The Andrew Show- A show for white kids!

[devilof76]

The word you're looking for is breed: a set of common phenotypes, resultant from the interaction of environment and genotype, none of which are relevant because people now have infinitely greater freedom of movement than they did in more primitive times. It is a strictly anatomical phenomenon, and has no effect on the defining characteristics of any member of the species.

'Race' is a term that imagines a causal relationship between the cultural habits of people of a certain phenotypic set, and their appearance. It's an invalid concept. There may be correlation, but there is no causation involved. Belief in the idea that genetics determine cultural attributes is the essence of racist thought, whether it be supremacist or egalitarian.

 

[devilof76]

Even 'breed' is a near meaningless term when it comes to human beings, but it hits closer to the mark than does 'race'. "Race' almost suggests a variation in species. Such a rotten, stupid word.

 

[Blackthornone]

The word you're looking for is breed: a set of common phenotypes, resultant from the interaction of environment and genotype, none of which are relevant because people now have infinitely greater freedom of movement than they did in more primitive times. It is a strictly anatomical phenomenon, and has no effect on the defining characteristics of any member of the species.

'Race' is a term that imagines a causal relationship between the cultural habits of people of a certain phenotypic set, and their appearance. It's an invalid concept. There may be correlation, but there is no causation involved. Belief in the idea that genetics determine cultural attributes is the essence of racist thought, whether it be supremacist or egalitarian.

Breed is more like Rottweiler vs dachshund, which were developed by selectively BREEDING various examples which have certain physiological traits to yield offspring with those traits to eventually produce a life form that has the final set of traits that the breeder was deliberately engineering.

Race is not a species. Race is a subgroup of a species that did not develop from selective breeding, but rather from the direct adaptation of a life form to it's physical environment.
You could almost use the word evolution, but that has a hierarchical connotation.

Race is simply a type of physiological characteristics developed by adapting to a specific environment for the purpose of realizing the most efficient physiology for that place, which conserves the most energy and yields the most potential for other things beyond basic survival, since less energy is wasted on things like shivering or sweating. The phenomenon clearly exists, and race is the word used to refer to it.

Since living in a certain area of the world tends to develop certain behaviors in order to survive, like routines, I'm thinking that the development of culture might in some way also might be related as well, and thus if so, race and culture developed simultaneously.
Because of this, I tend to think that the mores and traditions of a certain culture might be the most valid in their own, and less so in others, and in some cases, completely invalid in others. (Eskimos hunt for wild game in the wilderness, but that tradition would not serve much purpose in NYC.)

I'm not sure genetics develop cultural attributes, but the environment which develops certain genetics also develops certain cultural attributes as those people adapt their behavior to those environments, just as their genetics adapted to those environments after 20,000 years. There is the correlation, I think.

The environment causes genetic and cultural changes.

I don't think genetics cause cultural behaviors in the direct sense, except perhaps as instincts developed over thousands of years.
Certain types of tasks just come naturally with very little effort to some animals. I don't see why people should be completely different in this regard.

I really think that all people should be treated fairly regardless of racial or cultural background.

As far as race having no relevance today, black people have a higher incidence of rickets in Northern climates, because their darker skin, designed to block out too much sun at the equator, blocks out so much sun in the north that they don't synthesize enough vitamin D to assimilate calcium enough.

In Australia, white people have a very high skin cancer rate, while the Aborigines have almost none, if they have any at all, because their skin is dark enough to block out excessive sun in that sunnier climate.

Race is still relevant to human survival and quality of life, despite people having "infinitely greater freedom of movement" now.

 

[devilof76]

As I said before...racist. Apple doesn't fall far from Albert Schweitzer's tree.

 

[Blackthornone]

As I said before...racist. Apple doesn't fall far from Albert Schweitzer's tree.

There is nothing racist about understanding why people are as they are. Racism is the act of being unfair to people because of their race. Race is just a genetic variation of a species. What word would you prefer?

 

[devilof76]

If I thought you understood, I would not impugn your lack of understanding.

It's not a matter of semantics. You're inventing a concept for which there is no referent. But don't feel bad, or anything. Similarly to an overwhelming majority of people believing in God, an overwhelming majority believe in race. Theist... Racist... I bet they're both in the 98-99% range.

People just have the dumb when it comes to certain things. What can ya do?

 

[Blackthornone]

If I thought you understood, I would not impugn your lack of understanding.

It's not a matter of semantics. You're inventing a concept for which there is no referent. But don't feel bad, or anything. Similarly to an overwhelming majority of people believing in God, an overwhelming majority believe in race. Theist... Racist... I bet they're both in the 98-99% range.

People just have the dumb when it comes to certain things. What can ya do?

So you think that differences in appearance are not differences in design. That is illogical. Form and function are synonymous. Form follows function in the natural world, but human beings design things for purely capricious reasons. Your attitude towards the idea of race is perhaps attributable to that. Nature made humans black, white, Asian, but human beings design things with no physical function whatsoever.

The human attitude of capricious design is inferior to nature's attitude of form follows function.

Human beings did not rewrite the laws of the universe by designing things to look different just for the sake of being different. Nature designs things with a variety for a purpose.

People with certain physical characteristics have certain physical attributes. White people are more susceptible to sunlight than black people are. That will never change. However, after 20,000 years of people living in a certain area, according to nature's design, they will all become one race.

That is a long time to wait for optimizing genetic adaptation to climate when it has already been done however.


I did not invent the concept of race. There is abundant referent to it. In the video I posted, he proved by studying the blood how people migrated out of Africa to settle all corners of the globe. Also, there are plenty of references showing how certain racial groups are more susceptible to certain things, like whits to skin cancer, or blacks to rickets, or blacks and Asians to lactose intolerance.

 

[CelticPredator]

What have I done.....


*eats popcorn*

 

[devilof76]

Nice job Pandora.

 

[Blackthornone]

There is no design you ****ing racist.

Of course there is a design. It is a design package formulated by nature itself. When human beings live in a certain climate long enough, all of those people develop certain physiological traits. All people once were black, because they lived in Africa, and then, after 20,000 years living in a certain area, their entire physiology changed to look Central Asian, and then when they moved to Europe and lived there for another 20,000 years, they became white. You clearly do not understand this.

A plan to construct something or to alter an existing thing to serve a certain purpose is a DESIGN.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design
"Design is the creation of a plan or convention for the construction of an object or a system (as in architectural blueprints, engineering drawing, business process, circuit diagrams and sewing patterns).[1] Design has different connotations in different fields (see design disciplines below). In some cases the direct construction of an object (as in pottery, engineering, management, cowboy coding and graphic design) is also considered to be design."

The races are NATURE'S DESIGN.
When all of the people who live in a certain area have similar physiological characteristics, which can be distinguished from other people in other parts of the world who have different physiological characteristics, that clearly indicates a design. When those physiological characteristics of those people living in a certain area long enough are found to offer physiological advantages that people from OTHER parts of the world do not have there, that is also an indicator of design. When certain traits offer advantages, and without those traits people would not have those advantages, that indicates design.

Perhaps you believe that all of this perfect adaptation happened RANDOMLY, and the adaptation of people to those particular areas was pure coincidence in all cases???
It is either by design, or it is random. It is far too perfect to be random. Therefore, it must be design. The races are designed by nature. Would you prefer the term orchestrated, steered, influenced, or planned?


When was the last time a black baby was born to white people or a white baby to black people? That would be so random. That might disprove race. However, that might just prove that the wife was having an affair instead... I'm going to go with "B" on that issue.

 

[devilof76]

You're anthropomorphizing nature. It's not random. It's causal, but it is not guided by anything other than natural selection.

There is no design. For there to be a design, there'd have to be a designer.

I did not invent the concept of race. There is abundant referent to it. In the video I posted, he proved by studying the blood how people migrated out of Africa to settle all corners of the globe. Also, there are plenty of references showing how certain racial groups are more susceptible to certain things, like whits to skin cancer, or blacks to rickets, or blacks and Asians to lactose intolerance.

Or racists to racism. Is that genetically inherited?

The concept is invented anew every time it's bought into. It was contrived when people first started using the concept, and it is contrived now. Yes, environment influences phenotype, but it is reinforced through breeding. Breeding remains locked into a climatically influenced pattern when people do not leave the area in which the anatomical features emerged, or if they choose only to reproduce with those from the same region.

