Even without racemixing ethnics will end up white in the West (SFCELS AND RACISTS GTFIH)

[SecularIslamist]

It will take longer and multiple generations even without racemixing (hundreds of years). Have you ever wondered why curries born and raised in the West are lighter than curries back home? Maybe you didn't because all curries like the same.

Anyway, it's no coincidence most curries are not as dark as their families back home. Less sunlight and UV exposure naturally means your body is less likely to become darker since dark skin protects better against UV rays. This is the underlying theory behind why people became whiter in the first place. Unless you want to argue other thats races are another species (which you cannot reasonably argue). Everyone can become potentially white, curry or black. There is a similar theory as to why east Asians developed hooded eyes; because of strong winds and dust storms. And these wind-sensitive Asian cucks reproduced and fucked like rabbits until now - and theres 2 billion if them.

Ethnics living in the West and lucky enough to see their bloodline keep reproducing and within their race will naturally end up bleaching their genetics. Not through racemixing but the brutal nature of the environment and adaptation. Specific gene mutations will result from the adaptation to the environment meaning they will bleach themselves out. It also works the other way round too. I can bet that white Australians will look lightskin curry en masse by the year 3500 onwards. That's not long in human-civilisational terms. Not even Jesus was alive 1500 years ago.

Alongside this distinct cultural and linguistic norms and values will be associated with these groups. So nationalists worshiping their lines in the sand, can go suck a dick too.

@CFW432 @Jason Voorhees @gribsufer1 @Nazi Germany @Entschuldigung @cromagnon

 

[Deleted member 81734]

Sun/lack of it isn’t actually causing the selection pressure though. Nobody is dying because they are too dark as a result of the sun, we have vitamin D supplements, abundance of food, etc. The main pressure is sexual, since women only want white men. Lighter skinned males will continue to dominate since they are the most desirable globally. Shitskins will be eradicated with a swiftness. This is the revenge of white people for the civil rights movement.

 

[Entschuldigung]

Good

 

[PrinceLuenLeoncur]

It will take longer and multiple generations even without racemixing (hundreds of years). Have you ever wondered why curries born and raised in the West are lighter than curries back home? Maybe you didn't because all curries like the same.

Anyway, it's no coincidence most curries are not as dark as their families back home. Less sunlight and UV exposure naturally means your body is less likely to become darker since dark skin protects better against UV rays. This is the underlying theory behind why people became whiter in the first place. Unless you want to argue other thats races are another species (which you cannot reasonably argue). Everyone can become potentially white, curry or black. There is a similar theory as to why east Asians developed hooded eyes; because of strong winds and dust storms. And these wind-sensitive Asian cucks reproduced and fucked like rabbits until now - and theres 2 billion if them.

Ethnics living in the West and lucky enough to see their bloodline keep reproducing and within their race will naturally end up bleaching their genetics. Not through racemixing but the brutal nature of the environment and adaptation. Specific gene mutations will result from the adaptation to the environment meaning they will bleach themselves out. It also works the other way round too. I can bet that white Australians will look lightskin curry en masse by the year 3500 onwards. That's not long in human-civilisational terms. Not even Jesus was alive 1500 years ago.

Alongside this distinct cultural and linguistic norms and values will be associated with these groups. So nationalists worshiping their lines in the sand, can go suck a dick too.

@CFW432 @Jason Voorhees @gribsufer1 @Nazi Germany @Entschuldigung @cromagnon

As a black I have mentioned this esp as we race mix the most as a whole (black men and women) if it wasn’t for constant influx in the UK from Africa blacks would be extinct with. 50 years.

Samuel Jackson said he hates uk blacks and said we “race mix too much” and he’s right. And yes I am part of the problem

South Asians and Arabs are safe as you lot don’t race mix much. Gooks are Fucked cos the men will die alone and the women will breed white chads. Blacks are cooked both men and women slay white people esp black men we are the catalyst for this tbh. I remember a black foid claiming the reason “Arabs” exist is because black men were coons and bred white women and then created Arabs…. Some ppl man

 

[Nazi Germany]

It will take longer and multiple generations even without racemixing (hundreds of years). Have you ever wondered why curries born and raised in the West are lighter than curries back home? Maybe you didn't because all curries like the same.

