I want to hear Jow Forums's explanation for this

humans are a SPECIES, but not a RACE

This. But all I’m willing to do is give knowledge. The mark of a committed person is listening

>75,000 years ago
>Earth is not older than 6,000 yrs

ok, sage this fake news thread

I think it's fairly obvious that hotter environments lead to less development.

The American south, for example, is the poorest part of the country. States like Mississippi consistently rank lowest in the human development index. This is because the combination of heat and humidity makes manual labor difficult and exhausting.

Additionally, there's a theory that a country with abundant natural resources (gold, for example) will actually be unable to develop fully. The resources will hinder its growth, not help. This is because very little coordination is necessary to pull gold out of the ground-- all you need is a few miners and a gun to point at their heads. In European countries, where natural resources aren't quite so abundant, it became necessary for people to form complex political and economic associations in order to improve their lives.

These two points, coupled together, explain a lot more about the difference between Africa and Europe than pseudoscientific racial claims do.

>different species
races != species
Different species cannot produce fertile breed
While it's proved most times that racial interbreeding doesn't strengthen the offspring.

>but the stuff I've read on here has absolutely no basis in science
Most of the stuff you've read on here is JIDF or other thing to stir hate and low-IQ beliefs

Mississippi is the blackest state you chucklefuck

The toba disaster is highly overblown and recent archeogenetic research is beginning to cast a lot of doubt on it anyway.

Think you have it all figured out right? All of your claims are just theorys starting with your dumbass volcano erupting. Science has proven people of light are overall a better people less likely to sin and more intelligent than the average negroid.

I never denied we were different. I said this board tends to heavily exaggerate those differences, and treats all real-life outcomes as the result of genetic difference rather than geographic/economic difference.

The only evidence against it is a few fucking spears they found in India, which were both above and below the layer of ash. All that proves is that those people survived the blast. It doesn't disprove the theory.

Also, regardless of what caused the bottleneck, no one denies that it happened. The homogenity of human genetics proves it.

>So why do you people keep insisting that whites and Africans are two different species?
It's absolutely irrelevant if they're "different species" or not. They're just not compatible with civilization.

Well theres your first problem dumbass this board exaggerates everything.

> Science has proven people of light are overall a better people less likely to sin

To which scientific study do you refer? "Billy-Bob and Cletus' Study of the American Nigger?"

kys

Better? Hahahaha! Have you even read any of the history of the last few thousand years? Just a constant series of fuckers (white, black, whatever) being arseholes to each other.

I find this line of argument incredibly frustrating. If you're going to make a claim, stand by it. Don't immediately back down the moment someone questions you. Whenever someone throws a wrench in the gears, you all just retreat to your most socially acceptable opinions, and then go right back to your old ways the moment it feels safe.

Cowards.

>This genetic bottleneck theory is supported by the genomes of other animals, including chimpanzees.

There are two species of chimpanzees: the common chimpanzee and the bonobo. Thus there could just as well be two or more species of humans. Your argument is invalid.

Uneducated people, black or white, are incompatible with civilization. This includes white supremacists.

The gulf between niggers and whites in terms of iq mostly genetic and a chasm that simply cannot bridged.

There. Now go away.

Different races, just look at how dogs could be molded into various forms and temperaments in a few generations, now Humanity with groups all over the world in lots of different locations and society models fairly isolated breeding within themselves could only lead to this kind of natural selection.

I'm pretty sure that dogs and wolves are considered separate species despite being able to produce fertile offspring.

If you deny fact as i said in my first post its your problem negroids are more likely to kill steal or harm your person or property. However i treat them all the same and love them the same it seems you deny fact because you have undertones of white racism yourself.

Chimps and bonobos split from one another just under a million years ago. We're talking about a time scale of 75,000 years. Big difference.

Are you assuming that the 10,000 breeding pairs were homogenous? Homo sapiens had been extant for ~225,000 years when that volcano erupted, so I don’t really see the relevance of that event in your argument.

If we all started in the same place and moved around .... whichever combo of genes were best suited for each environment won out in those areas. The survivors would bread together and homogenize stabilizing traits. Kind of seems we're lesser versions of what was in the past due to environment based survival of the fittest and narrowing the gene pools.

Any basic fucking intro to psychology class will tell that IQ isn't a flawless test. It's not repeatable within a reasonable margin of error. Someone could score "normal" one day and "legally retarded" later.

And yeah, Africans suck at taking these tests, but they've never had any sort of formal education.

>Though it’s sometimes hard to believe, our modern canine friends are related to wolves—most closely to the gray wolf. The two animals are thought to share a common, extinct wolf ancestor
>rover.com/blog/wolf-vs-dog-whats-difference/

>Species:
>a group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding. The species is the principal natural taxonomic unit, ranking below a genus and denoted by a Latin binomial, e.g. Homo sapiens

Education isn't iq. One you can fix

What I'm saying is that not a great deal of variation can arise from such a small population. That's just a scientific fact.

