/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15540746]

Is this true or a /pol/ meme, are blacks and whites/anyone else actually different species?

[Anonymous No.15540752]

>>15540746
this is a /pol/ meme. the fact that most high-achieving blacks in the US have identifiable white ancestry (using DNA data) proves that we all interbreed. and interbreeding is the definition of what makes a species. as far as biology textbooks go

[Anonymous No.15540756]

/sci/ is IQ supremacist. We want to eliminate both violent gangbangers and low-IQ rednecks. We would always take a high-IQ black over some low-IQ redneck sitting around wowing about the 1,000th /pol/ "insider" LARP.

[Anonymous No.15540760]

>>15540752
If a human and neanderthal had offspring the baby would have only human DNA then according to your logic? Almost all humans have neanderthal DNA so I don't understand your point

[Anonymous No.15540761]

>>15540756
>/sci/ is IQ supremacist
So you'd eliminate almost all of africa since the average IQ there is like 65-70? That's raycis!

[Anonymous No.15540763]

>>15540761
Yes, and most of cuckservative America.
I don't see the problem.

[Anonymous No.15540765]

>>15540756
oh yeah, dumb whites are just as likely to be subhuman as sub-saharans. the Brits of the Victorian era thought Irish were basically apes. and Ashkenazis basically think all the goys as well as the Sephardim are subhuman.

i mean, in all honesty you have to admit that some folks are just trash. there are smart elite people who deserve money and then there are lots of trash, for all continents and skin colors and etc. and of course women are not as smart so they can just play around in woman world. we all know who runs shit and it’s the smart well bred men

[Anonymous No.15540769]

>>15540746
blacks are a different species, the recently disproved "out of africa" meme was constructed to disguise that fact. how can you even look at an african and think that they're the same species as us?

[Anonymous No.15540770]

>>15540756
Nah

Handsome low IQ people > Ugly high IQ people

I can't stand the uglies

[Anonymous No.15540776]

Then why can Africans and the rest of the world produce viable offspring?

[Anonymous No.15540778]

>>15540776
Why can coyotes and dogs?

[Anonymous No.15540903]

>>15540746
A convenient libshart strategem would be to put North Africans (which I would assume would be about where West Asians and Europeans are) in the "African" camp with them then going "See? It's all arbitrary. What? I am not technically incorrect!" while I continue beating in their fucking visage with a meat tenderizer.

[Anonymous No.15540930]

>>15540746
>1,000th /pol/ "insider" LARP.
/pol/'s average IQ is so fucking low it's ridiculous
that's the only reason that shit can happen day after day and still get full threads

[Anonymous No.15541018]

>>15540930
You didn't provide an argument, you essentially just said "LOL THEY'RE RETARDED".

[Anonymous No.15541021]

>>15540903
That is basically what they do. In most of the other published research I've seen they have it charted so that "African" has this extended tail of mixed-race Afro-Arabs connecting them loosely with the Asian corner of the graph.

[Anonymous No.15541037]

>>15540752
Actually there are many known distinct species that can interbreed, including lions and tigers, and polar bears and grizzly bears.
This kind of information is hidden away in objects called books.

[Anonymous No.15541056]

>>15540752
>interbreeding is the definition of what makes a species
No it isn't. Many different species can hybridise: polar bears and brown bears, foxes, coyotes and dogs/wolves, and many many more.

[Anonymous No.15541058]

>>15540752
>In 2016, a whole-genome DNA study suggested that all of the North American canids, both wolves and coyotes, diverged from a common ancestor 6,000–117,000 years ago. The whole-genome sequence analysis shows that two endemic species of North American wolf, the red wolf and eastern wolf, are admixtures of the coyote and gray wolf.
Younger than most human racial divergences.

[Anonymous No.15541060]

>>15541056
Africans are mutually fertile with chimpanzees, whites are not. The USSR tried the experiment on their own citizens and failed, yet an Angolan woman was able to get pregnant by a chimp

https://guardian.ng/news/genetic-makeup-of-12-year-old-angolan-boy-in-dispute/

[Anonymous No.15541075]

it's a PCA chart. it's for clustering based on predetermined labels. it's not giving you a phylogenetic tree and finding how different two branches are.
you're looking at a chart meant to check if the heritage labels match the genetics, looking for outliers.

[Anonymous No.15541103]

>>15541075
It's interesting how Spaniards essentially created several brand new races when they colonized America.

[Anonymous No.15541104]

>>15541103
Speciation often emerges from hybridization in nature.

[Anonymous No.15541166]

>>15540746
Two PCAs side by side with no information on what's being measured in either. How informative.

