How does Human evolution work?

southern arabs already did it

there needs to be a need though, australians live at the same latitude as africans

>>69664818
Medical intervention stops human evolution

>>69664818
example for asian:
monke>>gr8 monke>>erectus>>asian erectus>>arcaic asian>>modern asian

race develop at erectus level

>>69665262
I'm fairly sure according to science, humankind developed in Africa and then flowed outwards, colonizing Europe, Asia, the Americas and Australia.
However there was some interbreeding with neanderthals and such.

>>69664818
Bump

>>69665262
you're what happen when asians mix with niggers

>>69665230
This. Niggers would die in Funland from lack of vitamin D.
White would die from skin cancer, even more than Australians currently do.

gaia is a project, we (white,red,brown,black,yellow races) were seeded here by our ancestors, to learn how to live in peace and harmony. soul evolution is the purpose of life, change from within.

a lot of evolution and our current genetic diversity is pretty accidental in some ways. also, our african ancestors were likely not exactly like contemporary sub-saharan africans genetically even if they had similar phenotypes

look at Andaman Islanders who superficially look sub-Saharan but are genetically closer to East Asians

>>69667559
depends on their diet. European hunter-gatherers were very dark-skinned. also I'm not sure if skin cancer would even be the worst thing whites would have to deal with in a sub-Saharan Africa with just very basic technology. there are all sorts of diseases sub-Saharans have developed resistances to that would destroy Europeans initially

>>69664818
what>?

Difference in races came about when big headed scientist YAKUB breeded different races through a process called grafting (basically breeding people, killing the dark babies and making the lighter ones reproduce until you are left with pale devils)

>>69667425
nope, asian are just diverse in color and cock size

File: 1483297577036.jpg (16KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 350x350px

CRISPR already can make hereditable modifications in a baby's melanin enrichment

in other words, you can make your family tree WHITED if you're from a diferent race

>>69664818
Originating in the continent of Africa != being "black" and looking like modern sub saharan africans

>>69669262
There is even great variation in Sub Saharan Africans. Bushmen have a lot Asian features, for instance.

>>69665230
It actually doesn't. It rather creates a situation where a lot of mutations that wouldn't usually make the cut do. Then we have to rely on medical care more often than we previously did in order just to keep people from succumbing to what will by that time be very common genetic diseases.

>>69664818
It already happened. Furred mammals have white skin, as did our ancient primate ancestors. After early humans lost their fur they evolved dark skin to protect from the African sun, but our ancestors who migrated out of Africa developed white skin again because dark skin was no longer needed in the colder northern climates.

If a group of white Europeans went to Africa, yes they would eventually evolve black skin. Not sure about the curly hair though. Evolution is very fluid, there's no "going back", it's all about going forward to help the species survive.

File: images.jpg (39KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 480x360px

>>69664818
>How does evolution work?
with time. lots of it

>>69669758
Then those aren't Asian features.

>>69670823
Not really.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Domesticated_Red_Fox

File: 8c485d33070dc988dd6015c0c876d7fb.jpg (15KB, 236x296px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 236x296px

Do Asian eyes help block the glare of the sun? Or are they just a random mutation?

Read "A Troublesome Inheritance".
Its the book the NYTimes tried to censore despite it coming from its top researcher. It will make things clear for you.

>>69671545
I think that it takes a lot of time for mutations to occur, but for recessive genes to be activated; it only takes a few generations. How long it took those genes to become a part of their genome is where the time comes in.

>>69667559
Vitamin do comes mostly from diet up north.

File: Man after man.jpg (168KB, 538x717px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 538x717px

>>69670171
THIS The better example would be Melanesians whose black skin is dependant on genes different than those of Africans, they re-evolved this trait being descended from lighter skinned peoples.

Try googling Dougal Dixon's Man After Man if you want to see some informed speculation on how humans might evolve if intelligence was no longer their primary trait and they had to fill different ecological niches.

Which brings me to the point at hand, humans are no loger subject to the mechanism of natural selection, that's the basic premise for the film Idiocracy, what you'll get in reality is genetic engineering eventually taking a role similar to what many have advocated for Eugenics, Gattaca is the film that shows an extreme version of this scenario. In the future it is very likely these services will eventually change the genetic makeup of the species as a whole, as an example you would become a billionaire if you found a safe way to engineer brown eyes into blue. Eventually however why stop there? You could take genes from jellyfish and create bright violet red eyes, or you could even engineer night vision similar to cats.

