LOL this is the biggest phony baloney nonsense ever. News flash...Race IS REAL, if it wasnt then Geneticists wouldnt be able to determine your race with a saliva sample or an anthropologist wouldnt be able to to determine your race with the measurements of your skull.
Mixed race people who have blood cancer have much lower chances of finding a donor because they need donors from similar genetic background.
So yea, race is very real.
Think about what I've said and what you said, man. I said 'race' is arbitrary classification system and you're basically said 'but look, it's real because you can classify people into it'. You've defined it in terms of itself. You simply don't understand what I'm saying is all. There's an almost infinite number of ways you could divide or classify large biological populations and the study of classification sytems is a field in it's own right. What's inportant to understand is that a classification system - any classification system - is merely a means of describing something in the real world, not the thing itself. You familiar with the the now obsolete taxon 'pachydermata'?
No man, we're on a continuum... we're all a mixture to some degree or another and we all stem from a relatively small set of common ancestors. There's no clear and defined cut off point in nature between populations, the classifications and delinations we've chosen top make based on superficial phenotypical traits like melanin levels or physignomy - or even more arbitrarily on poltical boudaries based on conquest - are all but meaningless, certainly when it comes down to defining absolute differences between individuals. We can talk about certain populations having slightly higher or lower probabilities of having this or that trait or this or propensity for this or that disease but we can't say based on any concept of race that any individual chosen at random will definitely have this or that feature unique to that group and that no individuals from another arbitrarily defined 'race' will not have the same features or genes.
Once again understand that all humans are on a genetic continuum and the lines and divisions we've chosen at this particular period in human history to call 'races' are simply arbitrarily drawn lines in the sand which could just as easily be defined in diferent ways, such as based upon hair colour or eye colour or dick shape - genomics would also be able to find justification for such divisons if that's where we chose to divide ourselves. The differences - both genetypic and phenotypic between indivduals within what we've chosen to call 'races' based largely on superficial traits like melanin levels and skin tone are far greater that the average differences between those same races. Take away our trained in obsession with skin pigmentation and differences disappear almost entirely wheb compared to the multitude of ways in which we;re virtually identical.
And don't even get me started on personality and infant neuroplasticity - the core of what defines the individuals we become - which is what really defines us as humans.
LOL but none of this disproves that race isnt real.
What I'm saying, and I think what Citizen Koba is saying, is that "race" is being used differently than how it's used in forensics and other sciences. You're talking about using ancestral heritage in the realm of science, for diagnosing certain medical conditions and things like that, so in that sense, it's useful in a similar way that knowing the medical background of your parents is helpful. "Race" these days is being politicized and weaponized, used to divide people based on things that are not true.
That's not the whole of it or entirely accurate. You have a cluster of people who, over thousands of years, have taken on certain characteristics, such as bone structure, hair type and things like that. But these are based on environmental stressors that create biological changes within individuals. It's more like identifying where in a geographical area a person's ancestors spent most of their existence. For example, you have the Inuits with extremely large capillaries so as to tolerate the freezing temperatures of the north. You have the Aboriginals of Australia who can retain water within their bodies for a longer period of time than anyone else on the planet, so as to enable them to withstand the arid plains of that continent. You have groups of people who lived close to the equator having more melanin in the skin to enable them the ability to tolerate long periods of sun exposure.
It's comparable to Darwins finches, where they had a variety of different beaks. Regardless, they are still finches, capable of mating with one another. The different beaks are a result of making it easier to survive in different environmental conditions.
That's all it is, so what Citizen Koba said is true.
LOL but none of this disproves that race isnt real.
LOL this is the biggest phony baloney nonsense ever. News flash...Race IS REAL, if it wasnt then Geneticists wouldnt be able to determine your race with a saliva sample or an anthropologist wouldnt be able to to determine your race with the measurements of your skull.
Mixed race people who have blood cancer have much lower chances of finding a donor because they need donors from similar genetic background.
So yea, race is very real.
That's not the whole of it or entirely accurate. You have a cluster of people who, over thousands of years, have taken on certain characteristics, such as bone structure, hair type and things like that. But these are based on environmental stressors that create biological changes within individuals. It's more like identifying where in a geographical area a person's ancestors spent most of their existence. For example, you have the Inuits with extremely large capillaries so as to tolerate the freezing temperatures of the north. You have the Aboriginals of Australia who can retain water within their bodies for a longer period of time than anyone else on the planet, so as to enable them to withstand the arid plains of that continent. You have groups of people who lived close to the equator having more melanin in the skin to enable them the ability to tolerate long periods of sun exposure.
It's comparable to Darwins finches, where they had a variety of different beaks. Regardless, they are still finches, capable of mating with one another. The different beaks are a result of making it easier to survive in different environmental conditions.
