Miscegenation

DeCoR18

How do you feel about different races having children with each other?

Earthhorse

Perfectly fine.

You?

DeCoR18

Earthhorse wrote: »

Perfectly fine.

You?

Yeah the more the merrier I say! I think it should even be encouraged because I was thinking if all the races interbred there would be just one race then right? Sure then nobody could be called a racist for anything :cool:

bernardo mac

Would a wider gene pool lead to a healthier society?

Earthhorse

DeCoR18 wrote: »

Yeah the more the merrier I say! I think it should even be encouraged because I was thinking if all the races interbred there would be just one race then right? Sure then nobody could be called a racist for anything :cool:

I have heard people propose that idea before. That as different ethnicities mate there'll eventually be no telling us apart. I doubt it will ever get to that extent. It would be nice to live in a world without racism but we'll have to do it by reducing the number of racists to zero not the number of races to one.

DeCoR18

Earthhorse wrote: »

I have heard people propose that idea before. That as different ethnicities mate there'll eventually be no telling us apart. I doubt it will ever get to that extent. It would be nice to live in a world without racism but we'll have to do it by reducing the number of racists to zero not the number of races to one.

Ah yeah my reply was a bit tongue in cheek.

But yeah I don't know I find alot of people would not be against race mixing in order to appear politically correct and not rock the boat. But I also find being white means something to them and considering 12-15% of the global population is white it makes us an overwhelming minority.

Which further makes me wonder why people do not openly condemn race mixing.

Nevyn

IDIC

"Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations"

Iwasfrozen

DeCoR18 wrote: »

Ah yeah my reply was a bit tongue in cheek.

But yeah I don't know I find alot of people would not be against race mixing in order to appear politically correct and not rock the boat. But I also find being white means something to them and considering 12-15% of the global population is white it makes us an overwhelming minority.

Which further makes me wonder why people do not openly condemn race mixing.

Alot of people do privately condem it but don't want to be seen as being racist.

philologos

DeCoR18 wrote: »

But yeah I don't know I find alot of people would not be against race mixing in order to appear politically correct and not rock the boat. But I also find being white means something to them and considering 12-15% of the global population is white it makes us an overwhelming minority.

Which further makes me wonder why people do not openly condemn race mixing.

If I were born elsewhere I would be of a different skin colour, it isn't something that one can be proud of really.

What do you think being white means exactly?

ChocolateSauce

DeCoR18 wrote: »

How do you feel about different races having children with each other?

Exactly the same as I do with same-race couples having children.

DeCoR18

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Alot of people do privately condem it but don't want to be seen as being racist.

I would agree with you, the stigma of being labelled a racist is a very powerful one, perhaps the most powerful stigma in modern times. Far worse than HIV sufferers or gays and lesbians imo, and the strangest thing about it is you can be called a racist for even very mild opinions such as say an objection to large scale immigration.

GLaDOS

bernardo mac wrote: »

Would a wider gene pool lead to a healthier society?

DeCoR18 wrote: »

Wouldn't think so.

A wider gene pool is always good, as the offspring are less likely to inherit genetic disorders, which can be quite common in small gene pools, for example The English Royal Family or pedigree dogs

Far worse than HIV sufferers or gays and lesbians imo, and the strangest thing about it is you can be called a racist for even very mild opinions such as say an objection to large scale immigration.

Having HIV is an absolutely terrible affliction and being called an racist for having controversial opinion does not come close at all.


On the question at hand, I would be of the opinion that anybody who does have a problem with inter-racial relations is fairly ignorant and old fashioned.

AARRRGH

bernardo mac wrote: »

Would a wider gene pool lead to a healthier society?

It would have mixed results.

There are diseases which only affect certain races or which provoke a weaker immune response.

That means a child of a mixed race couple would be weaker to some diseases and stronger to others. So it probably balances itself out. :pac:

DeCoR18

ScienceNerd wrote: »

A wider gene pool is always good, as the offspring are less likely to inherit genetic disorders, which can be quite common in small gene pools, for example The English Royal Family or pedigree dogs

Cystic fibrosis the most common genetic disorder among white people is a very rare disease and the disappearence of that would have basically no change in determining the overall health of society.

