Around the time we started sequencing various African subpopulations and discovered there was more diversity within Africa than outside of it, making statements such as 'Africans are genetically less intelligent' nonsensical, since Africans do not have homogenous gene pool.
>>673922 Obviously the whole "lel niggers mudhuts xD" shit you see is a retarded oversimplification, and yes Sub-Saharan Africans had more complex social and political structures than a bunch of savages in mud huts.
That being said, I doubt you'll find very many people who would prefer to live in the 18th century Congo over 18th century Boston.
What's the point of launching investigations to find shared traits among members of an biologically obsolete classification? Do you also think we should pour research dollars into finding differences between Aquariuses and Pisces?
>>673830 Well the fact the non-white skulls in your pic are fake kind of shows it always was built on lies and forgeries. It not really that it had to be "debunked" as it is society had to reach a point were it would admit the truth. No real real work had to be done to debunk it, all it took was society allowing people to point out the obvious without being immediately ostracized.
>>673958 You must have misunderstood. Clearly if there are many different groups among "blacks" that are not related to each other, we should launch investigation to categorize those groups, and do away with the "black" category.
Instead the entire subject has been more or less banned.
>>673970 Genetic differences between various populations are very real, but racial categories are still very much social constructs. How do you decide "this dude's white, everyone past him isn't" or "this guy's black, but just barely".
The last one is particularly interesting, as it suggests in influx of Denisovan DNA into the tibetan gene pool was partly responsible for their altitude adaptation. These aren't second-rate journals either. Genetic anthropology is hardly suppressed.
It was dismissed without being seriously debunked because the incentive to study it ceased to exist. Scientific racism was the underpinning philosophy for the losing side in WWII. The winners labeled it a disgusting and abhorrent philosophy responsible for the atrocities of the bad guys. At that point, the incentive in academia was to debunk it, not to give it an evenhanded analysis, so they attacked specific, weak theories that were constructed within the framework of scientific racism, debunked them, and declared victory. These days, anyone reasonably intelligent knows that not every ethnic group has equal capabilities and potential in every field, but it's important to politely pretend that it is the case to avoid being affiliated with unpopular ideologies.
>racism ~ noun >1. the prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races >2. discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race #1 could never be true because 'intrinsically' is an inaccurate word to use whenever the subject of discussion depends on your ethical or aesthetic values/criteria #2 was debunked whenever people decided it failed to satisfy their ethics, most likely, although the ethics of le /pol/ bogeyman are probably fine with scientific racism.
The subject is a tricky one with so many varying definitions and values at play. So a skeptic will probably find either side of the discussion problematic; fuck partisans.
>>673952 They were literally house wreckers who looked with envious eyes at the empires of civilization builders (Persia, the empires in china at the time) and decided to chimpout to take that from them.
>>674111 Doesn't mean its not generally true. It also explains why Mongolia is an ex-soviet satellite state and more mongolians live as sinicized chink citizens than in mongolia proper. Nomads gonna nomad.
I mean name some contributions by mongolians to human advancement that weren't incidental transmission of technology from east to west.
>Analyses revealed that African-American males who carried the 2-repeat allele were, in comparison with other African-American male genotypes, significantly more likely to be arrested and incarcerated. >The effects of the 2-repeat allele could not be examined in Caucasian males because only 0.1% carried it. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912004047
>The finding that the Europeoid haplogroups did not descend from “African” haplogroups A or B is supported by the fact that bearers of the Europeoid haplogroups, as well as all non-African haplogroups do not carry either SNPs (...) http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=19566
>The Common Chimpanzee is divided into five different subspecies based on genome sequencing. >Fst value for an Eastern Chimpanzee and a Central Chimpanzee is 0.07. An Nigerian-Cameroonian Chimpanzee and a Central Chimpanzee have an Fst value of 0.16. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0021605 >Europeans & Yoruba people have an Fst of 0.153. >Cavalli-Sforza et al., 1994 puts African & European at a 0.205 Fst
>The brain volumes of 8 male Australian Aborigines and 11 male Caucasians were determined. Total brain volume was significantly smaller for Aborigines http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1261675/
>Statistical comparisons between the brain weights of the Caucasians and Aboriginal subpopulations show that Aboriginals had smaller brains than Caucasians. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6926391
>The White brain has a high degree of fissuring (higher complexity) and the Black brain has a lower degree of fissuring (lower complexity) in the cerebral cortex of their brains, where abstract and conceptual thought is performed. Race (John R Baker), Race, Evolution, And Behavior: A Life History Perspective by Professor J. Philippe Rushton
>>673877 Compare that map to quality of life and education, you'll be surprised at the similarities you note.
If IQ is based on race then why is there discrepancy between the South American counties, and even more between them and their former colonial overlords, considering natives are a small minority in the Americas now and Latin America is largely populated by descendants of Portuguese and Spanish settlers
>>674257 >Compare that map to quality of life and education, you'll be surprised at the similarities you note. Assuming that correlation implies causation here, causation could go either way.
In South America, there was a great deal of interbreeding with the local population, hence the term "hispanic." If we accept the premise that IQ is related to genetics, this makes sense as the disparity is greater between Europe and Africa than between Europe and SA.
Are you suggesting that IQ is more a product of environment than it is inherent? If you've got evidence for that I'd love to see it, it would add to the discussion.
Scientific racism refers more to people using data and theories to justify their bigotry towards different ethnicities, rather than a cogent and falsifiable set of beliefs. Most of the data and theories which were used in the 19th century to justify racism have been disproven, but lots of people (especially on the internet) still use more recent data like crime stats to justify their racism while appearing to remain objective.
Scientific racism simply fell out of fashion as folks realized that subtle genetic differences between groups of people shouldn't make a difference in how they treat people of particular phenotypes or ethnicities. The Holocaust played a big role in that. Scientists have shifted their focus to environmental and social factors to explain differences between various ethnicities.
>>674058 They didn't they just found that the categories you want to exist so you can get off your persecution complex don't. Because I know you're trying to imply through your comment that "blacks" are evolutionarily stupid, when in fact great studies in human evolution have been undertaken that show an Ethiopian and a Zulu have no more genetically in common with each other than they do a German does a Chinese. So trying to group various African races together as "Black" has been abandoned in legitimate human evolutionary research.
>>674313 But both Ethiopians and Zulus are less intelligent than the many ethnicities in Europe or East Asia. You will find the same pattern for all major ethnic groups in Africa, no matter how different from each other they are.
>>674308 >A single nucleotide polymorphism practically dictates whether you go to jail for murdering a family and dancing in their blood >One lone SNP is a subtle difference and we shouldn't treat people differently because of it
>hese findings, using a conservative estimate of evolutionary influences, provide support for a mixed influence on national cognitive ability stemming from both current environmental and past environmental (evolutionary) factors.
>>674323 Because regardless of actual genetic similarity, the whole continent was buttfucked to a degree no other continent can even hope to match, and people living in wasteland tend to be poor and poor people tend to be stupid and ignorant. Add to tis fact that the African climate and geography is at the best of times unsuitable for human life and well developed industrial civilizations, Africa won't be getting any smarter anytime soon.
In the case of 2R, you've got a better...case, since blacks definitely carry that gene in far higher numbers than whites or asians. Still, it's only 5%. Could that really account for all of the violent crime?
historical and environmental factors which would take hours to discuss for each and every ethnicity in Africa. Among these factors are abundant deadly parasites, poisonous snakes, and blights that made agriculture difficult and food storage even moreso.
Attributing the relative primitivity of African civilizations to innate intelligence is the wrong way of looking at it. IF (and it's a pretty big if) Africans are less intellectually endowed on average, it's because their ancestors were from environments which did not favor the passing down of intellectual traits. White people, with all of their superior communication, armaments, and transportation technology, had a hellacious time trying to settle most of subsaharan Africa before quinine was discovered.
>>674374 1. It was buttfucked only in the last 500 years or so. Before that, it had all the time in the world to develop civilizations, but with the exception of a few Islamicized medieval societies, Africa was stone age barbarism through and through.
2. The idea that African climate and geography is unsuited to human life and industrial civilization, but Europe isn't is completely ridiculous.
>>673830 It's literally never been debunked Leftists have never even tried, they just throw out illogical nonsense like "Some black people are smart", "White people have black ancestors", or "Black people are genetically diverse" and pretend like it's been debunked In reality, all scientific evidence shows that blacks (the negroid people originating in sub-Saharan Africa) have on average genetically lower intelligence and higher predisposition to violence than whites (the caucasoid people originating in Europe)
>>674529 >>674500 That anon is being pedantic and demanding standards for human subspecies that no other animal would have demanded of its categorization. Anti-racialists always do this.
In the world of taxonomy, the standards for a subspecies is generally that the traits of the population are common enough in the population that they can be readily identified against other populations.
But the second humans are the beings being analyzed, people go full Plato and demand to know the Essence of Asian-ness down to the exact gene, before they'll admit humans can be divided into subspecies.
So by all means listen with wide open ears as he explains how Africans have tons of genetic diversity and how a single albino or oddly shaped skull makes all attempts at human taxonomy worthless because we're all the same!
Meanwhile, we'll classify birds as different categories because they have different beaks.
>>674558 True, but even taxonomists don't use the kinds of standards these people demand.
In the real world, a sub-species is
"a category in biological classification that ranks immediately below a species and designates a population of a particular geographic region genetically distinguishable from other such populations of the same species and capable of interbreeding successfully with them where its range overlaps theirs"
That is literally the human races, and yet these people still demand to know what exact genes make someone white. Its a distribution. Its not a hard concept to grasp.
>>674553 I based it on various articles and papers I've read over the years that I remember. Am I expected to include a bibliography? This isn't a formal paper. You're free to google "heritability of IQ" or "IQ race differences". >>674562 (East) Asians are more intelligent on average than whites, but have fewer extremely intelligent people. Which is why they've invented less compared to whites. So in one sense we're inferior, in another we're superior.
>The idea that African climate and geography is unsuited to human life and industrial civilization, but Europe isn't is completely ridiculous.
Europeans didn't have to deal with tropical climates or the infectious diseases, blights, and other problems created by those. They didn't have to deal with innumerable parasites and poisonous snakes thwarting theirs attempts to domesticate animals. They also didn't have giant deserts separating them from each other, allowing for the relatively easier spread of important innovations like writing and certain crops from the middle east.
>>674587 You do realize that Europe had its own swathe of problems standing in the way of civilization, as did the Near East, as did Asia, as did everywhere else, and yet civilization prospered there in one form or another?
The things you're describing would be engineering problems at best if any other race inhabited that continent. Furthermore, that assumes those conditions reign universally over all of Africa. Which is hardly the case. We should expect far more pockets of civilization then we actually found.
>>674551 >That anon is being pedantic and demanding standards for human subspecies that no other animal would have demanded of its categorization. Anti-racialists always do this. No, because the categorization promoted by racialists are based on unscientific standards. At what point does someone decide there are European or Asian subspecies when comparing French, Polish, Georgian, Iranian, Turkic, and Chinese populations when each one overlaps considerably with their neighbors? We can say there is a Bengal and a Siberian tiger subspecies because of several thousands of miles isolating the two, but that doesn't work for human populations that have been migrating and in relative constant contact.
>>674597 >You do realize that Europe had its own swathe of problems standing in the way of civilization, as did the Near East, as did Asia, as did everywhere else, and yet civilization prospered there in one form or another? Because these regions were not isolated from one another and were constantly receiving migrations of people and technology and livestock from elsewhere to help them develop.
What do you think would become of Northern Europe without any contact with the Near East and Central Asia and the cattle, agriculture, and cultural developments that came from it?
>You do realize that Europe had its own swathe of problems standing in the way of civilization, as did the Near East, as did Asia, as did everywhere else, and yet civilization prospered there in one form or another
Every place has its unique challenges which shape the growth and development of societies. The challenges on the African continent towards developing societies with the characteristics of Eurasian civilization were greater than those on all others except Australia.
>The things you're describing would be engineering problems at best if any other race inhabited that continent
Europeans didn't develop the technology to adequately invade and settle most of subsaharan Africa until the 19th century. Without things like quinine, horses, railroads, air conditioning, sterile insect techniques, maize, potatoes, wheat, guns, writing, etc (all invented on other continents thousands of miles away) Africa could not have created populous cities like Europeans did in the 19th century, and it's absurd to think they could have done so with their relative state of isolation.
>>674682 Not stuck in the stone age, that I can guarantee. >>674645 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negroid
Is a basic model, but we could probably do better. The overall idea of 'racialism' is that genetic differences in human beings exist, and that these differences stretch across populations as distributions.
In the face of that, the exact taxonomy isn't as important, and is something that could be left to later researchers. If not for the fact that our culture's blind devotion to tabula rasa makes genetic research of any kind controversial.
>>674724 You know yourself better than anyone, so it wouldn't be hard. Maybe quit putting words in people's mouths and you'll feel better. I never said "are the same" or "aren't different at all." I said there's a very clear reason why the usual method we use to classify a subspecies doesn't work with humans.
>>674738 See the greentext of >>674724 I honestly can't tell if you're fucking with me, or retarded. Your reasoning for why we can't classify Orientals as different from Iberians is because there exists groups of people between them. >We can't classify x dolphin/bird as a subspecies, because y dolphin/bird sits between it and z dolphin/bird.
If you were being retarded on purpose, it worked, I give up here, you're welcome to the last word.
>>674765 >Your reasoning for why we can't classify Orientals as different from Iberians Stop. Just fucking stop.
>quit putting words in people's mouths and you'll feel better. I never said "are the same" or "aren't different at all." I said there's a very clear reason why the usual method we use to classify a subspecies doesn't work with humans.
Spend less time melting your brain collecting reaction images and start improving your reading comprehension above the average shitposter. As if an idiot like you could ever have the last word in an argument.
>>674765 >>We can't classify x dolphin/bird as a subspecies, because y dolphin/bird sits between it and z dolphin/bird.
To piggyback off the anon's tiger metaphor, we classify Siberians and Bengals as separate subspecies because they're geographically isolated with no in-between population that would muck with this distinction. We don't classify Sundarban Bengals or even White Bengals as a different subspecies of tiger however despite some unique traits because, as with humans, these tigers are not isolated and there's no clear way to distinguish, say, off-white tigers and kinda-pale tigers as one or the other, or their own subspecies.
>>673887 Races exist biologically, but the idea that they have anything but the most tenuous connection to overall intelligence in a conscious, sapient species is ridiculous. Furthermore, biological disparities do not lead to some form of "superiority" in one race over another, because
a) Any definition of superiority in this context is arbitrary, and
b) Biologically speaking, special proclivities and skill sets in a certain ethnic demographic are incredibly varied to the point where naming a group as particularly superior/inferior is pointless.
Neonazis support the idea of racism because it seems a convenient way of justifying their (completely, objectively amoral) political position. In reality, race is a completely and utterly unsatisfactory means of classification. Socioeconomic demographics have a much, MUCH greater impact on things like IQ and the likelihood of committing crimes, etc.
The modern racist phenomena are perpetuated by ignorant classicists who are still running on Victorian-era propaganda, trying to institute political reform that became outdated and irrelevant over a century ago. If these morons devoted themselves to any even slightly serious research beyond shitty anecdotes on 4chan and news from the past 2 years they would see just how flawed the whole concept is.
not him, but you seem to be under the impression that just because there are differences between people from different areas that they should be classified as a different subspecies.
Taxonomic differentiations between subspecies are already imprecise and controversial for many animals because there can be lots of genetic variation within a species from any one region. Trying to place the majority of humans into subspecies is almost impossible due to the relatively recent origins of anatomically modern humans and significant degrees of mixing with people from other continents due to migrations. The only ones you could really make a decent case for being different subspecies would be some isolated groups like Pygmies that genetically diverged from their closest neighbors 60,000 years ago.
One of the biggest reasons I'm convinced that race exists is that I think that the increase in neuroplasticity in our brains has increased the rate of our evolution rather than decreasing it.
People say that "It was only 10,000-100,000 years of separation, that's not enough time to evolve!" But that couldn't be further from the truth. Human sexuality is a downright phenomenal selective pressure, and I believe that the increase of neuroplasticity in our brains directly relates to it. If anything, we have been very active in controlling our evolutionary paths.
Combine this with geographical obstacles like the Mediterranean sea, the Alps, and the red sea, and you've got a case where humans have been selectively breeding themselves for their environments for a while over many generations.
The Mediterranean isn't an obstacle, it's an asset you dumbass. It created a near-perfect climate for people to live in and grow crops and develop civilization and encouraged them to develop boats and connect with non-neighboring peoples.
>>674574 >If Africans really are inherently less intelligent and more violent than whites, then they're inferior by most any metric. Being more violent is probably an advantage in survival, and their intelligence is where it needs to be to survive in Africa. That's what evolution is all about isn't it? To adapt to be able to succeed in your environment?
>>674875 >geographical obstacles like the Mediterranean sea, the Alps, and the red sea You said it yourself, human sexuality is amazing. As fucking if a few hills and puddles effectively stopped humanity from getting some exotic poon from the other side.
>>674832 >but the idea that they have anything but the most tenuous connection to overall intelligence in a conscious, sapient species is ridiculous Why though? If we evolved differently physically, why is it ridiculous to think we evolved differently mentally?
>>674875 The neuroplasticity argument is pseudoscience bullshit and you know it. It's just the same old dumbfuck rhetoric torn from a crappy unsourced essay that you people use to "justify" what is an undoubtedly unjustifiable position. The racists and nationalists are always conjuring up these shitty little scraps of data to lean on, arguments that don't hold up for more than a few years before being empirically disproved, hoping that they can somehow use them to defend against a mountain of contrary evidence and logical observation.
>>674921 Oh, so I guess those periodic migrations and colonization events between all shores of the Mediterranean never happened. Romans and Greeks never spread their genes into Egypt and Syria, North Africans and Levantines never influenced any genes in Spain and Southern Italy. And if they did, it must have been someone jerking off into the ocean and a few surviving sperm swimming up the leg of a girl bathing on the other side.
>>673860 >Around the time we started sequencing various bacteria subpopulations and discovered there was more diversity within bacteria than outside of it, making statements such as 'bacteria are genetically smaller' nonsensical, since bacteria do not have homogeneous gene pool.
Heterogeneity in general doesn't imply heterogeneity in all traits.
>>674955 >Around the time we started sequencing various bacteria subpopulations and discovered there was more diversity within bacteria than outside of it, making statements such as 'bacteria are genetically smaller' nonsensical, since bacteria do not have homogeneous gene pool.
>>674078 Yes, such a surprise you can change your hair color by using cow piss to dye it >b-b-but Africa isn't inferior all that cannibalism, child rape, mud huts, cow piss, etc Come on. When our ancestors were savages they were way better. They were pagan vikings and they didn't do shit like that.
>>674917 It isn't ridiculous: some minor differences in the average mind are assuredly present between different genetic demographics. But the fact that humans are self-aware and can already make conscious decisions means that those differences are so minutial that they aren't even scientifically observable.
If humans were guppies, a handful of differences in synaptic makeup MIGHT make a very slight change in ecosystem, but a large complex mammal that is SELF-AWARE and able to gather new information regardless of physiology wouldn't be affected in the slightest by varying patterns, whatever those patterns are.
>>674963 Yeah, but when someone says "the Mediterranean presents an obstacle to migration" you can't then go "hurr durr people still crossed it" and then act as if you've disproved them. You're the only one here that doesn't understand the word 'or.'
>>674322 It's not the high IQ that's the reason for the Caucasians achieving so much. It's their particularly high abstract intelligence that's the reason for making up near 100% of all classical composers, artists, inventions, etc. We have a perfect system where whites create things and Asians improve them.
Debating whether there are differences in intelligence between races in the current west is like debating whether mankind evolved from the ape in medieval europe. It's not a free and fair debate when one side is considered to be heretics.
>>674967 No, I definitely used the term correctly.
The reason these are recognized as events to begin with is because the gene flow between these regions is relatively low to begin with because there is a body of water between them causing relative isolation.
This is not complete isolation. It simply means it is hindered, and the reason we recognize these migrations in the first places is because they are compared with the normal rate of gene flow to begin with.
This isn't a hard concept. You don't need to be so difficult about this.
>>674574 Why do you assume that? Clearly not to the gene pool which is the only thing that matters. The difference between white and Asians society is virtually non-existent compare that between Europe and Africa.
>>674975 Yes you can, because the Mediterranean did not present an obstacle at all. It's been crossed so often, so readily, and so constantly for as long as humans inhabited both sides of the sea that it's barely an obstacle at all.
>>674942 Do you actually know what fucking oceans are?
The Mediterranean is not the fucking pacific. It has been nothing but conducive to travel, migration, and, yes, gene flow. You seem to have forgotten that land migrations are not simple, short processes. They take far longer and are much more gradual than Mediterranean travels in even the first century after the widespread development of galleys.
Migration is conducive to gene flow, and usually a prerequisite. You COULD make the argument that genes can play the telephone game, one person mating with someone slightly farther away and their offspring mating another person slightly farther away, but all evidence indicates that such a process is very uncommon and gradual to the point of irrelevance in the discussion of gene dispersal. MIGRATION is a far greater deciding factor.
>>675094 Just saying that even pre-galley travel in the Mediterranean would certainly be possible, and not so great an obstacle as it was made out to be.
Also plenty of room to migrate to within Australia (and I suspect that some sort of coastal migration culture through the Indonesian 'archipelago' seems likely to have lead to the colonisation of Australia)
>>675104 Because the atlantic requires sailing technology that is vastly different than the Mediterranean (the ocean we're actually talking about). Efficient travel across the Med was possible thousands of years before the same could be said of the Atlantic.
>>675100 Even a few hundred years of sea travel has a demonstrably massive impact on migration and genetic and cultural diffusion. There's a reason Russians don't have Chinese ancestry even though there's "just" a giant swath of plains between them.
>>675149 Can we go any further than you claiming it is a big obstacle and me and the other anon saying it's not so big an obstacle, is there any problem with the examples? are we actually able to PROVE this either way?
If this is a discussion of race, then we're talking about the evolution of mankind since its origin. In which crossing large bodies of water was extremely difficult, and things like the Mediterranean served as an obstacle.
>>675256 the history of scientific terminology is fraught with complete buffoonery, ignorance, fantasy, and whimsy. It makes no difference what you call it if it is what it is. you can rename a rock a rose petal, but at the end of the day it's still a fucking rock. ergo, a nigger is a nigger is a nigger. good night
>>675250 Youre a fucking moron. Your own source betrays you. The book (which I might mention is a fable and has so little basis in fact that its incredible that youre using it) is based in the 1300s BC. The Trojan war is generally believed to have occurred in the 13th century BC. Furthermore, the Minoans were said to have been trading across the Mediterranean decades before that. Once again, you do absolutely no research and dont know what youre talking about.
>>674968 A real way to test for this would be to gather newborns from various relatively isolated points on the globe, and raise them in identical conditions. Such an experiment would yield would all but preclude global social variables.
Test them in a variety of ways (personality, IQ, preferences, values, etc).
Get a large average from among members of each ethnic group, and compare the averages to one another.
Then we'd have a much better idea of how influential environmental factors are, relative to biological factors.
>>674528 back before Islam got big, the Aksumite Empire, a trading nation located off the the Horn of Africa that conquered a portion of the Arabian Peninsula was considered one of the 4 great civilizations by the Persians (Persia, Rome, Aksum, and China).
>>675400 You don't need a lot of land when you're more interested in shipping in spices from Asia overseas so you can funnel it up through Egypt into the Mediterranean to rake in the dough. You don't need to be a military powerhouse to be important.
>>675002 Lol, youre pretty Fucking stupid aren't you? Do you think all evolution in recent times took place in the last 10000 years? Your abo strawman is hilarious too, their gene pool is so limited that it's highly likely that the people there only got there by mere chance(which seems probable given that they don't exactly look like they won the genetic lottery and used their immense brain power to navigate the Pacific Ocean).
I generation of people usually travelled about 5km further every time and did so usually by land, people often stayed alongside rivers and eventually crossed those, but to think that new "breedable" groups of humans could travel the Mediterranean Sea by use of mere floats is laughable, they all wandered across the alps and the pyrenees.
>>676230 There were multiple waves of admixture into Australia though, such as the introduction of the dingo. Also it wasn't that anon that brought up Australia as an example. Unfortunately the thread isn't going to be bumped.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.