[Anonymous No.15541189]

>>15541166
PCAs are always measured in % of variation

[Anonymous No.15541331]

>>15540756
This is really telling of /sci/

>>15540746
/meme/

[Anonymous No.15541338]

The number of species of dogs always goes up and down. We can't even define it correctly.

[Anonymous No.15541369]

Only the middest of midwits actually believes that Africans are the same species as other humans. Everyone else knows this is wrong by sheer intuition. For obvious reasons this can never be acknowledged in polite society or even in academic circles. But it doesn’t mean it’s true.

Yes, different species can interbreed and have fertile offspring. That does not make them the same species, although admittedly it muddies the waters in terms of where one species ends and another begins.

As someone else already pointed out, Africans can (and on more than one documented occasion, have actually done so) breed with chimpanzees.

[Anonymous No.15541412]

>>15540756
>>15540765
>but not me, i'm slightly above average intelligence so i'm like the priest caste basically

[Anonymous No.15541414]

>>15541412
<140 IQ are subhuman and should sudoku

[Anonymous No.15541422]

>>15541060
>>15541369
Explain why whites can breed with bats then.

[Anonymous No.15541448]

>>15541103
the shape of it being a linear line between a point of Iberians and something close to east asian makes a lot of sense for a hybridization claim

[Anonymous No.15541449]

>>15540746
First thread wasn't good enough bait? You just had to post it again, huh? Fucktard.

[Anonymous No.15541461]

>>15540746
>>15538493 Couldn't handle getting BTFO so you made a new thread huh?

[Anonymous No.15541466]

>>15540746
it's a meme
>>15540769
>recently disproved
can you get the /pol/ cock out of your mouth when you talk? out of africa is still the leading theory

[Anonymous No.15541467]

>>15541060
it's hard to tell if this post is bait or not

[Anonymous No.15541489]

>>15541189
Of what? What are the measurements they used?

[Anonymous No.15541535]

>>15540765
Wrong.

[Anonymous No.15541785]

>>15540756
>We would always take a high-IQ black over some low-IQ white
No. Someone who is dumb but feels kinship with me is worth much more than someone who is smart and resents me.

[Anonymous No.15541789]

>>15541785
noone feels kinship with you because you fucking smell jason

[Anonymous No.15541794]

>>15541789
I hang out with hippies thank you

[Anonymous No.15542017]

>>15540746
PC's purpose is to maximize spread of elements to make them more distinguishable.
Notice how they don't even care about showing the scale.
If I use a tool with the specific intent of showing differences, then... it will just show differences.

[Anonymous No.15542024]

>>15540746
We need 2 threads dedicated to this? Did you know that the submarine was piloted with a video game controller?!?!?!

[Anonymous No.15542039]

>>15542017
>If I use a tool with the specific intent of showing differences, then... it will just show differences.
Only if there are differences

[Anonymous No.15542483]

no

[Anonymous No.15542500]

>>15540756
Based and IQ-pilled

[Anonymous No.15542506]

>>15541060
Insane if true. Someone needs to DNA sequence this kid asap

[Anonymous No.15542510]

>>15542483
I had similar results when I was doing genetics in university but West Africans specifically had a slight grouping outside of other humans (barely statistically significant).

[Anonymous No.15542546]

>>15542483
This is the definition of cherry picking and data manipulation to get an intended result.

[Anonymous No.15542607]

>>15540746
Yes it's true. Yes they are. That doesn't stop interbreeding, but it explains why hapas are so dysgenic.

[Anonymous No.15542672]

>>15541489
PCAs use percentage of variation. So basically if you restrict to looking at population wide differences, the PCA is saying that X% of the genetic differences between two populations can be explained by the component along one axis. So for OP's graph PC2 tells us that that as you move from top to bottom, so from Coyotes to Italian wolves, about 1.7% of base pairs will change. Then when you move from dogs to wolves about 10% of base pairs will change.

Scientists usually graph the components which explain the greatest amount of variation, but you can also find smaller components which tell you more advanced relationships between populations, though these explain a smaller amount of variation.

[Anonymous No.15542871]

>>15540746
Thanks to a genetic bottleneck some 70,000 years ago, that left less than 200 families alive, humans are such a homogeneous species that if they were any more interrelated we'd be able to pass cancers to one another the way Tasmanian devils can.

Taxonomy isn't an exact science, but there's no denying that all humans can interbreed, and their offspring can interbreed in turn. The only other standard is morphological, and humans vary very little compared to most species with global coverage. Chihuahuas and Great Danes are the same species, despite a morphological difference far beyond than that between any two given humans in all of history.

