Andiferous
New Member
You speak from experience? 
-
Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
Donations can be made via here
Race
- Thread starter kenandkids
- Start date
aeritano
New Member
JTB said:
The genetic testing used to determine jewish ancestry is based on a couple things.
1. a person's "jewishness" is passed on from mother to child according to rabbinical law
2. Since jewishness is maternally (mother), traced they can look at mitochondrial DNA. Since mitochondrial DNA is passed from mother to child as well.
without going into too much molecular genetics, what the can do is sequence this special region of the mitochondrial DNA called the "Hyper Variable Region (HVR).
like this name implies this region is prone to a lot of variation, and these variations can help trace back maternal ancestry.
Depending on the sequence of the HVR, you get placed into groups called "Haplogroups"
more info see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_mitochondrial_DNA_haplogroups
these haplogroups are created by sequencing millions of peoples DNA and comparing it to historical records.
These haplogroups correspond to people in certain regions.. so people with Haplogroup T tend to have ancestry in the Mesopotamian region.
For jews, there is a certain sub haplogroup that is comprised or strictly jews that settled in in the Poland area. Haplogroup K.
So if they sequence the mitochondrial DNA and they find that the HVR region matched up with the K haplogroup, they can logically assume that that body is infact jewish. Since the mitochondrial DNA that was passed on by the mother originated in a region where the jews settled after the out of Africa push... they cna logically make the conclusion.
and here is a good nature paper on the subject:
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v15/n4/full/5201764a.html
Andiferous
New Member
And is this defined as a separate 'sub species'?
aeritano
New Member
There are 4 distinct populations within the K Haplogroup
3 of the 4 populations are unique to Jews.. again.. this says nothing of race or species... since we are all part of Homo Sapien sapien, just ancestry.
SHAME ON YOU FOR PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH ANDIE!!!!
humans are all one species.. hence why we can all mate and produce viable fertile offspring... SHAME ON YOU ANDIE!
People who make up this group are not necessarily "white" or "middle eastern" .. so you cant attach race.. only common ancestry. And looking at jews in terms of "race" is a farce.. since there can be jews of different races.
there can be chinese jews, ethopian jews, european jews, Canadian jews...
all of which do exist
if you trace ancestry back far enough, we all came from Africa...
here is a good clip from Joniversity on this subject
3 of the 4 populations are unique to Jews.. again.. this says nothing of race or species... since we are all part of Homo Sapien sapien, just ancestry.
SHAME ON YOU FOR PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH ANDIE!!!!
humans are all one species.. hence why we can all mate and produce viable fertile offspring... SHAME ON YOU ANDIE!
People who make up this group are not necessarily "white" or "middle eastern" .. so you cant attach race.. only common ancestry. And looking at jews in terms of "race" is a farce.. since there can be jews of different races.
there can be chinese jews, ethopian jews, european jews, Canadian jews...
all of which do exist
if you trace ancestry back far enough, we all came from Africa...
here is a good clip from Joniversity on this subject
Andiferous
New Member
I am clarifying for the sake of the thread Aeri. <3
Uh oh, sorry.
Otherwise, it is interesting to read.
Uh oh, sorry.
Otherwise, it is interesting to read.
kenandkids said:
Yep. That was the key reason income and such were important. Mongoloids have the highest average cranial capacity and IQ, followed by Whites, with Negroids coming in last. This is true at all income levels and across continents.
These are simply the facts.
There's nothing 'racist' about recognizing the reality of human diversity and the different attributes of different breeds. Each has evolved to succeed in a given environment and thrives in that environment while being as a distinct disadvantage in environments to which other breeds are more well-suited.
You don't take a greyhound to pull a sled in Antarctica and my neighbor's Husky was rather miserable in the desert and would not have done well as an outdoor dog in that climate.
Is the NBA 'racist' because the players are disproportionately negroid and more or less than the halls of science and the echelons of civilized society are 'racist' because those who reach them are predominately White or eastern Asian?
aeritano said:
No go and lay a geographical map of haplogroups over a map of those common races recognized by all peoples for thousands of years and a map of human migration
You're not helping your case, if you want to deny the reality of race
So you can use their haplogrpoup to identify their race or ethnicity... yet race doesn't exist?
Another minor race than can be identified!
Yet race doesn't exist... :roll:
So Jews are not just a religious group, but a race.... but race doesn't exist? :lol:
aeritano said:
:lol:
So Polar Bears and Grizzlies are one species?
[/quote]
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article6926954.ece
I pointed this out earlier, but you all ignored it.
How many times have you explained ring species to a creationist? Why are you now arguing like one?
As for your video, resistance is not immunity (sickle cell). Come back when your source knows what he's talking about.
aeritano
New Member
JBT said:
im not arguing that there are seperate races.. i was just explaining how we can determine jew ancestry by bones and showing how stupid it is to use jews as a model for race
You're assuming that if we stick that haplogroup map over a geographic map, that we will see homogeneous mixture skin color? because that really isnt the case
take this for instance:
in area 1 you have 100 people.. 50 men, and 50 women.. lets also say that is is the basis for "jews" and lets say they are all middle eastern since the start of all modern Abrahamic religions were to arise in the middle east
so a women from this group is haplogroup K.. that is, her mtDNA has the K variation
lets say she screws a black guy and has kids.
her kids are now "jew" and now descendants of haplogroup K
so these kids also are darker then the parents.
lets say one of the children is a girl, who also has Haplogroup K
that darker child now travels and has sex with another black guy
they have children, one of which is a girl.
that girl is now darker then both previous generations, and she is now jew...
repeat this many many times and add in ,migration.. and now you can have black jews...
you can apply this logic to Asians and mongoloids.. since there was also probably inter breeding there as well
in that case, you can get mongoloid jews.
in addition to that.. you can have people convert into Judaism. so if a women of Chinese decent marries a Jewish guy and she converts to judism, all of her children are now jews and of Chinese decent... you can not attach "jew" to race
again.. nowhere dose this make a distinction about race.. since the haplogroup is determined by one half of the person's genome. again, unless you make the argument that DNA is the basis for race.. then we are all Africans.
Also.. last i checked.. while there may be modern scientific classification to separate out polar bears and grizzlies... there is no modern classification seperating out blacks from white.. from middle eastern..
there isnt homo sapien sapien uropis..
or homo sapien sapian africanas
these classifications do not exist taxanomically in science. We do not make a distinction in scince about race when it comes to mapping the genome or classifying species... humans are humans are humans.
while these classifications exist outside of the official classification of the human species, there are people whi liek to think there is..
but the fact remains... after Homo sapein sapien.. there is no recognized subspecies.. regardless of whatever racists think
kenandkids
New Member
aeritano said:
Wasted breath I think. Once you mentioned a girl mating with a black guy, all he heard was that there was now another mulatto child who wants to destroy the good white people...
aeritano said:
Are you being intentionally dense?
There is much more to race than skin colour
[Youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU4cvmk44MQ[/Youtube]
Now you have mixed-race children. Did you just now learn that these exist?
There's a reason we look at both mDNA and Y-chromosome DNA when examining heritage. You have a an extremely simplistic view of race, which is you say you don't know what race is. You want to claim Jews exist as a race and Israel can determine one's jew-ness via DNA, yet you deny that any other race exists
[Youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJMcyTx2j3M[/Youtube]
So Jews are a race a few posts ago and now it's a religion with no ties to one's race? Will you please make up your mind?
as opposed to...?
:lol:
nobody's denying common ancestry., but that doesn't mean humans and chimps are the same thing :facepalm:
You're arguing like a creationist
There weren't other recognized universes or dimensions at one point, either.
Andiferous
New Member
It would be kind of silly for me to argue at this point, given Aeritano's degrees in biology.
*Argh, my daughter spilled a slushy on my keyboard.
*Argh, my daughter spilled a slushy on my keyboard.
Prolescum
New Member
I'd quite like to know how JTB, sense, and the other one suggests we use these "facts". Do we dismiss human rights as a relic of libtardism and set up a system of internationally recognised rights based on IQ? Relegate the blacks to jobs that involve running? Revert back to the gold standard lest the Jewish bankers maintain their grip on the hàgh-IQ-weilding whites forever? Or do Semites, Arabs and Persians fall under the white banner? You never know where to put sand niggers (am I using the correct terminology here?) these days; if you're not using them for target practice, you have to kettle them somehow. Do we only educate a certain group or do we allow limited schooling for all? If all the blacks are in phyisical jobs, will they require less health care? Should we spend that extra moolah on smartphones?