Having HIV is an absolutely terrible affliction and being called an racist for having controversial opinion does not come close at all.

You misunderstood my point.

Emme

Hybrid vigour - mixing races is good for the species. I wish all those hot foreign guys had started coming to Ireland earlier - most of them are too young for me! :mad:

jady88

DeCoR18 wrote: »

Yeah the more the merrier I say! I think it should even be encouraged because I was thinking if all the races interbred there would be just one race then right? Sure then nobody could be called a racist for anything :cool:

What a tragedy it would be though... I wouldn't want to live in a world where everyone looked the same...

KaiserMc

Miscegenation is totally 'unnatural' imo, your natural instinct is that you breed with someone of your own race so as to pass on your own genes ie In my case that would result in a 'white ' child . I would be interested to know when people would consider 'miscegenation' a problem ,for example 'London' 1 out of ten children there are mixed race and 4 out of ten children there live in a mixed race family, there are now over 1 million mixed race kids in the Uk, it has taken roughly 70 years for this to happen.In another 100 years how many 'White Kids ' will be born there ? Will people attitudes towards this change if half the children born there were mixed race. I consider miscegenation a disaster , to me it is the replacement of the 'indigenous' people and in this case it happens to be 'White' people that are being replaced.

994

One problem with it is that a half-Asian, half-European child would be viewed as Asian, and the same for a half-African, half-European. Tiger Woods was criticised for calling himself "Cablinasian" - a mix of Caucasian (white), black, Indian (as in, Amerindian) and Asian - because journos insisted that his black ancestry trumps his other ancestors. The same goes for Obama

netwhizkid

994 wrote: »

One problem with it is that a half-Asian, half-European child would be viewed as Asian, and the same for a half-African, half-European. Tiger Woods was criticised for calling himself "Cablinasian" - a mix of Caucasian (white), black, Indian (as in, Amerindian) and Asian - because journos insisted that his black ancestry trumps his other ancestors. The same goes for Obama

When a white (caucasian) person has a child with a non-caucasian, the resulting offspring is usually classified by the other race. Barack Obama is 50% White but I never heard anyone call him white, unless say in a pejorative sense.

KaiserMc

Hazys wrote: »

Can you please provide evidence?

Yes i am shallow, but i rather be shallow and hot and pick a mate based on their hotness rather than profound and ugly and pick a mate the based on their ability to keep the white race strong.

I can't find the exact link at the moment but I will look for it and pass it on to you if i can find it, if you goggle it yourself you will find stats ranging from 55% up to 85%.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping the "White" race strong, we did not get to the stage we are today in Ireland through 'miscegenation ' we did it as a homogeneous country.

Why don't you move to Brazil if your so up for the 'miscegenation' lifestyle.

KaiserMc

I can't find the exact link at the moment but I will look for it and pass it on to you if i can find it, if you goggle it yourself you will find stats ranging from 55% up to 85%.

Couldnt find anything on Google, I'm guessing you'll have to find it for me.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping the "White" race strong, we did not get to the stage we are today in Ireland through 'miscegenation ' we did it as a homogeneous country.

What stage? are you saying we are better than other countries because we have kept Ireland mostly white? Last i checked we were suffering pretty badly with this recesion as opposed to most of other European countries who have a lot more cultural integration.

Why don't you move to Brazil if your so up for the 'miscegenation' lifestyle.

Its a 'lifestlye' to fancy somebody who isn't white?

I can't find the Link but the stats for same race marriage/ divorce (White) in the USA is 40% so it seems logical to me that 'Interracial' marriage/divorce will be higher.
The most stable marriages in the US (Inter Racial)type
1 White male/ black female
2White male/Hispanic female
Least stable
Black Male/ White female
White females initiate divorce proceedings in over two thirds of the cases, seems if you want a happy marriage in the multiCultural USA your best bet is not to marry a "White Female".

Our history goes back a lot further than the last fifteen years,we have not "Kept' Ireland mostly 'White' these economic/asylum seeker had no interest in coming here as we were too poor for them. Our boom years were based mainly on a property bubble and there is only so many houses you can build before people stop buying.
Where is all this Cultural(harmony) integration going on? Please enlighten me !! France or is it England, Italy ? Sweden , Denmark ,Austria, in most of these countries 'far right' parties have made significant gains and are having big problems with their immigrant populations.

