

>still shilling
>still not saging
>still posting political propaganda pasta on a fashion board
>still hasn't been banned for derailing the thread

mods=SJW cuckshills?

>>10479766
>political propaganda
Are these the buzzwords that you always use to criticize reliable modern studies? Take your tinfoil hat off.

>>10479760
>comparing modern humans to cats and dogs
There is absolutely zero empirical evidence to suggest that there are any significant differences in the capacity for strength and intelligence between members of the human specie from different regions. In fact, there is less difference in DNA between two humans from the opposite sides of the earth, than two chimps living in separate groups within the same valley. Humans are one of the least genetically diverse species on the planet. The only differences are phenotypic (meaning bodily appearances) which have nothing to do with brain function.

DEAL
W
I
T
H

IT

>>10479753
You are the MVP!

>>10479778
You're not getting anywhere copypasting shit, you know.

>>10479783
>muh last reply

>>10479710
>Our government and social institutions have created advantages that disproportionately channel wealth, power, and resources to white people.

Like affirmative action, quotas, and welfare?

>>10479786
What?

>>10479783
You will get nowhere arguing with biologists and anthropologists with your total lack of understanding of human evolution.

You are clueless and delusional.

>>10479778
People already replied to you that there are differences, they don't even need to be strength or intelligence to imply a division between genetic groups.
http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/Conditions/More/MyHeartandStrokeNews/African-Americans-and-Heart-Disease_UCM_444863_Article.jsp
One such instance.
People of different ethnic groups have different likelihood of diseases, how strange right?

>The only differences are phenotypic (meaning bodily appearances) which have nothing to do with brain function
Wait a second, so if a certain group of humans is statistically taller and wider, even if they aren't pound by pound stronger aren't they more suited for physical labor because of higher strength? Oh but that's just a physical difference.
Huh I guess only if you're a stupid frogposter it may be.


tl;dr stay mad I'm not even white, I just hate your bullshit

>>10479778
>modern studies
>tinfoil hat
talk about buzzwords.

Also, humans are in terms of genetic situation most similar to wolves, with not clearly defined racial lines due to mixing, but still different races across the globe.

And
>There is absolutely zero empirical evidence to suggest that there are any significant differences in the capacity for strength and intelligence between members of the human specie from different regions
The slow-twitch fast twitch groupings are well known. West africans have more type 2B muscle fibres (fast twitch) east Africans the opposite, making west africans good at sprinting but with poor endurance, east africans the opposite. North Europeans are estimated to be the tallest and strongest genetically, finding it more easy to build muscle, which is why they win most strong man competitions. This has been known to the romans since before the birth of christ. Intelligence wise, there is much that suggests that while IQ is nowhere near a full measure of our intelligence, in what it measures, humans with the exact same upbringing tend to follow a racial average.

You said "theres no difference in the capacity of strength", and then you said "The only differences are phenotypic (meaning bodily appearances)"?

>>10479795
I'm not him. I'm just stating that you're not going to make any progress with him by copypasting stuff that has been rebutted earlier.

See:

>>10479550
>>10479574

>>10479766

Typical racist cumskin
Go back to /pol/ cumskin
I bet you are one of the clueless fags cumskins who ACTUALLY post pictures of themselves and the outfits at the WAYWT threads rofl
LMAO

>>10479789
>I don't know anything about the history of the United States
It shows.

>b-but now le blacks have le welfare
You're an imbecile.

>hair thread
>derailed by some crazy-ass /pol/ racist

yep I'm on fa

>>10479802
Quotas help no one.
Good public education at the base level and decent scholarships for everyone who does well is what solves it.

>muh racial question
No. Just no. I live in a third world country and our biggest excuse for being a shithole is denying that we need to do shit ourselves instead of having it handed to us. Instead of handing out opportunities we hand out the goal objects, this is dumb and just breeds inefficiency. That's not how the world works.

>>10479797
>there are differences
No biologist or anthropologist denies this.

>Wait a second, so if a certain group of humans is statistically taller and wider, even if they aren't pound by pound stronger aren't they more suited for physical labor because of higher strength?
Logically, yes. Your point?

>but that's just a physical difference.
Correct and there's nothing paranormal about it.

At this point it's like you're just saying ''b-but blacks have curlier hair!!1 can't you see ?? ='(''

>>10479805
>hair thread
>derailed by some crazy-ass anti-racist spammer who got triggered cause someone said "your hair is probably inherited"
>people still blame /pol/

yep I'm on fa

>>10479812
>different races/whatever you want to call it that doesn't triggers you are not different strength wise
>but different races are different strength wise

What? Are North Europeans the tallest people on earth and win most strong man competitions, do west Africans have more type 2B fast twitch muscle fibres relatively, and east Africans the opposite, making the WAs good at sprinting and the EAs good at long distance running? Or is this nazi propaganda that still is brainwashing the olympics results according to you and Dr. Goldberg of the Red Revolutionary Front in the 50's?

>>10479812
>but that's just a physical difference.
>Correct and there's nothing paranormal about it.
Your brain is physical, your eyes are physical, your muscles are physical.

Look, where I live people are taller than our northern cousins.
And in the southwest there's an arguably even bigger folk.
Want to guess who's more suited to physical labor and generally stronger? BUT the shorter folk from the north tend to be better at running for long distances and they often show some pretty damn good stamina considering their conditions.
Are we all the same despite the fact these differences are genetic?

We're all equal, but different. Is what I'm saying.

>muh offense over blacks and sheit
Well thanks billy, I'm mixed tho so I don't know what you're talking about.

>>10479801
This
Why are cumskins so hateful and racist?
Go back to reddit, cumskins

>>10479798
>You said "theres no difference in the capacity of strength"
No. You removed the word: significant. I wrote:

There is absolutely zero empirical evidence to suggest that there are any significant differences in the capacity for strength and intelligence between members of the human specie from different regions

Do you understand the meaning of the word ''significant''?

>strong man competitions

Cringe.

Are people of different phenotypical groups doing ''strong man competitions'' everyday? The average strength of average people is average. There are no SIGNIFICANT differences.

>b-but muh strong man competitions

Jesus Christ

>>10479574
>>10479800
See
>>10479825

>>10479825
>there's no significant differences
Next you'll tell me men and women have the same average physical strength.

>>10479820
>Are North Europeans the tallest people on earth
Well meme'd, but in reality it's the Dinka people of the Bahr el-Ghazal region in South Sudan that are the tallest people on Earth.

Height is still merely a physical difference.

