Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Suntzu wrote:Modern man developed in Africa about 200,000 years ago. About 80,000 years ago one population moved out of Africa. This became the Caucasians and Orientals. Life was much different for them than their African brothers. They interbred with Neanderthals. Then about 40,000 years later the Orientals splits. We know by observing other species that populations when separated develop differently. The ability to run fast is useful in Africa. Living in a cold climate requires planning and organization.
Godstud wrote:Same, but you won't believe that because you've already decided you're right, despite there not being proof of it.
Hindsite wrote:After the Flood, God commanded humanity to "increase in number and fill the earth" (Genesis 9:1). Humanity decided to do the exact opposite, “Then they said, ‘Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth’” (Genesis 11:4).
God confused the languages of humanity so that they could no longer communicate with each other (Genesis 11:7). The result was that people congregated with other people who spoke the same language, and then went together and settled in other parts of the world (Genesis 11:8-9). God confused the languages at the Tower of Babel to enforce His command for humanity to spread throughout the entire world.
Praise the Lord.
Suntzu wrote:3a : an actually or potentially interbreeding group within a species
also : a taxonomic category (such as a subspecies) representing such a groupb : breed
c : a category of humankind that shares certain distinctive physical traitsLike dwarfs or albinos? No.
Suntzu wrote:I can buy that. You figure Kenyans behave differently than Norwegians?
Suntzu wrote:The ability to run fast is useful in Africa.
Living in a cold climate requires planning and organization.
Pants-of-dog wrote:This is vague.
None of this is an argument. It is merely your opinion about my debating style.
This is not your original position.
Your original position was that the differenxes between the races are so distinct and clear, and some races are clearly more advantageous to have around and that this is a rational reason for racism.
If you are now conceding that original argument and now are advocating this very different argument, okay.
It is obvious and true that genetics has an effect on us.
No one ever disputed this.
Verv wrote:As it has to be.
You see, I fully assent to the idea that there is not a hard break between any groups of humans that we can absolutely point to as a singular distinction between the two. Yet, they are clearly distinct because we can very reliably distinguish between people whose grandparents were black Africans and people whose grandparents were all from China.
So, it is a difference, but in some places it can become foggy.
You do not understand what is meant: I am here to point out that our genetic predispositions affect who we are, and that this comes from our heritage; whatever we call the lines of transmission of our genetics is irrelevant.
And, as it is true that some people are born to be tall, some people are born with sets of genes that can make them superior athletes, correct?
Our characteristics are often have a basis in our genetics, correct?
Everything listed is an act of god, including the […]
Liberals\"progressives" are the biggest[…]
@Truth To Power Have some work to do atm, so I'[…]
Fixing a country like the US is really easy. Comm[…]