Why can't we just admit that races are different species of human?
Why can't we just admit that races are different species of human?
William Flores
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Carson Mitchell
Muh unity
Muh equity
Muh bullshit
Jacob Barnes
>Why can't we just admit that races are different species of human?
That isn't conducive to forming a worldwide mulatto slave class
Jayden Cox
Because the Christ cucks will shriek about muh evolution and muh God made man in his image and muh were all one blood
Ironically, evolution perfectly explains the cognitive and social disparities among the races, whereas Christianity has no answer to this
Brandon Howard
What would that achieve exactly?
I think anyone who spent any time studying this subjects understands that his is a defensible position. But what is the purpose or reclassifying humans? I mean we have Neanderthals being separate species. And loads of people are part Neanderthal.
So, cross-species procreation is clearly possible. You wanna swap out word "race" for "species"? Do you really wanna fill up form with "your species" field?
Or perhaps you wanna make argument that only certain races are "true human". And that's definitely NOT a defensible position, we've diverged way to long ago from Chimps for that argument to make ANY sense.
Ryan Morris
>I mean we have Neanderthals being separate species. And loads of people are part Neanderthal.
so what you're saying is those people's with and without neanderthal dna are different species then?
Liam Barnes
Because it hinders the jew in his chameleon takeover of foreign lands. A sovereign nation with a people who feel a deep shared bond with their countrymen will actually look after their own first and foremost. Making them harder to conquer, infiltrate, and deceive. 300 million strangers won't even understand what happened.
Connor Rodriguez
Well that's one way of putting it. I'm saying any such classification would be essentially arbitrary. I guess it would make more sense to talk about different "populations", but then we usually also use the word "ethnicity". I mean why aren't we calling Neanderthals "humans" - there were loads of invasions, and this was one of them - one population replacing/merging with the other, creating a new population.
Taxonomy should serve a purpose, and there's be little use of this re-classification. I would argue that we should classify Neanderthals as humans instead.
Charles Price
>Taxonomy should serve a purpose
It does, races are distinctly different groups of humans in genetics, behavior, and appearance. The should be considered species and we should prohibit race mixing to preserve those individual species.
Alexander Murphy
Sure, amazing idea. And that's what's happening in the most of the world - China, Japan, India, Russia, Africa. And they don't classify themselves any differently.
So the problem is clearly NOT with taxonomy.
Also, do you really want that to be ENFORCED by government? Are people supposed to be smart enough to make the right decisions? Like it should be up to people to decide, if we can't decide even that, then what the fuck can we decide?
Julian Johnson
because they can fuck eachother and make offspring that is not sterile
Jayden Wright
>Cackling Geese were once classified as being a smaller species of Canadian Geese. However, in 2004, the smallest four of the eleven recognized Canada Goose subspecies were reclassified as being their own species. However, in some locations, Cackling Geese and Canadian Geese crossbreed in several locations, which can make distinguishing the two species a challenge.
These two can crossbreed viable offspring though?
Matthew Garcia
Polar bear and grizzly bear can mix... of course those geese can too.
Eli Mitchell
>pizzly bear
and these people expect to be taken seriously in their field
Ethan Scott
You'd rather reserve "pizzly" for some other kind of a hybrid?
Joseph Thompson
You'd think some science-thinking boffins would have had the autism and thoroughness by now to use mathematical models of genetic relatedness or something like that to define species.
Zachary Carter
>inb4 god created us this way to test us
Jeremiah King
Of course, they probably won't because someone will apply it to humans in a non-PC way I guess...
Angel Morales
You make absolutely no sense
The Caucasian species has many different races
Races are not species dumb mutt
Lucas Allen
name one other species with races you kike
Elijah Kelly
Sub-species, simple as. Taxonomically makes sense as well. Birds with far more similarities are classified as sub-species.
Gavin Morales
We are different breeds, like dogs, not different species
Brayden Allen
yes they did, it's called "Fixation index", and if you apply it to humans you'll get different species. Happy? So what, there's no use of that measurement, people already have natural in-group preference for procreation. As long as the "hollywood" and fucking "wokism" doesn't fuck with it - we'll be alright. No need to enforce anything.
Hunter Foster
Nice smooth brain take. Tower of Babel is the literal "answer to this." Holy shit you need Jesus.
Leo Adams
God owns this simulation and can do what he wants.
Noah Wood
Well dog is same as wolf, genetically. Yet we group dogs separately from wolves, because it makes practical sense. For humans that won't make any practical sense, other than some ridiculous justifications for some crazy laws (and I want to have FEWER laws).
Bentley Hernandez
Canine, but we call it "breeds." It's the same thing.
Asher Brown
i want out this clown world.
Aaron Cox
Still doesn't make sense given how many mixes people there are. Right now "race" is more of a political alliance, which makes some sense. Since it's easier to defend your interests in a group. Though we're a bit further than sub-species (those would've been like Germans and French). If you talk "races" - closer analogy would be species. But it's impractical.