Anyway, it's no coincidence most curries are not as dark as their families back home. Less sunlight and UV exposure naturally means your body is less likely to become darker since dark skin protects better against UV rays. This is the underlying theory behind why people became whiter in the first place. Unless you want to argue other thats races are another species (which you cannot reasonably argue). Everyone can become potentially white, curry or black. There is a similar theory as to why east Asians developed hooded eyes; because of strong winds and dust storms. And these wind-sensitive Asian cucks reproduced and fucked like rabbits until now - and theres 2 billion if them.

Ethnics living in the West and lucky enough to see their bloodline keep reproducing and within their race will naturally end up bleaching their genetics. Not through racemixing but the brutal nature of the environment and adaptation. Specific gene mutations will result from the adaptation to the environment meaning they will bleach themselves out. It also works the other way round too. I can bet that white Australians will look lightskin curry en masse by the year 3500 onwards. That's not long in human-civilisational terms. Not even Jesus was alive 1500 years ago.

Alongside this distinct cultural and linguistic norms and values will be associated with these groups. So nationalists worshiping their lines in the sand, can go suck a dick too.

@CFW432 @Jason Voorhees @gribsufer1 @Nazi Germany @Entschuldigung @cromagnon

Agreed. But If we’re talking about bleaching and fading, it’s not just about less UV or environmental adaptation; it’s entropy at the core of it all. The bloodlines are weakening, not evolving. We’re watching ethnic lines break down, not through choice, but through the slow decay of modernity.
You’re right that over time, genes will adapt to the environment, but it’s not some progressive whitening; it’s more like a slow unraveling of biological integrity.

 

[thenewhebbe]

Not how evolution works

 

[SecularIslamist]

Sun/lack of it isn’t actually causing the selection pressure though. Nobody is dying because they are too dark as a result of the sun, we have vitamin D supplements, abundance of food, etc. The main pressure is sexual, since women only want white men. Lighter skinned males will continue to dominate since they are the most desirable globally. Shitskins will be eradicated with a swiftness. This is the revenge of white people for the civil rights movement.

Sexual selection may accelerate it....or decelerate because of BBC fetish. But my point stands lower exposure to UV rays causes genetic mutations over time which leads to lighter skin.

As a black I have mentioned this esp as we race mix the most as a whole (black men and women) if it wasn’t for constant influx in the UK from Africa blacks would be extinct with. 50 years.

Samuel Jackson said he hates uk blacks and said we “race mix too much” and he’s right. And yes I am part of the problem

South Asians and Arabs are safe as you lot don’t race mix much. Gooks are Fucked cos the men will die alone and the women will breed white chads. Blacks are cooked both men and women slay white people esp black men we are the catalyst for this tbh. I remember a black foid claiming the reason “Arabs” exist is because black men were coons and bred white women and then created Arabs…. Some ppl man

What kind of theory is this? Sounds like Nation of Islam type shit lmao.

 

[SecularIslamist]

Not how evolution works

The process of adaptation to the environment is exactly what evolution is.

I could've said the same thing about humans. In a million years fuck knows what we will evolve into.

 

[PrinceLuenLeoncur]

Sexual selection may accelerate it....or decelerate because of BBC fetish. But my point stands lower exposure to UV rays causes genetic mutations over time which leads to lighter skin.


What kind of theory is this? Sounds like Nation of Islam type shit lmao.

It’s crazy I laughed so much bitch honestly was saying that Egypt today is Arab because black men saw Greek and Roman women and fucked them remember when I said many Americans genuinely believe that there’s only 3 races, black white and East Asian. That wasn’t a lie some genuinely believe browns are just combinations of those 3 like many Americans think Indians and abos are black people and many whites think Arabs are whites as well. Americans are truly retarded

 

[Offensive Bias]

Convergent evolution from a classroom in Slumdia. No, evolution doesn't happen over the course of 1000 years let work in the manner you described. It ignores the basic genetic history of how certain peoples have come about through history which will very clearly play a role in how they evolve overtime. You can only really get so similar to one genetic profile from an antithetical one from an evolutionary perspective and it certainly takes many tens of thousands of years rather than the timeline you suggested. No Curry will look white in 1000 years or even ten thousand and by the time that timeline is reached. They won't look distinctly like the whites we know today.

