---

Self-denial: saying that mixed racing is as destructive as inbreeding when EVERYONE knows the end result of inbreeding is: disformities.

---

---

Seeing only that mixed racing is destructive while ignoring-- wait DENYING the facts of the positive.

---

---

Self-denial: You can express what's ugly or not, but others can't.

---

---

These two examples shows how biased your argument is. Just stop while you're ahead.

---

---

I like how those charts you provided are found on a white supremacy website..

---

---

What positives? List them, don't be so vague

---

... ...Stop being so stupid. If you don't know the positives of genetic diversity than you really are an idiot.

And as for the aesthetic situation, it's there in stone. You can clearly see how you try to control the situation in your favor. I'm not even discussing that.

You really don't deserve any evidence as all your evidence probably comes from a white supremacy website.

Also, I apologize for misspelling deformities.

---

Dr Mark Shriver, who studies human origins at Penn State University, is interested in ancestry, variations in skin and hair colour, facial features and height....

Shriver's work has uncovered something else that is very interesting. He finds that mixed-race people are more symmetrical than the rest of us, and being more symmetrical translates into being more attractive, having less infection, being less stressed, and having greater genetic diversity. Professor Bill Amos at Cambridge University has also been studying the genetic basis of human disease. He finds that in humans, an individual's level of genetic diversity can predict with astonishing accuracy how likely they are to survive parasites and infectious disease. In a recent study in Kenya, he found that low levels of diversity were strongly associated with death before the age of five.

---

Post edited at 6:18 pm on Jan. 1, 2012 by jamjardee

---

Quote: from carracer at 9:01 pm on Jan. 1, 2012

---

There is more genetic variation between people in one racial group than between racial groups.

---

So?

---

Besides the fact that you are a racist, based on years of prejudiced and discriminatory posts, you are a moron who looks predominantly at terrible sources to try to "prove" ridiculous points.

---

Funny how you cannot point out one single "Racist" or prejudiced or discriminatory post, nor can you provide any support for the allegation that my sources are terrible.
Pathetic.

---

Is the reason you post so much on LW because no one in the real world will listen to the stupid things you have to say?

---

Loaded question, so stupid that it doesn't even deserve an answer.

---

You never post reliable facts you neanderthal.

---

Unsubstantiated statement, good job retard.
http://www.golivewire.com/forums/peer-eonyepy-support-a.html
Please point out here what's "Unreliable" with evidence of course...

---

You've been on LW about as long as I have. I don't need to prove that you're racist by going through years of misinformed and ignorant posts. Whether you want to admit it or not, you know yourself that you are racist. I'm just telling you, not everyone else. Arguing that you are a prejudiced introvert is like arguing that the sun is hot. Both of us know it without going to the sun and touching it to make sure.
A great example of how your sources are terrible is how you have disproved eugenics theories under your anthropology photo collection. Have you told anyone that eugenics were disproved in the 1940s?
You're a liar.

Unfortunately for every single intelligent person on the planet, my loaded question is so true that you won't even acknowledge that it's a possibility. Pick up a book that's not influenced by Mein Kampf.
If I write a blog and then quote it, it doesn't make it fact. Congratulations, you can find crap science using google. You must be some kind of genius.

-------
The world is only as sweet as you make it and only as terrible as you see it

---

... ...Stop being so stupid. If you don't know the positives of genetic diversity than you really are an idiot.

---

---

And as for the aesthetic situation, it's there in stone. You can clearly see how you try to control the situation in your favor. I'm not even discussing that.

---

---

You really don't deserve any evidence as all your evidence probably comes from a white supremacy website.

---

---

But just so I don't have to hear another of your ignorant replies:

---

Dr Mark Shriver, who studies human origins at Penn State University, is interested in ancestry, variations in skin and hair colour, facial features and height....

Shriver's work has uncovered something else that is very interesting. He finds that mixed-race people are more symmetrical than the rest of us, and being more symmetrical translates into being more attractive, having less infection, being less stressed, and having greater genetic diversity. Professor Bill Amos at Cambridge University has also been studying the genetic basis of human disease. He finds that in humans, an individual's level of genetic diversity can predict with astonishing accuracy how likely they are to survive parasites and infectious disease. In a recent study in Kenya, he found that low levels of diversity were strongly associated with death before the age of five.

---

---

Shriver is also using the false assumption that we are designed for perfect symmetry. There is a random and non-random component to bilateral symmetry and the random one is not part of biological design. The magnitude and side of the random component fluctuates and this is hence called 'fluctuating asymmetry' and thus this conclusion is not based on perfect symmetry, but fluctuating asymmetry, and the honest statement that a lower level of fluctuating asymmetry [not greater symmetry] is correlated with better health and attractiveness.
for example, fluctuating asymmetry instead of directional asymmetry correlates with facial attractiveness:
http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/5/864.abstract

-------
• Every time I pwn some tard 1 point will be added under my avatar •
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored" -Aldous Huxley
"Equality may perhaps be a right, but no power on earth can ever turn
it into a fact" -Balzac

Or am I missing something here?

