[FiveofSwords]

Yes, but this takes hundreds of thousands of years, and humans are unable to know what characteristics will enrich their species' survival odds.

"Race" describes the local way that humans have adapted to a particular local environment. For example, most Southern USA people have Scottish genes. This means that they often don't have enough skin pigment to live comfortably in the Southern states which they genocided.

The people they killed had enough pigment to thrive under this sun.

By mixing with the First Nations of the area, Scottish people would produce some offspring that would not get skin cancer so often. But first, they would have to let go of their anti-social ethnocentrism that served them so well when they lived in caves sculpted out of the sides of Scottish cliffs.

Well that isnt scientific. We know it does not take hundreds of thousands of years

[Bill_Nye]

Well that isnt scientific. We know it does not take hundreds of thousands of years

Yes, it does.

all current human mtDNA originated from a single population from Africa, at the time dated to between 140,000 and 200,000 years ago.

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

[Tainari88]

@Potemkin Do you remember the standard example for evolution that Darwin would use? Peppered moths.

What was Darwin theory on moths?
Peppered moth evolution - Wikipedia
This selective survival was due to birds, which easily caught dark moths on clean trees and white moths on trees darkened with soot. The story, supported by Kettlewell's experiment, became the canonical example of Darwinian evolution and evidence for natural selection used in standard textbooks.

What was Darwin theory on moths?
Peppered moth evolution - Wikipedia
This selective survival was due to birds, which easily caught dark moths on clean trees and white moths on trees darkened with soot. The story, supported by Kettlewell's experiment, became the canonical example of Darwinian evolution and evidence for natural selection used in standard textbooks.

How are moths an example of evolution?
Peppered Moths: Natural Selection
Moths passed their color to the next generation. Eggs from light moths developed into light moths and dark moth eggs turned to dark adults. The dark color was caused by a mutation in the DNA of a single moth, and the mutated gene had been passed to all its offspring.

How is the change in the moth population evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution?
The shift in coloring of the peppered moth population in Manchester in the 1800s is a case of Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection. The black moths were better adapted to the soot-darkened environment and thus had a higher survival rate. Over time, this resulted in most of the population becoming black.Oct 13, 2019

What is the most important cause of evolutionary change?
Natural selection and genetic drift are the two most important causes of evolutionary change. How do they differ? Genetic drift is nonadaptive; it changes allele frequency without regard to fitness.

What is the issue with the racists? They want to associate socially learned values or thoughts about differences in outward appearances as predictive of behaviors, thoughts, talents, or proclivities. When it is explained to them that humans are a highly complex species and are also naturally varied within their own group--and that variation can be greater within their own group than the differences between groups it becomes a problem for them. They refuse to realize that variation is innate in everything that is a living organism. It is innate. Life thrives with the ability to be flexible. All theories which want to create purity are problematic. Even with simpler organisms.

They fail to understand that context because it does not underscore what they want to achieve on a false narrative based on racism that is socialism learned, and not scientifically valid. They want to discard truth for fiction.

That is the problem with racist theories that are proven to be invalid.

You can't hold on to lies because it is socially learned and convenient for a capitalistic or feudalistic economic model. You have to be objective about what a function is in nature, not in a socially constructed category system. It is that and nothing else.

[Tainari88]

Everybody’s ancestry goes back centuries, @FiveofSwords. In fact, it goes back for over three billion years. I presume you mean that you can trace your ancestry back for a few centuries. So you should be able to tell us how ‘pure’ that ancestry is, hmm?

You might be surprised and he might wind up being blood-related to your brother-in-law. Hee hee.

La Malanga comes to mind.

[Potemkin]

You might be surprised and he might wind up being blood-related to your brother-in-law. Hee hee.

La Malanga comes to mind.

[FiveofSwords]

Yes, it does.



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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sama-Bajau

"More than a thousand years of subsistence freediving associated with their life on the sea appear to have endowed the Bajau with several genetic adaptations to facilitate their lifestyle.[92][93] A 2018 study showed that Bajau spleens are about 50 per cent larger than those of a neighbouring land-based group, the Saluan, letting them store more haemoglobin-rich blood, which is expelled into the bloodstream when the spleen contracts at depth, allowing breath-holding dives of longer duration.[94][93]"

A thousand years...

[Potemkin]

Yes, it does.



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

That refers to a different thing - ‘Mitochondrial Eve’ is just the most recent common ancestor of the mitochondria in all human populations. Why mitochondria? Because that can only be inherited through the female line, so can be used to identify the last female common ancestor. And of course, she must have lived a while ago, on the order of hundreds of millennia. But significant phenotypic changes can occur in human beings on a time span of just a few millennia, as @FiveofSwords has pointed out. In the case of moths, for example, it can take just a few decades, due to the shorter time between generations.

[Bill_Nye]

That refers to a different thing - ‘Mitochondrial Eve’ is just the most recent common ancestor of the mitochondria in all human populations. Why mitochondria? Because that can only be inherited through the female line, so can be used to identify the last female common ancestor. And of course, she must have lived a while ago, on the order of hundreds of millennia. But significant phenotypic changes can occur in human beings on a time span of just a few millennia, as @FiveofSwords has pointed out. In the case of moths, for example, it can take just a few decades, due to the shorter time between generations.