 

[SecularIslamist]

Convergent evolution from a classroom in Slumdia. No, evolution doesn't happen over the course of 1000 years let work in the manner you described. It ignores the basic genetic history of how certain peoples have come about through history which will very clearly play a role in how they evolve overtime. You can only really get so similar to one genetic profile from an antithetical one from an evolutionary perspective and it certainly takes many tens of thousands of years rather than the timeline you suggested. No Curry will look white in 1000 years or even ten thousand and by the time that timeline is reached. They won't look distinctly like the whites we know today.

Schizo ramblings with ZERO evidence.

How did light skin evolve in Europe? - The Tech Interactive

www.thetech.org

 

[SecularIslamist]

@Offensive Bias

I can already see the difference in one generation of curries in the West and you think nothing is gonna change in 100 generations

 

[Offensive Bias]

Schizo ramblings with ZERO evidence.

How did light skin evolve in Europe? - The Tech Interactive

www.thetech.org

Alright so your evidence suggests a timeframe in opposition to what you suggested initially. Afterwards it suggests that changes in superficial anatomy can be attributed to a controlled environmental variable than something intrinsically linked to evolutionary pressures.

Also how does the current discourse of skin colour even relate to a change of the races? You do realize that race is more so linked to a genetic gestalt rather than something you can pinpoint directly. For example, the Roma aka Indians who migrated still have very evident Indian features despite being in more higher latitudes than their original homeland for nearly a millennia. Walllah

Look at these white Europeans and this is inspite of heavy admixture through out the centuries which has had a much grander impact than simply waiting for for evolution to convergently shift them to a completely different appearance.

This is Cheddar man from 9th Millennium BC

Notice how feature wise not much has changed aside from skin colour? And even then back then they were more outside which skewed them to having a much more darker appearance than they typically would have if living a present lifestyle of our own.

Least not forget the fact that convergent evolution can't just erase vestigial remnants of evolutionary past effortlessly. Which is why for example whales aren't considered fish despite placental mammals very clearly not being something you find in the ocean.

 

[SecularIslamist]

Alright so your evidence suggests a timeframe in opposition to what you suggested initially. Afterwards it suggests that changes in superficial anatomy can be attributed to a controlled environmental variable than something intrinsically linked to evolutionary pressures. View attachment 3237375
Also how does this even relate to a change of races? You do realize that race is more so linked to a genetic gestalt rather than something you can pinpoint directly. Also the Roma aka Indians who migrated still have very evident Indian features despite being in more higher latitudes than their original homeland for nearly a millennia. Walllah
View attachment 3237379
Look at these white Europeans and this is inspite of heavy admixture through out the centuries which has had a much grander impact than simply waiting for for evolution to convergently shift them to a completely different appearance.

I was thinking about the gypsies of Romania while writing this thread I think that's the sinti group.

Are you retarded and think even in this (cherrypicked) photo that they look like typical pajeets. And they migrated from the early 10th century. So that's like 50 generations. Not 100.

This is Cheddar man from 9th Millennium BC
View attachment 3237389

Notice how feature wise not much has changed aside from skin colour? And even then back then they were more outside which skewed them to having a much more darker appearance than they typically would have if living a present lifestyle of our own.

Least not forget the fact that convergent evolution can't just erase vestigial remnants of evolutionary past effortlessly. Which is why for example whales aren't considered fish despite placental mammals very clearly not being something you find in the ocean.

I'm not talking about features I'm talking about colour. Yeah in 10,000 years Indians might not even look Indian. They may look like something completely different which doesn't exist yet. Humans are malleable.

