Cultcow Mikemikev / Michael Coombs / Twinkle Toes / Velcro Pants - Pedo Teacher and Neo-Nazi, Advocate of Child Murder, Secret JewMuslim ANTIFA, A-Logs Null Constantly

[ChurchOfGodBear]

This sounds a bit like the infamous Sarah Palin when asked what newspapers she reads. Do you read all the books too, Mike?

Mike goes to the @Brad Watson_Miami school of literacy, where he tells you to read a book in order to avoid admitting that he, personally, hasn't read the book.

 

[Florence]

Lol what? Are you a bit slow?

When you've finished read all of these too:
http://stumbleinn.net/forum/showthr...ok-by-Chuck-with-ubersperg-pdf-reference-list

I would, if you could prove you've ever read anything more sophisticated than Goodnight Moon.

 

[unclestryker]

Lol what? Are you a bit slow?

Unlike you, I am not a neet mike. I simply don't have the time mike, so how about this you give me some reference points from some of those scholars. That I can look at my leisure. I don't think that's a unreasonable request.

 

[fbi nigger]

We divide continua arbitrarily all the time. It's called operationalisation. Is human variation a perfect continuum? What's your data? On what criteria do you construct the category sapiens sapiens? Interfertility? Do you really think I define race by skin color?

You're now saying there's not "enough" differentiation. Quantify enough, and contrast it with other subspecies.

Yes we do in fact use operationalization, but it's mostly for health, psychology, social sciences, and economics for purely empirical observation, I don't seem to recall it being used in biology or life sciences, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

I suppose you can define clines in separate categories, that's where the concept of race comes from, but like I said clines are very relative. Now this is about whether we can define races like sub-species and you're using the classification of sapiens sapiens and sapiens idaltu as an an argument. Well it all comes down to morphology. Yes, I am aware that the skulls of different races aren't identical when it comes to features but they all share a unique homo sapiens sapiens morphology. We construct the categories of sapiens sapiens and sapiens idaltu on definable traits between the two such as idaltu having larger supraorbital ridges as well as other archaic features.

Now when I brought up the walking from Africa to Siberia example I wasn't strictly talking about skin color as I know you don't define race by skin color. You have shown that you define race by more disturbing factors such as intelligence and other human phenomona which seems to be the crux of this debate, so if you wish, please inform us on how the skulls of other races are archaic and/or deserve to be placed in their own categories of subspecies.

 

[unclestryker]

Hey guys, just found this on my feed.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/

 

[Mikemikev]

You have shown that you define race by more disturbing factors such as intelligence and other human phenomona which seems to be the crux of this debate, so if you wish, please inform us on how the skulls of other races are archaic and/or deserve to be placed in their own categories of subspecies.

Why are you making things up? I said no such thing anywhere. Race is defined genealogically a la Darwin or Blumenbach or genomically a la Mayr, as are all biological taxa. Have you read Darwin on the definitional similarity of species and variety? They are different levels of the same taxonomy. The taxa are then informative for traits such as intelligence.

Unlike you, I am not a neet mike.

Lol

 

[fbi nigger]

Why are you making things up? I said no such thing anywhere. Race is defined genealogically a la Darwin or Blumenbach or genomically a la Mayr, as are all biological taxa. Have you read Darwin on the definitional similarity of species and variety? They are different levels of the same taxonomy. The taxa are then informative for traits such as intelligence.

Fine, whatever, we can dick around and play around with semantics, but the point remains that you believe different races have different IQs which you just summed up in this post.

Also I just responded to many of your points so it's only fair you respond to some of mine before this becomes some stupid, petty game of semantics

 

[unclestryker]

Lol

and with that I leave the your lecture mike and leave the floor to @fbi nigger. Have fun there guy.

 

[Mikemikev]

Fine, whatever, we can dick around and play around with semantics, but the point remains that you believe different races have different IQs which you just summed up in this post.

