>The Swedish government announced that it plans to remove all mentions of race from Swedish legislation, saying that race is a social construct which should not be encouraged in law.
>"We know that different human races actually do not exist," Swedish Integration Minister Erik Ullenhag told Sveriges Television (SVT).
>"We also know that the fundamental grounds of racism are based on the belief that there are different races, and that belonging to a race makes people behave in a certain way, and that some races are better than others."
>The concept of race is included in around 20 Swedish laws, including criminal code, student financial aid laws, and credit information laws. On Thursday the Swedish government began an investigation into how to remove the concept from all legislation, as has been done in Austria and Finland.
>"Legislation should not include the word race, if we argue that there are not actually races," Ullenhag said. "I have wanted to remove the concept of race for a long time."
>>33281636 it means there arent any genetic differences between races and that its a made up thing by people, so if you put a bunch of kids in a room that never heard about race they wouldn't notice that some groups of kids are different from others
>>33281548 >self-annihalting white people Man, ebola can't wipe us out quickly enough. Can I get three cheers for loading cropdusters full of aids and ebola dosed nigger blood and having them fly low and slow over every populated area on earth, starting with Scandinavia? I want to see them bleed out through their peeholes while proclaiming to all and sundry that viruses are social constructs before I die of the same.
>>33281636 The labels we use to define people (races) are arbitrary and not objective.
In real life Biology, there are no fine lines dividing "races" of people. There are some similarities between people who look the same, but there is no way to predict someone's actual genetics from their superficial appearance alone.
Basically, of course there are different "kinds" of people, but the labels we call "race" are actually quite invalid in any scientific context.
Don't get freaked out, they're just playing a semantic game.
Since the only mentions of race in Swedish legislation is affirmative action, this means that the immigration politics of Sweden has finally come full circle. True tolerance is not giving a shit about how black and oppressed you are.
>>33281865 >The labels we use to define people (races) are arbitrary and not objective.
exactly! just like species! who's to say a lion is not a human being! we are all living creatures!
>There are some similarities between people who look the same, but there is no way to predict someone's actual genetics from their superficial appearance alone. i know! those forensic anthropologists are just evil liars! they claim they can determine someones ancestry with 99% just by looking at their skeleton! clearly it is just evil racist magic lies! even evil bigoted hospitals use race classification for medicine, such evil
>>33281548 >>"We also know that the fundamental grounds of racism are based on the belief that there are different races, and that belonging to a race makes people behave in a certain way, and that some races are better than others."
>>33281548 >The concept of race is included in around 20 Swedish laws, including criminal code, student financial aid laws, and credit information laws.
While the rest of that paragraph is retarded, I do question why race needs to be addressed in these areas. Unless the law was specially about documentation and statistics, I don't see why credit information laws need to know if someone's black when job, payment, and criminal history is a better judge of character.
>>33282053 >A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. While in many cases this definition is adequate, the difficulty of defining species is known as the species problem.
>The species problem is a mixture of difficult related questions that often come up when biologists define the word "species". Definitions are usually based on how individual organisms reproduce, but biological reality means that a definition that works well for some organisms (e.g., birds) will be useless for others (e.g., bacteria).
>How biochemically identical are we to our fellow humans? The DNA sequence in your genes is on average 99.9% identical to ANY other human being. Meaning, if you have a gene that is 1000 bases long, on average there will be only 1 base that is different between you.
Why is it that only white people do this? If you were to tell a Korean that he belongs to the same race as a Japanese, you'd be laughed at. Niggers in Africa kill each other due to the size of their shins and other stupid shit. Tribes in South America split apart by 10 meters wide water streams had different languages, customs and went to war all the fucking time. Why is it that only white people keep hammering this idea that everyone is the same despite glaring differences? No other people on Earth would even consider belonging to this brownish mass that only white people insist on creating.