Why are you trying to strawman me. I wasn't even arguing that. You just seemed pissed I spoke some facts.

 

[Offensive Bias]

@Offensive Bias

View attachment 3237373

I can already see the difference in one generation of curries in the West and you think nothing is gonna change in 100 generations

Clear cut case of placebo effect with an appeal to your ancedote or just classic confirmation bias.

 

[SecularIslamist]

Clear cut case of placebo effect with an appeal to your ancedote or just classic confirmation bias.

Another schizo comment. Yes the study/quote I highlighted from wiki confirms my 'bias' (or in other words clearly cut evidence).

 

[Orc]

Which is why for example whales aren't considered fish despite placental mammals very clearly not being something you find in the ocean.

whales are considered fish in cladistics, all mammals are classified under sarcopterygii.

Sarcopterygii

†Onychodontidae Actinistia (coelacanths) Rhipidistia †Styloichthys changae Zhu & Yu, 2002 Dipnomorpha †Porolepiformes Dipnoi (lungfishes) Tetrapodomorpha ?†Tungsenia paradoxa Lu et al., 2012 †Kenichthys campbelli Chang & Zhu, 1993 †Rhizodontiformes ?†Thysanolepidae †Canowindridae †Osteolepiformes Eotetrapodiformes †Tristichopteridae †Tinirau clackae Swartz, 2012 †Platycephalichthys Vorobyeva, 1959 Elpistostegalia †Panderichthys rhombolepis Gross, 1941 †Elpistostegidae Stegocephalia †Elginerpeton †Metaxygnathus denticulus Campbell & Bell, 1977 †Ventastega curonica Tetrapoda s.s.

 

[Offensive Bias]

I was thinking about the gypsies of Romania while writing this thread I think that's the sinti group.

Are you retarded and think even in this (cherrypicked) photo that they look like typical pajeets. And they migrated from the early 10th century. So that's like 50 generations. Not 100.

They are heavily admixed with populations who have already underwent these adaptations. Even in the picture I posted you can clearly see some that look white adjacent and others just curry looking.

Drop the second kid off in India and everyone there would not recognize the hundreds of years of geographic isolation in his face.

This suggests more so mixing rather than environmental pressures as the causes for current Roma phenotypes. It's akin to how some Black Americans look lighter, that is, until you remember the heavy influence of European DNA which is more likely to be the case rather than environmental constraints(not saying all lightskinned blacks are of a result of euro DNA but more likely than not it is the case).

I'm not talking about features I'm talking about colour. Yeah in 10,000 years Indians might not even look Indian. They may look like something completely different which doesn't exist yet. Humans are malleable.

Why are you trying to strawman me. I wasn't even arguing that. You just seemed pissed I spoke some facts.

You very clearly didn't define your meaning then as evidenced by this citation from your opening paragraphs. Will they just look like curries because of some change in skin colour? Which in an irl context nobody will think so clearly.

" I can bet that white Australians will look lightskin curry en masse by the year 3500 onwards."

Then you had this added which can only suggest that you are making a blanket statement on phenotype in general rather than the colour of a subject's skin. Hence you needing to clarify your point rather than relying on people to telepathically understand it.
" There is a similar theory as to why east Asians developed hooded eyes; because of strong winds and dust storms. And these wind-sensitive Asian cucks reproduced and fucked like rabbits until now - and theres 2 billion if them."

I'm not strawmaning because I am going off based on what I see. Sure Indians may change in skin colour but will not look the way you anticipate them to look. You are very clearly shifting the goal posts hoping that I won't spot it. Improve on your gaslighting skills if you want to beat a jew in a debate.

Your entire argument is just an emulation of Diogenes "Behold a man!" mockery.
Where in he mocks the idea of a man being a featherless biped as he presents a plucked chicken in mockery of that poorly defined definition.

In this case you presenting a "Behold, a white person!"
and it's just a beached curry lol.

 

[SecularIslamist]

They are heavily admixed with populations who have already underwent these adaptations. Even in the picture I posted you can clearly see some that look white adjacent and others just curry looking.
View attachment 3237412
Drop the second kid off in India and everyone there would not recognize the hundreds of years of geographic isolation in his face.

