Thread: Will the UK be a mulatto nation by 2100?

Originally Posted by mikemikev

That's what you insinuated genius.

While I thank you for the compliment (even if it was sarcasm), I think I'll let the other members of this forum decide for themselves if I insinuated any of the things you suggested.


And to those who noticed, the last line should of my last post should have been "Next you'll be telling me that a man with no legs below the knees can't become an Olympic runner." Didn't catch it until it was too late to make an edit.

Originally Posted by DarkDaimon

While I thank you for the compliment (even if it was sarcasm), I think I'll let the other members of this forum decide for themselves if I insinuated any of the things you suggested.


And to those who noticed, the last line should of my last post should have been "Next you'll be telling me that a man with no legs below the knees can't become an Olympic runner." Didn't catch it until it was too late to make an edit.

So let me summarize your argument:

"We shouldn't be concerned about the degeneration of the white gene pool because people with genetic disorders and undesirable predilections can still lead meaningful lives (whatever that means)."

Is that it?

Having a white skin is only a genetic disorder in equatorial regions, where the melanin levels are not protective.

Originally Posted by Colonel K

Having a white skin is only a genetic disorder in equatorial regions, where the melanin levels are not protective.

We're talking about genetics, not ignorant catchphrases based on willful misunderstandings.

White doesn't mean "having white skin", it refers to the European origin genetic cluster.

But of course, you know that.

Originally Posted by mikemikev

So let me summarize your argument:

"We shouldn't be concerned about the degeneration of the white gene pool because people with genetic disorders and undesirable predilections can still lead meaningful lives (whatever that means)."

Is that it?

What I am saying is that we shouldn't be concerned about the degeneration of the white gene pool because:

1. The proof that certain races are genetically inferior compared to others is tenuous at best.
2. The mixing of genes makes a species stronger.
3. Environment has more influence on our personalities and behavior than genetics.

Originally Posted by DarkDaimon

What I am saying is that we shouldn't be concerned about the degeneration of the white gene pool because:

1. The proof that certain races are genetically inferior compared to others is tenuous at best.
2. The mixing of genes makes a species stronger.
3. Environment has more influence on our personalities and behavior than genetics.

Wrong on all counts.

Originally Posted by DarkDaimon

1. The proof that certain races are genetically inferior compared to others is tenuous at best.

Why do certain races continue to fail at adapting to our modern, knowledge based society?

When will excuse factories like yourself stop ignoring the facts and coincidences that point to what a majority of people already believe?

Originally Posted by DarkDaimon

2. The mixing of genes makes a species stronger.

Tell that to mixed race people looking for bone marrow donors. Being African (or even part African) also greatly increases one's chances of contracting AIDS, sickle cell disease, and a host of other for the most part "black only" diseases.

Originally Posted by DarkDaimon

3. Environment has more influence on our personalities and behavior than genetics.

Go smoke your peace pipe somewhere else...

I vote "Who cares"?

I do not live in the UK, am not a UK citizen, so really have no imput or concern at to how they choose to run their own country.