NationStates Jolt Archive

Creating civilizations. You must admit, we have proven remarkably adept at that.

And I do have statisics for you. Mongoloid average IQ=105 Caucasoid average IQ=100 Negroid average IQ=African-American:85 Pure African:70

African-americans are a full standard devation behind Caucasoids, and pure africans are 2 SD's behind.
NAR, The Bell Curve is not an acceptable source. Try again

Interracial marriage is also good because it expands the gene pool

Interracial marriage is also good because it expands the gene pool


Is that all you come up with? We could expand the gene pool tremendously if we made concerted efforts to mate with the mentally and physically unfit. But we know that is not healthy. So to do we know that miscegenation is unhealthy because they are genetically unfit when compared to our people.


It all goes back to genetics!

Is that all you come up with? We could expand the gene pool tremendously if we made concerted efforts to mate with the mentally and physically unfit. But we know that is not healthy. So to do we know that miscegenation is unhealthy because they are genetically unfit when compared to our people.


It all goes back to genetics!

Interracial marrige is good because I'm white, and asian girls are hot :p

Plus, by your logic, asians are superior to whites. Therefore, they should be kicking us out :p

Interracial marrige is good because I'm white, and asian girls are hot :p

Plus, by your logic, asians are superior to whites. Therefore, they should be kicking us out :p


Whites are the superior race, the only thing keeping us from living out our destiny is the mind poison spoonfed to our youth via the TV and the other media. It dumbs them up and turns good white kids into idiots (white negroes) is that they are called, white kids who reject their own culture and act black.

I'm white, and I'm into asian girls, so I'm all for it.

I think people should be able to decide who they wish to be with based on love, not the expectations of society ;)


Love, or the size (not usage) of their partners.

Whites are the superior race, the only thing keeping us from living out our destiny is the mind poison spoonfed to our youth via the TV and the other media. It dumbs them up and turns good white kids into idiots (white negroes) is that they are called, white kids who reject their own culture and act black.


white kids do that on their own where i come from. Violent ghetto black culture is glamorous to a teen (an uninformed suburban teen), so they like it. What else can i say?

white kids do that on their own where i come from. Violent ghetto black culture is glamorous to a teen (an uninformed suburban teen), so they like it. What else can i say?

I would say that jewish mind poison has a decidedly destructive affect on white youth. I would say that MTV and VH1 need to be smashed, and that would just be the first step. Until the stranglehold of jewry+masonry over the white nations is broken, there will be no peace in the world.

As long as jewry is allowed to reign unchecked and sink their venomous tentacles into the mechanisms of power and the apparatuses of state, there will be no peace!

"Thanks to the terrible power of our International Banks, we have forced the Christians into wars without number. Wars have a special value for Jews, since Christians massacre each other and make more room for us Jews. Wars are the Jews' Harvest: The Jew banks grow fat on Christian wars. Over 100-million Christians have been swept off the face of the earth by wars, and the end is not yet."
(Rabbi Reichorn, speaking at the funeral of Grand Rabbi Simeon Ben-Iudah, France, 1869)

"Wars are the Jews harvest, for with them we wipe out the Christians and get control of their gold. We have already killed 100-million of them, and the end is not yet." (Chief Rabbi in France, in 1859, Rabbi Reichorn).

As long as jewry is allowed to reign unchecked and sink their venomous tentacles into the mechanisms of power and the apparatuses of state, there will be no peace!

Tentacles! You sound as though the Jews are from hentai.

Ugh cmon man.. I dont love Jews (or anyone else) but I dont hate them on principle either; you cant blame everything on them. I mean, sure they complain about the Holocaust and ignore everyone else's genocides (they really did suffer a lot though) but the thing is, can you really attribute all that to the jews alone?

You say the Jewish mind poison has an effect on kids? guess what?

Most of the wannabe rappers and gangstas are Jews where I live. So that means everyone's affected by it, and the ones you blame for 'mind poison' are also being poisoned.

NAR, The Bell Curve is not an acceptable source. Try again

Why is it not acceptable? Explain. Is it only acceptable if it agrees with you?

The Bell Curve, and Rushton's work mentioned above, are currently the subject of furious debate within the scientific community. But they have not been discredited. They are just as valid as any works you may present that attempt to prove an counterpoint.

Again New American Reich, is it your contention that Homo sapien is divided into the subspecies Homo sapien caucasoid, Homo sapien mongoloid, and Homo sapien negroid and that this division is accepted among biologists?

Why is it not acceptable? Explain. Is it only acceptable if it agrees with you?

The Bell Curve, and Rushton's work mentioned above, are currently the subject of furious debate within the scientific community. But they have not been discredited. They are just as valid as any works you may present that attempt to prove an counterpoint.
No sir, the bell curve has been debunked as bullshit.

http://www.sfu.ca/~wwwpsyb/issues/1996/winter/keenan.htm
http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/Issues/bell-curve/latimes-cole.html
http://www.fair.org/extra/9501/bell.html
http://goinside.com/98/3/postmod.html

"Thanks to the terrible power of our International Banks, we have forced the Christians into wars without number. Wars have a special value for Jews, since Christians massacre each other and make more room for us Jews. Wars are the Jews' Harvest: The Jew banks grow fat on Christian wars. Over 100-million Christians have been swept off the face of the earth by wars, and the end is not yet."
(Rabbi Reichorn, speaking at the funeral of Grand Rabbi Simeon Ben-Iudah, France, 1869)

"Wars are the Jews harvest, for with them we wipe out the Christians and get control of their gold. We have already killed 100-million of them, and the end is not yet." (Chief Rabbi in France, in 1859, Rabbi Reichorn).

There's a bit of a problem with your quote here. Rabbi Reichorn never existed... http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/ftp.py?people//r/reichorn.rabbi/the-rabbi-never-existed

The Bell Curve has been "debunked" by liberal bigots who picked up on a few statistical errors in Murray's book to try to disprove the whole ideal of racial inequality regarding intelligence.

But what can you expect? When the whole theory of leftism is built upon the idea of racial equality the possibility that nature is more responsible than nurture (and environment) for low black intelligence is a crime and the liberals must unleash the attack dogs to try to to destroy a transgressor like Murray. The funny thing about it is, is that even most liberal scientists accept the idea of the Bell Curve - until it comes to race.
A few? The entire book is based on a statistic that is in error.

wow.

is there even anything to say to something like that?

Whites are the superior race

All people are equal in my opinion.

Mixed-race relationships for everyone! They are the best!

Agreed. I'm white, but my girlfriend is Thai. (Her picture is in my NS Player Profile)

There is allways argument against the Idiot Right of our nation, here represented by Fascist Ideals. To begin with he points out some very interesting arguments, but he fails to back them up with evidence. He plays off of your emotions to create the illusion of a valid argument, but if what he writes is looked at from an analytical viewpoint, it is filled with holes and errors in reasoning. He points out a general improvement in economic condition, but fails to point out what this improvement actually is. Show me how the quality of life has increased for blacks over the last thirty years. Taking into account improvements in technology which benifited all of society, clearly state how life has improved for blacks.
I may dissagree with what you say, but i respect your right to whatever truth you may belive in, i would just like to see it clearly stated.

And still no one has demonstrated the core of this thread - that a biological division of Homo sapiens into races beyond sapien and neanderthal exists.

Until you can demonstrate that it exists, you all might as well be arguing about pink unicorns....

Well the original poster read:

"What do you all think of inter-racial marriage. I think its terrible, I think people should stay in their own race."

