Serious science business.

[Anonymous No.4128245]

Why do people claim that blacks are the same species when hard, concrete, objective science says they are not? Science even says that we are closer to Neanderthals than blacks, and recent discoveries on human/Neanderthal cross breeding in the past seem to explain how this is possible. Please look at the image for scientific proof.

Please dont post your typical strawman argument like "we shouldnt treat them bad just because of that" or "troll troll sage sage"

[Anonymous No.4128253]

Being "closer to Neanderthals" doesn't necessarely mean better... If we are closer to an older species, it means that they are more evolved.

[Anonymous No.4128260]

>>4128253
I told you not to bring those strawman arguments about "better" or "worse" or "treating people bad"

stay out of my thread

[Anonymous No.4128268]

Not even worth a response.

[Anonymous No.4128275]

<div class="math">\smash{ \rlap { \lower{-35em}{\mathbf{~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/}}}}
\smash{ \rlap { \lower{-32em}{\mathbf{~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/}}}}
\smash{ \rlap { \lower{-30em}{\mathbf{~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/}}}}
\smash{ \rlap { \lower{-28em}{\mathbf{~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/}}}}
\smash{ \rlap { \lower{-26em}{\mathbf{~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/}}}}</div>

[Anonymous No.4128277]

>Why do people claim that blacks are the same species when hard, concrete, objective science says they are not?

Because Americans are cowards when it comes to race. The moment someone prominent enough says something bad about minorities in general and blacks in particular, their career is over.

[Anonymous No.4128278]

>>4128275
reported

[Anonymous No.4128285]

>>4128245
>retard confirmed
humans = subspecies 'homo sapiens sapiens'
that includes black and even shit for brains like you

[Anonymous No.4128291]

<div class="math">\smash{ \rlap { \lower{-25em}{\mathbf{~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/}}}}
\smash{ \rlap { \lower{-22em}{\mathbf{~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/}}}}
\smash{ \rlap { \lower{-20em}{\mathbf{~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/}}}}
\smash{ \rlap { \lower{-18em}{\mathbf{~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/}}}}
\smash{ \rlap { \lower{-16em}{\mathbf{~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/~~~Back ~to ~/pol/}}}}</div>

Don't like it, hide the thread.

[Anonymous No.4128308]

>>4128285
did you even look at the science i posted? its like you are part of some religion and you just repeat robotic phrases despite proof to the contrary

BZZ BZZ WE..ARE..ALL...EQUAL...AND...SAPIENS BZZ BZZ PLEASE INSERT FLOPPY DISK BZZ BZZ

[Anonymous No.4128316]

>>4128253

Evolution isn't linear you retarded fuck. You aren't "more evolved" in any value adding or meaningful sense just because you are the mutation combo of the day.

[Anonymous No.4128329]

>>4128308
>2011
>thinking coons are the same species

[Anonymous No.4128342]

The genetic variance between any two humans is not enough to even differentiate them as a subspecies. Sorry, but genetic closeness does not equal genetic variation.

[Anonymous No.4128387]

>>4128342
keep repeating robotic phrases. ill keep replying to tell you that the image and the scientific sources within it prove you wrong

[Anonymous No.4128404]

>mfw when OP's pic says human v. neanderthal
>mfw when OP auto assumes human does not include black people
>mfw when OP is raciss
>mfw when black culture wasn't a mess until gangster rap
>mfw africa sucks, but black people from africa in europe do fine
>mfw I decide that means africa is cursed land and my argument has as much validity as OP's argument.

[Anonymous No.4128407]

>>4128387
>>4128329
>>4128308
non sequiturs out the ass
it doesn't say what you claim it says
suck a dick

[Anonymous No.4128410]

Can we breed with black people and produce fertile offspring? Yes. Then we're the same fucking species. End of discussion.

[Anonymous No.4128416]

>mfw OP is autistic but really believes he is functional
>mfw OP thinks he might even be superior to others
>mfw OP storms out of classes because they disagree with his opinions
>mfw the extremely well documented european history appears a lot worse than the undocumented history of other peoples
>mfw white people invented the atomic bomb, but that's ok
>mfw OP is the only person worried about brainwashing because non-autistic people can handle hearing these things
>mfw OP comes on an anonymous forum to say his stupid ideas, because irl non-autists laugh at him

[Anonymous No.4128421]

because we can mate with them and then those children can mate with other mixed children. This by definition makes them part of our species

[Anonymous No.4128424]

>>4128245

[Anonymous No.4128429]

>>4128424
keep saying its wrong and ill keep directing you to look at the image in the OP which proves me right and has sources cited

[Anonymous No.4128431]

>>4128404
>MFW when you are dumb as fuck and don't know how to interpret the image OP posted.

