>scientists unironically want you to believe that these two in pic rel are the same race while at the same time saying that two different types of dogs are not the same but are different breeds.

>>16733669 (OP)
What "the science" says about the matter is that races are arbitrary and poorly defined (same goes with dog breeds but that's neither here nor there).
You can describe differences between populations is a much more well defined manner by talking about what genes are actually expressed by which people. But there is a large degree of ideologically motivated fuckery that gets in the way of that.

As bad as the "one race" crowd is, race obsessed morons aren't helping the situation either.

>>16733669 (OP)
>scientists
Actually God is telling you that you are the same race. Will you ignore God as well?

>>16733697
When did god say this? Do you ahve it on video or something? Please tell me you arent actually claiming a book written by a bunch of Jews is God talking. Because if that is what you are implying you should be ruthlessly mocked and rightly labeled a fool and clown and never taken seriously on any topic

>>16733697
in fact even if that is what you are implying that isnt even what the book says. It very clearly says the KNOWN races of the time and location, arabs, aryans and jews are separate races spawned of Shem, Ham and Japhus

>>16733669 (OP)
idk about ya, but something tells me the creatura goblina on the right will suck the life essence out of the guy on the left, iykwim

>>16733669 (OP)
>race = breed
Ngmi, OP.

>>16733672
The genomes of a sub-saharan African, and east Asian, and a native white Swedish man are inherently different. As are their literal skeleton phenotypes of their skulls. DNA has such a dense storage of information that even a 0.5% variance is enough to account for totally different phenotypes and expressions of genotype. There are also proven nervous system differences between races, the races with the most complex nervous systems are northern Europeans and north Asians (mongoloid) followed by caucasoid in general (southern Europeans and middle easterners).

Light skin Europeans literally absorb sunlight more efficiently and their bodies produce vitamin D more efficiently than even light skinned east Asians, and do so at 3 times the efficiency of black and brown skinned peoples. Light skinned Europeans also more efficiently conduct atmospheric electricity across their skin, they are literally more electric. Atmospheric and applied electricity is also implicated in advancing wound healing capabilities. Light eyes are also directly correlated with more sensitive and clearer vision at lower light levels. Light hair, light eyes, and light skin in a caucasoid individual is a triple recessive genetic system, they are the rarest individuals of a macro genetic group on Earth, representing less than 0.5% of the global population by both carrying and expressing the genotype and phenotype for triple recessive traits.

Intelligence has many types, a purely mathematical intelligence is not capable of advanced innovation and novel formation. This is why east Asians cannot innovate like Europeans.

Red hair genetics cause multifaceted genetic variances in those individuals, especially caucasoid red heads, such that their absorption of sunlight is different the resulting red hair expression is due to the accumulation of pheomelanin, they also have different dopaminergic responses and levels and different pain responses and levels, ie different nervous systems.

>>16733783
The argument that was given was that saying both the single race and whatever other definition out there fails to encapsulate a good enough distinction between people. Yeah there are clearly huge differences between people far away from eachother, but there are fairly big differences between those who live close by as well.

Also I gotta say that image is pure aids. Mendels genetics is more than just the Punnett square and there have been more scientists who added onto that since then. So gross oversimplification.
The link that was given to substantiate that claim about height doesn't refer to Dominance at all. So misleading source.
The Asian conclusion is worthless due to the sum of quality of the other parts.
Twin studies is just there, it wasn't referred to at any other part. All you get out of that is just
>oh the rest of it has something to do with race this probably proves it further
The IQ part is just plain drivel.
At this point I honestly can't be assed to look at the last one.

What a waste of a post. Misunderstanding the original argument and posting a fake image. Anon, get the fuck out of /sci/.

>>16733783
>empathy

What?

>>16733816
The mendel diagram is actually moderately accurate in racce mixing studies of phenotypes (genotype expressions) between races. In reality if you are a double or triple recessive individual and you race mix with a double dominant individual, your offspring will almost never look like you (higher than a 90% chance they will never inherit your eye color).

Additionally in studies of innovation density and novelty, it is only European peoples in general that are blessed. Historically the highest densities in the world for innovation per capita were the Italian peninsula, the low countries, England, Germany, France, and the Nordic countries (namely Sweden and Denmark). At a lower rate per capita were the Slavic peoples and their density was higher the farther west they were in Europe. All modern technological systems and developments in use today came from Europeans, the majority of them from northern Europeans (north of the Alps). Even the ancient "barbarians" were actually building 18 sq km hill fort cities and using stellar navigation in cloudy weather in small klinker type ships to travel to and colonize 4 continents prior to 1000 AD. Of the ancient world the Greeks had the highest density of innovation, multiple times higher than the Romans (whom adopted most of those earlier Greek innovations as their own even though they used Greek vocabulary to describe them). Of the modern innovations, it is English that dominates, using Greek etymology for most technological terminology. The full Germanic innovators used novel words for concepts or gestalt word strings (Svenska, Dutch/Flemish, Deutsch, Dansk). The French (90% Latin vocab) and Latin (mostly Italian) speaking innovators used mostly novel Latin and ancient Greek terms and concepts. Modern science emerged from the medieval European esoteric class of alchemists and artificers.

>>16733826
No matter where you put a sub-saharan African, they are statistically guaranteed to commit violent crimes at a rate no less than 3 times that of Europeans, in some localities they commit violent crimes at more than 40-50 times the rate of Europeans (Sweden and parts of the USA). This is not due to purely socio-economic factors, it is genetics. The highest rate of empathy and related traits are in Europeans, despite a violent history like the rest of the world. Asians are more neurotic than Europeans, and mongoloids (Mongols and native Americans) were almost as violent as niggers on a per capita basis.

>>16733828
> studies of phenotypes (genotype expressions)
Nigganon you're posting on /sci/ this is the minimum that's expected for people to know. Why say this?
>In reality if you are a double or triple recessive individual and you race mix with a double dominant individual-
Okay? If a blue eyed german mixes with an a beady eyed anglo they'd also have a chance of facing this. Also I believe eyes have incomplete dominance, so blending genetics, where you get a mix of eye colour, is going to happen here regardless. Genuinely hoping to get your kids to have the same eyes as you in terms of colour then you're going down the route of heavy matchmaking, gene stealing and incest.
Don't worry about the funny asian people, worry that your neighbour is welsh.

>Additionally in studies of innovation density and novelty
Don't care, take it to >>>/his/

>>16733783
>The genomes of a sub-saharan African, and east Asian, and a native white Swedish man are inherently different
The genes of the Swede and the Asian are statistically closer than that of 2 random Subsaharan niggers.
>Intelligence has many types, a purely mathematical intelligence is not capable of advanced innovation and novel formation. This is why east Asians cannot innovate like Europeans.
This is a cope used by white niggers being sad over having lower IQs than chinks. IQ is an actually objective metric, "innovation" is a vibe.

>>16733783
>>16733669 (OP)
>can they have offspring together
>can the offspring reproduce as well
Is usually the benchmark

The genes of two random men of any race are closer than the genes of a random man and his own mother

>>16733853
>This is a cope used by white niggers being sad over having lower IQs than chinks. IQ is an actually objective metric, "innovation" is a vibe.
Sure, you can quibble on what exactly gets counted or not as innovation, but the trend is overwhelming
The reason matters not, it is the asians who should cope

Personally I suspect it's mainly not intelligence/type of intelligence differences, but personality. The east asians, especially the Chinese, tend to live in massive stifling autocratic bureaucracies, it's a reflection of the racial personality which doesn't pursue innovation