Insight from Asian Genes......

[WhisperBlade]

Well, looks like the Chinese are eating themselves and cranking out billions of babies.

I don't mind what Dwayne said. At least he had some pretty damned accurante numbers to follow up. But I fail to believe the science part. Your body never will try to consume itself. The only time when your body would need to consume itself is

A) If you are absolutey starving. Which Asian's arent.

or

B) Ketoacidosis.

If you can find some correct theories targeting that "Asians lack food", then I'm willing to listen.


TruthSeeker:

You just said the Big Bang theory was a hypothesis without evidence. So now, after your standpoint is taken down, you revolt to saying that the Big Bang theory HAS evidence?

I don't like to direct any comments towards anyone personally. But you are making this stuff up, and it really bothers me.

 

[iam]

Originally posted by Whisperblade
I don't like to direct any comments towards anyone personally. But you are making this stuff up, and it really bothers me

Truthseeker has been insulting all along as well as Rabon. Can't you read between the lines? (Asians are "punished") Do you not realize that was a purposeful insult? You don't have to use known expletives and name-calling to insult. The problem is its obvious, direct and in the open. In my case, at least it was true but truthseeker has called me retarded, ignorant of evolution, and jealous(of asians) which he is all of them. How could I be retarded with an iq over one-forty or jealous of asians when I am one? I'm definitely not ignorant of evolution. I understand it better than the average layman. But Its far more cowardly to do it in the guise of 'hypothesis', concern, diversity, and racism. The better to play innocent and hide behind.

 

[TruthSeeker]

This ones for numbnuts #1, truthseeker.
Evidently China is no "island." The result is tremendous genetic diversity.

I see you didn't take a look at all the variables.
While China has many contries around its long borders, the number of countries around is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the North has the toughest desert separating it from Mongolia and Russia, and the south has the highest mountain. Environment can also cause isolation. Just like Swizterland is very isolated despite being in the very middle of Europe.

You really don't understand. This is not black and white...

 

[TruthSeeker]

You just said the Big Bang theory was a hypothesis without evidence. So now, after your standpoint is taken down, you revolt to saying that the Big Bang theory HAS evidence?

I didn't say it has evidence. I said the Big Bang hypothesis correlates redshift with expansion while I correlate diversity with genetic health. A correlation does not imply causation. Just because the Big Bang hypothesis says that redshift is caused by expansion doesn't mean that is true. Yes, there is a correlation, but we have no proof that that correlation implies a causation, nor that the correlation is accurate. Which is why so many believe the Big Bang to be a theory when it is just a hypothesis that explains the birth and development of the universe through a correlation between an observed redshift with a possible expansion.

I don't like to direct any comments towards anyone personally. But you are making this stuff up, and it really bothers me.

I am not making anything up anymore then the scientists that came up with teh Big Bang hypothesis.

 

[iam]

Originally posted by Truthseeker
You really don't understand. This is not black and white...

Exactly.. if only you'd realize that. Asians are not more or less genetically diverse than caucasians or africans.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Truthseeker has been insulting all along as well as Rabon. Can't you read between the lines? (Asians are "punished") Do you not realize that was a purposeful insult?

Oh yes, an insult....
Just because I couldn't come up with a better word then "punishment", so I put the word "punishment" IN QUOTATION MARKS, and now it is considered an insult. My god... some people have their brains the size of a peanut....

You don't have to use known expletives and name-calling to insult. The problem is its obvious, direct and in the open. In my case, at least it was true but truthseeker has called me retarded, ignorant of evolution, and jealous(of asians) which he is all of them.

Huumm.. where did the "theory of jealousy" came from....?

How could I be retarded with an iq over one-forty

"one-forty", eh?

or jealous of asians when I am one?

Did I ever say you were jealous of asians?

I'm definitely not ignorant of evolution. I understand it better than the average layman.

So far, you have proved the contrary.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Exactly.. if only you'd realize that. Asians are not more or less genetically diverse than caucasians or africans.

Well, ok. But how would you go about measuring the level of diversity? How would you know if they are or not.

How would you know how diverse Australia is. Australia is pretty isolated. It has kangaroos which are a very different animal then the rest of the world, but is it more diverse or less diverse then the rest of the world?

 

[iam]

Originally posted by Truthseeker
Well, ok. But how would you go about measuring the level of diversity? How would you know if they are or not.

Random genetic studies of a given population, which they have already done. Asians are as genetically diverse, maybe not your definition of "diverse" as caucasians. Satisfied?