The thread got distracted by other issues of race but the original "core" was valid enough. Let the mutts be the mutts, but don't confuse them with pedigrees :)

Well, my original answer still stands unchallenged - inter-racial marriage is impossible, as the only possible other race to inter-marry with is Homo sapien neanderthal, which is extinct, as far as I know.
In other words the OP's statement is the functional equivillant of: "What do you all think of pink unicorns. I think they are terrible, I think they shouldn't exist."

You and the other racists are going to have to show that there are races first before your position in this debate has any meaning at all.

I think inter-racial marriges are great, it's too bad there aren't more of them. I mean if everyone married people of different races and had kids with em, then eventually everyone would look about the same, the racism would be eliminatied!
Of course, this just means people would hate for different reasons (religion, political standing, w/ever), but still....

And then liberals would be really upset because there wouldn't be any marvellous racial or ethnic diversity to celebrate. The world would be all one color - brown. And if everyone married everyone else then all religious differences would eventually become attenuated. We would end up all the same. It would be the nightmare of rootless cosmopolitanism personified. Nothing to live or die for, to quote John Lennon.

Do you ever take a breath and really think before you post this kind of stuff here?

"Racial" diversity doesn't exist because, as Daistallia 2104 and others have eloquently demonstrated, there are no "racial" subdivisions of humanity. This argument has been supported by extensive references to modern science, and I note that none of the tiny handful of "white supremacists" posting here has managed to refute it. How you can be so adamant about a belief system when you can't even adequately define your basic terms of reference is beyond me. I suppose there is no limit to humanity's capacity for self-delusion.

Ethnic -- i.e. cultural -- diversity would be maintained because cultures are emergent properties of the beliefs and mores, both religious and societal, of people living in the various regions of the planet. Cultures develop over time; they don't stop. Even in incredibly enclosed societies like medieval Japan, or Bhutan, or pre-Chinese Tibet, new ideas and concepts arise and arrive and the culture changes.

Look to the beam in your own post, before commenting on the mote in someone else's...

I smell racists in this thread.

I mean if everyone married people of different races and had kids with em, then eventually everyone would look about the same, the racism would be eliminatied!



People who are lighter and darker shades of brown, people who have different style hair, people who have physical defects, etc.


You keep saying you don't want a pure white world because it's all the same. But you want a mongrelized world..

Europeans are quite diverse, whites have different hair styles... Have you ever seen africans with any diversity in looks? They're about as diverse as copy paper.

I honestly believe that the white genotype is worth preserving. We're a hardy lot who have adapted to many climates over the centuries, and like it or not, "race" is a part of both culture and civilization. I'm not some evil monster who wishes to enslave everyone. But for posteriety I would like to see my race preserved.

Those that argue that interbreeding will increase the gene pool are right only in the most minor sense. This is because there are still well over half a billion to a billion whites left - more than enough for a large and varied gene pool. One must also remeber that the whole human race as a whole may have come about from only a few thousands to a few tens of thousands of individuals.

Those of you who dismiss me as a "racist" may do so. All I wish is to preserve my people for posteriety. Is this so terrible?

I honestly believe that the white genotype is worth preserving. We're a hardy lot who have adapted to many climates over the centuries, and like it or not, "race" is a part of both culture and civilization. I'm not some evil monster who wishes to enslave everyone. But for posteriety I would like to see my race preserved.

Those that argue that interbreeding will increase the gene pool are right only in the most minor sense. This is because there are still well over half a billion to a billion whites left - more than enough for a large gene pool. One must also remeber that the whole human race as a whole may have come about from only a few thousands to a few tens of thousands of individuals.

Those of you who dismiss me as a "racist" may do so. All I wish is to preserve my people for posteriety. Is this so terrible?

The only people who are suggesting imposing restrictions on who you should be able to marry based on the colour of their skin are the racists. With so many pale-skinned people around, what on earth makes you think that the "white genotype" is in danger of dying out?

I don't think your wish to "preserve your people for posterity" is terrible, I just think it's a fallacious idea based on an unfounded fear. You are very different from your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather; in fact, I'd bet that if you were to meet him he'd probably be horrified at some of your opinions because they would vary so greatly from the beliefs and morality of his day. No doubt if you could meet your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandson, many of his beliefs and opinions would horrify you. So what?

I'm not against inter-racial marriage. There is one problem though. Some people might be rude towards the people if they didn't agree with inter-racial marriage, but that's their(the anti-inter-racial marriage people) problem.

I have considered it very carefully and I have found a REAL problem with interacial marriage which is I feel is big enough we MUST put a stop to it.
We will kill the Menu.
You know everyone looks alike and suddenly you cant find that thich chocolate dark honey with full lips and sinful hips, she is just a lighter shade of brown stacked like everybody else!!!
Or the dimur little CHinese girl, with the almound eyes the round face deliciously fragile in appearence-nope she is gone too just a lighter shade of brown--
Interracial marriage must be stopped eventual from perhaps our great grandchildren we will robbed them of the delicious sample platter that is human females(God bless them everyone).

People who are lighter and darker shades of brown, people who have different style hair, people who have physical defects, etc.


You keep saying you don't want a pure white world because it's all the same. But you want a mongrelized world..

Europeans are quite diverse, whites have different hair styles... Have you ever seen africans with any diversity in looks? They're about as diverse as copy paper.

For someone who keeps banging on about genetics, you really need to read something on the topic published since 1900. Africa is the most genetically diverse continent on the planet.

"Genetic diversity in Africa is extremely high, even between closely related or located groups and much higher than diversity in other human populations. This diversity suggests a recent African origin for modern humans and a raft of potentially fertile medical research, according to a Penn State evolutionary biologist."

Science Daily (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/01/990125073157.htm)

low black intelligence.
Actually, African people have a slightly higher capacity for learning than whites, because they have an earlier, and longer puberty period (by 6-12 months, it was said earlier in the thread and sourced to a relaible source [The Discovery Channel]). It is a proven fact that all mammals learn more during childhood and especially as they go into sexual maturity, its development.

The reason that many African people aren't always as learned as the common Cacucasian is because of the culture they grew up in. Whether they are tribal or live in a poor neighborhood [with poorly funded schools], that can have an adverse affect on any person.

Also, Africans, Asians, even Natives have just as much of a chance at being a superiorer race as Caucasians. In fact, many Africans have, on average, mroe physical ability than the average Caucasian because of their genetic makeup, they adapted to their harsh enviroments, and thus, without much reliance on technology, became an improved race by genetics. I don't personally believe in a superior race [all race is by our definition is just cultural and genetic differences].

Actually, African people have a slightly higher capacity for learning than whites, because they have an earlier, and longer puberty period (by 6-12 months, it was said earlier in the thread and sourced to a relaible source [The Discovery Channel]). It is a proven fact that all mammals learn more during childhood and especially as they go into sexual maturity, its development.

The reason that many African people aren't always as learned as the common Cacucasian is because of the culture they grew up in. Whether they are tribal or live in a poor neighborhood [with poorly funded schools], that can have an adverse affect on any person.

Also, Africans, Asians, even Natives have just as much of a chance at being a superiorer race as Caucasians. In fact, many Africans have, on average, mroe physical ability than the average Caucasian because of their genetic makeup, they adapted to their harsh enviroments, and thus, without much reliance on technology, became an improved race by genetics. I don't personally believe in a superior race [all race is by our definition is just cultural and genetic differences].

