Anonymous
8/5/2025, 3:18:58 PM
No.938045400
>>938042594
> Do you really think that all the offspring the ghetto trash bucks sire with their multiple "baby mamas" are going to amount to anything?
Not in one, two or three generations. But here's the thing: your line doesn't cease after a single generation unless you only had one child who remained childless. I got a govt job now, my 5th-great-grandfather was a notorious criminal with no money to his name. And eventually, the more your offspring spreads, the more people will be your descendants. What I said about Charlemagne? That's not only true about Charlemagne. There are peasants from his time that all current Europeans are descendants of too, they got lost in the paper trails - but we are their descendants. Your line will end with you. Maybe your parents might live on through your siblings, but you won't be passing down anything. At a certain moment, we'll all be forgotten - but those who breed will be passed down.
> This is just plain wrong. And you're looking back up the pyramid to when the world population was smaller. If everyone is related to Charlemaine then going forward everyone will still be. But it's meaningless.
That's not plain wrong. Just one google search and you'll find it out: https://www.theguardian.com/science/commentisfree/2015/may/24/business-genetic-ancestry-charlemagne-adam-rutherford
And I'm not saying WE WUZ KANGZ N SHIET, I don't derive any value from that ancestry. I just meant to say that, if given enough generations, both peasant and royal will eventually divulge into the same thing. There's always going to be a second son of a second son marrying a commoner etc. There's always going to be someone marrying up.
> That's it anyway. What are Lincoln's offspring doing now? How about Einstein's? Or Neils Bohr's?
Idk what their descendants are doing or if they have any, but it's what I meant: those people have made a big enough name to be passed down in writing for time immemorial. Those who can't have to get passed down in genes.
> Do you really think that all the offspring the ghetto trash bucks sire with their multiple "baby mamas" are going to amount to anything?
Not in one, two or three generations. But here's the thing: your line doesn't cease after a single generation unless you only had one child who remained childless. I got a govt job now, my 5th-great-grandfather was a notorious criminal with no money to his name. And eventually, the more your offspring spreads, the more people will be your descendants. What I said about Charlemagne? That's not only true about Charlemagne. There are peasants from his time that all current Europeans are descendants of too, they got lost in the paper trails - but we are their descendants. Your line will end with you. Maybe your parents might live on through your siblings, but you won't be passing down anything. At a certain moment, we'll all be forgotten - but those who breed will be passed down.
> This is just plain wrong. And you're looking back up the pyramid to when the world population was smaller. If everyone is related to Charlemaine then going forward everyone will still be. But it's meaningless.
That's not plain wrong. Just one google search and you'll find it out: https://www.theguardian.com/science/commentisfree/2015/may/24/business-genetic-ancestry-charlemagne-adam-rutherford
And I'm not saying WE WUZ KANGZ N SHIET, I don't derive any value from that ancestry. I just meant to say that, if given enough generations, both peasant and royal will eventually divulge into the same thing. There's always going to be a second son of a second son marrying a commoner etc. There's always going to be someone marrying up.
> That's it anyway. What are Lincoln's offspring doing now? How about Einstein's? Or Neils Bohr's?
Idk what their descendants are doing or if they have any, but it's what I meant: those people have made a big enough name to be passed down in writing for time immemorial. Those who can't have to get passed down in genes.