I'm not responding to you anymore.

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

You all seem too ignorant to even have the slight idea of what I'm talking about here.

Yes yes, you’ve professed your superior genetics knowledge many times already. For the record, are you brave enough to state what formal educational qualifications you have achieved in this area? Just to edify us poor ignorant chumps? Hmmmmmmm?

My prediction is : none<P>

 

[WhisperBlade]

^I'm with stupid on that one.

I mean, I'm with IAM on that one (Kidding iam, just trying to break the ice with some jokes ).

We're all here on a good and formal note of debate. We try to prove points, and we try to make our opinion clear. I love a good debate, and I stand down when I'm beaten. But you continue to support false, erroneous, and made up facts.

I didn't say it has evidence. I said the Big Bang hypothesis correlates redshift with expansion while I correlate diversity with genetic health. A correlation does not imply causation. Just because the Big Bang hypothesis says that redshift is caused by expansion doesn't mean that is true. Yes, there is a correlation, but we have no proof that that correlation implies a causation, nor that the correlation is accurate. Which is why so many believe the Big Bang to be a theory when it is just a hypothesis that explains the birth and development of the universe through a correlation between an observed redshift with a possible expansion.

What you fail to see that the Theory of Big Bang is the ONLY one that can logically explain what happened within all written and unwritten history. And so far, none of it is proven wrong.

All YOUR theories, hypotheses, and statements and whatever you said has been proven wrong and are false. So why do you keep going on trying vainly to defend your point? There shouldn't be a reason why 3 of us are attacking the 1 of you unless you are wrong.

Also, China, Mongolia and Russia are not separated by a "big desert". Only the western region is. The Eastern Region of Hei Long Jiang is very close to Russian borders and Mongolian borders. How the hell do you think the Yuan Dynasty would have existed if a desert separated China and Mongolia by stretches eh? The Mongolian army would have died long before it reached China. Oh I forgot the fact that you don't know of any Asian history to know what I'm talking about.

During the Qing Dynasty, China repeatedly fought wars against Russia. Isolated? I think not.

China and India are separated, yes. But no way does it interfere with anything. During the Tang Dynasty, Buddhism rapidly spread to China. And Trade between the Chinese and the Indians were abundant. The Mountain didn't stop anything or anyone.

Well, ok. But how would you go about measuring the level of diversity? How would you know if they are or not.

I just don't know what direction you're talking about now. You said all Asians look the same. I think all Caucasian look the same. I'm sure all Asians would agree as well. Don't you think?

If you've taken math, you should know about Generation Doubling. It took 2 people to make me; my mother and my father. Then, it takes 2 people to make each of those people. We start with one, and we go by the exponent of 2 for every generation. 40 Generations back (So 30 years per generation on average, times 40 gives you 1200 years), we had about 1 Trillion People and it took that many people to create one of me. If anything, we should be all related. It makes us one big (incestuous) family, doesn't it?

 

[TruthSeeker]

Random genetic studies of a given population, which they have already done. Asians are as genetically diverse, maybe not your definition of "diverse" as caucasians. Satisfied?

Oh wow! Great. You expect me to be satisfied when you don't even post any evidence. Wow...

I'm not responding to you anymore. I need to devote myself to another thread. See ya, wouldn't want to be ya. Good luck.

Yeeeehhh!!! Goodbye!

 

[TruthSeeker]

Yes yes, you’ve professed your superior genetics knowledge many times already. For the record, are you brave enough to state what formal educational qualifications you have achieved in this area? Just to edify us poor ignorant chumps? Hmmmmmmm?

My prediction is : none<P>

Does anyone here have education qualifications in that area...?

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

Does anyone here have education qualifications in that area...?

I have a PhD in developmental genetics, as does Spuriousmonkey. I research the genetics of central nervous system development as part of the developmental biology program of a university department.

Are you still rolling your eyes?<P>

 

[TruthSeeker]

We're all here on a good and formal note of debate. We try to prove points, and we try to make our opinion clear. I love a good debate, and I stand down when I'm beaten. But you continue to support false, erroneous, and made up facts.

Where are the made up facts?

What you fail to see that the Theory of Big Bang is the ONLY one that can logically explain what happened within all written and unwritten history. And so far, none of it is proven wrong.

Oh really? Maybe you should take a look around these forums. There are literally swarms of threads with evidence against the Big Bang.