This suggests more so mixing rather than environmental pressures as the causes for current Roma phenotypes. It's akin to how some Black Americans look lighter, that is, until you remember the heavy influence of European DNA which is more likely to be the case rather than environmental constraints(not saying all lightskinned blacks are of a result of euro DNA but more likely than not it is the case).

Where is the evidence they mixed? Literally no one wanted to be associated with these Indians when they immigrated to Romania. They are like Jews. In fact they are worse than Jews. At least Jews were powerful. Nobody liked these Indians, and nobody still does to this day.

It's true apart from that second kid the others don't look that Indian. The other three even have light hair whereas pretty much all Indians have jet black hair.

Why are you denying genetic mutations in response to the environment. Are you Americuck? I can see it with my own eyes with every ethnic born to immigrant parents. Some ethnics in the UK are like 3rd generation. They are lightskin AF compared to their FOB cousins back home.

You very clearly didn't define your meaning then as evidenced by this citation from your opening paragraphs. Will they just look like curries because of some change in skin colour? Which in an irl context nobody will think so clearly.

" I can bet that white Australians will look lightskin curry en masse by the year 3500 onwards."

Then you had this added which can only suggest that you are making a blanket statement on phenotype in general rather than the colour of a subject's skin. Hence you needing to clarify your point rather than relying on people to telepathically understand it.
" There is a similar theory as to why east Asians developed hooded eyes; because of strong winds and dust storms. And these wind-sensitive Asian cucks reproduced and fucked like rabbits until now - and theres 2 billion if them."

I'm not strawmaning because I am going off based on what I see. Sure Indians may change in skin colour but will not look the way you anticipate them to look. You are very clearly shifting the goal posts hoping that I won't spot it. Improve on your gaslighting skills if you want to beat a jew in a debate.

Your entire argument is just an emulation of Diogenes "Behold a man!" mockery.
Where in he mocks the idea of a man being a featherless biped as he presents a plucked chicken in mockery of that poorly defined definition.

In this case you presenting a "Behold, a white person!"
and it's just a beached curry lol.

Technically you're right they will develop different facial features that will for the basis of their overall phenotype. But I am a swarthy belt theorist. If you're brown then you are a 'potential curry'. White Australians will not be white in ten thousand years time if they stay on that island. Maybe since they duck for cover 23 hours a day then process may be slower. But JFL if you think having successive generations out in the sun in the open won't cause genetic mutations over time that darken their skin.

This applies to white people as well. Whether they are Nordics, Angloids or the whatever. They will not look the same as they do currently in a thousand

 

[Offensive Bias]

whales are considered fish in cladistics, all mammals are classified under sarcopterygii.

Sarcopterygii

†Onychodontidae Actinistia (coelacanths) Rhipidistia †Styloichthys changae Zhu & Yu, 2002 Dipnomorpha †Porolepiformes Dipnoi (lungfishes) Tetrapodomorpha ?†Tungsenia paradoxa Lu et al., 2012 †Kenichthys campbelli Chang & Zhu, 1993 †Rhizodontiformes ?†Thysanolepidae †Canowindridae †Osteolepiformes Eotetrapodiformes †Tristichopteridae †Tinirau clackae Swartz, 2012 †Platycephalichthys Vorobyeva, 1959 Elpistostegalia †Panderichthys rhombolepis Gross, 1941 †Elpistostegidae Stegocephalia †Elginerpeton †Metaxygnathus denticulus Campbell & Bell, 1977 †Ventastega curonica Tetrapoda s.s.

I must admit, I'm not really well versed in definitions in this department. However from what I see they considered aquatic placental marine mammals

They are warm blooded, have lungs, placental and gestation phases like land mammals typically do and lactate. Many definitions consider them fish but I'm going off the most commonly used taxonomical one that I find is best suited for what I'm attempting to communicate.

