Sign into an existing account

I completely understand where you're coming from. 12% in the highest concentrations in a single region doesn't sound too crazy on paper. This isn't the whole story, though.

Just looking at the 12% number, for every no nigger there's a quarter nigger running around. No one thinks the pure celts living in Portugal for a millennium are niggers. But, there are definitely Spaniards who don't make the cut at whiteness. 12% is too high. The majority of the people there are not quite the same as pre-occupation.

Remember, for every AOC who might fool you from a distance, there's a Jeb's wife. In this case, both of them are still niggers.

I agree with some of what you said.

I have no idea what the origin of Rh- is? Can you cite any sources on this subject? Im very skeptical on origin of the Wheel and bronze use being at 35 kya. Those things happened around 3500 - 5000 ya. Has someone established a correlation between red haired gene and Rh- status?

You are assuming that a single genetic population with a continuity of culture lasted for 35,000 years and theres nothing like that in europe or anywhere else. Theres too much genetic and cultural turnover during that period.


I agree. White people domesticated themselves, at least in part. Climate was clearly another major factor in our differences from blacks for example.


Im aware of these experiments.


Right now we are living in a very dysgenic time

I don’t think this is biased. CHG is not of middle eastern origin. Its of caucasus origin which straddles asia and Europe. Georgians are not middle easterner. Middle easterners, north africans, turks, persians are all heavily descended from CHG, not the other way around. CHG was one of the bottleneck populations to survive the LGM in west eurasia as western eurasians had to move south to escape glaciation in the caucasus “refugium”. But the majority of the ancestors of CHG and Dzudzuana came from further north prior to the LGM, from something like aurignacion culture. They (mostly) split off from the same ancestry as WHG although some are arguing they have some “basal eurasian” contribution, nobody is suggesting thats the majority of their ancestry. Anatolian farmers also had mostly northern roots prior to the LGM.


Yes I see your ancestry map. Most white europeans have relatively low contribution from late mesolithic WHG. It peaks in the baltics at ~50% but I think its 10% max in places like Britain. That map is probably calculating your contribution of magdalenian villabruna cluster WHG and maybe some EHG (WHGxANE hybrid), which is a very specific post LGM population. What you don’t understand is that even groups like natufian and taforalt have high contribution from europeans of the mesolithic and upper paleolithic. Another hint at this is that WHG’s main Y haplogroup (I) and CHG’s main haplogroup (J) diverged from haplogroup IJ pre-LGM.


West Eurasian didn’t know where the border between europe and asia was. But west eurasians diverged from east eurasians 45-50 kya, just after the divergence of “basal eurasians” (notable for lack of neanederthal DNA) from all other eurasians. Subsequently west eurasians split off into ANE, CHG and WHG. Elements of all three moved into the ME and NA, mixing with Basal Eurasians. Now middle easterners have more basal eurasian than norther europeans, to be sure. But they still have majority west eurasian ancestry from people who lived north of the middle east and ultimately north of the caucasus, prior to the LGM

Now we can argue which direction genetic flow is going till the cows come home. I happen to embrace the multiregional evolutionary hypothesis which rejects a strict interpretation of OOA. I think there was continuous exchange of genetics between africa and east and west eurasia among homo species for at least 2 million years. And I believe the major “innovations” to homo species were coming from homos living in colder climates, including greater reliance on meat/hunting and higher IQs to survive harsh winters. Which areas were sufficiently cold for higher IQ selection would depend on the climate conditions of the era. The pre-neolithic indigenous indian populations were too far south to advance farther than aussie abos and central africans.

MENA populations were much darker than they are today before the neolithic, as were SE Asians (who weren’t even chinky). Mutations in pigmentation from the European/siberian region (Siberia was dominated by West Eurasian related ANE) were the source of the light skin mutations in caucasoids today, particularly SLC-24A5 and SLC-45A2. European genetics lightened the pigmentation of middle easterners.


Yes, indirectly. The elites who ruled ancient egypt had levantine roots which were ultimately heavily derived from CHG. There are plenty of papers establishing that modern MENA populations are heavily derived from CHG and older pre-Lgm european migrations.


Yeah I agree, we see that sort of thing going on right now with welfare. I am right about polygyny. Polygyny was not favorable in colder more humid european climates. Its probably the main reason for Europe’s genetic success over the ME in the last several thousand years.


You’re literally trying to denigrate megalith culture. Im not the biased one here.


Do better! Thats a cop out.

The same phenomenon occured in E. Eurasia and even in pre-columbian america. Cold climates are the “engine” of innovation in homos/humans and when smarter cold climate people move into warmer climes they take over/outbreed locals (India is another example) and have more resources to live at higher populations densities which accelerates cultural development.