/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.8654669]

Why do people get so triggered when you say that "race is a social construct"?

Papuans and Africans are the two least related groups of people on earth, yet they're virtually indistinguishable to the average American.

Obviously there's a lot of correlation between the "genetic" and the "social" constructs, but there are too many major exceptions (both real ones and theoretical ones through genome editing) to equate them.

[Anonymous No.8654678]

>>8654669
The one thing they're proud of is their skin color and if you take that away from them by making it a fake social construct they've got nothing.

[Anonymous No.8654685]

>>8654669
Probably because it's not a social construct. Your example is retarded and only serves to demonstrate your own racism.

>b-but muh poop and and africans--
are different races, because each of these races has a certain set of physical and intellectual qualities that are unique to it.

Now please stop posting BLACKED.com images on /sci/ because you're salty that /pol/ mods banned you.

[Anonymous No.8654687]

>>8654669
Usually it's because people assume that means more than it really does. Race is a social construct but that doesn't make it not real. The division between humans and dogs is a social construct too. We arbitrarily group things by common traits.Honestly it doesn't mean much at all.

[Anonymous No.8654769]

>>8654687

>The division between humans and dogs is a social construct too.

Sure, but it's also backed up by genetics.

Contrast this to the social construct of "white" and "arab", where there are white-looking groups (the kalash, for example, who have skin, hair, and eye color allele frequencies closer to whites) who do not genetically group up with white Europeans.

In fact, the average Bedouin Arab is twice as related to Europeans as the average Kalasha, despite the latter having much lighter pigmentation (as confirmed by allele databases)

Now obviously, the "social" and the "genetic have a large degree of overlap, but there are major EXISTING exceptions which differentiate the two.

Another example would be early Indoeuropeans. Even the northernmost ones had skin color allele frequencies on par with modern day middle easterners, as recently as 5k years ago.

Now if you want to get into theoreticals, we can imagine people editing their genome to have blue eyes, blonde hair, white skin, etc., and the reverse (although the reverse would happen less often).

How many genetically "non-white" people would be perceived as "white" by the average American? Probably a lot, maybe even most of them.

How many genetically white people would be perceived to be white if they had their skin color edited? None of them would.

[Anonymous No.8654777]

you, (as a white man) could breed with one of these "subhuman" niggers and produce a viable, fertile offspring

explain

[Anonymous No.8654784]

>>8654669

>why do people get so triggered when you say race is a social construct

because they start with an emotional bias, and look for evidence that supports it, while ignoring evidence that goes against it.

[Anonymous No.8654801]

>>8654669
Race is a social construct the inborn xenophobia isn't.

[Anonymous No.8654803]

>>8654784
start with that bias from birth.
born this way bigot. get over it

[Anonymous No.8654808]

>>8654777
so can vastly different dog breeds

explain

[Anonymous No.8654815]

>>8654801

>inborn xenophobia

but there's no evidence that xenophobia is inborn.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2566511/

newborns don't show xenophobic preferences, while 3 months olds do. In other words, it's highly likely that the prejudice is learned, through exposure to the mother.

Most infants tend to share a certain appearance with their mother.

[Anonymous No.8654818]

>>8654808
my point is you are just as human as the nigger. one singular species.

[Anonymous No.8654822]

>Why do people get so triggered when you say that "race is a social construct"?

Because acceptance of said statement makes the world more complex to them. Race is simple, while something like haplogroups represents something much more complex.

Ironically enough we have far less push back from stating that math is a social construct than race despite math having way higher amounts of correlative load to real world phenomenons. This being even more so ironic since race in on itself is derived using mathematical models to derive separation and relational values between different sets.

So how is it exactly easier to say the "mathematical models" that are utilized to categorize race is a social construct but the not the subject matter in question for which requires those mathematical models to have any stable ground?

One could argue it is because race is supposedly founded within the study of biology. But biology merely observes and identifies different characteristics of a given genome in nature, the act of categorizing these characteristics in a given fashion comes from the need for human agency to identify and make easier a interpretation of chaotic system which has no self proclaimed reason to exist in the way it is.

Another argument is that race is correlative to regional locations, the distance between different regional locations and the traits unique to those regional locations. But again like biology, these regional locations and traits (aka geography) merely identifies the topological attributes and distances. It is human agency that once again requires the need to break it down further to social political differences.

So I would say that ultimately it has more to do with the rise of complexity. Because once you identify a subject is derived/ altered by human agency it becomes more harder to provide clear answers.

Perhaps the entire debate is representory of a larger endeavor perpetrated by man to fight a chaotic system in hopes of finding self worth.

[Anonymous No.8654831]

>>8654818
equally ""human""but different races (and some superior than others in aspects)

[Anonymous No.8654832]

>>8654822

>all races being the same is more complex than the obvious truth that genetics play a large role in your behavior, intelligence, character, etc.

[Anonymous No.8654853]

>>8654832

You have poor reading comprehension anon, my post never insisted all races were the same. The first paragraph of my post positioned that the identification of race is far more simple than haplogroups which identifies differences in various populations by specific genetic clusters similar to a gradient (scalar if you will). Which bars blanket identification of various populations under a simple category as "black", "white", "asian" or etc.

[Anonymous No.8654866]

>>8654808
>so can vastly different dog breeds

the average genetic distance between different dog breeds is 0.33

That number is likely much greater for very divergent breeds (eg: malamute versus saluki)

the average distance between different human populations is 0.15. The greatest genetic distance between any two human groups (coincidentally, the Africans and Papuans, which most people would assume are the same race) is 0.25.

the average distance between whites and non-white Caucasoids (eg: Arab, Indian) is 0.015. The average distance between whites and Levantines (eg: Syrian refugees) is probably going to be something like .009, or even less.

