/sci/ - Science & Math

Table 2 shows SNPs of five subclades of "African" haplogroup A. None of those SNPs have been observed in haplogroup R1a1, it maintains their ancestral state. These data, based on the SNPs (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism), along with the data based on the STRs (Short Tandem Repeats), described in this study, are compatible with each other and undeniably indicate that non-African people, bearers of haplogroups from C to T, did not descend from the "African" haplogroups A or B. Their origin is likely not in Africa. A higher variance of the DNA in Africa, which was a cornerstone of the "Out of Africa" theory, is explained by Figure 3, in which haplogroup A has been evolving (mutation-wise) for 132,000 years, while the non-European haplogroups are much younger. Hence, there is a lower variability in the latter. The same is related to language variability, which has also been used as an argument of the African origin of non-Africans. We believe that those arguments upon which the "Out of Africa" theory was based were, in fact, conjectural, incomplete and not actually data-driven. Therefore, we are left holding the question of the origin of Homo sapiens.

Based on palaeoarchaeological evidence, the region, where anatomically modern humans have likely originated, is comprised of a vast territory from Central Europe in the west to the Russian Plain in the east to Levant in the south. Each of these regions is renowned for discoveries of the oldest skeletal remains of modern humans dating back to 42,000 – 44,000 ybp. To date, none of these sub-regions has clear and unequivocal advances in this regard.

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/04/26/9530.aspx
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=19566
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5979/710.full
http://www.articlesafari.com/2010/09/critique-of-the-african-origin-theory/
http://www.articlesafari.com/2010/09/humans-not-genetically-identical/
http://www.scotsman.com/news/environment/did-early-man-take-his-first-steps-in-asia-1-1124573
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1341973/Did-humans-come-Middle-East-Africa-Scientists
-forced-write-evolution-modern-man.html
http://www.rafonda.com/html/genetic_reality_of_race.html
http://erectuswalksamongst.us/
http://whitelocust.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/morality-and-abstract-thinking-how-africans-may-differ-f
rom-westerners/
http://www.theapricity.com/snpa/racesofeurope.htm

Whatever advantage these genes [ASPM and MCPH1] give, some groups have it and some don’t. This has to be the worst nightmare for people who believe strongly there are no differences in brain function between groups.

The race-deniers, who say there is no such thing as “race,” have a difficult time explaining why, when genetic differences of native populations across the world are mapped, the result is almost exactly the same as a map of the races.

Here are some genes for brain size and intelligence (Weiss, 1992; Plomin, 2004), behavior, skin, hair, and eyes, and diseases that are either already known to differ between populations or are very likely to differ.

http://erectuswalksamongst.us/Chap13.html

Modern White Europeans are more closely related to their ancestors (the Neanderthals and Haplogroup D Homo Sapiens), than to modern day Africans (Homo Heidelbergensis/Rhodensis and Haplogroup A & B Homo Sapiens).

There is more genetic distance between White Europeans and Africans, than between White Europeans and Neanderthal. We consider Neanderthal to be a unique species or sub-species from White Europeans. So why aren't Africans, with a greater genetic distance, considered a unique sub-species?

In fact, there is more genetic differentiation between White Europeans and Africans than between dogs and wolves.

Race-deniers think you're more related to someone 5000 generations apart than someone 100 generations apart.

Good luck getting /sci/ to debate racial egalitarianism.

Most people here are smart enough to know it is true, and smart enough to know that speaking the truth on this issue is career suicide.

>>4777870
A lot of those links look pretty racist you clown.

>>4777883
Sorry, *NOT* true.

>Stormfags
>Flooding /sci/ now too
I'm sorry guys
Come here if you want to complain about stormfags.

>>>/pol/3640954

Thank you for enlightening me, Anon.
This confirms my latest doubts - well partially.
I look forward to seeing more similar things being unearthed in the near future.

If the bearers of the generally Caucasoid haplogroups did not descend from the Africans, where did these haplogroups originate from? Any theories on specific locations?

>>4777888
http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/26/feeling-like-a-neanderthal-heres-why/

>>4777893

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2010/10/28/3050509.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/8227204/Did-the-first-humans-come-out-of
-Middle-East.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1341973/Did-humans-come-Middle-East-Africa-Scientists
-forced-write-evolution-modern-man.html

So, and what do we do with this newly found knowledge?

