ballin trump racism rant

[amsy]

Wow...in the end, all the knowledge acquired so far in the world has amounted to nothing for some people.

 

[slimreaper]

hey dumbo, if you got into a car accident and the donor is black and has the same blood type as you his/her organs will work fine with your body because you are both human...


Try putting a foxes organs inside you dumbo and see what happens.

But i guess according to your retard logic people with different blood type would be of different species.

you fail at logic. Foxes of different species can also share organs dumbass

 

[LordRaikage]

you fail at logic. Foxes of different species can also share organs dumbass

i don't think you know the difference between species and breeds.


All humans are 1 species =Homo sepians


If you think you're better than any other "ethic Group" you're sadly mistaken each ethic group have great people and garbage people

Eg. obama being black and decent guy,smart,charismatic

you on the other hand who is white and clearly not a good person, very stupid, and overall a repulsive personality.

and visa versa

humans are humans get it through your skull.

 

[Jugram Haschwalth]

Why bring this to NB where nobody is educated on such things. Let's be honest here what could you possibly accomplish posting this here on a site targeted for people who aren't even old enough to vote in the first place.

Be gone you clown. As a white person this is annoying seeing as if all the Blacks,Mexicans,Muslims etc where removed from America our country would still have conflict shootings killings and everything else there is.

 

[Jugram Haschwalth]

Whites in Blacks should be considered different species? Do you know how species are organized with each other? Obviously you don't.

Can a Black man have a baby with a White Women? Yes
Can a White man have a baby with a Black Women? Yes

If it can mate with a species it's the same species. Also to enlighten you more on the subject the oldest found human bones were found in Africa. One could argue that Black people where the first actual race to exist. To add more to the claim is that our skin is easily irritated by the sun while Black people Skin aren't.

 

[Lightbringer]

Watching Slimreaper get destroyed yet again.

You must be registered for see images

 

[-immortal-]

Wrong!

 

[Power Bottom]

You dumb as hell

 

[Chikombo]

They are not very tolerant. Being pro stuff like sterelizing peope with mental issues is worse to me.

 

[slimreaper]

Whites in Blacks should be considered different species? Do you know how species are organized with each other? Obviously you don't.

Can a Black man have a baby with a White Women? Yes
Can a White man have a baby with a Black Women? Yes

If it can mate with a species it's the same species. Also to enlighten you more on the subject the oldest found human bones were found in Africa. One could argue that Black people where the first actual race to exist. To add more to the claim is that our skin is easily irritated by the sun while Black people Skin aren't.

polar bears and brown bears can produce viable offspring but are considered different sub-species... humans are no different yet we aren't.


Why is that moron?

 

[Оdin]

polar bears and brown bears can produce viable offspring but are considered different sub-species... humans are no different yet we aren't.


Why is that moron?

Because polar bears and brown bears evolved from the same ancestor no more than 200,000 years ago and have not developed significant genetic differences. The genetic difference between you and an African is no greater than the genetic difference between me and an Asian living on the other side of the world. Physical features that differentiate you from other humans such as skin color, hair texture, cheekbones, height, (etc...) are determine by a very small number of genes. Your genetic makeup is so similar that you can't even consider yourself a sub-species. The only thing you can call yourself is a different race because the term is needed to describe different human population that developed across various parts of the world in which they were genetically isolated.

Take a trip to another planet along with the other people who think like you, produce viable offspring (i.e., no child born from incest), and maybe after 500,000 years you can call yourself a sub-species of Earthlings - then after a million years you can call yourself a completely different species. But until then, I suggest you read a couple of books and indulge on the precious knowledge scientists left us to become a better, smarter species.

 

[slimreaper]

Because polar bears and brown bears evolved from the same ancestor no more than 200,000 years ago and have not developed significant genetic differences. The genetic difference between you and an African is no greater than the genetic difference between me and an Asian living on the other side of the world. Physical features that differentiate you from other humans such as skin color, hair texture, cheekbones, height, (etc...) are determine by a very small number of genes. Your genetic makeup is so similar that you can't even consider yourself a sub-species. The only thing you can call yourself is a different race because the term is needed to describe different human population that developed across various parts of the world in which they were genetically isolated.