 

[Orc]

I must admit, I'm not really well versed in definitions in this department. However from what I see they considered aquatic placental marine mammals

View attachment 3237425

They are warm blooded, have lungs, placental and gestation phases like land mammals typically do and lactate. Many definitions consider them fish but I'm going off the most commonly used taxonomical one that I find is best suited for what I'm attempting to communicate.

the most common taxonomic approach in the modern day IS cladistics, and how it works is that you basically never seize to be what you were, so pretty much everything with a spine is a fish.

I know what you are trying to say in layman's terms, but purely taxonomically speaking dolphins are both fish and mammals, but not the other way around, all mammals are fish, but not all fish are mammals.

a lot of the distinctions people make between animals don't exist in reality, i.e people are careful with the difference between apes and monkeys, but apes are monkeys that secondarily lost their tails in taxonomy.

same thing happened with tortoises, they evolved from turtles so they are turtles.

same thing happened with birds, they evolved from avian-dinosaurs, so they are avian-dinosaurs.

you'd still be correct in assessing that most dinosaurs are modern birds, and their absolute peak diversity is today.

 

[Gengar]

As a black I have mentioned this esp as we race mix the most as a whole (black men and women) if it wasn’t for constant influx in the UK from Africa blacks would be extinct with. 50 years.

Samuel Jackson said he hates uk blacks and said we “race mix too much” and he’s right. And yes I am part of the problem

South Asians and Arabs are safe as you lot don’t race mix much. Gooks are Fucked cos the men will die alone and the women will breed white chads. Blacks are cooked both men and women slay white people esp black men we are the catalyst for this tbh. I remember a black foid claiming the reason “Arabs” exist is because black men were coons and bred white women and then created Arabs…. Some ppl man

Shut up bhenchod you're not black, you're curry.

 

[PrinceLuenLeoncur]

Shut up bhenchod you're not black, you're curry.

My bad I forgot

 

[Gengar]

My bad I forgot

It's ok bhai.

 

[SecularIslamist]

Bump

 

[kusaila]

the most common taxonomic approach in the modern day IS cladistics, and how it works is that you basically never seize to be what you were, so pretty much everything with a spine is a fish.

I know what you are trying to say in layman's terms, but purely taxonomically speaking dolphins are both fish and mammals, but not the other way around, all mammals are fish, but not all fish are mammals.

a lot of the distinctions people make between animals don't exist in reality, i.e people are careful with the difference between apes and monkeys, but apes are monkeys that secondarily lost their tails in taxonomy.

same thing happened with tortoises, they evolved from turtles so they are turtles.

same thing happened with birds, they evolved from avian-dinosaurs, so they are avian-dinosaurs.

you'd still be correct in assessing that most dinosaurs are modern birds, and their absolute peak diversity is today.

i fuck like a fish

 

[Funnyunenjoyer1]

It will take longer and multiple generations even without racemixing (hundreds of years). Have you ever wondered why curries born and raised in the West are lighter than curries back home? Maybe you didn't because all curries like the same.

Anyway, it's no coincidence most curries are not as dark as their families back home. Less sunlight and UV exposure naturally means your body is less likely to become darker since dark skin protects better against UV rays. This is the underlying theory behind why people became whiter in the first place. Unless you want to argue other thats races are another species (which you cannot reasonably argue). Everyone can become potentially white, curry or black. There is a similar theory as to why east Asians developed hooded eyes; because of strong winds and dust storms. And these wind-sensitive Asian cucks reproduced and fucked like rabbits until now - and theres 2 billion if them.

Ethnics living in the West and lucky enough to see their bloodline keep reproducing and within their race will naturally end up bleaching their genetics. Not through racemixing but the brutal nature of the environment and adaptation. Specific gene mutations will result from the adaptation to the environment meaning they will bleach themselves out. It also works the other way round too. I can bet that white Australians will look lightskin curry en masse by the year 3500 onwards. That's not long in human-civilisational terms. Not even Jesus was alive 1500 years ago.

Alongside this distinct cultural and linguistic norms and values will be associated with these groups. So nationalists worshiping their lines in the sand, can go suck a dick too.

