We’re the cavemen, not Neanderthals

https://www.mpg.de/7494657/neandertals_leather_tools

“acquired”

Humans never admit they wronged another species.

Some argue that before they were replaced, Neandertals had cultural capabilities similar to modern humans, while others argue that these similarities only appear once modern humans came into contact with Neandertals.

Better than ‘humans’ of the time, clearly.

 “Lissoirs like these are a great tool for working leather, so much so that 50 thousand years after Neandertals made these, I was able to purchase a new one on the Internet from a site selling tools for traditional crafts,” says Soressi. “It shows that this tool was so efficient that it had been maintained through time with almost no change. It might be one or perhaps even the only heritage from Neandertal times that our society is still using today.”

Bullshit.

They know we non-Africans have their genes, they hope we don’t know.

Maybe human genius is just higher percentages of Neanderthal. It would explain NW Europe’s incredible ingenuity and science, even compared to other Whites.

Haven’t you wondered why they want your DNA? (Before whites die out, ofc).

And the companies privately researching never find/report Neanderthal DNA, unlike real geneticists?

You know how they acted like this is a vague finding?

Left until right at the end, where only nerds read:

The results place the Pech-de-l’Azé I bone tool to approximately 50 thousand years ago.

This is well before the best evidence of modern humans in Western Europe, and it is much older than any other examples of sophisticated bone tool technologies.

Negative evidence of ‘human’ superiority.

Taxonomic approaches to race

There is no race, only the human race.”

Literary terms [1] are anti-science.

http://www.toqonline.com/archives/v8n3/TOQv8n3Hamilton.pdf

Purely to wind up Sargon of Cuckad.

On that last line, boy do I have an interesting post scheduled.

Links or it didn’t poem.

http://www.bartleby.com/205/25.html

Oh! that the Desert were my dwelling-place,
  With one fair Spirit for my minister,        
  That I might all forget the human race,
  And, hating no one, love but only her!

Avoiding the word ‘race’

http://anthropology.msu.edu/anp489-fs16/files/2012/08/Race-in-anthropology.pdf

Things a scientist wouldn’t do.

Imagine being so scared of the truth posed by harder sciences that you try to flip the cause and effect.

As in, that biology is shaped by culture.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20983/abstract

That isn’t how evolution works. That’s really what it is, evolutionary denial.

White weeaboo people don’t spontaneously give birth to an Asian kid, do they?

The harder science wins, in this case, the mathematics of genetics.
When they compare intragroup, they rarely factor in the genetic admixture of many groups e.g. Africans living in America. This contaminates their group result.

Note a trend with these papers

https://www.anthropology.northwestern.edu/documents/people/di_leonardo.pdf

No such thing as whiteness, or an ever-changing and expanding definition of White.

They’d never dare pull that with any other racial category. The term is erasure. It’s white erasure.

This isn’t some sociology hokum you can talk your way around. Yet we see attempts.

Official statements try to minimize the evidence.

Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic “racial” groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. source

Only?

ONLY?

In genetics, anything over 0.0001% is huge. That’s the medical standard of significance. They can’t call it insig. but they’re downplaying it (lying) for stupids who can’t do stats. Six percent is huge. Physical variation is the forensic meaning of race, yes, but note the labeling problem, the so-called. Okay, improve the naming convention but what you measure is still real. 94% is intended to throw you off by the anchoring effect. That’s a deliberate bias (fraud) where you fiddle with the context. For the same species, 94% is incredibly low. 

Bear in mind, we share 50-60% of our genetics with a BANANA.

The bleeding heart of the rest of that page shows you aren’t going to get an intellectually honest conversation out of the people funded by the taxpayer. Fine, don’t develop race-specific meds, it’s black people that’ll die since they’re less insured in the US. Denial of reality has fatal consequences. Deny race-specific illnesses too, since it’d be racist to diagnose and treat them, huh? Like, the original definition of scientific racism.

http://www.jewishgeneticdiseases.org/diseases/tay-sachs-disease/

But wait, there’s more!

bowing

http://whoami.sciencemuseum.org.uk/whoami/findoutmore/yourgenes/wheredidwecomefrom/whatareourclosestanimalrelatives

Our closest animal relatives are the great apes: chimpanzees, orangutans and gorillas. About 98% of the DNA in your genes is exactly the same as in chimpanzees, making you as closely related to a chimp as horses are to zebras. Chimps and humans share a common ancestor, who was probably swinging through the trees about 5 million years ago. Many other species of ape around at the same time eventually became extinct.

Yes, you read that right, you have more in common with a chimpanzee than some other races.

darwincontrol

Video: The Druids and the Egyptians

hey, these posts are fun

advice to the guy: faster tempo, less monotone sound like you’re reading out a lecture, imagine you’re flirting with someone at a bar, fast back and forth to ideas


Contains:
The origin of the name Scotland and the Stone of Destiny.
Africans don’t have red hair and straight noses, also statues are absorbent, a lot of people dunno that. These white people (red hair is recessive down the ENTIRE line, it’s a Neanderthal trait actually) brought horses and chariots to Egypt, along with metallurgical technology (later expanded during the Scientific Revolution).
NW European genetics link at 7 minutes. GENETICS. 70% of British men. Less than 1% of modern Egyptians have that connection.
BOOM.

boom boom boom blackadder
KANGS WUZ KANGS. WIZARD KINGS WITH MAGIC ROCKS.

Once read a theory that Jesus was in Britain during one of his disappearing binges.
I bet that ties in.

Someone get this guy on alt right podcasts.
Seriously, why is he not a thing?