>>10479825
So it's insignificant that different human races have average height deviations of over 40cm, that different races perform much better at sprinting/long distance running, or strength/body building, it's insignificant that some races can digest milk because they were cow herders and others can't, it's insignificant that some races can digest much more fatty acids and omega 3 due to evolving in an arctic climate, it's insignificant that some races can't digest alcohol, it's insignificant that some races can live in low light environments and not get a vitamin D deficiency, but get burned and get cancer in very bright environments, it's insignificant that some races are much more resilient to heat and some to cold, that some developed longer narrower noses and smaller lips to live in very cold climates, that some races can digest alcohol better because they evolved eating ripe/rotten fruit, whereas others get nauseous instantly, that there are empirically very significant differences in mental capacity on average for people with the same or similar upbringings of different "races" etc.? Is all this "insignificant"?

>>10479847
Are you stupid? Serious question. Your reading comprehension is awful.

>>10479857
It's called fishing.

>>10479855
> physical difference
Ok so the kalenjin are amazing runners because of their genes, but you're saying that despite that they're no different from other peoples?
Despite the obvious difference they're no different?
Is that it?

Equal but different lad. You can both be humans and be different groups with different inherent traits.

>>10479856
>So it's insignificant that different human races have average height deviations of over 40cm
Give me those ''human races'' along with their average heights please with reliable sources.

>different races perform much better at sprinting/long distance running
Name those ''human races'' along with their athletic capabilities.

Tip: don't say ''Africans'' or ''blacks''

>it's insignificant that some races can digest milk because they were cow herders and others can't
Who says so?

>it's insignificant that some races are much more resilient to heat and some to cold, that some developed longer narrower noses and smaller lips to live in very cold climates
Yes, it's insignificant today. A Southern African man can live just fine in Iceland and an Icelandic man can live just fine in Southern Africa.

Newsflash: we aren't like the other animals on this planet today

>>10479855
Actually if I recall correctly the Europeans in the Dinaric Alps are the absolute largest, followed by the Dinka. In terms of national averages, the Netherlands is the tallest with an avg. height of 185cm.

Don't forget to sage people, this is a fashion board.

>>10479869
>the kalenjin are amazing runners because of their genes, but you're saying that despite that they're no different from other peoples?
Yes and define ''different''.

>>10479869
>Equal but different
Define ''different.

>You can both be humans and be different groups with different inherent traits.
Are you serious??????? NO WAY!!!!

>>10479882
>>10479872

You refused to acknowledge any differences between ethnic groups and now you are saying that these differences exist but should be disregarded.
Just admit you're a moron, we're humans but we're still different because of our genetic background.
It's idiots like you who would think a blanket statement like "everyone should drink milk" are fine because hey we're all similar, and yet forgets that a large group of ethnic groups have lactose intolerance.
e.g. almost no brits with lactose intolerance, but a whole fuckton of amerindians with lactose intolerance.
Simply saying what you were saying before (NO DIFFURENCE) is the epitome of retardation.

>>10479753
>But race is little more than skin deep in biological terms, and individuals are frequently more genetically similar to members of other so-called races than they are to their own said race.

Frequently? Is 35% of the time frequently?

http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic185351.files/RACEgen.pdf

You've got here a paper that's often sourced as showing that "pairs of individuals from different populations are often more similar than pairs from the same population." such as here:

http://www.genetics.org/content/176/1/351.full

Yet this very same sourced article clearly states that "for
example, an African will be more dissimilar to an Asian individual compared with another African individual ~65% of the time."

This is what people mean when they say that academia are social propaganda when it comes to race. They are simply not honest. It's fairly funny how, as you move farther and farther away from the USA (by far the most intellectually dishonest nation on Earth when it comes to race), more and more anthropologists believe in the existence of human races. From only 31% in the USA to 43% in Europe (75% in Poland) and a total 100% consensus among Chinese anthropologists.

http://collegium.hrvatsko-antropolosko-drustvo.hr/_doc/Coll.Antropol.28(2004)2_907-921.pdf

>>10479872
>Give me those ''human races'' along with their average heights please with reliable sources.
Germanic Nederlanders have an avg. male height of 185. Dinaric Alpine people have an avg male height of 185.6cm. All pygmy peoples have average male heights of below 150cm, with several reaching below 145cm on average.

>Name those ''human races'' along with their athletic capabilities.
Has been done many times already. West African groups are known to have the type 2B fast twitch mutation. Usain Bolts ancestors are west Africans. Several East African groups have more type 1 slow twitch muscle fibers, believed to have evolved due to their extra-ordinary hunting techniques, and indeed they win pretty much every single long distance running competition.

>Who says so?
Just google it you dense fuck. Europeans and the African clusters along the Nile can digest lactose as adults. The rest of the world can't because they never relied so heavily on cattle farming as to make it an evolutionary trait to be able to eat cheese.

>Yes, it's insignificant today. A Southern African man can live just fine in Iceland and an Icelandic man can live just fine in Southern Africa.
No they can't. Dark skinned people are more prone to frostbite, cold weather related lung infections, vitamin D deficiency, autism, rickets etc. Light skinned people are more prone to skin cancer and severe sunburns. We were talking about race, not how society has countered race.

>>10479856
>>10479566
>>10479909
>>10479926
SJW spammer/derailer, status:

BTFO
T
F
O

>>10479894
>You refused to acknowledge any differences between ethnic groups
No.

>now you are saying that these differences exist but should be disregarded.
What ''differences'' are you talking about? Besides, I've kept saying that the physical differences which you describe are insignificant, because they are.

>Just admit you're a moron
Just become aware that your reading comprehension is awful.

>we're humans but we're still different because of our genetic background.
Of course there's differences, define ''different''.

>*black person in front of you*
>''I'M DIFFERENT, WE'RE NOT THE SAME!!!!!''
You sound like a special little faggot snowflake, define ''different''.

>It's idiots like you who would think a blanket statement like "everyone should drink milk" are fine because hey we're all similar, and yet forgets that a large group of ethnic groups have lactose intolerance.

No one says that all adults should (including those with lactose intolerance) drink milk. You're getting desperate now, stop it with the silly assumptions. I bet that you also have no understanding of lactose intolerance. You just read some memegraph that stated that lactose intolerance ranges from 5% in Northern Europe to over 90% of Asian and African countries.

Start with this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactose_intolerance

>muh lactose intolerance stats prove the existence of ''human races''
You have no understanding of human biology and anthropology.

readabooknigger.jpg

to the racist on here, >>>/pol/

WHEN THE FUCK DO WE GET OUR JANITOR

>>10479947
lol your meltdown and utter defeat is hilarious. Protip: It's over. You've been spanked by these guys
>>10479856
>>10479566
>>10479909
>>10479926
Just stop posting, and never post your make-believe political agenda shill spamming on a fucking fashion board ever again.

