RACES ARE REAL!

C'mon.. This is from a legit website.
You're telling me that these differences don't constitute "Subspecies"?

Attached: Fucked up smaller.png (912x816, 191K)

Stop it.

Yes, they are, but they're still superior to sub Saharan Africans who are not a sub species.

Attached: Screenshot_20180415-192932_Chrome.jpg (1080x1087, 307K)

>RACES ARE REAL
they unironically are. You can measure the genome and determine your ancestral heritage. There are also several objectively measurable traits between the races, like west-saharans being extremely enduring and fast runners.

Doubting any of this is doubing reality.

>t. abbo

>Humans from Africa have a bigger nose, this means they are a different species
Physical differences in a population are the metric by which species are judged.

This is not reddit... we all know very well that races are real and they differ not only in appearance but also behaviour and intelligence.

>In zoology, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (4th edition, 1999) accepts only one rank below that of species, namely the rank of subspecies. Other groupings, "infrasubspecific entities" do not have names regulated by the ICZN. Such forms have no official ICZN status, though they may be useful in describing altitudinal or geographical clines, pet breeds, transgenic animals, etc.

According to the ICZN, race doesn't exist.
However, if people were to be classified officially, they would be under subspecies.

The main (and ultimately the only criteria) prerequisites for denoting a subspecies, are the morphological and geographical differences, and the unlikelihood of said subspecies breeding in the wild.

No, I just really hate African American culture and the saving grace of genuine African culture is they admit it's inferior. African Americans repeat shit and have that approval seeking shit where they end sentences with "knowaimsayin" or "know what I mean."

Without alcohol, aboriginals are at worst a little loud sometimes. Everyone knows violence only exists with aboriginals when accompanied with alcohol, remove the alcohol and they objectively a better people than African Americans in every way.

Aboriginals literally are a different species. It's impossible to find remains 70kya in Australia when the first homo sapiens only left Africa by then.

Again, this doesn't mean they're the worst homo variant. It just means they're very obviously different and react biologically differently to certain things.

Also, Stefan Molyneux is about to talk a lot of shit about them. It's all fake. What one tribe did in western Australia like once 100 years ago isn't necessarily what the Victorian or Tasmanian tribes did.

Attached: 1522717345615.gif (499x281, 1.15M)

>Aboriginals literally are a different species
Then why is it that they can interbreed with people outside of their race and produce fertile offspring? Different species can't do that.

Is it true that, up until relatively recently, aboriginals were classified as fauna by the Australian government?

I don't understand how someone can think convergent evolution accounts for development of the human brain and the language faculty. This brain is basically how the species is defined and delineated from other hominids, and we can all interbreed on top of that. Neanderthals, unlike aborigines, are at the extreme limit of what is considered normal modern variation, so it is argued whether they are the same species.

Human genetic diversity is nothing like what we see in dogs, and yet nobody ever insists we're being lied to about whether dog breeds are really different species.

>the unlikelihood of said subspecies breeding in the wild
this would be the excuse used to keep all contemporary hominids classified as the same subspecies
There's a stark difference between Anglos, chinks, and groids when viewing only those 3 groups, but there's an obvious genetic gradient moving between all of them when accounting for the rest of the planet

nah you are just racist OP

Not different species because we can still interbreed, but variations on Homo sapiens created by generations of adaptation, sure. Races are distinct from subspecies because the amount of different genes is small, they are not distinct groups, and it's heavily complicated by social factors.

nice 8th grade uunderstanding of biology there. go read the Wikipedia articles on “subspecies” and “species” and come back

Oh yeah? What are pizzlies/grolar bears then, brainlet?

Polar bears and Grizzly bears have a common ancestor from 200,000 years ago, the species only recently diverged and as such can still produce fertile offspring. In order for Aboriginals to be a different species from us but still be able to produce a fertile offspring, they would have had to diverge from modern humans fairly recently, which is the exact opposite of what the user I was replying to was stating.

Attached: race reality.gif (2970x2400, 851K)

They aren't a subspecies either, the amount of genetic difference is too small.

>nah you are just racist OP

Attached: diversity.jpg (646x792, 151K)

>diversity
isnt a single race, it's multiple races luving in harmony

You need to assign different pitches and chords to a song to make a harmony. Fucking racist Nazi, implying that we need to segregate people to make them more harmonious. My professor was right; you Germans still are Nazis. Now suck my black dick, white boy.