I just mentioned 'Brazil' there in case you were interested in seeing a truly mixed race country.

Hazys

KaiserMc wrote: »

Miscegenation is totally 'unnatural' imo, your natural instinct is that you breed with someone of your own race so as to pass on your own genes ie In my case that would result in a 'white ' child . I would be interested to know when people would consider 'miscegenation' a problem ,for example 'London' 1 out of ten children there are mixed race and 4 out of ten children there live in a mixed race family, there are now over 1 million mixed race kids in the Uk, it has taken roughly 70 years for this to happen.In another 100 years how many 'White Kids ' will be born there ? Will people attitudes towards this change if half the children born there were mixed race. I consider miscegenation a disaster , to me it is the replacement of the 'indigenous' people and in this case it happens to be 'White' people that are being replaced.

Funny how Miscegenation has be going on for centuries but is considered unnatural. The average Irish person has a mix of Celtic, Norman and Viking blood in them. Even my second name, which is a reasonably common irish 2nd name can trace its roots to Norway with the Normans and my mothers maiden name is a Celtic name.

I can see how an Irish woman with red hair and freckles marrying (probably not consentual...those Vikings were always upto no good) a big, blonde, axe weaving, swedish viking would have been seemed as different races back in 1200's. Now as its easier for people to travel in the modern world ie last 150yrs and more of the human race from every corner interacts the blend of the world becomes closer.

In the US it would be very hard to find to find anybody who has a blood line that 'kept to its own'. The mix of people with Irish, Italian, African, German, Polish heritage all rolled into one, is astonishing...and the fact that average american wouldnt even know the capitals of the countries their grandparents are from!!

There is nothing more natural than a man find a woman that he thinks is hot, shagging her, having kids and their kids shagging based on whos hot, and so on.

Whats unnatural is picking your mate based on their ability to keep the race strong, or selectively picking who should survive see 1940 Germany.

People are horny by nature theyll shag whatever comes their way...

KaiserMc

Hazys wrote: »

.

I saw the 80% figure on an 'America Christian' zealot site and even I wouldn't use that as a source but would be quiet pleased if it were true , the figures I have seen online say a divorce rate of between 55% and 75% for 'interracial' divorce

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/search/allsearch?mode=viewselected&product=journal&ID=119400377&view_selected.x=96&view_selected.y=4&view_selected=view_selected

My little rant regards our economy was in reply to your statement that countries with high populations of immigrants were somewhat immune to the effects of the present recession which is total nonsense, America is/was hemorrhaging jobs at a rate of half a million a month ,British banks were also in dire straits recently, Iceland is practically bankrupt. China and Japan also felt the effects of the downturn as did Saudi Arabia.

Even though Right wing /Nationalists are minority parties but are gaining support, does it not show that the indigenous populations of these countries are now getting to a stage where they are starting to worry about where their countries are going or could it be the significant rise in crime /murder/rape / robbery in the MultiCultural societies of Europe is what is turning people to the nationalist parties

Hazys

KaiserMc wrote: »

I saw the 80% figure on an 'America Christian' zealot site and even I wouldn't use that as a source but would be quiet pleased if it were true Why would a high rate of divorce make you happy? Do you not argee taking pleasure out of people's pain is a bit f'd up? , the figures I have seen online say a divorce rate of between 55% and 75% for 'interracial' divorce

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/search/allsearch?mode=viewselected&product=journal&ID=119400377&view_selected.x=96&view_selected.y=4&view_selected=view_selected

My little rant regards our economy was in reply to your statement that countries with high populations of immigrants were somewhat immune to the effects of the present recession which is total nonsense Pls quote me where i said that, response below, America is/was hemorrhaging jobs at a rate of half a million a month ,British banks were also in dire straits recently, Iceland is practically bankrupt. China and Japan also felt the effects of the downturn as did Saudi Arabia.

Even though Right wing /Nationalists are minority parties but are gaining support, popularity of these groups have always risen and fallen through the years but they have always and will always be a minority. Yes the BNP's populatrity has slightly risen in the recessionary times but the reasons are obvious. In the 70's they were as popular as they are now but the nearly died out in the 80's so whats to say they wont die out in 2010's? does it not show that the indigenous populations of these countries are now getting to a stage where they are starting to worry about where their countries are going or could it be the significant rise in crime /murder/rape / robbery in the MultiCultural societies of Europe is what is turning people to the nationalist parties A very broad unfound statement that covers all of europe. Again facts and figures would be handy or else its just racist propaganda. Crime can always rise or fall for a number of reason but unless you provide evidence its the non-whites who are the trouble makers you are talking sh1t

What you said was "There is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping the "White" race strong, we did not get to the stage we are today in Ireland through 'miscegenation ' we did it as a homogeneous country." So from this you are implying that Ireland success was based on us having an all white population, while i replied "What stage? are you saying we are better than other countries because we have kept Ireland mostly white? Last i checked we were suffering pretty badly with this recesion as opposed to most of other European countries who have a lot more cultural integration" saying that countries with more cultural integration than us weren't screwed becuase of the recession. I never said a more culturally diverse nation is more likely to suceed than a less culturally diverse nation or vica versa, i just unproven your point.

KaiserMc

Hazys wrote: »

What you said was "There is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping the "White" race strong, we did not get to the stage we are today in Ireland through 'miscegenation ' we did it as a homogeneous country." So from this you are implying that Ireland success was based on us having an all white population, while i replied "What stage? are you saying we are better than other countries because we have kept Ireland mostly white? Last i checked we were suffering pretty badly with this recesion as opposed to most of other European countries who have a lot more cultural integration" saying that countries with more cultural integration than us weren't screwed becuase of the recession. I never said a more culturally diverse nation is more likely to suceed than a less culturally diverse nation or vica versa, i just unproven your point.

The recession has Feck all to do with miscegenation !!.





[/QUOTE]I saw the 80% figure on an 'America Christian' zealot site and even I wouldn't use that as a source but would be quiet pleased if it were true Why would a high rate of divorce make you happy? Do you not argee taking pleasure out of people's pain is a bit f'd up? , the figures I have seen online say a divorce rate of between 55% and 75% for 'interracial' divorce

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/s...=view_selected

My little rant regards our economy was in reply to your statement that countries with high populations of immigrants were somewhat immune to the effects of the present recession which is total nonsense Pls quote me where i said that, response below, America is/was hemorrhaging jobs at a rate of half a million a month ,British banks were also in dire straits recently, Iceland is practically bankrupt. China and Japan also felt the effects of the downturn as did Saudi Arabia.

Even though Right wing /Nationalists are minority parties but are gaining support, popularity of these groups have always risen and fallen through the years but they have always and will always be a minority. Yes the BNP's populatrity has slightly risen in the recessionary times but the reasons are obvious. In the 70's they were as popular as they are now but the nearly died out in the 80's so whats to say they wont die out in 2010's? does it not show that the indigenous populations of these countries are now getting to a stage where they are starting to worry about where their countries are going or could it be the significant rise in crime /murder/rape / robbery in the MultiCultural societies of Europe is what is turning people to the nationalist parties A very broad unfound statement that covers all of europe. Again facts and figures would be handy or else its just racist propaganda. Crime can always rise or fall for a number of reason but unless you provide evidence its the non-whites who are the trouble makers you are talking sh1t[/QUOTE]



If people in 'interracial marriage ' are divorcing in high numbers then they are obviously not happy in each others company,me being happy that they are divorcing in high numbers will not effect their 'Unhappiness' I assure you.My view is that people should remain in their own ethnic group.
I think the rise of 'Right Wing Nationalism' will not falter this time,if anything it will rise even more . Modern Europe has never had the amount of immigrants it has now and it doesn't seem to be slowing down. European cities are forecast to have majority non white populations in the very near future ie Birmingham London Rotherdam and others.And if European people don't see a problem with this, well then they will deserve the problems they will have in the not so distant future.