Typical "science lurving" /sci/ denizen.

[Anonymous No.4128452]

>>4128421
thats not the definition of a species, that is a laymens non-scientific general rule of thumb for the average moron, which does not apply on MANY occasions.

[Anonymous No.4128449]

>>4128429
It's not wrong.
>Why do people claim that blacks are the same species when hard, concrete, objective science says they are not?
Look at it. It says under species that all three are H. sapien.
You just can't read tables.

[Anonymous No.4128453]

Hey mod, I saw you deleted the js stuff in this thread, yet you kept this thread alive. Please, could you explain why you did that? This thread is blatant /new/shit, trolling, not-science garbage. Why would you keep such a thread alive on the one hand but prevent other people from shitposting on it as it deserves on the other hand? I'm fine with mods being lazy and not moderating anything, but if you can't be bothered with moderating anything, please let users do it for themselves. If you insist that shitposting should not be tolerated, then finish the job and delete this whole thread. Those were my two cents, thanks for reading. Have a nice day!

[Anonymous No.4128462]

>>4128449
and both homo erectus and neanderthal which are considered different species, have less genetic distance to homo sapiens than blacks do to other homo sapien races

learn to read the chart. they are a different species by all accounts. the species column is merely identifying current classification but the conclusion of the data is that the classifications are wrong and we need to classify human races as separate species

[Anonymous No.4128468]

>>4128452

spe·cies   [spee-sheez, -seez] Show IPA noun, plural -cies, adjective
noun

1.
a class of individuals having some common characteristics or qualities; distinct sort or kind.
2.
Biology . the major subdivision of a genus or subgenus, regarded as the basic category of biological classification, composed of related individuals that resemble one another, *are able to breed among themselves, but are not able to breed with members of another species.*

[Anonymous No.4128470]

>>4128453
Just because it hurts your feelings, it doesn't make it a troll. And how can you say it's not science when there are scientific scientists being referenced, studies being cited, etc.? Please take your anti-science rhetoric back to /b/.

[Anonymous No.4128482]

>>4128468
neanderthal and homosapiens, different species, able to breed fertile offspring

[Anonymous No.4128487]

because when you even think of hinting on pointing this out, you are labelled racist, all your funding is revoked and you won't publish anything anywhere and you'll be deemed crackpot for the rest of your life.

Such are the times. Like that guy who was deranged for finding that Africans have smaller skulls. He was labelled racist and biased and, overall, shitty scientist only to find out that he was actually right years after his death and his opponents were biased against ``racism''.
https://www.stanford.edu/dept/anthropology/cgi-bin/web/?q=node/897

[Anonymous No.4128496]

>>4128482
Neanderthal is a subspecies of H. sapien, not a separate species.

[Anonymous No.4128531]

>>4128496
no, not all academics agree on this. but okay, lets take another example:

polar bear and grizzly bear

also, lets forget about neanderthal since you want to play the semantics game. notice that theres more distance between blacks and other races than there is between homo erectus and homo sapiens

[Anonymous No.4128541]

SAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGE
ESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAG
GESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESA
AGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGES
SAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGE
ESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAG
GESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESA
AGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGESAGES
  ▲
▲ ▲

[Anonymous No.4128547]

>>4128541
Truth hurts your preconceived ideas, little girl? Such is life. Get used to it.

[Anonymous No.4128557]

>>4128531
>since you want to play the semantics game.
It's based on scientific evidence and the nomenclature is based on it.

>notice that theres more distance between blacks and other races than there is between homo erectus and homo sapiens
That's what your image says.

But you've already conceded your main point that blacks are not the same species, which your image does not back up.
All that image does is back up genetic drift, and as homo sapiens sapiens originated in Africa and migrated upward to the other continents, this makes sense.