All YOUR theories, hypotheses, and statements and whatever you said has been proven wrong and are false.

Where? I've seen no evidence against them so far.

So why do you keep going on trying vainly to defend your point? There shouldn't be a reason why 3 of us are attacking the 1 of you unless you are wrong.

Ad populum fallacy...

Also, China, Mongolia and Russia are not separated by a "big desert". Only the western region is.

I thought there was a desert on top of China... What is the desert of Gobi, then?

The Eastern Region of Hei Long Jiang is very close to Russian borders and Mongolian borders. How the hell do you think the Yuan Dynasty would have existed if a desert separated China and Mongolia by stretches eh? The Mongolian army would have died long before it reached China. Oh I forgot the fact that you don't know of any Asian history to know what I'm talking about.

Why do you assume I know anything about asian history?
There was once a mongolian army conquered pretty much the entire continent. But that's an exception.

During the Qing Dynasty, China repeatedly fought wars against Russia. Isolated? I think not.

You mean the sparsely populated country of Russia against China?

China and India are separated, yes. But no way does it interfere with anything. During the Tang Dynasty, Buddhism rapidly spread to China. And Trade between the Chinese and the Indians were abundant. The Mountain didn't stop anything or anyone.

Didn't stop, but decreased.

I just don't know what direction you're talking about now. You said all Asians look the same. I think all Caucasian look the same. I'm sure all Asians would agree as well. Don't you think?

I never said all asians look the same. I was even shown pictures of chinese and japanese people and I was clearly able to distinguish between them. And those pictures were very hard to distinguish because they were immigrants from China and Japan with more then one generation away from their ancestors!

So if I can't see the differences and don't understand asian people, how come I can see so much just by looking at two simple pictures!

If you've taken math, you should know about Generation Doubling. It took 2 people to make me; my mother and my father. Then, it takes 2 people to make each of those people. We start with one, and we go by the exponent of 2 for every generation. 40 Generations back (So 30 years per generation on average, times 40 gives you 1200 years), we had about 1 Trillion People and it took that many people to create one of me. If anything, we should be all related. It makes us one big (incestuous) family, doesn't it?

Yes, absolutely. I never said otherwise. Please show me where I said otherwise.

 

[WhisperBlade]

For instance, they have lots of health problems

You still have not yet addressed any health problems. Again, made up non-existent problems, or ones that plague not only the Asian population.

So maybe asians were "punished" by nature for sleeping too close together...

Buffalo Crap. There are no problems in Asian babies. Where are you getting this saying?

Oh really? Maybe you should take a look around these forums. There are literally swarms of threads with evidence against the Big Bang

Yet BigBang is still internationally recognized as the only logical explanation. When you can publish your thesis in paper to prove that BigBang is wrong, THEN come back and criticize why BigBang is wrong. As for the other people discussing this, it's their opinion. Stop trying to evade your compulsive failure behind another theory.

Your statements of Asian languages being similar was absolutely false. Your statement of Asian inbreeding was absolutely false. Better yet, someone with at Ph. D in genetics said you are wrong. Get your facts right

Didn't stop, but decreased.

Just last year, China imported Aircraft Carriers from India. It didn't decrease, nor did it stop. Ever since the 1400's (Close to Marco Polo era, but not necessarily relevant), trade figures between China and foreign Countries, such as England, France, Russia, India has been on the rise. Yes, India was included. It didn't decrease. Stop making it up.

]You mean the sparsely populated country of Russia against China?

By Russia, I mean Russia. Russia supported the Mongols in fighting the Chinese. When the Mongolians failed, Russia repeatedly invaded Manchurian borders between China and Russia. Later, under the leadership of KangXi Emperor of China, Russia was defeated, and a pact of truce was signed. The 2 nations grew into very friendly trading partners instead, especially in FireArms, weaponry, and silk.

Ad populum fallacy...

Or your ignorance and stupidity.

I never said all asians look the same. I was even shown pictures of chinese and japanese people and I was clearly able to distinguish between them. And those pictures were very hard to distinguish because they were immigrants from China and Japan with more then one generation away from their ancestors!

Telling the difference between the races has no relevance to this subject. You said all Asians look like monkeys. Can you tell the difference between 2 monkeys? Therefore, you are subtly stating that all Asians look the same.

You have been backpedalling on your statements over and over again. Here's an exceprt from Hercule's post from an earlier page (Sorry Herc for plagiarism.)