[Anonymous No.8654869]

>>8654866

forgot to post source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_genetics

https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/debunking_a_racialist_myth_about_the_genetic_variation_between_dog_breeds

[Anonymous No.8654889]

>>8654832

Except he never said that, you retarded nigger.

>>8654822

If it was just about the complexity, there wouldn't be anger fagainst it. They would simply nod "ok", move on, and ignore it, because 2complex4u.

I can tell people that "wetness is a social construct" and they will either debate me rationally if they're interested, or not care and agree with me so we can move on.

If I tell people that "whiteness is a social construct", half of them lose their fuckin' minds.

I think it's because a lot of people have their self-worth and identity wrapped up in political stuff. You get the same thing, perhaps even bigger, when you say quantifiable things about liberals/conservatives, from both parties.

[Anonymous No.8654898]

>>8654853

that dude is a retard, but you're actually incorrect here.

Haplogroups just describe ancestral descent. If a black man fucks a bunch of white women and a bunch of Asian women, the progeny will all have the haplogroup of the black man.

Race can be a gradient, or it can not be. "Europeans" and "Japanese" are very discrete from each other.

"White Americans" and "African Americans" flow into a gradient due to admixture.

Our entire concept of race is based on whatever happened to exist in the year 1500 AD.

If it existed in 1500, it's a "pure race", if it didn't, it's "mixed".

Of course, the real truth is that every "pure race" has already been mixed many times in the past, often by very divergent founder peoples.

Example: White Europeans can be differentiated accurately based on their proportion of "hunter", "farmer", or "Indoeuropean" ancestry.

These proportions can vary enormously between individuals of the same nation, and between different European ethnicities.

[Anonymous No.8654916]

>>8654669
Maybe because you're making a false claim, faggot. If you're unconvinced at this point that there are different races, let me offer you an example which may remedy this belief instilled in you by your shitty liberal university:

There are several types of apples.

Take red apples and green apples for example:

Red apples are of the color red (by definition) and green apples are of the color green (also by definition). Most red apples taste sweet, and most green apples taste sour. So stop spreading this lie that there are no races

[Anonymous No.8654936]

>>8654669
because you sound like you have a extrem lack of intelligentsia.

taco/10 made me reply

[Anonymous No.8654939]

>>8654669
because a lot people dont know what race means.

[Anonymous No.8654956]

>>8654916

Poe's law tier

>>8654669

Here's an excellent analogy.

All races are mixed. However, racists think that certain races are "purer" because they were in existence earlier.

Europeans are a mixture of different races that mixed up 15,000 years ago, and then again 5,000 years ago.

Mexicans are a mixture of European and Native. However, because European is already mixed, that somehow makes Mexicans "more mixed".

If we use this same logic, then future generations are always more "degenerate" than past ones. Mom and dad mix genetic material to create kids. Those kids then mix with other kids to create grandkids.

The grandkid would be more "mixed" than the grandparents.

[Anonymous No.8654957]

>>8654818
no one disagrees with that

it doesn't mean they aren't a different breed

[Anonymous No.8654960]

>>8654956
brainlet tier

[Anonymous No.8654969]

>>8654898

>Haplogroups just describe ancestral descent.

It is true that it describes ancestral descent but this is through identifing specific genes found within a given region.

>If a black man fucks a bunch of white women and a bunch of Asian women, the progeny will all have the haplogroup of the black man.

The progeny would receive haplotypes from both the black man and the white/ asian women. The progeny however would not necessarily find itself in the exact same haplogroup as the black by default.

The issue here lies in the black person (to a lesser extent the white and asian too). First we have to identify what region the said black man is native to. If they're from sub-sahara Africa than yes, the progreny will likely fall closer to his haplogroup. But if they're from America then the progreny may fall closer to the white woman's haplogroup due to the chance of the black man having a relatively high admixture of white (European genes) in him.

[Anonymous No.8654985]

>>8654669
DELET THIS

[Anonymous No.8654991]

>>8654956
>racists think that certain races are "purer" because they were in existence earlier.
How is it racist to think that? A black person whose ancestors bred among themselves for 15000 years up until now is a purer black than a black whose parents bred among themselves for 9000 up until now you fucking retard

>"racist"
take your shitty liberal rhetoric and shove it up your ass

[Anonymous No.8654992]

>>8654769
That picture is retarded and proves nothing.

Humans have an Fst of about 0.15 overall, while almost all other apes are around 0.3-0.4. All other apes have about ten times as much genetic diversity as humans. All humans alive today are more genetically related to each other than two different troops of chimps are.

[Anonymous No.8654994]

>>8654969
>genes found within a given region.

Learn the difference between gene and allele. All humans have the same genes.

[Anonymous No.8654995]

>>8654969

Right, but none of that is actually relevant to race. In the past, "races" or "tribes" constantly mixed.

For example:

30,000 years ago, European hunter with haplogroup I fucks girl, has a son. The progeny continue having sons until today, and today's male child has haplogroup I, and is 99.99% European genetically.

Random Japanese person sails to Europe 30,000 years ago, fucks girl, has a son. Same thing happens, today's son has haplogroup D (typical of Japanese), and is 99.99% European genetically.

[Anonymous No.8655000]

>>8654995
Haplogroups are based on SNPs in y-chromosome or mitochondrial DNA anyway.

