I heard on leddit that all humans are genetically closer to each

>genetical distance
Meaningless buzzword. Also, you have to go back.

>>9070396
I was quoting.
I mean does the whole of humanity have more similar alleles than two different subspecies of chimp?

>>9070417
yes because humans dont have subspecies

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3822165/
I know that for brainlets such as myself large chunks of this article are hard to read, but:
>It is striking, for example, that sequencing of 79 great ape genomes identifies more than double the number of SNPs obtained from the recent sequencing of more than a thousand diverse humans25—a reflection of the unique out-of-Africa origin and nested phylogeny of our species.
In short 79 apes contained twice the genetic diversity of a thousand human subjects from across the world. By "nested phylogeny" I believe they're referring to the fact that human genetic diversity falls off a cliff the further you go from East Africa.

This is true. Humans have about a tenth of the overall genetic diversity of most other apes.

The reason for this is that we started off a very small species in Africa, and there is evidence that things like the Toba event reduce early humans to very lower numbers only about 75 kya. There is also event similar large volcanic eruptions disrupted early humans. We basically went from a few thousand mating pairs to a population of over 7 billion with almost no increase in genetic diversity due to the speed at which we migrated, multiplied, and circumvented most forces of natural selection.

>>9070396
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixation_index

File: 14453526565790.jpg (7KB, 250x241px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 250x241px

>>9070396
>Meaningless buzzword

>>9070483
>>9070850
>remove duplicate genes
>reorder the remaining ones up the ass
>claim there is proximity
Yes, it's meaningless.