The discovery channel a reliable science source? You've got to be kidding! Read real scientific journals! The dicovery channel is for laymen! And some of the data is inacurate. Good lord man! The Dicovery channel is about as watered down as it gets! It's the "Mc Donalds hamburgers" of the science world!

Examples: It stated that the Jovian moon Europa was a world similar to the size of the Earth. It's not, not even close. It's far more similar to the Moon than the Earth.

Another example is they stated the Pterosaurs were "flying dinosaurs". More nonesense! Pterosaurs were not dinosaurs at all! If I recall they also said that the sea reptiles that lived during the age of dinosaurs were also dinosaurs. Again wrong information.

With all these errors, I quickly stopped watching "Discovery Channel".

As for the apparent genetic superiority of blacks, as someone who was in a number of strongman and powerlifting compatitions in my youth I can assure you that what you said is simply not true. As a matter of fact, mid and eastern european stock are the stongest men in the world. I've also watched on TV and saw first hand many such events (powerlifting, Olympic lifting and varies strongman events) and I rarely saw blacks. And those I did see usually came in near last.

You must also understand that whites also evolved in a very hostile world - namely ice age europe, and other cold northern locals. Why do you think most people go traveling south for their holidays?

Even the apperent superiority of blacks in some sports can easily be attributed to cultural preferences. A way to "make it" so to speak. To get out of the ghetto.

It would seem you are no better than the nazis you hate so much.

i think inter-racial marriage should be illegal!it's an act of ignorance towards our ancestors and their sweat on protecting and sometimes enlarging our nations!our blood is our honour!our race is our pride!our land is our most important heritage....and we should prevent it from beeing taken by other races...see the USA, most countries all over Europe...crime has risen specially due to the acts of afro and south american invaders!inter-racial marriage sould be prohibited...just like inter-racial lands should be prohibited also...each one in it's own land...!or... :sniper:

Europeans are quite diverse, whites have different hair styles... Have you ever seen africans with any diversity in looks? They're about as diverse as copy paper.

That is just plain silly, and totally easy to demonstrate as wrong.
http://www.georgetourism.co.za/images/xhosa.jpg
http://www.photoarts.ch/foto_sw_Afrikaner.jpg
http://www.anglo-boer.co.za/images/photos/boerpeople/010.jpg
http://www16.brinkster.com/blinkdt/images/berber.jpg
http://www.tarrega.com/novatarrega/arxiu/nt20-10-00/nt20-10-3/ElMiloud%20Ladra%20desaparegut.GIF
There you have five Africans. Are they all of the same appearance?

For someone who keeps banging on about genetics, you really need to read something on the topic published since 1900. Africa is the most genetically diverse continent on the planet.

"Genetic diversity in Africa is extremely high, even between closely related or located groups and much higher than diversity in other human populations. This diversity suggests a recent African origin for modern humans and a raft of potentially fertile medical research, according to a Penn State evolutionary biologist."

Science Daily (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/01/990125073157.htm)

Quite frankly, I'm sceptical of this information. Have you heard of the "Orstrich people" of Africa? They are one exemple highly inbred group. Egypt was also famous for inbreeding as well. Also, Europe has seen successive waves of people over it's long history. No doubt these eventually interbred with the local populations of the time.

i think inter-racial marriage should be illegal!it's an act of ignorance towards our ancestors and their sweat on protecting and sometimes enlarging our nations!our blood is our honour!our race is our pride!our land is our most important heritage....and we should prevent it from beeing taken by other races...see the USA, most countries all over Europe...crime has risen specially due to the acts of afro and south american invaders!inter-racial marriage sould be prohibited...just like inter-racial lands should be prohibited also...each one in it's own land...!or... :sniper:


I absolutely agree agree with you. No Homo sapien sapien should be allowed to marry a Homo sapien neanderthal. (As I have been hammering at through this whole thread, with no one able to refute it, those are the only races of humans. Your "afro and south american invaders" are not races.)

I absolutely agree agree with you. No Homo sapien sapien should be allowed to marry a Homo sapien neanderthal. (As I have been hammering at through this whole thread, with no one able to refute it, those are the only races of humans. Your "afro and south american invaders" are not races.)

Homo Neaderthalis went extinct around 30,000 years ago (give or take) so the humans that exist today cannot be from that stock. Also Neaderthal man was a gentic offshoot of H.spapiens a "sister species" if you will. And as such, not directly ancestoral to humans in general.

I'm all for preserving the white genotype, but let's not spew out nonsense like this, shall we?

I absolutely agree agree with you. No Homo sapien sapien should be allowed to marry a Homo sapien neanderthal. (As I have been hammering at through this whole thread, with no one able to refute it, those are the only races of humans. Your "afro and south american invaders" are not races.)


Some races: Chineese, British, Scottish, American.
Some Species: Homo Sapien Sapien, Homo Sapien Neanderhtal, Homo Sapien Erectus.

Homo Neaderthalis went extinct around 30,000 years ago (give or take) so the humans that exist today cannot be from that stock. Also Neaderthal man was a gentic offshoot of H.spapiens a "sister species" if you will. And as such, not directly ancestoral to humans in general.

I'm all for preserving the white genotype, but let's not spew out nonsense like this, shall we?

Well at least someone is finally speaking to the biological issues. I certainly acknoledge the possibility of neanderthal being classified as a sister species. But you cannot simply dismiss the debate over their classification as spewing out nonsense.
Furthermore, if you classify them as Homo neanderthal, then we have only one race of Homo sapien. That would make any objection to inter-racial marriage, and this whole thread meaningless.

Well anyway, I disagree. But think about this. Two generations of black children have grown up as the products of parents who were the recipients of racial quotas, many of them in stable middle class homes. Yet their intelligence and academic performance is still so poor that racial favoritism is required to get them to graduate high school and quotas are needed to guarantee their entry to college. And when they are at college, they perform abysmally. The black drop-out rate is higher than everyone else, and for those who graduate, their degree is defined by failure, because of race-grading. Employers know this. Blacks don’t have to work as hard as everyone else to get a degree. They are graded within their racial group, not in comparison to everyone else. It’s easier for them. And yet even with all the advantages they have, they still, as I wrote, have the highest drop out rate. I wonder why.

This is not to say that every black is untermensche. When
I was at college there were some blacks who were intelligent. Not that many, but some. I’m talking about averages - the average is after all the basis for awarding blacks quotas in the first place.

Let’s just face it. Blacks are just not, on average, as smart as whites or Asians. The average black intelligence score refuses to move beyond the mid-80’s despite great economic improvements for many black families compared to the 60’s and before.
This is nonsense, as you have the poorer urban areas (predominately black) dragging down the entire population, who are most certainly not middle class, and are in the worst schools in the nation.

Some races: Chineese, British, Scottish, American.
Some Species: Homo Sapien Sapien, Homo Sapien Neanderhtal, Homo Sapien Erectus.

Nope. Race has a specific taxanoimic definition, which I have given repeatedly throught this thread. To classify Chinese, British, Scottish, and American as races, you will need to prove that they do not inter-breed due to geographic isolation.
Also note that what you listed as "species" examples of trinomial nomenclature (http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Trinomial%20nomenclature), or genus species and race (aka subsecies), not simply species.

Some Species: Homo Sapien Sapien, Homo Sapien Neanderhtal, Homo Sapien Erectus.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't it just Homo Erectus? Although I've heard there are arguments as to whether Homo Erectus was a completely seperate species at all.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't it just Homo Erectus? Although I've heard there are arguments as to whether Homo Erectus was a completely seperate species at all.

