95% of White Americans might not have West African ancestry within the last few centuries through mixing with slaves, but virtually all of them are a mixture of European ethnicities e.g. Irish, English, Greek, Italian, German, Swedish, Polish etc. In other words they're still mongrels. This is why ethnic nationalism does not exist in America, only White nationalism, which mistakenly treats all these European ethnic groups as a cultural or racial monolith. This is pretty ridiculous when you realize all these ethnic groups have historically been at war with each other and there are phenotypic differences between them: the average Englishman does not resemble a Greek.
Because any two unrelated human beings differ by about 3 million distinct DNA variants and about 85% of that variation occurs within local populations.
That 85% is shared by all 3 individuals while the 15% by only 2. Two individuals from different races are never more similar than two from the same. - - - Updated - - - That 85% is shared by all 3 individuals while the 15% by only 2. Two individuals from different races are never more similar than two from the same.
I think love should trump any racial or cultural differences, although from personal expedience I do find similar cultural background help with communication or prevent cultural misunderstanding. I will say that the major social problems holding black people down is the level of self shame many feel, and how many black people want to bring down other successful blacks by calling them uncle Tom etc. I think most of this is a result of slavery and centuries of discrimination, but the solution can only be found by looking in the mirror and being proud of what you see. There is nothing more rewarding then proving your opposition wrong, Blame is easy, excuses are easy, but real fixes come only through self reflection and painful hustle.
I don't think anyone should be proud of their race...their country...or anything else external and ultimately meaningless. It's things we've been taught to take in as part of our identity. Two people like each other enough to marry each other. They might stay together forever or break up in a month. Whatver happens, it won't be their race that's the problem, but their's and other peoples opinion on what race is and what they should do because they "belong" to it that will be the problem.
If you found a couple who shared 100% of that part of their DNA they would be identical twins. It would be illegal for them to get married. The three do not share 85% of that very small part (~0.1%) of their DNA. And the two do not share that 15%.
Sorry, I only got this far into your Stormfront-endorsed drivel before this glaring stupidity jumped out at me. All human parents share the exact same amount of genetic material with their offspring - half, or 23 chromosomes from each. Ethnicity of the parents is irrelevant.
racism /ˈrāˌsizəm/ noun Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that ones own race is superior.
True. Racists like ElDiablo don't understand genetics. While there are ancestry informative markers in the human genome that are population specific the genetic variation between populations represents only about 15% of overall genetic variation within the species. So while a parent will look phentypically more like their same-race child than their biracial or multiracial child genetically there is no significant difference in genes between the children and their parents.
You do not know (*)(*)(*)(*) from shiloh>>>>>Differences Between the White and Black Races People like to say that Caucasian man has only 0.5% difference in his DNA from a Negro, implying that there is only a very small difference between them; yet, there is only 1.5% difference in DNA between a Caucasian and a chimpanzee. A very small amount of change in the DNA makes for huge differences between species, due to the many different ways that the genes themselves can be combined. Unlike the Cultural Marxist lie that race is only skin deep, just about every part of the body is uniquely different among the races. They have different genital size, position and placing, different shape and sized feet, legs and arms, different amounts of teeth, eggs and muscle, different skull shape and thickness, in fact the bones themselves are so entirely different from each other that forensic scientists can tell what race someone is just from a tiny scrap of bone from anywhere in the body, by sight alone. Blood transfusions are not possible between the races (yet they are possible between cats and dogs) and neither are bone marrow transplants. A mixed race person stands little chance of finding a donated organ that will not reject their mismatched body, since the organs are irreconcilably different as well. Obviously, the skin is different (the largest organ of the body), but so are the lungs, testicles, brain and kidneys. Caucasoid brains are larger than Negroids and the frontal lobes have deep fissures associated with complex problem solving, whilst Negroid brains are smaller and have shallow fissures. Consequently the average Negro IQ is 15 points lower than the average Caucasian IQ. This result is found regardless of geography and social status. Negroes adopted into affluent White families and Negroes in Africa and in America all produce the same averaged IQ results. Obviously not all people have their average racial IQ and there are always exceptional individuals at either end of the scale, yet exceptions serve to prove the rule, rather than to negate it. Racial differences seen in the fetus https://blacktoday.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/biological-problems-with-mixed-race-children/ http://ironlighthouse.tumblr.com/image/134852981445 chrome-extension://mhjfbmdgcfjbbpaeojofohoefgiehjai/index.html