They have zero relevance to genetic diversity or heridability anyway. Racists just latch on to the idea because to them it makes it appear that humans are different from one another, but they don't even understand what haplogroups are.

[Anonymous No.8655003]

>>8654898
>Europeans" and "Japanese" are very discrete from each other.

Not genetically.

[Anonymous No.8655004]

>>8654956

I don't know why this is such a hard lesson for racists.

It's kind of like some weird Freudian fixation. Maybe they have penis envy.

[Anonymous No.8655006]

>>8654992

I know. I posted the map because it's relevant to what I said.

Human "races" are much closer to each other than "races" of other animals, what you said is true.

But EVEN if an alt-righter wants to discriminate based on that small difference, there still isn't a one-to-one correlation between "appearance" and the "genetic race".

So by shunning an Arab, and accepting a blue eyed Kalash, you'd actually be rejecting your own genetic kin. Because race is a social construct, and the Kalash are a more different race, that just happens to also have gone through high selection for light pigmentation.

[Anonymous No.8655013]

>>8655003

Yes, they are. Biometrics companies can differentiate European genomes from Japanese ones with 100% accuracy.

Europeans and Syrians/Tunisians? Less so, because there's more admixture there.

[Anonymous No.8655018]

>>8655013
Differentiation is not the same as saying two things are significantly different or that they are discrete things.

Remember that there is more genetic variation found within any divided population of humans than between them. If you were to pick a random European and a random Japanese, they are more likely to be genetically similar to one another than anyone in their group.

[Anonymous No.8655049]

>>8654685
>are different races, because each of these races has a certain set of physical and intellectual qualities that are unique to it.
Not true. There are traits that are more common in some races that aren't common in other races, but all traits are encountered in every race.

[Anonymous No.8655059]

>>8654769
source?

[Anonymous No.8655088]

>>8655059

For the indoeuropean bit, source is pic related

For the Bedouin thing, just look up the frequency of the skin color and eye color alleles on ALFRED

[Anonymous No.8655216]

>>8654669

where does this meme come from (the pic)

it's so uncomfortable and funny at the same time

[Anonymous No.8655295]

>>8654669
>Why do people get so triggered when you say that "social constructs are a social construct"?

Social constructs are constructed by our society therefore they are not real, proove me wrong.

Pro tip: your proof is a social construct too and therefore not real.

Check mate leftists.


(btw. race can be objectively measured therefore it is not defined by society)

[Anonymous No.8655347]

>>8654669
That pic is so uncomfortable desu

[Anonymous No.8655363]

>>8654685
>muh races are different
So are individuals. And californians and new yorkers. And countries that start with different alphabets.

[Anonymous No.8655365]

>>8654832
Do people really believe this race and gene nonsense? It makes no sense. A race has a distribution of genetic frequencies, which automatically makes it inaccurate.

[Anonymous No.8655372]

>>8655363
>comparing California with New York
>literally comparing white liberals with the skypes
>claiming they are the same race
Oh anon never change

[Anonymous No.8655382]

[Anonymous No.8655384]

>>8655372
>that pic
>whites having lower than average birthrates is genocide

What is it with politics and bending the meaning of words?

[Anonymous No.8655389]

>>8654669

Thats why no white was in the last Olympics in the 100m dash finals. Because its a social contruct. Yes, thanks for ackknowledding the fact that whites are so much discriminated against, they are not able to train for sprints.

Races are groups of people who are more genetically similar than average. They exist. Your ideology may say otherwise but reality is no bed of roses.

[Anonymous No.8655394]

>>8655384
You don't know much. Mass immigration from third world countries will eventually lead to the replacement of whites and the inevitable result will be the same as that of genocide. Therefore, genocide is the word best describing the phenomenon. You can argue semantics all day, but its pointless in any case.

[Anonymous No.8655400]

>>8655049
Same between apes and cats.

[Anonymous No.8655401]

>>8654815

wow the 3 month old cant even speak but should be able to have a self-identity to differentiate his own family and other families aka races? Fucking babies are babies. They are not grown up. Only after you are an adult you are a full grown up human being with hopefully every feature.
Babies have no self-awareness or self-identity. They even have no ability to fucking run. Your argument is that if they are able to run instantly running is a social contruct the same as "xenophobia". WoW i hope you are just brainwashed.
Families are a biological reality, races are a biological reality. Children grow up and start to act on their genetical code. They start to differentiate between their own family and LOVE their own family more than others. Its human nature. But you invent some fancy political correct labels to cloud real facts and reality.
Sad!

[Anonymous No.8655407]

>>8655394
In 1994 the Hutus seized power in Rwanda and the army began slaughtering Tutsis. Roadblocks were set up at key exits leaving the country and anyone passing them identified as a Tutsi was taken away and executed. Within the borders, soldiers were given orders to find and kill any Tutsi. In the first week, 800,000 Tutsis died.

This is genocide you retarded redneck. What is scientifically a slight shift in halpgroup frequency of a population over the next hundred years is not. It'd be more accurate to say McDonald's is committing genocide.

[Anonymous No.8655408]

>>8654818

[Anonymous No.8655427]

>>8655408
I'm not sure if there's a constant influx of new polacks or the old ones don't remember because me and many other biologists have explained this many times

First, race is not a classification in taxonomy. The classifications are kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus and species.

Second, there are two criteria for what goes where. The first is that any two subgroups that have the same preceding group share an ancestor. For example, orang utans and humans are both family hominidae because we share the same ancestors as orang utans and other of the family hominidae like chimpanzees.