>>10479947
look at him
he's all beat down but he's just too persistent to give up

>22 POSTERS
>150

JUST A FRIENDLY REMINDER HOW FEW PEOPLE IT TAKES TO TURN A BOARD TO SHIT

10/10 2015

the day /fa/ proved races exist

>>10479975
Was /fa/ not shit?

>>10479947
gb2 /pol/

>>10479975
Bruh it's not the whole board I've been saging and reporting all along. If anything it's a reminder of slack jawed mods not doing what they're supposed to.

>>10479988
can't OP's delete their threads tho?

>>10479976
its the opposite

>>10479981
There are days when we have a few hours when these threads aren't bumped to the top constantly.

>>10479995
just stop posting man you lost

>>10479926
>>Give me those ''human races'' along with their average heights please with reliable sources.
>Germanic Nederlanders have an avg. male height of 185. Dinaric Alpine people have an avg male height of 185.6cm. All pygmy peoples have average male heights of below 150cm, with several reaching below 145cm on average.
That does not answer the question. Try again.

>>Name those ''human races'' along with their athletic capabilities.
>Has been done many times already. West African groups are known to have the type 2B fast twitch mutation. Usain Bolts ancestors are west Africans. Several East African groups have more type 1 slow twitch muscle fibers, believed to have evolved due to their extra-ordinary hunting techniques, and indeed they win pretty much every single long distance running competition.
That does not answer the question. Try again.


>>Who says so?
>Just google it you dense fuck. Europeans and the African clusters along the Nile can digest lactose as adults. The rest of the world can't because they never relied so heavily on cattle farming as to make it an evolutionary trait to be able to eat cheese.
Twisting my words I see, pathetic. I asked ''who says so?'' in response to this EXACT statement:
>it's insignificant that some races can digest milk because they were cow herders and others can't

>>Yes, it's insignificant today. A Southern African man can live just fine in Iceland and an Icelandic man can live just fine in Southern Africa.
>No they can't.
Yes they can and the rest of your babbling is meaningless. A Southern African man can live just fine in Iceland and an Icelandic man can live just fine in Southern Africa. We don't live like animals anymore.

Also, stop samefagging, it's cringeworthy.

>>10479995
Not really, all that one anon did was imply there was an overwhelming consensus among geneticists, anthropologists and biologists, when that is simply not the case.

>>10479995
that guy got BTFO to the point that everything he tries to say is damage control

If races aren't real then I don't know what is.

>>10479999
quads checked

>>10479998
no you lost, you just can't stop posting and make claims like '''i won'' when you clearly lost.

>>10480004
>>10480003
to>>10479999

listen>>10479999 I know your right. they know your right, they just can't admit it to themselves, they're not worth the time or effort.

Denial fags fool noone but themselves

Anon, we're better than them and we know it, lets just move on, we already proved we're right.

>>10479824

tbh

>>10479999
quads of defeat

>if I say "doesn't answer the question" for no reason I'm right
>if I say "doesn't answer the question" for no reason I'm right
>You mis-interpreted one thing and peoples evolving due to cattle farming is irrelevant
>what you said is meaningless because we have sunscreen and vitamin D pills. Sunscreen and vitamin D proves races are not real.

bro just stop the damage control it's getting awkward. Just stop posting and kill yourself.

>>10480004
>>10480008

See? This is damage control at it's finest. Races are indeed real, from what we can salvage from the BTFOing this man just took.

>>10480014
>>10480008
>>10479999
samefag. No new posters in thread. Just stop posting already.

>>10479824
I prefer to call them

white cancer
skincancer
pale cancer
noculturefags

cancerskin

>>10479998
He's not me the ''frogposter''.

I wonder how many ''You''s one of you /pol/cucks will see:

>>10479566
>>10479570
>>10479574
>>10479576
>>10479585
>>10479592
>>10479604
>>10479688
>>10479697
>>10479716
>>10479735
>>10479760
>>10479766
>>10479797
>>10479798
>>10479820
>>10479847
>>10479856
>>10479869
>>10479909
>>10479926
>>10479945
>>10479965
>>10479967
>>10479976
>>10480008
>>10480014
>>10480019
>>10480023

your hair looks dry as fuck
- first moisturise
- then learn to gel the curls together
- be like paulo costanzo

>>10480029
>mfw

>>10480031
no his hair is just not that loose

but he could try

For the sake of /fa/ I will not post any more. This retard keeps posting without saging at all, bumping his political spam to the top of /fa/ with each post.

Bye retard. Read these posts over and over until you cry.
>>10479945

>>10480027
>no culture
I know this is bait, but it's also one of the best jokes ever written.

To the samefagging child:

See >>10479999 >>10479999 >>10479999 >>10479999 >>10479999 >>10479999 >>10479999 >>10479999 >>10479999 >>10479999 >>10479999 >>10479999


1) Fails to answer my questions and responds with something irrelevant so he can tell himself ''h-hey I replied! I know what to say d-don't worry''.

2) Does it again

3) Twists my words and pretends I said something I didn't when I clearly just quoted an ironic post.

4) Claims that in 2015 AD a Southern African man cannot live just fine in Iceland and that still in 2015 AD an Icelandic man cannot live just fine in Southern Africa.

5) Samefags
>y-you got btfo h-hehe

yeah, no

>>10480049
its the truth

>>10479999
>>No they can't. (explanation why)
>Yes they can and the rest of your babbling is meaningless.

>>10480051
>it's 2015, people! come on!

>>10480058
>explains why
''Dark skinned people are more prone to blablabla and light skinned people are more prone to blablabla''
Does not prove that they cannot live in different regions TODAY IN 2015 AD.

>he's convinced that in 2015 AD a Southern African man cannot live just fine in Iceland and that still in 2015 AD an Icelandic man cannot live just fine in Southern Africa

If it's not insanity I don't know what it is.

>>10480064
>it's 2015, people! come on!
Who are you quoting?

>>10480031
my hair is not like that at all.i would need a fucking bottle to gel my entire hair properly.usually i just gel the front so it doesnt fall down and massage the rest with my hand.

>>10479131
>>10479310
>>10479322
1) Don't use shampoo ever again.
2) Don't comb ever again.
3) Wash your hair with cold water and conditioner EVERY DAY.
4) Put on a leave-in conditioner EVERY DAY and before going to sleep.

Thank me later fam.

>>10480066
>Does not prove that they cannot live in different regions TODAY IN 2015 AD.
You're trying to use the current year (>I MEAN COME ON PEOPLE) as an excuse why race isn't real. If that's not retarded I don't know what is.

