Although HBDers deny that they believe some races are superior to others, their critics claim that they do, and in this case, the critics are correct. J.P. Rushton argued that there was an Oriental > White > Black hierarchy partly caused by the time period when each of the three races branched off the main trunk of the human evolutionary tree: Negroids branched off first and thus were considered genetically primitive, while Mongoloids branched off last and were deemed new and improved.
“One theoretical possibility” said Rushton “is that evolution is progressive, and some populations are more advanced than others.”
The notion of progress seems to imply superiority.
But if the evolution of racial differences was as progressive as Rushton implies, we might not only expect “more advanced” races to be smarter, but more beautiful too. This might even be true of plants where the highly evolved angiosperms are much more beautiful than the primitive slime molds.
I just had a mental image of all the people who think they understand evolution pulling their hair out at how ridiculous this sounds.
Here’s some 2014 data from OkCupid where people were asked to rate various race/gender combinations by how good looking they are.
The percentages show how attractive different demographics consider each other. For example Asian women rate Asian men +24% and rate black men -27% meaning they think Asian guys are 24% more attractive than the average guy, but consider black guys 24% less attractive than the average guy. However black men do much better with black women, who consider them 23% more attractive than average. Unfortunately black men don’t return the favour, ranking black women only 1% more attractive than the average women, while ranking Asian women 2% more attractive.
Averaging across demographics. Asian women are considered the most attractive by men in general, with a mean rating of +7.5%, followed by Latinas (I LOVE Latinas) who average 4.25%, followed by whites who average +1.75%, and lastly blacks who average -13.75%. Sadly, these rankings confirm Rushton’s Oriental > white > black hierarchy.
However when it comes to men, whites are on top averaging +10.75, followed by Latinos +0.25%, followed by Asians -3.75% and lastly blacks -7%.
So why do Asians dominate among women but not among men? If you believe in Rushton’s controversial theory, you might speculate that women like a guy who is little more primitive than she is because primitive men are more muscular and aggressive and thus better protectors, but if he’s too much more primitive, women get scared and disgusted.
From this controversial perspective, women are willing to date guys who are one step below them on the evolutionary ladder, but not two.
Meanwhile, men don’t need to worry about being protected, so if they date outside their group, they just go for the best women they can find, and if you believe Rushton’s model, the best are East Asians.
I am reminded of my favorite love story Quest for Fire. In that film, depicting humanity 80,000 years ago, a member of the advanced modern human tribe of East Africans (bottom right in the above picture) had a crush on a caveman (top right), because he was just primitive enough to be more masculine than the scrawny guys in her highly evolved tribe, but she would have been terrified by the super manly Wogaboo man (left) from the most primitive tribe.
Pumpkin Person 
I covered why East Asian men are seen as less attractive.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/02/12/female-mate-preference-and-body-type/
Women aren’t attracted to short men.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12350254
So this is why East Asians come up short (get it?) in the dating game.
More evolved, rubbish, garbage, objective not subjective, etc.
“More evolved, rubbish, garbage, objective not subjective, etc.”
Subjective not objective *
“From this controversial perspective, women are willing to date guys who are one step below them on the evolutionary ladder, but not two.”
This ‘evolutionary ladder’ doesn’t exist. Read my article on female mate choice and attraction, I explain why this occurs.
Are mountain gorillas ”ugly’ race? Just want to know what you think ‘scientifically’ here.
“So why do Asians dominate among women but not among men? If you believe in Rushton’s controversial theory, you might speculate that women like a guy who is little more primitive than she is because primitive men are more muscular and aggressive and thus better protectors, but if he’s too much more primitive, women get scared. From this controversial perspective, women are willing to date a guy who is one step below them on the evolutionary ladder, but not two. Meanwhile, men don’t need to worry about being protected, so if they date outside their group, they just go for the best women they can find, and if you believe Rushton’s model, the best are East Asians.”
In this case then it sort of dampers your idea of “superiority” by progressiveness through the proxy of attractiveness.
First of all your use of “less primitive” in the case of women is called Neotony, the retention of infantile traits and are described a Pedomorphic. Paramorphic traits by contrast are novel or more developed Adult traits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peramorphosis
You could still argue for progressive evolution but just with different gender standards for attraction, but then it becomes and issue with the obvious problem of WHY then wouldn’t Asian men be more “progressive” by peramorphic standards compared to White men if we are to consider this bidirectional model of progressiveness?
But this is just some issues with the interpretation of the data, not even the data gathered itself.
What we are measuring is the archetypes people have of these groups, not necessarily accurate ideas of the mean and variation in appearances.
A better method would be constructing a series of facial composites that reflect both the means and SD distribution in morhpology of different races.
Elaborating on my comment, some examples of each trend in attractiveness in human sexual dimorphism.
Pedomorphic trend in Women- Lighter Pigment, less muscle mass, shorter legs, short faces, reduced robust facial traits.
Paramorphic trends in men- Longer legs, Longer and narrower faces, prominent chins, leaner bodies, etc.
Now neither type of trend is exclusive to each sex, for example longer legged women are seen as more attractive and likewise male arm reach has decrease as well.
However, this does bring up an arguably “better” measure of so called progressive attractiveness, that being sexual dimorphism itself if we compared such to our ancestors.
As for the specific confounds of how this study is measures, it’s less of people not conforming of what is “attractive” but rather how representative the sample of each group they’ve been exposed to is compared to the actual parameters of appearance.
Data from a dating website, illustration from a movie, insight from a charlatan… Lol!
In my opinion, a dating app selects a large share of lame folks. And it’s not a surprise that Asian chicks are so popular, nerds have yellow fever and it’s well known.
Then I guess the data is US data because we only see US racial categories. Who says US also says US racism, so it’s no surprise that blacks are so disliked and it’s also not so surprising that black men don’t crave white chicks as much as they do in Europe.
Anything you infere from Rushton and your movie makes no sense. You only observe attraction patterns in real life, not on the internet.
Actually, to your point of internet versus real life, they are probably more similar in practices using interracial marriage rates in the US and other similar studies like this on US internet samples.
However I notice in the UK for instance that Blacks/White Couple are not only more common but also less skewed between men in women compared to the U.S.
My guess is SES, given how many proportionately would be actual African immigrants compared to the US
Another problem with this study is making “racial” conclusions using the category of Latinos.
The most involved in interracial unions in the UK are Caribbean, Africans are about as endogamous as Asians. Caribbeans are more working class than Africans and they tend to get with white working class girls.
One specificity of Europe where the working class is much less racist than the American white working class. There are no European rednecks but plenty of European white trashes. Europe is like Latin America where wealth and income is the first factor of segregation whereas race comes first in the US.
the lies afro tells himself. sad!
it’s the same in america afro. interracial marriage is LESS common the higher the status. and “working class” whites are MORE racist in europe. so are the euro elite. they’re also much more anti-semitic in europe.
the idea that poor people are stupid and racists are stupid therefore poor people are more likely to be racists is FALSE.
forbes 400 members married to someone of another race. rupert murdoch was married to a chinawoman. he isn’t anymore. george soros also. they don’t have children with these women. they married them when they were old and ugly, because pretty white women wouldn’t touch them.
famous politicians married outside their race? there’s not one US president. there’s senate majority leader mitch mcconnell (no children with dragon lady). there’s secretary of state william cohen (like mcconnell second marriage no children.)
celebrities married outside their race? none that i know of except holle berry (a mulatto) was married to a white guy and mcconaughey (went to an all black high school in texas), though his wife is at least 75% european.
the reality is the higher the status the MORE actual racism among whites, but the far LESS likely they are to express it publicly. the purpose of the jive talk of elite white “liberals” is to make them look good. they actually couldn’t care less.
i guarantee that in time even half abo iggy azalea will marry a white guy. probably an obese jewish record producer or agent.
the bottom line is white men who marry out and white women who marry out are and are regarded as LOSERS.
this is not the way it should be. it is the way it IS.
capiche?
the reason is simple.
poor people of all races are more likely to live near one another, go to school together, work together, etc.
as long as other races remain “strange” however smart, however well educated, subconsciously at least there’s going to be discomfort. (i feel it much less than most, because i had black friends all the way growing up. and i notice how they are not treated well by whites. whites aren’t rude to them necessarily. they just ignore them.)
the american elite is almost exclusively white. and these white people have known very few non-whites, maybe none. i will also guess that the east asians (indians and mongoloids) in california who occupy high ranks are MORE likely to marry members of their own race. when you have a choice, you do. this is the rule.
the white american and european elite is concerned with their own status. that’s it. the jive is to promote their status. they care about nothing else. duh!
think of the one “white trashes” afro has named. the footballer riberry. he married an algerian muslim and converted. not technically interracial, but in france the muslims are like blacks in the US. they live in poor ghettos and they are discriminated against in hiring. their school performance is abysmal.
afro will deny this. but afro is DULUSIONAL obviously.
if they could promote their status by joining the nazi party, the nationalist party, or the confederate army…they’d do it….and they did.
this is why hillary was right regarding race relations when she said she wanted laws; she didn’t want to “change people’s hearts”.
today overt racism is considered very low class in public. on the golf course it’s different. the reason is that whites for whom being white is important are losers. nothing else makes them important. rich white people fear poverty much more than they fear black crime, so they must dehumanize poor whites. that is, they must imagine that there’s no way they could ever have been poor; poor whites are a separate species.
texaco had to have paul newman do ads for them, after its c-suite was recorded making racist comments.
so in general it can be said, “the more diverse your workplace, the lower your pay. the more diverse your neighborhood the poorer it is. the more diverse your school the shittier it is. ubc for example.”
by “the nationalist party” i am obviosuly referring to the south african national party. the party of hendrik verwoerd. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Party_%28South_Africa%29
the point is, racial minorities think they have “friends in high places” they’re delusional.
again. not the way it should be.
the way it IS.
against this theory is tidjane thiam. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidjane_Thiam
this guy may be very smart but his cv SCREAMS that his CS appointment was AA on steroids. i mean he came from insurance. insurance is the bastard child of finance. much lower status than banking or real estate.
LMAO! I can’t even.
Where do I start?
Ok, a few facts to begin with.
1- Among minorities, the higher the education level, the higher the probability of marrying out with a similarily educated spouse.
2- In the UK, 1.2% of children under 16 were Black Caribbean and 1.1% are mixed black Caribbean and white British, that’s almost 50% of the young population of Caribbean heritage being mixed, This is unimaginable in the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_African-Caribbean_people#Recent_history
This although Black Caribbeans are one of the lowest performing group in terms of SES. And most of these unions happen in the working class to which most of the belong.
3- There is no miscegenation taboo in Europe, the reason why upper class European whites marry fewer non-whites is that there are very few non-whites at this level of wealth and class culture. But the few non-whites that are at this level almost always marry whites, only have white friends and so on. It differs from the US where there is a black bourgeoisie that’s appart from the white bourgeoisie.
4- The European upper class is more international than the North American one. First, the European upper class is European, secondly, the European upper class has strong links with the ex-colonies and their indigenlus elites. Most families have members from the ex-colonies and other European countries.