What of the mixed-race children? Parents in mixed-race relationships are not only genetically dissimilar to each other but they also have a much greater genetic distance from potential mixed-race children than from same-race children. Regarding the individual's genetic investment in the second example above, Frank Salter (On Genetic Interests, pg. 261) writes: "For a person of English ethnicity, choosing an English spouse over a Dane gains less than one percent fitness. But choosing an English spouse over a Bantu, one yields a fitness gain of 92 percent.... The same applies in reverse order, so that a Bantu who chooses another Bantu instead of someone of English ethnicity has 92% more of his or her genes in offspring as a result. It is almost the equivalent to having twice the number of children with an English spouse. Thus assortative mating by ethnicity can have large fitness benefits, the largest derived from choosing mates within geographic races." In other words and general terms, a white mother will be almost as twice as closely related to a child with a white father versus a child with a black father. Because same-race parents share more genes, each parent is likely to see more of his or her genes in the offspring even if they are not passed on directly. For example, if the father has gene X and doesn't pass it on directly to his son, there's a good chance his same-race spouse will have gene X and pass it on, so the son will indirectly possess the father's gene X. Noting phenotype in mixed-race children, each parent would more closely resemble co-ethnics than their own child, especially the white mother, since whites tend to have recessive traits for appearance. (A person only 1/16 black will often still have visible and prominent black features.) http://southendpatriot.blogspot.com/2016/02/biological-problems-with-mixed-race.html
The Ethics of Racial Preservation..................http://www.counter-currents.com/201...servation-frank-salters-on-genetic-interests/ The suicide of the West is far more than a figure of speech. All Western societies — and only Western societies — are voluntarily allowing mass immigration of peoples who are not ethnically connected to historical Europe. Not only are they allowing massive non-White immigration, it is being promoted as fulfilling the lofty ethical goal of increasing ethnic diversity rather than any practical goal such as the needs of the labor force. What this means in the long run is that Europe will cease to be Europe, not only culturally, but also genetically. http://www.counter-currents.com/201...thnic-genetic-interests-delayed-for-30-years/
Human Genetic Diversity: Lewontin's Fallacy Human Genetic Diversity: Lewontin's Fallacy From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia "Human Genetic Diversity: Lewontin's Fallacy" is a 2003 paper by A. W. F. Edwards.[1] He criticises an argument first made by Richard Lewontin in his 1972 article "The Apportionment of Human Diversity",[2][3] which argued that division of humanity into races is taxonomically invalid. Lewontin's argument In the 1972 study "The Apportionment of Human Diversity", Richard Lewontin performed a fixation index (FST) statistical analysis using 17 markers, including blood group proteins, from individuals across classically defined "races" (Caucasian, African, Mongoloid, South Asian Aborigines, Amerinds, Oceanians, and Australian Aborigines). He found that the majority of the total genetic variation between humans (i.e., of the 0.1% of DNA that varies between individuals), 85.4%, is found within populations, 8.3% of the variation is found between populations within a "race", and only 6.3% was found to account for the racial classification. Numerous later studies have confirmed his findings.[5] Based on this analysis, Lewontin concluded, "Since such racial classification is now seen to be of virtually no genetic or taxonomic significance either, no justification can be offered for its continuance." This argument has been cited as evidence that racial categories are biologically meaningless, and that behavioral differences between groups cannot have any genetic underpinnings.[6] One example is the "Statement on 'Race'" published by the American Anthropological Association in 1998, which rejected the existence of races as unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups.[7] Edwards argued that while Lewontin's statements on variability are correct when examining the frequency of different alleles (variants of a particular gene) at an individual locus (the location of a particular gene) between individuals, it is nonetheless possible to classify individuals into different racial groups with an accuracy that approaches 100 percent when one takes into account the frequency of the alleles at several loci at the same time. This happens because differences in the frequency of alleles at different loci are correlated across populations — the alleles that are more frequent in a population at two or more loci are correlated when we consider the two populations simultaneously. Or in other words, the frequency of the alleles tends to cluster differently for different populations.[8] In Edwards's words, "most of the information that distinguishes populations is hidden in the correlation structure of the data." These relationships can be extracted using commonly used ordination and cluster analysis techniques. Edwards argued that, even if the probability of misclassifying an individual based on the frequency of alleles at a single locus is as high as 30 percent (as Lewontin reported in 1972), the misclassification probability becomes close to zero if enough loci are studied.[9] Edwards's paper stated that the underlying logic was discussed in the early years of the 20th century. Edwards wrote that he and Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza had presented a contrasting analysis to Lewontin's, using very similar data, already at the 1963 International Congress of Genetics. Lewontin participated in the conference but did not refer to this in his later paper. Edwards argued that Lewontin used his analysis to attack human classification in science for social reasons.[9] https://www.quora.com/What-is-Lewontins-Fallacy?share=1
Shocking Stats on Black-on-White Rape in USA Like Ahab's search for the Great White Whale, liberals' search for the Great White Defendant is relentless and never-ending. When, in 1988, Tawana Brawley's and Al Sharpton's then year-old spectacular charge that several white men including prosecutor Steven Pagones (whose name Brawley had picked out of a newspaper article) had abducted and raped the 15 year old was shown to be completely false, the Nation said it didn't matter, since the charges expressed the essential nature of white men's treatment of black women in this country. When the Duke University lacrosse players were accused of raping a black stripper last year, liberals everywhere treated the accusation as fact, because, just as with the Nation and Tawana Brawley, the rape charge seemed to the minds of liberals to reflect the true nature of oppressive racial and sexual relations in America. To see the real truth of the matter, let us take a look at the Department of Justice document Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2005. (Go to the linked document, and under "Victims and Offenders" download the pdf file for 2005.) http://sociobiologicalmusings.blogspot.com/2014/09/shocking-stats-on-black-on-white-rape.html
What a load of garbage. Provide sources for the following: 1) Racial differences in genital size, position and place. 2) Different shape and sized feet, legs and arms. 3) Different amounts of teeth, eggs and muscle. 4) Different skull shape and thickness. 5) Scraps of bone being identified by race by the naked eye of forensic scientists. 6) Blood transfusions not being possible between races. 7) Bone marrow transplants not being possible between races. 8) Mixed Race people not being able to be donated an organ because of their ancestry. 9) Racial differences in the lungs, testicles, brain and kidneys. 10) Caucasoid brains being larger than Negroid brains. 11) Racial differences in the frontal lobes. 12) The Black-White IQ gap being an immutable 15 points. Your source is trash. I mean look at this.... Complete garbage. While there is some variation in anthropometric characteristics between populations most of what your source is claiming is not true and clearly motivated by a racist ideological agenda. I discussed this subject with Graves listing numerous claims that were being made about racial differences in human anatomy. This is his reply: You should read this article:
Unless they're blood relatives, and the family tree doesn't fork, that gene mashup is random regardless of ethnicity. Hmmmm. That might explain a lot of perceived "racial purity" among racists, however. Actually, it would explain a lot about racists...
You think two Europeans don't share any genes vis a vis Africans? I lol'd again. Where are you drawing the line for "blood relatives"? Aren't we all related to a greater or lesser degree? I think we're closer to explaining the mind of egalitarians.
I mean blood relatives in a West Virginia/European royalty kind of way. You might want to look at what maintaining a "pure" royal bloodline cost the progeny of some European (read - WHITE) monarchies. Genetic purity ain't all that it's cracked up to be. Galahad: The world is changing. There's a reason why aristocrats develop weak chins. from Kingsman: The Secret Service