The FST between Whites (British) and Blacks (Bantu) is 0.23: http://www.genetics.org/content/105/3/767.abstract
The FST between the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) and the bonobo (Pan paniscus) is 0.103 which is half the White-Black difference despite the two being classified as separate species: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018442X04700335
The FST between two gorilla species, Gorilla gorilla and Gorilla beringei is 0.04 or 1/6 the difference between Blacks and Whites: http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/bioc/2005/00000014/00000009/00004781;jsessionid=ebk3f9ja9mb61.alexandra?format=print http://www.berggorilla.org/fileadmin/gorilla-journal/gorilla-journal-20-english.pdf
The FST between humans and Neanderthals is less than 0.08 or about 1/3 the Black-White difference: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018442X04700335 http://www.pnas.org/content/100/11/6593.abstract http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/8/1359.full
The FST between humans and homo erectus is 0.17 which is 3/4 the Black-White distance: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0018442X04700335
Thus, whites and blacks are more genetically distant than two different chimpanzee species, two different gorilla species, humans vs. Neanderthals, and humans vs. homo erectus.
The average FST between different dog breeds is 0.154 which is nearly identical to the average FST between human populations at 0.155: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11773246 http://www.pnas.org/content/94/9/4516.abstract
Although wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) are a different species (lupus) than coyotes(Canis latrans): "there is less mt-DNA difference between dogs, wolves, and coyotes than there is between the various ethnic groups of human beings." http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Domestic_Dog.html?id=I8HU_3ycrrEC
>>33282428 >Niggers in Africa kill each other due to the size of their shins and other stupid shit
They learned it from the whites. Unless the whites had planted ideas of ethnical differences and created rifts in Rwanda by placing the minority Tutsi in charge of the majority Hutu(because the Tutsi were considered racially superior), the genocide would have never happened there.
>>33282378 Not that I don't think it exists, but what you're saying doesn't make any sense. Humans have imagination, beliefs, misconceptions, you know, things that aren't necessarily scientifically correct. Race very much so exists in science though, so yeah.
If you are so tied to your own ideology that you will literally deny science in order to reaffirm your views then I don't know what else to say to you. Myself, I prefer facts and objective evidence as the basis for holding an opinion. Have fun though.
What I don't understand is how you can claim that it doesn't exist. Even superficial attributes like natural skin color is indicative of your race. Regardless if you think the difference is only skin-deep, you at least in some way acknowledge the diffference between different distinct groups of human beings.
Personally I think that the culture you belong to holds much more importance than your pedigree, but I acknowledge the existance of race.
I'm not saying the whites are entirely to blame for what happened in Rwanda, but in that particular case they ignited the spark. Of course the Hutu themselves savagely did the killing(first hand with machetes no less), but the lessons they received in colonial times didn't exactly improve the situation.
So if we placed a newborn baby born from a mother in a particularily vile and brutal indigenous tribe from africa in a family of middle class white people in a first-world country, what do you think would have deepest impression of the child's life? Perhaps it would be less able in some academical areas or something, but I think it would end up pretty "normal" in our eyes. More so than blacks in a black ghetto anyway.
White guilt isn't justified, since modern whites have little to do with what happened during colonial times. What is important is to learn that it's easy to stir up ethnical conflicts in a position of power. The people in Rwanda doing the killing are ultimately to blame since they did the killing, but we should learn from history that this is what happens when you create a rift in society, just like the Swedes are doing by importing massive amounts of people of a different culture. Unless they are assimilated to the cultural majority already there, violence on some scale will erupt.
>Upon the Suiones, border the people Sitones; and, agreeing with them in all other things, differ from them in one, that here the sovereignty is exercised by a woman. So notoriously do they degenerate not only from a state of liberty, but even below a state of bondage.
>Sweden to scrap any mention of "language" from Swedish legislation, saying that language is a social construct which should not be encouraged in law
>Sweden to scrap any mention of law from Swedish legislation, saying that law is a social construct which should not be encouraged in law
Races are as much a "social construct" as language or species are. There's a REASON you can tell with 99% certainty where someone is from based on their looks. There's a reason a DNA test can tell you where you are from.
Even in the unlikely scenario that SD gets a massive election result like 20%, and Ullenhag loses his position in the fallout, he'll probably end up in some PR firm and make mad dolla just like his peers.
>Genetic influences on brain morphology and IQ are well studied. A variety of sophisticated brain-mapping approaches relating genetic influences on brain structure and intelligence establishes a regional distribution for this relationship that is consistent with behavioral studies. We highlight those studies that illustrate the complex cortical patterns associated with measures of cognitive ability. A measure of cognitive ability, known as g, has been shown highly heritable across many studies. We argue that these genetic links are partly mediated by brain structure that is likewise under strong genetic control. Other factors, such as the environment, obviously play a role, but the predominant determinant appears to genetic.