Exactly, and that's why I didn't object to it. I am going to leave the debate over whether either neanderthal and erectus were subspecies or species for the biologists.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't it just Homo Erectus? Although I've heard there are arguments as to whether Homo Erectus was a completely seperate species at all.

Yes, it is H. erectus, and it would be considered a true species of the genus Homo.

Interracial relationships are disgusting and sick. Why should a White look outside the White race for a mate?

Well, if you are an example for a "white"... I think you have answered your own question.

I agree with the first person, inter-racial unions are not right

PEOPLE.

It's simple, really. Painfully simple.

You like diversity? You like multiculturalism? Right?

Well, consider this. If you, and everyone else, mix with other races, then what do you think will happen in a few generations?

That's right. Diversity will disappear. Your beloved multicult will disappear. We'll all become one bland brown race. No variety, no difference, no diversity.

Is that what you want?

If you want diversity, if you want multiculturalism, the long-term solution is simple.

BREED INSIDE YOUR OWN RACE. That will preserve the racial groups. That will preserve the cultural divides.

Actually, no. I don't want diversity or multiculturalism.

I would like to like in a community that embraced all as equal, regardless of skin-tone, religious affiliations, politics, sex, gender, age, etc.

I would like to live in a community that didn't think it had to limit certain outputs to certain groups (like the white-guys-can't-rap faction).

I have known and been close to people of a variety of 'races' (as you refer to them) - and maybe I have an understanding of how similar we all are... below the skin.

I consider myself a 'Citizen of the World'.

Some of my best friends have been Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Christian, Wiccan, 'white', 'black', Indian, Chinese, Americans, Italian, Gay, Straight, Bi, Celibate, Not Sure.... etc. You get the drift.

But then I don't see what is 'great' about any 'race'. All cultures have skeletons in their closets. Things they SHOULD be ashamed of. But, then, all cultures have sat in gutters and reached for stars.

I think we should celebrate 'people'. We should be proud of what we do as 'people'.

And 'people' that are more tied up in promoting seperations, in 'encouraging' difference, rather than embracing 'sameness'... those people sadden me.

I agree with the first person, inter-racial unions are not right

A masterful argument... now let me respond to some of your points and discuss some of your facts....

Oh, wait.... you didn't post any...

Why, pray tell, is there anything wrong with 'inter-racial' unions?

I think we should celebrate 'people'. We should be proud of what we do as 'people'.

*deep bow* I applaud the sentiment. Maybe, just maybe, if the inter-cultural tensions don't manage to bomb the whole human race into oblivion within the next ten thousand years or so, we'll see this happen.

Personally I think that inter-racial and inter-cultural unions of any kind are perfectly alright, as long as it's consentual by all parties concerned.

When you fill out your Taxes or any other form, It asks for Race. you can pick White, Black, Hispanic, Native American.

Quite frankly, I'm sceptical of this information.

Oh, dear. The evolutionary biologist will be disappointed.

Have you heard of the "Orstrich people" of Africa? They are one exemple highly inbred group. Egypt was also famous for inbreeding as well. Also, Europe has seen successive waves of people over it's long history. No doubt these eventually interbred with the local populations of the time.

You haven't quite grasped a) the size of Africa compared to the size of Europe, or b) the fact that there have been humans in Africa for far, far longer than anywhere else in the world.

Egypt was famous for inbreeding within the Royal family. The European monarchies were (still are) famous for inbreeding too. Big deal.

And then liberals would be really upset because there wouldn't be any marvellous racial or ethnic diversity to celebrate. The world would be all one color - brown. And if everyone married everyone else then all religious differences would eventually become attenuated. We would end up all the same. It would be the nightmare of rootless cosmopolitanism personified. Nothing to live or die for, to quote John Lennon.

Do you ever take a breath and really think before you post this kind of stuff here?
You are so wrong, I'm of mixed 'race' and have a daughter with fair skin and blue eyes and a son who is dark skinned with brown eyes. Non dominant traits don't disappear, they just don't surface until they're matched in a union with other non dominant genes (as in my daughter's case). The only way to get a homogenous society would be if the non dominant traits never reproduced, mixing them might make them less frequent but they will always pop up.

I'm white, and I'm into asian girls, so I'm all for it.

I think people should be able to decide who they wish to be with based on love, not the expectations of society ;)

w00t!!!!!!!!!!!!

*makes sure girlfriend can't hear*

JAPANESE GIRLS RULE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

w00t!!!!!!!!!!!!

*makes sure girlfriend can't hear*

JAPANESE GIRLS RULE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*thumbs up*

w00t!!!!!!!!!!!!

*makes sure girlfriend can't hear*

JAPANESE GIRLS RULE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry to dissapoint you, but it ain't so. I should know, having lived here more than 13 years. There are just as many ugly or bitchy women here as you'll find in any other country. There was a good thread on this a few months back....

My parents both had brown eyes, brown hair, and medium caucasian skin-tone. Of their five children, one was born with blonde hair, blue eyes, paaale white skin, and a patrician's nose. Another was tall, black-haired, brown eyed, with a bent nose. The third had strawberry blonde hair, grey eyes, and a slightly golden complexion. The fourth had kinked reddish-brown hair, brown eyes, and a mild astygmatism. I was the only one to inherit any native traits, from my blue birthmark, to my swarthy complexion, my deep brown eyes, and my dark brown hair.

The gist of it is, we, our parents, and their parents before them, are vast repositories of unseen recessive traits.

To stand my blonde-haired, blue-eyed brother next to me, you really wouldn't guess that we're blood relatives. It's only apparent when we speak, as our voices are identical.

I really wouldn't worry about losing any 'unique' characteristics in the gene pool. Besides, those things are completely peripheral. What's important doesn't come programmed into your DNA.

You are so wrong, I'm of mixed 'race' and have a daughter with fair skin and blue eyes and a son who is dark skinned with brown eyes. Non dominant traits don't disappear, they just don't surface until they're matched in a union with other non dominant genes (as in my daughter's case). The only way to get a homogenous society would be if the non dominant traits never reproduced, mixing them might make them less frequent but they will always pop up.

Same here exactly SH, daughter blonde and blue eyes, son brown hair brown eyes, daughter red hair and green eyes.
But I guess that would factor into the original posters reasoning that Inter-racial Marriage is "wrong".
To quote Forrest Gump (loosely) Kids in inter-racial marriage is like a box of chocolates, you never know what youre going to get.

Hey Endoscopia. Try reading the "what ethnicity are you" post before asking crap like this. You do realize that every single person that posted more than 1 is the result of something you think is terrible? That makes them all abominations?
Im really a tolerant person, but if I could end your reproductive capabilites by sending an entire ant colony up your urethra, I would do it.

Interracial marrige is good because I'm white, and asian girls are hot :p

Plus, by your logic, asians are superior to whites. Therefore, they should be kicking us out :p


;) SO..I'm half korean..half white..does that mean I'm superior to all?? JUST KIDDING...LOL :D

That is just plain silly, and totally easy to demonstrate as wrong.
http://www.georgetourism.co.za/images/xhosa.jpg
http://www.photoarts.ch/foto_sw_Afrikaner.jpg
http://www.anglo-boer.co.za/images/photos/boerpeople/010.jpg
http://www16.brinkster.com/blinkdt/images/berber.jpg
http://www.tarrega.com/novatarrega/arxiu/nt20-10-00/nt20-10-3/ElMiloud%20Ladra%20desaparegut.GIF
There you have five Africans. Are they all of the same appearance?