---

You've been on LW about as long as I have. I don't need to prove that you're racist by going through years of misinformed and ignorant posts. Whether you want to admit it or not, you know yourself that you are racist. I'm just telling you, not everyone else. Arguing that you are a prejudiced introvert is like arguing that the sun is hot. Both of us know it without going to the sun and touching it to make sure

---

---

A great example of how your sources are terrible is how you have disproved eugenics theories under your anthropology photo collection. Have you told anyone that eugenics were disproved in the 1940s?  
You're a liar.

---

---

Unfortunately for every single intelligent person on the planet, my loaded question is so true that you won't even acknowledge that it's a possibility. Pick up a book that's not influenced by Mein Kampf.

---

---

If I write a blog and then quote it, it doesn't make it fact. Congratulations, you can find crap science using google. You must be some kind of genius.

---

---

Each race has gone through thousands of years of evolution basically in isolation, this is how races form. One selective mechanism is 'sexual selection' which removes the 'ugly' traits and keeps the 'attractive' ones. Races have dozens of traits that work together in harmony to create 1000s of years of selected-for attraction.
Race mixing destroys these harmonious mixtures and adds traits from other races to the child, often times they are discordant. Non-White admixture in Whites for example makes noses broader, faces flatter, faces broader, jaws more protruding, faces larger, limbs smaller relative to height, noses more hooked, and weakens the musculo-skeletal build.
This is recipe for ugliness.
I find other races attractive, but rarely mixed people, and I only find them attractive if their traits are majorly found in one race. That is my opinion though so I wouldn't use it as an argument, and nor would an sane person, but the negative health effects of race mixing are undeniable.

---

so mixing races=making a new race
a new race that has new and different traits and qualities, nothing like inbreeding at all
mixing races=evolution in progress
inbreeding=no evolution at all, the exact opposite really

and considering how the original tribes were isolated(thus forming their own races over time) and when two different tribes eventually came together, they coexisted and combined to form a new race

you're arguing against evolution, you cant stop evolution, its most often necessary for the continuing survival of a species. rather sad that you're trying to stop it

if two races that mix produce undesirable traits and consequences, they won't survive long (and by undesirable traits, i don't mean deformities and genetic defects that inbreeding would cause)
if two races mix and things work out, you'll survive
just because a new race would have a new mixture of qualities, doesn't make it a "disaster"

for millions of years the mixing of races has been happening
without it, how did you expect the human race to grow and become so successful?

---

Also to point out, you used fluctuating asymmetric to be symmetrical in one paragraph but than you contrasted it with perfect symmetry in the 2nd.

Or am I missing something here?

---

---

Quote: from jamjardee at 9:17 pm on Jan. 1, 2012

---

But just so I don't have to hear another of your ignorant replies:  

 

---

Dr Mark Shriver, who studies human origins at Penn State University, is interested in ancestry, variations in skin and hair colour, facial features and height....  

 Shriver's work has uncovered something else that is very interesting. He finds that mixed-race people are more symmetrical than the rest of us, and being more symmetrical translates into being more attractive, having less infection, being less stressed, and having greater genetic diversity. Professor Bill Amos at Cambridge University has also been studying the genetic basis of human disease. He finds that in humans, an individual's level of genetic diversity can predict with astonishing accuracy how likely they are to survive parasites and infectious disease. In a recent study in Kenya, he found that low levels of diversity were strongly associated with death before the age of five.

---

---

Based on experiments, not wishful thinking like shriver's, mixed people actually have more health problems such as depression and poor health. Of course Shriver doesn't have any facts to support his case, but what else is new.
Here are 2 studies showing that 'symmetrical' people are more aggressive which Shriver conveniently ignored:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1688754/
http://www.springerlink.com/content/m882xk202712164j/

Shriver is also using the false assumption that we are designed for perfect symmetry. There is a random and non-random component to bilateral symmetry and the random one is not part of biological design. The magnitude and side of the random component fluctuates and this is hence called 'fluctuating asymmetry' and thus this conclusion is not based on perfect symmetry, but fluctuating asymmetry, and the honest statement that a lower level of fluctuating asymmetry [not greater symmetry] is correlated with better health and attractiveness.
for example, fluctuating asymmetry instead of directional asymmetry correlates with facial attractiveness:
http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/5/864.abstract

---

Depression and poor health are both highly impressionable by sociological factors. Neither can be narrowed down entirely to genetics. Children are not a good control group. Other very important factors exist, or should we forget that conditions like poverty that affect development exist? Also are you considering worldwide studies or just Americans?
How do you prove that all symmetrical people are more prone to violence? This is also bad science. What is the control group? You don't think in terms of the scientific method.

Psychological studies prove that perfect symmetry is the most desired and adaptive physical trait. People are always more physically attracted to people who are symmetrical over those who are not.  (Look it up. It is existing psychology theory and is very well known).  No asymmetry is better than any kind of asymmetry. Also, since psychological studies are constantly updated, I would look for something more recent if I were you.  

-------
The world is only as sweet as you make it and only as terrible as you see it