I never said it was genetic..

which could have been caused by trading genes too close (like incest...).

their genes are so peculiar.

So what are we, the other people, supposed to believe? Your FIRST post? Or your poor recovery to defend your statement in latter posts?

I have flaws (And perhaps, false information in my post too) but I'm willing to admit it. I'm not as well educated as some of the other people in here, and I am certainly not the smartest. If you want to "discuss" your theory, it would be fine. But if you're wrong, you should admit it, rather than trying to defend it to death.

 

[Renrue]

TruthSeeker,

Man, I thought you already left. But if you want to continue...

Please respond to my posts a page back please. If not, then obviously it seems my posts are a dagger in your sides. A sure sign of flaw in your argument.


[Renrue]

 

[TruthSeeker]

I have a PhD in developmental genetics, as does Spuriousmonkey. I research the genetics of central nervous system development as part of the developmental biology program of a university department.

Are you still rolling your eyes?<P>

Well no! Then I ask you where are the flaws in this reasoning:

"A perfect example of what I'm trying to talk about is Swizterland. Swizterland is literally made by isolated valleys. People from different valleys speak different dialects. Aside from the dialects, there are also 5 different languages spoken there. This is a perfect example of isolation creating diversity. People in isolated small towns are more likely to commit incest then others where there is not so much isolation. More likely is not a certainty. After many years, they eventually connected the cities with railways. Now, it is easier for them to move between cities, which increase the chances of interbreeding between them, which increases the amount of diversity and decreases the language barriers (even tough in the beginning the language barriers are increased).

Now we look carefully at the variables and how they relate to each other. First we have a geographical area, alright? It has a definite size. The size of the geographical area is defined by the boundaries which distinguish them from another distinguishable geographical area. Those two areas are by definition two different areas (well, duh!). The size and level of danger of the features which define the borders of thsoe geographical areas determine how isolated they are. For instance, if you have a geographical area in Japan and another US, the degree of isolation is defined by an entire fucking ocean. Ok? Does it sound isolated enough? Alright. Then we have people within a geographical area. The number of people within the area creates a relationship between the area itself and how many people per kilometer, for example. It depends on the size of the area and the number of people. Those are two important varialbes in this discussion. If you have a few people in a very large geographical area, then you increase the possibility of incest. Do you understand? Because it decreases the number of options. Now, in the other way, if you have a smaller area and more people, the number of incest cases will decrease. Now, if the geographical area is really big and you have lots of people, then the number of incest cases might be smaller, because it might be easier for them to have more options. Then you have people from different areas being able to breed. The new variable here is locomotion. The degree of locomotion is defined by the technology that people have as well as the hazards along the way. That's why I said that chinese people are more likely to breed within the boundaries of their own country, because they didn't have enough technology to get out of the geographic limitations for a long time. Now, there is such thing and they are more likely to breed with other people. Finally, there's the dreaded variable- the genetic health. It is widely known that there is a correlation between incest and genetic problems. Therefore, you can create a scale that measures the amount of genetic health. Incest is the lowest one. Then, within a larger gegraphical area, until you have the entire planet. If I travel from Brasil and breed with a Canadian, my son is bound to be more genetically healthy then if I would have bred with someone from my own country. Now, also observing the interactions between asians, I also find that they often have a hard time talking amongst other non-asian people. Not always, but very often. I don't know why. Maybe it is the language barrier, or part of the culture, but they generally don't talk much in English, around here. Once again, that is also a factor that decreases their chances of breeding with other cultures.

But again, there are countless variables. There are also countless of relationship between the variables and countless examples that clearly show what I'm saying. The conclusion of my hypothesis is obvious- racism is by far not beneficial at all to mankind, as the more we breed amongst each other, the better our genes get. What I'm saying is that people should love diversity and should see what is good in all and accept everyone's imperfections, because it is our imperfections that makes us different and unique anyways. I don't know why most people are not very keen to diversity, but I am. I wouldn't be married to someone so genetically "different" then me if I wasn't."

Thank you kindly.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Truthseeker,

how many specimens does a local population of the human species need before inbreeding becomes a problem?

 

[Renrue]

TruthSeeker,

Are you ignoring me? :|


[Renrue]

 

[TruthSeeker]

Truthseeker,

how many specimens does a local population of the human species need before inbreeding becomes a problem?

A small amount, of course. Just a few families...
If you have lots of people in a concentrated space, then the possibility of inbreeding decreases because there are more options.