Whites are genetically inferior to blacks

[Trooper Thorn]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331949,00.html


Says Cornell University and it gets gleefuly promoted by the MSM.

Worse is better and the backlash is coming soon.

 

[Alpha Male]

Wow, disgusting how the MSM spun that little study. "Whites Genetically Weaker Than Blacks, Study Finds" with both black and white hands clasped.

What the study found was less genetic diversity, such bullsh*t.

 

[White Shogun]

I wonder what would have happened to this study had it reported that blacks were genetically inferior?

Like the ones that say blacks are less intelligent? Like the studies that show blacks are more prone to violence and commit more crimes?

Bell Curve, anyone?

 

[Colonel_Reb]

Sickening!

 

[DixieDestroyer]

The "findings" are total hogwash, and the "study" itself is no doubt funded by the Elite to propagate their Marxist leanings (via the controlled MSM).

 

[whiteathlete33]

Wow. I always wanted to be called inferior.

 

[Poacher]

The title was pretty awful but not surprising given who we're dealing with.

Sounded like the researchers were associating strength with diversity.

Either way it doesn't really matter. The only results that count are those of the Human Genome Project. Soon, just like Dr. Watson predicted, the HGP will discover the genes that code for intelligence and then the game will be up.

 

[darthvader]

If by genetically inferior they mean blacks are much less physicallyattractive than whitepeople then I do agree with the study.

 

[Tired old White]

Any one who has taken a basic experimental design or statistics course knows that a sample size of 15 is not large enough to give any result with sufficient significance to make the kind statements that were made in this articleEdited by: Tired old White

 

[Alpha Male]

They used African Americans, not pure Africans. African Americans can have on average 30% Euro ancestry; so of course they are more diverse.

Diveristy = Stronger

*Brainwashed Americans*

 

[Colonel_Reb]

Good point Tired old White. In my quick and infuriated reading of the article, I failed to take note of that. In most types of research that I do in social science, the minimum numbertested from a group before you can make claims as they do here is 30. So they would need 60 total, and Alpha Male is correct as well. It is funny (but predictable) that they didn't mention the likely fact that some (oreven most) of the blacks they surveyed have some European ancestry. This study is flat out bad research, even for Cornell.

 

[voice]

I actually read the whole article and where did they get genetically weaker from ?? Less Diverse doesn't mean genetically weaker.

Selecting for IQ to build modern civilization whilst having disadvantageous genes in other places is considered genetically weaker?

Laughable...

 

[Van_Slyke_CF]

As would be expected with the "out of Africa" theory, the researchers found Africans had the greatest amount of genetic diversity, followed in turn by Middle Easterners, then Europeans and South Asians at about equal levels, then East Asians.
Native Americans had the least genetic diversity of all, indicating that part of the world was settled last.
Instead of diversity, we should be talking about absurdity here. I don`t care about the findings of this research. They can talk about "harmful" things in our DNA related to some sort of "genetic bottleneck" all they want, but, if you ask me, it helped weed out African influenceto the greatest extentpossible. It`s what made us white and proud and made Asians what they are, Native Americansetc. Do they think there is somethingabout Africa and its peoples that we should be envious of? Look at what we have done in Eurasia and the Americasoverthe past 10,000 years and compare it to Africa.Look over here inAsia where I am.I have a helluva a lot more respect for this continent too than I do for anything from the Dark Continent.
Whatever could have been responsiblefor the so-called bottleneck about 30,000 years ago anyway? Strangely those Neanderthal died out completely around the same time-if the experts are to believed.So our ancestors were hardy enough and clever enough to survive whatever environmental changes were going on, but the Neanderthal couldn`t, the incredibly robust ones, if the experts are to be believed.
Africa-there is a reason it ismissing from the world map on another recent thread.
Thank God I`m white.

 

[Alpha Male]

Contrast this from the outlandish response of James Watson's finding. He was ostracized and called a racist, and this is research from a Nobel Peace prize-winning scientist. Cornell's study, which doesn't even have the minimal sample size of 30, is spun by the media as definitive proof whites are inferior. The black and white handshake says it all. This country has gone to sh*t.

