Total Posts:49|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Very interesting racial study

Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 9:01:48 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
This is a decade-old, but many people have never heard of it. It is a scientific attempt to prove that there are biological differences between the races:

http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org...

You don't have to read the study unless you are really interested, because his graphs tell his conclusions very succinctly (particularly the very first graph). His conclusions? That there are 3 basic genetically distinct races: mongoloids, negroids, and caucasions (it is unclear where he puts American and Asian Indians into this scheme). He basically puts forth that blacks and asians occupy both ends of the spectrums, continually, while whites take up the moderate position in every case. What are these spectrums? IQ, personality, law-abidedness, genital size, reproductive rate... Basically, blacks have big genitals (and lips) so that other blacks will be more likely to mate with them faster, and they basically live shorter, faster lives, breeding frantically. Asians have small genitals, live longer, and are more relaxed with breeding. Asians are the smartest while blacks are the dumbest... Please read these graphs and tell me what you think. I know there are people on here that respect this sort of science so we should get a good dialogue. Sorry if this has been posted in the past.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 9:09:11 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/10/2010 9:01:48 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
This is a decade-old, but many people have never heard of it. It is a scientific attempt to prove that there are biological differences between the races:

http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org...

You don't have to read the study unless you are really interested, because his graphs tell his conclusions very succinctly (particularly the very first graph). His conclusions? That there are 3 basic genetically distinct races: mongoloids, negroids, and caucasions (it is unclear where he puts American and Asian Indians into this scheme). He basically puts forth that blacks and asians occupy both ends of the spectrums, continually, while whites take up the moderate position in every case. What are these spectrums? IQ, personality, law-abidedness, genital size, reproductive rate... Basically, blacks have big genitals (and lips) so that other blacks will be more likely to mate with them faster, and they basically live shorter, faster lives, breeding frantically. Asians have small genitals, live longer, and are more relaxed with breeding. Asians are the smartest while blacks are the dumbest... Please read these graphs and tell me what you think. I know there are people on here that respect this sort of science so we should get a good dialogue. Sorry if this has been posted in the past.

I think nature vs. nurture has a lot to do with it.

inb4 Geo says race doesn't exist.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 9:12:35 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/10/2010 9:01:48 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
This is a decade-old, but many people have never heard of it. It is a scientific attempt to prove that there are biological differences between the races:


Aieee!!! A scientist is trying to show us stuff that we already know!!!

The horror the horror!

RACIST!!!!
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 9:17:48 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/10/2010 9:12:35 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/10/2010 9:01:48 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
This is a decade-old, but many people have never heard of it. It is a scientific attempt to prove that there are biological differences between the races:


Aieee!!! A scientist is trying to show us stuff that we already know!!!

The horror the horror!

RACIST!!!!

Lol xD I do believe I've heard that years ago tho. How under the radar was it really? Is it just cause people don't like admitting that others are statistically different?
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 1:25:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/10/2010 10:32:51 AM, Pirate wrote:
Is the scientist black?

A black scientist? Are you crazy?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 2:16:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Please read these graphs and tell me what you think.:

A garbage-in, garbage-out hypothesis. Upon peer-review, they'd wipe their @ss with this paper.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 2:23:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
What I have been taught is that the "racial" differences we see are just trivial and skin-deep. Racial biological differences are quite minute and not worth noting. Do you disagree Cereb Narc? I am open to the fact that this scientist is right, if only for the reason that I feel my own bias towards the opposite.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 5:49:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I just searched this guy on PsycInfo database and he has 31 journals, 2 essays, and a book, every one of them determined to prove blacks are genetically inferior in something (namely intelligence) or more criminal/animalistic. I will take a look at his "proof" but I can't say it'll do anything for me...
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 5:58:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/10/2010 5:49:09 PM, TulleKrazy wrote:
I just searched this guy on PsycInfo database and he has 31 journals, 2 essays, and a book, every one of them determined to prove blacks are genetically inferior in something (namely intelligence) or more criminal/animalistic. I will take a look at his "proof" but I can't say it'll do anything for me...