5- The working class, and all classes, are much less racist in Europe than in America. Ethnic ghettos don’t exist, there are neighborhoods with high concentrations of non-whites but whites are always the majority or the plurality in these neighborhoods. And I would say whites are the most open to out mariage. Africans an MENA people tend to be endogamous, South-East Asians and Caribbeans are on the level of whites.
6- There is anti-muslim racism in France but it’s nowhere close to what blacks experience in the US. The segregation is much lower, police persecution too, people aren’t really white conscious and we don’t have racially motivated ideologies and policies like libertarianism, gun rights, war on drugs… There is populism, but no European populist would say a tenth of what Trump said and Europeans wouldn’t have elected a Donald Trump, the worst we’re able to is Berlusconi.
i start here.
points 1 through 6 are all FALSE.
you’re either delusional or lying.
sad!
You’re either retarded or retarded.
medallion!
sad!
It differs from the US where there is a black bourgeoisie that’s appart from the white bourgeoisie.
you’re a joke afro, just not as funny as jerry lewis.
sad!
jesus christ france is fucked!
with a similarily educated spouse
DUH!
here’s a plan afro.
shut up.
I’m overwhelmed by the depth of your insights 🤡
Robin Thicke and Paula Patton? David Bowie and Iman? Kanye West and Kim Kardashian? John Legend and Chrissy Tiegen? Ryan Gosling and Eva Mendes?
Jamie Foxx and Katie Holmes, Robert de Niro and his wife, Selena Gomez and The Weekend, George Lucas and his wife, Eddie Murphy and his wife, Mug of pee and his right hand…
@Afrosapiens and others:
The reason why Europeans are more open minded about interracial dating and miscegenation is simple. The number of non-whites in those countries is low and therefore there isn’t much alarm yet about white European beauty being replaced by African sub-Saharan features. White European features are the norm and not considered special… yet. Eventually this will change, especially as the percentage of whites in European countries shrinks. At some point, white Europeans will develop a stronger sense of identity and a greater sense of pride in their European white features and beauty and how it makes them distinct and sets them apart from non-whites. At this point, there will be a greater desire to preserve white beauty than to destroy it by mixing out.
There is a reason why white South Africans are so endogamous. They are only 7% of the South African population and therefore have a strong racial identity and take pride in their smooth, flowing hair, European bone structure, slender pointy noses, thinner lips, light eyes, light skin and everything else that distinguishes them from the black masses.
To put it very simply:
-In Europe and America currently: A white majority woman marrying a black man and producing a black child with sub-Saharan features, who looks nothing like the white mother = cool and exciting
-In South Africa: A white minority woman marrying a black man and producing a black child with sub-Saharan features and thereby contributing to the decline and extinction of the white South African race and European beauty = NOT cool and NOT exciting.
Given time and endless immigration, white Americans and Europeans will be in the same situation as white South Africans and will become just as endogamous.
@Ian Smith
“the reason is that whites for whom being white is important are losers. nothing else makes them important.”
What a smart man you are, blabbering such mindless left-wing nonsense. That claim you made is a big blanket statement. Most whites, like me, value whiteness because we love and cherish white European physical beauty. To me, white European women are the most beautiful in the world by far. There is simply no comparison; even the best looking Asians and black Africans can’t compete with even the 6/10 white women out there. I love the pale skin, the round eyes, the smooth, flowing hair, the slender noses and lips, the straight vertical facial profiles, the light hair and eye colours of white women.
I oppose race mixing as it is impossible for an interracial couple to produce fully white-looking children. It is impossible for an interracial couple to produce fully white daughters who will look like Sage Watson, Sofia Jakobsson, Rose Leslie, Elizabeth Hurley, Cindy Crawford, Katheryn Winnick, Sabina Gadecki and Charlotte Hope. Look at Heidi Klum’s children with Seal: Not only are they hideous by my white standards, but they are also fully sub-Saharan looking. They look nothing like their white mother. It is an absolute tragedy.
Interracial relationships will bring about the decline and eventual extinction of white European beauty, and I hate that. I don’t want a future world where everyone in Europe, from Norway to Greece, looks sub-Saharan like Tiger Woods, Leroy Sane, Naomi Osaka and Jordan Peele. No thank you. The beauty of whites, which took 60,000 years to develop, needs to be preserved in Europe.
The anti-immigrant parties will be getting my vote.
Some actual scientific data from the add health study:
Women rated by men:
Men rated by women:
Now it makes sense.
What makes that data more scientific?
The add health study is a huge longitudinal study that controls for a lot of variables. Attractiveness ratings are just one of the many things they looked at.
http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/
Well first he judgement was based on actual interaction with live subjects rather than general opinions/perceptions of a populations being relied on.
Click to access Jelte-Kaufman-2011.pdf
And, supplied with this, has context.
Those graphs are a redo of an examination that Kanazawa did of the ADD health study showing that black women were less attractive. He excised a group that scored highly if I recall correctly, thusly skewing the numbers.
Do you beloeve black women are as desirable as white and asian women afro according to these numbers?
Yes, they have a similar share of very attractive and attractive ratings.
peepee will do anything to convince herself that she’s attractive.
she’s not. sad!
ne asian women? gimme a break. YUCK!
they look like 12 year old boys.
UGLY 12 year old boys.
I’m on board this time.
Thats not nice.
Just because you dont find them attractive does not mean they are not.
yes it does.
No it doesnt.
Oh, what about white women? They easily get fat and wrinkled. European-americans are even fugglier and fat. By teenage years, they already look like adults! By age 30 they already look like an old woman! I can give credits to mainland Europe, but United States fucknuggets too many fat women, most of the decent-looking ones are sluts. Whereas asian women retain their youth, their vitality. Ugly 12 year olds, really? You’ve never been to Asia. What if I say that all old white men look like pedophiles?
So here is the answer to the post’s question:
Most attractive men:
1= blacks: 3.41
2= Whites: 3.39
3= Asians: 3.35
4= Amerindians: 3.30
Most Attractive women
1= Asians: 3.51
2= Whites: 3.50
3= Blacks: 3.44
4= Amerindian: 3.40
Both sex average
1= White: 3.445
2= Asians: 3.430
3= Blacks: 3.425
4=Amerindians: 3.325
Add “American” and you would be closer to correct, but better data and conclusions nonetheless.
I write Amerindian because most people understand “American” as US citizen.
These stats make more sense but not specifically in a racial sense. I can easily imagine a link between obesity and the scores of different races of women for instance. Likewise, there is probably a a link between muscularity and the ranking of men. I guess Injuns get the lowest scores because many of them are ruined by alcoholism and obesity.
I meant “american” as a label to clarify what nationality these ethnic samples came from.
Your point on Amerindians makes sense.
Aight, yes it’s an American study on American subjects, results would likely vary a lot from country to country.
Correction:
Amerindian women: 3.42 (n°4)
Amerindian average: 3.360 (n°4)
On the question of how representative a sample are dating apps users. Maybe they are, maybe they’re not but one sure thing is that subscription is not meant to be representative of anything.
My opinion is:
-black folks on those apps are the renegades of the black segments of the sexual market because blacks in the US have more liberal sexual behaviors and don’t need help to get laid.
-Hispanics show a high rate of co-ethnic preference, probably a large share of them are lonely migrants drawn to their country people
-white men are nerds trying to fulfill their anime fantasies
-white women are basic bitches
-Asians are just being Asian, with probably the same lonely migrant factor as hispanics.
I notice East Asians are less represented at the extremes of beauty and ugliness, is there a “they all look the same” factor here?
Blacks look more alike.
Nigeria:
China:
The Chinese all look like cousins whereas the Nigerians all look unrelated.
To Afro,
While both groups appear general similar within their own group, I see what you are saying more in the case of the Chinese team.
The thing is that Philosopher, I’m guessing, had experiences with blacks from New World populations and generally they are going to look closer related due them likely having common origins based on ancestral slave tribes within a general region or SES status.
For example, Virginian lower class blacks were more oftern from the SE nigerian region traditionally from tobacco fields while upper class are descents of Angolan indentured servants.
In nigera, the lower Guinea region in general is very variable not only due to the “stockier” types being said to vary more that taller ones (Sudanids of West Africa) in head/facial features in old anthropology but that they are also mixed with taller ones
through various migration events.
China as ethnic variation, but Due to Han dominance in culture and population, the variation is more pushed toward the North, South, and West.
Philibuster is from Europe and he has experience with Africans. New world blacks have more phenotype variation due to varying degrees of European and Native admixture. Africans and Asians look more alike because their hair and eyes are always black.
On other traits, they vary as much as Euros. See prognathism, many west Africans are orthognathic, I don’t have much prognathism either, big lips exaggerate this impression.
Afro looks the spitting image of my son. Its not debatable.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTUUYSmV3a9CjbViK9woGiPtAB0Bk5CAVTFsw_8awsv7T26h7ZP
If someone, anyone can tell the difference here they must be geniuses even more than pumpkins gestalt tests. I can’t see any difference.
I wore Ralph Lauren polos as a toddler but I never had straight hair. Try again.
I think Afro is playing me big time. Theres no way these 3 people are seperate individiuals. For example. you can clearly see the african person in photo 3, even with the dyed blonde mane looks exactly like the person in photo 1 and 2. Its uncanny.
Black men being voted the most attractive race of men by non-black women is utter nonsense. There is no way that most white women consider dark skin, flat wide noses, huge thick lips, sleepy eyes, protruding mouths and nappy frizzy Afro hair the most attractive. Look at any top 100 most attractive men list by publications mostly read by white women and you will be hard pressed to find a single black man on that list and those who are there are most likely token or voted in because of a phenomenon called “racism/prejudice avoidance” among progressive white people. This phenomenon compels pinko whites to laud some blacks as good looking even though they don’t really believe this, in order to signal that they are not racist.
In this day and age it would not surprise me that a lot of white women will cast a vote for black men out of pity or prejudice avoidance, therefore compromising the data. Beautiful white women are very much in love with their European features: their light skin, slender pointy noses, medium thickness lips, full round eyes, European bone structure, smooth hair, different hair colours and eye colours, European physiques, etc. – this much is very evident, so it would not make any sense for them consider black men, who have literally the opposite features, as most attractive. White women who love their European beauty wouldn’t want black children with African features – that would be cognitive dissonance.
I agree. Asian women being the most desirable is bogus. As a white man, I have never seen an Asian woman who could compete with the 6-10/10 white women out there. I am exclusively attracted to white women. I have no problem with each race considering their own race the most beautiful, but claims that state that among white people, black males and Asian females are considered the most good-looking is utter bogus.
afro is right. skin color is merely supervenient not essential. imho, the facial skeleton is what defines race best and closest to the everyday use of the term. there are caucasians with kinky hair and black skin. there are no caucasians with prognathism, wide noses, or slit eyes. but it’s a gestault. in the case of forensic anthropology the facial skeleton is all that matters if there’s no dna analysis.
Pigment does play some role, but not trump facial skeleton as you put it.
