Here we go, another deplorable coming out of the basket. No, I didn't give you negative reputation, if it is what you are referring to by the red mark. Except now for explicit disrispet.Thank you for the red mark, you scumbag. I bet you 1k now against it having been you. You may now be protected based on being the a-kisser your are, but mark my words...
No they didn't. 10K years ago ancestors of Basques lived in 3 separate races or subraces of what we call WHG, EHG and Anatolian Farmer, plus a pinch of Iranian Farmer. Check our population genetics threads for details. Today's Basque genome was created either in Bronze or Iron Age. Maximum 5 kya, or perhaps half of this time. That's nothing when we consider Homo Sapiens to be 200-500 years old. The only constant thing for our species is a change, not status quo. Status Quo of human races is just an illusion, because we live so short time, and can't notice changes. If you could live 100 thousand years you would notice how mingles many things are, what we consider dear today. Like our language, religion, countries or some phenotypes. They all pop up for a thousand or two, max 5, years into existence and vanish quickly in nothingness. Replaced by new cultures, languages, countries, races and religions. Replaced by new people who will be sure that their race, langue, country and religion will stay here forever...For the most part, I agree. But still: Populations like the Basques have existed as such for 10k years. It will require major political decisions in order to ensure that changes occur on a global scale. And the Basques are not the only example here.
I think that either if you are ethno-nationalist or multicultural / multiracial. The future isn't really on our individual hands. I also think in term of mathematics and 7 milliards of human can hardly become the same thing in less than milleniums, more than milleniums it's even natural selection who needs to act crazely accurately. You just have to look at neanderthals, a human species that leaved alone ( pretty much ) for hundred of millenias, they had different form of physical characteristics. You can look at black americans, they have a different physic than modern africans for the majority.
Slave owners forcing selective-breeding aiming at enhancing particular physical traits, the mix with Native Americans and Whites is what differentiates many African-Americans from their Ancestors and Sub-Saharan Africans.
Natural Selection is not responsible for it. imo
Lol, the selective-breeding fact i aint gonna take it, but yes, i know that mixing with europeans or natives is what make black americans different than africans lol. My point is that natural selection with 7 milliard of humans = so many possibilities that the " one race " isn't possible. Or we do what modern marxists want, we kill all white people, then after that mixing gonna be easy! ( it's an ironical statement on a real idea )
Lol, the selective-breeding fact i aint gonna take it, but yes, i know that mixing with europeans or natives is what make black americans different than africans lol. My point is that natural selection with 7 milliard of humans = so many possibilities that the " one race " isn't possible. Or we do what modern marxists want, we kill all white people, then after that mixing gonna be easy! ( it's an ironical statement on a real idea )
What exactly is everyone's exact definition of "white"? Most White Americans have at least some Native American DNA. What percentage European do you have to be to be considered white?
I wasn't setting the scale that high. White Americans (European Americans) on average are: 98.6 percent European, 0.19 percent African and 0.18 percent Native American. That's what I was referring to with "at least some".The vast majority of European Americans have no Native American ancestry, or SSA ancestry for that matter.
The vast majority of European Americans have no Native American ancestry, or SSA ancestry for that matter.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929714004765
A lot of these people actually probably didn't know about this until they took the test. The SSA ancestry, in particular, was often "passed" off as "Indian". A lot of people actually thought they had Native American in them when they actually didn't.
This whole "white" thing is a misnomer. It was originally used by the British colonists to differentiate between themselves and the Indians and Blacks. However, it could be applied strangely. William Penn famously said that the Palatine Germans coming to the U.S. weren't as "white". By that he probably meant more dark haired, eyed people.
Thomas Jefferson, writer of the phrase "All men are created equal", and father of numerous mixed race illegitimate children, wrote in his personal papers that once you were only 1/32 or 1/16, I forget, you were "effectively" white. Maybe that was the ancestral proportion of his own children and why, while not emancipating them, he "let" them run off. Kind of him, right?
Then came Jim Crow, with its "one drop" rule. By those standards, some of the people promoting it would probably have had to have moved to the back of the bus.
Now, I see some African Americans supporting a "one drop" rule of sorts. Even if some one is only 1/4 or 1/8 African, they self-identify as "black", instead of mixed race.
Elizabeth Warren did something similar. She's probably 2% or something Native American, although she didn't reveal the exact percentage, but put "Native American" on her application forms for Penn State and Harvard. Dishonest, imo.
So, it's a phrase which should be retired, imo, as well as the thinking behind it.
Other than perception, based on what?It clearly exists, though.
Other than perception, based on what?
There is only one sky, so its color is easily agreed upon. With variations (see Northern Lights).I refer to my blue argument - it is literally identical. Unless you'd deny the existence of the colour blue.