I think in the end, it's all a moot point really. What's so "wrong" or "against evolution" for a species with small variations in different geographical locations to cross paths with other members of the same species and exchange genetic material? Can't genetic diversity be preferable over specialization during certain environmental pressures? I think the fact that we are a global species fu*#ing on a global scale would mean that we are ultimately falling for what was evolutionarily inevitable. Any other species would do the same thing. You find another organism with which you can have viable offspring with and you mate. That's the whole point! Darker or lighter, faster or stronger, thinner or fatter, smarter or more aggressive....who's to say what traits are evolutionarily more viable? Evolution is a selective yet indifferent machine. You might argue for what might be preferable to us strictly as a social and sapient species, but going out and segregating each other based on color or some arbitrary labels, especially in light of technology that can manipulate the genetic playing field, would be quite self defeating toward socially forward goals.
Prolescum said:
Are you serious? Coming to terms with reality(admitting genetic differences, accepting the existence of races) does not entail advocating nazi-like regimes. Racial realists do not have identical political preferences. Personally, I talk about facts relating to race because so many egalitarian lies are propagated, depicting a false scenario of the situation, for example, the income gap between whites and blacks are blamed on systematic racial discrimination in western societies, but this myth can easily be eliminated by examining IQ studies, when IQ is controlled, the black and white income gap disappears. Blacks earn less because their average IQ is lower. Egalitarian lies also promote reverse racism and policies that are rationalized on a racial level, hence it is important to counter egalitarian lies with studies dealing with human genetics. I can also derive perverted pleasure from rubbing cold hard facts on the faces of hypocrites(those that I mentioned in the other thread), it doesn't go any further than that.
Since you seem so keen on defining a race as a subgroup of the human species with a given genetic marker would you say that all those with sickle cell are a race?
Could you perhaps tell me which particular genetic markers constitute a race? Blue eyed people? If you wish to divide up the population in a way that fits your preconceived prejudice then of course we can look at race. We can define those of recent Iclandic decent as a different race to those of Australian ancestry. We can consider my family a race when compared to your family.
The bs starts by imposing your preconceived notions of society, traits which you perceive as being inferior, and then finding genetic markers in those subsets of society. You can do that for just about any subset, it's completely pointless, and in the context it's being used here JTB it's simply a method of exposing your own pre-conceived ideas on racism.
Links to youtube in a discussion like this will cut fuck all weight with anyone btw.
Could you perhaps tell me which particular genetic markers constitute a race? Blue eyed people? If you wish to divide up the population in a way that fits your preconceived prejudice then of course we can look at race. We can define those of recent Iclandic decent as a different race to those of Australian ancestry. We can consider my family a race when compared to your family.
The bs starts by imposing your preconceived notions of society, traits which you perceive as being inferior, and then finding genetic markers in those subsets of society. You can do that for just about any subset, it's completely pointless, and in the context it's being used here JTB it's simply a method of exposing your own pre-conceived ideas on racism.
Links to youtube in a discussion like this will cut fuck all weight with anyone btw.
I'm the first to stand up and speak out against what we might term positive discrimination. It gets us precisely nowhere, for starters reinforcing the notion that skin colour is a valid reason for subdivision of humanity. Why is someone a minority based on black skin, but not for ginger hair?
Racism will be dead when 100 black people and 100 white people apply for a job, all of one group get the job, none of the others do, and nobody even considers that skin colour was the reason, in much the same way that nobody would notice if all the blondes got a job.
Sadly that day is a long way off.
Racism will be dead when 100 black people and 100 white people apply for a job, all of one group get the job, none of the others do, and nobody even considers that skin colour was the reason, in much the same way that nobody would notice if all the blondes got a job.
Sadly that day is a long way off.
JTB said:
So you and impiku share a consciousness or something? Some sort of Vulcan mind meld trick?
Edit: Actually you know what? I don't want to derail that thread of conversation. Quit taking my questions out of context and stop pretending to speak for others.
Prolescum
New Member
impiku said:
Aww how sweet, you've given your little group a name that implies you're all discerningly discriminatory, like middle class racists. I see a lot of not answering my question there, which suggests to me that you "race realists" don't want to face the logical endgame of your purported beliefs.
Perhaps JTB can better answer, he/she seems a bit bolder.