@CFW432 @Jason Voorhees @gribsufer1 @Nazi Germany @Entschuldigung @cromagnon

 

[Deleted member 101955]

It will take longer and multiple generations even without racemixing (hundreds of years). Have you ever wondered why curries born and raised in the West are lighter than curries back home? Maybe you didn't because all curries like the same.

Anyway, it's no coincidence most curries are not as dark as their families back home. Less sunlight and UV exposure naturally means your body is less likely to become darker since dark skin protects better against UV rays. This is the underlying theory behind why people became whiter in the first place. Unless you want to argue other thats races are another species (which you cannot reasonably argue). Everyone can become potentially white, curry or black. There is a similar theory as to why east Asians developed hooded eyes; because of strong winds and dust storms. And these wind-sensitive Asian cucks reproduced and fucked like rabbits until now - and theres 2 billion if them.

Ethnics living in the West and lucky enough to see their bloodline keep reproducing and within their race will naturally end up bleaching their genetics. Not through racemixing but the brutal nature of the environment and adaptation. Specific gene mutations will result from the adaptation to the environment meaning they will bleach themselves out. It also works the other way round too. I can bet that white Australians will look lightskin curry en masse by the year 3500 onwards. That's not long in human-civilisational terms. Not even Jesus was alive 1500 years ago.

Alongside this distinct cultural and linguistic norms and values will be associated with these groups. So nationalists worshiping their lines in the sand, can go suck a dick too.

@CFW432 @Jason Voorhees @gribsufer1 @Nazi Germany @Entschuldigung @cromagnon

this only happens if flow of migration will end. Which is possible. and Tbf a lot of the paki/indian mix with whites often look white, and put their ethnicity as white.

Also unlike a lot of niggas will have u believe they arent jihadists or some shit, a lot of the paki girls are hoes.

 

[SecularIslamist]

this only happens if flow of migration will end. Which is possible. and Tbf a lot of the paki/indian mix with whites often look white, and put their ethnicity as white.

They do not look white in most occasions. Some can look a bit med. Depends on what you mean. Do you consider Zayn Malik "white"? He does not look white to me at all. However guys like this do look white for sure.

Very rare

 

[cromagnon]

Unless you want to argue other thats races are another species (which you cannot reasonably argue).

i want to argue this

 

[SecularIslamist]

i want to argue this

Take a DNA test. No one is 100% anything.

 

[NoReedemingFeature]

Alright so your evidence suggests a timeframe in opposition to what you suggested initially. Afterwards it suggests that changes in superficial anatomy can be attributed to a controlled environmental variable than something intrinsically linked to evolutionary pressures. View attachment 3237375
Also how does the current discourse of skin colour even relate to a change of the races? You do realize that race is more so linked to a genetic gestalt rather than something you can pinpoint directly. For example, the Roma aka Indians who migrated still have very evident Indian features despite being in more higher latitudes than their original homeland for nearly a millennia. Walllah
View attachment 3237379
Look at these white Europeans and this is inspite of heavy admixture through out the centuries which has had a much grander impact than simply waiting for for evolution to convergently shift them to a completely different appearance.

This is Cheddar man from 9th Millennium BC
View attachment 3237389

Notice how feature wise not much has changed aside from skin colour? And even then back then they were more outside which skewed them to having a much more darker appearance than they typically would have if living a present lifestyle of our own.

Least not forget the fact that convergent evolution can't just erase vestigial remnants of evolutionary past effortlessly. Which is why for example whales aren't considered fish despite placental mammals very clearly not being something you find in the ocean.

Evolution is lamarckian anyways and light/caucasoid features will reemerge through atavisms even if all european populations people were to disappear

 

[SecularIslamist]

Evolution is lamarckian anyways and light/caucasoid features will reemerge through atavisms even if all european populations people were to disappear

Exactly. In fact there may even be a race type we are not yet fully aware of. In 10,000 years time people will look different. Irrespective of globalization and immigration. Globalisation on the immigration just sped things up.

 

[Bomber517]

Europeans back in the Medieval Ages were probably shitskins.