I understand that, but my point was that speciation does not happen over the course of a few hundred years.

[ingliz]

You simply assume

No.

Your own words, "The fact we literally have no country at all means that we face a very serious existential threat and any level of brutality would be perfectly justified to ensure our survival and sovereignty."

You said, "Jews are the enemy ... The planet simply is not big enough for both of us."

As for blacks...

After being asked how you would find a nation (country) for your nation (people) when all are taken, you said, "We will conquer."

I assumed - rashly it seems - you wouldn't commit fratricide.

[Potemkin]

I understand that, but my point was that speciation does not happen over the course of a few hundred years.

@FiveofSwords wasn’t claiming that it does; his idea of ‘race’ is based on the concept that there has been (some vaguely defined) genetic adaptation by a human population to the conditions of a particular locality. That can happen on the time scale of a few millennia.

[wat0n]

@FiveofSwords wasn’t claiming that it does; his idea of ‘race’ is based on the concept that there has been (some vaguely defined) genetic adaptation by a human population to the conditions of a particular locality. That can happen on the time scale of a few millennia.

I'd say it's more than just that. Skin pigmentation is one such example, but race "realists" claim those adaptations go well beyond looks.

[FiveofSwords]

No.

You said, "Jews are the enemy ... The planet simply is not big enough for both of us."

As for blacks...

After being asked how you would find a nation (country) for your nation (people) when all are taken, you said, "We will conquer ... The fact we literally have no country at all means that we face a very serious existential threat and any level of brutality would be perfectly justified to ensure our survival and sovereignty."

I assumed - rashly it seems - you wouldn't commit fratricide.

The first comment I made was explaining why I specifically do not support the existence of a sovereign jewish state..i.e. Israel. Indeed I have stated later that I just want palestinians to take all of the land back and they can do whatever they like with the jews there. That had nothing to do with killing jews and certainly not me personally doing any of that. But I suppose this is a sort of confession on your part...you do not want white people to be sovereign so by your own logic I suppose you just want to kill white people.

The second comment...of course. I will gladly double down on thst. It is universally true of all people of any race. Nobody ever acquired their own homeland by asking nicely. But there isn't even anything racial about that comment and I explicitly stated in that conversation that I do not care where it is...it would be based on whatever opportunity arises.

[ingliz]

I will gladly double down on th[a]t.

So after saying all whites are brothers, you would gladly kill them?

That had nothing to do with killing jews

Then why say, "The planet simply is not big enough for both of us."

How would you rid the planet of Jews?





p.s. Note: I have connected the links to the correct posts (oops) in my previous comment. And, to make my point clearer, I moved a quote.

[FiveofSwords]

I'd say it's more than just that. Skin pigmentation is one such example, but race "realists" claim those adaptations go well beyond looks.

FYI, you could not tell by looking at a Sama bajau that their spleen is 50% larger..

[FiveofSwords]

So after saying all whites are brothers, you would gladly kill them?


Then why say, "The planet simply is not big enough for both of us."

How would you rid the planet of Jews?

I don't care who I have to fight. White people who are dedicated to their own extinction would be far too weak to put up any resistance...so it is difficult to imagine how that would occur.

Jews simply cannot be allowed near the levers of power. Whatever power they have they will always dedicate to harm white people, as they have always done historically.

Killing jews is not a good way to eliminate them as a people. I think instead they should eliminate their exclusionary culture and learn to embrace having sub saharan boyfriends. Perhaps the rest could be homosexual or dinks. After all, we need to fight climate change.

[ingliz]

@FiveofSwords

In previous posts, you have said:

1. Jews are the enemy.

2. I kill my enemies.

3. The planet is not big enough for both of us.

Join the dots and your position is clear.

Why back away now?

[Potemkin]

I don't care who I have to fight. White people who are dedicated to their own extinction would be far too weak to put up any resistance...so it is difficult to imagine how that would occur.

That’s not what Hitler found in 1939-1945.

[QatzelOk]

@FiveofSwords

In previous posts, you have said:

1. Jews are the enemy.

2. I kill my enemies.

3. The planet is not big enough for both of us.

Join the dots and your position is clear.

Why back away now?

While I see that you are trying to shame FiveofSwords based on a few crude statements about "the usual suspects," those same "usual suspects" in Israel seem to have the exact same worldview that FiveofSwords is expressing in this thread.

Do you find Jewish chauvinism and racism beautiful, Ingliz, but White Nationalism (chauvinism and racism) ugly?

Is it because you are both competitors for masters of the earth that you fight? Is your argument just more "know you are, said you are, what am I?" between colleagues in the dominating-racist sweepstakes?

[ingliz]

@QatzelOk

All Zionists are Jews, but not all Jews are Zionists.

[Potemkin]

@QatzelOk

All Zionists are Jews, but not all Jews are Zionists.

It’s not even the case that all Zionists are Jews - there are plenty of ‘Christian Zionists’ in the USA.