Second is classifying by a number of factors, including ecological niche, habitat, behavior, physiology and predators/prey. Humans are special in that we occupy and can live in almost every habitat, and we have extremely migratory habits. Yes, you could say that general variations in the bone structure and skin means we should be a separate subspecies, but this would be very new in taxonomy. What you posted, the crows, life in habitats over many countries and have very different diets. Humans are already a subspecies, homo homo sapiens, separate from the extinct homo sapiens idaltu.

Now assuming we create a sub sub species of races, which would be the first of its kind, there's only vague ways to do it. As >>8654769 pointed out the skin color race defintion which most people use doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The only consistent way to do it is with haplogroups, which are slight and almost definitely inconsequential mutations to humans. This would be contrary to almost every taxonomic rule.

[Anonymous No.8655432]

>>8655427
So what's the correct name for the classification we usually refer to as "breed"? Because dog breeds also have the same diets and can live in the same habitats.

[Anonymous No.8655449]

>>8655432
Taxonomically all breeds are canine lupus familiaris. Breed is not a formal, scientific term. There's some dog organization that officially decides what breeds exist and how to identify them.

[Anonymous No.8655467]

>>8655407
>speed determines whether something is a genocide or not
I guess jews were never genocided after all then.

[Anonymous No.8655468]

>>8655467
Nobody is killing you or preventing you to have children.

[Anonymous No.8655475]

>>8655427
...but niggers though...

[Anonymous No.8655477]

>>8655467
Genocide is a systematic execution of a certain group carried out by another group. Not a decline in birthrate - which by the way happens to any race once they're rich - when compared to other races.

[Anonymous No.8655479]

I wish the mods would just start banning these threads.

No one on /pol/ has any education, nor do they want to learn anything. They just come here to try to deny science. All the race threads and climate change denial threads are getting out of hand.

[Anonymous No.8655483]

>>8655479
>>8655479
>implying they would consider mostly liberal universities to be an education and not illuminati goyim brainwashing schools

they probably actually believe that

[Anonymous No.8655489]

>>8655479
>you're not allowed to talk about x because it makes me uncomfortable
>somehow I'm intellectually superior because of this
Not even from /pol/ but this is just sad. If you don't like talking about this you're free to leave and hide the thread you know.

[Anonymous No.8655492]

>>8655394

>the inevitable result will be the same as that of genocide.
>Therefore, genocide is the word best describing the phenomenon.

Not him but no it is not the best word to describe it. Genocide requires coordinated intent, the situation occurring right now lack this. The phenomenon in question is not only occurring in white countries but in a number of asian countries as well. This is a result of being a highly developed nation where everything including time and space itself is at a premium, accruement of debt in some capacity is almost required and reducing any and all individual living expenses is seen as virtue.

What you're supporting/ insinuating here is the equivalent of some grand conspiracy theory that would have required +1000 years of planing. Due in part to the fact that mass immigration to satisfy excessive need to develop national infrastructure is a old concept human civilization. And that said conspiracy would require prophetic knowledge of nations that have yet to even exist to plan against.

As a matter of fact the only country that explicitly utilizes immigration to such an intent where genocide of it's citizens through said method is even remotely feasible is Qatar. Where only roughly 300,000 of it's 2.3 million citizens are native born.

Ironically enough Qatar is a middle eastern country.

[Anonymous No.8655494]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06ybg84

Everyone's questions answered here. Great, simple explanation about genetics, clusters of people etc.

Tldr ; humans don't really have different 'races' in a biological sense. Cabbages do. It's more about specific groups of people. Skin colour is also one of the most misleading ways to detect genetic difference between clusters.

Good listen, hope you enjoy.

[Anonymous No.8655495]

>>8655489
>>you're not allowed to talk about x because it makes me uncomfortable
You can talk about it. But you don't need to make 3 threads for it every day in which you just ignore any counter-arguments.

[Anonymous No.8655496]

>>8655489
It's not that no one isn't "allowed" to talk about it. It's just that there is nothing here to be said. The threads are always the same. They make scientifically false assertions, we tell them why they are wrong, and they claim it's all a conspiracy then come back and repost the same garbage the next time.

[Anonymous No.8655497]

>>8655489
>not even form /pol/
yeah you are or you would never defend spamming of easily falsifiable garbage like this, and yes, it's spamming if you don't even care about the answers given to you by people more educated than you on the subject, ignore them and keep posting the same stupid questions every day. "race" is a social construct and if you've ever talked to any taxonomist, or hell, taken a uni-level biology class, you'd be able to explain it to all of your autistic /pol/ shitposters why they're such idiots.

[Anonymous No.8655498]

>>8655479
You mean come here expecting science to confirm their views then calling everything Jews and liberals when it doesn't
Then they just go right back to pol and forgot anything we said, this is the tenth race thread this week

[Anonymous No.8655502]

>>8655489
>completely ignoring what he said
>somehow reading /pol/ doesn't want to debate as I'm uncomfortable with what /pol/ says

[Anonymous No.8655504]

>>8655497
It's retarded how these people always think they are good at lying or pretending to be people they are not.

>i'm totally not from /pol/ guys, but why are black people all dumb!? I'm really a black liberal! Also Hitler did nothing wrong!

[Anonymous No.8655507]

>>8655400
I know you're trying to be sarcastic and think that black people and white people are as close as apes and cats, but science knows that's just not true. You should just stopping trying to differentiate yourself so much from "subhuman niggers" because your race shares every trait with them. It's just that such traits appear in different frequencies amongst the populations.