Some facts, figures ,pictures ,video of 'Non Indigenous' crime in Europe.
http://www.parapundit.com/archives/003789.html


http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/2006/04/sweden_is_sick_1.html


http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/12/violent-muslim.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmrIIlEwy6g

http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/07/norwegian-government-covering-up.html

http://blogg.visir.is/logicsociety/2008/03/14/muslim-rape-wave-in-sweden/

http://www.racismeantiblanc.bizland.com/005/01-01.htm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2237940.ece?Submitted=true

http://www.iamanenglishman.com/rogues_gallery.php

http://warband.wordpress.com/category/crime-statistics/

KaiserMc

Hazys wrote: »

Funny how Miscegenation has be going on for centuries but is considered unnatural. The average Irish person has a mix of Celtic, Norman and Viking blood in them. Even my second name, which is a reasonably common irish 2nd name can trace its roots to Norway with the Normans and my mothers maiden name is a Celtic name.

I can see how an Irish woman with red hair and freckles marrying (probably not consentual...those Vikings were always upto no good) a big, blonde, axe weaving, swedish viking would have been seemed as different races back in 1200's. Now as its easier for people to travel in the modern world ie last 150yrs and more of the human race from every corner interacts the blend of the world becomes closer.

In the US it would be very hard to find to find anybody who has a blood line that 'kept to its own'. The mix of people with Irish, Italian, African, German, Polish heritage all rolled into one, is astonishing...and the fact that average american wouldnt even know the capitals of the countries their grandparents are from!!

There is nothing more natural than a man find a woman that he thinks is hot, shagging her, having kids and their kids shagging based on whos hot, and so on.

Whats unnatural is picking your mate based on their ability to keep the race strong, or selectively picking who should survive see 1940 Germany.

People are horny by nature theyll shag whatever comes their way...

Celtic Normans and Vikings are all very closely "Related' .Their Dna is almost identical ..the main difference between these is Language and Culture but as "Looks"go when they breed together it would be very difficult to tell if the child was 'Halfcaste' but lets say a 'viking' breeds with an 'African' the resulting offspring will be genetically 80% African,the offspring will not resemble the 'White' person in this union as the 'White' gene is recessive.

I don't think we had the pleasure of being invaded by the 'Swedes' back in 1200's ,I think that was either the Norse or the Danes, I think the Swedes done their pillaging in Russia and the Caucasus region.
'The blend of the World becomes closer'... you'll have to explain that one to me ? Have you got a Link to this ..or is it all in your head.

I agree there is an "American White' look .. and I personally don't find it attractive, I prefer the diversity of the Europeans ..Blond , Red , brunette , Black haired people with Blue Brown ,Green, Grey eyes and the Fair Skin .Where else is there such diversity on a continent.
Why is it when people talk about 'Race'that Germany seems to come into the Equation
Why not say' Turks or Muslims or Africans or Chinese or Japanese or English or Boers as all and more are guilty of crimes against humanity.

metaoblivia

KaiserMc wrote: »

I agree there is an "American White' look .. and I personally don't find it attractive, I prefer the diversity of the Europeans ..Blond , Red , brunette , Black haired people with Blue Brown ,Green, Grey eyes and the Fair Skin

That doesn't make any sense at all. I've lived for extended periods of time on both continents, and white Americans are just as diverse looking as Europeans. To say differently is pure ignorance, no matter how you try to justify it.

KaiserMc

metaoblivia wrote: »

That doesn't make any sense at all. I've lived for extended periods of time on both continents, and white Americans are just as diverse looking as Europeans. To say differently is pure ignorance, no matter how you try to justify it.

What I meant to imply was that there is a particular look to some white American people,have you ever heard non American people say he/she looks 'American' ,I have many times.
The part relating to the diversity of the European race had to do with with 'Europe' even though it does seem I am referring to America. I concur that every type of European that exists in Europe is also existent in the USA.

GLaDOS

KaiserMc wrote: »

lets say a 'viking' breeds with an 'African' the resulting offspring will be genetically 80% African,

Are you making this up as you go along? There's a hell of a lot more to genetics than skin colour.

alfranken

KaiserMc wrote: »

Celtic Normans and Vikings are all very closely "Related' .Their Dna is almost identical ..the main difference between these is Language and Culture but as "Looks"go when they breed together it would be very difficult to tell if the child was 'Halfcaste' but lets say a 'viking' breeds with an 'African' the resulting offspring will be genetically 80% African,the offspring will not resemble the 'White' person in this union as the 'White' gene is recessive.