Can black people live in Iceland? Yes.
Can white people live in Africa? Yes.
Does the fact that we have the tools necessary to live in climates different to ours mean that black and white people are the same? No.

>>10480051
> Fails to answer my questions
Abstract make-believe to avoid my replies. When I'm right, you just said "y-you didn't answer what I REALLY meant so I don't have to consider what you wrote about height, muscle fibre types, running performance, strength and hunting techniques. I asked you to cite which groups had the height difference, you did, but that's not what I REALLY meant"

>Twists my words and pretends I said something I didn't when I clearly just quoted an ironic post.
A single mis-intepretation where I thought you meant the evolution of the capacity to digest lactose wasn't a thing, when what you actually meant was that it didn't prove there were races/markedly different human populations.

>Claims that in 2015 AD a Southern African man cannot live just fine in Iceland and that still in 2015 AD an Icelandic man cannot live just fine in Southern Africa.
Now you're deliberately misquoting. I said sunscreen and vitamin D pills allowed for this, but that it in no way dements the fact that these two people evolved for different climates and are significantly different. You completely ignored everything else I said about cold weather adaptations too.

You've basically completely ignored everything I said, attacked a single admitted mis-interpretation over and over, and claimed that "didn't answer the question" for no apparent reason.

>>10480064
topkek
best argument against race

>>10480066
No one said that. You know no one said that. I even mentioned sunscreen and vitamin D pills in the post that you're quoting. Let me re-quote my post:
>Dark skinned people are more prone to frostbite, cold weather related lung infections, vitamin D deficiency, autism, rickets etc. Light skinned people are more prone to skin cancer and severe sunburns. We were talking about race, not how society has countered race.
>we have sunscreen and vitamin D pills

This will be my last reply. Frogposter, do you know what sage is?

>>10480070
>the actual OP is still here

/fa/ is truly a resilient board

>>10480085
plot twist:
OP is le frogpost man

>>10480084
you can't sage while posting images, the image will auto-bump; so long as he keeps memeing it up, the thread will go to the top regardless of if he sages or not

at least that was how it used to be years ago, I'm just passing through after a long time away

>>10480081
>You're trying to use the current year (>I MEAN COME ON PEOPLE) as an excuse why race isn't real.
Modern human races don't exist and my argument isn't the current year you blind cretin.


>Does the fact that we have the tools necessary to live in climates different to ours mean that black and white people are the same? No.

For the 100th time define ''different'', and yes, the fact that we have the tools today makes those physical differences caused by geographical adaptations unimportant. Deal with it.

>>10480070
SHUT THE FUCK UP OP WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RACE

>>10480084
>Abstract make-believe to avoid my replies
Your replies do not answer the questions that I asked.

>y-you didn't answer what I REALLY meant

Who the fuck are you quoting? What I asked isn't vague or anything, I asked you to give me the names of the ''human races'' you speak of along with the average height of each one of them, their athletic capabilities (>implying averages prove the existence of ''human races'' which you're also unable to name)

Thing is, there are different modern human PHENOYTPICAL GROUPS, modern human races? None.

>cold weather adaptations too

Whoopty fuckin' doo, in 2015 AD a Southern African man can live just fine in Iceland and still in 2015 AD an Icelandic man can live just fine in Southern Africa. That is a fact and the fact that they can today in 2015 AD MAKES THE WEATHER ADAPTATIONS UNIMPORTANT TODAY IN 2015AD, just like wide noses and thin noses, they're unimportant today in 2015AD because we do not live like animals anymore.

If all you get from this is
>it's 2015, people! come on!
you're a complete imbecile.

>>10480089
>and my argument isn't the current year you blind cretin.
You basically said "in 2015 these racial traits are irrelevant due to modern technologies such as vit D pills, sunscreen, and protective clothing. Hence these racial traits are not racial traits and races do not exist."

Your logic was pretty much, "it's 2015, come on people!"

>those physical differences caused by geographical adaptations unimportant.
That doesn't mean they don't exist.

Stop posting frog pictures and use sage, you're spreading cancer to this board.

>>10480081
>the same tools used mean different races

>>10480089
>my argument isn't the current year you blind cretin.
>>Does not prove that they cannot live in different regions TODAY IN 2015 AD.
>>TODAY IN 2015 AD.
>my argument isn't the current year
Oliver is memeing with us again.


>>10480089
>For the 100th time define ''different''
How fucking dumb do you have to be?
There are several climates present throughout the world. From the tropical dry environments of North Africa to the boreal moist environments of North Russia. They're differentiated by their temperature, humidity, quantity of rain and pressure.

>>10480084
>No one said that. You know no one said that.
Said what? You didn't say that:
>in 2015 AD a Southern African man cannot live just fine in Iceland and that still in 2015 AD an Icelandic man cannot live just fine in Southern Africa
?

Then why did you reply to my post>>10479872
>Yes, it's insignificant today. A Southern African man can live just fine in Iceland and an Icelandic man can live just fine in Southern Africa.
with
>>10479926
>No they can't.


?

You're contradicting yourself and not making much sense. Stop posting

>>10480084
>This will be my last reply
Good boy.

>>10480108
>these racial traits are not racial traits and races do not exist
These genetics traits are not ''racial'' since races do not exist. What do you fail to understand?

In biology the meaning of ''race'' is basically subspecies and there are none among modern humans. That is reality. Deal with it.

>>10480104
>That is a fact and the fact that they can today in 2015 AD MAKES THE WEATHER ADAPTATIONS UNIMPORTANT TODAY IN 2015AD, just like wide noses and thin noses, they're unimportant today in 2015AD because we do not live like animals anymore.

Alright, fair enough, but it seems to me you are accepting many differences between various human populations, yet refusing to acknowledge differences when it comes to behaviour and intelligence.

>If all you get from this is
>it's 2015, people! come on!
>you're a complete imbecile.

le only one person could possibly be disagreeing with me meme

>>10480104
>Your replies do not answer the questions that I asked.
The questions were:
Which groups have a 40cm different in average height.

The answer he gave was Dinaric Alpine people and netherlanders, vs. African pygmy groups.

And:
Which groups have what athletic capacities?

The answer he gave was: West African groups are known to have the type 2B fast twitch mutation. Usain Bolts ancestors are west Africans. Several East African groups have more type 1 slow twitch muscle fibers, believed to have evolved due to their extra-ordinary hunting techniques, and indeed they win pretty much every single long distance running competition.

Is this not sufficient? If it's unclear: Short groups: African pygmies, long groups, Netherlanders and Dinaric alpine people. Fast sprinters (fast twitch type 2b muscle fibre): West african groups. Good long distance runners: East african groups.