>inb4 but blacks can't be blonde or blue eyed
Ever heard of albinos? They aren't exactly caucasian but they share those characteristics with europeans. Obviously there aren't subsaharan africans exactly equal as europeans, but all european characteristics are distributed along that population (in a different frequency, I should repeat).

[Anonymous No.8655513]

>>8655495
>>8655496
>>8655497
>>8655502
>>8655504
I really am not from /pol/ though. Again, feel free to leave and hide the thread if you don't like it. You're not forced to be here.

[Anonymous No.8655515]

>>8655401
>Its human nature.
You seem to know very little about human nature.
Part of the human nature is actually being able to be shaped by the environment and by itself. If humans were able to only follow their "genetic code" (the quotes are here because humans are actually only able to follow their genetic code, but that doesn't mean what you think that means), there wouldn't be any race mixing throughout history. We wouldn't even be able to mix with neanderthals, given that they were an actual subspecies, which was very distinct from us.

[Anonymous No.8655517]

>>8655513
>Criticized for just ignoring any points made
>Replies in a post where every point made is ignored
Well, except the /pol/ part. Where it's just "but I'm really not /pol/!".

[Anonymous No.8655518]

https://bethematch.org/transplant-basics/matching-patients-with-donors/how-does-a-patients-ethnic-background-affect-matching/

i'm not even a /pol/back but y'all are bitchass retarded

[Anonymous No.8655520]

>>8655517
I wasn't even involved in this thread retard. I scrolled past it and came across yet another whiner, posting about how he doesn't like what's being discussed in the thread. That's what I called you out for, I don't care about the discussion in this thread so I won't engage with it. You should do the same from the tone of your comments.

[Anonymous No.8655521]

>>8655513
It's inherent to the scientific community to be active, open, and always questioning things, and people like you simply take advantage of that by arguing your idiotic topics (flat earth, global warming, race) because you know the scientific community is actually held to a standard and would be hypocritical to ignore idiots like you. You're abusing an altruistic system.

[Anonymous No.8655523]

>>8655520
I'm not talking about this thread. I'm talking about the posts you replied to. They gave perfectly valid reasons as to why one would want threads like these to be banned.

[Anonymous No.8655524]

>>8655520
You called them a whiner and put words in their mouth, saying they said they were uncomfortable with what was being talked about, so you're literally openly lying right now in front of everyone because you're an idiot. If you're going to ask questions, accept the answers or don't post here and waste peoples time. You don't get to choose what to believe.

[Anonymous No.8655525]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06ybg84

I'll just post this again because people are still arguing (mostly pol guy) about things they don't really understand.

Then again, as other posters have pointed out, this of course will be fake / jew / liberal 'science'.

[Anonymous No.8655527]

>>8655518
No one is claiming that there aren't traits that differentiate one race from the other. What /pol/tards don't get is that the traits that distinguish one race from all others are ultimately found in all of them.
Just because blacks are muscular it doesn't mean that there aren't eurasians who are muscular. The same goes with intelligence (which I think is the whole point of this discussion; just a bunch of autistic /pol/tards trying to prove that blacks are all intellectually inferior and should be enslaved again): asians and jews are the smartest races, but you can find smart people among africans, europeans and australoids too.

[Anonymous No.8655534]

>>8655527
>What /pol/tards don't get is that the traits that distinguish one race from all others are ultimately found in all of them.
Who here has claimed otherwise?

[Anonymous No.8655535]

>>8655518
>>8655525

>>8655527
no that's just one idiot in this thread. you bait them out by making generalized, fucking retarded thread topics like this. /pol/ is actually a hugely diverse population & the racism is largely satire

/pol/doesn't say that. a couple flaming autists say that. & AMAZINGLY they all happen to show up if you say things like, "why does X behavior arise in this scenario, people whom i know populate this site & ravage decent conversation with guttural abandon?"

these threads always get the same response because you people always ask the same question in a wat perfectly calculated to attract the most violently idiotic alternative point of view

you invite this upon yourselves

[Anonymous No.8655540]

>>8655518
>i'm not even a /pol/back but y'all\

>y'all

yeah you are

[Anonymous No.8655546]

>>8655523
Because banning perfectly valid threads is alright just because it questions the established narrative huh? How scientific of you.

>>8655524
>You called them a whiner and put words in their mouth, saying they said they were uncomfortable with what was being talked about
They are, why else would they like to shun others that do want to talk about it? Let them talk about it and hide the thread if you don't. You must have a very thick skull to claim everyone has to be silenced just because (You) don't like it.
>If you're going to ask questions, accept the answers or don't post here and waste peoples time
Learn to read, toddler. I never cared about this thread. Also, your time is worthless, you do realize where you are right?
>You don't get to choose what to believe.
Nice autism.

[Anonymous No.8655549]

>>8655546
>why else would they like to shun others that do want to talk about it?
>silenced

You not accepting the answers by people more intelligent than you is a good reason because you waste peoples time.

This was already said, but predictably, you ignored it.

[Anonymous No.8655551]

>>8655549
>>Learn to read, toddler. I never cared about this thread. Also, your time is worthless, you do realize where you are right?

[Anonymous No.8655558]

>>8654669
>Papuans and Africans are the two least related groups of people on earth
Only ameridumbs would consider those people the same race.

[Anonymous No.8655559]

>>8655551
You're attacking people who are actually knowledgeable on a topic that you asked about yourself, because you don't even care about the answer. You just want blacks to be enslaved or something because jamal beat you up in elementary school or whatever other reason you're so fucked up and incapable of accepting what we know. This isn't /pol/ and these threads shouldn't be allowed because they are malicious.