While they all come from Africa, only 2 of them are what we would call Africans, ie Negroids. Berbers are Caucasoid, Boers are Dutch, and your last picture appears to be Semitic. Semites are Caucasoid.

For someone who keeps banging on about genetics, you really need to read something on the topic published since 1900. Africa is the most genetically diverse continent on the planet.

"Genetic diversity in Africa is extremely high, even between closely related or located groups and much higher than diversity in other human populations. This diversity suggests a recent African origin for modern humans and a raft of potentially fertile medical research, according to a Penn State evolutionary biologist."

Science Daily (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/01/990125073157.htm)

The genetic varation between Africans is predominately junk DNA that doesn't seem to do any apparent function.



For more information on genetics and racial differences, try Stalking the Wild Taboo (http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/) and some articles from VDare. (http://www.vdare.com) Edit: And read Rushton's book!

I'm all for interracial marriage, but I've got a question. How come you never see any white guys with black girls? I often see black guys with white girls- why not the other way around?

i never see white girls wit azn guys, but i see azn gurls wit white guys.

stupid status quo... im gonnna go kill whoever made these rules up.

if there are any rules that is

wow, thats a really retarded question... "would you marry someone if they had a different skin and accent?" does it really matter? you must not get out much. for example, im latino and i love azn girls, ive gone out wit 3 latina's 3 azns and 1 white girl... what could be so difficult about that?

wow, thats a really retarded question... "would you marry someone if they had a different skin and accent?" does it really matter? you must not get out much. for example, im latino and i love azn girls, ive gone out wit 3 latina's 3 azns and 1 white girl... what could be so difficult about that?
azns? What is an azn?

wow, thats a really retarded question... "would you marry someone if they had a different skin and accent?" does it really matter? you must not get out much. for example, im latino and i love azn girls, ive gone out wit 3 latina's 3 azns and 1 white girl... what could be so difficult about that?


"you must not get out much."

what does that have to do with f*cking girls? I get out a lot more than most ppl i kno, and it is from getting out that i notice this shit.

'For example, i'm latino..'
I'm not asking you. I would like to ask one of the girls u date their opinion as to whether this trend exists. And if you think its a retarded question, go ahead.

But its my rite to ask wutever fucking question i want, and i do it cause my friends and i are fucking curious, cause we all notice the same thing.

For more information on genetics and racial differences, try Stalking the Wild Taboo (http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/) and some articles from VDare. (http://www.vdare.com) Edit: And read Rushton's book! :rolleyes: Well it's a little better than than the Amren or Stormfront crap, they tend to play down the superiority bit and just push seperatism. But if you start digging into the articles there still is enough skewed and biggoted views to turn me away from the site in disgust. But you do run with a higher caliber of racists than most of the neo-nazi's who come along.

Didn't America get over that whole "interracial marriage is wrong" thing in the decades between the 60's and 80's?

Besides, if you look at it, race is a fairly ambiguous political construction. Who can tell the difference between northern and southern Europeans on appearance alone? How about Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans? They've been relatively isolated from each other for centuries. The only time people tend to get *close* to being able to guess racial heritage is when the differences involve skin-tone... And even then, we're wrong most of the time. Ever notice how half-Puerto Rican half-caucasian-Americans can look just like Italians, Native Americans, or African Americans depending on which features they got?

Race is just a classification the people try to put people in to for ease of reference. Its nothing measurable. And no, all physical diversity will not vanish because of "inter-racial breeding." Regional differences caused by female sexual selection will still be there. Plus, Switzerland will remain full of elitist nationalist jerks, so they'll always be "different."

So, to re-iterate: I'm right, you're wrong, neener neener neener.

While they all come from Africa, only 2 of them are what we would call Africans, ie Negroids. Berbers are Caucasoid, Boers are Dutch, and your last picture appears to be Semitic. Semites are Caucasoid.

And why would you not call Boers, Berbers, and Egyptians African?

Sorry if this has already been said, but interbreeding is biologically good!

Heterozygousity (having 2 different genes at each locus) increases fitness.

Remember how inbreeding produces mutant freaks? well outbreeding has the opposite effect. Ask a farmer, they do this with crops all the time to increase yield.

and regarding the "there is no such thing as race" argument: By your definition (geographgical seperation preventing mixing) they atleast used to exist, so surely we can still discuss them? Plus if the seperatists in this thread have their way they will exist again.

and re Neanderthalls: we can't interbreed with them, they have a different chromesome count. Any offspring would be infertile, as per mules. thus they are a seperate species. Cro-magnon man (homo-sapien, as opposed to humans which are home-sapien-sapien) on the other hand we probably could breed with, as they are just a sub-species.

For more information on genetics and racial differences, try Stalking the Wild Taboo (http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/) and some articles from VDare. (http://www.vdare.com) Edit: And read Rushton's book!


When you, and the authors you posted, can clearly show that "race" as you believe it to be, even exists, then you can start talking the differences. However, I have yet to see any proof for it.

How about Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans?




They can sure tell each other apart! Whites might not be able to tell them apart, but different races often have trouble when picking out other races specific nationality and ethnicity.

Try to go to Rwanda and pick out the hutu from the tutsi!

(Well the hutu might happen to be the guys chasing the tutsi with machettes)

But aside from that, they look largely the same, to me at least. But I can generally tell an east african negroid from a west african negroid, a sudanese negroid, congoloid, south african negroid, etc.

I can often tell the various groups of the caucasoid race as well.

They can sure tell each other apart!

Ha! Shows what you know. Osaka has the largest ethnic Korean population in Japan, and I know sooooooo many who "pass".

Whites might not be able to tell them apart, but different races often have trouble when picking out other races specific nationality and ethnicity.

Try to go to Rwanda and pick out the hutu from the tutsi!

(Well the hutu might happen to be the guys chasing the tutsi with machettes)

But aside from that, they look largely the same, to me at least. But I can generally tell an east african negroid from a west african negroid, a sudanese negroid, congoloid, south african negroid, etc.

I can often tell the various groups of the caucasoid race as well.

1) Can you do so reliably (ie if we set up a double blind test)?
2) If you are admiting that the differences are a matter of ethnicity (as it seems you are), how does that affect your argument dividing humans into three "races"?

I think for myself as a enlightened racist (no, its not an oxymoron!) and as such, I simply wish to preserve my phenotype/genotype because it is truley a part of my culture and heritage - at least that's how I see it. The arguement that no interbreeding between the races is a weak one. This is so because there are still vast numbers of each race for a massive diversified gene pool of each. I'm a conservative (at least in a number of respects) and as such a wish to conserve my heritage from being lost forever. I see nothing inherently wrong with this.

Those that claim that blacks have a more diversified gene pool than other races is also a weak point. So what if they do. Is this "greater diversity" statistically significant? Is this increased diversity merely composed of "recessive DNA" or sometimes what is called "jung or useless" DNA? Again, there are still plenty of whites for genetic diversity. Also remember that all humans may have originated from only a few thousands of individuals...

Sskiss, what you describe is ethnicity, based primarily on culture. I have almost no objection to your wish to preserve ethnic heritage, just as long as you realise it is almost entierly cultural, not biological, and that the traditional declinations of race are meaningless.

Sskiss, what you describe is ethnicity, based primarily on culture. I have almost no objection to your wish to preserve ethnic heritage, just as long as you realise it is almost entierly cultural, not biological, and that the traditional declinations of race are meaningless.

