Ramira:
As they are incapable of making a good hypothesis, I will do the favour: if somehow population genetics had a very strong influence on criminalities, they should be able to point to strong differences between parts of the population that is mixed and that is not, so that very heavily mixed black populatins should be like their european counterparts. It is the only logical result of such a population structuring.
And on his other claims, the same effects. It is of course illogic to put all Africans in with a american population that is so heavily mixed.
I bet NDD pulls out the heavily discredited Lynn studies- and “shows” Lynn’s fabricated IQs for various African countries to answer this.
I prefer to do it my way so that neutral lurkers don’t get the idea that I’m not responding because I don’t have a good response.
Ramira
June 11, 2012, 2:47pm
1303
No they need not, it is already evident.
You don’t have a good response. The smoke screen serves to highlight rather than obscure it. But by this point no one expects a coherent answer from you; it’s all smoke and mirrors, mixed with sheer stupidity.
The silent, invisible masses who don’t think you’re a racist tool and dishonest debater who takes his ball and runs home when he can’t persuade his opponents to play an endless, tiresome game of minutiose pat-a-cake?
Yeah, they’re out there all right. Herding pink elephants and hunting jackelopes, and cheering you on ever so silently.
As I said, you have made no coherent argument or provided any real evidence for your opinions. And I call you a fucking drooling cretin as a matter of documented fact, not out of ire.
You’re parents would have done better to have raised you not to be a racist, and also not to have a closed mind.
For all of your bluster you cannot explain why some individuals are better than others at everything they do, why members of some racial groups tend to out score members of other racial groups on all the mental aptitude tests however they are designed, and you cannot explain persistent racial patterns of performance and behavior that have always existed, and that exist everywhere in the world.
There’s nothing to explain, since you haven’t demonstrated any of those things.
I have said nothing of the kind.
Lol, I’m still waiting for you to quote this supposedly false claim I made.
But I won’t hold my breath since you obviously prefer to rely on vague generalities and hand-waving.
If by “good response” you mean vague generalities, hand-waving, mindless invective, and unsupported assertions, then I would have to agree with you.
By the way, do you agree that iiandyiii clearly contradicted himself and then weaseled and strawmanned to try to get out of it?
brazil84:
If by “good response” you mean vague generalities, hand-waving, mindless invective, and unsupported assertions, then I would have to agree with you.
By the way, do you agree that iiandyiii clearly contradicted himself and then weaseled and strawmanned to try to get out of it?
I’m really interested in this fabricated contradiction… please ask him to show it!
brazil84:
If by “good response” you mean vague generalities, hand-waving, mindless invective, and unsupported assertions, then I would have to agree with you.
By the way, do you agree that iiandyiii clearly contradicted himself and then weaseled and strawmanned to try to get out of it?
You keep claiming that, but nothing you’ve quoted of him shows any contradiction.
He has… sort of. I just think he’s too stupid to understand your points.
Sure it has.
Please answer my question from Post #1097:
Ok, so then according to iiandyiiii’s reasoning and definition there must be a genetic marker or markers which distinguishe “Han Chinese” from “non-Han Chinese”.
Agreed?
brazil84:
Sure it has.
Please answer my question from Post #1097:
Ok, so then according to iiandyiiii’s reasoning and definition there must be a genetic marker or markers which distinguishe “Han Chinese” from “non-Han Chinese”.
Agreed?
It’s called coherent genetic structure. From here
The Han Chinese is the largest single ethnic group in the world, consisting of ten Chinese branches. With the exception of the Pinghua branch, the genetic structure of this group has been studied extensively, and Y chromosome and mitochondrial (mt)DNA data have demonstrated a coherent genetic structure of all Han Chinese. It is therefore believed that the Pinghua branch, being members of an old branch of the Han Chinese, despite being scattered in and around Guangxi Province where members of the Daic and Hmong-Mien are more prevalent than Han Chinese, is no exception. We have studied 470 individual samples (including 195 males) from Pinghua populations and other ethnic groups (Zhuang, Kam, Mulam, Laka, and Mien) from six areas (Hezhou, Fuchuan, Luocheng, Jinxiu, Sanjiang, and Wuxuan) in the north of the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region of China. Both mtDNA and the Y chromosomes were typed in these samples. High frequencies of the Y chromosome haplogroups O2a* and O*, which always present at a high frequency among the populations of the southern minorities, were found in Pinghua populations. Only Pinghua populations in Luocheng and Jinxiu maintain the Han frequent haplogroup O3a5a. mtDNA lineages B4a, B5a, M*, F1a, M7b1, and N* were found in Pinghua populations, exhibiting a pattern similar to the neighboring indigenous populations, especially the Daic populations. Cluster analyses (dendrograms, principal component analyses, and networks) of Pinghua populations, the other Han branches, and other ethnic groups in East Asia indicated that Pinghua populations are much closer to the southern minorities than to the other Han branches. Admixture analyses confirmed this result. In conclusion, we argue that Pinghua populations did not descend from Han Chinese, but from southern minorities. The ancestral populations of Pinghua people were assimilated by the Han Chinese in terms of language, culture, and self-identification and, consequently, the Pinghua people became an exceptional branch of Han Chinese’s coherent genetic structure.
Ummm, does that mean yes or no?
Yes or no to what exactly?
To my question. This is the third and last time I will ask you:
Ok, so then according to iiandyiiii’s reasoning and definition there must be a genetic marker or markers which distinguishe “Han Chinese” from “non-Han Chinese”.
Agreed?
Did you notice the rest of the post that you quoted?
Like staring into the vacant space between the stars, isn’t it, and finding only madness and despair?
You even quoted an entire block of text that had some good information.
At this rate, you’re going to be added to the “ignore list” with the rest of us for running logical circles around him.
brazil84:
To my question. This is the third and last time I will ask you:
Ok, so then according to iiandyiiii’s reasoning and definition there must be a genetic marker or markers which distinguishe “Han Chinese” from “non-Han Chinese”.
Agreed?
Excuse me, you fucking moron, you complained about clicking links so I quoted it here. Now, apparently you want to pigeonhole me into making a statement about genetic markers. Did you understand my quote? No you did not. Read it and try to figure out what it says.
It should be noted that I was talking about populations, not individuals.