I don't think we had the pleasure of being invaded by the 'Swedes' back in 1200's ,I think that was either the Norse or the Danes, I think the Swedes done their pillaging in Russia and the Caucasus region.
'The blend of the World becomes closer'... you'll have to explain that one to me ? Have you got a Link to this ..or is it all in your head.

I agree there is an "American White' look .. and I personally don't find it attractive, I prefer the diversity of the Europeans ..Blond , Red , brunette , Black haired people with Blue Brown ,Green, Grey eyes and the Fair Skin .Where else is there such diversity on a continent.
Why is it when people talk about 'Race'that Germany seems to come into the Equation
Why not say' Turks or Muslims or Africans or Chinese or Japanese or English or Boers as all and more are guilty of crimes against humanity.

There's also a likelyhood that the viking and african are closer geneticaly than that african would be to other africans. There is alot more genetic diversity within africa than there is outside.

alfranken

KaiserMc wrote: »

I can't find the exact link at the moment but I will look for it and pass it on to you if i can find it, if you goggle it yourself you will find stats ranging from 55% up to 85%.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping the "White" race strong, we did not get to the stage we are today in Ireland through 'miscegenation ' we did it as a homogeneous country.

Why don't you move to Brazil if your so up for the 'miscegenation' lifestyle.

Ireland has done so well, an economic basket case since the country was established controlled by the catholic church. White race please, Hitler loved the white race, didn't stop him killing 10 million white people. If everyone was white we would just find something else to differentiate each other.

Emme

alfranken wrote: »

Ireland has done so well, an economic basket case since the country was established controlled by the catholic church. White race please, Hitler loved the white race, didn't stop him killing 10 million white people. If everyone was white we would just find something else to differentiate each other.

Look no further than Northern Ireland - Catholics and Protestants killing each other in the name of religion for years. They should get together and count each others freckles instead because they're the same genetic mix.

KaiserMc wrote: »

I prefer the diversity of the Europeans ..Blond , Red , brunette , Black haired people with Blue Brown ,Green, Grey eyes and the Fair Skin .Where else is there such diversity on a continent.

I agree KaiserMc. Some of the most attractive mixes in Europe are in Southern Spain, Sicily and Sardinia where the locals bred with North African pirates and some of those pirates even made their way to the west coast of Ireland.

Did anybody on this thread mention that it has been proved that the Irish are genetically related to the Basques of Spain? We're more Basque than Celtic.

alfranken

Emme wrote: »

Look no further than Northern Ireland - Catholics and Protestants killing each other in the name of religion for years. They should get together and count each others freckles instead because they're the same genetic mix.



I agree KaiserMc. Some of the most attractive mixes in Europe are in Southern Spain, Sicily and Sardinia where the locals bred with North African pirates and some of those pirates even made their way to the west coast of Ireland.

Did anybody on this thread mention that it has been proved that the Irish are genetically related to the Basques of Spain? We're more Basque than Celtic.

To quote Ben Goldacre "I think you'll find it's more complicated than that". The Basque region seems to be a "genetic hub" or jumping off point, when that area was settled around 10,000 - 12,000 years ago (the people that came first probably had their origin in what is now Tajikstan) most areas north of it was uninhabitable due to the ice age, as the ice receeded people moved north. At this stage there was no Basque or Spain, people started moving westward, due to its location Ireland was more than likely settled after Britain so there are alot of genetic similarities. Like you say when the regions became more established there was alot of Northern African influence, and in the case of Sicily some Arab.
There was a program on Channel 4 a few years ago which made the claim that Ireland and Scotland aren't Celtic countries in the strictest sense of the word, I think the Celts originated around central Germany and moved southwards.
Spencer Wells book The Journey of Man gives a good overview of mans movements out of Africa and it's an interseting read. Brian Sykes an English author has soemthing similar called The Seven Daughters of Eve and another about britain and Ireland which more or less says we share an awful lot of genetic similarities.
I findit hilarious when peopel talk about the white race as it's some massive monoltihic block, deep down with these people you'll find not all white people are equal.

KaiserMc

ScienceNerd wrote: »

Are you making this up as you go along? There's a hell of a lot more to genetics than skin colour.