OP, you idiot. Yes, there was a genetic bottleneck. It's called Ham, Shem, and Japeth, the three sons of Noah. And of course Canaan, the son of Noah's wife and Ham. You weren't there 75,000 years ago and there are no eyewitness accounts. Hundreds of disparate cultures retain memory of a global flood event.

Inb4 "Christkike" or "myth".

Judging individuals is pointless, when just a 5-10 IQ points of difference in the population average can make or break the nation.

>75,000 years.

1. I think you are underestimating how long period 75k years is. Multiple species can be born and go extinct in such time period.

2. It's not like a nation/tribe of 10k was spared. It was a group of humans here, other there. Significant differences between these groups could have already existed by the point the bottleneck occurred.

If that's what you look for in history, that's what you'll find. There are also vast swaths of time where there was prosperity and peace, you just choose to ignore them because of your preformed opinions from your edgelord days.

Learn to speak English.

Yes it can when those 10,000 remaining pairs were already very diverse due to environmental pressures.

Iq tests and psychometrics are literally the only repeatable material the entire discipline of psychology has produced. And no, education level is completely irrelevant. Iq tests do not test fluid intelligence. They test g loaded crystallized intelligence.

You know absolutely nothing, please refrain from embarrassing yourself.

>We're talking about a time scale of 75,000 years.
How long a period of time is required for a species to be reclassified as separate?

>Do you just deny the factual evidence for all of this?

Yeah.

humans are genetically engineered from 3 races

Attached: 1515947629154.jpg (526x470, 83K)

Yes, and interbreeding undoubtedly arose soon after.

Sorry, please fluid intelligence and crystallized intelligence in this post. I got them confused.

The bottleneck he is talking about is a poor assumption. As I pointed out humans had been around for ~225,000 years prior to this, so those 10,000 pairs would have been pulled from a diverse gene pool.

>Dumbass if you think we are all the same race
That's literally not what he said.

>I think it's fairly obvious that hotter environments lead to less development.

This is true, but not for the reasons you think. Survival in harsher environments requires more planning, creativity and foresight, which means that traits that result in abstract thinking, co-operation and intelligence will be selected for. Such selection would not occur in tropic, where food is plentiful all year round.

I'd love to see you grow up in a mud hut with no internet, school, or books, and then have someone ask you to take an IQ test. Hard to do when you're functionally illiterate. There's simply no accounting for circumstance within the test, so even if it worked when applied to individuals, it would be unfair to extrapolate that to the population as a whole AND THEN make broad generalized claims about their genetic inferiority.

>So why do you people keep insisting that whites and Africans are two different species?
Africans have more variation because, over at least hundreds of thousands of years, all sorts of hominoids have migrated into Africa and mated with populations that were already there, infusing a large variety of different alleles into their gene pool. Asians have more variation than Europeans not because they are more ancient, but because the Europeans, already smaller in numbers, were decimated much more by Toba and the ice ages than the Asians and lost much of the variation that they had accumulated.

Until the 1960s, Neanderthals were classified as Homo neanderthalensis, a different species from us, Homo sapiens. But the genetic distance between Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis (

I included that in my comment as well, though I may not have worded it well (I was typing fast). Regardless, it's absolutely correct.

>past 75,000 years
that’s where you’re wrong kiddo

Attached: 1512232282141s.jpg (250x250, 10K)

OP do you still hold to your original assertion that we have only had 75,000 years to differentiate or will you now admit that is flawed.

Bad condition lead to smart brain, even Grug know this

Yeah. True. Go look up the average iq of Mongolia. They live in huts too. But they don't have an African tier iq.

Education does not affect IQ, because IQ symbolises pre-linguistic visual pattern recognition. Education is a means of teaching ways to utilize IQ. IQ could be seen as raw visuo-spatial processing power. Such can't be taugh.

Kikeonastick

So all the people that survived from all around the world traveled large distances and got together to breed.Bulshit.

You completely didn't read his post. The geographical differences between each of the groups of ~2000 or fewer humans that survived that event we're so vast that cross breeding was impossible for thousands of years afterwards.

Like he said, it was not one location with 20k people that survived, it was spread out over the whole earth.

Attached: 94c276be66967745b208f1012b97b994 (2).jpg (602x700, 96K)

Attached: tyrone 3.jpg (501x373, 39K)

Maybe we don't want to light brown retards with no culture. The will of my ancestors will live on without pollution by whites.

No, you would have pockets of survivors around the world. These groups would be isolated from each other.

>It's thought that
Here is were it is wrong.