[Anonymous No.8655561]

It makes me laugh how many racists, particularly in the USA, are also climate change deniers

Well, I'm sorry to tell you this, but climate change is very real indeed, and one effect of it is that your descendants will almost certainly have darker skin than you

Have a nice day

[Anonymous No.8655568]

>>8655559
Hahah wtf

[Anonymous No.8655581]

>>8655496
Its brainwashing, through simple repetition
Would have thought /sci/ could figure this out
Maybe all the anti-psychology shitposting also worked

[Anonymous No.8655744]

>>8655581
lol this poster is literally schizophrenic holy shit

[Anonymous No.8655745]

>>8655561

>thinking the modern human has anything close to the selective pressures our ancient ancestors had

Idiots who don't understand evolution make me laugh

[Anonymous No.8655757]

>>8655745
> the we're-special meme
>> Idiots who don't understand evolution make me laugh
ikr

[Anonymous No.8655763]

>>8655757
Not even the same guy, but we don't suffer the selection that our ancestors did. Many people who are alive today wouldn't have made it through infancy if they were born in the middle ages.

[Anonymous No.8655771]

>>8655018
>If you were to pick a random European and a random Japanese, they are more likely to be genetically similar to one another than anyone in their group.

You're doing the science a big disservice by completely misunderstanding the statement you're parroting.

[Anonymous No.8655776]

>>8654669
People get mad because of muh heritage

[Anonymous No.8655782]

>>8655763
Different selection pressures, doesn't mean selection doesn't happen faggot.

People living in cities in 5000 BC had different selection pressures than their ancestors on the Savannah too.

[Anonymous No.8655795]

>>8655771

Explain it properly then, please.

[Anonymous No.8655819]

>>8655782
People living in cities in 5000 BC had little knowledge of medicine and were affected by diseases as much as people on the savannah. Today we only suffer societal an economic pressure, but even that doesn't compare with what our ancestors had to face. There's plenty of free or at least cheap medicine and treatment for people to survive. That's why the disease of the 21st century is depression not AIDS. And most people with depression reproduce and don't suicide.

[Anonymous No.8655832]

>>8654669
Because it implies race doesnt exist, which completely invalidates biology.

[Anonymous No.8655835]

>>8654777
Neanderthals and Erectus could breed with humans.....

[Anonymous No.8655839]

>>8654956
>All races are mixed.
Um no blacks africans basically have alien genes in them not found anywhere else on earth.

[Anonymous No.8655865]

>>8655782

No shit

most of our evolution as divergent races occurred the 100,000 years prior you tard, as hunter gatherers exposed to the whims of nature

[Anonymous No.8655867]

>>8655408
abbos aren't human

[Anonymous No.8655876]

>>8655372
Wow. I'd pay good money to know if this guy got laid.

[Anonymous No.8655901]

>>8654669
Why is the NBA almost entirely black? Its not society, they are genetically better at running and jumping because the ones that arent became jaguar food in africa or were whipped to death as a slave. Why is virtually every major technological advancement in the past 200 years the product of an inventor of Asian or European descent? Answer that question without referring to oppression. If you can i will consider changing my viewpoint on whether or not race is a social construct and not the result of hundreds of thousands of years of evolution.

[Anonymous No.8655974]

>>8654995
>sails to Europe
>30,000ya
More like walk across.

[Anonymous No.8656019]

This thread is bait and you're all idiots for giving (you)s. Including myself it seems.

[Anonymous No.8656315]

@8656019but you gave no (You)s

[Anonymous No.8656672]

>>8655018

>If you were to pick a random European and a random Japanese, they are more likely to be genetically similar to one another than anyone in their group.

This statement is just plain false.

I do agree with OP though, and 100% of /pol/acks have no idea what race actually means.

[Anonymous No.8657322]

>>8654669
SCIENTIFICALLY, whites are smarter than other races

[Anonymous No.8657325]

[math]wew ladd[/math]

[Anonymous No.8658013]

>>8655497
if it's so easy to explain then do it instead of getting throwing an autistic fit. pretty hypocritical

race is a historically valid way of differentiating people. while it is largely argued that it has no genetic backing and that it is entirely based in culture, it remains to be undeniably proven. all the theories presented in this thread are still just theories, and ignoring people just because they don't share the same opinion on these theories is also very uncouth. you should consider going to /pol/ yourself, honestly

[Anonymous No.8658029]

>>8657322
I think you mean statistically. on average they are, this is why IQ testing never took off. it goes against the marxist ideology that pajeet the street shitter can become a rocket scientist if he believes in himself.

[Anonymous No.8658045]

>>8654669
>Why do people get so triggered when you say that "race is a social construct"?
The only people who get triggered by this are /pol/tards, for normal people it's a mildly contentious issue best left to discussion in graduate sociology classrooms.

I suggest you stay away from /pol/tards unless you want to become a brainlet like they are.

[Anonymous No.8658048]

>>8655521
Well said. I just hope that people with more energy than me care enough to continue to debunk /pol/ bullshit, because I'm tired of doing it.

[Anonymous No.8658053]

>>8658029
>it goes against the marxist ideology that pajeet the street shitter can become a rocket scientist if he believes in himself.

hahaha

[Anonymous No.8658056]

>>8658029
>it goes against the marxist ideology that pajeet the street shitter can become a rocket scientist if he believes in himself.
Marxism criticizes that kind of thought. It postulates that poor people are doomed by default (which is not entirely false).
Marx himself was, like everyone in the 19th century, a believer of the idea of lesser races.
That being said, anyone can become a rocket scientist if they want. It's just that some may have to want it very, VERY much, enough so that they have motivation to get through every obstacle that gets on their way.