>015 AD MAKES THE WEATHER ADAPTATIONS UNIMPORTANT TODAY IN 2015AD, just like wide noses and thin noses, they're unimportant today in 2015AD because we do not live like animals anymore.
Just because you can compensate by wearing one of those ski-masks doesn't make the differences cease to exist. If you can get prosthetic legs when your race was born legless, would this make your race not born legless, and make it not different from any other race?

Please sage

>>10480108
>>those physical differences caused by geographical adaptations are unimportant.
>That doesn't mean they don't exist.
WHEN THE FUCK DID I SAY THAT PHYSICAL DIFFERENCES DON'T EXIST????????????

JESUS CHRIST

>>10480127
Oh god that chart is infuriatingly misleading

>>10480134
Can you elaborate? I'd be more than willing to delete it if you explain why.

>>10480131
Not him, but you're dismissing physical differences by saying they're no longer relevant in 2015 (>mfw when) because there are ways around them. It's like saying they don't exist when you talk about race.

>>10480120
>>No they can't.
You decided to only quote that, but not
>e were talking about race, not how society has countered race.

Clearly what I meant was they can't naturally survive as well as icelandics, without the use of modern technologies, supplements and utilities.

>These genetics traits are not ''racial'' since races do not exist. What do you fail to understand? In biology the meaning of ''race'' is basically subspecies and there are none among modern humans. That is reality. Deal with it.

Saying something many times despite being disproven does not make you right.

>>10480131
>WHEN THE FUCK DID I SAY THAT PHYSICAL DIFFERENCES DON'T EXIST????????????
You used the argument that because these significant differences can be countered by modern technology, they are irrelevant to whether or not races exist. In other words, you claimed that because they can be countered, it's an argument races don't exist.

Please sage. Your shitty meme pictures aren't worth fucking up the board.

>>10480110
My argument is that traits like thin noses and flat noses are unimportant today. When will you learn?

I asked you to define the word ''different'' when talking about humans to justify saying ''I AM NOT LIKE YOU!!!!! WE'RE DIFFERENT!!!!!'' like a speacial snowflake little autistic faggot to a black person. You reply:
>From the tropical dry environments of North Africa to the boreal moist environments of North Russia. They're differentiated by their temperature, humidity, quantity of rain and pressure.

telling me about the natural geographic diversity of our planet.

6/10 b8 tbh fam

>>10480127
>le poor whites and poor blacks live in le same ghettos, have le same upbringing, have le same violent ghetto culture and le same history

Sick meme

>>10480144
>My argument is that traits like thin noses and flat noses are unimportant today. When will you learn?
We know this is your argument. And that argument is fucking retarded if you mean that they're not important and therefore they don't prove anything regarding race.

>I asked you to define the word ''different'' when talking about humans
see
>>10479856

please write sage in the options field and stop posting pepe pictures, for the sake of the board.

3hunna is just a hundred posts away

>>10480147
>its dey culcha

Pathetic excuses for violent criminals, mate. I'm sure they'll appreciate it though!

>>10480144
>unimportant today.
What the fuck does the current year have to do with anything?


>>10480144
>telling me about the natural geographic diversity of our planet.
I'm only doing it because you're incapable of seeing the differences between the hot climate of African regions and the snowy climate of North Europe.

>>10480148
stop being a racist troll cancer for the sake of the board

>>10480154
pretending to be retarded I see

its a lot of autism when you can't just see that op has tight curly blond hair

>>10479310
You look biracial tbh

>>10480139
If we were in /pol/ or /lit/, yes

I will concede no contest and let it stand for today because I really don't think this should discussed on /fa/. Just stop responding to that guy and stop bumping with images. I'm sure there are fair points on both sides, just not made to be hashed out here.

>>10480147
>shitty upbringing
>violent ghetto culture

Created and maintained by who? Culture does not exist by itself, it is constructed by the actors of that culture. If poor blacks are consistently more violent than poor whites because of a culture created by blacks, then who or what's to blame?

>>10480156
Racism is effay.

>>10480128
>The questions were: Which groups have a 40cm different in average height.
I never asked this.

I asked:
>>10479872
>Give me those ''human races'' along with their average heights please with reliable sources.

>Which groups have what athletic capacities?
I never asked this.

I asked:
>>10479872
>Name those ''human races'' along with their athletic capabilities.
>Tip: don't say ''Africans'' or ''blacks''

>Short groups: African pygmies
That's not it.

>long groups: Netherlanders and Dinaric alpine people
That's not it.

>Fast sprinters (fast twitch type 2b muscle fibre): West african groups. Good long distance runners: East african groups.
And what ''races'' are the members of these groups part of? See, you still haven't answered my questions.

>>10480158
who fucking cares, he's human

>>10480164
no its not white cancer

>>10480128
>wearing one of those ski-masks doesn't make the differences cease to exist.
Please link me the post in which I claimed that these differences which are due to climatic adaptations don't exist.

Thanks.

>>10480169
Did I trigger you? I am trying to explain why his hair looks like that. He doesn't look "white" you can see it in his facial structure. I am not white btw.

>>10480157
who the fuck is talking about OP anyway?

>>10480176
we can tell that,

thats why racist faggots can't go to /pol/ insted hang around here to denialfag

>>10480165
>what races
>implying races in a migrating species can be easily defined like that when studying them is taboo
Bro he said west african groups, east african groups, african pygmies, probably north germanics and dinarics.

Those close enough to races for you?

Just because it is difficult to classify specific races because the differences are fluid like in wolves, and people like you keep pressuring scientists not to draw specific lines, doesn't mean different groups of people are suddenly not significantly different. Which they very much so are.

>>10480148
>physical differences prove the existence of different modern human ''races'' and in biology: different modern human ''sub-species''

>>10480172
No one claimed you claimed that and you're misintepreting on purpose to pretend you're right.

What people said was you're claiming that because the differences are irrelevant due to modern technology, they're irrelevant to whether or not there are significant differences, "races", of humans.

>>10480185
A sub-species is not a race.

>>10480185
not him, but what's wrong with that statement?

>>10480182
....

>>10480152
>some ghetto thug killed someone

Shocking.

>>10480195
what is ... suppose to imply

>>10480176
how do i not look "white" in that picture?rofl.My mothers ancestors are from the Balkans and my fathers from Cretan Island.

>>10480197
I know right? You should see when white people shoot up schools (niggers dont go to school thats why they dont shoot them), the whole media blows up in defense of gun control. It's an amazing thing to see.