Caucasians aren’t all white people. Caucasians include white Europeans, Arabs, Levantines, Turks, Iranians, Afghans, Kurds, Pakistanis, Indians, – basically people in the geographical area stretching from Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, Eurasia and central Asia.
Therefore whites are Caucasians, but not all Caucasians are white. There are no whites with dark skin or kinky Afro type hair. (African kinky is a whole different level compared to European curly).
Caucasian features are good for enhancing the looks of non-Eurasian, though. Not equally, however.
hence ZERO female sex symbols who are ne asian except in ne asia.
DUH!
flushton is proven wrong as usual.
sad!
You’re confusing beautiful with sexy
Evolution is about reproduction, and reproduction is about sex. So if you wanna make evolutionary hypothesis, you must consider sexiness over beauty. Children are beautiful, and fortunately, they aren’t sexy to a sane person.
I’m talking about something more profound than mere sexual selection.
Can you be more specific ? Or are you just messing around ?
More “profound”? You mean like in an artistic sense in application to human features?
More “profound”? You mean like in an artistic sense in application to human features?
Something like that. The idea that life forms become superior in an almost absolute sense over time & this can be measured by how impressively they look & act
It’s a very controversial idea because most educated people realize that natural selection favours whatever is superior in a local environment but lack the meta-evolutionary understanding to see how evolution can select for more global & absolute superiority
Even i didn’t get it right away & most people can never get it
Too abstract
the one thing that makes afro cry every time. sad!
I bought a new phone, now I can call bullshit.
“Something like that. The idea that life forms become superior in an almost absolute sense over time & this can be measured by how impressively they look & act
It’s a very controversial idea because most educated people realize that natural selection favours whatever is superior in a local environment but lack the meta-evolutionary understanding to see how evolution can select for more global & absolute superiority
Even i didn’t get it right away & most people can never get it
Too abstract.”
Define abstract, because what I reading here lacks any reference of terminology of such an idea.
Also define educated because, pardon, you haven’t exactly “wowed” me with your evolutionary understanding of “black” and negroid in a verified and consistent manner. So excuse me if I’m skeptical of you suggesting something beyond more measurable (and evolutionarily significant) beauty.
BTW, such a concept did exist among europeans….didn’t exactly agree with your suggestions of East Asians.
Poor mug of pee, you think I mind that Schwarzy won Mr. Olympia in 1976 because he’s white ?
1- I don’t give a fuck about pro BBing and winners races.
2- It’s unfortunate that your world stopped in 1980 because you would have known that from 1977 to 2016, four black dudes have won 23 Mr. Olympia titles: Jackson, Heath, Coleman and Haney. Coleman and Haney are the most titled dudes in BBing history with 8 victories each. ✊🏿
Phil Heath is a beast. Only Flexatron Shawn Rhoden has a chance to beat him.
but they weren’t afro-caribbeans from france afro-tard.
And?? Am I supposed to care?
Pp seems like we have many other racist asswipea other than our resident Guido mongrel. Atleast our Guido bothers to post links and comes up with plausible explanations for his pseudo science racial theories other dipahita like Jimmy don’t even do that. Plain racism. Jewish conspiracy theories and blatant sweeping generalisations are becoming the norm. These dickwads have better chance of making their presence felt at racist colostomy bags like dailystormer or vnnforum. Even pusillanimous mangina jared Taylor won’t indulge in these kind of pseudo science blatherings.
“which race is the most beautiful?” is a stupid question.
what does it even mean?
the possibilities:
1. which race is prettiest on average.
2. which race has the prettiest people.
3. which race has the prettiest females?
4. which race has the prettiest males?
etc.
it’s stupid.
the correct answer is white people of both genders will always win the world ugly pageant and the world beauty pageant. get over it.
this is objective!
races of man in order of looking like monkeys:
1. black africans
2. australian aborigines, melanesians
3. ne asians, mongoloids, polynesians
4. native americans
5. caucasians
that’s just the way it is.
Northeast Asians look the least like monkeys
While caucasians have more prognathism, they have larger chins, narrower faces, less dense and wavier hair, as well smaller cheekbones.
Exactly what traits give NE asians the advantage?
Nope, caucasians are the most orthognatic, I’ll find you a link to a very comprehensive study later on.
peepee is making another joke i hope.
ne asians look FAR more monkey like than caucasians.
On Maxillary structure itself or the proxy facial flatness?
If the first that makes sense given how the other lower face details would correlated in favor of less prognathism for europeans.
lol seriously, monkey looking? Asian-men are natural-looking, authentic. Tanned skin is the more advantageous than pale skin. Look out for Global warming because many white people will get skin cancer. White men tend to become more creepy-looking as they get old, they look like pedophiles, and they tend to have pedophilic tendencies than any other race. White people look like they don’t belong to this world at all, they’re like aliens from another planet that’s why they’re hostile to other races on Earth.
i remember when michale palin visited chiner. some women who’d never met a european said, “you have very big nose. your face is very 3 dimensional.”
monkeys have no noses. the probiscis monkey is the only exception.
this is the highest evolution has reached:
sadly. flushton was a pervert afflaicted with yellow fever and stole the pioneer fund’s funds.
you’d have to be autistic not to know this.
No rushton was probably a white nationalist. He probably wanted an all white country.
Of course he was. What Greg Johnson said (veracity of it aside) makes sense—especially with him saying he’s read CoC (everyone here should if you haven’t. You too PP).
Jensen was the opposite. Not caring if East Asians came to be the majority in America—only caring that someone would carry on our American culture.
….That’s hilarious.
Yes Jensen was one of the few social scientists who was almost 100% objective. No political bias
You don’t need to ‘have no political bias’ to see that that statement is incorrect.
except the data shows in theory that idea is hilarious
Jensen was a covi natuonalist ie. He believes america is an idea that was invebted and continued by the genes of whites which could magically be held over to asians and blacks shud the jews succeed in repopulating america.
Ie his odea is illogical because genes chose the rules. Not rules choosing the people as much.
The only races whose men and women are both sexually successful with their own race are white-skinned races, which are Europeans and even more so, on average that is, Jews.
Also Asian women are definitely not the most beautiful in the world on average. The most psychologically intensive men I have met are non-black men. I can’t say definitively say what the association of this is with the pigment of their skin.
Skin pigment isn’t nearly the only observable physical difference. Please don’t tell me that you think that an Albino African looks like a Norwegian blonde. Bone structure, lip size, nose shape, eyes and eyelids, hair type are all different.
Pumpkin,
Why is IQ 170 really high?
You really have not told us what they can do?
I have been taking Klonopin recently and my anxiety is gone but I am so tired that my IQ must have dropped lower than before.
This must mean cognitive alertness allows people to remember and handle lots of information.
Computers don’t get tired, if a computer had high cognitive alertness it would be really smart.
I miss Marsha, she should comment more often, and so should deal with it.
Genetic similarity is still the best indicator of attractiveness people fell for each other.
I said before that I don’t think most models are attractive.
Attractiveness has a ratio of the face and hair color and body proportions.
All you can do is make relative comparisons. Because attractiveness is about clusters of people that you compare who is better and worse.
It’s called the Anima which is the female side of the man that contains all the female attributes inside the male that is the perfect match of what a male finds in the perfect female. Everything else is not a perfect match. Every male has that female inside them that is perfect. This matters because perfect matches are what attractiveness is measured by. The similarity a woman has to the perfection of all the female attributes in the man.
I don’t like models because no model has the perfect attributes of all the females I have ever encountered in my life. The female archetype is every female you have ever seen. And only the best features reach into the Anima which is the female side of the male.
Anyway, pumpkin should tell us why 170 IQ is really intelligent.
How does 170 cognitively adapt better than the rest of us in intelligence?
no. the flushton theory predicts that aliens are the world’s most beautiful race.
I know you’re joking but you’re right
And notice the resemblance to East Asians
The only remote semblance is a round silhouette of their heads. Otherwise, bulging eyes, slim lower face, etc. are obvious and major differences.
Their only link is neotonous features overall, which isn’t necessarily the exclusive trend of “progressive” as I’ve already covered.
I knew you would start saying Ancient Aliens things next.
Would you presume that we would “evolve into greys one day”?
No i believe we’ve gone as far as natural evolution will take us & now we’ll either go backwards, kill ourselves or make the leap to artificial evolution (genetic engineering)
I don’t believe we’ve ever been visited by aliens & consider greys plausible but fictional
“No i believe we’ve gone as far as natural evolution will take us”
What is the empirical evidence for this?
“now we’ll either go backwards”
Why do you contradict yourself? You’re implying a ‘teleology’ to evolution—when biological organisms adapt to their surroundings mainly through natural selection weeding out the ‘not fit enough’ leaving ‘those fit enough’, changing the genome. Evolution just happens and for you to say that ‘backwards evolution’ would occur implies you don’t understand evolution.
“make the leap to artificial evolution (genetic engineering)”
Maybe. I’m buying a book on this soon.
“I don’t believe we’ve ever been visited by aliens & consider greys plausible but fictional”
It’s possible; I think about it sometimes but there is no empiricism to it.
Evolution just happens and for you to say that ‘backwards evolution’ would occur implies you don’t understand evolution
No, you just don’t understand what backwards means.
“No, you just don’t understand what backwards means.”
Toward or into the past is the way I assume you’re describing it.
Natural selection is local change based on the environment. Things may change in the environment, which, to ‘us’ (well, some people who don’t understand evolution) looks like ‘progress’ and ‘deevolving’ (whatever that means), yet evolution, again, just happens.
Depending on the conditions of that particular environment, a biological organism will either genetically adapt or perish. It’s that simple.
well, some people who don’t understand evolution
Yes, J.P. Rushton, Arthur Jensen, E.O. Wilson, Dale Russel, Charles Darwin, and Princeton emeritus professor John Bonner all don’t understand evolution, yet some 90 IQ guido does? Hilarious.
Appeal to authority. Ad hominem. More and more fallacies. Good job.
Darwin had contradictory writings on “progressive evolution”. You can look into that yourself though. There is actually a lot to read about it and I’ve pointed you to numerous books on the matter yet you still cite the same shit, citing the same people. It’s tiring. You still have no explained how a selection process that changes every generation is “progressive”. Citing Rushton and the people he cites in his book is useless, I’ve rebutted that.
Do you want to discuss Wilson’s views on “progressive evolution” next?
Natural selection is local change. Evolution occurs based on the environment which changes. If the environment changes then the genotype changes which in turn would change the phenotype. Natural selection is local change, not “progress”.
Keep with the fallacies though. It’s cute.
Citing Rushton and the people he cites in his book is useless, I’ve rebutted that.
You haven’t rebutted shit. You couldn’t even qualify to be a student at the university Rushton taught at, and you have the delusional arrogance to think you rebutted his ideas? If you even tried to walk into Rushton’s class he would have screamed “HELP! HELP! SOMEONE CALL THE POLICE! GET THIS PRIMITIVE GUIDO AWAY FROM ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
More and more ad hominem attacks. Why don’t you use three ad hominem in your next reply for the hat trick, eh?
That doesn’t change your ad hominem and appeal to authority fallacies, which I shouldn’t respond to.
More and more ad hominem attacks
It’s all you deserve when you make idiotic claims like that you’ve rebutted Rushton. Dale Russell, E.O. Wilson and John Bonner. Do you have any idea how delusional you sound?
If you think copying and pasting a few quotes from Stephen Jay Gould rebuts some of the greatest minds in 20th century biology then you’re a fucking idiot.
“If you think copying and pasting a few quotes from Stephen Jay Gould rebuts some of the greatest minds in 20th century biology then you’re a fucking idiot”
Another idiotic, baseless attack. You’re just full of fallacies. Again, appealing to authority. Assuming my motivation too.Can you get any more fallacious? I’ve never appealed to Gould’s authority. You’ve appealed to Rushton’s (imaginary) authority in biology however.
Left and right walls of complexity. Remember that.
Keep with the fallacies man.
Another idiotic, baseless attack.
HEY! WATCH YOUR FUCKING MOUTH! DON’T YOU EVER TAKE THAT TONE WITH ME AGAIN YOU LITTLE SHIT.
Left and right walls of complexity. Remember that.
Sigh. The complexity wall explains nothing once you get beyond a very basic level of complexity. There’s no wall preventing brain size from shrinking, and yet the average relative brain size of mammals has tripled over the last 65 million years. That’s a long-term progressive trend.
I’m right.
You’re wrong.
GET OVER IT!
Of course there is “no wall” preventing brain size from shrinking, yet, and we’ve been through this a ton, our brain size has specifically begun to decrease in the past 10 to 20 thousand years.
I believe that was a nutritional change, not an evolutionary change, but even if it was a genetic change, so what? It’s the exception that proves the rule. The long term trend over all mammals is a tripling of relative brain size in 65 million years. You can dispute almost any scientific hypothesis by cherry-picking subsets of data. Proves nothing RR.
You don’t seem to understand that energy drives evolution. Less quality energy equals smaller brains.
That makes it even more impressive that relative brain size tripled. There were huge selection pressures to shrink brains to save energy, and still progress marched on for 65 million years and the same thing happened in dinosaurs.
Nutritional changes can select for genetic changes over time. If a gene is epigenetically altered to cause side effect X and then a gene that’s elsewhere in the genome helps to fix the negative side effect, then positive genotypic selection should occur. Though the nutritional change would need to last long enough so the phenotype doesn’t revert back.
Right. Dispute, cherry pick one sub set of data, etc. You can continue parroting Rushton and REB until your face turns blue, you won’t be right though.
Progress didn’t “march on”. Recall to the Dmanisi erectus who had a smaller body due to lower energy intake, along with people’s isolated on islands and in rainforests—they all have decreased body and brain sizes. So tell me that brain size isn’t predicated on energy quality.
If mammals had arisen late and helped to drive dinosaurs to their doom, then we could legitamately propose a scenario of expected progress. But dinosaurs remained domininant and probably became extinct only as a quirky result of the most unpredictable of all events—a mass dying triggered by extraterrestrial impact. If dinosaurs had not died in this event, they would probably still dominate the large-bodied vertebrates, as they had for so long with such conspicuous success, and mammals would still be small creatures in the interstices of their world. This situation prevailed for one hundred million years, why not sixty million more? Since dinosaurs were not moving towards markedly larger brains, and since such a prospect may lay outside the capability of reptilian design (Jerison, 1973; Hopson, 1977), we must assume that consciousness would not have evolved on our planet if a cosmic catastrophe had not claimed the dinosaurs as victims. In an entirely literal sense, we owe our existence, as large reasoning mammals, to our lucky stars. (Gould, 1989: 318)
I know you’ve never read Gould, PP. It’s painfully obvious.
Nutritional changes can select for genetic changes over time.
Of course but I doubt that’s what happened in the last 20,000 years
Progress didn’t “march on”. Recall to the Dmanisi erectus who had a smaller body due to lower energy intake, along with people’s isolated on islands and in rainforests—they all have decreased body and brain sizes.
More exceptions that prove the rule. Like citing every female giant in the World and thinking it will debunk the male > female height gap.
So tell me that brain size isn’t predicated on energy quality.
Everything needs energy to evolve RR. It’s like saying bigger brains wouldn’t have evolved without oxygen or water or the sun. No shit.
If mammals had arisen late and helped to drive dinosaurs to their doom, then we could legitamately propose a scenario of expected progress. But dinosaurs remained domininant and probably became extinct only as a quirky result of the most unpredictable of all events—a mass dying triggered by extraterrestrial impact. If dinosaurs had not died in this event, they would probably still dominate the large-bodied vertebrates, as they had for so long with such conspicuous success, and mammals would still be small creatures in the interstices of their world. This situation prevailed for one hundred million years, why not sixty million more? Since dinosaurs were not moving towards markedly larger brains, and since such a prospect may lay outside the capability of reptilian design (Jerison, 1973; Hopson, 1977), we must assume that consciousness would not have evolved on our planet if a cosmic catastrophe had not claimed the dinosaurs as victims. In an entirely literal sense, we owe our existence, as large reasoning mammals, to our lucky stars. (Gould, 1989: 318)
But Dale Russell showed relative brain size WAS increasing among the dinosaurs, and extrapolating the trend line, he predicted they would have reached near-human intelligence by now had they not gone instinct. Even if bigger brains are beyond the reptilian design, there’s no reason to think many of their descendants would have evolved into non-reptilians thus lifting any constraints on brain size.
I know you’ve never read Gould, PP. It’s painfully obvious.
And it’s painfully obvious you’ve never read Russell, who unlike Gould, wasn’t busted for smearing another scientist by publishing fake data.
Whats your opinion of ‘the’ grays race? Ugly or beautiful? Just want to know what mr scientists personal trainer thinks.
“Of course but I doubt that’s what happened in the last 20,000 years”
….So you haven’t read The Ten Thousand Year Explosion.
“More exceptions that prove the rule. Like citing every female giant in the World and thinking it will debunk the male > female height gap.”
How are those exceptions that prove rules? If energy intake were equal (100 percent nutritionally the same) and there were a difference then you can say that. However, what a human—any animal eats—dictates a lot about it, especially how it lives its life.
“Everything needs energy to evolve RR. It’s like saying bigger brains wouldn’t have evolved without oxygen or water or the sun. No shit.”
You fail to see its importance though.
“But Dale Russell showed relative brain size WAS increasing among the dinosaurs, and extrapolating the trend line, he predicted they would have reached near-human intelligence by now had they not gone instinct.”
I ordered the book Rushton cited.
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/an-odyssey-in-time-dale-a-russell/1112375407?ean=9780802077189
So let’s see what it says word for word.
Dale Russel’s dinosauroid is pretty funny. Such anthropometric bias (the usual).
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/dinosauroids-revisited-revisited/
Talking about what Troodons may have looked like (highly, highly, doubtful. The anthropometric bias was pretty strong) is a waste of time. I’ve stated this a few times and I’ll state it yet again: without our primate body plan, our brains are pretty much useless. Our body needs our brain; our brain needs our body. Troodons would have stayed quadrupedal; they wouldn’t have gone bipedal.
“And it’s painfully obvious you’ve never read Russell”
Astrobiology is cool and all, but talk about speculation…
Thinking of this thought experiment of a possible ‘bipedal dinosauroid’ we need to be realistic in terms of thinking of its anatomy and morphology.
Let’s accept Russel’s contention as true; that troodons or other ‘highly encpehilized species’ reached a human EQ, as he notes, of 9.4, with troodons at .34 (the highest), archaeopteryx at .32, triconodons (early extinct mammal of the cretaceuos) with a .29 EQ, and the diademodon with an EQ of .20.
Table 3
Click to access 10.1016%400273-1177%2883%2990045-5.pdf
None of these species had the morphology to resemble anything like us, so a humanlike brain would be pretty meaningless. You also have to think of species body plans—that is, if large brains lie outside the capability of repitlian design—which I think is highly likely.
Then let’s accept his contention that a humanlike EQ would have evolved. Would we have anything resembling what we have today? You’re fooling yourself if you say yes.
None of these species would have been able to have the bipedality we do, nor would anything like our hands evolve—as Melo says, which I agree with—I’d say somethiing like an ocotopus would be able to do some pretty neat things, especially how they’re able to manipulate their environment.
The brain needs the body and the body needs the brain. The brain without the body is useless.
“who unlike Gould, wasn’t busted for smearing another scientist by publishing fake data.”
We have this:
“‘There is prima facie evidence of racial bias in Morton’s (or his assistant’s) seed‐based measurements. This argument is based on Gould’s accurate analysis of the difference between the seed‐ and shot‐based measurements of the same crania.” and “Gould made some analytical errors which were uncovered by Lewis et al., but his two most important claims—that there is evidence that Morton’s seed‐based measurements exhibit racial bias and that there are no significant differences in mean cranial capacities across races in Morton’s collection—are sound.”
Click to access remeasuring-man.pdf
and this:
Click to access KAPGOM.pdf
Both papers are critical of Gould as well.
The debate is clearly not over. Why so quick to jump to conclusions without seeking out every last bit about something?
….So you haven’t read The Ten Thousand Year Explosion.
WTF?
How are those exceptions that prove rules? If energy intake were equal (100 percent nutritionally the same) and there were a difference then you can say that.
You’re missing the point RR. The average relative brain size of all mammals tripled in 65 million years. That’s a long-term progressive trend and not something restricted to a local environment. Did bigger brains require more energy? Of course. They also required more oxygen and blood flow and larger craniums and 100 other things so the way you keep obsessing over energy over and over again is very strange and inappropriate.
Maybe you’re still obsessed with the importance of cooking, but that only played a potential role in the evolution of human brain size, it can not explain the overall trend in increased encephalization across all mammals and dinosaurs for that matter.
I ordered the book Rushton cited.
OMG you’re actually spending money ordering book in the desperate hope of finding a flaw in my argument. That’s funny.
So let’s see what it says word for word.
Shaking in my boots. LOL
Talking about what Troodons may have looked like (highly, highly, doubtful. The anthropometric bias was pretty strong) is a waste of time. I’ve stated this a few times and I’ll state it yet again: without our primate body plan, our brains are pretty much useless. Our body needs our brain; our brain needs our body.
No shit. But bigger brains cause selection for a body that can manipulate the environment, and greater manipulation then selects for even bigger brains which then further selects for a body that can make use of it. It’s called a feedback loop and it had already started, causing troodons to be six times more encephalized than other dinosaurs. Russell merely extrapolated the trend into the future and found they would have reached homo erectus level by now, and like erectus, they may have even discovered cooking, which may have helped them to make the leap to human intellect or beyond. Does that mean they would have looked similar to us? Maybe, maybe not, but the point is, evolution would have likely found a body type that allowed them to exploit their huge brains.
Troodons would have stayed quadrupedal; they wouldn’t have gone bipedal.
Troodons were bipeds. OMG LMAO!
Astrobiology is cool and all, but talk about speculation…
No Gould’s claim that dinosaurs would never have become smart was speculation. Russell was making an educated guess by simply extrapolating a trend line in time.
You also have to think of species body plans—that is, if large brains lie outside the capability of repitlian design—which I think is highly likely.
Birds lie outside the reptilian design as traditionally defined, yet they’re descended from dinosaurs and some of them have evolved incredibly large brains for their bodies.
That’s going to have to be the last word RR, otherwise this debate will never end, and I still have to wrap up our brain-size expertise discussion in the other thread.
maybe peepee meant whites look more like neanderthals.
that’s true.
but neanderthals did not look like monkeys. for one thing they had yuge noses.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/87/bc/99/87bc999c3c1683ebc8915de630ea47f3.
black africans look less like monkeys than ne asians and most caucasians in one respect. cephalic index.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cephalic_index
I see what Afro is talking about and it’s what I expected, the face is “flat” but the maxillary bones are more prominent than in Europeans.
Actually asians have the least prominent maxillary bones:
Left = less developed Maxilla
Right = more developed Maxilla
However, they probably have a higher rate of bimax due to their smaller neotenous chins:
Also asians are less likely to have wisdom teeth than other races, so go figure.
Are you talking about the angle that they protrude forward or the actual length of the bones as I meant the latter when observing the skulls.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2884890/
I suppose “deep” would be a better word.
(accrding to the chart) In South East Asia (and maybe parts of South China, which is not specified) and the Himalayas (incl Tibet) they are prominent (more so than in some Europeans and some Subsaharan African groups). But seemigly In North East Asia less developed
Edit: “…Himalayas (incl Tibet) they are apparently often more developed (or roughly equally so)…”
prognathism and size of jaw bone are two different things.
To Ian,
are you referring to me or Jm8? Technically there is a association between the maxilla/mandible size and the bones jutting forward.
Regardless, both aspects generally decreased over the course of human evolution.
To Ian:
prognathism
To Ian:
Sorry. I meant I was referring to prognathism ( I must have misremembered your comment as asking me which I meant).
Who is Ian?
To The Philosopher:
“Who is Ian?”
I was responding to Ian Smith, whose comment came after my second one, and to whom Phil78 also responded.
ne asians look like their faces have been smooshed in a horrible accident. sad!
Don’t exaggerate… What I personally dislike in East Asians is the dullness of their faces and the flatness, shapelessness of their bodies, plus short stature. I fucked a few Asian chicks by curiosity, liked their tight pussies, I guess their men don’t enlarge it too much.
Please try to keep your comments classy.
Aesthetically speaking smaller bodies look better with smaller private parts. A big p*ssy looks awkward on a small body.
Lol, you guys are grown folks, you can handle graphic language. A big pussy is always gross but the size of the outer parts is not related to the size of the inside.
do you have a tight pussy or a loose pussy afro?
leading santo along like you did was cruel.
Afrosapiens, lmao why don’t you just say you hate their physical appearance instead of listing everything out 🙂 Also, I’m sorry, I didn’t know that looking like porcelain dolls(which is the beauty standard in korea, japan, and china) looks as if their “faces have been smooshed in a horrible accident.” Because, obviously, that’s what you would use to describe delicate porcelain dolls. And apparently, Afrosapiens, the few asians you’ve met now represent the billions of asians you have not met in northeast aisa. makes sense
Oh yeah lol, let me take those cringey back. That was very ignorant of me to generalize like this. I didn’t write the “horrible accident” thing though. I told mug of pee not to exaggerate.
I have a theory as to why asians look like they do, i think its because during the last ice age, east/north east asia was super windy. And their faces/.eyes evolved to combat it. Their eye lids seem like they are protecting their eye balls from something.
West africans look like they do because they evolved in west african rain forests. Rain forest are super humid (thats why you find them less hairy and their head hair is curly to let sweat evaporate faster) and full of fruits. And equatorial forest fruit eating involves a lot of sucking. Thats why they must have evolved big lips and prognathism. And wider noses to combat humidity. A narrow nose is probably less effective at keeping moisture out i suppose. A friend of mine had the narrowest nose in our group. And she used to feel suffocated more quickly than all of us, when in a crowd.
While caucasoids occupied areas that were intermediate between these two ecosystems.
Dont ask me to cite a study, as these are strictly my own conclusions 🙂
” And equatorial forest fruit eating involves a lot of sucking.”
Where do you get this idea?
“Thats why they must have evolved big lips and prognathism.”
prognathism reduction is due to eating softer foods like meat or grain compared to harder vegetation that was more common in Australian and African environments.
Other races without it to a wide extant pretty much feasted on game or grain farming.
Lips were also a humidity/ heat factor as well, as you see that decreasing usually with wide noses.
Tropical forests and tropical area fruits involve more sucking as they are smaller (berries) and even if the fruits are bigger like mango/custard apple they involve more sucking. While fruits found in areas farther from the equator like apples, grapes, dont involve that much sucking. Fruits like water melon are found in tropics true but found in drier areas not in west african rain forests where blacks evolved.
You say lips were a humid/heat factor can you elaborate?
They too ate meat and grain too. A human can hardly survive on fruits alone. And
I think eating harder vegetation gives you more powerful jaws (a squarish jaw like some people have) not prognathism/big lips.
Someother factors also might have contributed to these IDK, but i think these factors definitely played a role.
Your point about grain gave me another reason for their evolution, just now 🙂 Maybe its not hard grain but the kind of grain they ate that might have also contributed to big lips. Northern people eat/ate wheat/barley/rye more right? Wheat is eaten not as grain but is made into breads. Even grains like rye etc are made into various kinds of breads in northern areas. But in southern area grains like rice, some millets are still eaten as grain even after cooked. It just becomes softer after cooking thats all but still remains as a grain form factor. Those grains cant be made properly as bread.
So since they are still eaten in grain form factor bigger lips might have evolved to keep the grain from falling out of the mouth too.
Aesthetic reaons might have also contributed to a wider/nose bigger lips combo. In nature facial features of various living beings are often symmetrical than assymetrical. Nature must have tried to make their facial features more symmetrical for aesthetic reasons. A wide nose/thin lip combo or a narrow nose/thick lip combo might not look good.
Why would nature care about aesthetics? 🙂
Simple…nature wanted us to mate and have offspring (Well atleast until the year 2010). Same reason nature made sex pleasurable.
West Africa is not dominated by rainforest.
And West Africans originated in the Sahara when it was a savanna.
“Tropical forests and tropical area fruits involve more sucking as they are smaller (berries) and even if the fruits are bigger like mango/custard apple they involve more sucking. ”
Do you have info on how people in these areas actually eat, because sucking would be pretty inefficient for a human to get energy from fruit.
Plus would smaller mouths be more beneficial towards sucking?
“While fruits found in areas farther from the equator like apples, grapes, dont involve that much sucking. Fruits like water melon are found in tropics true but found in drier areas not in west african rain forests where blacks evolved.”
“Blacks in West Africa mainly ate some game but primary vegetation such as roots, leafy vegatables, etc. Berries weren’t that common.”
“You say lips were a humid/heat factor can you elaborate?”
Click to access jnma00280-0021.pdf
“Differences in lip size and structure are also
anatomical variations that are related to environmental
adaptation. In general, individuals from colder climates,
have thin, inverted lips and those from hot climates
have thick, everted lips. Thin lips tend to conserve body
heat and prevent their freezing and damage in severely
cold weather (Allen’s rule states that exposed portions
of the body decrease in size with decrease of average
temperature). Conversely, thick, everted lips tend to
radiate more body heat and thus cool the body.
Individuals with thick, everted lips who live in cold, dry
areas often experience chronic chapping, drying, and
splitting.”
“They too ate meat and grain too. A human can hardly survive on fruits alone. And
I think eating harder vegetation gives you more powerful jaws (a squarish jaw like some people have) not prognathism/big lips.”
Prognathism is a preserved, not developed trait, and is associated with larger jaws as well, which blacks also have.
They did get grain, but they were one of the latter people to adopt/develop it and they traditional ate less meat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_African_cuisine#Vegetables
You can survive with both vegatable and occassional meat, that how humans ate for ages.
“Someother factors also might have contributed to these IDK, but i think these factors definitely played a role.
Your point about grain gave me another reason for their evolution, just now 🙂 Maybe its not hard grain but the kind of grain they ate that might have also contributed to big lips.”
Well first of all Australian Aborginals don;t even have basic agriculture traditionally, so how did they get big lips?
Second, as I said before, grain farming in West Africa was more recent compred to other people traditionally using it. I said that it reduces prognathism as it is used for softer foods.
“Northern people eat/ate wheat/barley/rye more right? Wheat is eaten not as grain but is made into breads. Even grains like rye etc are made into various kinds of breads in northern areas. But in southern area grains like rice, some millets are still eaten as grain even after cooked. It just becomes softer after cooking thats all but still remains as a grain form factor. Those grains cant be made properly as bread.”
Alright, as I said, it was used as a softer food.
“So since they are still eaten in grain form factor bigger lips might have evolved to keep the grain from falling out of the mouth too.”
Humans generally don;t have trouble keepinf food in their mouths, and i already have proof that lip size is unrelated to eating.
“Aesthetic reaons might have also contributed to a wider/nose bigger lips combo. In nature facial features of various living beings are often symmetrical than assymetrical. Nature must have tried to make their facial features more symmetrical for aesthetic reasons. A wide nose/thin lip combo or a narrow nose/thick lip combo might not look good.
Why would nature care about aesthetics? 🙂
Simple…nature wanted us to mate and have offspring (Well atleast until the year 2010). Same reason nature made sex pleasurable.”
Read my link and you will see nose shape is also climate related, not aesthetic.
While humans are technically not perfectly symmetric, we belong to a group of animals that basic body design IS essentially symmathic in regard to basic shape.
The type of asymmetry you are talking would be comprably slight. For example, naturally, both nostrils on a person would be generally “wide” or “thin”, just one would be larger or smaller than the other.
AS,
1) Thats only a recent picture of rain forest in west africa. Extensive deforestation happened in west africa.
2) What i am about to furthur say could be scandalous as i am arguing against established evidence.
I think after AMH evolved from apes in the savannah, a line of AMH went into west africa when the sahara savannah was turning into a desert while a line of AMH stayed in the savannah and some of them later migrated to asia. And the group that went into west african rain forests evolved into the current west-africans. Why do i think this way? Because west african faces/bodies are a perfect perfect fit for rain forests, more than they are for the savannah or desert which sahara later turned into. This is the reason they are better sprinters too than anybody else as forest animals prey or predators run quickly for shorter period as thick vegetation doesnt support long-distance escapes or chases. And blacks too evolved this way in order to hunt or escape from them.
I am not saying they lived in the forest 24/7, i am saying most of their times were spend in forests for hunting/gathering/collecting grain etc.
Phil, no i dont have any ‘info’ what i strictly found in african rain forest. These are strictly my own observations and conclusions. I have been saying this from the beginning. Just because i dont have citations doesnt mean what i am saying is not unscientific. You might wonder why am i even discussing this if i dont have evidence to link to? 🙂 This is a site where we can bounce off ideas off each other, even though we dont have ‘evidence’ as long as what we say makes atleast some basic scientific sense.