Making what Up ? Yes there is a big difference in the genetic make up of people .
Races can also be identified through their skeletal remains.

KaiserMc

alfranken wrote: »

There's also a likelyhood that the viking and african are closer geneticaly than that african would be to other africans. There is alot more genetic diversity within africa than there is outside.

Lets say that this Dane is aware that his genetic makeup is very similar to that of the Nigerians .Lets say , the Danes and the Nigerians are playing a competitive football game.
Do you think that this Dane will support the Nigerians or the Danes.

I am all for genetic diversity and its great that there is so much diversity amongst the African peoples and long may this diversity last.

alfranken

KaiserMc wrote: »

Lets say that this Dane is aware that his genetic makeup is very similar to that of the Nigerians .Lets say , the Danes and the Nigerians are playing a competitive football game.
Do you think that this Dane will support the Nigerians or the Danes.

I am all for genetic diversity and its great that there is so much diversity amongst the African peoples and long may this diversity last.

If Denmark appointed someone like Stephen Staunton then he might as a protest. Can't wait for the white soccer team, everyone will get on great.

KaiserMc

Emme wrote: »

I agree KaiserMc. Some of the most attractive mixes in Europe are in Southern Spain, Sicily and Sardinia where the locals bred with North African pirates and some of those pirates even made their way to the west coast of Ireland.

Did anybody on this thread mention that it has been proved that the Irish are genetically related to the Basques of Spain? We're more Basque than Celtic.

The original Spanish were Old Europeans (Mediterranean) they don't exist today in large numbers.
Those Spanish you mention are a mixture of ,Nordic(European) Alpine(European) ,Moors (Africa)stayed 700 years but there are claims that they did not leave much of an add mixture as they were expelled and ethnically cleansed, Arabic, Turks and Gypsy's (India)and Jews.

Picture is of a typical old European ,Mediterranean.

KaiserMc

alfranken wrote: »

Ireland has done so well, an economic basket case since the country was established controlled by the catholic church. White race please, Hitler loved the white race, didn't stop him killing 10 million white people. If everyone was white we would just find something else to differentiate each other.

After eight hundred years of foreign rule ,you would expect a country to take a few decades to find it's feet.It was doing pretty well up until recently.
Stalin killed millions of white people, the Romans killed millions of whites,the mongols killed millions of Whites and others in Europe are responsible for killing whites to a lesser extent.
It's not just whites that kill each other .American Indians were guilty of wiping out rival tribes,Turks killed millions of Armenians,India, Africa, the Middle East, South America ,anywhere there are people ,there has been wars .
If people weren't fighting over religion or land or race and even if the world blended into one,they will still fight.

KaiserMc

ScienceNerd wrote: »

That if a Viking and an African mate the genes of the offspring will be 80% African

I read the 80% figure on an article a few weeks ago ,could be true could be false.
But just from observations ,the Black /Arab/ Chinese etc look is dominant in children with a European parent and non European parent

alfranken

KaiserMc wrote: »

After eight hundred years of foreign rule ,you would expect a country to take a few decades to find it's feet.It was doing pretty well up until recently.
Stalin killed millions of white people, the Romans killed millions of whites,the mongols killed millions of Whites and others in Europe are responsible for killing whites to a lesser extent.
It's not just whites that kill each other .American Indians were guilty of wiping out rival tribes,Turks killed millions of Armenians,India, Africa, the Middle East, South America ,anywhere there is people there have been wars .
If people weren't fighting over religion or land or race and even if the world blended into one,they will still fight.

That's my point, what we call race is determined by appearance factors; skin color which is a product of the climate.

herya

KaiserMc wrote: »

But just from observations ,the Black /Arab/ Chinese etc look is dominant in children with a European parent and non European parent

Only because you're white and don't see the traits of your own type as you're used to them. For a Black/Arab/Chinese person they will look "whitey" and different.

GLaDOS

KaiserMc wrote: »

I read the 80% figure on an article a few weeks ago ,could be true could be false.
But just from observations ,the Black /Arab/ Chinese etc look is dominant in children with a European parent and non European parent

You cannot tell somebodys genes by their looks, that was my point. Just because somebody from a mixed parentage looks more like one than the other, doesn't mean that all their genes come from that side.

KaiserMc

ScienceNerd wrote: »

You cannot tell somebodys genes by their looks, that was my point. Just because somebody from a mixed parentage looks more like one than the other, doesn't mean that all their genes come from that side.

I understand that you inherit genes from both your mother and father but in the majority of cases it seems that the non European look is prominent in the children.
Just by looking at some people you can safely say that they are genetically mixed.

KaiserMc

herya wrote: »

Only because you're white and don't see the traits of your own type as you're used to them. For a Black/Arab/Chinese person they will look "whitey" and different.

I don't see it like that, other peoples have 'Whitish' skin but would not be seen as 'European' eg Chinese, Japanese. It's about looks as well, they don't look European.

herya

KaiserMc wrote: »

I don't see it like that, other peoples have 'Whitish' skin but would not be seen as 'European' eg Chinese, Japanese. It's about looks as well, they don't look European.

I assure you that they don't look like "full" Japanese or Chinese to a Japanese or Chinese person.

Acacia

DeCoR18 wrote: »

Yeah the more the merrier I say! I think it should even be encouraged because I was thinking if all the races interbred there would be just one race then right? Sure then nobody could be called a racist for anything :cool:

It's really none of your business, tbh.

I couldn't care less if two people of the same race or different race decide to have children. I find the hysteria of certain individuals about races becoming ''impure'' or us all becoming ''one race'' hogwash of the highest order. To be honest, the opposition to mixed race children, marriages, etc, is out-dated , backward rubbish and the sooner people let go of this kind of thinking the better. It has only ever led to trouble and hatred (i.e. ''The Stolen Generations'' in Australia, to give just one example.)

Bottle_of_Smoke

DeCoR18 wrote: »

I would agree with you, the stigma of being labelled a racist is a very powerful one, perhaps the most powerful stigma in modern times. Far worse than HIV sufferers or gays and lesbians imo, and the strangest thing about it is you can be called a racist for even very mild opinions such as say an objection to large scale immigration.

Think I'd much rather people thought I was a massive racist than thought I have HIV to be perfectly honest. If I didn't hate the roll eyes smiley and people who use it I'd totally add it in here.

kaisermc wrote:

Miscegenation is totally 'unnatural' imo, your natural instinct is that you breed with someone of your own race so as to pass on your own genes ie In my case that would result in a 'white ' child

Whether you breed with someone of your own race or someone from the other side of Africa the child will have approxaimately 50% of your genes. You pass on the same amount. The genes that make your skin white only make up a tiny tiny tiny percentage of your genes. And you would still pass on plenty of them!

f it was "unnatural" different races wouldn't be able to interbreed, or genes to make you avoid it would have been successful. But as pointed out, 1mil mixed race people in the UK.

Read "the selfish gene" by Dawkins. And that goes for anyone reading this post too!

The Corinthian

Whenever a child of mixed race is produced one must consider the consequences which, broadly speaking, can be divided into genetic and social.

Genetically there are consequences in that some populations have a higher incidence of certain traits (be they advantages or disadvantages) that could be passed on to offspring. Some are superficial, such as skin, hair or hair colour and make-up (although this is affects the social consequences) as well as height and build, but others are less visible. For example Asians (due to historical reasons) have a lower tolerance to alcohol. They are also more lactose intolerant. Africans have higher incidents of cycle cell anemia.

Then of course there is the entire intelligence debate, but I cannot honestly include this as a genetic factor, simply because intelligence on racial grounds has not been scientifically demonstrated - largely because of the effects of environment.

Social consequences are essentially down to prejudice. When I was a child in ethnically homogeneous Ireland, being half Italian and half Irish, the only person who had darker skin than me was Phil Lynnot. As a result I did get a fair bit of xenophobia thrown my way growing up (both from Adults and children), but as I grew older found that there were advantages to being exotic (especially with women) - up until the immigration influx of the Celtic Tiger when I lost my exotic status.

So the social consequences are really more to do with the society you live rather than the child. Some societies are more accepting and others less so - I would rather be of mixed race in London than in Tokyo, for example.

GLaDOS

Found this interesting article on the subject

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/6475543/Its-a-wonderful-mixed-up-world.html