race is barely explored in biology beyond a couple cases already mentioned which indicates genetic differences
Genetic difference, again, doesn't mean different races. There is more in common between a black african and a white american than two king pinguins. So et's stop the discussion here.
no take a dna test, it literally tells you your exact percentage of dna that includes whatever races you are
No it does not. Its not race its ORIGINS. again, stop with the racists comments.
i literally disapproved of that idea in the post you responded too
like you even read what im posting???
i literally said south americans are not african heritage despite both having similar pigment colors
Yes I read, contrary to you, and you are still confusing race with skin colors and social ethnecity origins.
bs
the only case an offspring of mine would be darker skin would be if my selected mate was darker skin otherwise the kids would just be light skinned afterall if both parents have the genes for lighter pigmention then they could only ever inherit the lighter skin genes
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aan8433
Its literally a scientific paper mate. If you wanna play ignorance, please do it with more subtility.
There is absolutely no need for your relative to be with another skin color to create a colored baby, in fact it can skip generations.
Learn about science bro. Or don't talk at all.
so when you liberals try to support black community
I'm not a liberal, so you are not talking to me here. But continue and I will call you far rightist for real this time.
What you don't understand is that "woke" people are in fact fighting for people to DEinvisibilize the history and the culture of black communities.
So you are saying literally the opposite of what we are trying to do. Simply because you are ignorant about the subject and you don't understand our fight at all.
We on the contrary recognize the existence of black people as a LEGITIMATE social group of people that have rights and need, oncontrary to you who just see them as a different race like the racist you seems to be.
i value nature more then humans
the life of a lion matters far more to me then one human
and yes nature does need human help to protect it from other humans who destroy it
This explain why you have such an horrible vision on human's rights.
the people often had other irl issues going on at the time carrot
No, sometimes its just the case of an internet harassment.
nobody kills themselves just over the internet
You should look around you, nature lover. Maybe take a look at humans for once
https://jaapl.org/content/early/2023/02/23/JAAPL.220078-22
amber heard is not really a person who suffers in life, she's a rich bitch like clinton
and a manipulative person such as her would not exactly be mentally unstable
She most likely suffered violences and sexual trauma so take those words out of you sexist mouth please.
like man, id kill to have amber's position in life and your acting like she has it so rough
ohh im to have it so fucking rough let me dry my tears with these million dollar bills
Wealth do not negate violeces and sexual abuses. So stop with this incel rethoric.
i dont care about some self entitled rich twat who got supported by thousands of randoms like yourself not to mention the status quo, to compare that to suicide vitchims who had nobody to help them is digusting and yet you invoke their deaths as a means to prove some point like you leftists wouldt enjoy all the white men dying
The status co is men like you calling women "bitch".
You refuse to see the harm online harrassment can do, in fact you are complicit of propagating incel rethoric that helps this kind of behavior to flourish. You are the problem here dear far right activist.
to you guys that suffering and misery is like a popcorn show just male tears right
This is only the vision of people like you, incel that are ignorant about our fights and values. You have been "brainwashed" so much by far right rethoric that you can't see that we also fight for men in general.
I guess you will never understand.. and that's pretty sad.
you just say that to keep the appeal of the rebe
We don't care about imagery, we only care about the fight. If our vision was hegemonic, we wouldn't need to fight racist and sexist guys like you.
you just say that to keep the appeal of the rebel
it's not the era of ragan anymore
tv sitcoms dont depict the conservative family structure anymore, wake up to reality carrot
times have changed, it's not the era of the right anymore
Your problem is that you think the right is about conservatism. You are completely ignorant (once again) about what makes the right, the right.
THe right is the representation of values opposed to the left, those values include, individuality, absolute freedom, libertarianism, economic liberalism and most of all meritocracy. What you are talking about are the value of the far right and the very conservative right.
And yes, society evolved toward more progress, the family structure didn't disappear, it just changed and the right changed with it.
Those who didn't changed are the more conservative ones and the far rightist like yourself.
cause nobody buys your bs here so dont see what other purpose this serves
If nobody here "buy my bullshit" here, how can you say that my vision is the status co ?
Don't you feel like there is a contradiction here ?
Or do you really blindly believe that this forum is made of far right rebels that are fighting the status co ?
biden agrees with you on every fucking issue man, I even listed them off to you before but here we go again
carrot and biden agree on femmism
carrot and biden agree on blm
carrot and biden agree on transgenderism
You just quote me three progressive vision. This is but 5 % of every issues. And even on those three progressive vision Biden is not acting properly.