I inferred that smaller fruits that involve more sucking are found in african rain forest because my country is a tropical country with some rain forests too and it has those kind of fruits which i talked about.
”Prognathism is a preserved, not developed trait, and is associated with larger jaws as well, which blacks also have.”
Okay, when a line of AMH (like i said above in the comment to AS) went into the rain forest from savannah, they preserved prognathism,big lips while lossing body hair and developing curly hair on the head, while the line of AMH that stayed in the savannah lost a little bit of prognathism/thickness of lips while not losing as much body hair as west africans.
And maybe my grain hypothesis is wrong,
but eating smaller fruits and roots definitely must have contributed to preserving prognathism and big lips (along with the need to expel more heat through lips like you said).
As for australian abo’s having bigger lips not all of them have as big as lips as the purest west africans. Also remember they too lived in the ‘hot’ savannah so they too needed to expel heat through lips. This explains their big lips 🙂 But notice they dont have as much prognathism or hairless-ness as west africans since they spent less time in rain forests.
”Read my link and you will see nose shape is also climate related, not aesthetic.”
Didnt i too say that wider noses evolved to combat higher humidity? But you are right those must not have evolved for aesthetic reasons since the need to have colder adaptations alone can explain it. Instead nature simply could have wired men in colder/drier climes to find these features attractive .
“And maybe my grain hypothesis is wrong,
but eating smaller fruits and roots definitely must have contributed to preserving prognathism and big lips (along with the need to expel more heat through lips like you said).”
Why when you offer no evidence?
“As for australian abo’s having bigger lips not all of them have as big as lips as the purest west africans. Also remember they too lived in the ‘hot’ savannah so they too needed to expel heat through lips. This explains their big lips 🙂 But notice they dont have as much prognathism or hairless-ness as west africans since they spent less time in rain forests.”
Actually they live in the desert, which is less humid so that possible explains it. For Example, Arabs in the Gulf having fuller lips than Northern Europeans or Even Southern Europeans having fuller lips.
Also, Australians actually have MORE prognathism if you look at “anon’s” chart above.
Nope, rainforests select for pygmy type phenotypes, west Africans are perfectly adapted to savannas.
To K,
on the Lip thing, I’ve already have a link saying it is for climatic reasons, so why say “definitely”?
“Just because i dont have citations doesnt mean what i am saying is not unscientific.”
Yes, yes it does when you would need it for credibility.
This map seems to be before the 1980’s when deforestation occurred in West Africa, still mostly Savannah.
In fact, deforestation is irrelevant, the reason why West Africa can’t be dominated by rainforest is climatic. A rainforest needs an equatorial climate that provides yearlong abundant rainfall. West Africa has a tropical monsoon climate with a 6 months long dry season. A dense forest can’t grow under such circumstances.
To Afro,
To your credit, that actually lines up with what anthropologist observed in Black Populations approaching Central Africa.
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/552-Egon-von-Eickstedt-s-quot-Das-negride-Afrika-Krperformgruppen-quot
In terms of variation, Blacks local to the Guinea and Central Africa were described as having both less Prognathism and thinner lips compared to those of the Savannah which approaches what is seen in Pygmies.
To K
“What i am about to furthur say could be scandalous as i am arguing against established evidence.”
It’s okay to have ideas, but it’s not good to frame it to compete with pre-existing knowledge unless you have either evidence to support your own or at least missing holes in the typical narrative.
It’s pedantic otherwise, especially with those more educated on the topic. It’s like a regular Joe given his intuition on how the Moon is made of cheese to anyone who reads astronomy.
To Afro,
Your knowledge on climate basically frames another thought I had, that does a former Rainforest automatically become Savannah Land by *artificial means* despite the conditions to qualify as one to be lacking.
I mean South America has a much Higher rate of deforestation yet climate Maps still place it as a Tropical Forest area.
https://www.google.com/search?q=deforestation+map+of+south+America&safe=strict&rlz=1CAACAJ_enUS665US665&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi_38u5vfnTAhVBTmMKHR57CB0Q_AUICigB&biw=1366&bih=630#imgrc=6urGd_ywpIh1pM:
The Sahel vanishing into desert, despite being at least in part artificial, is Still clearly an example of desertification which is a far more universal case of climatic zone transitioning.
Phil, there is no evidence because nobody looked for it. Because no study (that i am aware of ) was conducted to determine why prognathism and other features that are are found in west africans are found a lot in in them and not in others. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. There was no ‘evidence’ for oxygen in our atmosphere before the 18 th century…does it mean it doesnt exist?
PP, please put a reply button directly underneath the replies to comments people make.
There are only reply buttons on the first few comments in a subthread to avoid the subthread from getting too indented.
AS, by ‘west africa’ i didnt mean the ‘entire’ western africa.
Phil, prognathism is more common in sub-saharan africans as compared to caucasoid, mongoloid. (commonly taken to mean west africans) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prognathism
Also look at images in google search for autraloid and west-african people, it seems to me that ‘prognathism’ is just as much common in west-africans and australoid. But this could be due to later intermixing (sex) of some west africans with australoid. Why? Because just as many australoids seem to have caucasoid level prognathism/lips too while west afrcians seems to have less of them. This contrast wouldnt have been possible if they were a ‘unmixed’ race
West Africa is commonly defined as the area between the Sahara to the North, the Gulf of Guinea to the South, Senegambia to the West and the Cameroon Highlands to the East. The Congo rainforest is in Central Africa and has a very low population
I mean the contrast in australoids.
Africans and Australoids never mixed, they are very distant genetically.
“Phil, there is no evidence because nobody looked for it. Because no study (that i am aware of ) was conducted to determine why prognathism and other features that are are found in west africans are found a lot in in them and not in others. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. There was no ‘evidence’ for oxygen in our atmosphere before the 18 th century…does it mean it doesnt exist?”
In my previous comments I used a link that directly explains Big lips for instance, so there are studies.
Also, just because you don’t look for studies doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
“AS, by ‘west africa’ i didnt mean the ‘entire’ western africa.
Phil, prognathism is more common in sub-saharan africans as compared to caucasoid, mongoloid. (commonly taken to mean west africans) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prognathism”
I said Australians and more prognathism, not those races.
“Also look at images in google search for autraloid and west-african people, it seems to me that ‘prognathism’ is just as much common in west-africans and australoid.”
I told you to look at the study above, which is more reliable than just looking at pictures.
” But this could be due to later intermixing (sex) of some west africans with australoid.”
There is no evidence of this based on genetic profiles of the two.
Look at Australia, then look at West Africa. WHat migration do you know off that could’ve happened in the past 50k-80k years that would explain race mixing as you call it?
“Why? Because just as many australoids seem to have caucasoid level prognathism/lips too while west afrcians seems to have less of them. This contrast wouldnt have been possible if they were a ‘unmixed’ race”
No, it would be possible because just because a race is more variable in traits than another it doesn’t mean “race mixing”. It could be to selective forces being weaker or stronger in different areas.
K,
On Hominid Prognathism
“The broad pattern of variation in the hominid facial skeleton has highlighted the influence of the environment, both in evolutionary time (climate) and on a local scale (diet). In the last 5 million years, the lower face has displayed considerable variation. These differences are largely due to changes in the size of the teeth and in the power of the chewing muscles; both of which can be affected by
local environmental conditions. This shows the potential to adapt to rapid and dramatic changes in the environment, which has enabled modern humans to colonise all parts of the world (Gamble 1993).”
http://www.academia.edu/4981691/Facial_prognathism_in_the_hominid_and_human_species
I’ve now explained both prognathism variation and how big lips developed.
As for human variation.
Click to access efa4bf7ab04bfbe307f9870a21707baa0eab.pdf
pg. 123.
I agree that this table shows prognathism to be more similar than the table directed you to (the other table was a different measurement), however this shows Australians and melanesian groups have less variation in prognathism compared to Africans if you look at their distributions.
Afrosapiens, lmao why don’t you just say you hate their physical appearance instead of listing everything out 🙂 Also, I’m sorry, I didn’t know that looking like porcelain dolls(which is the beauty standard in korea, japan, and china) looks as if their “faces have been smooshed in a horrible accident.” Because, obviously, that’s what you would use to describe delicate porcelain dolls. And apparently, Afrosapiens, the few asians you’ve met now represent the billions of asians you have not met in northeast aisa. makes sense
Once again we have a discussion about aesthetics and nobody dares mention the most beautiful race in the world.
As afro knows.
The danes.
Feinstein and wasserman schultz are the monroe and bergman of our age. I posted a pciture of afros gf a while back. Im still seeing stars.
if asian women are the most physically desirable women then asian men must be the most the most physically desirable men by necessity
we know thats not true so the whole thing falls apart
another failed HBD theory down the drain
The entire HBD asian thing is purely the product of sexual frustration
They are tired of rejection so they go for the easy asian chicks
The easiest women i have ever met were chinese then koreans then japs
when i was in Hong Kong in 2007 the chinese women were like dogs in heat
It was embarrassing
Jimmy, if you want to be taken serious, work on your dichotomy of ideologies.
HBD is merely the concept of population differences rooted in genetics. What you are arguing against is the mainstream HBD theories, or more precisely those popularized by Rushton.
Otherwise, you clearly believe in the concept. We already have Philosopher and Ian around to troll around the comment sections.
Notice how he always gets hurt whenever i mention some hard truths
every time he reads my comments he thinks i’m talking about him
he’s right
” your dichotomy of ideologies ”
what a poser lol
i always skim passed your comments because they are just too cringeworthy
“Notice how he always gets hurt whenever i mention some hard truths”
Who? I have no idea who you are specifically referring because this is the 1st time you’ve responded to me. You mean Pp or Afro.
“every time he reads my comments he thinks i’m talking about him
he’s right”
First actually specify who you are talking about.
“what a poser lol
i always skim passed your comments because they are just too cringeworthy”
Did I use “dichotomy” incorrectly? All I said was that you clearly don’t disagree of genetic differences in HBD and only disagree with theories under the concept.
So exactly what makes me “awkward” to read? I actually address science while all you do is through a link or anecdote around and concluding HBD is crap.
Okay no need for you two to start feuding
Jimmy is valued for his political insights & phil78 is valued for his anthropology knowledge.
“if asian women are the most physically desirable women then asian men must be the most the most physically desirable men by necessity ”
Correct, and this is what people have trouble understanding. White women are the most beautiful women in the world by far and only white men can create white women, provided they mate with a white female. That means that white men produce the most valued and sought after beauty in this world. The consensus among all races, except maybe African blacks, is that black women are the least good-looking, which makes the allegation that black men are the most attractive race completely bogus, as black men produce black women no matter whom they mate with. A black man and a white woman will produce a mixed-black daughter with African bone structure, nappy Afro hair, flat nose, thick lips, black eyes and droopy eyelids. Therefore one cannot consider the black males as the most attractive, as what they produce are most definitely not considered beautiful by other races who are not virtue signalling.