That's all it is, so what Citizen Koba said is true.
are they part arab? Muslim too. Are they an ancient group of arabs that settled in russia and breeder with local women?
more russian, they just happpen to be musim
Youtuber boxingego hasn't acknowledged their fight, so I'd say white.
"Old media is racist" - boxingego hypocrisy
Funny, coz BOXINGEGO looks mixed race himself but clearly doesn't have any mirrors at home.
Are they part Arab? Muslim too. Are they an ancient group of Arabs that settled in Russia and breeder with local women?
No, they are black, 100% obviously.
The fact that the question is even asked is a pretty good illustration of just how absurd and muddled the entire concept of 'race' is. Newsflash people, 'race' ain't real, it's just an arbitrary and wildly incoherent classification system that served a useful political and economic function for certain groups and has been maintained because it still does plus that deeply rooted and often repeated ideas gain an inertia and persistence all of their own.
LOL this is the biggest phony baloney nonsense ever. News flash...Race IS REAL, if it wasnt then Geneticists wouldnt be able to determine your race with a saliva sample or an anthropologist wouldnt be able to to determine your race with the measurements of your skull.
Mixed race people who have blood cancer have much lower chances of finding a donor because they need donors from similar genetic background.
So yea, race is very real.
What Citizen Koba just said. However, if you are interested in the ethnic and linguistic heritage of the Chechens, then here's a little snippet from Wikipedia's "Prehistory and origin": The Chechens are one of the Nakh peoples, who have lived in the highlands of the North Caucasus region since prehistory. There is archeological evidence of historical continuity dating back to 3000 B.C. as well as evidence pointing to their ancestors’ migration from the Fertile Crescent c. 10,000–8,000 B.C.
The discussion of their origins is intertwined with the discussion of the mysterious origins of Nakh peoples as a whole. The only three surviving Nakh peoples are Chechens, Ingush and Bats, but they are thought by some scholars to be the remnants of what was once a larger family of peoples.citation needed]
They are thought to either be descended from original settlers of the Caucasus (North and/or South) or supposedly Nakh-speaking ethnic minorities in the north-eastern regions of the ancient state of Urartu (whose people also spoke a language that was possibly related to the Nakh languages). The two theories are not mutually incompatible, and there has been much evidence that seems to link the two (either by dual origins or the "return" theory, in which the Nakh peoples originally lived in the Caucasus, migrated down to the south, lived there for a long period of time, and then returned to the Caucasus).
According to the opinion of Caucasus folklorist Amjad Jaimoukha, "It is certain that the Nakh constituted an important component of the Hurrian-Urartian tribes in the Trans-Caucasus and played a role in the development of their influential cultures."
Amjad Jaimoukha notes in his book The Chechens: "Some authorities believe that the Nakh nation was an offspring of the Hurrians and Urartians, builders of the magnificent civilizations of the Near East, that had profound influences upon other cultures of the region." According to some data, Chechens are genetically, linguistically and anthropologically considered the descendants of the Hurrians and Urartians.
Other scholars, however, doubt that the language families are related, or believe that, while a connection is possible, the evidence is far from conclusive. Uralicist and Indo-Europeanist Petri Kallio argues that the matter is hindered by the lack of consensus about how to reconstruct Proto-Northeast-Caucasian, but that Alarodian is the most promising proposal for relations with Northeast Caucasian, greater than rival proposals to link it with Northwest Caucasian or other families. However, nothing is known about Alarodians except that they "were armed like the Colchians and Saspeires," according to Herodotus. Colchians and Saspeires are generally associated with Kartvelians or Scythians. Additionally, leading Urartologist Paul Zimansky rejected a connection between Urartians and Alarodians.
The fact that the question is even asked is a pretty good illustration of just how absurd and muddled the entire concept of 'race' is. Newsflash people, 'race' ain't real, it's just an arbitrary and wildly incoherent classification system that served a useful political and economic function for certain groups and has been maintained because it still does plus that deeply rooted and often repeated ideas gain an inertia and persistence all of their own.
Not all white people are blonds though, and a mixture of middle eastern and white usually looks like a Spaniard, these guys are whiter than most white people.
But yeah not all whites are blondes, some have brown red or black hair, most white people i see have dark brown hair.
I Would say they are 2 men with a good amount of admixer. They aren't just "dark whites" they clearly have a large portion of admixer of some sort.
Their coloring is so dark with black hair
Not all white people are blonds though, and a mixture of middle eastern and white usually looks like a Spaniard, these guys are whiter than most white people.
But yeah not all whites are blondes, some have brown red or black hair, most white people i see have dark brown hair.