• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The "N" word

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Alistar7

It was never a question of my intelligence, I understand this quite well. We came OUT of Africa, simply reinserting these now limited genetic offerings back into the pool would not create more diversity, it would reduce it overall.

If you're too dumb to understand how evolution works, visualize me saying "I am sorry". Easiest explanation is you actually have the process in relation to genetic diversity 100% backwards. Don't be ashamed, it is the most common misinterpretation.

Umm...obviously a large number of isolated groups is more genetically diverse than a huge freely mingling group. That explains why Africa is more diverse than the US.

But YOU'RE too dumb to understand how evolution works, if you think that removing a small segment of the African population and isolating them in Asia will "limit" their genes. It's exactly the same scenario...there will be genetic drift. Add that population back into the isolated communities of Africa, and genetic variability goes up.

"Now limited"? You speak of genes as if they are static, and any population that left Africa preserved those genes exactly, with no new genes being inserted or changes in the old. That's simply not how things work.
 
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: Alistar7

It was never a question of my intelligence, I understand this quite well. We came OUT of Africa, simply reinserting these now limited genetic offerings back into the pool would not create more diversity, it would reduce it overall.

If you're too dumb to understand how evolution works, visualize me saying "I am sorry". Easiest explanation is you actually have the process in relation to genetic diversity 100% backwards. Don't be ashamed, it is the most common misinterpretation.

Umm...obviously a large number of isolated groups is more genetically diverse than a huge freely mingling group. That explains why Africa is more diverse than the US.

But YOU'RE too dumb to understand how evolution works, if you think that removing a small segment of the African population and isolating them in Asia will "limit" their genes. It's exactly the same scenario...there will be genetic drift. Add that population back into the isolated communities of Africa, and genetic variability goes up.

"Now limited"? You speak of genes as if they are static, and any population that left Africa preserved those genes exactly, with no new genes being inserted or changes in the old. That's simply not how things work.


I never said anything along those lines lol. Your second conclusion is false. I have not said genes were static, actually the exact opposite, hence the differing levels of diversity and why they are found. I understand how these "things" work, and have no desire to discuss this with yet another person who obviously does not.
 
Originally posted by: Stiganator
Here's the thing, today not a single black person or even their parents were slaves. If you were personally a slave you have every right to be bitter, but the last slave died in 1979 ish (debatable since he claimed to be 137). Shit happens when cultures collide or when bad/crazy people are in power. Time to move on.

Tell that to my GF who overheard her manager at work durring a drawing for a monthly price say "put that name back in the hat, I don't want a black person to win that" There might not be any more physical slaves, but mentally slaverly is alive and well. If you heard her stores you would go "damn, get another job" and she would say "the last 3 places I worked were no better" The same goes for a lot of black people. They are generally treated worse in the work place, don't get raises as often, and promotions? Only so they can prove they're "all about equality in the work place" when called out for how they treat blacks and minorities.

funny thing is my GF isn't even black, she's Panamanian & Native American, that still doesn't stop people at her work from calling her a n*gger. A lot of the bosses there are much nicer about it, they'd never call her a N to her face, but their actions still are slaps.

but black people should forget slavery, and ignore how they are treated much worse, and move on. I mean big fucking deal right? All that matters is YOU don't have to deal with being a minority, so they should STFU and suck it up.
 
What is the n-word, you mean ***** so might as well say it. Euphemisms and trickery merely confuse and pander with painfully pitiful placations (to peons).

Oh stupid, the idiot filter means I cannot even say it. Rhymes with trigger but starts with an n, then.
 
Back
Top