I wasn't setting the scale that high. White Americans (European Americans) on average are: 98.6 percent European, 0.19 percent African and 0.18 percent Native American. That's what I was referring to with "at least some".
Eloquent analysis but this falls into the colour spectrum fallacy. Is the sky blue? Well, it might not be a perfect blue, it might have tints of some other colour. And then I might say how do you define blue? But clearly, the sky is blue.
White should just mean someone with light (inclusive of olive) skin (and basic indisputable Caucasoid features), simple as that. So, even non-tanned Jeff Goldblum should count, if you want to use the term "White" in a non-narrow sense. The narrower the term becomes, the less sense it makes on a practical basis, as it is after all a social construct (even if based on real physical features). It clearly exists, though.
When Angela Ihegboro first saw her newborn daughter, she was “speechless.”
“She’s a miracle baby,” the 35-year-old mother said yesterday. “But still, what on Earth happened here?”
What happened is that baby Nmachi is a blond, blue-eyed white baby born to two black Nigerian immigrant parents at a London hospital.
“The first thing I said was, ‘What the flip?’ ” said the father, Ben Ihegboro. “We both just sat there after the birth staring at her for ages — not saying anything.”
He quickly sought to dispel any speculation.
“Of course she is mine. My wife is true to me,” the 44-year-old customer service adviser said. “Even if she hadn’t been, the baby still wouldn’t look like that.”
Genetics experts don’t believe in miracles, but they didn’t have any simple answers to the mystery of baby Nmachi. Instead, they offered three theories:
- She’s the result of a gene mutation unique to her. If that is the case, Nmachi would pass the gene to her children — and they, too, would likely be white.
- She’s the product of long-dormant white genes, passed on to her by her parents, that might have been carried by their predecessors for generations without surfacing until now.
- While doctors have said Nmachi is not an outright albino, or lacking in all pigment, they added that the child may have some kind of mutated version of the genetic condition — and that her skin could darken over time.
A black couple told yesterday of their shock and mystification when their son was born with white skin and blond hair.
Francis Tshibangu admitted: ‘My first thought was “Wow, is he really mine?”.’
He and his wife Arlette already have a two-year-old boy, Seth, whose features reflect his African parentage.
But it is thought that baby Daniel, now 11 weeks old, has a slight genetic mutation. He is not an albino.
Congo-born Mr Tshibangu, 28, said his ‘jaw dropped open’ when Daniel arrived at Leicester Royal Infirmary.
‘I was too stunned to speak and I could see the doctors looking at each other, thinking the baby couldn’t be mine.
‘Then Arlette and I looked at each other and smiled and I knew he was. I have been with my wife for three years and there was never a question of infidelity, but seeing his white skin was a surprise to say the least.’
Mr Tshibangu, a sociology student, added: ‘The initial reaction from the nurses must have been that Arlette had had an affair. Their faces were a picture, but then I’m sure mine was too.
'When I bent down and kissed him I got a better look at his features and could see he looked just like me and Arlette. He has my nose and my wife’s lips.
‘All we can say is that Daniel is our miracle and, though we are shocked by his white skin, we feel very blessed. He’s beautiful.’
His 25-year-old wife added: ‘The reaction in the operating theatre was one of shocked silence, myself included.
‘I stared at Daniel with my eyes wide. The looks on the faces of the doctors and nurses said it all. Everyone was wondering why I had a white baby.
‘But as the nurse put his little pink body in my arms I bonded with him instantly. When I looked at him all I felt was love.
‘Like any mum who has just given birth, my main concern was that he was healthy, which he is.’
Mr Tshibangu added: ‘I know there will be some who say my wife has had an affair but I trust her completely and know that isn’t the case.
‘Even if she’d had an affair with a white man, you would expect a mixed-race baby with black hair, not a white baby with soft blond hair like little Daniel.’
Mr Tshibangu, who has lived in Britain for ten years, met his future wife on a return visit to the Congo in 2007. They married a year later and settled near Loughborough.
Arlette qualified as a doctor in Africa and, while she is currently working as a part-time shop assistant, she hopes to practise medicine in the UK.
The couple believe Daniel could be a throwback to Arlette’s great-great-great-grandmother, who is also thought to have given birth to a white baby. But Mr Tshibangu said: ‘That was six generations ago and we don’t even know if that was true.’
He added: ‘You can see people looking at us thinking, “What are that black couple doing with that white baby?” I am sure there are a few people who think we have stolen him.
‘But to us, his skin colour isn’t important. The most important thing is that we have a healthy little boy who we love very much.’
Those are children with albinism. This is completely different.There are also strange cases like these:
Strange cases of black parents give birth to white children
Ben Ihegboro and Angela Ihegboro with their daughter
Black parents give birth to white baby
The black parents shocked when their son was born white with blond hair
Black and white family: Francis and Arlette with Seth and Daniel