I quote you a lot more REAL values that we are opposed with against liberals, but no, your problems is feminism, transgenderism and BLM, three BASIC progressive stuff that everyone should agree on no matter the political spectrum.
You are complaintly ignoring meritocracy, liberalism, ultra capitalism, the collusion with far right gov, the interor and exterior poor policy for non priviledged people, and in case of France the collusion with the far right, the racists laws the anticonstitutional reforms, the deny of democracy..
You are completely failing to see that we completely oppose liberalism because you can't look past simple progressive data like feminism or antiracism.
You have a lot of cognitive bias problems mate.
so on and so fucking forth every social issue that is debated currently you agree
No mate but rest in ignorant in you want to..
what if we use the term liberal like yknow how everyone but you do
you can say it's ad poplum but whatever, if everyone who is x way calls themselves y thing
So you want to call an entire group X depise the fact that this entire group is saying to you "we are not X" ?
Ok.. but I call that intellectual lazyness and far right thinking.
do we stop calling that x thing, y cause it offends one single person on a random forum
Not one people, the left is a coherent group. I speak here in the name of ALL leftist : We CAN'T stand liberals (and far rightist like you, but that out of the point)
ig we should stop calling kids, kids or dogs dogs cause there was probably some fucking retard somewhere who got offended at the idea of using terms to describe things
The problem is that you don't understand basic political definition
we dont determine language based on the hurt feelings of 1 person much less one like you who is a clearly biased and b nobody respects or takes seriously
You don't have to determine language in the first place. Liberalism is used to define leftist only by the far right and ultra conservative/confusionnist, others sides of the political spectrum knowwhat liberalism means.
you just using definitions nobody uses and then pretends like you add shit to a conversation
If nobody is the far right for you, then yes, I don't use those definitions. Simply because they are incorrect with reality.
like you take liberal and just give it a static meaning even tho that's not how common people speak nor even the reality
One thing you are right about is that liberalism had multiple meaning over history. But the thing you are failing to understand is that the root of the values of liberalism are directly opposed to the values of leftist. So they can't coexist.
But since you refuse to understand reality, you will never understand these differences of values.
when people own libs as conservatives say nobody thinks ohh he means tucker carlson
Liberals are not conservative, even if conservatives can also be ultra liberals. Liberals are the group between the center and the conservative. They are the entry rightist. So I won't call Tucker Carlson a liberal. Tucker Carlson is a far right activist.
and yea you can speak using terminology nobody else has but it's just not communicating with me
Yeah, its seems, there is a communication problem on your end, I understand perfectly your points, but you completely fail to understand mines. And I know its not me not being clear enough as when I talk with other people, they can understand. its you who have a cognitive bias problem, those bias completely blinds your vision of reality.
Therefore you refuse to understand - despite me explaining clearly to you why and how - that nowaday leftists completely oppose liberalism.
and maybe liberal = nazi hitler dude in your home land of france but that's just not how English people use the term
Liberalism of France and the US are similar. The only differences is that Biden is just a little bit more open on progressive question than Macron, that's all, both are horrible in term of liberalism values
you are on a english forum carrot with basic assumptions in that speaking the same basic language which includes same meanings and yknow figures of speech if you dislike go a french forum that speaks using french meanings
im not french,i dont speak it or give a shit what the terms mean.
use english terminology or leave
Don't worry, its only you who don't understand the term, leftist of the united state also agrees that liberalism is problematic.
you post french videos like anybody here understands one lick of what they say or post french words with only french meanings like confusionism
Confusionnism might have french roots, but its a political words that describe political process that are present ALL OVER THE WORLD.
So the moment I give you a definition and an explaination of the process (I did) you shouldn't have problems with that word unless you are targeted by it (and you are, so your reaction is logical). Your lack of understanding of the concept now that it was explained is on you.
long winded rant aside carrot, if everybody calls themselves liberal and they do progressive shit the the term just becomes a leftist one
No, progressism is not something only reserved to the left, the right can also be progressive. (not the conservative one, only the liberals)
dude anybody you call far right is just considered milquetoast conservatives by every other human who's not a fellow far left liberal like yourself
The far right has a set of specific values. I don't call far right someone with just conservative or liberals values, I call them far right because they have values that are seen as far right ALL OVER the western world.
biden despite being right wing to you does not go far right why
Because biden is a liberal progressist. he understand the value of progressism so he won't go far right, but he won't make the effort to act toward real progress
(note that biden is still supporting the far right in Israel) AGAINST the left's interests.
almost like he agrees on your politics so you cant disapprove him of entirely afterall when elections come up we know what side you be voting for
Of course I won't disapprove everything he says, he is liberal not a conservative. He can still have progressive ideas so they should count. The problems is that its only a very little % of his ideas. In reality he uses like Macron ultra liberalism and the collusion with far right like in Israel.