Relates to the Rhesus Negative mutation, which prevents outbreeding to an extent by aborting Positive babies (look it up, medical fact), thereby it must‘ve evolved in isolation (recessive).
Rh- is not present in Africans. It comes from the Cro Magnon man.

TLDR: OOA (Out of Africa) is BS. The BBC should really hire this guy since he crosses over into forensics, wider biology and other fields that are nigh-on impossible to falsify (unlike most mainstream cultural anthropology). That would be intellectually honest, which we know they are not.

The woman on the cover of The Occult Secrets of Vril may have known Nikola Tesla.

I… heard.
Somewhere.

Link: Evolution’s speed and selection

http://takimag.com/article/the_scientist_vs_the_splc_steve_sailer#axzz45yDbBkBG

Considering the SPLC are rentseekers, for a scientist, that’s a badge of honour.

What a loss, though. I don’t see a new guard to replace the old.

It would be nice if they could measure finer-grain details on the speed and selection pressures.

It annoys me when people treat all Africans as the same, they had as much variety as Europeans, and it’s important to call a thing by its name.

European racial genes defy OOA, support Multi-Regional

OOA = Out of Africa

MRH = Multi-Regional Hypothesis, without which, everyone would share all their DNA.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/11/european-genetic-identity-may-stretch-back-36000-years

Europeans today are the descendants of a very old, interconnected population of hunter-gatherers that had already spread throughout Europe and much of central and western Asia by 36,000 years ago. “What is surprising is this guy represents one of the earliest Europeans, but at the same time he basically contains all the genetic components that you find in contemporary Europeans—at 37,000 years ago,” Willerslev says.

We’re older than they claimed.

As researchers recently sequenced the genomes of more than a dozen ancient members of our species,Homo sapiens, in Europe and Asia in rapid succession, they added a third genetic component: a “ghost” lineage of nomads who blew into northeast Europe from the steppes of western Asia 4000 to 5000 years ago.

There’s your MRH.

If that finding holds up, the mysterious DNA from western Eurasia must be very ancient, and not solely from a wave of nomads that entered Europe 5000 years ago or so, as proposed by researchers in September.

Instead of a mystery, perhaps they were just wrong?

The Victorians started the romantic notion of Africa as the Cradle of Life because it was so primitive, savage and untouched by industrialization. Along with Darwin, was the idea they’d been left behind, or were furthest behind in the ‘race for life’ of evolution.

Other researchers say that this new genome is important because “it is the first paper to document some degree of continuity among the first people to get to Europe and the people living there today,” says population geneticist David Reich of Harvard University, one of the authors on the triple migration model. It also is “a striking finding that the Kostenki 14 genome already has the three major European components present that we detect in modern Europeans,” says Johannes Krause of the University of Tübingen in Germany.

Looks like a land claim. Ours.
Perhaps some braniac could develop a salivary border test for it?

But even if the man from Kostenki in Russia had all these elements 36,000 years ago, that doesn’t mean that other Europeans did, Reich says. His team’s DNA data and models suggest that Europeans in the west and north did not pick up DNA from the steppes until much later. He and Krause also think that Willerslev’s study needs to be confirmed with higher resolution sequencing to rule out contamination, and to have more population genetics modeling explain the distribution of these genetic types. The bottom line, researchers agree, is that European origins are “seem to be much more complex than most people thought,” Willerslev says.

Population = race.

White people are a race. End of discussion.

Nordic Spartans? How white were Ancient Rome and Greece?

And that’s why the Ancients had Empires. The IQ required would match.

http://www.unz.com/article/what-race-were-the-greeks-and-romans/

…There is good reason to think that Homer was recording stories handed down during the Dark Age. He was a bard who lived in Ionia, a region on the Aegean coast of what is now Turkey, and if he were making the stories up he would have claimed that the heroes were Ionian. Instead, he sings praises to the light-haired Achaean nobility: Achilles, their greatest warrior, has “red-gold hair,” Odysseus, their greatest strategist, has “chestnut hair,” his wife Penelope has “white cheeks the color of pure snow,” Agamede, a healer and expert on medicinal plants, is “blonde,” and King Menelaus of Sparta, the husband of Helen, has “red hair.” Helen, likewise, has “fair hair,” and even slave girls are light-skinned: “fair-tressed Hecamede,” “fair-cheeked Chryseis,” and “blonde Briseis.” This is significant, for if even some of the slaves were blond it would mean the Nordic type was not unique to the Achaeans, that it was present elsewhere in the Aegean world.

Homer (and Pindar) describe most of the Olympian gods and goddesses as fair haired and “bright eyed,” meaning blue, grey or green. The goddess Demeter has “blond” or “yellow hair,” as does Leto, mother of Apollo, who is also described as “golden haired.” Aphrodite has “pale-gold” hair, and Athena is known as “the fair, bright-eyed one” and the “grey-eyed goddess.” Two of the gods, Poseidon and Hephaestus, are described as having black hair. As noted above, Xenophanes complained that all peoples imagine the gods to look like themselves…..

Thus, classical Greece was a fusion, both cultural and racial, of these two types of whites. Some city-states, such as Thebes and Sparta, were predominantly Nordic. Others, such as Athens, were predominantly Mediterranean, and still others were mixtures of the two.

300 didn’t feature enough gingers.

applause clap clapping yes well done

Wait, there’s more. On wikipedia;

Grant, after defining the Nordics as having aquiline noses, went back through history and found such a nose and other characteristics he called “Nordic” in many historically prominent men. Among these were Alexander the Great, Dante Alighieri, “all the chief men of theRenaissance“, as well as King David. Grant identified Jesus Christ as having had those “physical and moral attributes”.