>>10480203
Can you translate the post pls

>>10480205
Then it is confirmed you're not germanic and your hair is inherited, not a medical phenomenon/cucking.

We are but 70 posts from 3hunna.

>>10480210
we can tell op is mixed

people from pol, need to go back to pol, but they don't want to cus there to busy shitposting and, end up denying everything like a denial fag

... because they have nothing

DBZ is on must go

>>10480205
>Balkans
>white

>>10480205
>greek and balkan ancestry
>white

cant believe you actually dragged me into this fucking racist dipshit

>>10480154
>you're incapable of seeing the differences between the hot climate of African regions and the snowy climate of North Europe.
In your delusional mind.

>>10480183
>admits to not being able to define the modern human ''races'' and in biology modern human ''sub-species'' which he speaks of

I thought so.

>>10480193
>A sub-species is not a race.
In biology yes and in everyday use, well ''race'' has no logical meaning. For example a white skinned, blonde haired and blue eyed man with nordic facial features could be classified as ''negro'' (as if he were a part of the ''negroid'' phenotypical group) if he has some ''negro'' ancestry (as if nobody except Africans had African ancestry), see pic >>10479521
.

Obama 50% white 50% black is apparently part of the ''negro race'' according to many clueless americans. I could go on and on. ''What race are you?'', ''I'm Irish and Scottish xD'', ''race'' my ass and in the tru biological sense, race = sub-specie.

FACT: There are no modern human sub-species. ''Modern human races'' do not exist.

>>10480220
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2Rs8CoJv_k

>>10480226
You shouldn't be using a computer, blackie, that's cultural appropriation!

>>10480229
>In your delusional mind.
Then why'd you fucking ask?
>For the 100th time define ''different''

>>10480226
its the pol fags, it should have stopped by>>10479484

i really am sorry op for these faggots, they just are so barbaric they can't handle small features

>>10480232
>Then why'd you fucking ask?
>>For the 100th time define ''different''

Here:
>>10480144
>I asked you to define the word ''different'' when talking about humans to justify saying ''I AM NOT LIKE YOU!!!!! WE'RE DIFFERENT!!!!!'' like a speacial snowflake little autistic faggot to a black person

>>10479484
>check picture's text
>it's just copypasted from a news article

These niggers truly have no idea what they're talking about do they? They just spew shit hoping it's true.

fag post above just wants attention, not worth is ignore it

>>10480246
my correction

not worth it, just ignore it

>>10480238
We are different. We live in different climates. We have different physical differences. We have different cultures. We have different IQs. We have different races (race as in people who share similar and distinct physical characteristics.)

>>10480229
>>admits to not being able to define the modern human ''races'' and in biology modern human ''sub-species'' which he speaks of
I admit it's difficult to draw a defined line in certain cases because of the lack of isolation of many human "races", just like defining races in wolves is also difficult due to their large territories. I do not claim there are no or insignificant differences, or that it would be impossible to organize all humans into proper racial definitions. However, it would take time and money that no scientist is willing to spend since it's a career suicide because leftist nutjobs will claim people can't handle knowing about races.

An australian Abo, an African pygmy, a north European, a japanese man, and an eskimo, are all very different from each other. However drawing the exact lines is not as easy.

>>10480253
>We have different IQs. We have different races (
this is where your wrong, just read anything above retard, 100 post

btw physical differences aren't that much faggot racist

>>10480253
>le IQ meme
Nice try

>race as in people who share similar and distinct physical characteristics
In biology race basically means sub-species and so ''modern human races'' do not exist.

>>10480267
In anthropology race literally means a group of people with different who share similar and distinct physical characteristics. This means races are indeed real. As admitted by you.

>>10480264
see
>>10479856
There are significant differences to different human populations, regardless of whether or not you can easily classify them as "races" or sub-species. Races/sub-species are a human invention to define empirically different sub-group of a species, just because that invention isn't optimal, it doesn't mean there are no differences.

>>10480272
cut the "with different", it's just my phone making shit up

>>10480272
Well anthropologists are the group most likely to NOT essentialise differences, so it tends to be mostly a formality for organization rather than making one for making metaphysical claims.

>>10480280
*omit 'making one,

>>10480224
this is me as a kid. im 100% white,my parents have white ancestors.i have afro. shut the fuck up already and give me some advice for fucks sake.

>>10480287
We gave you advice. Use oil and all that. Please don't bump AIDS thread with pictures, and use sage.

>>10479131
and me as a baby.such a nigger face, am i right? fucking unbelievable you people

>>10480259
>it would be impossible to organize all humans into proper racial definitions
Correct, because the differences are not as big as you believe they are, hence the reason ''modern human races'' do not exist since in biology race = sub-specie. We are all modern human aka homo sapiens sapiens who appeared in Africa around 40,000 years ago (anatomically AND intellectually modern) before spreading around the world and adapting rather quickly to different climates.

>>10479610
>scientists attempted to classify human races based on variations in characteristics such as skin color, hair color and form, eye color, facial anatomy, and blood groups. In the recent past, various scientists, such as Franz Boas, have divided us into anywhere between three and more than thirty different races, without any success. Most of these hypothetical “races” were developed using assumptions about genetic relationships and distributions among different human populations.

We're not as DIFFERENT as you believe we are.

>>10479588
>There are no major complex behaviors that directly correlate with what might be considered human “racial” characteristics.
>there is no relationship between nose size, height, blood group, or skin color and any set of complex human behaviors.
>>10479637
>Using a number of molecular markers has shown that the degree of isolation among human populations that would have been necessary for the formation of biological subspecies or races never occurred during the 200,000 years of modern human evolution.

>>10480289
wow i really didn't think about oiling the hair at all.let me do something i have no idea how to do it or when to do it also without knowing what will happen after i do it.great information indeed.so many cancer fags in this thread

>>10480259
>>10480293
See
>>10479669
>Templeton analyzed genetic data from mitochondrial DNA, a form inherited only from the maternal side; Y chromosome DNA, paternally inherited DNA; and nuclear DNA, inherited from both sexes. His results showed that 85 percent of genetic variation in the human DNA was due to individual variation. A mere 15 percent could be traced to what could be interpreted as "racial" differences.
>"The 15 percent is well below the threshold that is used to recognize race in other species," Templeton says. "In many other large mammalian species, we see rates of differentiation two or three times that of humans before the lineages are even recognized as races. Humans are one of the most genetically homogenous species we know of. There's lots of genetic variation in humanity, but it's basically at the individual level. The between-population variation is very, very minor."
>Among Templeton's conclusions: there is more genetic similarity between Europeans and sub-Saharan Africans and between Europeans and Melanesians, inhabitants of islands northeast of Australia, than there is between Africans and Melanesians. Yet, sub-Saharan Africans and Melanesians share dark skin, hair texture and cranial-facial features, traits commonly used to classify people into races. According to Templeton, this example shows that "racial traits" are grossly incompatible with overall genetic differences between human populations.