I don't think it's implying that blacks are inferior in any way - simply that they have genetic, biological tendencies toward certain behavior, or certain strengths and weaknesses. There's no denying that genetics determine things like athletic ability, for example. If one race seemingly has more of the genes that make one athletic, then wouldn't it logically follow that this race is predispositioned to this aptitute based on the science? Sure it does.

Similarly, there are some negative tendencies people are dispositioned to also (such as crime). There have been several attempt to prove that certain races are more apt at certain things than others. Of course this makes no mass generalization about how you should treat people or what to expect of them, but if the findings are consistent then it makes sense to report the information. I think a lot of the backlash and criticism is because people presume this content is racist.

I read a book on a similar topic titled Race, Evolution and Behavior. Interesting stuff (boring book though - not gonna lie).
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 6:03:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Wow, lotsa typos.

*aptitude, for instance.

Also, speaking of genetic tendencies for athleticism lol I think in the book the author proved or tried to (I forget how) that actually black people are genetically dispositioned to be most athletic, and yes that Asians are more likely to be good at math (for reasons outside of their strict parents forcing them to study it).

This kind of stuff should be taken with a grain of salt.

For instance I'm a huge feminist, but should I get my panties in a bunch if people point out that woman can or tend to be moody, catty, emotional, sensitive and passive? No, because biologically speaking women are built that way (insofar as having more of the genetic and most importantly hormonal attributes that lead to these traits). Similarly men tend to be more aggressive because they have more testosterone, etc. Of course those qualities do not apply to *all* girls but it's not automatically negative to stereotype. There's a difference between an observation and an insult and I guess you just have to be tactful in how you state things *shrugs*
President of DDO
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 6:20:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Here's another study in direct reponse to one of Rushton. http://journals2.scholarsportal.info.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca...

Granted, the journal I posted was published 6 years before the journal in the OP.

Main points are:

-Rushton doesn't measure brain size accurately and ignores gender differences; ie. caucasian women have smaller brains than black men and yet have higher test scores, which undermines his premise that the bigger the brain = the smarter you are.

-By lumping American whites and European whites together, data gets skewed.

I sort of just skimmed through this one, I'm kind of busy right now...
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 6:24:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/10/2010 2:23:46 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
What I have been taught is that the "racial" differences we see are just trivial and skin-deep. Racial biological differences are quite minute and not worth noting. Do you disagree Cereb Narc? I am open to the fact that this scientist is right, if only for the reason that I feel my own bias towards the opposite.

Sorry my sarcasm was not clear, I am very much open to what this scientist is saying. Clearly there are differences between the races, athletic prowess is clearly one such difference.

The reason why I have reacted like this is because it concerns things we all know, but are forbidden to address. As if a slight disparity in IQ rates would suddenly cause us to build death camps.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 6:48:28 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/10/2010 5:58:10 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 9/10/2010 5:49:09 PM, TulleKrazy wrote:
I just searched this guy on PsycInfo database and he has 31 journals, 2 essays, and a book, every one of them determined to prove blacks are genetically inferior in something (namely intelligence) or more criminal/animalistic. I will take a look at his "proof" but I can't say it'll do anything for me...

I don't think it's implying that blacks are inferior in any way - simply that they have genetic, biological tendencies toward certain behavior, or certain strengths and weaknesses. There's no denying that genetics determine things like athletic ability, for example. If one race seemingly has more of the genes that make one athletic, then wouldn't it logically follow that this race is predispositioned to this aptitute based on the science? Sure it does.

Similarly, there are some negative tendencies people are dispositioned to also (such as crime). There have been several attempt to prove that certain races are more apt at certain things than others. Of course this makes no mass generalization about how you should treat people or what to expect of them, but if the findings are consistent then it makes sense to report the information. I think a lot of the backlash and criticism is because people presume this content is racist.

