0
0

[–] Commie_Meta ago 

That is incorrect. Cross-breeding between compatible sub-species often improves some traits. This is especially true for species that do not have much genetic variation, like humans and dogs. Most traits are created by many genes, so cross-breeding two groups produces a new group whose characteristics are the average of the ancestral group. Animal breeders do this regularly to improve the breeds.

Cross-breeding will usually strengthen the immune system. It evolves very quickly, so cross-breeding lets you pick up new genes quickly.

Cross-breeding can cause problems when the two sub-species are too different. For example, crossing horses with donkeys produces mules, which are generally infertile. This does not apply to humans. We are a fairly inbred species. We are all descended from only 2,000 ancestors who lived about 50,000 years ago. For the most part, every human race shares the same common pool of mutations. The only difference is the relative proportion of mutations. You could turn Japanese into Australian aborigines at the genetic level with a few centuries of selective breeding.

0
0

[–] 18169765? ago  (edited ago)

This is all straight out of a textbook, and has nothing to do with reality. It's all best case scenario assumptions. When you talk about "often improves some traits" then that is build around centuries of failed experiments, killing billions of lives, which gave us modern cattle, horse or dog breeding. All of these require insane amounts of supervision to create NOT a superior species, but a superior trait, that is accompanied by countless negative side-effects. This process of breeding is always a net negative for the species.

Next you bring up "cross-breeding two groups produces a new group"...and you have to destroy both groups to create another one, that from the get go has identity issues. You just bred infinite mental trauma. That's a massive inferiority, and not the only one because those different groups you're talking about are based on different races, which are naturally bound to different locations. So when you breed them you throw together incompatible climates, which came with incompatible traits, which always create inferior products.

Lastly you talk about "selective breeding"...that never happens in reality. It's based on jewish crimes that forced the human races on top of each other. Be it slavery, labor migration, war, commerce, travel etc. All designed around money, and control. Nothing natural about that at all. The human species is getting systematically destroyed by a corrupted bloodline. Now look at the history of the so called jews. Always crime, always persecution, always on the move, therefore nomadic lifestyle, internationalism, globalism, being rootless. Out of that behavior came inbreeding, race-mixing, psychopathic traits, birth defects (tay-sachs), every degeneracy known to man and so on. Rootless means not connected to nature, which means the collective of blood and race, because only that constellation can create healthy offspring. Go against it and you create corruption of the bloodlines, which is followed by cascading side-effects, which will destroy the species.

0
0

[–] Commie_Meta ago 

Your comment appears to be motivated by fringe politics and pseudoscience.

Tay-Sachs disease was not created by inbreeding. We know this because in inbreeding, a single mutation becomes common. When a person inherits a copy of the mutation from both parents, they get the disease. But in Tay-Sachs, several different mutations of the same gene are common. This only happens under intense selective pressure. Even more interestingly, there are mutations in a gene with a similar function, causing a disease called torsion dystonia. The European Jews were evidently under extremely strong selective pressure.

And what was that pressure? Intelligence. Presence of of copy of the gene substantially increases IQ scores. Two copies creates very high intelligence (and death in Tay-Sachs). This is a measured scientific fact.

Which leads us to why the Jews were constantly being thrown out. Intelligent people naturally become wealthy and powerful. And in pre-modern times, people like that were routinely chucked out. And then in a generation or two returned the favor. If they had actually been hated and feared, they would have been exterminated, like Vlad the Impaler did to the Muslims. Throwing people out is what you do to competitors when you fear they might have already hired mercenaries.