The fact that black men manage to attract women from outside the black race is due to the large penis stereotype, which is admittedly very successful. I would venture a guess that 90% of white women who enter into relationships with black men only do so because they have an infatuation with the black penis, and don’t really find the faces and other African features, especially the Afro hair, of their black male partners good-looking. They merely put up with those undesirable features for the sake of the black penis.
Either that or a lot of white women who enter into relationships with black men suffer from extreme cognitive dissonance and fail to grasp that by getting impregnated by a black man, they will be throwing away their white European beauty they take so much pride in by having black children. They simply don’t think that far ahead.
A few white women might genuinely consider brown skin, flat noses, thick lips, mouths and chins that protrude far beyond the forehead, droopy eyelids, nappy coiled Afro hair and sleepy, black eyes the most attractive, but I believe they are an extreme minority. It just doesn’t make sense how white women could be so in love with their own European features and then at the same time love the totally opposite sub-Saharan features.
There can be gendered traits that decrease the attractiveness on one gender on one race and not the other, like genital size or body size. So if asians got better faces, yet smaller bodies, that would mainly only harm the Asian men. I personally only focus on face so thats what ill do. Asians have larger, higher and more smoothly surfaced cheekbones. Thats a killer right there. Their skin age well. Elongated eyes are less prone to have deformities like we see with the most round eyed populations like Africans or medditeraneans.
The mayor advantages for whites are smaller eye sockets and narrower noses, or teutonics specifically beuase their narrower noses have lower volume istead of having wierd deformities and they are the ones with the smallest eye sockets.
But i dont really care becuase I’m of the belief that many traits “ideal form” are culturally aqired while others are pogrammed to be liked universally. But some anecdotes do indicate another view, that all sexually desired traits are learned, only that different traits have different plasticity.
Blacks are definately not admired by our culture but you apply these traits in an exaggerated way. Focus on distributions and not absolutes. And try to operationalize it so that bias is minimized, becuase the subject discussed is evidently filled with it. Imagine if we would rate which kinds of foods were the best tasting.
I shouldn’t say wierd deformities becuase of the third paragraph. What i meant were the more frequent noses of non Teutonic Caucasians, which look wierd by american standards.
Working out saud are vassals of big z was quite brilliant. But then saying they pounded the oil market to tank russia was more far fetched in my opinion. Good stuff all round.
Robert saying jimmy thinks the chinese communist party are crypto jews made me laugh a long while.
Play aoe 3, its a step grade fromr aoe 2. So good.
So good.
My fav games were
Oblivion
Pro evo football 2004
Resident evil code veronica
Shadow of rome
Hitman series
Gta series
And a special mention for sonic 2, streets of rage, shinobi, shadow of the colossus, okami and kingdom hearts for more nostalgic reasons.
video games past mario kart are autistic.
” Pro evo football ”
ISS ….. Fake names ….. legendary era
The FIFA games did not take off until they copied the engine of ISS/Pro evo
“Gta series ”
I was addicted to the 2-D one .
when it comes the modern 3-D ones, i didn’t do any of the missions as i would just punch police officers and then make them come after me in a high speed car chase
I would also use the helicopters and just wreak havoc on cities
Some games are immersive experiences, rather than games per se – like Okami or Vice City. You really felt you were back in the 80s in that game.
you’re both autistic crypto danes.
i forgot bill deblasio, boris becker, heidi klum, and robert deniro all have/or had jungle fever.
black guys may find it easier in europe. it’s not american racism, it’s the same reason that a brown eyed woman in norway is more attractive ceteris paribus.
Black men are rarer in Europe and therefore not perceived as a threat to the genetic white European beauty. There are too many white people, white features are considered the mundane and ordinary and producing mixed children with blacks who won’t look white and instead will look more “exotic” is considered cool and exciting… AT THIS STAGE.
This will inevitably change. As whites decrease as a percentage of the population of European countries, they will eventually reach a point where they will begin to value their white identity and the features that make them distinct from other races. This will result in greater unity among whites and a greater resistance to mixing out with other races. Whites who enter into interracial relationships with non-whites will decrease dramatically as a percentage of total whites, as most whites will develop a strong desire to preserve white European beauty and they will take pride in how their flowing, smooth and light hair, light eyes and fine facial features set them apart from the blacks, Arabs and Asians.
There is a reason why interracial relationships in South Africa are almost non-existent. Whites being only 7% of the population has infused them with a pride in their European beauty and physical features and a belief that endogamy is the right thing to do to preserve their uniqueness. This will happen in Europe too, eventually. Europeans will only welcome tolerate their population becoming increasingly sub-Saharan in appearance to a point. They will never allow themselves to disappear. The human desire to be and look unique and distinct is too powerful.
there are beautiful people of all races. what all non-caucasoid beuatiful people have in common is an approximately caucasoid facial skeleton.
why do i like the witch look…to an extent? because it’s an exaggeration of the most distinguishing caucasoid facial feature and the facial feature which most distinguishes humans from apes.
you can see in the above how mongos rook rike monkeys.
the witch could never be from any other race. the huge pointy nose. the pointy chin. these are exaggerations of caucasoid features, and they make the witch look very un-monkey-like.
mongos also have an edge to edge bite, whereas caucasoids have an overbite. another monkey feature.
Aha.
Ive just realised who withces are supposed to parody.
Very good philosopher.
For centuries men have viewed controlling women as nags but when the man is a Gentile and the woman is not, the witch imagery began to emerge. Seeing Bill O’Reilly grow frustrated with Jennifer Rubin shows how this dark chapter in our history happened:
Jen Rubin is the most despicable of the CIA’s blog/Washington Post’s propogandists.
Unlike many autistic or brainwashed journos, I’m pretty sure she is aware of her role and why she must push Iraq Wars, Russia and so on.
Wicked Witch indeed.
Great article ! Short but efficient. Thann you
former alpha #1 ridicules french people. SO TRUE!
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/francias/2877574?snl=1
this is what americans actually hear afro!
pure chest hair:
sad!
btw, i myself do NOT have a big nose…at least by european standards. it’s medium and (has always been) perfectly straight.
point of art…and another example of covert racism among the white elite-ish…my nose has never breathed well. i tried every remedy. i had a deviated septum. this was partially corrected in the only surgery i’ve had. it was NOT rhino-plasty, so jimmy can fuck himself. it didn’t even work very well and made me look worse.
the point of art et seq?
the surgeon told me that septoplasty was recommended only for caucasians. other races never had a problem.
imagine if the white man could breath through his nose…
then he’d have something.
…could breathe through…
“it was NOT rhino-plasty, so jimmy can fuck himself ”
Jewish surname + nose job
how deep does the rabbit hole go ?
you even mentioned that your maternal grandmother called your dad a ” nice jewish boy”
I think your moms dad agreed to the marriage on the condition that any kid they have be raised christian and not be told of his dark paternal family history.
I think its time for you and your dad to have a long overdue discussion.
it wasn’t a nose job retard. and no one except a retard like you and my grandmother would think my name was jewish.
my dad’s dad used to talk about how great hitler was.
the video depicts one of the many defects of frog talk.
french is a legato language. it must make up for this with tone. otherwise even french people wouldn’t understand each other.
tonal languages are gay.
german is staccato but it has 4 noun cases and 3 genders. it’s gay. english has 2 noun cases and 1 gender.
just like species, languages evolve. some dominate. survival of the fittest. french is just UN-fit. sad!
english is OBJECTIVELY the world’s best language and the EASIEST to learn.
afro will deny it…
in a century or two the world will have ONE language. that language will be ENGLISH.
but afro is DELUSIONAL obviously.
that is, english personal pronouns have objective, nominal, and personal cases and gender.
outside of personal pronouns english has no genders…and 2 cases.
english’s 2 noun cases are possessive and not.
when a single person of indefinite gender is referred to, he is referred to with “he”, not “they”. this is the elite custom. it is NOT male chauvinist, as “he” in this context is understood to be male or female.
english nouns also have a singular and a plural…which is conveniently identical to their possessive and not cases.
until afro can explain the utility of french’s male/female genders for every noun he must accept that french is INFERIOR. there are many other reasons why french is inferior, but this afro must explain.
the one and only. the greatest. arnold schwarzenegger.
French isn’t tonal language and it doesn’t have pitch accent either.
English has three genders (masculine, feminine, neutral) and yes it is very easy to learn although the orthography is often counter-intuitive. English would be even better if it had an actual future tense.
Why are you putting words in my mouth?
I never said there is a logic in French genders, it makes sense for proper nouns sometimes like un Range Rover (big car, masculine) une Twingo (small car, feminine) other times it makes no sense like le Japon, la Chine, le Mexique, la Colombie. Sometimes gender is useful to find what someone is exactly talking about in a sentence. A native speaker knows the gender of a word instinctively and almost never makes mistakes, it’s always extremely funny when they do.
And no, people won’t give up their native languages for English, it’s not even happening in countries where English is an official language. However, it is likely that virtually everyone in countries with efficient school systems will speak both English and their mother tongue in 100 years.
your mouth is already full afro. but not of words.
french isn’t tonal like chinese. that’s not what i meant. in french tone doesn’t define a lexeme, but it does mark a string of sounds as a lexeme. the french sound like birds chirping. if they didn’t they would be unintelligible to one another. and by “tone” i don’t mean pitch. that’s only part of it.
i’m talking about french’s “suprasegmental” charcteristics.
this is all made very obvious in the video above.
I can’t play the video cause it’s blocked in France in copyright grounds. But I speak French everyday and I can tell everything you said only exists in your head.
convenient excuse for a moron. use an american proxy afro-tard. do i need to tell you how?
afro…sad!
just plain sad!
No, don’t tell me how. You’re clueless about French language.
actual standard French here:
There is no such thing as your suprasegmental bullshit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_phonology#Stress
in future you might read your own citations before posting them.
https://vk.com/video419325_151743355
BS, no French person talks like that. We don’t raise our voices like this at the end of sentences.
Large languages like Arabic, Mandarin, Hindu, Spanish etc. will never go away. You have to consider that that whites, who are the primary first language English speakers, are shrinking in number by the day.
even though english is the easiest language to learn and the best…
part of why it’s the best is that the difference between intelligible novice and master is greater than that of any language.
hyperbolically speaking: english is easy to learn, impossible to master.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushnell's_Law
there is no mastering english even for its native speakers.
it’s not a fixed language. this is why it’s the best language.
it’s an organism. like V’Ger in Star Trek: The Motion Picture.
it’s not really a language at all.
its sole purpose is to make french people look ridiculous.
peepee is lucky i’m almost two bottles deep in argentine red.
i’ll tell her a “secret”.
the best “horror movie” ever made was released…this year!
pearls for swine. sad!
but it takes a yuge IQ to get it.
which is it? dunkirk?
it’s one of the movies on this list. released on netflix in 2017, not in theatres.
https://moviepilot.com/posts/3749186
Ewww, who drinks new world wines? There are only two countries that can produce wine that deserves the name wine: France and Italy.
more bullshits from afro.
new world wines ALWAYS win blind taste tests.
sad!