Also I just responded to many of your points so it's only fair you respond to some of mine before this becomes some stupid, petty game of semantics

We're discussing the definition of race. The semantics are crucial. You're saying you define sapiens sapiens morphologically. That's fine, but it's not Darwin's or Mayr's definition where morphology is used to inform genealogy, and genealogy is the definition. Races share genealogy versus other races. You didn't answer my question about how one calculates "enough" differentiation.

 

[FataBataRang]

Excuse me, guys, but I swear I just heard a little mouse squeak.

We're discussing the definition of race. The semantics are crucial. You're saying you define sapiens sapiens morphologically. That's fine, but it's not Darwin's or Mayr's definition where morphology is used to inform genealogy, and genealogy is the definition. Races share genealogy versus other races. You didn't answer my question about how one calculates "enough" differentiation.

Oh, it was Mikemikev. Carry on.

 

[fbi nigger]

You didn't answer my question about how one calculates "enough" differentiation.

Nigga, I don't fucking know. Lol
That question is up to taxonomists to decide, it's a huge grey area. As far as how I apply differentiation. Well like I said all human skulls have unique homo sapien morphology. As far as genetics, populations in separate regions may share similar alleles, but that doesn't mean everyone in that population will share it, nor does it mean it can't be found in other populations

 

[GethN7]

We're discussing the definition of race. The semantics are crucial. You're saying you define sapiens sapiens morphologically. That's fine, but it's not Darwin's or Mayr's definition where morphology is used to inform genealogy, and genealogy is the definition. Races share genealogy versus other races. You didn't answer my question about how one calculates "enough" differentiation.

Micheal, I have a question: If a black person saved you from near death, handed you some money with no strings attached, and put in a good word for you as a work reference for a job, would you still think less of them?

Or would still cling to the idea they are subhuman even if they showed you a ton of the best behavior you would hope a human would be capable of?

 

[Mikemikev]

I don't fucking know, nigga. Lol
That question is up to taxonomists to decide, it's a huge grey area. As far as how I apply differentiation. Well like I said all human skulls have unique homo sapien morphology. As far as genetics, populations in separate regions may share similar alleles, but that doesn't mean everyone in that population will share it, nor does it mean it can't be found in other populations

You don't because there is no limit on differentiation, other than a fake 0.25 Fst made up by Alan Templeton ad hoc for humans and parroted by liberals.

Yes, genealogy is obviously not inferred from single genes.

Micheal, I have a question: If a black person saved you from near death, handed you some money with no strings attached, and put in a good word for you as a work reference for a job, would you still think less of them?

Or would still cling to the idea they are subhuman even if they showed you a ton of the best behavior you would hope a human would be capable of?

One point at a time.

 

[ADN_VIII]

I can't believe you've blown this thread by five hundred something pages.

 

[FataBataRang]

One point at a time.

Talking about more than one thing makes your brain hurt, I guess.

Micheal, I have a question: If a black person saved you from near death, handed you some money with no strings attached, and put in a good word for you as a work reference for a job, would you still think less of them?

Or would still cling to the idea they are subhuman even if they showed you a ton of the best behavior you would hope a human would be capable of?

Never underestimate Mike's pettiness or spitefulness. Even when shown kindness, he remains hostile.

 

[fbi nigger]

You don't because there is no limit on differentiation, other than a fake 0.25 Fst made up by Alan Templeton ad hoc for humans and parroted by liberals.

Groovy.
Could you please respond to some of my points, please?

 

[Mikemikev]

Groovy.
Could you please respond to some of my points, please?

You don't have points against the race concept I haven't dismantled.

Talking about more than one thing makes your brain hurt, I guess.

Sure. It's really annoying to be surrounded by rude interrupting little shitheads when one is trying to discuss something.

 

[Anonymus Fluhre]

Sure. It's really annoying to be surrounded by rude interrupting little shitheads when one is trying to discuss something.

Mike, the only person being rude here is you.

 

[Mikemikev]

Mike, the only person being rude here is you.

You're a liar.

 

[ChurchOfGodBear]

You're a liar.

It's hilarious how you think that's an effective counter.