Daistallia, if I can see the differences, then to me they are very real. There are genetic differences. Phenotype/genotype does exist and although I will agree we are all the same species, there are what I call "local" or "regional" varients. Whites or caucasians are one such regional varient. I still believe the the term "race" still roughly applies. I will agree that culture and language etc... is a still a part of it, But I'll credit you for understanding my point of view - at least in part.

What do you all think of inter-racial marriage. I think its terrible, I think people should stay in their own race.

(see my other post below before flameing me)

With the greatest of respect, I suggest you give this question to older inter-racial couples whose marriages have been a success. They are the best people to talk to. There are far more of them than you realize!

Have you ever seen africans with any diversity in looks? They're about as diverse as copy paper.

And shortly thereafter:

I can generally tell an east african negroid from a west african negroid, a sudanese negroid, congoloid, south african negroid, etc.

Well, never let it be said that you were ever troubled by consistency. Or maybe you tell them apart by the bumps on their heads?

For more information on genetics and racial differences, try Stalking the Wild Taboo and some articles from VDare. Edit: And read Rushton's book!

Thanks, but I prefer my science straight up, rather than laced with ideologically predetermined junk. I have, in my time, read enough of these and other similar pieces of pseudoscientific bilge to know that they are, at best, hopeless confusions of correlation with causation riddled with unjustified and unproven assumptions; and at worst, pitiful attempts to justify the fears and prejudices of a tiny and under-educated minority. Hardly surprising, though, when you consider the negative impact of racism on cognitive performance (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994388).

Those that claim that blacks have a more diversified gene pool than other races is also a weak point. So what if they do. Is this "greater diversity" statistically significant? Is this increased diversity merely composed of "recessive DNA" or sometimes what is called "jung or useless" DNA? Again, there are still plenty of whites for genetic diversity. Also remember that all humans may have originated from only a few thousands of individuals...

The "claim", as you put it, is not significant in terms of the general unity of all of humanity, no. Human beings as a species are VERY genetically homogeneous; this is the principal reason why it is so foolish to attempt to draw lines between various "races". As you say, we are all descended from a few thousand individuals, from Africa, in the recent past.

By the way, there is a huge difference between "recessive" and "junk" DNA, even if we accept the assumption that "junk" DNA is actually all junk.

I think for myself as a enlightened racist (no, its not an oxymoron!) and as such, I simply wish to preserve my phenotype/genotype because it is truley a part of my culture and heritage - at least that's how I see it. The arguement that no interbreeding between the races is a weak one. This is so because there are still vast numbers of each race for a massive diversified gene pool of each. I'm a conservative (at least in a number of respects) and as such a wish to conserve my heritage from being lost forever. I see nothing inherently wrong with this.

Those that claim that blacks have a more diversified gene pool than other races is also a weak point. So what if they do. Is this "greater diversity" statistically significant? Is this increased diversity merely composed of "recessive DNA" or sometimes what is called "jung or useless" DNA? Again, there are still plenty of whites for genetic diversity. Also remember that all humans may have originated from only a few thousands of individuals...

If you consider yourself an 'enlightened racist', and see no conflict in that term, you clearly have no understanding of what at least one of those words means. I would be fascinated to know what you consider to be 'your culture' and 'your heritage'.

If you are white, anglo-saxon, living in Europe or America:

Your laws are based on Judaic Laws
Your legal system is based on the Roman model
Your political system is (probably) based on the Greek model.
Your calender is (probably) a combination of Roman and Norse input.
Your popular music is likely a collection of predominantly African and Latin rhythms, in some form or another.
Your language is (probably) a heavily bastardised form of Germanic/Latin languages.

Who told you that YOU have a culture or heritage, and what was their evidence?

"if we accept the assumption that "junk" DNA is actually all junk"



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3703935.stm
http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/junkdna.html
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-06/hms-jdy052804.php
http://www.sciencentral.com/articles/view.php3?type=article&article_id=218392305

and so on

If you consider yourself an 'enlightened racist', and see no conflict in that term, you clearly have no understanding of what at least one of those words means. I would be fascinated to know what you consider to be 'your culture' and 'your heritage'.

If you are white, anglo-saxon, living in Europe or America:

Your laws are based on Judaic Laws
Your legal system is based on the Roman model
Your political system is (probably) based on the Greek model.
Your calender is (probably) a combination of Roman and Norse input.
Your popular music is likely a collection of predominantly African and Latin rhythms, in some form or another.
Your language is (probably) a heavily bastardised form of Germanic/Latin languages.

My definition of heritage is broader than that. I embrace the first 4 and the last one (Number 6) - all caucasian contructs. You also neglected to mention my point on phenotypes/genotypes - which do exist! And is a part of culture, a part of my heritage! I see no conflict here. Regardless of nationality, or where I came from, white is still white...

...that is my heritage!

As for so called "popular music" it's all garbage that I never listed to unless it's forcably rammed down my throat at the gym. A pair of earplugs help somewhat, however... Normally I listed to classical and various "period" music.

Who told you that YOU have a culture or heritage, and what was their evidence?

History...

My definition of heritage is broader than that. I embrace the first 4 and the last one (Number 6) - all caucasian contructs. You also neglected to mention my point on phenotypes/genotypes - which do exist! And is a part of culture, a part of my heritage! I see no conflict here. Regardless of nationality, or where I came from, white is still white...

...that is my heritage!

As for so called "popular music" it's all garbage that I never listed to unless it's forcably rammed down my throat at the gym. A pair of earplugs help somewhat, however... Normally I listed to classical and various "period" music.

History...

So - the colour of the skin really is your only motivating factor there... Etruscan, Latin or Sabine doesn't matter - so long as they were 'white'.

I assume you know of 'mathematics', which is a construct of Middle Eastern culture.

You are doubtless also aware that printed media and gunpowder technologies are Far Eastern in conception?

You listen to classical music... so a large part of your catalogue must include slavic artists - once again, though, so long as they are 'white'...

I didn't neglect to mention the 'phenotype/genotype' point. I just do not consider it valid. The degree of possible genetic variation (the span of genotypical possiblity) between 'races' is about 6% - which is a small, but significant scope of variation. However, the degree of genetic variation WITHIN a race is about 6%.

So, there is the same amount of genetic variety in AND out of a 'race' - which implies that humans are all basically the same +/- 3%.

If you have a problem with skin colour, science does not back your prejudice (except the pseudo-science that racists must resort to). So it IS just a prejudice, and it's YOUR problem.

It's ignornant to think that love is not powerful enough to traverse race, ethnicity, religion or gender.

MARRY WHO EVER YOU WANT.

F*CK WHO EVER YOU WANT.

I think I already posted here, but I'll post something different if I did. I have nothing against people of other races, some of my closest friends are of different races so I have nothing against inter-racial marriage. The only difference between the races pretty much is skin colour and to my understanding skin colour is caused by the amount of melanin in the skin and that is caused by the climate where your ancestors lived. I could be wrong about the melanin thing, though, but I'm still not against inter-racial marriage.

And is a part of culture, a part of my heritage! I see no conflict here. Regardless of nationality, or where I came from, white is still white...
Um... Hate to break it to you, but Jews aren't considered "white" by most.

Yet more evidence that race is a political idea and not actually real: A racist at odds with most other racists (and many non-racists) by believing Jews are white.

I think I already posted here, but I'll post something different if I did. I have nothing against people of other races, some of my closest friends are of different races so I have nothing against inter-racial marriage. The only difference between the races pretty much is skin colour and to my understanding skin colour is caused by the amount of melanin in the skin and that is caused by the climate where your ancestors lived. I could be wrong about the melanin thing, though, but I'm still not against inter-racial marriage.