>>10480259
>>10480293
>>10480298
>>10479686
>Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin showed that human populations, then held to be races, were far more genetically diverse than anyone had imagined. Lewontin’s study was based on molecular-genetic techniques and provided statistical analysis of 17 polymorphic sites, including the major blood groups in the races as they were conventionally defined: Caucasian, African, Mongoloid, South Asian Aborigines, Amerinds, Oceanians and Australian Aborigines. What he found was unambiguous—and the inverse of what one would expect if such races had any biological reality: The great majority of genetic variation (85.4 percent) was within so-called races, not between them. Differences between local populations accounted for 8.5 percent of total variation; differences between regions accounted for 6.3 percent. The genetic divergence between geographical populations in the course of human evolution does not compare to the variation among individuals. “Since such racial classification is now seen to be of virtually no genetic or taxonomic significance either, no justification can be offered for its continuance,” Lewontin concluded.
>>10479691
>Between 5 and 7 percent of human genetic diversity is between subgroups within the classically defined races; 6 to 10 percent of the total human variation is between those groups that we think of as races in an everyday sense based on skin color. The remainder of the variation occurs at the individual level and cannot be categorized by group or subgroup.
>Certainly some traits are more clustered in specific populations than in others, such as skin color, hair form, nose shape and blood type. But race is little more than skin deep in biological terms, and individuals are frequently more genetically similar to members of other so-called races than they are to their own said race.

>>10480280
>so it tends to be mostly a formality for organization rather than making one for making metaphysical claims

>>so it tends to be mostly a formality for organization

That's exactly what it is. A type of human categorization. I really don't understand what you're trying to say.

>>10480287
>>10480290
post you now without covering up
anyone who might know you already identifies you from the hair, so you have nothing to lose
that will determine if you're part black or not, not baby pics

>>10480293
>Correct, because the differences are not as big as you believe they are, hence the reason ''modern human races'' do not exist since in biology race = sub-specie.
Uh no, it's because humans are a migrating species without clear isolated habitats which makes drawing exact lines difficult. For the twentieth fucking time, see
>>10479856
For an example of a few of the countless of variations there are to our species that has evolved in an extreme amount of habitats across the earth. There are examples of subspecies where one subspecies of birds have a red feather in its tail, and the other doesn't, however these birds live in isolation from each other and are thus easier to define.

We did not "evolve 40,000 years ago". The first homo sapiens left Africa 200 000 years ago, with several following waves.

>We're not as DIFFERENT as you believe we are.
Uh, your out of context argument that classifying people as races is difficult has nothing to do with whether or not we're different.

Also your quotes aren't cited, don't explain how they reached their conclusions, and pretend people have argued that lip size alters behaviour so they can claim "there's no such correlation", which of course you should then mis-interpret as our brains do not vary at all depending on race.

Your last quote even proves my point. We have not been isolated enough to make clear definitions. This has nothing to do with different populations not being different.

>>10480295
Google it. Do you want /fa/ to instruct you on how to wipe your ass too?

>>10480298
>>10480299
Just cite a link instead of fucking up the board even more you cancerous fag.

>>10480301
It's just to make a point of what kind of "reality" is ascribed to them. It's a mixture of performative recognition, but mostly, if not entirely, interest in internal diversity and exteriors rather than impossibly established meta ones. The consistency of realness given to race by modern anthropology is often times completely unrelated to that of their interpreters.

>>10479131
holy fucking shit,leaving the thread.keep making the board cancer.i hope it gets shut down to fucking oblivion. dem mods tho.

>>10480315
>We did not "evolve 40,000 years ago". The first homo sapiens left Africa 200 000 years ago, with several following waves.
I never claimed this. Nice reading comprehension, I stated:
>>10480293
>40,000 years ago (anatomically AND intellectually modern)
>AND intellectually modern
>AND

>>10480287
it don't matter but somewhere along the line your parents were dark skinned, some traits are left behind

Daily reminder we're all descended from Africans and modern europeans simply have a large percentage of Homo Neanderthalis blood because Homo Sapiens went there and engaged in bestiality with them.

As well as Asians having Homo Erectus DNA for the same reason, neither one being pure Homo Sapien.

>>10480315
>Your last quote even proves my point. We have not been isolated enough to make clear definitions. This has nothing to do with different populations not being different.
See
>>10480238

>>10480322
So you're saying humans became intellectually modern long after they migrated? Which was the latest major migration out of Africa, the abos right? 40 000 years ago roughly. I thought they only mixed with Indians, thais, viets, malays, philipinos and then ended up in Australia... Are these the only intellectually modern peoples?

>>10480328
this

btw:

>Various Y chromosome studies show that the San carry some of the most divergent (oldest) human Y-chromosome haplogroups. These haplogroups are specific sub-groups of haplogroups A and B, the two earliest branches on the human Y-chromosome tree.[44][45][46]

>Mitochondrial DNA studies also provide evidence that the San carry high frequencies of the earliest haplogroup branches in the human mitochondrial DNA tree. This DNA is inherited only from one's mother. The most divergent (oldest) mitochondrial haplogroup, L0d, has been identified at its highest frequencies in the southern African San groups.[44][47][48][49]

>In a study published in March 2011, Brenna Henn and colleagues found that the ǂKhomani San, as well as the Sandawe and Hadza peoples of Tanzania, were the most genetically diverse of any living humans studied. This high degree of genetic diversity hints at the origin of anatomically modern humans.[50][51]
for citations:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_people#Genetics

>>10480328
Nope. Blonde hair is believed to have evolved as an adaptation to life in northern Europe about 10k years ago. The neanderthal mix happened in the mid east, and all asians, Europeans, arabs, amerindians etc have it.

Our physical traits are not due to cross-breeding with other evolutionary lines, they're primarily due to our own evolutionary adaptations away from Africa.

>>10480331
See the replies to what you posted there.

>>10480328
Africans don't have Neanderthal shitposter

>>10480332
I said around 40,000 years ago, it's actually 50,000, not that much of a difference considering the fact that modern civilizations are extremely recent:

>There is considerable debate regarding whether the earliest anatomically modern humans behaved similarly to recent or existing humans. Modern human behaviors characteristic of recent humans includes a language, the capacity for abstract thought and the use of symbolism to express cultural creativity. There are two opposing hypotheses regarding the origins of modern behavior. Some scholars argue that humans achieved anatomical modernity first, around 200,000 years ago. Later, around 50,000 years ago, humans then adopted modern behaviors. This hypothesis is based on the record of fossils and biogenic substances from periods before 50,000 years ago and the human artifacts found after 50,000 years ago. Correspondingly, as stated by Paul Mellars, the view distinguishes anatomically modern humans from behaviorally modern humans.