I mean, I work as a scientist and whenever I read an interesting paper, I usually get ideas how I would make use of the results - but this?

So I saw someone on /pol/ claiming /sci/ can beat /pol/ in debate.

So, where's the counter arguments?

>>4777901
How about we take all the coloreds

and PUSH THEM SOMEWHERE ELSE

>>4777901

Do you have any suggestions?
I believe it's quite restrictive since well... not everyone appreciates these kinds of things.

>>4777911
Actually it's that /pol/ can't troll /sci/

>>4777911
It's not an us vs them thing, the science is pretty clearly there.

>>4777901

Nobody sane would deny the facts but, all of this can be pretty explosive on a social scale. Collectives like white supremacists use this to advocate for superiority and try to instaure it in society.

>>4777915
Not really. I mean, sure, it's probably a fascinating discovery in search of the origins of mankind and how we evolved until today.

Aside from that... but ah well, the last 5 years in experimental physics probably killed off my academic curiosity for things that don't immediately give a practical use.

Notice how OP's picture takes the extremes of each race and compares them?

Obvious subtle brainwashing?

>>4777894
>>4777894
>>4777894
>>4777894
scifigs are falling for infographics

>>4777934

>each race

>race doesn't exist

Pick one.

If whites are so much smarter than "niggers" than why is OP such a fucking idiot?

>>4777925
Hm, I can't really see this. I don't think this slight change in knowledge on human evolution has the potential to fuck up things.
I mean - we didn't originate in Africa, but probably somewhere between the middle-east and western Asia. Academically interesting, sure - but else? Fuck, I don't even know what the fuck alleles are, and as a holder of a PhD in physics, I consider myself a tiny bit educated.

No spudhead will get an additional burst of buttmad because of the genetic history of certain ethnics.

>>4777951

The very fact that the ideologies that dictate our lives (at least those who live in the US, Canada, West Europe, and Australia) revolve around an extreme form of egalitarianism and race-denialism, I would say this type of research is important.

>>4777927

>>4777954
Yeah, treating people fairly and providing equal protection under the law was a huge mistake.

>>4777954
Is that so?
At least in Austria, Germany, Belgium and the UK (haven't lived in other countries yet), I haven't seen genetics / race ideologies to be any sort of dominant part in everyday politics. It's usually just corruption and money laundery, and then nationalistic / EU conflicts that are made up most of the time - subtly ignoring the fact that the countries each have their say in the EU legal institutions.

>>4777901
How about ending affirmative action and any other policies which are based on the incorrect assumption that all races have equal abilities?

>>4777934
>Obvious subtle
Maybe definitely not.

>>4777965

Nobody is denying all humans should be equal before the law.

Nobody is denying all humans should be equal before "God".

What people are questioning is whether or not "equality" applies to genetically-controlled traits. The allegation that no population differs genetically from any other population, except in trivial differences in appearance.

>>4777961
Don't you think that race-tailored legislation would be quite a guarantee for civil war?
I personally would feel like smacking the shit out of someone telling me what I can and can't do due to my genetics. Maybe I would accept it, if it were based on some sane rationale - but you and me both know that wars started for less.

It's like closing down borders - in a way it would make things easier, but people won't stand for it.

>>4777966
Well the thing is in the UK the far-right parties are more of a laughing stock than anything else.

>>4777965
That's exactly the problem. Fair and equal treatment has been trumped by unfair treatment for the sake of equal outcomes.

Of course once you become aware that abilities are not equally distributed among races there is no longer any reason to cling to the delusion that occupations or incomes should be equally distributed either.

>>4777966

Not this shit.
Go away you retarded racist piece of shit.
The only point you've successfully made is that there is most likely some correlation between race and intelligence. Not how strong the correlation is, and not that we should, therefore, exterminate them, or whatever it is you want to do.

>>4777980
Your post doesn't logically follow from the post you are replying to. There seems to have been a complete breakdown in your reading comprehension.

>>4777981

Name one factually inaccurate thing Nick Griffin or any other high ranking BNP member has ever said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7JTGspZfL8

>>4777976
Bullshit.
Have you seen the "red pill" thread on /pol/ that spawned this thread?

>>4777961

I wonder why this even exists if what we are trying to do is achieve equality.

>>4777976
There are many intelligent blacks that surpass whites. Therefore their genetics, if different, are negligible since the gene pool still produces quality human beings.

I think the far more common cause for blacks' statistical likelihood for crime and low IQ is chronic impoverishment, and thuggish culture formed out of constantly being an underclass in the ghetto.

>>4777990

>>4777982
I couldn't even start to begin quoting you the headlines regarding corruption scandals here in Austria right now.

Every now and then you have the usual "fuck foreigners" phase, but the relative majority of "what people are concerned about" is definitely not about whether some hindu people want to erect a buddhist temple.

>>4777991
Well, that thing happens if you're trying to read a text in the language you've learnt only after four others.

My mistake and apologies, good sir.

>>4777993
Basically it is because equal outcomes and equal treatment (fairness) are mutually exclusive.

Modern leftists suffer from the insane delusion that everyone is _literally_ equivalent, and they use this faith based belief to justify unfair discrimination against the overachieving races to bring about equal outcomes.

The truth about those "racist" IQ tests.

So, you're not part of this species

>>4778006
Jews have a culture of education. Their religion has long advocated that every Jew be able to learn and analyze the Torah. This propensity for education is why Jews took all the 'white collar' jobs in the Middle Ages like banking and why Jews are so inclined towards academia.

>>4777987
When did I ever say anything about the factual accuracy of any of Griffin's policies? I'm saying that nobody takes the BMP seriously, for good reason.

Also keep in mind that the british people are decended from the picts, gauls, celts, romans, norse, saxon, norman, and irish immigrants, so don't give me any "genetic purity" bullshit.

>>4778014

actually the majority of indigenous white british people (english, scottish, welsh and irish) are largely a reflection of the people who migrated there thousands of years ago.

the roman, anglo-saxon, and norman conquests had a minimal effect on the gene pool.

>>4778015

>subspecies

Fixed

>>4777998
- 20% of Whites are smarter than all Blacks in existence.
- 87% of Whites are smarter than an average Black.

The idea that there is some great untapped potential in Blacks is an emotionally motivated myth. They are dead weight and money spent trying to uplift them is wasted.

>>4777998
How do you explain the fact that Black students from families with incomes of $80,000 to $100,000 score considerably lower on the SAT than White students from families with $20,000 to $30,000 incomes? How do you explain why social class factors, all taken together, only cut the Black-White achievement gap by a third? Culture-only theory cannot predict these facts; often its predictions are opposite to the empirical results.

IQ is a narrow way of looking at people. Far too narrow. It cannot accurately judge the success of an individual, their talents in creativity, or their ability to work. There are far too many 'brilliant but lazy' people out there intelligent people can show a lack of wisdom or the ability to apply their intelligence to anything in the real world.

Stop using it as a basis for judging the value of people. It's worthless mental masturbation that accomplishes nothing.

>>4778023
But you are part of this one

http://www.scirp.org
Stopped there.
Fuck those spamming cunts.
>Dear X
>We invite you write some bullshit for one of our hundreds of open access journals. We know fuck all about you except for the fact that your e-mail pops up in scientific papers so but we want you to be on our board and referee our bullshit journal. Our journals are top quality and not refereed by randomly selected scientists who are retarded enough to respond to scam publishers spam e-mails.
>Thanks Some Wog
Fuck off and die.
If you are not a scientist GOOGLE : scirp spam

>>4778023
So you're not part of this subspecies

The truth about those "racist" crime statistics.

>>4778009
Oh, okay. Affirmative action is a policy in many western countries where certain racial discrimination is mandated by law in order to favour underachieving groups. (No, these laws have not yet caused any civil wars.)

The post you are responding to is opposed to racial discrimination.

>>4778036

I'll provide you the definition of subspecies.

A category in biological classification that ranks immediately below a species and designates a population of a particular geographic region genetically distinguishable from other such populations of the same species and capable of interbreeding successfully with them where its range overlaps theirs.

>>4778028
Interesting graph - but a bit worthless without errorbars. Are these SAT tests evaluated anonymously? Not that it would explain the discrepance, but I read this article once where teachers (apparenty motivated by xenophobia or some form of racism) in a school would give foreigners lower scores by default.

A little bit more info on the graph would be neat.

>>4778034
IQ/g usually predicts major life outcomes better than does any other single predictor in broad samples of individuals. For example, whether IQ predicts strongly (educational performance) or weakly (law-abidingness), it predicts better than does social class background.

The race-deniers have no problem identifying who belongs to what race (the same races they pretend don't exist) when the topic is colonialism, slavery, reparations for slavery, alleged white privilege, black achievements, affirmative action, and hate crime laws.

>>4778038
Well, AA has failed big time, that probably isn't news. I know of no other country that practices affirmative action in such a way as the US. We do have "equal-opportunity" regarding females (aka choose the woman if a man has equal qualifications), but I doubt that it hardly has any effects on nation-wide statistics.

>>4778022
>The idea that there is some great untapped potential in Blacks is an emotionally motivated myth. They are dead weight and money spent trying to uplift them is wasted.
"great untapped potential" is a strange use of words, but yes, the idea is that there are factors holding back the "performance" of black populations. Any purported (inherent) differences in intelligence are then exacerbated.

I'm sure you're familiar with this pic. Imagine a hand pushing the black curve to the left. Not only is there the legacy of slavery and institutionalized discrimination, but there is the ever-present influence of a pop culture specifically targets black youth, instilling absolute shit values.

I'm not making an excuse, I'm offering explanations, ones that you have completely ignored while gathering information for the thread you planned.


>>4778028
source of stats plz

>>4778043
Missed the point entirely
>>4778040

>>4778028
Why would culture not continue to be relevant? Rich black kids will still identify with blacks and be influenced by its culture. Even many rich white kids get sucked into the shitty white American culture by consumption of dumb movies, tv, music etc and neglect education/self betterment. It would only be exacerbated for blacks who have an even shittier culture to work with.

>>4778046
Reminds me how one of the things wikileaks revealed was a BNP members list including teachers and policemen, ect. You know, people who have no business being in such a bigoted hate group.

>>4778048
Nah, regarding colonialism etc., I usually go straight for the country and don't give a shit about their genetic makeup.

>>4778048
Look, bro, i'm really sorry you were born too late. I know you would've loved to be born where hating black people was accepted by society and as as a straight white male you were top of the food chain. I'm sorry such unfair practices are slowly being weeded out and people are (hopefully) no longer discriminated on race. But you're a big boy now and you're just going to have to accept it.

You're obviously not going to do that, though.

What really gets me about these troll threads is people always point out how much better whites are from blacks but nobody points out that the same research shows Chinese and Japanese are higher than whites and Jews actually rank higher than all other groups.

But they don't like admitting they're inferior.

Careful, the /mu/ mod is German and suffers from white guilt syndrome.

He will ban you for "inane racist trolling garbage", because anything that he doesn't like is "inane trolling garbage".

>>4778074
Except you were probably posting inane racist shit that had no business on a board about music.

What a victim you are. A travesty.

>>4778058
Two professions that have large amounts of contact with black people. Their opinion holds a lot more weight than an it consultant or middle class liberal living in the suburbs

>>4777901
Think back to the last time there was a Eugenicist movement.

Then think to the times when those people took things to their logical extremes.

Millions of people will have their humanity stripped from them by the claim that they were never truly human at all.

Thats what you do with this knowledge.

Hey stormfags, you're big on eugenics, right? Why don't you do us a favour and eliminate yourselves from the gene pool.

You're as bad as the fucking creationists.

This thread went pretty silent once some guy asked for source on the stats.

>>4778076
>people always point out how much better whites are from blacks but nobody points out that the same research shows Chinese and Japanese are higher than whites and Jews actually rank higher than all other groups.

Definition for racist:
Web definitions:
a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others.

The reason being found in the definition of racist.

>>4778052
Why is it that this "legacy of slavery" has caused descendants of slaves to have a higher average IQ than those who remained in Africa?

>>4778085
>He doesn't know that the point of eugenics is to get rid of substandard life

have the liberals finally given up? awful quiet around here

>>4778079
Why would you want a racist teaching your kids? Why would want a racist enforcing the law?

>>4778086
Interesting point - the Eugenics movement (at least in the pre-WW2 era in e.g. Germany and Austria) wasn't primarily motivated by scientific findings, as far as I know. Yes, they used the back-then-current science to justify their actions, but it wasn't the motivator.

Nevertheless, good point.

>>4778092
Those who had remained in Africa, such as the Nigerians, rank the highest in pursuit of education after immigrating to the U.S.

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Data-show-Nigerians-the-most-educated-in-the-U-S-1600808.php

>>4778085

So intelligence is suddenly hereditary? Make up your mind.

>>4778097
Give us the sauce on those stats as perviously requested, kid.

>>4778102
Why would you want someone dumb enough to believe racial egalitarianism teaching your children?

Why would you want someone who doesn't understand racial differences in criminality enforcing the law?

>>4778108
Well now they have the full support of empiricism behind it.

That might imply that something motivated by quackery back then will extend 10 fold now because they are now justified.

Just what the fuck do you say to a black man
To kill himself because he's a genetically inferior dog?

No, really. What?

>>4778116
Do you want someone who believes in genetic predeterminism teaching your kids?

In 1980, Robert Graham started a sperm bank that made the sperm of Nobel Prize winners (“geniuses”) available to women who wanted to become pregnant. It closed in 1999. Sperm banks have discovered that women do not choose sperm just on the basis of the intelligence or success of the donor. They pick the physical characteristics they want in their child, usually selecting characteristics similar to themselves. They certainly want a healthy good-looking child of above-average intelligence but, after that, they select on the basis of all sorts of quirky things, such as does the sperm donor like cats, was he born on a farm, is he a good swimmer, etc.?
If people make their own eugenic decisions, and the technology is available to implement those decisions, they will generally select for traits that will improve the health, intelligence, attractiveness, and fitness of the next generation. If government bureaucrats do the selecting, a quite different result is likely. Western countries, for example, by paying more welfare for more children ("You feed, we breed"), provide a perverse incentive that encourages people who are incapable of caring even for themselves to have children, passing on to their children the very alleles that made their parents incompetent, which is surely dysgenic. (“The rich get richer and the poor get children.”)

>>4778097
>liberals
>confirmed for political motivations and not scientific motivations
Get out.

Do thousands of years of geographic separation affect the presence or absence of genes or alleles related to brain activity? Yes, and this is evident through the ASPM and MCPH1 genes.

>>4778116
>dumb enough to believe racial egalitarianism

Actually it turns out those who are racist and have conservative beliefs tend to have low IQs.

http://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html

Perhaps it is because they were raised in rural, religious, socially conservative families that had dumb culture. That pattern tends to hold true for middle and southern America.

>>4778113
Biology -
Too hard for some people.

>>4778122
>genetically inferior
How again does this show up in the new findings? I don't know shit about genetics, but I though these papers are about genetic evolution and genetic relationships between different ethnics or races around the world - where does this result imply any superiority or inferiority?

>>4778125

You know, all those horses would be equally as fast if they had just had the same quality of food and training. I think some of the horses lose because people think they can’t win and the horses believe it, Horse racing is really just plain wrong because it makes the horses that lose feel bad about themselves.

How could someone think a horse is genetically inclined to be more intelligent or more fast because of his pedigree?

>>4778102
>Realising one race is stupid and violent
>Racist

Pick one

>>4778133
What makes the study ludicrous, even ignoring the biases, manipulations, and qualifications just outlined, by the authors’ own admission the direct effect size for “g” on “racism” is only -0.01 for men and 0.02 for women. Utterly trivial; close enough to no effect to be no effect, their results statistically “significant” only because of the massive sample size.

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=5118

>>4778109
there is a selection bias here.
Nigerians in america are smart =/= all nigerians everywhere are smart

the smart ones are able to leave and succeed while the stupids stay and languish.

>>4778109
>>4778157
Not to mention that that is a self-reported survey. All it reveals is that Nigerians are less honest.

People who fall for the "Nigerians are most educated" lie are the type of people who fall for Nigerian email scams.

>>4778133
i clicked the link and saw 1 paragraph with not data......
i would also like to see their definition of low iq.

>>4778141
but people aren't horses and life isn't a horse race.

>>4778133
>>4778151
This is the type of trash that /sci/ considers good science? How embarrassing for your entire board.

>When the kids became 33 and 30 year olds, they were asked whether they agreed with 13 or 16 questions like, “Schools should teach children to obey authority”, “Family life suffers if mum is working full-time.”

>Another was, “People who break the law should be rehabilitated.” Just kidding! It’s actually, “People who break the law should be given stiffer sentences.” The bias in the question wording is ignored.

>Another question was, “None of the political parties would do anything to benefit me.” Is agreeing or disagreeing with that a “conservative” position? What would the Occupy people say? Another, “Being single provides more time to experience life and find out about yourself.” Conservative or liberal?

>According to the NCDS (pdf), there were about 50 questions, of which only 13 were used. A “conservative”, then, is whatever Hodson and Busseri say it is. The same thing goes for what a “racist” is.

i for one as a white admit that east asians are smarter in math then whites the evidence is overwhelming.

>>4777893
>>4778047

Wow, people are fucking stupid. Generally, scoring less than a 70 classifies someone as mentally retarded. You can be as racist as you want, but judging by those "graphs" it looks like they're saying that about a third of black people are mentally retarded... which is fucking stupid and clearly not true.

Jesus, people never actually fucking think about the "statistics" they present.

>>4778183
Just because you wish it weren't true does not make it so.

I'll just leave this here. Stop using dog-breeds analogy, you retards.

>>4778183
>Generally, scoring less than a 70 classifies someone as mentally retarded.

Really? I always thought that IQ tests are normalized so that the score 100 is exactly the median, which would make such a rule (<70 points - retarded) quite a bad idea.

>>4778183

Forgive me about that graph, but I didn't feel like posting without an image. Also, since I am extremely racist, I find it necessary to post such images to (hopefully) make other "politically neutral" people change their minds about their opinions, provided that they're stupid enough, in the same fashion as other extremists do.

>>4778183
>>4778183
makes sense that low iq people commit more crime

pls archive this thread

West Virginia is extremely poor yet crime is not a problem there.

Because the state is 99% white.

>liberals

See, this is what I don't understand. There is nothing about liberalism that says there can't be generic differences. In fact, it is right wing policies which are incompatible with genetic determinism as the whole moral argument of capitalism relies on the claim that anyone can rise to the top if they work hard enough.

Relevant:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjVFwSyBDdA&feature=plcp

>>4778052
>>4778046
Ogbu, J. U. (2003).Black American students in an affluent suburb: A study of academic
disengagement. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

>>4778218
Prisoners Per capita
United States: 715 per 100,000 people
South Africa: 402 per 100,000 people
Clearly these statistics show that White Americans commit more crime when compared to Africans.

>>4778239
The belief that all races are inherently equivalent is central to modern liberal politics.

Liberal policies like affirmative action, disparate impact, "hate" speech, forced integration, mass third-world immigration, and more are all founded on their faith based belief in racial equivalence.

Conservatives tend to believe in equal treatment, while liberals believe in equal outcomes no matter how unfairly you have to treat people to achieve them.

>>4778256
> The belief that all races are inherently equivalent is central to modern liberal politics.
lolno

>>4778216
Yeah, that one guy who claimed that /sci/ can beat /pol/ in a debate must be feeling pretty embarrassed right now.

Either /sci/ and /pol/ agree on the realities of racial differences or /sci/ is completely outclassed here.

>>4778258
Yes.

Liberal policies are completely unjustifiable when deprived of the myth that all races are equivalent.

>>4778262
I don't think you're reading the correct thread, buddy.

>>4778270
Your repeated assertion deserves only repeated denial. You're wrong.

>>4778275

How is he wrong? Give him proof.

>>4778282
> make wild-ass claim about the foundations of an ill-defined political group
> never defend your wild-ass claim
> someone says you're wrong, giving you exactly as much attention as you deserve
> shift the burden of proof

stay classy faggots

>>4778262
>claimed that /sci/ can beat /pol/ in a debate must be feeling pretty embarrassed right now.
Get fucked arsehole /sci/ racist bigots can out class /pol/ retarded racist bigots any day of the week.
Some of the /sci/ racists can actually spell, and a few have been spotted making coherent statements.
Fuck off and die.

>>4778262
You and I obviously have different reasons for archiving this.

So perfect~ ;_;