Blind taste tests performed by Americans without wine education, new world wines are so unsubtle, if a pal came visit me with some crap wine like that I’d take it as an insult. It’s a bit like the abomination that Americans dare to call cheese. Americans are gastronomically retarded.
Best wines:
1-Bourgogne
2-Bordeaux
3-Chianti
the french are so behind.
the official story is that the Beatles and the Stones are the best pop bands.
sad!
the Who, the Floyd, the Doors are better.
jimmy likes the Led.
sad!
the most played band in bathhouses.
Bacci d’Italia, ragazzi.
How Mug of Pee became big JJ.
You should see the chinese non jewish version of that ad…..
Weren’t you saying that Italy isn’t under jewish influence the other day?
And I saw the Chinese copy and it’s laughable.
They kept the Italian music and chose an ugly skinny Chinaman.
Under less influence. Italy is in the EU. And they hounded Berlusconi out as I’ve been saying.
and an ugly skinny italian not arnold’s only competitor, franco.
italians are BY FAR the most homophilous europeans…at least in america.
it’s sad!
Is Latino a race or is it Asian+Black or something else ? Are arabic people Black+White ?
And among each race, there is so much variety. Even for white, celtic+scandinavia+north med with pale skin doesnt look the same ? If ashkenazi jews are white, they may look like all varieties of white from red-hair, blond, brown hair with pale or dark skin.
Latinos are a linguistic group, but generally they’re a mix of Spanish Caucasoid and South American Mongoloid with a splash of black.
Depends a lot on the country, In the Caribbean and parts of Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Panama and Nicaragua, the African component is stronger than the Native one.
And of course in Brazil too, I thought you were talking about hispanics instead of Latinos.
PP, I have been meaning to ask you this and now reading this comment gave me the right context. Fair skinned argentinian or brazilian women seem to look similar to quite a few fair skinned indian women atleast of india’s northern most states. Infact a brazilian girl played a part in an indian movie as a fair skinned indian girl and many thought she was indian until the news about her nationality came out. (sure there might exist height and physique size differences but that can be explained by more beef/meat consumption of latinas over indian girls but the faces look quite similar). So if latinas are mix of european, mongoloid and blacks, how could they look similar to fair skinned indian girls who seemingly are a mix of only caucasoid and australoid but have no mongoloid or black component.
Well indians are a mix of caucasoid and Andaman islanders who are physically indisdinquishable from negroids so it makes sense
Latinos are basically anyone with Amerindian/Mestizo genetics.
For that reason, Spanish/Portugeese peoples in my opinion are not latinos, although the phenotype is similar. But the personality and abilities are very different.
If we Control+A, then Control+Delete everyone with European Spaniard/Porto ancestry in Latin America we get the descendants of the Amerindians and Magical Negroids. So expect a 30% GDP drop per person.
Sailer makes a point I wouldn’t have known until I discovered HBD. Most of the Latam elite are (1) often direct descendants of the conquistadores, (2) marry fair skinned women, hence the fair skinnedness of the arisotcracy.
This relates approximately to the generic elites of nations, including India and of course Africa, were ‘red skinned’ auburn coloured women are valued according to Sailer.
Skin tone is but one of many differences. A black African albino does not look like a Norwegian, even though they are pale with blonde hair. Bone structure, lips, noses, hair type, eyelids, eye shape, body proportions, etc. are all different.
That makes sense. If they are 40% white 100 +40%south-asian 95 + 10%capioid70 +10% congoid85 , their IQ should be av. 93.5.
It would be interesting to see if there is a difference among east-asian and south-asian preferences. I feel that people prefers Thai, with their big lips, sensual demeanor and dark skin, to the round face chinese or very pale and exotic japonese. And I remember that in the mating game, asian – wheter female or male – was in fact a huge put off for most people (male for their alledged lack of virility and women for their inexpressive face).
In France, i would say that blond women and black men – when educated and posh – are the one getting most attention in upper level society for date. For mating, interacial marriages are more seen into lower levels of society yet (even if i’ve attented some).
I think I’ve never seen an east Asian chick that was more than just cute. And I’ve never seen an east Asian guy that made watch out for my girl or that I saw as a serious competitor while playing game.
Now a further corollary – if conquistadores rule Latam for 200 years in de facto feudal oligarchies. Doesn’t that completely run counter to Pumpkin’s theories about intelligence?
On hereditary lineage grounds.
On the fact soldiers and explorers got enthroned, not scientists/astronomers/philosophers/chemists/doctors?
Any brief look at world history shows nature favours warriors the most.
And thats why I can see why its important to be tribal.
For example many jews look white. There couldn’t be a greater difference between the two races. Arguably jews are more a polar opposite to whites than blacks.
The Economist is simply unhinged and unreadable these days.
1 article on why nationalisation is stupid. Rothschild facilitated the 1980s privatisation schemes and in fact was the brains behind it according to Niall Ferguson in his book.
1 article on why there should be class based airplane travel to ‘stop air rage’.
1 article on why the immigration ban is ‘self defeating’ as it shows the world (i.e. jewish media) that the people are ‘not open for business’ (i.e. jewish scams).
People should burn the Economist in a daily ritual and spill goats blood over its cover to mark its satanic underpinnings.
As Mikey Blaze was saying, many of these people are avowed satanists, not as an ironic thing. But I suspect because, like J Rubin above, their aesthetic shows they really are [rest of comment redacted by PP, may 17, 2017]
Why won’t afro go out with a mountain gorilla? I don’t get how someone can keep claiming hes against racism and at the same time not date a gorilla.
IMG]http://i66.tinypic.com/2yy80vp.jpg[/IMG]
Answers?
I scored 80 on picture completion,
How am I supposed to get this image?
Pumpkin, please explain the neuroscience of picture completion?
If we are talking about “being more evolved”…
Caucasoids clearly have more progressive facial features than East Asians.
Though they are more primitive in body type and skull shape and size.
Actually no seeing how they have longer legs.
More primitive in the sense of being more muscular (and hairy)
How is muscularity primitive ?
To oversimplify, when you have a big brain you don’t need big muscles.
I suppose you mean that by “less primitive”,or less ancestral, you mean that Asian are neotonous.
Technically that not off but if we are going to interpret that as “more evolved” and thus superior….yeah not exactly hit the mark.
“To oversimplify, when you have a big brain you don’t need big muscles.”
Yet European Colonialism was a thing nonetheless.
“Yet European Colonialism was a thing nonetheless.”
Is you point saying that Europeans might be smarter than Asians because they were able to colonise the whole planet ?
I don’t know, may be. What I know is that Asians have bigger brains, higher IQs, shorter reaction time than Whites.
because an adult chimp female can rip your arm off with one tug afro-tard.
“Is you point saying that Europeans might be smarter than Asians because they were able to colonise the whole planet ?
I don’t know, may be. What I know is that Asians have bigger brains, higher IQs, shorter reaction time than Whites.”
Not necessarily, but that little chapter in history sort of dampers PP’s assertion of “superiority” towards asians.
Being neotonous and Hairless with short limbs doesn’t exactly scream “superior”, especially not much of a trade off of a few IQ points (comparing the highest of Europe to the highest of Asia that is).
If we are going to agree that superiority as a valid concept, why play around with theories when the theory itself in biology as been attributed to Caucasians ever since the idea persisted in early acceptance of evolution as well as a history of advancing technology and using it to achieve resources fitting PP’s requirements?
That makes his repetitive cling to Asian meaningless.
To Ian,
I think you mean disproportionate upper-body strength and weaker motor neurons, not necessarily lean muscle mass itself.
While that possible decreased overtime, the main reason why it did (like bone density) is due to the trade-off of agriculture.
Yeah nice oversimplification. I was unable to find any study that provided evidence of the negative muscle/intelligence correlation that you claim. And strength has more to do with fiber typing than muscle mass. A ripped overswollen bodybuilder is not as strong as a stocky powerlifter.
Pumpkins blog most have the most diverse readership possible. I don’t mean that in the Danish Jim Jones sense.
There are clearly a number of very autistic commenters here as well as schiz types. And a few blacks in between.
your and jimmy’s fake hatred, crypto love, is getting old.
neither of you is at all serious.
so either you’re joking, or you’re a joke.
which is it?
you’re almost as bad as afro.
Translation form Yiddish :
Back me up against Jimmy whenever he talks about my jewish heritage
jimmy the sockpuppet has a theory that the original nazi, richard wagner, was really danish and married cosima for her danish-ness.
hitler was danish too.
it’s all in the “plan”.
fucking retarded dyke loser.
notice how he has to attribute statements to me because he cant refute anything i actually say .
Look i fully understand why someone with a jewish surname and a jewish phenotype would be uncomfortable with me saying that jews are organized and powerful.
i would love to say that i can empathize with you but i just cant.
its times like this tat i really appreciate being 100% Nordic
“look at that jew nose”, says jimmy the autistic lesbian. sad!
that doesn’t even look remotely jewish.
is that what your new nose looks like ?
whats the going rate for nose jobs these days?
what did you say to the surgeon ? ” make me white ! ” ?
afro learning to speak a real, non-silly, language.
I like mediterranean looking guys. The best combo is dark hair and light eyes.
And what is your second, third, and fourth choice?
black hair blue eyes is very rare.
most instances occur in ireland. not the med.
the leader was obviously irish…#thinklikejimmy
She shared Wagner’s convictions of German cultural and racial superiority, and under her influence, Bayreuth became increasingly identified with antisemitism.
yet she was danish. #thinklikejimmy
Black or dark brown hair and blue eyes is frequent in France and much appreciated.
dark brown doesn’t count.
when i said “black” i meant black.
it’s a very rare combo.
there’s hitler and bono.
Other than your choice in eye color you have good taste.
deal’s ideal man also corresponds to fleming’s description of bond.
lazenby, dalton, and brosnan come closest to the description.
dalton is a welshman and therefore naturally dark.
the welsh are not pure celtic.
many welsh are darker than s italians.
Dalton was born in Colwyn Bay, North Wales, to an English father…and an American mother of Italian and Irish descent.
not welsh. just looks it because italian.
deal knows that italian men in italy have cheesers. right?
afro is proud of his cheeser.
so that’s really TWO surgeries i’ve had. sad!
jimmy loves cheese.
as the i-man said…
more attractive penis.
Men like asian women because they are easy..
Italian soccer players are so hot omg
https://shechive.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/eye-candy-fabio-cannavaro-21.jpg?w=500&h=797
you both have penises and balls.
sad!
Oh grow up Mug of Pee! Are you still a toddler or is that just what prole adults find funny?
How bout Mario Balotelli?
So one thing I agree with Chimpo — White Americans are obnoxious proles and the working class are worse, because they can’t hide their ill feelings.
It’s really an Anglo Sphere phenomenon. The British Isle Whites are just as miserable. And now the sphere is revealing of its inherent inferiority…in the world of globalization.
…I just wanna say that asian men and women are sexy asf. what are you all on?
i vote for iraqi or jewish