№3951361[Quote]
>>3951323more like africans barely evolved past australopithecine
№3951421[Quote]
>>3951323Dog breed are the result of selective breeding by humans. There are certainly some traits found in different races that are the result of artificial selection, but the majority of our differences stem from natural and sexual selection. So I do not think that is a good comparison.
№3951429[Quote]
its like dog breeds or something
№3951439[Quote]
>>3951421dog n cat breads are most of the time naturally evolving doe
selective breeding is something more recent
№3951474[Quote]
homo sapiens sapiens and homo sapiens africanus
№3951476[Quote]
by definition all races belong to the same species
№3951486[Quote]
>>3951439No they are not
Almost all dog breeds are the result of artificial selection, I.e. humans deciding which dogs get to breed and which do not. We have had control over the reproduction of dogs since Paleolithic times. Natural selection played a very minor role in differentiating dog breeds, sexual selection played basically no role.
№3951498[Quote]
>>3951452yeah humanity has had alot longer than youd really think to have several branching lines that in any other animal youd consider a new species but we just dont do that for reasons i cannot understand. the word "subhuman" isnt just an insult for a dipshit online i think africa genuinely peaked and we kept moving without them in the rest of the world.
№3951515[Quote]
>>3951476By which definition? The classic definition of speciation? Because many different species technically violate that definition, most famously wolves and coyotes. Despite their ability to reproduce with each other and their genetic similarity, they are considered different species because they fulfill different ecological niches and exhibit major behavioral differences that prevent the animals from reproducing with each other under normal environmental circumstances when they operate in the same habitat.
My question is can that way of defining different species be applies to Africans and Eurasians, or is it more fair to say they are sub species instead, or is even calling them different sub species incorrect?
№3951568[Quote]
hello hello , in the end of the day a African remains genetically homo sapiens just like 0.1% of your dna is what makes you white black traces your lineage etc rest is the blueprint on how to be a homo sapien , HOW EVER , the thing is eurasians and Africans have split way before ooa , THE MAIN OOA THE OOA(out of africa) , they split 40 thousand if not more who knows years ago from sub Saharans etc , meaning Eurasians have separated from africans before ooa (60kya) over a 100 kya if not more , the thing is due to the common snps and mutations that happened during ooa and to ooa pops (eurasians) , an aborginal is genetically closer to western Eurasians than afros do vice versa , why despite them(abos) looking niggerish , well first of all abos nigerity comes from enviroment and possible very plasueable basal admix(basal east eurasian was a branch of main basal Eurasian , they didn't mix with any Neanderthals etc despite abos carrying influence from Denisovans and Neanderthals ) , how ever 100k years are more than enough to evolve a fuckton of mutations ,so yeah theyre the same spices but way diffrent on a pca and may have some health issues of their own same for each group to be honest , more specifically afros started to split from each other over 160kya to 100kya which means you (Eurasian) probably got seprated from some of those afros over 160kya , besides east and north afros we split from them around ooa
№3951576[Quote]
>>3951515I see
Why do taxonomists have to complicate things
№3951621[Quote]
>>3951568i really spent time reading and refact checking this please read , and also i hate many hypotheses regarding ooa and those who say we modern homo sapiens didnt exist until 100kya(doe Jebel Irhoud was 315kya) , also regarding east eurasian splti i really dont see sense in the southern migration hypothesis northren makes more sense , northern route , maybe only basal branches through south eehhh hard to believe but plausible (speaking about east eurasian core)
>>3951602idiot neanderthal dna runs in all non afros especially white Caucasians(inc iran) and some east asians
№3951661[Quote]
the only abnormal (non homo sapiens) abos and Papuans have is higher rates of Denisovan ancestry (3 6%!) compared other groups such as east Asians Siberians and Americans(not merimutts) who have like 0.3 1% max , so yeah abos are less homo sapiens then Africans thats if we exclude these cases that are like10 6% unknown hominin in south Africa(weird thing) , even though abos are very very very very very very far from afros and are closer to all Eurasians due to the ooa bottleneck
№3951671[Quote]
>>3951602sub human, parahuman, idk they just aint you and me humans i know that much