What makes racemixing degenerate?

Attached: WG 16 - Real Diversity 2.png (748x667, 669K)

So you're saying that inbreeding is bad? Now, let's think, what's the opposite of inbreeding... hmm..... think hard about this one.

>sex
Naturally.

Is the end result of racemixing good in your opinion? And in what way?

having a stable population of the same or similar haplogroups

>asks dumbass question
>posts homosuck
tranny

Yes. Having two of the same allele is more often deleterious than having two different alleles. Here are a few examples: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterozygote_advantage#In_human_genetics

Would you rather have two shovels, two rakes, or a rake and a shovel?

>same or similar haplogroups
You've just described inbreeding.

sickle cell is exclusive to niggers so that's a net loss for everyone else.

You didn't answer my question. In what way is racemixing good?

Layman's terms, please.

countries have millions of inhabitants with substantial genetic variance,
Around a thousand breeding pairs are enough to deter mutations brought on through inbreeding.

If you have a bad trait (burn easily) and your spouse does not have that trait (some skin protection), your offspring more often than not possess the good trait and not the bad one, even though the genetics at 50/50. Good versions beat out bad ones, so mixing with someone who has completely different version increases your chance of covering up your bad versions with their good version and covering up their bad versions with your good versions.

>Around a thousand breeding pairs are enough to deter mutations brought on through inbreeding.
This is actually true, I'll give you that.

So what about bad traits, in that case?

I'm not even knocking on it, you love who you love, and it's none of my business who fucks whom.
People of all races and cultures generally dislikes seeing a foreigner hop in bed with one of their own -- it's instinctual.
I just hate it when people get uppity about it
>LMAO it's the future ur grandkids will be brown LOL
That's just a net loss for everybody
Ot would be a shame to actually muddle true diversity into a bloody mess with no semblance of culture and identity.
All people are beautiful in their own way.

If both parents have nothing but bad traits, then yes, the bad trait comes out. But if a single parent has a good version of the trait, the good version overwrites the bad version.

Obviously this is more complex for complex traits like intelligence, but the principle should remain logical.

Look at Brazil

1) It destroys the cohesion of a people.
2) Mixed children have a trouble finding their identity.
3) More prone to certain illnesses.

Sin of self harm/hatred

>this is more complex for complex traits like intelligence
Is it? Why would the offspring's intelligence not be somewhere in the middle? That's logically consistent, as you said yourself.

If you take 100 white people with an average IQ of 100, and 100 black people with an IQ of 90, and mix them together, why/or why not would their average IQ be ~95? For the sake of argument, just assume IQ is as close an objective measurement of intelligence as we can currently get.

And do you think the exploding population of Africa along with the declining population of whites poses a "danger", so to speak, in regards to intelligence? If racemixing continues and open borders along with it (things we can't quantify, necessarily predict for), wouldn't you agree that, logically, we should see a decline in global average intelligence.

Attached: africaeuropepopulationgrowth4_thumb.gif (484x346, 19K)

Cultural aspects.

>Is it? Why would the offspring's intelligence not be somewhere in the middle? That's logically consistent, as you said yourself.
No, I said the very opposite: despite the genetics being 50/50, the result is often the same as the "good" version of the trait. There are some traits that do behave like you are describing (incomplete dominance or co-dominance), but those are irregular and uncommon as far as I understand it.

The rest of your post hinges on your initial incorrect characterization of what I said, so the questions don't really make sense.

What if I told you that is how intelligence works?

Attached: untitled9.png (447x139, 4K)

>litteraly only person to recognise the op image
everyone here is a fucking shill and needs to lurk more

Then you're going to need to provide a hell of a lot more evidence than .pngs on a japanese walrus-painting forum.

Are you unfamiliar with the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study? It's quite notorious.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study

"Racemixing" is not inherently degenerate. What's degenerate is say white men or women sleeping with Africans in almost every case. Since most of them don't believe in western values and they have very low iq. I.E not suitable mates. It's as if I was to go for a really fat blue haired feminist.

It's degeneracy because it's not a suitable mate.

Biologically we are to go for the healthiest mate we can find.
However if you want to fuck your children up who am I to stop you. But don't try to stop me from calling it what it is. Degenerate.

I'm very drunk cuz valentine's day hope this all makes sense.

The part where you racemix
Or maybe the part where you forsake your heritage and create some hideous goblin abomination

Attached: 1550034010974.png (181x194, 45K)

Just look at the results OP

It isn't necessarily degenerate. If you take an evolutionary biology point of view it is actually beneficial to the whole of humanity to breed with people with like traits. The offspring will likely have those traits as dominant and will encourage genetic variance in the same way pygmy tribes did. In the event of catastrophic disease outbreak or natural disaster some of those differing traits may be advantageous to survival and furthermore to the overall survival of the human species

dont say that shit i love my mixed friend

Yeah just like I love my dog

There's no moral framework by which to condemn racemixing as degenerate or wrong, it's all a matter of pragmatism and taste

.

Brazilians.