I'm not a racist, but I am...

This forum is full of it, but it's all true. The facts are there. Maybe there is a little hyperbole, sure black people can become doctors, fly planes etc... I'm a reasonable human being, I was raised in a liberal environment. I have bullied before, but never been racist and I see bigotry as immature, however I can't escape the fact that they are indeed very unusual looking.

http://unicast.org/forums/forum.php?forum_id=1

"golly, niggers are hideous with their buck teeth, black skin and brillo heads. Egads."

Just do a google search for skull shapes of different races and albino black people... CAucasian and mongoloid skulls are about the same and both these races have obviously exceeded negrito races in culture and civilisation. Even the obscure native americans constructed early civilisations. Their hunter gatherers tribes only existed due to their isolation, deprived of the circumstnaces that allow for agrarian civilisation. Given another 1000 years after the SPanish arrived, and the Gulf of Mexico would be like the Mediteranean circa 1000 B.C..

Though I can't say the same for black civilisations, they were not isolated, theywere exposed to the Egyptians, who were arabic, im not one of these nuts who thinks they are white. I really am not a racist or even a far right conservative...

I can't contain what i think anymore and I shouldn't be afraid of expressing my thoughts. They do look so animal like, it is as if they are a relic from evolution before human civilisation. In fact that's what they are, the only tribal systems outside of sub-saharran africa left by around 1300 were in areas which didn't have much food. Yet in the rich jungles of africa they still lived in the stone age, never utilising the wide range of plants there.

I think the out of africa theory is correct and that blacks haven't evolved much whilst caucasians and mongoloids have had to deal with the ice age.

How should I approach these facts rationally? Liberals say I should just ignore them, conservatives say I should become a whtie supremacist nut. Surely there is another way? Surely there is a way to get society to accept these facts without sinking into depths of paranoia and stupidity.

>>978

The *how* of the genotype is the core of the race argument. "So what" is your repsonse because it completely smacks in the face of how you percieve race. Race only has cultural and social definitions (environmental)- not biological. So any co-relations between race and IQ- are environmental.

Again, if you can make co-relations between race and IQ. Why not hieght/weight/eye color? Why are you having such a difficult time addressing the ridiculousness of this?

You don't want to confront the fact that the human genome hasn't changed since the sub-saharan African. The base genotype for skin color is black skin. Mankind comes out of Africa. Sorry to keep repeating this, but you think this means that anything that comes after Africa can be somehow more "evolved" than the sub-saharahan African.

Again, show me scientific proof that this is "evolution" and not what it actually is natural and sexual selection for certian traits.

This leads to another question that I've posed numerous time and remains unanswered: Why is impossible that the sub-saharan African didn't already contain the entire potential for intelligence in its base cast of genes?

If you're born with white skin, you can get brown with a tan, but no matter what you do, when you're out of the sun, you'll turn white again. Likewise, if you're black, you're not going to magically turn white.

That's strange, because that seems to be exactly what's happened. Over time depending on where you are- skin color will change to suit that environment. But this is already present in the human genome. It doesn't make the new skin color fundamentally different biologically from the prior.