 

[Don Wassall]

I love how you find speculative crap like this casually stated as fact:
It's been known for years that all non-Africans are descended from a small group, perhaps only a few dozen individuals, who left the continent between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago.
But the Cornell study, published in the journal Nature Thursday, indicates that Europeans went through a second "population bottleneck," probably about 30,000 years ago, when the ancestral population was again reduced to relatively few in number.
The doubly diluted genetic diversity has allowed "bad" mutations to build up in the European population, something that the more genetically varied African population has had more success in weeding out.
Yeah, right. I'm all for the scientific method, but 99 percent plus of what's authoritatively stated as scientific truth as if from on high will eventually be contradicted by different scientific "truth." Science is the State's religion, and most of its "revelations" havelittle more validity than the wisdom of voodoo doctors.
And a sampling of just 20 whites and 15 blacks is laughable. This article is nothing more than pure anti-white hate propaganda, as vile and blatant as anything written about blacksin the bad old days we're supposed to spend our lives feeling guilty about.

 

[Alpha Male]

So true Don. Are we all out of Africa??? I posted a study a while back stating out of Asia. [url]http://www.castefootball.us/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6034&K W=Alpha+Male[/url]



Edited by: Alpha Male

 

[Quiet Speed]

Now somehow in these locations after or during the bottlenecks the hearty, diversified African went the way of the dodo bird. Where's the weaker genetics in that? The diversified genetics lost out under their conjecture.

For a really really politically incorrect view on the Out of Africa theory, check out <a href="http://www.rafonda.com/origin_of_humans.html" target="_blank">
The Age and Origin of the Human Species</a>. Even the multi-regionalist would consider it x-rated for extreme.

The last paragraph :

Yet another challenge exists to the claim that our species radiated out of Africa. There is a consensus among anthropologists that s. sapiens' cultural artifacts display a higher level of cognitive function than all previous species. The technical level and diversity of their tool industry alone would have set them apart. Add to that whole new categories of behavior: the creation of representative art, the domestication of the dog etc. Thence we would expect that the populations which were hybridized with predecessor species would be intellectually and cognitively disadvantaged in relation to low-diversity, Eurasian populations. In fact we do observe that Eurasians are cognitively advantaged in comparison to high-diversity populations (Herrnstein and Murray, 1994), which clearly reveals the direction of species radiation. Expressing this view however is likely to attract such vehement abuse that few dare speak it openly. Only those few whose livelihood is not subject to the fiats of "wimmin and minorities" can openly state the truth on this subject, and even then their views are ruthlessly censored.



Edited by: Quiet Speed

 

[GiovaniMarcon]

Next time I come out of 7-11 on the way home from work I'll make sure to give a dollar to the two fat-a$$ed homeless drunk black morons panhandling outside to thank them for being so genetically superior to me.

 

[Solomon Kane]

Let's see...whites have kicked black ass in every war from the Egyptians defeating the Nubians (and then forbidding them entrance into Egyptian territory) (1500 BC) to 87 Brits defeating 4,400 Zulus at Rorke's drift (1879), to the White victories over blacks in the urban gang wars of the 50's.

On top of that, we have the obvious superiority in mental and aesthetic accomplishments...where are the great black philosophers, architects,...where is the black Bach? the black Michelangelo?

 

[GiovaniMarcon]

Let's see...whites have kicked black ass in every war from the Egyptians defeating the Nubians (and then forbidding them entrance into Egyptian territory) (1500 BC) to 87 Brits defeating 4,400 Zulus at Rorke's drift (1879), to the White victories over blacks in the urban gang wars of the 50's.



On top of that, we have the obvious superiority in mental and aesthetic accomplishments...where are the great black philosophers, architects,...where is the black Bach? the black Michelangelo?

The typical black response to these assertions is either that the white achiever is in reality black somehow, or else the white achiever is merely a cover boy for the blacks who did the actual work or were the actual geniuses.

Example: If white men successfully explore space, it's only because the black man invented the rocket and never got credit for it.


Disgusting.

 

[Trooper Thorn]

Blacks more susceptible to more diseases as differences in immune systems found

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7270562.stm


Note the different wording in the two stories - For blacks its just a difference for whites its a weakness and a sign of genetic inferiority.

 

[JD074]

The discrepancy between the title and body of the article says it all. The title focuses on the notion that whites are "weaker" than blacks, but the article states that East Asians and Native Americans are even less diverse (in other words, "weaker") than whites. That they singled out whites is all we need to know about the purpose of this propaganda.

 

[White Shogun]

It should be obvious to anybody with eyes that whites are the most diverse people on earth. The description 5'5, black hair, and medium skin tone describes about 90% of the rest of the planet.

 

[ToughJ.Riggins]

The discrepancy between the title and body of the article says it all. The title focuses on the notion that whites are "weaker" than blacks, but the article states that East Asians and Native Americans are even less diverse (in other words, "weaker") than whites. That they singled out whites is all we need to know about the purpose of this propaganda.

Bingo! You hit it JD!