No, you're about right. Skin colour is all about melanin, and the proportions thereof. Except in albinos, where it is the absence of melanin.

"if we accept the assumption that "junk" DNA is actually all junk"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3703935.stm
http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/junkdna.html
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-06/hms-jdy052804.php
http://www.sciencentral.com/articles/view.php3?type=article&article_id=218392305

and so on

Interesting links, thanks! It looks as if the assumption is -- like so much else coming from that end of the spectrum in this argument -- baseless.

You're missing the point. Race matters, it is real, it is genetic. You don't see two blacks mating and having a chinese son. Race is real and it is genetic. The "dark" races generall speaking are of lesser intelligence than the "light" races.

Studies have shown the lowest form of life that you can class as human are the Australian Aboriginies, they are outclassed even by the Congolese.

And even if this were true ( I haven't read beyond this post to see if you substantiated this claim or not ) what makes you think that it is essential for a couple to be potentially capable of producing so-and-so intelligent offspring? Would it really be that bad if your kids' intelligence were below average?

After 23 pages, and reading all the material, I must say I'm quite exhausted.

First of all: a little bit of extra biology. In Cambell and Reece (a biology textbook for AP Biology and Bio97/98 in the UC system) it is clearly stated that the color of one's skin is determined by multiple and not single genes. There are at least six genes that control pigmentation. Between to hexoheterogeneous parents, any kid from black to white could be developed. Cool huh?

Next: Anyone here from Southern California or some other really big melting pot place? I'm not talking about deep LA, I'm just saying any new age SoCal neighborhood with at least second generation Americans making up the population. I'm asian and I don't see any real divisions among anything cultural.

I personally don't have a culture, having been raised to define my own culture I look around and I don't see any pure lines of distinguishment.

I challenge all of our "liberally politically incorrect" friends to move out of the house away from their computer monitors and inundate themselves in a community where there are not like minded people. Learn a little, perhaps, before talking.

Me? I like the thought of interracial marriage/relationships - it multiplies your chances of getting some.

There isn't anything wrong with it? Not sure about that. Culture is always a difficulty, but take it this way: As I'm sure many of the forumers here will agree, you can probably see it coming. In any relationship, working things out before leaping into it is always a plus.

For the minority: Kudos for your bravery. I'm sorry if you don't think anything a Mongoloid says is valid. My parents are(ahem...) not racist but they are different thinkers and would be consistent with the "don't dumb down your race" argument.

As an experiment, would anyone like to join me in another forum with the same argument except citing asian/black/jewish superiority? I don't find it wrong to impersonate other races. I've been 12, 40, and 85 online before. Always fun. Even more fun when its an social science experiment. If you're interested in being the TT or CM of another race in another forum, send me a telegram. That's Rights of Man @ NationStates Telegrams.

PS: I love women. That's my type. That's the only species I'm interested in marrying. Black men, white men, asian men, jewish men, men from the future, men from the past, blue men - not interested.

Can I marry a goat? Well if you are all into chinks and niggers, I'm into goats...as long as MTV and all other jewish fags preach racial equality as a must, there will be blind people..........Satan's bond!

people tend to marry those who are physically similar to someone they imprinted on in their childhood. usually this prevents racial mixing.

Do you have any scientific evidence for this argument?

It seems like all the dark latin guys I know go for the light skinned blonde girls and all the white guys tend to go for the dark eyed latinas.

I would argue the opposite from you, that perhaps there is something in the male brain that makes men attracted to the exotic, from an evolutionary stand point this would be to prevent imbreeding.

Unfortunately I have no scientific evidence to back up this theory.

Originally Posted by Communist Mississippi
You're missing the point. Race matters, it is real, it is genetic. You don't see two blacks mating and having a chinese son. Race is real and it is genetic. The "dark" races generall speaking are of lesser intelligence than the "light" races.

Studies have shown the lowest form of life that you can class as human are the Australian Aboriginies, they are outclassed even by the Congolese.


Oh my god. If I didn't know any better, I would swear you are one of my cracker relatives.

Sorry but there is NO map to what defines a "race" as being smarter then another. That logic is the failed efforts of RACISTS of the early 1900s under the pseudo sceince of Eugenics. It was disproven.

By your logic white people should be the smartest of all and yet we use the ARABIC number system. A dark man(I forget his name) came up with the concept of zero. Look at Egypt and what they were doing when our Lighter skin relatives were still wearing animal skins. A black man gave the world plasma., etc., etc., etc.

I don't use this often but welcome to my ignore button hillbilly.

Look at Egypt and what they were doing when our Lighter skin relatives were still wearing animal skins.

I agree with your argument, but this is a really bad example!

At this time Egyptians were more technologically advanced, but they lived in a very oppresive society. The tribal societies of Europe were much more egalitarian and so by todays standards, I would argue they were more 'sophisticated' (socially at least).

Those of African descent are better than us in every way.............They are more physically capable than we. They've proven time and again in various popular sports such as Basketball or (American) Football, as well as in the Olympics, that they are stronger, faster, and generally speaking, more atheletic. Their muscle and bone structures are slightly different, but the main difference is that they are more well developed.

I was watching the Olympic 100 meter dash the other day and something struck me. Obviously all the contestants were black, but that wasn't the only thing. They were only two contestants who were not from North America. There was 1 Portuguese guy and 1 guy from Ghana, but the rest were all from North America (I think there were about 5 from the USA and 3 from Caribbean countries).

These people are probably so physically fit because they are descended from slaves, that were bred to be fit. It had nothing to do with the color of their skin.

Besides, if Black people really were significantly 'better' at sports then they wouldn't just dominate Basketball and American Football, they would be the only participants. There would be no white ballers (I mean 0 in the NBA!)

Lets try and cut the reverse racism please, your just giving material for the white power nuts to work with.

I was watching the Olympic 100 meter dash the other day and something struck me. Obviously all the contestants were black, but that wasn't the only thing. They were only two contestants who were not from North America. There was 1 Portuguese guy and 1 guy from Ghana, but the rest were all from North America (I think there were about 5 from the USA and 3 from Caribbean countries).

These people are probably so physically fit because they are descended from slaves, that were bred to be fit. It had nothing to do with the color of their skin.

Besides, if Black people really were significantly 'better' at sports then they wouldn't just dominate Basketball and American Football, they would be the only participants. There would be no white ballers (I mean 0 in the NBA!)

Lets try and cut the reverse racism please, your just giving material for the white power nuts to work with.

I think we have to accept there are certain physical differences between races. Black people certainly do seem to do well on the track, but white people do really well in the pool, you hardly see many white runners but likewise, i dont think i saw many black swimmers in the games either. Maybe its got something to do with the country they grew up in but you have to bow to the statistics at least.

I would argue the opposite from you, that perhaps there is something in the male brain that makes men attracted to the exotic, from an evolutionary stand point this would be to prevent imbreeding.

Unfortunately I have no scientific evidence to back up this theory.

I would wonder if this would apply to women, as well. I happen to be quite pale--but interestingly, I am actually turned off by men as pale as I am. Blond and red hair don't do it, either.

Oh my god. If I didn't know any better, I would swear you are one of my cracker relatives.

Sorry but there is NO map to what defines a "race" as being smarter then another. That logic is the failed efforts of RACISTS of the early 1900s under the pseudo sceince of Eugenics. It was disproven.