>>33283631 No, I want this. I would rather be a dead person on a dead world than live another day in a world where white people refuse to wake up and accept the burden of their own magnificent majesty.
I'm dreading the day when feminists get enough influence to restrict access to something they brand something like "Misogynistic websites"(including 4chan) and I can't visit this place unless I use a VPN service.
>General intelligence is an important human quantitative trait that accounts for much of the variation in diverse cognitive abilities. Individual differences in intelligence are strongly associated with many important life outcomes, including educational and occupational attainments, income, health and lifespan. Data from twin and family studies are consistent with a high heritability of intelligence, but this inference has been controversial. We conducted a genome-wide analysis of 3511 unrelated adults with data on 549?692 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and detailed phenotypes on cognitive traits. We estimate that 40% of the variation in crystallized-type intelligence and 51% of the variation in fluid-type intelligence between individuals is accounted for by linkage disequilibrium between genotyped common SNP markers and unknown causal variants. These estimates provide lower bounds for the narrow-sense heritability of the traits. We partitioned genetic variation on individual chromosomes and found that, on average, longer chromosomes explain more variation. Finally, using just SNP data we predicted ~1% of the variance of crystallized and fluid cognitive phenotypes in an independent sample (P=0.009 and 0.028, respectively). Our results unequivocally confirm that a substantial proportion of individual differences in human intelligence is due to genetic variation, and are consistent with many genes of small effects underlying the additive genetic influences on intelligence.
Laws are social constructs too you stupid fucking cunts. Jesus Christ this world is going to hell. We are entering an age of both conservative and liberal anti-intellectualism. God have mercy on our ignorant masses.
>>33284004 No, you can still be anti-semetic or racist, it will merely be classified as being a form of schizophrenic delusion and you will be sectioned and medicated to control your hallucinations of race.
>>33284004 We can only hope. It'll be a hoot reading the news about some "guy" getting his ass kicked by a group of "urban youths" with whitepixelated features in malmö and just know it was a bunch of arabs fucking up a jew.
Surely you know enough about genetics to know about epigenetics, then? I'm not talking about mumbo jumbo social sciences and how newborn humans are blank papers waiting for ink. Humans are different from population to population, from individual to individual, and all people are not equally gifted.
But behavior is very moldable by environment, from the moment you are a fetus.For example that babies born from mothers who starved during pregnancy are more likely to over-eat due to their bodies being configured for survival-mode since infancy. Even if some races are vastly inferior in terms of intelligence, or more agressive, et cetera, it's possible to coexist with them in the right environment.
>>33281865 Im so sick of this 'ignoring science for a perfect world outcome' attitude.
Its great though. People of different races require different treatments and procedures when it comes to medicine, so if we all pretend that we are one race, we are guaranteed that all but one race will die off.
>>33281649 >Race has been biologically proven to not exist. If this does away with affirmative action based on race, all the better. Thats funny because they can determine what race someone is by looking at their DNA..
>>33283449 Celts are gauls you filthy nigger. What do you want? Fucking Irish & Scots? Those weren't even really celtic, after all, they mixed so wonderfully with norse and pictish populations they encountered there!
So at what point is a human subhuman garbage, then? How do we deal with matter of outliers?
Even if it's a fact that the vast majority of white people are superior in empathy, intelligence, and their overall contribution to humanity genetically, there would still be exceptions. Should they die? How should we test them? Should all people with insufficient IQ be imprisoned or killed? Vice versa, how about exceptional individuals from a "lesser" race who show intelligence superior to most white people?
It's not so much monkey see monkey do as it is creating an ethnical rift by placing the minority in charge of the majority. Of course, I doubt the people who did this had any idea of what it could lead to.
Gregory Cochran gives a discussion on genetics, including epigenetics:
>Humans are different from population to population, from individual to individual, and all people are not equally gifted.
>But behavior is very moldable by environment, from the moment you are a fetus.
The evidence I just presented to you suggests that at least in terms of intelligence genetics matters more than environment.
>Even if some races are vastly inferior in terms of intelligence, or more agressive, et cetera, it's possible to coexist with them in the right environment.
Wouldn't the less intelligent, more aggressive people be a burden on the more intelligent? It's possible to coexist, but why should we? Why, for example, should Sweden embrace "multiculturalism"? Their immigration policy is filling their country with millions of low IQ individuals. They are importing a permanent underclass.
>>33284550 >So at what point is a human subhuman garbage, then? If they are niggers, they are subhuman garbage. >How do we deal with matter of outliers? We ignore them because if they breed their children regress to the mean. Just because an incredibly exceptional nigger can function at the same level as a slightly above average white or asian person doesn't mean shit.
I don't even give a shit about g, to be honest. I want to live in a world that values populations with genetic tendencies towards future time orientation, strong group trust networks, and men who feel strongly compelled to look out for the children they father with women who consider the monogamous relationships they enter to be sacrosanct. These are traits that emerge from evolving in resource scarce northern environments which niggers can't even begin to emulate, much less embody.
Are these guys really subtly ending pro-nonwhite legislation by doing this? If the only crime is "racism" but you can't specify who it's directed against, they'll have to arrest racist Muslims too, right?
I believe we can exist side by side with blacks better if we cut the bullshit out of the dialogue. That means no more pandering. No more excuses. No more promoting their debased culture. That means the naked truth.
No more bringing ourselves down to their level, but rather bringing them up to ours. This means unpleasant realities need to be addressed.
I think you will have burdens on society regardless of how you choose to do, whether it be people of other race, culture, cripples, addicts, elders, people with psychological issues, people with medical issues or what have you. I think the more important point is how you handle these burdens, whether you can exploit whatever skills they have regardless of their handicap.
Of course, there is absolutely no reason to actively increase your burden like Sweden is doing with arguments like "We are so well off, we can take care of more people", "We have so much space", "They make things more exciting" or my personal favorite "Don't see it as a problem, see it as a challenge!". Especially since Sweden already is faced with the burden of an aging population, how is that going to be solved with importing people who most likely be on welfare all their life, regardless if it's caused by their lack of education, talent, will or because of the inefficiency of integration/assimilation.
I concede the point about epigenetics though, you seem more knowledgeable.
>>33284968 What most people fail to realize is that most swedes are seriously racist against anyone who doesn't speak perfect swedish and has assimilated. Not openly, but they are. Sit down in any lunchroom and wait, and sooner or later someone is gonna bring up immigration or niggers doing something stupid, and everyone will agree.
>Of course, there is absolutely no reason to actively increase your burden like Sweden is doing with arguments like "We are so well off, we can take care of more people", "We have so much space", "They make things more exciting" or my personal favorite "Don't see it as a problem, see it as a challenge!". Especially since Sweden already is faced with the burden of an aging population, how is that going to be solved with importing people who most likely be on welfare all their life, regardless if it's caused by their lack of education, talent, will or because of the inefficiency of integration/assimilation.
>>33285017 >These outliners should help their own fucking people.
Agreed, but they are actively encouraged not to since they are offered a better life in the west.
I was more talking about how you deal with people who are part of a large ethnical minority and who are already in a western country, perhaps for several generations. Some argue as though they want to exterminate or throw them all out, and I don't think it's realistically feasible, nor do I think it's the ethically correct decision.
The ones who speak warmest about immigration are the ones who live and work farthest from it, which ironically is the case for all people working in established media. Even immigrants themselves hate Swedens excessive migration, since it causes problems for them.
>>33285269 Yeah, I bet immigration is no big deal when you work in a swanky office in downtown Stockholm, where the only immigrants are modern, college-educated people who WANT to be a part of the society. They don't see the hordes of uneducated, illiterate and violent savages that try to bring along their honorkilling, sharialaws and who are just happy to get welfare for the rest of their lives. I mean, welfare is a giant step up from sitting in the desert without any money. Here they get paid to watch satellite tv and hang out with other foreigners. It must truly be a paradise, if it wasn't for that annoying part where you need to learn enough swedish to go shopping in a grocery store...eh, fuck it, just play dumb and wait until your kids are old enough, they'll pick up swedish while growing up, let them do the talking.