[Anonymous No.4128657]

>>4128557
nice try. but if you say that blacks are not a separate species, then you also have to argue that homo erectus is not a separate species, or better yet, that grizzly and polar bears are not separate species.

[Anonymous No.4128682]

OH MY GOD WHY NOBODY READ THE DNA ANALYSED!!!!!!!! Mitochondrial DNA IS NOT CHROMOSOMAL DNA

[Anonymous No.4128738]

>>4128682
0/10

[Anonymous No.4128763]

>>4128657
>implying bear evolution is the same as human evolution

[Anonymous No.4128766]

>>4128738
0/10

Have a genetic lesson please

[Anonymous No.4128769]

>>4128245
Since when did biology become a hard, concrete, objective science capable of producing the same?

[Anonymous No.4128780]

>>4128657
Homo erectus cannot be considered the same species as Homo sapiens, due to the fact that they had no chronological overlap. (These are known as chronospecies.)
Polar bears and brown bears, while they CAN interbreed, generally do not due to having adapted to different niches.
The differences between negroids, caucasians, mongoloids, and australoids do NOT merit classification as separate species. The phenotypic differences are restricted to pigmentation and some soft-tissue morphology.

[Anonymous No.4128781]

>>4128410
/thread

[Anonymous No.4128789]

>species defined as population that can only procreate within itself
>blacks still able to procreate with other "races" to create viable, functional humans
>>>/pol/ shit in my /sci/? say it aint so

[Anonymous No.4128851]

>>4128780
>Polar bears and brown bears, while they CAN interbreed, generally do not due to having adapted to different niches.

would be true of humans as well if non-blacks had not developed transportation technology. the definition of a species is not privy to your whims and rationalizations. lets face it, you either have to claim that blacks are a separate species or that polar bears and grizzlies are the same species. you cant escape this.

[Anonymous No.4128889]

https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/woodley-2009-is-homo-sapiens-polytypic-huma
n-taxonomic-diversity-and-its-implications.pdf

From the paper OP copypasted this from:

>Criticisms of Fuerle’s arguments
>
>FST reflects the relative amount of total genetic differentiation
>between populations, however different measures of genetic distance
>involving mtDNA and autosomal loci are simply inappropri-
>ate for the purposes of inter-specific comparison as the different
>genes involved will have been subject to markedly different selection
>pressures and are therefore not likely to have diverged at the
>same time [62].

OP is a troll.

[Anonymous No.4128940]

>>4128889
so because someone had an argument against something it automatically becomes a troll? i guess that makes all of science a troll then?

dumb fuck

[Anonymous No.4128946]

>>4128342
Wrong nigger worshipper!

Negroids and European whites are further apart genetically than dogs and wolves.

[Anonymous No.4128951]

>>4128940
Knowing about a strong argument against your claim, and not mentioning it, makes you intellectually dishonest. Or in the context of a webforum, a troll.

[Anonymous No.4128952]

>>4128889
That "argument" isn't an argument at all. It's nitpicking by someone deeply biased against the concept of biological race.

Negroids are a different subspecies from the rest of humanity.

[Anonymous No.4128964]

>>4128951
>the argument against yours is strong because it confirms my bias

who is the real troll?

[Anonymous No.4128967]

>>4128946
>no evidence
OH BOY, I SURE TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT.
>>4128851
Blacks and whites are not adapted to different niches and can live equally well in different climates. Ancestrally (before modern transportation), negroids and caucasoids share range in North Africa.

[Anonymous No.4128970]

>>4128951
>HURRRRR DA ONLEE RACE IS DA HUMAN RACE XD

[Anonymous No.4128982]

>>4128967
LOL. LOL. LOL.

>U HAV NO EVIDENCE STFU

>LOL I WILL MAKE AN OUTLANDISH CLAIM WITH NO EVIDENCE THAT IS ACTUALLY CONTRADICTED BY EVIDENCE

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/booster_shots/2010/01/low-vitamin-d-levels-in-blacks-may-explain-hig
her-rates-of-heart-disease.html

[Anonymous No.4128989]

>>4128967
did you know that blacks whove immigrated to northern countries get severe vitamin D deficiency and often get sick? whats the remedy for this? technology, yet again (vitamin D supplementation).

this is just one small example that shows: 1. no, they cannot live equally well just because your emotions tell you they can and 2. technology yet again allows humans to circumvent your definition of what species differences should be

[Anonymous No.4129020]

>>4128245
The statement "more evolved" isn't even a thing. Every single species alive today is just as evolved as the other

[Anonymous No.4129028]

>>4128789
>implying mulattoes are viable or functional people

[Anonymous No.4129042]

>>4129020
you must have replied to the wrong post because no where there does it say anyone is more evolved than anyone else. in fact, some anti-race arguer tried to make that point later on in the thread.