But as climate changes, and people move, encountering other with which to breed, phenotypes mix. There is no fixed set which qualifies as 'Asian', 'African', 'Caucasian'. There are only chromosomes, which are only combinations of four nucleotides. The creation of specific recurring sets are perfectly comparable to breeding in dogs, and they are equally unstable. Prior to the development of agriculture, people didn't even sit still. There were constant migrations throughout the Paleolithic era and what phenotypic sets existed before specific settlement occured is anyone's guess. Modern breeds are exactly that. **** sapiens chased its food for some 30,000 years before anyone stopped long enough to cultivate crops.

To speak of a race is as aconceptual as speaking of ecosystems or climates. They are constantly changing, and have no fixed source. Occasionaly there will be period in which the genetic similarities pool in one place. What of it? Invent the airplane and the supposedly fixed set is completely thrown out the window, unless there is some kind of bias towards reproducing exclusively with those who share one's basic genetic structure.

The concept of race has no referent. It is a poorly designed abstraction that is especially meaningless when you are speaking of an animal that does not have instincts, i.e. is not dependent on its anatomical features for its survival. Humans can certainly opt to reject their evolutionary gift for using their minds to survive, but what you get is not a human culture based on ideas; you get a sub-human excuse for culture based on the most primitive level of commonality, attempting to live as perceptual level, reflex driven animals who did not evolve as a species to live as such.

When they do make such an attempt, living is what they becomes that which they are most inept. And that is perfectly understandable when they are emerging from primeval conditions. An animal that has to think to survive needs to learn first. But once it has advanced beyond that into highly developed conceptual technological culture, what happens when they revert to old methods is Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, Communist China, Islamist Middle East, etc.

The only culture that accurately reflects the true, raceless human design is America, which is presently dying from an infection of dim hyphenation because no one can get over their racist fetish of 'my people'. There are no races. There is no future unified race waiting to happen. There are individuals, with specific genetic identities. That's it.

 

[Blackthornone]

Nature is the designer. There does not need to be an individual for there to be a design. When the human species migrated to a new area, it adapted to that new area and manifested new physiological characteristics to do that, and which indicated that.

By saying there is no race, you are saying that genetic adaptation of the human species to a climate doesn't happen and never did, or could.

Race is just adaptation to climate, and by adapting better to a new climate, the ability to do as well in the previous climate is sacrificed. That mechanism isn't going to go away for any reason.

You speak of easy travel, and allude to genetic drift, but that doesn't make the mechanism go away. Mentioning those things doesn't invalidate the mechanism.

Those things does however undermine a feature of nature so that people benefit less by it, by opting out of natures design, honed by tens of thousands of years as opposed to human technology, which has only been around a few thousand at best.
When it comes to the tech that makes people believe they are really above nature, that has only been around a few hundred years at most.

I gather that you believe that because of modern tech, that some of the laws of nature are totally invalidated as if somehow the human race has evolved beyond them.
That belief fails to extend the logic. Both nature and technology exist.


Genetic adaptation to climate is not determined by natural selection. Natural selection or selective breeding takes place at the same time, but it isn't the same thing. Genetic adaptation to climate is only determined by the climate. Social aspects are irrelevant to the process. By suggesting that Genetic adaptation to climate is a part of natural selection, you are implying that when blacks migrated the Asia, they only mated with the most Asian looking ones, until they eventually became Asian. I really doubt that. If they did, it was racist.

 

[devilof76]

You're not only a ****ing racist, but a ****ing idiot.

Thank you for sharing your mental speedbumps. It was morbidly fascinating, but I would no sooner submit to your criteria of logic than I would Goebbels or Mengele. Adios.

 

[Blackthornone]

You're not only a ****ing racist, but a ****ing idiot.

Thank you for sharing your mental speedbumps. It was morbidly fascinating, but I would no sooner submit to your criteria of logic than I would Goebbels or Mengele. Adios.

There is nothing stupid or racist about what I wrote.

For example:
"Race is just adaptation to climate, and by adapting better to a new climate, the ability to do as well in the previous climate is sacrificed. That mechanism isn't going to go away for any reason."

All human beings used to be black, and now some are white, and the white ones are more vulnerable to sunburn and skin cancer than their black ancestors. That is science.

Lighter skin was needed in order to absorb enough sunlight in the Northern climates where people migrated to, who WERE black. Blue eyes also absorb more light than brown ones.