By your logic white people should be the smartest of all and yet we use the ARABIC number system. A dark man(I forget his name) came up with the concept of zero. Look at Egypt and what they were doing when our Lighter skin relatives were still wearing animal skins. A black man gave the world plasma., etc., etc., etc.

I don't use this often but welcome to my ignore button hillbilly.


I know an arab came up with the number 0.

I also know that the Egyptians were Southern European Whites. (The ancient Egyptians were white, probably Greek, Italian, and a few central European Germanics)

I know an arab came up with the number 0.

I also know that the Egyptians were Southern European Whites. (The ancient Egyptians were white, probably Greek, Italian, and a few central European Germanics)

The first is wrong, and the second is the subject of intense debate.
Zero came out of India.
And the ethnic (not racial) population of ancient Egypt is the subject of highly charged and politicized debate. However, tyhe Egyptians viewed themselves as a separate population:

Together, the pictorial and written sources indicate most often four broad divisions of human beings, as in the Underworld Books (in tombs of kings in the New Kingdom):

1. Egyptians
2. those living to the south (Nubians and others)
3. those living to the west (western nomads, 'Libyans' in the sense of anyone living west of the Nile and south of the Mediterranean)
4. those living to the east (Asiatics)
source (http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/social/race.html)

And I have some special requests for all the proponents of race here:
How many races are there? 1? 2? 3? 20? (Are you a lumper or a splitter?)
What is your specific definition of race?
And how do you account for variation?
What is the exact dividing line between the races you propose?
For example, if you use pigmentation, what concentration constitutes a "pure" member of a given race?
No one seems to be able to answer the later questions clearly. Maybe you can be ther first to prove to me that your definition really is a true definition....

It'd be nice to see if there were some real definitions as opposed to the normal namby-pamby liberal sort of definition that it's whatever I feel like....

NAR, The Bell Curve is not an acceptable source. Try again

Okay, quick statement here. I'm going to do a longer essay in a bit, but this just seriously pissed me off, so I'm going to refute it. The evidence the Bell Curve was applied to wasn't backed up, and was widely discredited, but the Bell Curve is simply a statistical way of describing a difference. It recognizes that there is an average, and that things that are very good, or very bad are very rare. That's a simplification, but close enough. Bell Curve can be applied to anything from battery life to average temperatures of refridgerators. Bell Curve isn't a source, it's an analyzation tool, like range, average, median, etc.

Oops. Should have read further. I thought you were objecting to S.D. usage, didn't realize it was a book. :( Meh.

As to the rest, it seems like there are two arguments. The prevalent one is that some some races are superior. I think that certain races tend to focus on things more. (the majority of the asian kids in my school do very well, their parents focus on it, the majority of the sports teams are negros, etc.) However, this doesn't make one race ergo superior, smarter, or stronger than any other. It is simply a case of what they choose to do. There may be a *minor* difference, however, there is no good evidence for that, and a person working on a skill will still do better that a person of a 'stronger/smarter/etc.' race who doesn't chose to work on that.

The second argument is preseving a 'race.' First, as people have so elequently said, it's a phenotype, or genotype, I never remember. Anyhow, it's not like diversity will go away. Even if everyone interbred, there would be major differences. And the fact is, there's no way that's going to happen anyways. So ha. As it is, I think someone said it was 20%. Even if it's accepted, it's probably never going to get all that much higher. There's never going to be a 'race' die-off. Besides, what is it you want to preserve? Eye or hair color? That's not guaranteed. Skin color? What's so very important about that? That seems to be the only real thing that can be passed down. Culture, that doesn't have to be genetic, or even your child. Anyone you spend time with can adopt some of your culture.

So, a long post for a long thread. God, this thing is long. I woke up and started reading it, now it's time for bed. Well, maybe I'm exaggerating slightly. ;)

And I have some special requests for all the proponents of race here:
How many races are there? 1? 2? 3? 20? (Are you a lumper or a splitter?)
What is your specific definition of race?
And how do you account for variation?
What is the exact dividing line between the races you propose?
For example, if you use pigmentation, what concentration constitutes a "pure" member of a given race?
No one seems to be able to answer the later questions clearly. Maybe you can be ther first to prove to me that your definition really is a true definition....

It'd be nice to see if there were some real definitions as opposed to the normal namby-pamby liberal sort of definition that it's whatever I feel like....
I'd probably say that it was mainly split up into continents. You've got White Europeans, who populate Australia and North America and Europe, obviously. People from South America (Latin Americans?), Black Africans, Arabs, from the middle east, people from middle Asia, Japanese and Chinese people. That's not exact and there are probably loads of people I've missed out but I think they are the main races.

I agree with your argument, but this is a really bad example!

At this time Egyptians were more technologically advanced, but they lived in a very oppresive society. The tribal societies of Europe were much more egalitarian and so by todays standards, I would argue they were more 'sophisticated' (socially at least).

I agree with you. They were not the "model" society but the argument presented was basically white = smart; all else not so smart to stupid.

Can I marry a goat? Well if you are all into chinks and niggers, I'm into goats...as long as MTV and all other jewish fags preach racial equality as a must, there will be blind people..........Satan's bond!Knock yourself out Goat-boy, as long as the goat is willing.


But somehow I don't think the consent or even the gender of the goat concerns you.

Can I marry a goat? Well if you are all into chinks and niggers, I'm into goats...as long as MTV and all other jewish fags preach racial equality as a must, there will be blind people..........Satan's bond!

If you feel you can't land a female homosapiens, I say: go for it! :p

Can I marry a goat? Well if you are all into chinks and niggers, I'm into goats...as long as MTV and all other jewish fags preach racial equality as a must, there will be blind people..........Satan's bond!

mate with anything that has the same number of chromesomes. So that disallows goats, horses, insects, monkeys and neanderthalls.

It does however allow cro-magnons, blacks, whites, asians, any other race (whatever the barrier may/mayNot be) and, strangely, tobacco plants.

that's right, tobacco.

Do you have any scientific evidence for this argument?

It seems like all the dark latin guys I know go for the light skinned blonde girls and all the white guys tend to go for the dark eyed latinas.

I would argue the opposite from you, that perhaps there is something in the male brain that makes men attracted to the exotic, from an evolutionary stand point this would be to prevent imbreeding.

Unfortunately I have no scientific evidence to back up this theory.

Birds in new zealand.
They suck at flying, so tend to be stuck in their little valleys. The females love strange colours, so the colour patterns are completely different in each valley.

Every now and then a Male manages to get from one valley to another, and his unfamiliar colours make him an instant adonis.

Birds in new zealand.
They suck at flying, so tend to be stuck in their little valleys. The females love strange colours, so the colour patterns are completely different in each valley.

Every now and then a Male manages to get from one valley to another, and his unfamiliar colours make him an instant adonis.

I'd like to read up on that. Any idea about name of the bird you are reffering too?

mate with anything that has the same number of chromesomes. So that disallows goats, horses, insects, monkeys and neanderthalls.

It does however allow cro-magnons, blacks, whites, asians, any other race (whatever the barrier may/mayNot be) and, strangely, tobacco plants.

that's right, tobacco.

The f? How would that work? I mean...and it's...How do you find out this sort of thing in the first place?

I think that skin colour doesnt matter for marriage. More to the point, why does it matter how we feel? If two people love eachother, they can marry eachother and tell anyone who says they shouldnt to politely go shove it.
And for no reason whatsoever, heres a bio-terrorism smiley
:gundge: