P
Punch
Guest
None of those things are the same for any group you call a race.
Too easy, what else you got?
Race discussion with Big.Thirsty
- Thread starter Leigh
- Start date
Too easy, what else you got?
P
Punch
Guest
I count two.One time in jest because it was suggested. And my frustration comes from the fact that@Leigh started this thread to discuss an opinion that he won't give up in the face of being proven wrong.
Okay. I can meet that qualification too.
Language. Not as we know it now. As we knew it back in the 1500s.
Refute...
That's because you're using modern context. How about 5000 years ago?None of those things are the same for any group you call a race.
Too easy, what else you got?
I haven't specified any races homie.None of those things are the same for any group you call a race.
Too easy, what else you got?
Only that we have discernible physical differences.
People within a race look physically different, therefore physical appearance cannot be used as a racial separator.
People within a race speak different languages and people from different races speak the same languages, therefore language cannot be used as a racial separator.
Immune systems differ within a race, therefore immunology cannot be used as a racial separator.
Refuted.
P
Punch
Guest
So your arguement is we may have been more different once upon a time?
How about a white as fuck Irish guy and a black as fuck African guy. How many black as fuck Irish guys are you aware of?
You're speaking in modern terms again. How about 5000 years ago?
You're glossing over the North Sentinelese again. Why don't we just rope them up and bring them to modern times?
lol. Try again.
My argument is the word race is correctly defined and biologically based.So your agruement is we may have been more different once upon a time?
In the 1500s, different races were trading with each other, demonstrating they could learn each other's languages.
Refuted.
P
Punch
Guest
For 5000 years ago. Wow dude. Lol.
I can name lots of black Irish people. Is this a joke?
Come on man. Nobody said it couldn't be learned. Just like nobody is saying we're not more alike than not.
But the fact these people are geographically adapted to specific areas of the world, and used their own language system is a biological difference.
500. But the concept predates the dictionary definition and expands well beyond 5000 years back too.For 5000 years ago. Wow dude. Lol.
You mean a person of African descent who resides in Ireland?
This is the word play I referenced earlier.
P
Punch
Guest
Actually that's the very definition of an environmental difference.
You're tyring to sell me on a native, full-blooded Irishman being a black guy.
Who's the one being absurd now?
Who's the one being absurd now?
And do environments not exist in the physical world?
P
Punch
Guest
Of course. External influence does not an intrinsic difference make, however.
But the external influences caused physical adaptations (differences)...
So clarify your question. Are you defining a race by skin colour?
lol @ this loaded question.
Melanin levels are one physical differences, yes.
I'm more interested in arguing the points of inherited immunities and speech patterns to be honest.
How is language a proof of biological difference between races when races can share a language? That's absurd.
P
Punch
Guest
So you are saying that if you took the same people and stuck them in different environments long enough they would change and appear different on the whole? Kinda proves the point of social construct if anyone could look like anyone on a long time table.
So list the immune differences. I've asked you many times now.