>I don't think it's realistically feasible, nor do I think it's the ethically correct decision.
Then you're just another bleeding heart, they'd wipe us out without any debate as history has shown. They don't belong in Europe or any white country, they should be deported, it will of course end in some violence as some won't obey.
They're projected to replace whites as a majority in more and more countries within a few decades and yet here you are talking about ethics. It not being realistic is ridiculous with the possible exception of America, but I've long since given up caring about America.
>>33285654 Holy shit but why? Some of these people have had roots in these countries for several generations, and you just want to throw them back to some country they no longer belong to?
This is referring to those living in western countries who were born in said countries and have integrated themselves within the larger culture. For all intents and purposes, they are whatever that culture happens to be, and they would no more fit in to their supposed home country than you would fit into their country.
Throwing them out like this would not only cause huge issues both foreign and domestic, but would create enemies out of formerly loyal citizens.
>>33285950 If they have been in country for several generations and the great great great grandchildren of the first generation don't look almost indistinguishable from the native population, then they haven't assimilated and have proven they don't belong in the host country.
If you move to a country and only breed with your fellow immigrants and continue practicing your old traditions, you're a fucking parasite and you need to be excised.
Of course, the ethic side of it is subjective, otherwise I don't even think we would be having this discussion.
As for the realistic feasiblity of it I just don't understand how it would be done. Take Sweden for example. A lot of the immigrants are second or third generation. They have never lived in "their country", perhaps they don't even have bonds to it, or perhaps the concept of "their country" doesn't even exist, like it is with Kurdish people. Is it reasonable to have them leave? Some of them aren't even welfare tourists, but people who escaped because they would be killed if they stayed, or if they return, as is the case for many christians from muslim countries. It would be like sending them to execution.
Disregarding the "who and where", there is also the matter of actually making them leave. Dumping a letter in their inbox saying "It's time to get the fuck out" might work for some, but the vast majority won't have that. They might even rebel, riot or cause acts of terrorism. So if they won't leave voluntarily you must force them, but even that might prove difficult, especially since Sweden's army is practically nonexistant. But even if Sweden had a grand army, it hardly feels like it would be enough to make all of them leave peacefully. At the very least, the whole country would be distabilized, perhaps even plunged into a civil war.
The most efficient approach as I see it is just to cut social benefits on a grand scale, or at least require something in return for benefits. Social turists who aren't interested in working or becoming a part of the society would leave pretty quickly, and those that can't make it would follow suit after. The ones left would be the ones who can make some sort of living and thus a contribution to society. But even so, this approach probably would cause much outrage.
And all this is ignoring the fact that neither the Swedish public nor the politicians in Sweden are open to the deportation approach, as is the case for most countries where immigration is a problem. That is the foremost reason why this I don't consider this to be realistic.
>>33286654 sweden along with france were the leading countries for feminism and women's suffrage in the late 19th century ... long before the soviets. sweden is just a liberal shithole. it has been this way since the 1800s
But Sweden wasn't a shithole during the most of the 20th century, even though it was a bit too socialistic for my taste. Although much of the well-being of the country can be attributed to staying out of WW2. Shit started to go downhill in the 70s with Olof Palme, when East Germany spies was crawling up Sweden's ass.
>>33286859 Are you deluded or something? Sweden isn't a shithole by any reach, hell, it's one of the best countries on earth. I'm not saying it's gonna continue being great, what with all these brown people ruining everything, but it's still vastly superior to most of the world.
You misinterpret me, I meant that it was a shithole before the 20th century. I did say things started to go downhill in the 70s, but as you say, Sweden's standard of living is still up there with the best countries, but the future is looking pretty grim.
>>33283113 Yeah... no, they still turn out too stupid to be anything more than a petty criminal most of the time.
Why can't a race raise its own kind without it going to shit?
>>33284304 >What's the alternative, killing them all? Placing them in quarantine?
You do realize how we evolved, right? It wasn't a magical process of harmony and pleasantness. Every specimen too unfit for the environment had to die, basically. That's why we have the intelligence we have. Be fucking thankful it happened. But now our duty is to artificially impose it, since natural selection is no longer taking place.
>>33283775 Nationalistic swede here, i read every single one of these threads every day, only to never forget, never let my flame of vengeance be extinguished.. the viking is still alive..the next election during this fall will decide everything.
thank you brother, across the globe there are like minded people who support your cause.. we're not all supremacists, a lot of us are seperatists and only want to be proud of our heritage just like you, keep fighting the good fight.. here's some tits
>>33287666 You can't say that the reason for adopted kids low iq is the race. Look at what happens to the kids in the system. 7/10 foster kids are on psychotropic drugs. The food supply is probably worse and with the fluoride and lack of nutrients and care yes it drops
>>33287718 >the next election during this fall will decide everything
I'm a nationalistic Swede as well, but I don't think we have enough momentum to cause any great difference this election. The problems in the way the country is run right now aren't apparent enough for the majority of the public to pick up on and treat seriously. Sometimes I wish that suicide bomber in Stockholm would have succeeded in blowing anything else up but himself, since it would have led to people treating radical islam more seriously. Now it's treated like a fucking joke even though there was SUICIDE BOMBER in our CAPITAL CITY.
>all race specific forms of government aid will be eliminated, leaving only the metric of income, as it should be I see no problems with this. It may be for pants on head retarded reasons, but the outcome will be positive (and not at all what they expect)
>>33287878 You are not alone in your mindset, what we need but also dont want is a large swedish memorial/historical building blown up by Random Raghead Rabbadoullh Abdul..but at the same time we dont want our preserved buildings damaged or destroyed.
I've thought about it, but I fear how my family and friends would view it, as well as future employers. Media constantly talks about immigrants are discriminated against in Sweden, but people supporting SD or anything beyond it are treated like social pariahs. Freedom of opinion as long as you share the opinion of what's politically correct.
i understand, and alienating yourself isn't the answer.. if you need to start slowly, do it like this anon on the internet- until you build up the confidence and community to have like minded people around you.. you don't have to be a hermit to be proud of who you are, I promise.. just learn to not use words that trigger people and don't be a fucking idiot and no one will like you any less for being proud
It's not really at that level yet, but we've got an extreme SJW party(Feministic Initiative) knocking at the doors of the Riksdag(Our parliament). They had good result in the EU elections so they have a good chance of surpassing the 4% mark required to enter the Riksdag.
lol i'm not a nazi, did i imply that at any point? congrats on telling me to kill myself, what ya gonna do next call me a newfag? you're amazingly original, i'm sure everyone waits with baited breath for your next post
and for the record, i don't support socialism of any kind, socialists are commie fags.. and i idolize/worship no person.. i'm just here to help other people know that being proud of your race isn't wrong because you're white..
Rather than saying people are different races, its more correct to say that blacks, whites, etc are all sub-species under the umbrella "human". There are different kinds of dogs out there, but you dont call each one a different species. Humans are retarded.
>>33288655 agreed. but unfortunately race is the power word everyone reacts to and makes the point quicker.. but you are not wrong for wanting to clarify the terminology.. my pic dump is done, everyone is faggots for not contributing an image
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loki%27s_Wager >Loki's Wager, a form of logical fallacy, is the unreasonable insistence that a concept cannot be defined, and therefore cannot be discussed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy >The continuum fallacy is an informal fallacy closely related to the sorites paradox, or paradox of the heap. The fallacy causes one to erroneously reject a vague claim simply because it is not as precise as one would like it to be. Vagueness alone does not necessarily imply invalidity.
>The fallacy appears to demonstrate that two states or conditions cannot be considered distinct (or do not exist at all) because between them there exists a continuum of states.
>There are clearly reasonable and clearly unreasonable cases in which objects either belong or do not belong to a particular group of objects based on their properties. We are able to take them case by case and designate them as such even in the case of properties which may be vaguely defined. The existence of hard or controversial cases does not preclude our ability to designate members of particular kinds of groups.
>THE HEAP >The fallacy can be described in the form of a conversation:
>Q: Does one grain of wheat form a heap? >A: No. >Q: If we add one, do two grains of wheat form a heap? >A: No. >Q: If we add one, do three grains of wheat form a heap? >A: No. >... >Q: If we add one, do one hundred grains of wheat form a heap? >A: No. >Q: Therefore, no matter how many grains of wheat we add, we will never have a heap. Therefore, heaps don't exist!
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
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 content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.