Race is just a polite term for breed. Humans come in just a few skin and hair shades with average size differences of about 20%. There's no difference between any two humans that would be sufficient allow one to seriously consider labeling them different species by any standard.

[Anonymous No.15542878]

Why are liberal and white leftists so adamant to defend the blacks, even fucking muslims? You understand that they don't like you either, right?

[Anonymous No.15542882]

>>15542871
>Race is just a polite term for breed. Humans come in just a few skin and hair shades with average size differences of about 20%. There's no difference between any two humans that would be sufficient allow one to seriously consider labeling them different species by any standard.
Explain why are blacks on average so much more agressive than whites, and especially asians

[Anonymous No.15542953]

>>15542882
Why are shitbulls so much more aggressive than golden retrievers, and especially shiba inus?

[Anonymous No.15543691]

>>15542882
Lead, american.

[Anonymous No.15544245]

>>15542871
>but there's no denying that all humans can interbreed, and their offspring can interbreed in turn.
So can dogs, wolves, coyotes and jackals.
> The only other standard is morphological, and humans vary very little compared to most species with global coverage.
That's not true. Chihuahuas and Great Danes are artificially selected to look very different. Naturally evolving sister species, like wolves and coyotes, do look about as similar as pic.

[Anonymous No.15544327]

>>15542871
>Thanks to a genetic bottleneck some 70,000 years ago
That probably didn't happen though. Most of the evidence for the supposed bottleneck is just the signature of the out of Africa expansion that took place in the last hundred thousand years. There is no sign of it in African genomes.
There was no global bottleneck, you're just looking at the founder effect in non-Africans.

[Anonymous No.15544360]

>>15540746
Let's see how many different species of humans we can imply by pretending to misunderstand graphs.

[Anonymous No.15544363]

>>15543691
Do they consume lead as a cultural practice? Because they have the same behavior worldwide.

[Anonymous No.15544375]

>>15544360
The Chinese and Japanese species.

[Anonymous No.15544382]

>>15544375
Indian and European species.

[Anonymous No.15544384]

>>15544375
You just discovered an age-old concept in animal husbandry. Congrats. Did you know that mixing those subspecies will cause tremendous negative selection pressure?
>>15533006

[Anonymous No.15544385]

>>15544382
European and near eastern species.

[Anonymous No.15544388]

>>15540746
It's data taken out of context. Taken at face value chart B seems to say that there is some principal component that accounts for 78.7% of genetic variation in the population. I've never seen it be anywhere close to that high on any PCA chart I've seen, so probably this is just looking at some limited set of genetic markers.

[Anonymous No.15544389]

>>15542672
>OP's graph PC2 tells us that that as you move from top to bottom, so from Coyotes to Italian wolves, about 1.7% of base pairs will change
Is it not that PC2 encodes 1.7% of the variation? not that the variation itself is 1.7%?

[Anonymous No.15544391]

>>15544385
Wait, hang on, Europeans and west Asians are the same, but it's okay, because now Oceanians are a different species.

[Anonymous No.15544397]

>>15540760
first google result
>Neanderthal DNA is present in about 1 to 2 percent of modern humans, with zero or close to zero percentage in people from African populations.
kys

[Anonymous No.15544413]

>>15544397
Your first Google result was written by someone who barely speaks English. Neanderthal DNA is found in all modern humans, not "1-2 percent of modern humans". I think what they were trying to say, despite their inability to communicate clearly, is that DNA inherited from Neanderthals makes up 1-2% of the average modern human genome.

[Anonymous No.15544420]

>>15542483
why don't you remove the dogshit and zoom on the important part jew

[Anonymous No.15544457]

>>15540756
/sci/ is not your personal army
/sci/ is not one person
you are a jew or jew-by-proximity-to-a-jew

[Anonymous No.15544574]

>>15544360
>>15544375
>>15544382
>>15544385
>>15544391
>implying these aren't all actually different species

[Anonymous No.15544580]

>>15541166
PCA 1 and PCA 2 are always the axis with greatest variance retard

[Anonymous No.15544597]

>>15544389
1.7% of total variance yes,
the key point is that every component is orthogonal

[Anonymous No.15544611]

>>15540760
Neanderthals were humans.

[Anonymous No.15544897]

>>15540746
is a meme, there's no statistically significant differences between humans to claim we are different species, genetics is largely a meme when used in manipulated charts like your pic to push a certain narrative, only field of genetics that has credibility is Mendelian randomization

[Anonymous No.15545499]

>>15544580
But the prinicipal components of what? What data is being measured? Some collection of SNPs? How many?