Add nanotechnology and you could have telepathy via hooking your brain up to a network through an implant (which in reality is a lot more simple than many realize) technology will be able to create within the next century results which will far exceed what you could obtain through evolution. And this is going to be a problem, imagine living in a world in which the wealthy can live centuries at their peak physical form (using stem cells to regenerate their brains and genetic engineering to deal with aging) what do you think those amongst the poor will be willing to do for a shot at immortality? Or you might even have people willingly plugging themselves in Matrix style pods to permanently live in virtual reality, that would be the NEET's ultimate dream.

It's going to be transgenic cyborgs in the future.

File: bots-bush-sc-b6-005_screen[1].jpg (69KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 960x720px

>>69671290
>>69669758
The Bushmen look alot like all of those half Chinese/half African hapas being born right now

File: ef8dc92b5dd01eee1461c46ea960833f[1].jpg (148KB, 500x539px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 500x539px

>>69673029

File: Latina-Asian.png (946KB, 734x719px) Image search: [Google]

946KB, 734x719px

>>69673029
Yes, and Latin Americans strongly resemble hafus

>>69667559
A black population in the snow could switch to a fish based diet to compensate for the lack of Vitamin D. I guess they would probably still lighten up over time if blackness stopped being actively selected.
White people in extremely sunny climates would develop Muslim-like fashion to cover themselves.

>>69673141
Makes sense, as Ameri-Indians descended from Asians crossing the land bridge, throw in the white genes from colonization, and basically they are a version of hapas.

File: Melanesian blonde.jpg (27KB, 400x600px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 400x600px

>>69673505
It is now being speculated that fair skin did originally re-evolve in farmers whose mainly vegetarian diets did not allow for a sufficient intake of dietary vitamin D, as you have pointed out yourself conditions for such a process are unlikely to repeat themselves however.

In objctive terms, and I will admit I may be a little biased, the most versatile skin type is that of southern Euros, you can tan in order to obtain adequate protection during summer yet retain a paler skin during winter to deal with winter conditions.

Blonde hair would be the next most advantageous trait, as it revolved in Melanesians (pictured) as this would offer you more comfort in the sun while retaining it's thermal qualities in winter.

Finally brown eyes with epicanthic folds are a slight advantage as there's lesser risk of macular degeneration as associated with lighter colored varieties and you get some (admitedly minimal) protectyion in high glare environments such as snow without impairing your vision.

While it makes absolutely no difference in the post-industrial world I would say something like that would make for the ideal combo of traits for a generalist human, obviously in extreme environments specific adaptations would be better.

>>69674192
>tfw being white is just a meme

Are you similar to that badass mix you mentioned?

>>69674192
Also what about height, facial hair, and nose shape?

>>69673029
Not at all if you sense of discerning people isn't ass like most people here.

Humans discover new things, information field becomes larger, humans build machines, machines create new information, information field overloads, enought charge builds, machines become self-aware, humanity ceases to exist, machines take on, cycle continues.

>>69671545
ah but that's not natural
not saying it as in "bad", just not natural

>>69675743
>cycle continues
but it's a grown spiral, not a circle
you can't say that machines will go back to being humans or that humans will devolve into apes again like the author of >>69672769's pic shows

File: 1471951409928395_480_320[1].jpg (161KB, 480x320px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 480x320px

>>69675654
>>69675654

>>69671545
It takes generations. Look at how many generations of foxes were specifically bred for the traits then apply it to humans. That's a long time.

>>69664818
Europeans evolved at a faster rate than asians.
Asians are between niggers and europeans...
Niggers haven't evolved because they didn't need o change their melanin production etc

>>69675937
Nah, machines also create information, information overloads, machines create organics, organics become self-aware, machines cease to exist. Cycle continues.

File: images.jpg (173KB, 604x445px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 604x445px

>>69676231
yeah, but not "bilions and billions" like my image implied

>>69676296
romantic. and plausible, why not have a Robo-God indeed

>>69676499
Species possessing concept of "god" can't create any self-aware entities.

>>69676296
Wew lad

>>69676296
Wouldn't the machines and new organics emerge around the same time? It would probably be much easier to make something self-aware with organic brains than with a network of computers.

>>69676687
Organics need machines to do tasks that are impossible for organics, machines would need organics for tasks impossible for machines.
Bringing it to same point would diminish the range of possibilities, perhaps to the point of zero amplitude.

>>69676569
says you. we will make it anytime soon

>>69676795
So network enabled cyborgs that can remotely operate machinery?

Will I be black eventually then/int/???

>>69677041
You'll probably just get more of a tan like arabs/abos.

Evolution means species constantly mutate.

If someone manages to procreate the species or the mutation keep on living.
If someone does not procreate, but dies before that moment, that mutation will end there.

In theory animals can both gain and lose features, but it's a lot easier to lose features. Losing DNA, pigment, hair, aggressive traits, etc is easier than gaining it. But sometimes certain traits are also stimulated by a certain lifestyle. Eating lots of meat encourages brain growth. Breathing more oxygen encourages animals to grow bigger. etc

>>69677000
>we will make it anytime soon
Machine god? We already did that, it's just in infant stage now.
But it's not going to live much.
>>69677029
Maybe. But most probably just self-aware servers that have some multiverses in them.

>>69676240
actually mongoloids are further away from negroids than caucasians on the evolutionary scale

>>69677260
no, machine children that will become self aware
for them we will be God, until we're "killed"

>>69677212
That's why so many animals degenerate from their older forms. Cats who can't taste certain flavours anymore. Dogs who are the small cousin of wolves. Modern humans who aren't good at smelling anymore. All features you don't need are easily lost.

>>69677395
That would never happen. Any entity without fear of death would reject an idea of "god" instantly.
For any machine you would be just another, but inferior machine.

>>69675320
No, I'm Iberian of a more "celtic" pale complexion so not even a good match on skin for what I mentioned, I'm certainly no blonde nor have anything resembling epicanthic folds.

>>69675609
>A European straight nose would be the best IMHO as it allows you to warm air, I don't know that there's any advantage to wider noses as are present on some people in Africa but if there was argument to be made for those that would be a consideration.
>Facial hair does provide natural insulation and it can be shaved or cut short by minimally technologically proficient humans so better to have it than not.
>Height is tricky, Amerindians in Mesoamerica adapted through the heat via smaller bodies and height does correspond with caloric intake, on the other hand a larger body is a better adaptation for the cold and is specially advatageous in terms of human vs human competition. Going for the aproach of a generalist that can do most things well is better a medium height (say 175cms) would probably be the better compromise (I'm 180cms btw) a fit man at this height could considerably lower caloric intake compared to taller individuals while not being at as much of a disadvantage.

Keep in mind this is just discussing traits as an abstract, again it makes no difference in post-industrial societies, for a post-industrial society I'd go with Huxley's Barve new orld idea that having a society with a larger female ratio would be more advantageous (less crime, aggresiveness, competition) although the idea of having freemartins with no libido would probably run contrary to a basic motivation for consumption. So your ideal society would be mostly women, it takes care of gender issues while ensuring stresses from men accessing sexual partners are also minimized. For something like say a colon in Mars I would honestly go with a full female ppulation on just a petite girl can be as intelligent as a large male while consuming half the resources (oxygen, food, etc.) so you CONT

>>69665230
Wrong. Sexual selection is still a thing.

>>69677675
CONT get more brain power for yur expenditure of resources, have a more docile, less aggressive population which socializes and adjusts better.

Now, I'm not a racist oir a eugenicist or anything like that, again this is all abstract, one way or another humans will have to discuss useful traits if space exploration is to go beyond pipe dream and genetical engineering is a necesity here (we can't long term survive exposed to radiation and without earth gravity)

>>69677746
In the absence of natural selection sexual fitness is no longer evolution and can lead to degeneracy, eg the Idiocracy scenario.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzbWXgM0ygU

>>69677522
Whites seem to be more emphatic than blacks, which is shown in our respect for authority. Empathy also correlates with intelligence because you have to think for more than one person. Evolution tends to favor emphatic creatures, as they can operate better in societies. Empathy saved the dogs, while their more aggressive cousins, the wolf, are faring very badly.

>>69677573
says you. it seems you don't see "god" as a mother/father archetype
plus a machine without sense of wonder might as well never reach singularity. "enlightment" and "understanding" are cognitive dead ends. as long as a machine can wonder and imagine, it will grow
let's not even talk of how vital a fear of termination/cesation is for life. a machine without fear of death is a dead machine, it would be destroyed fast

>>69678155
That's not scientific, just speculation, some would argue being less empathic is correlated with higher intelligence in which case your supremaqcist would argue for the colder "germanic" character as opposed to emotional black people.

You're just creating a scenario here that fits your a priori conclusions.

>>69677522
dogs are literal retarded (baby-fied) wolves though
you chose a poor example because those traits were domestically selected, not naturally
stuff like "human appendix" or "human loss of smell sense" is better
also you seem to misinterpret evolution. those traits weren't "lost",
the individuals that had it just didn't have offspring
of course some traits can be "kept" because they're more useful at survival, but not all of them

>>69665522
except for Black Africans, they don't have Neanderthal genes at all

>>69678382
If 10 humans are born. 9 have a good sense of smell. 1 has a bad sense of smell. And they all procreate. Then the feature is slowly getting lost. Because the feature is unnecessary.

File: 51r8Ph-vcaL.jpg (37KB, 326x500px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 326x500px

>>69678078
It's still evolution. Nature doesn't give a shit whether or not you consider certain traits degenerate.

>>69678382
>you chose a poor example because those traits were domestically selected, not naturally
It doesn't really matter. Dogs adapted. Wolves did not. That's evolution. Regardless of how it happened.

>>69678582
.... you mixed up the "good/bad sense"?

also this is what most likely happened:
a) 1 million years ago: 10 human males were born. 9 had a good sense of smell. 1 had a bad sense of smell, but also was a great hunter (therefore ""rich"") and all the chicks digged him. let's call him CaveChad. he procreated and the others didn't, therefore the trait was lost
b) 3 thousand years ago: 10 human males were born in a town. 7 had a bad sense of smell, just like the king/the elders and they were considered part of the tribe. 3 had a good sense of smell and could detect shit the elders couldn't, so they were considered witches and killed/banished. therefore the trait was lost
(a) is natural selection and (b) is domestic selection. methinks that (b) has more to do with human races than (a), but that's only recent. also many have told me that not all tribes were isolated and inbreeding, since there was plenty of wars, trading and migration involved

>>69678342
What does Germanics being "cold" and blacks being "emotional" have to do with empathy?

Do you think your being emphatic if you get upset over everything or if you start touching random people when you meet them?

>>69678618
No, without adaptation is not evolution and I'm not using "degenerate" in that sense, eg cave organisms losing eyesight is evolution/adaptation.

What isn't a result of evolution is the selection of deleterious traits. Again without natural selection/adaptation you can't call it evolution even if you get related phenomena (say genetic drift)

>>69664818
>how long would it take for them to develop a darker skin
It wouldn't happen at all since technology virtually eliminates that particular evolutionary pressure.

>>69679077
They're adaptations that allow an organism to produce more offspring. It's still evolution.

>>69677675
>>69677794
Thanks for the read, Jose.

>>69678960
Some would correlate a tendency towards being emotional with empathy (eg it's frequently assumed in women) the ability to make hard choices contrary to empathy (eg firing an employee) based on cold rationale would be an example of a situation in which both impulses are diametrically opposed. Arguing Germanics are more empathic than other peoples is also ridiculous, memes aside what evidence would you provide for that? Historic/anecdotical evidence would rather point to the contrary.

>>69679387
Not the guy you're replying to, but you might find this interesting.

https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/big-summary-post-on-the-hajnal-line/

>>69679387
I already said empathy correlated with how well someone can function in a group or society. Someone who makes a personal sacrifice (refrains from an action) out of respect for the rules of the group. So respect for authority.

Criminals for example tend to lack empathy or are under the influence of people who lack empathy.

>>69679655
Asians can be very cold, but are very much influenced by what others think about them.

>>69679197
Is this about the idiocracy scenario? Then yes I supose you could call it evolution as the idea is based on inheritable traits however this is a setting in which natuural selection is absent which does eventually lead (as in the movie) to a Malthusian crisis one the artificial constraints have been removed.

It's more like breeding than evolution in the sense that artificial conditions have been imposed, this is artificial selection. It's all a matter of semantics and personal views, to you that process is an analogue of evolution that counts, to me it's not.

>>69679751
Africans or Mexicans on the other hand spend their day killing each other. Such warm creatures.

File: 1481461571444.jpg (61KB, 489x594px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 489x594px

>>69664818
This is not an easy question to answer, but I'll give it a shot:
> if we took a group of Europeans to Africa, forming their own community separated from the natives, how long would it take for them to develop a darker skin, curly hair etc.? I mean, could they even do that?
Assuming they would have no access to modern medicine and live as hunter-gatherers, probably not, they would die out within a few generations: the shift from European to African climate would be a shellshock.
Excessive exposure to sunlight, especially in places like Africa, reduces the levels of folate, which is an essential vitamin for the foetus. Lack of folate causes several defects in newborns, and a high number of disabled kids means certain extinction over time. Also the members of the tribe would be more likely to get skin cancer. Humans developed dark skin when they evolved to protect themselves from the above.
On the other hand, if a group of white people, still living as hunter-gatherers, moved gradually from Europe to Africa over the course of many, many generations, yeah, their descendents will probably develop dark skin, and maybe other typical African physical traits, but it's hard to say whether they would look like modern Africans or have new unique features. I think the latter is the most likely outcome.
t. med school dropout

>>69679655
Submision is not the same as empathy, you're comparing to Asia >>69679751 which traditionally is considered less individualistic than the West, conceptions such as religious liberty or due process which characterize Western thought are born from challenge to authority not subjection to it.

Islam (literally translated as surrender or submission, or meme "peace") is the best example of a thinking which is what you describe as "Germanic", sure you lemmings do seem to be more like Asians than Mediterraneans but Westerners in general are to some extent the opposite of that. And you want to factor empathy here? Conservative Americans, those who argue for "muh freedoms" are also those who also argue for stuff like leaving the uninsured to die outside of hospitals if they can't pay the bills. These people are certainly more "Germanic" than mexicans who have adopted universal healthcare, an originally German idea, much the same as eugenics and euthanasia the latter two contrary to empathy.

Now I'm sorry if that came out as roundabout or confusing, but again you're drawing correlations where they don't exist and that you're using them to fit racist views is just intellectually dishonest, if you were say a "race realist" it doesn't necessarily follow you should be for your own kin at the expense of all others (that runs contrary to empathy) yet the reality is those that hold such views rarely act or speak in empathic ways towards others. To me the contradiction is glaringly obvious let's just agree to disagree.

>>69679582
Thx anon, that's actually quite interesting.

>>69679908
Yes, that's non meme what we do all day, it has nothing to do with complex political/economic reasons, it's in our genes. I took a couple of extra minutes to respond to the last post as I had to satisfy the urge to kill my neighbour with a machete.

>>69679892
Fair enough. I've always thought natural vs artificial selection was a false dichotomy, but I can definitely understand why you wouldn't think that.

>hungarian education

>>69680586
The Islam is a religion and Muslims fail to adhere to it.
Americans on the other hand follow their national ideology closely.

>>69681110
Oh yes, they just chose pro free trade pro free competition man as president whose background is consistent with consistent with Christian conservative values.

>>69681255
He really comes off as an "America first" type of guy. A lot of people felt that, in serving their own self interests, companies and politicians were implementing policies which were benefiting themselves and other countries rather than benefiting the average American. I mean you make a valid point, but the Trump phenomenon can also be rationalized in a way that is consistent with American values.

>>69681255
Oh yeah, that feminist represented capitalism and christian values.

>>69681255
>Christian conservative values.
He pretended he was down with it

>>69680778
>Brazil
kek

It works just like every other evolution works

1. mutuation happens
2. sexual and/or survival selection favors the mutation

>>69664818
yes

>>69686866
no

Evolution doesnt go forward or backwards,its not linear, it doesnt reward strongest or best species, simply those who can fuck most and not die in process, for long time with humans and in animals this means most adaptable individuals got to pass their genes.

However with how advanced medicine is+ the way our society is shaped (we are all equal bullshit) virtually everyone gets to have kids

File: 084.png (298KB, 600x512px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 600x512px

>>69664818
>So we know that black people can turn white
>Could whites or asians for example...reverse their evolution with time and turn into blacks?

are you attended in some magic circus lately?

>>69688608
Sexual selection is real, still

You should really do some light reading on evolution.

All of you.

OP especially.

>>69664818
All you need to understand is that niggers are bad.

>>69690177
So what? When everyone gets to have kids its irrelevant

>>69677675
>a larger body is a better adaptation for the cold
Isn't it the other way around? That a stockier body helps conserve warmth better? (Which is why Eskimos are short).

>>69693331
It's not irrelevant. Especially if one group isn't reproducing at replacement level while another is.

>>69693665
>Especially if one group isn't reproducing at replacement level while another is
This is different from sexual selection though.

>>69693331
If you don't have desirable traits then no one is breeding with you

File: TRGk6Av.jpg (76KB, 368x453px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 368x453px

>>69697730
niggers reproduce by rape

>>69693612
and the paler the skin the better for cold and skimos are swarthy

File: hqdefault.jpg (29KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x360px

>>69664818
> How does Human evolution work?
Somethimes Russians invade Europe and raep European girls. Russian semen make Europeans stronk and they shout about their racial superiority some time untill they degradate into their natural weak state. After this Russians repeat this cycle again.

>>69664818
Human evolved from different subspecies of primate.

>>69677675

I believe the advantage of wider nostrils is related to airborne diseases. Your nose is a natural air filter, thanks to the presence of nose hairs. Humans can breathe through both their nose and mouth, but it's safer to breathe through the nose. Wider nostrils take in more air and discourage "mouth-breathing", which could be the difference between life or death in the tropics.

>>69677794

In theory, a female society sounds good, but I think people overestimate how much the male sex drive plays into the building and maintaining of society. Pretty much all female-run tribes and mini-societies are fairly primitive because women don't have nearly as much incentive to build impressive things.

Similarly, organizations comprised primarily of women tend to have a lot more in-fighting, because women are generally ultra-critical of other women.

If we're talking simply about maintaining a peaceful society, 2 women for every 1 man could work. The prettiest girls would have good-looking children and the women who lose in the mating game could refocus their energies into financially secure jobs like engineering. Compared to violent incel men, the worst that sex-deprived women do is get fat, write shitty smut novels and draw crappy porn.

>>69698749

The diet of eskimos is based almost entirely in fish and other seafood. These foods have high amounts of vitamin D so there was less pressure to get paler for them. European farmers were much more dependent of vegetation than on fish and whale blubber.

>>69698749
pale skin lets in enough UV light for the skin to synthesize vitamin D, eskimos are hunters who have a diet very high in vitamin D, if they farmed and didn't eat so much vitamin D rich food, there would be evolutionary pressure for paler skin.

>>69667425

More Asians mixed with Abo.

>>69667559
skin cancer wouldn't matter that much, sunlight destroys Folate in the skin and Folate is essential for the production of sperm cells,without modern tech the White population would shrink in number because of lack of breeding, not skin cancer

>>69698677
Black population is basically stagnant in the USA. Will have 1% growth between 2010 and 2060. Whites will decline, but that's due to unchecked Hispanic growth.

>>69700329
for now, their numbers will level off

>>69700227
yeah thats how you get indonesians, they're basically malay + papuan abos mix

>>69690177
>>69688608
>virtually everyone
but then the selection will be cultural
mind you that i'm talking about money, which is a tool of civilization (ergo "cultural")
either if the medical advancements are available to everyone in theory, in the practice only those that can afford it will have it

>>69690584
me? nah i'm cool

File: french_football_girls_01[1].jpg (146KB, 1000x620px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1000x620px

>take a group of random European people to a secluded African region
>several centuries later they have physiologically remained the same and developed an advanced and prosperous society

How would non-racists explain this?

>>69665164
Southern Arabs never lost all their pigment from Africans. They just retained more than whites did.

>>69700329
> unchecked
Pretty racist yo. Hispanics are nice. Not like dirty evil niggers.

>>69701746
i hopw you are talking about Moluccas or islands around bali

>>69702561
MS13 says hi. Sherri Papini's kidnappers and torturers says hi. Kate Steinle's muderer says hi. The latter two being pretty blonde women.

>>69702561
hispanics are peaceful as long as their economy isnt crap