Why do Communists deny human biodiversity?
They seem to accept Darwinian evolution up until the point where it discusses how seperating populations of a species into radically different geographic climates for tens of thousands of years creates tangible and easily-observable genetic variation between those populations.
Is it because this fact creates cognitive dissonance in their minds and threatens the legitimacy of the failed ideology they hold so dear?
Other urls found in this thread:
debunkingstormfags.blogspot.com
twitter.com
They do, they just don't take artifact-riddled jpegs featuring the 'science' of a Laotian pottery barn seriously, so obviously not its conclusions either.
He had no knowledge of genes, and that is why his hypothesis was flawed. The current theory of evolution takes as much knowledge as possible into account, including "racial" differences in human beings, and has concluded that race does not exist.
So the statement "blacks were slaves" is non-factual.
We need to edit our history books, they were wrong all a long.
Why do right wingers only use science on race that's from the colonial era?
What do you mean? The group of human beings commonly known as "black" were indeed kidnapped from their homes by other blacks (mainly North Africans) and some Europeans, sold to Europeans, transported across the Atlantic, and sold into chattel slavery.
The fact that many Europeans and other groups justified this by inventing the false concept of race does not mean the actual events did not occur.
It is true however, we should turn right-wingers and cappies into our slaves
denying race =/= denying biodiversity
Nobody ever said that everyone is genetically the same. The point is that the differences between us are not sufficient grounds for dividing humans into races. The racial boundaries used by the likes of Holla Forums are really more arbitrary than anything.
This proves that you do not really understand the point of Darwinian evolutionary mechanics.
"As man advances in civilization, and small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. This point being once reached, there is only an artificial barrier to prevent his sympathies extending to the men of all nations and races."
fug, forgot to turn off muh shitposting flag
Why do stormfags always resort to oblique strawmen whenever their beliefs are challenged?
Like, can't you ever address the actual point? Do you just have to dance around people's arguments like a fucking ballerina all day?
Additionally, Darwin has said that there is more genetic variation between individuals of the same race than there are between averages of differing populations. Unfortunately, as with history and Holla Forums, people did not really choose to read Darwin, nor Lewhontin, and decided to make up a fallacy in the latter's name (despite not being the first, nor the only) because they could not bring sufficient research nor understanding to the subject of race.
"The fact that, given enough genetic data, individuals can be correctly assigned to their populations of origin is compatible with the observation that most human genetic variation is found within populations, not between them. It is also compatible with our finding that, even when the most distinct populations are considered and hundreds of loci are used, individuals are frequently more similar to members of other populations than to members of their own population. Thus, caution should be used when using geographic or genetic ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes."
So here this black race does exist, and soon after it pops out of existence again as false concept.
Spooky stuff, I don't understand quantum mechanics so the equations underlying your theory are probably lost on me.
Every concept could be called arbitrary, "rock" is just an arbitrary name we give to certain formations of atoms.
No, i'm not going to beg the question with you.
at least you revealed you're retarded saved me the trouble of typing out a long, serious reply
debunkingstormfags.blogspot.com
now fuck off moron
No, the black race does not exist. People simply choose to call a certain group of people "black".
Pick up an apple in your right hand.. Call it a pear. Is there a pear in your right hand?
Take a group of people. Call them the black race. Is there a black race in existence?
Reported for being stupid
No, the trees don't exist. People simply choose to call certain formations of atoms "trees".
Some things have specific qualities or attributes which differentiate them from others.
None of the shit you talk about supports the idea of discrete human "races" or subtypes.
I don't see how this addresses the issue.
Say 95% of the human genome is constant.
4% is pretty much variable equally across the board. And 1% is pretty constant by region/population.
I could be 99% like a random Tibetan, while 96% like my neighbor. But the fixed 1% my neighbor and I share, which no Tibetan has, would still be there.
It addresses number 4 of OP's pic.
I don't understand what you mean by issue anyway. These are just numbers you are giving me, not problems per se.
The point is that there is essentially no difference between the group of people usually referred to as "black" and any other given group.
Also, that's not really how the genome works.
There is no such thing as a set of genes that belongs exclusively to one group and not to another. There is not separate species within homo sapiens.