[Anonymous No.15545510]

>>15540746
its real but noone will admit that

[Anonymous No.15545602]

>>15540746
Unless I'm mistaken, it means the graph covers 89.1% of all genetic differences for people, but only 11.7% for canines. It doesn't show the absolute difference, only the share shown by the geaph.

[Anonymous No.15545604]

>>15540756
>We want
Speak for yourself.

[Anonymous No.15545626]

>>15540746
I am all for blacks being different subspecies to whites and all (I would probably separate Humans into 10 or so subspecies, and sure if the same standards were applied to humans as bears, then blacks would be a different species to whites), but the axes on that graph are telling you that the Human PCA graph preserved far more of the original variance than did the canine one. So it's not a good one to one comparison. Though feel free to use F_{st} or measures like it, which do show humans having enough group genetic variance to have different subspecies when compared to different animals.
In any case, this is bickering over common sense. Continental populations are different (manifesting in looks and behavior), and anywhere where there is a value judgement to be made one can find superiors and inferiors.

[Anonymous No.15545656]

>>15540746
> if one didn’t know better, one might think it was all about politics instead of science

What is it that you should know better? That animals are discriminated by species, but Huumons don’t do that, so we need another word for it?

[Anonymous No.15545699]

>>15540752
The ability to interbreed is proof that two organisms belong to the same species? Interesting hypothesis. Let's test it.
>wolves and coyotes are the same species
>lions and tigers are the same species
>horses and donkeys are the same species
Did you drop out of high school or something lmao?

[Anonymous No.15545706]

>>15540765
>the Brits of the Victorian era thought Irish were basically apes.
They weren't wrong. Take a trip to the rough parts of Dublin, maybe stay there for a few weeks, and you'll start to wonder if the locals are just SSAs with pale skin.

[Anonymous No.15545738]

>>15545699
It has to reliably produce viable (fertile, among other things) offspring. Ligers can not have children, and mules are famous for their inability to foal.
I don't know about wolves and coyotes but I suspect it is true there as well because this is how a species is defined in terms of biology.

[Anonymous No.15545753]

>>15545738
Wrong

[Anonymous No.15545757]

>>15545738
Interesting point. Now go look up the heterozygosity of humans, wolves, and coyotes, and report back with your findings.

[Anonymous No.15545760]

>>15545738
Btw that thing you said about ligers is false.

[Anonymous No.15545772]

>>15545738
>I don't know about wolves and coyotes
Their offspring is fertile. In fact there has been a lot of spontaneous gene flow among their populations in north america. Dogs which are currently considered a different species from wolves, and jackals can also have fertile offspring with the others.
There are many examples of different species with fertile offspring.
Carrion crows and hooded crows, domestic cats and wild cats, american crocodiles and cuban crocodiles are a few I can remember.

Species are not well-defined in terms of biology. It's a weird mix of the old phenotypical classification, conflicting ad hoc definitions, and phylogenetic corrections.

[Anonymous No.15545832]

>>15540752
>most high-achieving blacks in the US have identifiable white ancestry (using DNA data)
Anon, you do realize what you just said implies the higher percentage of white DNA in a nigger then the higher achieving their offspring becomes
Low white DNA = Dumber niggers
High white DNA = Smart niggers
You said it anon, not me

[Anonymous No.15545840]

>>15545738
>Ligers can not have children
Is it so hard for a retard faggot like yourself to search the most basic information up?
It is like you are trying to sound as retarded as possible on purpose by literally making as many false claims as you can shit out

[Anonymous No.15545893]

>>15545832
Blacks are low IQ and retarded, but most on average american Blacks have 20% euro admixture.

[Anonymous No.15545903]

>>15545832
Blacks in the US have on average ~20% Euro admixture.

[Anonymous No.15545904]

wasn't there a point in human history where only a few thousands of us were left and we were close to extinction

[Anonymous No.15546565]

>>15545903
That's a pretty weak correlation and it looks like there was a black guy with less than 10% admixture that was smarter than all but five whites. Average differences in IQ mean less than you chuds think.

[Anonymous No.15546822]

>>15540765
I like this reply, it's smart and down to earth

[Anonymous No.15546841]

>>15545904
No, that's a myth just like "out of africa."

[Anonymous No.15546842]

>>15545904
God that was so kino, we should have either killed the darker ones or let us all die.

[Anonymous No.15546925]

>>15545903
25%

[Anonymous No.15546940]

>>15545832

its the other way around, dysgenic mixed race american negroes are dumb, racially pure africans are far more intelligent