- Companion encyclopedia of archaeology. Vol. 2. Page 763 (cf., ... "effectively limited to organic samples" [ed. organic compounds ] "or biogenic carbonates that date to less than 50 ka (50,000 years ago).")

- Mellars, Paul (2006). "Why did modern human populations disperse from Africa ca. 60,000 years ago?". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103 (25): 9381–6. Bibcode:2006PNAS..103.9381M. doi:10.1073/pnas.0510792103. PMC 1480416. PMID 16772383.

>>10480340
>The neanderthal mix happened in the mid east
Only in the Middle East? Got evidence?

>>10480349
he's wrong cus Neanderthals lived in cold climates

this relates to>>10479499

>>10480349
No not only in the middle east but primarily. And the admixture is fairly evenly distributed in all northern route eurasians and their descendants from the Japanese to the maya to the germanics.

>>10480354
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal_genome_project

>>10480381
you can't pull anything out, you just post a Wikipedia page and hope that I'll look for what not there

>>10480397
I'm not "pulling anything out" cause this is /fa/, and I don't want to go full autism like that from memester.

Here's a quote from the source citation:
In May 2010, the project released a draft of their report on the sequenced Neanderthal genome. Contradicting the results discovered while examining mitochondrial DNA, they demonstrated a range of genetic contribution to non-African modern humans ranging from 1% to 4%. From their Homo sapiens samples in Eurasia (French, Han Chinese & Papuan) the authors state that it is likely that interbreeding occurred in the Levant before Homo sapiens migrated into Europe.[20]

>>10480400
>the authors state that it is likely that interbreeding occurred in the Levant before Homo sapiens migrated into Europe.[20]

pretty sure that hopeful thinking is not proof

>>10480401
What? Hopeful thinking? Why would they hope for that?

How else would the neanderthal DNA have reached all humans outside of Africa?

>>10480403
>>10480403
prob cus the children human's that got raped by the Neanderthals were more resilient to the heat than the pure Neanderthals, that fact get stronger after breading with human's a 2nd generation and so on

mfw op's father is actually his stepfather

damn ur dad got cucked

>don't even have a face

Post blonde negroes.

>>10480444
what the fuck

http://www.yelp.ca/user_details?userid=IERfBjA-V0wp_HAJN-FJ2w

Same situation as you but instead w/ darker red/brown haircolour

I keep it somewhat faded but I wear thick rimmed glasses. Dont ever go to a white barber/salon, they will fuck it up to now end. I've gone through 5 or 6 different barbers before settling on a black barber. Its worth it fam.

>tfw there is literally nobody on the planet that look like you

I dont know how to feel

>>10480554
>bumping the aids

>>10480597
omw to 3 hunna

>>10480600

>>10480606

>>10480611

>>10480613

>>10480613
you can't stop the bump

>>10480616

can't stop

won't stop

the bump

the bump

>>10480617
>>10480630
two posts from freedom

>>10480634
we 3hunna now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xt0V0_1MS0Q

bump

>>10479701
He's a fucking pretentious tacky try hard faggot who looks fucking terrible

>>10480444
jesus. race mixing smh

>>10482651
it's albinism you fucking autist

>>10482146
Oh I can't stand him but OP asked who the "one ginger black singer" the other anon talked about was, so I showed him a picture.

Dude seems like a massive Uncle Tom to me. "I'M DIFFERENT BECAUSE I'M BLACK BUT I WEAR SUITS AND I HAVE A COON ASS STRAIGHTENED HAIRSTYLE!!!!!" Painfully tryhard.

>>10479131
hahahahaha looks like your mom fucked a NIGGER behind your dads back

>>10482855
how's it like being 12 and edgy?

want ur hair sobad

>>10482651
ikr!

>>10483079
fucking coaIbuᴦᴨer

>>10483098
the fuck are you talking about?

>>10479131
this looks dry as fuck, coconut butter the shit out of that.
I have no idea about black hair but I watched enough Chris Rock's "Good Hair" doc to know that there's a thing called Relaxer which is toxic as shit but it makes your hair manageable, have you tried that?

>>10479335
>no idea how dreading works
what is the internet

>>10483275
pls don't listen to this dipshit. Relaxer chemically straightens your hair, it doesn't make it "manageable".

>>10483275
>has no idea how to black hair
>gives shit
fuck off

>>10480554
the thing is,like i said,there are no black barbers around.there are not even black people around.i barely convinced my barber to try side cutting and i cant go beyond that atm.i have to do something on my own.or explain exactly what i want in a way he can understand.i can probably find some places to do dreads,but i dont know how that will do and heard that it can be really hard to take care of.i did take some of the advices of fellow fams like i washed it with full ice water no conditioner.i bought bunch of creams and stuff and applied them after shower.it was cool for a few hours curls looked nice and wavy.then it got dry as fucking sand again.

>>10483310
its so fucking frustrating,everyone is like "oh be thankful that you have hair you could be bald.you care too much about your hair."
its okay when straight haired people take role models from celebrities,football players etc.cut here cut there comb here leave here.but when i want to make something they just dont want to say anything because they have no fucking idea about how to help. no one understands.

>>10483338
>>10483310
the real question is what do you want to do with your hair. lurk a /bhg/ (black hair general) thread and figure out what you think would look good on you. Only then can we truly help you

Go to a barbershop and ask for a low bald taper and tell em to leave the top alone or just tell em to fuck your shit up.

>>10483310
>no conditioner
WHY???? It's no shampoo, use conditioner and leave-in conditioners as much as you can.

>>10483310
google keratin treatment. no idea what it does coz i dont have curly hair but a few people i know has helped them, as they have grown up.

>>10480444
You know when you take the uncooked ramen out the pack? Say no more fam.

>>10480287
IDK what to tell you bro. I think you're one of us. Somehow, somewhere. You have black in you. Get a DNA test if it bothers you.

>>10479310
>>10479322
>>10479131

Keep in mind, Pic related is
>50% Black
>50% White

It happens OP. Embrace it.

>>10485181
forgot pic

>OP's dad got cucked by a black guy

Might as well embrace your ethnicity at this point

i feel you man, get a 1 on the back and sides to the temple then get an 8 clippers all over and get it partially blended!!