I read a book on a similar topic titled Race, Evolution and Behavior. Interesting stuff (boring book though - not gonna lie).

Gah, sorry for my last post but I got engaged in a phone conversation and lost my train of thought.

Anyway. I will respectfully disagree with you in that I do believe it implies inferiority, despite what the author claims. These studies will be (and have been) used for the purpose of furthering prejudice against black people. The best way to not sound racist is to say "it's a scientific fact" and that's what the author is doing.

As mentioned in my last post, the actual measurements of brain size and intelligence contradict the claim that bigger brain=higher intelligence.

Typical IQ tests are not standardized across cultures, so I'm highly dubious of his results for African intelligence.

I don't really understand his point about high sex drive and STDs... all it proves is black people don't wear condoms (this s cultural, not biological, as he claims).

As for crime, the link I posted in my last post showed that Amerian whites have significantly higher crime rates than European whites, and yet the averages between them both lowered the score for American whites. This sort of sloppy data collection puts credibility into question.

That's my two cents, anyway.
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/10/2010 7:39:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Great! So if I fail the SAT, I have an excuse!!! Of course... it will only be half as good since I am only half black.
kfc
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2010 1:10:24 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
What a load of old rubbish! I'm clever, but I'm not Chinese and I have a large appendage but I'm not black!

And another thing: they say that one in four people on the planet are Chinese, but that's rubbish too: I mean, I'm not Chinese, my mum's not Chinese, my dad's not Chinese and neither is my sister Lei-Lei.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2010 1:14:51 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/11/2010 1:10:24 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
What a load of old rubbish! I'm clever, but I'm not Chinese and I have a large appendage but I'm not black!

And another thing: they say that one in four people on the planet are Chinese, but that's rubbish too: I mean, I'm not Chinese, my mum's not Chinese, my dad's not Chinese and neither is my sister Lei-Lei.

LMAO.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2010 7:03:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/10/2010 6:24:11 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/10/2010 2:23:46 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
What I have been taught is that the "racial" differences we see are just trivial and skin-deep. Racial biological differences are quite minute and not worth noting. Do you disagree Cereb Narc? I am open to the fact that this scientist is right, if only for the reason that I feel my own bias towards the opposite.

Sorry my sarcasm was not clear, I am very much open to what this scientist is saying. Clearly there are differences between the races, athletic prowess is clearly one such difference.

The reason why I have reacted like this is because it concerns things we all know, but are forbidden to address. As if a slight disparity in IQ rates would suddenly cause us to build death camps.

But is there really an IQ disparity? IQ score disparities can be attributed to a vast array of social complexities, without going into detail...

Blacks definitely occupy a disproportional amount of basketball players and most football positions (quarterback is certainly not one of those for some reason), but this could be attributed to selective breeding, possibly during slave times.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2010 8:00:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
What I want to know is why somebody concluded that various races of people who lived on different continents with little contact with each other until a few thousand years ago would have evolved with no significant differences genetically besides skin color.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/11/2010 9:39:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
It's not that interesting, not particularly well done as far as studies go. Brain size was determined in traditionally nutrition poor areas for the African regions (sub Saharan), confounding brain size measurements. IQ was not measured by an IQ test - but measured via Ravens Matrices - which while it does scale well with IQ, isn't a measure of it - the issue of using U.S. norms to score the African data still applies.

Rob, graphs such as those used only indicate differences, not whether they are statistically meaningful differences, which is an entirely separate thing.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2010 2:51:43 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/11/2010 7:03:35 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
At 9/10/2010 6:24:11 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/10/2010 2:23:46 PM, Rob1Billion wrote:
What I have been taught is that the "racial" differences we see are just trivial and skin-deep. Racial biological differences are quite minute and not worth noting. Do you disagree Cereb Narc? I am open to the fact that this scientist is right, if only for the reason that I feel my own bias towards the opposite.