[Anonymous No.8658057]

>>8655521
get off your high horse. asking shitty questions on a slow ass board is abusing an altruistic system? fuck you

anyway, I disagree with your statement. only by questioning the things you consider most fundamental can new things be discovered, or perhaps one day, one of these shitty threads will inspire someone to discover something amazing. don't give up when things are bleak, anon!

[Anonymous No.8658059]

Race has a genetic basis though the pollution of the gene pool is making it more muddled, which makes the social construct nonsense self fullfilling.

If you wsnt to remove the ambiguity, enforce a racial hygiene policy.

[Anonymous No.8658060]

>>8658057
>asking shitty questions on a slow ass board is abusing an altruistic system? fuck you
No, you retarded brainlet /pol/ shitter, fuck YOU.

Now get the fuck off my board and go to your containment septic tank:

>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.8658074]

>>8658060
did someone get their ego hurt? I'm sorry you can't handle people who question your beliefs. how would you like me to conform? is this better:

"race" is clearly a social construct. all of the evidence in this thread points to this, thus we must all accept this as a universal fact. anyone who questions this will hereby be banned. anyone who questions this ban will forever be branded by society as a heretic and shall not be welcomed back into the scientific circle as they are clearly mentally unfit to perform science. but remember, anyone can be a rocket scientist, just not people who might consider the possibility that people of other races might, on average have slightly different social, physical, and intellectual learning capacities. these people are racist and we shall not communicate with them

[Anonymous No.8658076]

>genus: interbreeding sometimes possible, offspring usually less fit (canis)
>species:freely interbreeds with no loss of fitness in offspring (canis lupus)
>subspecies: populations with markedly different phenotypic or behavioral traits, usually geographically isolated (canis lupus familiaris)
>race: a grouping of particular alleles within a subspecies (canis lupus familiaris golden retriever)

Your average black american would be something like
Homo Sapiens Sapiens CongoXNigerXCeltXGerman

[Anonymous No.8658078]

>>8654669


I remember reading the book on pic, and that the author made some arguments to classify race, but in the occasion I thought that his explanation was not very convincing. This was a long time ago, and since my memory is crap I cant remember exactly what were the genetic fundamentals for his classification. What I remember is that the human races were mostly – according to him and the studies he used – related to continents, to bodies of land where people lived for a long time isolated from other populations of humans.

I have no knowledge to say if his explanation is simply wrong or if there is some truth in it. If anyone brighter than me also read the book, please, explain to me. Here is Wikipedia on the race section:


>Wade writes that along with the ongoing social evolution that occurred after humans left Africa, the human physical form also continued to evolve. This is the subject of chapter nine, Race; because humans were spread across different continents, and distance and tribal hostility limited gene flow between them, they followed different evolutionary paths.[22]Race is not well understood, he says, because its historical implications cause it to be avoided in modern academic studies. Wade states, however, that there are reasons to reconsider the study of it; the genetic differences between races may give evidence of the different evolutionary pressures they faced, and the differences may be medically relevant.[23] Citing Neil Risch, Wade puts forth that there are five continental races – Africans, Caucasians, Asians, Pacific Islanders and Native Americans[nb 1] – which are made up of smaller subdivisions called ethnicities. He explicitly avoids discussing the cause of IQ differences between races, but hypothesises that racial differences may have an influence on sporting achievement.[25]

[Anonymous No.8658080]

>>8658078

forgot pic

[Anonymous No.8659008]

http://web.mit.edu/racescience/in_media/what_dna_says_about_human/

end of story

now fuck back to /pol/

[Anonymous No.8659143]

>>8659008
the guy who wrote that works for buzzfeed. if that's seriously your "end of story" you should really find another hobby

to be a little less shitposty though, this paper is pretty unscientific. at the end he says (copied)

"Over time, ''genetics will help beat down racist arguments,'' says Eric Lander, a world-renowned geneticist at M.I.T. ''But they will need to be beaten down, because they will keep coming up.""

another passage that caught my attention was where he states that the majority of the geneticists he was citing in this article were careful not to "concretize the racist assumption" in their work. this is directly stating that both the author and the people cited were biased in their method.

[Anonymous No.8659168]

>>8654669
>Why do people get so triggered when you say that "race is a social construct"?

Because they hold essentialist views of racial formation, and have never bothered to examine the merit of these views or the massive amount of evidence essentially proving that it's a bullshit approach.
I'm not talking down to them - honestly. For most people there's never any obvious need in their life to truly analyze how they see race. It would probably be quite informative and beneficial, but hey, your life.

>>8658076
what's your rational for extending Linnaean hierarchy to human races? As you have defined things, does this hierarchy extend to dogs as well? i.e. do dogs have races? Do peas have races? Or do the classifications of everything except humans suddenly end at subspecies? Or maybe only mammals have race? Or only quadrupeds? Your model as stated is incomplete. I'm genuinely curious how your extension of Linnaean hierarchies applies to non-human species.

[Anonymous No.8659272]

>>8659008
looks like you fell for the "if it was written by MIT it must be the word of the lord" meme

[Anonymous No.8659439]

>>8654777
>race is synonymous with species

really makes u think

[Anonymous No.8659476]

>>8654869
>wikipedia
>majorityrights.com a racialist myth
Nice unbiased sources there kiddo

[Anonymous No.8659500]

>>8658013
>it has no genetic backing
Thats a load of bullshit, forensic scientist can tell if a corpse is black or white by just looking at the skull, but surely the structure of the cranium has nothing to do with DNA now does it.