As long as people like Biden will be meritocrate apologist, they will be on the sides of liberals, therefore, the right side (opposed to our side, where meritocracy is something of the past)
the blue one funny that despite you saying he's right wing, you guys still will show up en mass to vote for these evil liberals
Because its better to vote for a liberal rather than letting the far right win. Even if I disagree with everything Macron is saying, I will still vote for him if he ends up against the far right. That's just the right thing to do.
The problem in the united state is that election are corelated with money and lobbying so the left (who gets logically less support from rich people who don't want there money to go away) gets less visibility so less people are voting for people like Sanders for example.
my sources were literal mainstream shit
is the smithsonian
a fucking nazi organization??
The smithsonian doesn't say that race exist, only you come to this conclusion. Again, genetic difference or variations doesn't meant different of races.
cause nazi no matter means anything cause leftist kinda took away the meaning of the term so that it no longer has to refer to aryan/german supremacy with nationalism at it's base
No, nazism still means nazism.
instead disagreeing with far left politics now just entails how twitter lefties like yourself use the word kinda eliminates the meaning when you change it to be so broad as to include everybody you hate
Not everybody , just the part where you are advocating the reality of races in the human species.. just like racist and therefore, Nazis... sorry if you don't like that.
it's like those racist black people who redefine racism so they can hate on white people without being considered not woke by their friends
There is not "redifinition" of racism. Racism as always been defined by science as a system of domination. You just heard an retained a vulgarized and somehow incomplete version from school.
not in the case of comatose people
Actually yes it is
https://www.scientificamerican.com/...ar-to-be-in-a-coma-may-actually-be-conscious/
Consciousness is a trait of humanity even for people in coma.
and listen it's just killing of a unborn child, that's it
No its not. Again, its only killing a bunch of skin+electrical activity which has a 100% rate of becoming a human. Its not a human yet, therefore it can't be called a child.
Its a new living human being in the first developmental stage.
Doesnt matter, its human and its living. You can talk about philosophical personhood or whatever, but biologically its fucking human and alive, get over it.
No, its a living POTENTIAL human, its not human yet. It only has the biological POTENTIAL characteristics of a human. It has not developped all human cahracteristic yet so its not fully human.
Btw im not anti-abortion. the biologists who say life begins at fertilization are also not necessarily against abortion.
Yes, and like them I agree with that consensus. Life beginning at fertilization doesn't negate the right for abortion.
Bruh i just gave an example. Want me to drop a list?
Yup, showing the characteristic of a psychopath please. (psychopathy is something defined in psychology, its not some random stupid set of actions)
Testimony of her obviously biased sister? While she is on record admittint violence against johnny telling him to not be a baby about it?
Lmao
Actually I heard this recording, and yes, she did hit him, that's something she didn't deny. This actually show that she was violent as well, just like the testimony of the psychologist of the couple was saying so.
But again, this doesn't negate the abuse she suffered too. it just means that Deep was abused too.
The problem comes when the public states that depp was a victim while Heard was the only abuser, which is false and systematically representative of the value we give to women testimonies.
Reports. After that, its in the hands of the staff.
Yes, which is why i added something after that, which you conveniently left out.
Hit me up when definitions change so that your fringe version is the default.
They already did. A trans woman is a woman. Period. That's scientifically established.
And sex is not just "male" or "female", its a set of characteristic that can change.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/
No, because pro life people value human life above all other life forms, often this is religiously motivated
I'm talking about consistant people. Prolife are not consistant people.
Nah the ancestry dna stuff isnt about skin color. Its about haplogroups. Races dont exist, but human populations can still be isolated enough for us to mske genetic distinctions. Even in medicine there can be differences between "races", like iirc asian people being lactose intolerant more often
I wasn't talking about haplogroups here, but the search for the skin color of ancestor in dna (which is as far as I know, something possible to do - even tho I didn't found researches about that, so i'll stay careful about that affirmation)
Kinda does though, at least because we are fucking up nature. Whole animal species go extinct
Yes you are right, I shouldn't have said "nature" but "flora". The fauna needs us to be careful about it, not flora.