Then it must be clear to you how and why people of indo-european descendants are functionally and behaviorally different from the African negroid.

The archeogenetic record does not show any such interbreeding.

Oh, there was substantial differentiation prior to the event. But with fewer than 10,000 breeding pairs, how long was that diversity sustained for? Am I to believe that the disparate populations managed to never interbreed over that period of time, to the point that their genes became mixed?

Obviously someone living in the Cape of Good Hope didn't breed with someone living in Siberia-- I'm not arguing that every human is the same.

All of humanity are inbred?Sounds about right when you look at how mentally ill the average person is.

Again, I'm not denying that they have different cultures. But anthropologists agree that humans are among the least-varied species on Earth.

So I think we have established that we are still dealing with 300,000 years of potential differentiation of the species, I think if you want to argue that isn’t enough time for different races to emerge you are going to have a hard time of it OP.

>I'm not arguing that every human is the same.
What are you actually even arguing for? Seems that you agree that there are distinct differences between groups of people, yet you seem to reluctant to admit that these differences can be labelled as races.

>Am I to believe that the disparate populations managed to never interbreed over that period of time, to the point that their genes became mixed?
Yes. The ability to traverse large distances afforded by things like airplanes and cars is a recent invention. Human populations were highly geographically isolated up until recent history. This is why the peoples of the world are not one homogeneous undifferentiated brown soup of DNA. You idiot.

>75000

Seems like enough time to diversify those genetics and mutate..

LOL niggers are so pissed they arent white

[citation needed]

>Doesn't know what an IQ test is

The Earth didnt exist 75 thousand years ago silly.

>But anthropologists agree that humans are among the least-varied species on Earth.

I don't think such agreement exists. See pic related and the pics that follow

Attached: 1532782400477.png (700x3636, 304K)

Attached: 1532781554062.png (750x564, 106K)

Attached: 1532782366760.png (540x238, 41K)

Actually, those 10,000 pairs were not all concentrated in the same place. There were small, isolated populations widely separated, in very different environments, with no interbreeding. Are you really a retard, or are you just trying to get attention by saying really stupid things? We are the LEAST homogenous species on the planet.

Not only that, but sub Saharan Africa is cut off by a massive desert, so advanced ocean fairing capabilities were required to even have sustained commerce between Southern Africa and Europe.

>Different species cannot produce fertile breed

While often the case it is certainly not a rule or true at all. Many example of different species being able to procreate. There are many species with closer relation than caucasoids and niggers that are called distinct races. Virtually all of humanity is the same race imo except niggers their genetic drift is crazy far from the rest of humanity

To everyone commenting about how diversity existed prior to the event: Yes, that's true. However, the population was not as spread-out as you think.

Modern humans arose in Africa 200,000 years ago, but did not leave the continent en masse until around 60,000-70,000 years ago-- AFTER the eruption of Mt. Toba. That means that those 10,000 breeding pairs I talked about were centralized in northern Africa and parts of the Middle East. Hominids existed in India and Europe, but they were not Homo Sapiens.

pic related

Attached: migration.jpg (736x571, 66K)

Himalayas are another excellent example.

I'd like a source for this.

Substantiate this claim

>measurable differences in IQ

You omitted that one. You're not anti-science, right?

>Science has proven
>sin

Neanderthals survived toba. Just because worldwide populations took a hit doesnt mean diversity did

Homo erectus, Neanderthal, and denisovan introgression has been found in the DNA of modern Eurasian populations. Strict OOA theories are outdated.

>Different species are the same race
You can't even be bothered with science but you still demand answers? Okay, here's the answer to every question you've ever had. You're a faggot. Everytime you think "why?" remember, you're a faggot. You're brain is a faggot's brain, you think faggot thoughts along faggot lines of thinking. That's why you don't understand anything of the world around you. It's because you're a faggot, all of it, everything is because you're a faggot. Faggot.

I believe that bonobos and chimps freely interbreed, and produce fertile offspring. These two species are also closer to each other genetically than Caucasians are to negroes. All groups, except sub Saharan africans, also have 1 to 3% Neanderthal genes. Which were a different species. And yet, they interbred, and created fertile offspring. How do you think we got those Neanderthal genes? Ancient geneticists doing some gene splicing?

You are not counting Neanderthals in this then? They were in Europe ~400,000 years ago and interbred with Homo sapiens in the Middle East and Europe.

>75,000 years is not enough time for evolution to branch out
Get a load of this brainlet

>Modern humans arose in Africa 200,000 years ago

That is the dominating theory by the virtue of being the oldest one. There is hardly consensus among the contemporary scientific community regard the legitimacy of OOA

Attached: 1485854099787.png (480x405, 58K)

Can they interbreed? Then they're the same species. Wake me up when autists split off through their own bottleneck and leave the normies behind.