If you put a black sheet and a white sheet on top of grass, eventually the grass under the black sheet will be dead, but the grass under the white sheet will still be alive, because the white sheet allows more light to pass through to nourish the grass.

Just because you are in denial about what race is, and deny the magnificence of nature in facilitating this faculty, does not make my comments akin to Nazi ideology.

The Nazis believed that they were the master race, descended from extraterrestrials, and that because their ancestors came from a people from a superior planet they were a superior people, meant to rule the rest of the world.
Much of their genetic ideology was based on the premise of identifying those traits of alien origin, and preventing any Earth bound genetics from intermingling, to preserve the divine heritage of the Aryan people. They did not want anything to get in the way of their purity.

For a long time I was unaware of this, but all of that Nazi master race propaganda was about them being from another planet, and their entitlement to rule hinged upon their genetic purity. That is why they killed the Jews, since they saw them as too similar looking to Aryans, yet were supposedly from a different planet.
I do not share their beliefs at all.

I say the Aryans came from blacks from Africa, like everybody else.
That is what the science proves.
That is what the video, Journey Of Man, is about.
Well, not the Aryans specifically, but how all peoples journeyed from Africa to populate the whole world over tens of thousands of years.

I see all races as equal, so again, I do not share Nazi ideology.
I find your comparison to lack intellectual merit, to be incorrect and totally unfair.

 

[crows]

There is nothing stupid or racist about what I wrote.

For example:
"Race is just adaptation to climate, and by adapting better to a new climate, the ability to do as well in the previous climate is sacrificed. That mechanism isn't going to go away for any reason."

All human beings used to be black, and now some are white, and the white ones are more vulnerable to sunburn and skin cancer than their black ancestors. That is science.

Lighter skin was needed in order to absorb enough sunlight in the Northern climates where people migrated to, who WERE black. Blue eyes also absorb more light than brown ones.

If you put a black sheet and a white sheet on top of grass, eventually the grass under the black sheet will be dead, but the grass under the white sheet will still be alive, because the white sheet allows more light to pass through to nourish the grass.

Just because you are in denial about what race is, and deny the magnificence of nature in facilitating this faculty, does not make my comments akin to Nazi ideology.

The Nazis believed that they were the master race, descended from extraterrestrials, and that because their ancestors came from a people from a superior planet they were a superior people, meant to rule the rest of the world.
Much of their genetic ideology was based on the premise of identifying those traits of alien origin, and preventing any Earth bound genetics from intermingling, to preserve the divine heritage of the Aryan people. They did not want anything to get in the way of their purity.

For a long time I was unaware of this, but all of that Nazi master race propaganda was about them being from another planet, and their entitlement to rule hinged upon their genetic purity. That is why they killed the Jews, since they saw them as too similar looking to Aryans, yet were supposedly from a different planet.
I do not share their beliefs at all.

I say the Aryans came from blacks from Africa, like everybody else.
That is what the science proves.
That is what the video, Journey Of Man, is about.
Well, not the Aryans specifically, but how all peoples journeyed from Africa to populate the whole world over tens of thousands of years.

I see all races as equal, so again, I do not share Nazi ideology.
I find your comparison to lack intellectual merit, to be incorrect and totally unfair.

YOU MEAN REPTILIANS?

 

[CelticPredator]

...........Dulce!11

 

[Blackthornone]

YOU MEAN REPTILIANS?

I saw it on the Learning Channel I think. No, reptilians were not mentioned.

 

[devilof76]

There is nothing stupid or racist about what I wrote.

 

[crows]

I saw it on the Learning Channel I think. No, reptilians were not mentioned.

Nephilim ?

 

[devilof76]

I find your comparison to lack intellectual merit, to be incorrect and totally unfair.

You are taking the fact of environmental effect on phenotype (which I have not denied) and calling any local similarities (that have endured over time) a race. The logical fallacy you're committing is composition.

Belief in race is racism, which is the foundation of racial supremacism. Supremacism is the natural progression of belief in an arbitrary, unfounded standard of categorizing people. Similarly to religion, it will inevitably be used to hold one group as higher than another because there is no way to oppose such within reason. It is not founded upon reason, and cannot be delimited by any objective standard. Anyone can claim anything about it so long as there are idiots to keep the faith. It doesn't matter if they come from a different planet, or a different continent, or a different corner of the continent. Anyone can rationalize anything about an idea that has no meaning.