Take a trip to another planet along with the other people who think like you, produce viable offspring (i.e., no child born from incest), and maybe after 500,000 years you can call yourself a sub-species of Earthlings - then after a million years you can call yourself a completely different species. But until then, I suggest you read a couple of books and indulge on the precious knowledge scientists left us to become a better, smarter species.

if they haven't developed significant differences why are they considered different sub species?


Maybe it should be you cracking a book

 

[Оdin]

if they haven't developed significant differences why are they considered different sub species?


Maybe it should be you cracking a book

"A taxonomist decides whether to recognize a subspecies or not. A common way to decide is that organisms belonging to different subspecies of the same species are capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring, but they do not usually interbreed in nature due to geographic isolation, sexual selection, or other factors. The differences between subspecies are usually less distinct than the differences between species."

 

[slimreaper]

"A taxonomist decides whether to recognize a subspecies or not. A common way to decide is that organisms belonging to different subspecies of the same species are capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring, but they do not usually interbreed in nature due to geographic isolation, sexual selection, or other factors. The differences between subspecies are usually less distinct than the differences between species."

According to Woodley (2010), it is plausible that H. sapiens does not belong to one species and subspecies (i.e. is polytypic). Some of the data he uses to support this hypothesis could be useful for answering our question. He claims that H. sapiens, which is often considered monotypic, posses higher levels of morphological diversity, genetic heterozygosity and differentiation than many animal species which are considered polytypic.

Woodley cites a study by Sarich and Miele, who claimed that morphological differences between humans, on average, are equal to the differences among species within other mammalian genera (excluding species bred for domestic purposes), and are typically more strongly marked than in other animals.

However, morphological differences are known to be caused by little genetic differences too, like in the case of domestic dogs, which are still considered to be one species. Therefore, Woodley presented further evidence that looked on these inconsistencies in classification using allele frequencies and genetic diversity.

He presented data from a wide range of studies, which compares genetic diversity of various mammalian species based on heterozygosity (H), which is a common indicator for genetic diversity, and describes whether both alleles are the same or not on a studied locus. According to this data (which you can find in the linked paper):

Chimpanzees exhibited H of 0.63-0.73, which is very similar to H found in humans (0.588 - 0.807), however, chimpanzees are divided into four subspecies.
Some species like the grey wolf even exhibited a lower H (corresponding to lower genetic diversity) than humans (0.528 vs 0.588 - 0.807), while the grey wolf has been divided into as many as 37 subspecies.

 

[Оdin]

According to Woodley (2010), it is plausible that H. sapiens does not belong to one species and subspecies (i.e. is polytypic). Some of the data he uses to support this hypothesis could be useful for answering our question. He claims that H. sapiens, which is often considered monotypic, posses higher levels of morphological diversity, genetic heterozygosity and differentiation than many animal species which are considered polytypic.

Woodley cites a study by Sarich and Miele, who claimed that morphological differences between humans, on average, are equal to the differences among species within other mammalian genera (excluding species bred for domestic purposes), and are typically more strongly marked than in other animals.

However, morphological differences are known to be caused by little genetic differences too, like in the case of domestic dogs, which are still considered to be one species. Therefore, Woodley presented further evidence that looked on these inconsistencies in classification using allele frequencies and genetic diversity.

He presented data from a wide range of studies, which compares genetic diversity of various mammalian species based on heterozygosity (H), which is a common indicator for genetic diversity, and describes whether both alleles are the same or not on a studied locus. According to this data (which you can find in the linked paper):

Chimpanzees exhibited H of 0.63-0.73, which is very similar to H found in humans (0.588 - 0.807), however, chimpanzees are divided into four subspecies.
Some species like the grey wolf even exhibited a lower H (corresponding to lower genetic diversity) than humans (0.528 vs 0.588 - 0.807), while the grey wolf has been divided into as many as 37 subspecies.

The "plausibility" of such "

You must be registered for see links

" won't change the fact that you are not a different species or even a sub-species simply because you are white and believe yourself (and your race) to be superior. I'm gonna as you to come at me with facts or you can stop wasting my time.

 

[slimreaper]

The "plausibility" of such "

You must be registered for see links

" won't change the fact that you are not a different species or even a sub-species simply because you are white and believe yourself (and your race) to be superior. I'm gonna as you to come at me with facts or you can stop wasting my time.

the fact is these taxonomists are displaying hypocrisy when studies show other animals to be less biologically diverse yet being classified as different sub species.

 

[Оdin]

the fact is these taxonomists are displaying hypocrisy when studies show other animals to be less biologically diverse yet being classified as different sub species.

Of course, but only because their scientific views don't align with your personal views, right?

 

[slimreaper]

Of course, but only because their scientific views don't align with your personal views, right?

scientifically speaking we have less in common genetically with our other races than wolves and chimpanzees do with their different sub species.


How is this fact a personal view?

 

[Оdin]

scientifically speaking we have less in common genetically with our other races than wolves and chimpanzees do with their different sub species.


How is this fact a personal view?

"A subspecies is an individual division within a species, meaning that the members of the sub-group are individual enough that they cannot be lumped together, but they are not so distinct that they are entirely different species. This biological specification can be a bit confusing, and the categorizations are constantly being adjusted and changed to deal with new information. As a general rule, you can think of it as being almost like a race of individuals, although human races are not considered subspecies, for a variety of biological and political reasons.

Before delving into what makes a subspecies, it may help to think about the taxonomic rank of “species.” A species is an individual class of organisms that are distinctive from other animals, and unable to breed with other groups of animals. Members of a species are defined on the basis of their differences, which may be quite diverse or very minimal. For example, you can probably think of a lot of differences between an elephant and a pet cat, because these animals are considered to be different species, but there are also differences between Indian and African elephants that lead them to be classified as being in different species, despite superficial resemblances.

Many people think of “species” as the terminal taxonomic rank, since it does imply a sense of finality. In fact, many species are extremely diverse, and as a result, the smaller rank emerged to do justice to this diversity. The different subspecies within a species are distinctive and unique from each other, but they are still capable of interbreeding.

One example that you may be familiar with is the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, as opposed to the wolf Canis lupus lupus, or the dingo, Canis lupus dingo. All of these animals can interbreed, but they are morphologically distinct, and they lead very different lives. Within the genus of Canus, lupus is considered to be a “polytypic species,” meaning that it has a number of subspecies; a species with no smaller divisions is called a “monotypic species.”

There are a number of ways to indicate a subspecies. In the method used above, animals are identified as Genus species subspecies. You may also see “ssp” or “subspecies” in binomial nomenclature, like this: Panthera tigris ssp. altaica, for the Siberian tiger."


So what would you call your "completely different" human species? Homo sapiens sapiens supremus?

 

[slimreaper]

"A subspecies is an individual division within a species, meaning that the members of the sub-group are individual enough that they cannot be lumped together, but they are not so distinct that they are entirely different species. This biological specification can be a bit confusing, and the categorizations are constantly being adjusted and changed to deal with new information. As a general rule, you can think of it as being almost like a race of individuals, although human races are not considered subspecies, for a variety of biological and political reasons.

Before delving into what makes a subspecies, it may help to think about the taxonomic rank of “species.” A species is an individual class of organisms that are distinctive from other animals, and unable to breed with other groups of animals. Members of a species are defined on the basis of their differences, which may be quite diverse or very minimal. For example, you can probably think of a lot of differences between an elephant and a pet cat, because these animals are considered to be different species, but there are also differences between Indian and African elephants that lead them to be classified as being in different species, despite superficial resemblances.

Many people think of “species” as the terminal taxonomic rank, since it does imply a sense of finality. In fact, many species are extremely diverse, and as a result, the smaller rank emerged to do justice to this diversity. The different subspecies within a species are distinctive and unique from each other, but they are still capable of interbreeding.

One example that you may be familiar with is the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, as opposed to the wolf Canis lupus lupus, or the dingo, Canis lupus dingo. All of these animals can interbreed, but they are morphologically distinct, and they lead very different lives. Within the genus of Canus, lupus is considered to be a “polytypic species,” meaning that it has a number of subspecies; a species with no smaller divisions is called a “monotypic species.”

There are a number of ways to indicate a subspecies. In the method used above, animals are identified as Genus species subspecies. You may also see “ssp” or “subspecies” in binomial nomenclature, like this: Panthera tigris ssp. altaica, for the Siberian tiger."


So what would you call your "completely different" human species? Homo sapiens sapiens supremus?

I would call all races completely different. even the term race is never used in the animal kingdom but only for humans. Why is that?

This pretty much confirms what i've been saying, it's only to preserve feeling that humans aren't broken into sub-species