Use your brain and stop this human egoism at once.

[Anonymous No.8659505]

Why are these cucks on /sci/ getting so triggered? You would think the concept of a completely wild breed of man would be a logical idea and an inevitability but no these faggots let their brainlet morality cloud their rational judgement.

[Anonymous No.8659604]

>>8654669
Because of the implicit hyper-liberal bias it caries.
But also mostly the fact that it's dumb. How is your biological lineage constructed SOCIALLY...? I mean it may take a village to raise a child, but if he's a brown kid, they aint gonna raise the white into him, and vice versa.

[Anonymous No.8659652]

>>8659505
>>8659604
Typical response. Not reading the thread even a bit. Not responding to any arguments. No.
Just coming here, believing to be clever and posting their opinion. Sometimes with an unrelated stupid argument.

[Anonymous No.8659720]

>>8655427
That way of thinking is actually quite cultural, believe it or not. I've had the opportunity to spend some time with a group of biology and genetics students and professors that weren't from USA/western Europe and definitely weren't pollacks (and peppered the following statements with a bunch of antiracism sentiments). I mentioned to them "race as a social construct" theories and shit and basically the unanimous reply was that races objectively do exist and that it's ridiculous to try and ignore physical, behavioural and genetic differences between various human populations when species and subspecies of animals, despite the ability to crossbreed, are differentiated with much stricter criteria.

[Anonymous No.8659816]

There is more variation within each category than without

Even if 'race' was a valid category (it isn't), you will still find a greater range of values of [any metric you care to measure] than you will if you compare the mean values of each category in question (each 'race')

This makes the categories themselves comparatively useless for determining the value in question

It's easier just to treat all members individually, because what appears to be a convenient shorthand is more likely to give you bad data

And that's assuming that race is a valid category to begin with

[Anonymous No.8659941]

>>8659816
Race should be defined in a new way. It should be a function of smarts.
You should have a smart and a stupid race.

[Anonymous No.8661892]

>>8659652
that's, funny that's exactly what your post is doing

[Anonymous No.8661926]

>>8654669
Race is not a social construct. Why are there features typically different in some races, other than skin color? Even our hearts look slightly different by race.

[Anonymous No.8661960]

>>8661926
I think people are confused in this debate. Obviously there's genetic variation. When people say race is a social construct they mean racial categories are. Not what i assuming you mean by race, itself

[Anonymous No.8661962]

>>8659816
Doesn't mean there aren't meaningful differences across race geographically, even if that is continuous. And I think the individual thing is only really relevant for dealing with diseases but in general you are right.

[Anonymous No.8661983]

>>8655400
Lol no its not
Where did you get that idea brainlet

[Anonymous No.8661992]

>>8661960
people object because the crude visual cues that people used to think up the races, i.e.e the clustering of different ethnic groups by relatedness, actually lined up with the genetic reality pretty well.

for instance, an unsupervised clustering algrotihm would definitely pick out a caucasoid cluster and a mongoloid cluster in a genetic distance map

https://jaymans.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/global-genetic-distances-map.jpg
a negroid genetic distance map would need more data points and we would very likely find it had greater variance and was less clustered, but even so it still shows some clustering.

[Anonymous No.8662005]

>>8661992

What race? Superior or inferior?

[Anonymous No.8662175]

>>8661992
Ha I wouldn't say that is lining up with genetics pretty well considering how coarse those groups are compared to the specificity to which we can identify someone's ancestry. Given enough data you'll pick up many many clusters though.

[Anonymous No.8662193]

>>8654669
>virtually indistinguishable
[citation bloody well needed]

[Anonymous No.8662209]

>>8662193
Just looked up papuans on Google images and I'm pretty sure any American would think they are black.

[Anonymous No.8662735]

>>8654669
Because retards think that just because something is a social construct that it's not real or doesn't have power. For example the state and civilization are social constructs, but no one complain s about that.

[Anonymous No.8662775]

>>8654669
Do people get triggered by that? I thought that was common knowledge by now. There are genetic components to "race," being skin color and traits like that but the recognition of race is completely constructed in a social sphere.

[Anonymous No.8662886]

>>8662209
Really? Look at this picture and tell me you'd say they're black.
They're almost indistinguishable from your typical american redneck.

[Anonymous No.8662895]

>>8662209
>I'm pretty sure any American would think they are black.
That is OPs point.

[Anonymous No.8662932]

>>8659816
If race is not real explain why there are five different cranial shapes for all of humanity?

[Anonymous No.8663034]

>/pol/ is not x! / i know /pol/
t. shill
>race means x! This definition is x!
t. LARPer
>actually your argument is mainly true but let me point out something i disagree with without telling you my posture on this matter
t. spammer who doesn't contribute to the thread and instead of lurking and having a solid POV he posts trash
>guys guys, race is actually x!
>pseudoscience IQ and blah blah blah
>actually haplogroups are
Almost nobody cares about asian-white differences. So it means the concerns is centered on blacks.

The concern started on actual behavior and observation, AKA non scientific knowledge.

You can spam your theories on /his/ if you like.

>IQ pseudoscientific
>haplogroups (non genotype studies) blah blah
>history facts and bla bla
Pseudoscience is not science. "Genetical" studies lack genotype studies. You can go to /his/ to refute your "facts" over there.

>>>/pol/ You have to go back, trumplet.

[Anonymous No.8663078]

>>8654669
>Why do people get so triggered when you say that "race is a social construct"?
You got that backwards