[Anonymous No.4129123]

>>4128889
Note that it even shows on the table how much of a difference comparing different types of DNA makes. Look at the last two rows.

So leaving aside value judgments or classification arguments, no, this data does not show that we are closer to Neanderthals than blacks.

Now if anyone has data showing how whites' mitochondrial DNA compares with blacks, that would be interesting to see.

[Anonymous No.4129223]

>>4129042

>Being "closer to Neanderthals" doesn't necessarely mean better... If we are closer to an older species, it means that they are more evolved.

>more evolved

First post you dumb fuck

[Anonymous No.4129228]

Everyone who isn't a wishy washy faggot can agree that niggers are primitives who belong in a zoo.

[Anonymous No.4129307]

<div class="math">\frac{\frac{\frac{\frac{\frac{\frac{\frac{\frac{\frac{\frac{n^{i^{g^{g^{e^{r^{s}}}}}}}{n^{i^{g^{g^{e
^{r^{s}}}}}}}}{n^{i^{g^{g^{e^{r^{s}}}}}}}}{n^{i^{g^{g^{e^{r^{s}}}}}}}}{n^{i^{g^{g^{e^{r^{s}}}}}}}}{n
^{i^{g^{g^{e^{r^{s}}}}}}}}{n^{i^{g^{g^{e^{r^{s}}}}}}}}{n^{i^{g^{g^{e^{r^{s}}}}}}}}{n^{i^{g^{g^{e^{r^
{s}}}}}}}}{n^{i^{g^{g^{e^{r^{s}}}}}}}}{n^{i^{g^{g^{e^{r^{s}}}}}}}</div>

[Anonymous No.4129394]

>>4128989
>>4128982
So...what you've proven is that black people have more melanin in their skin than white people.
GOOD JOB!

Are yellow labs and black labs different species?

[Anonymous No.4129416]

Because unity of races makes it possible to de-localize heritage and introduce the concept of inherent equality necessary to unilateralize the working class into a single strata while the operating class remains aloof and outside the public view.

[Anonymous No.4129462]

>>4129394
if youre not going to follow/werent following the discussion, why reply?

[Anonymous No.4129476]

>>4129123
why would that be more interesting than blacks to australoids (which is on the chart)?

[Anonymous No.4129498]

>>4129223
Yea, and that first reply was not the one you quoted, nigger.

[Anonymous No.4129513]

>>4129476
There is no comparison of mitochondrial DNA between modern human races on that chart.

[Anonymous No.4129550]

I am proud of /sci/ for all of the sage. Keep up the good work.

[Anonymous No.4129613]

>>4129513
are you retarded or trolling? look at the first two comparisons. or are you going to try playing word games like liberals often do when confronted with evidence that challenges their religion?

[Anonymous No.4129664]

>>4128952
>Negroids are a different subspecies from the rest of humanity.
really, because scientists say the only existing humans are homo sapiens sapiens, ie, 1 subspecies, the only 1

[Anonymous No.4129863]

If a black guy fucked your sister, she'd have a kid, therefore = same species, fuckhead.

[Anonymous No.4130237]

>>4129863
13 year old detected

[Anonymous No.4130250]

>>4128245
>straw men claim
fix'd

[Anonymous No.4130280]

>>4130250
i dont understand your post

[Anonymous No.4130300]

>>4128462
>the conclusion of the data is that the classifications are wrong and we need to classify human races as separate species

Mind posting the image of that conclusion, then?

[Anonymous No.4131875]

>>4130300
that would be the conclusion of any rational human being, seeing as how we are talking pure numbers and numbers are not objective. do you need some authority to tell you what to think about everything? do you need an authority to tell you the sky is blue before the blue sky you see before you is noted as being blue?

[Anonymous No.4132218]

>>4128889