Sorry my sarcasm was not clear, I am very much open to what this scientist is saying. Clearly there are differences between the races, athletic prowess is clearly one such difference.

The reason why I have reacted like this is because it concerns things we all know, but are forbidden to address. As if a slight disparity in IQ rates would suddenly cause us to build death camps.

But is there really an IQ disparity? IQ score disparities can be attributed to a vast array of social complexities, without going into detail...

Yea IQ is a bad example. Under our IQ tests a pygmy (assuming we could make the test accessable) would probably score something like 50, under his tests so would we.

Blacks definitely occupy a disproportional amount of basketball players and most football positions (quarterback is certainly not one of those for some reason), but this could be attributed to selective breeding, possibly during slave times.

It is shown across the range of the black race however, I don't think slavery is the reason. Slavery was based on the fact that are physically superior to whites, and the natives. No one will accuse you of racism for point that out, but show them an IQ chart and you are Nazi.

The races are different, though IQ tests are flawed it is entirely possible that there is a genuine disparity.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Zetsubou
Posts: 4,933
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/12/2010 1:53:48 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Old topic is old.

>The Bell Curve
>Race, Evolution, and Behavior

I've cited from both books before; I own both but have never completed them. If you're interested in 'racial science' it's always fun to read (Neo)Nazi/German euogenic studies, try not to get too into them. :P
'sup DDO -- july 2013
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2010 11:34:13 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/10/2010 9:01:48 AM, Rob1Billion wrote:
This is a decade-old, but many people have never heard of it. It is a scientific attempt to prove that there are biological differences between the races:

http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org...

Having problems with acrobat so can't open the pdf but I can say with some confidence that it is bs.

Rushton is an academic joke. How many respectable scientists have wiki pages where over half the content is serious criticisms of their methods and conclusions? http://en.wikipedia.org...

The only people who seem to give this clown a platform are racist groups like American Renaissance magazine who often invite him to speak at their conferences. http://en.wikipedia.org...

At 9/11/2010 8:00:40 PM, mongeese wrote:
What I want to know is why somebody concluded that various races of people who lived on different continents with little contact with each other until a few thousand years ago would have evolved with no significant differences genetically besides skin color.

I think it's pretty much established that modern man originated in Africa and we all descend from common ancestors.
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.trussel.com...
http://www.sciencemag.org...
http://www.ecotao.com...
http://news.bbc.co.uk...

Also, there are plenty of ethnic variations other than skin colour, but they are all just as superficial.

At 9/10/2010 9:09:11 AM, J.Kenyon wrote:
inb4 Geo says race doesn't exist.

Ethnic traits certainly exist and it is definitely possible to identify someone based on their geographic ancestry, this is the scientific basis for the general conception of race amongst humans.

The quibble is that the term is a misnomer, because different ethnic groups don't differ enough to fit into the biological classification of race, the way it is used regarding other species.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
"The term race is often used in taxonomy as a synonym for subspecies. In this sense human races are said not to exist, as taxonomically all humans are classified as the subspecies Homo sapiens sapiens"
http://www.nature.com...

At 9/12/2010 2:51:43 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
It is shown across the range of the black race however, I don't think slavery is the reason. Slavery was based on the fact that are physically superior to whites, and the natives. No one will accuse you of racism for point that out, but show them an IQ chart and you are Nazi.

I will indeed accuse you of racism if you claim black people are inherently physically superior to white people. I think it's bs and that the success of black athletes from Western countries is mostly due to societal expectations and stereotyping, as well as perhaps the issues of selective breeding Rob referred to.

Don't know what you're getting at with your proposed basis for slavery.
Rob1Billion
Posts: 1,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2010 1:11:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/11/2010 8:00:40 PM, mongeese wrote:
What I want to know is why somebody concluded that various races of people who lived on different continents with little contact with each other until a few thousand years ago would have evolved with no significant differences genetically besides skin color.

A good point... Although I wasn't aware you were a pro-evolutionist.

Are these differences significant though? I mean, if I have ten children with the same woman, they all won't have the exact same attributes that he listed; you could probably spread them out in the same way. Do you see where I am going with this?

I have a relevant anecdote - Back in my hometown there is a set of identical twins. On one of my trips back, while we were getting drunk at a party, I remember them talking about the fact that one of them had an extremely large "appendage" while the other one didn't. I remember one of them making the comment that "I wish I could fvck a girl with [his] d1ck..." Or something to that effect. So, if even identical twins have THAT much disparity, what is the point of this guy's data? Again, I think Mongeese's point has some definite merit, but I somehow doubt that if this study were performed in different areas of the world that they would reach the same repeatable results.
Master P is the end result of capitalism.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/13/2010 1:35:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/13/2010 11:34:13 AM, feverish wrote:

I will indeed accuse you of racism if you claim black people are inherently physically superior to white people.

Well that is your perogative but I am happy to reach conclusions based on the evidence.

I think it's bs and that the success of black athletes from Western countries is mostly due to societal expectations and stereotyping, as well as perhaps the issues of selective breeding Rob referred to.

So how do you explain the 'Great White Hope' of American boxing, it also fails to address the disipropotionate success of blacks not drawn from slave stock.

Don't know what you're getting at with your proposed basis for slavery.

It is historical fact and indicates the differences between the races.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2010 11:02:21 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/13/2010 1:35:43 PM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/13/2010 11:34:13 AM, feverish wrote:

I will indeed accuse you of racism if you claim black people are inherently physically superior to white people.

Well that is your perogative but I am happy to reach conclusions based on the evidence.

Any evidence you would care to offer?

I think it's bs and that the success of black athletes from Western countries is mostly due to societal expectations and stereotyping, as well as perhaps the issues of selective breeding Rob referred to.

So how do you explain the 'Great White Hope' of American boxing, it also fails to address the disipropotionate success of blacks not drawn from slave stock.

You could just as well say that the success of black boxers indicates superior intelligence on their part, as boxing is a very mentally demanding sport. If you take a sport that relies purely on physical strength, like power lifting for example, you will find that the most succesful athletes in that discipline are actually white. http://www.google.co.uk...

There are plenty of social explanations for the success of black heavyweight boxers. The determination and enthusiasm for violence required to succeed in this field is often nurtured in the very hostile and impoverished environments that black Americans have been more likely to endure than their white sporting rivals.

Don't know what you're getting at with your proposed basis for slavery.

It is historical fact and indicates the differences between the races.

I am quite prepared to accept that you are better informed on history than myself, but I'm not going to accept something as "historical fact" just because you say so. Can you please provide me with something to support your belief that the slave trade was based on the physical superiority of black people.

Are you saying the slave trade "indicates the differences between the races"?
I don't really follow you here.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2010 11:17:31 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I suppose in not so many generations from now, in multi-ethnic countries like the US and the UK, the number of "pure" whites, blacks, Asians (people from the Indian sub-continent) and Orientals (people from the Far East) will decrease through inter-breeding.

On another side-note: I find the heated debate about immigration in the US fascinating. After all, the vast majority of the population descend from immigrants - only the minority "Indians" are indigenous to the country.

I mean why put the brakes on immigration now?
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2010 10:02:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 9/15/2010 11:17:31 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
I suppose in not so many generations from now, in multi-ethnic countries like the US and the UK, the number of "pure" whites, blacks, Asians (people from the Indian sub-continent) and Orientals (people from the Far East) will decrease through inter-breeding.

On another side-note: I find the heated debate about immigration in the US fascinating. After all, the vast majority of the population descend from immigrants - only the minority "Indians" are indigenous to the country.

I mean why put the brakes on immigration now?


I always wondered the same. -_- One of the reasons I oppose the US.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave