Memes that need to die

>We're all mixed

This meme is shit
If this was true we all would look like mudbloods

Cry more

>the gene pool of ancient civilizations were the same as their modern day geographic counterparts

If they dont have writing they are basically Neanderthals.

This is true, with exceptions

Areas that did not have mass migrations to and from areas are going to be more or less the same. If I recall, Egypt for example will be roughly the same, France however has changed.

>Byzantium wasn't the Roman Empire

I'm torn on this. Byzantium was a rump state, a very powerful political entity that was directly the government of the Roman empire.

Culturally, they were Greek-speaking, orthodox (not Catholic), and didn't even control Rome itself.

Politically, they were that same Roman government. They themselves were not Roman

>They themselves were not Roman
What constitutes a Roman?

>modern day populations have no connection to the pool of ancient civilizations
>migration basically destroyed any trace of the former populations and the current ones are rape-babies

Mention anything about ancestry, lineage, anything older than 1500 and you get something like:

>Hurr WE WUZ, nationalism
>migrating conquerors FTW
>Italian/Spanish etc are Arabs

The Roman Empire is the polity, not the nation or the people. So they were literally the roman empire.

Also most people makes Byzantium start in 476 or even 395. The last roman emperor that had latin as his mother tongue was probably Justinian (527-565) and latin was the language of the state up until Heraclius (610-641). The "they were greeks" meme doesn't work unless you specifically decide Byzantium starts a shitload of years after the supposed fall of Rome.

Think of it this way, the people in Constantinople may not have been ethnic Latins from the city of Rome, but their state was the Roman Empire, and therefore their nationality was Roman.

>but muh culture
Changed a lot over 1000 years, it's amazing that it didn't change even more in all that time. That complaint is like someone saying that the America of today is nothing like that of 1776, the country has changed way too much in territorial composition, culture, fashion and ethnic makeup to still be called the United States of America.

>ancient Greeks were blonde and pale
>modern Greeks are Turk rape babies

This should stay on /int/ and travel no further.

Ancient Greeks were curly-haired mudbabies just like Australasian aboriginals.

A Latin, Catholic, citizen of Rome.

>colonization destroyed africa
>protestantism destroyed christianity and catholiscism wasn't a corrupt religion at it's inception
>the only reason ww1 occured was because of a political accident

Is argue that the WASP culture has remained rather consistent in the US' case, in that we're still a largely protestant, English-speaking people.

Byzantium was the continuation of the Roman political identity, but they fundamentally changed what made them a people. They were what Roman-controlled Greece turned into, not Rome itself.

See

>>protestantism destroyed christianity and catholiscism wasn't a corrupt religion at it's inception
>said the prot trying to defend his heresy

What "they were" is not important since the Roman empire was an entity, not a person or group of people. Maybe byzantine greece was "what Roman-controlled Greece turned into, not Rome itself", I will not enter this debate, but that's irrelevant since you cannot have a roman-controlled Greece without a Rome. They were still under a state, a government, that was Rome.

>>protestantism destroyed christianity and catholiscism wasn't a corrupt religion at it's inception
>>the only reason ww1 occured was because of a political accident
gonna need an explanation on this one bud

These are not mutually exclusive, you moron. Having a different genotype =/= being unrelated.

When people think that "conquering" means exterminatus, or that every single child born in a conquered country immediatly after a conquest is already halfbreed and a product of rape.

Kings wanted more people to tax, not just piles of bones (except mongols, fuck mongols)

>IQ is environmental

But the expression of just about all genes is environmentally influenced. Height is clearly heritable and also clearly massively influenced by eg nutrition.

This, only on Balkan level.
In reality Greeks got "whiter" due to Slavic invasions and mixing with Slavs.
Brown people in Balkans have nothing to do with Turks (who were Central Asian people), but with the fact original inhabitants were swarthy people.

WW1 would have occurred assassinated Archduke or not; the French, the Germans and the Russians had already laid down their plans and were ready to go at each other, that's why they mobilized so fast

>Slavic people are Mongolian
>Finnish people are Mongolian
>Hungarians are Mongolian
>Romanians are gypsies
>Greeks are Turks
>Italians are Arabs
>Turks are Mongolian
>Iberians are Arabs
>Germans are Huns
>English people are German/Danish
>Egyptians are Arabs
>North Africans in general are Arabs

/int/ posters need to be banned

Yup. I hate the "one guy started ww1" meme.

my bad I didn't mean to highlight that part. I want to know about why you think catholicism was corrupt at its inception

Now explain why protestantism isn't the reason that Christianity isn't fucked.

Oh I don't know I'm not him

So Augustus wasn't Roman?

>But the expression of just about all genes is environmentally influenced. Height is clearly heritable and also clearly massively influenced by eg nutrition.
Nobody in the determinist camp denies that the environment plays a significant role. But people in the environmental camp completely deny a significant genetic role, despite twin studies proving them wrong.

>2cool4school pseudo-linguists saying things like Proto Indo-European not existing, or English not being a Germanic language
>>people taking cultural terms like Celtic/Germanic/Slavic/Latin to be genetic rather than ethno-linguistic
This but to add to the latter

>muh haplotype groups means region X is culturally Y
so many things wrong with this it makes my head spin

He was, Catholic means universal.

>But people in the environmental camp completely deny a significant genetic role

Some people do, others not so much. Maybe the problem is that you have this notion of rigidly-divided and exhaustively inclusive 'camps' in your mind. Tabula rasa won't last too long.

>Nobody in the determinist camp denies that the environment plays a significant role.
>Implying nobody
>But people in the environmental camp completely deny a significant genetic role
>Implying completely

>Protestants don't believe in the Trinity
Do Catholics only encounter Jehovah's Witnesses on a daily basis or something?

I've seen people on Veeky Forums telling me that the Trinity is Polytheist bullshit.

>Egyptians are Arabs
>North Africans in general are Arabs
These are true.

Culturally

Culture and language are more important than ethnicity.

I see. I think we agree more than we know. The Latins were the tribe that made Rome, and subsequently Roman culture. For the longest time, only Latins were true Romans, and for the longest time true Romans were seen as being Latins. If you were a Gaul in the Roman Empire, you weren't a Roman, you were just a Gaul under Rome's control. That's why many areas under extreme Roman influence like Gaul and Iberia, took on Latin-derived languages. Greece was taken into the Roman Empire, but retained their culture. They were only Roman in the political sense, not actual Latin people. They were Greeks in the Roman Empire, not Romans.

Ethnicity IS culture and language. I'm amazed how many people don't know this.

Most people use ethnicity as shorthand for racial haplotype shit because they're retarded and think it's important in any conversation that isn't purely scientific.

So he's right?
What are we even discussing? Mahgrebians clear look arabian/mediterran

THATS WHAT ETHNICITY IS

They all look the same because they're all caucasians adapted to the desert

i'm atheist actually

PIE is an imaginary "reconstructed" language, its unlikely that there was any one proto indo european language, and european languages other then greek and latin don't descend from it through any other lineage except greek and latin

cool4school pseudo-linguists saying things like Proto Indo-European not existing, or English not being a Germanic language

its half romance and half indo-european, but germanic languages all descend largely from romance languages and proto-illyria anyway, and finnic and other pre-indo-european languages to a lesser extent

show us any depiction of ancient greeks that look as middle eastern as modern greeks

Where do we find you retards?

Then Protestantism did destroy Christianity, because shit like that wouldn't fly back then. Hell I know some parts of the Church is corrupt but it's better than having people who aren't trained in the word of God and trying to interpret something that in all honesty shouldn't be interpreted by the lower class

>PIE is an imaginary "reconstructed" language, its unlikely that there was any one proto indo european language, and european languages other then greek and latin don't descend from it through any other lineage except greek and latin
Completely wrong, are you unaware of Proto-Germanic? Proto-Celtic? What about the Indo Aryan languages? Do you actually believe that Germanic languages come from Latin? It's also not imaginary, it'd very clear that they have a language of common descent, what, do you believe do languages totally identical rose up out of nothing at the same time?
>its half romance and half indo-european, but germanic languages all descend largely from romance languages and proto-illyria anyway, and finnic and other pre-indo-european languages to a lesser extent
Totally wrong, where did you learn this from? There weren't "pre-PIE" languages, just different ones. Basque wasn't before PIE it was just other. And how would you explain Norse coming from Latin? You're pulling things out of your ass.

YOU ARE EXACTLY WHO THIS THREAD WAS MADE FOR

user

You're implying that it's possible to fix trolling or stupidity

I get being unknowledgeable, we all were at one point, but there's being so confident and loud about it that I cannot fathom.

>religion whose texts explicitly elevate the "lower class"
>should only be taught by higher ups
Why do Catholics call themselves Christian when literally none of them follow ANYTHING in the Bible?

>Why do Catholics call themselves Christian when literally none of them follow ANYTHING in the Bible?
Why do Protestants consider themselves Christian when all they do is spit on Christ?

>Islamic Golden Age

>its half romance and half indo-european
???
What did he mean by this?

half romance and half germanic

>Completely wrong, are you unaware of Proto-Germanic? Proto-Celtic?

yes

>Do you actually believe that Germanic languages come from Latin?

proto-illyrian, latin, finnic, and pre-indo-european languages

>What about the Indo Aryan languages?

What about them?

>There weren't "pre-PIE" languages, just different ones.

it means languages which were spoken by a people before they spoke indo-european languages

>And how would you explain Norse coming from Latin?

When was the earliest attestation of Norse? When was the earliest attestation of any germanic language? You'll find there's no record or evidence of these languages until well after extensive contact, influence and exchange between germanic people and romans

Says the guy hating on the poor and downtrodden. You know, the same people Jesus surrounded himself with? Might help if you crack open the Bible, instead of blindly following your papal hierarchy.

Loudest man in the room is usually assumed to be right. The very reason trolls can't fuck off

>proto-illyrian, latin, finnic, and pre-indo-european languages
Phonetics, grammar, do these words mean anything to you?

>When was the earliest attestation of Norse?
Rune stone carvings

Dont eat well in childhood and you wont be able to become as tall as your genes would otherwise allow. Its exactly the same for the brain.

On a side note, it is claimed that being tall is correlated with higher probability of getting cancer. You're probably better of between tall and small.

>Rune stone carvings

writing doesn't attest a language. Runes are based on the latin alphabet by the way, and thats the mainstream position, but historians can't take the logical step that the language is based on latin as well. If their writing system was derived from latin then their language could have been. And there's no reason for any other explanation let alone imaginary narratives about mythical prehistorical races.

Indus valley script for example doesn't attest a language, we don't know what language it was for because we can't decipher a language by looking at the characters

>Phonetics, grammar, do these words mean anything to you?

'not science'

>writing doesn't attest a language.
The script itself does not but the language it was written for can be understood if the script could be understood.
>Runes are based on the latin alphabet by the way, and thats the mainstream position
Wrong, they're both based on Italic script
>but historians can't take the logical step that the language is based on latin as well
Because your previous statements are false
>If their writing system was derived from latin then their language could have been
Hell no, I can write Japanese words in Latin script, that doesn't mean Japanese is Germanic
>And there's no reason for any other explanation let alone imaginary narratives about mythical prehistorical races.
There are, I've illustrated

>Indus valley script for example doesn't attest a language, we don't know what language it was for because we can't decipher a language by looking at the characters
If we could decipher the script, we could figure out the language features, and from there see of it has any relatives. We did these with Egyptian Hieroglyphics

>'not science'
What do you mean? I'm saying that languages are classified by things like phonetics and grammar, not word origin (this is normally given though). Most importantly, you just follow the languages history, and from there you clearly tell it's from Old English, which follows all the way back to Proto-Germanic and PIE. You can't skip to another language family.

We don't find them, they find us.

>Says the guy hating on the poor and downtrodden
You pulling my leg here, right? You know who has the biggest charities? It's the Catholics. You know who helps the poor in Latin America, it's the Catholic Church.

Define IQ

>because your previous statements are false
And it was also nonsensical to begin with

>that doesn't mean Japanese is Germanic
I mean Latin for our exercise, not Germanic

It is. The amount of mindfucking theological dodging to cover up this simple fact is astonishing. Even more astonishing is the fact that there are people on Veeky Forums who actually buy this cheap crap.

Christianity could easily make sense as a monotheistic religion, in fact Partialism, Arainism, and Modalism are all explanations for just that. But of course these are grave heresies, the trinity has to make no sense at all to be the real thing.

>The amount of mindfucking theological dodging to cover up this simple fact is astonishing.
But it's not. Three wholes are parts that make up one being. Simple as fuck.
>Even more astonishing is the fact that there are people on Veeky Forums who actually buy this cheap crap.
If I had a fedora image I would post it.

>half of this board believes that world is 6000 years old

>Jesus isn't God
Wow user, go be a heretic somewhere else.

>parts

>Europeans were never invaded by non-white people

>Wholes which are parts (but not really) that equals one

Each 'person' has to be completely and transcendentally whole, they can't be parts to equal anything. Your explanation was just partialism.

Parts but wholes doesn't make any sense. So I guess we are entering trinity territory.

>Parts but wholes doesn't make any sense
But it does. The Whole is made of up of three smaller wholes.

>wholes are parts

I get the whole credo quia absurdum thing but that falls down a bit when you start trying to deny the absurdum bit.

>The Whole is made of up of three smaller wholes.

No, according to most christians god isn't voltron. He doesn't need 3 parts to be combined. Smaller wholes that combine to make a larger whole is just wordplay. Those "smaller wholes" are just parts. Partialism, heresy!

Three but actually not 3 but actually one. It can't be understood logically which is why it was debated for centuries and still remains a contentious subject.

How do you know he isn't Voltron?

>Those "smaller wholes" are just parts. Partialism, heresy!
Smaller wholes is a whole. A Smaller whole isn't part because a part cannot be a whole, ergo it's a whole.

>Catholics and Protestants chimping out over which of their versions of the myth is right
>again

>A Smaller whole isn't part because a part cannot be a whole, ergo it's a whole.

And a 'whole' cannot be a part of a 'whole'. That would make it a part. Come the fuck on dude.

To be honest I can't disprove this.

>And a 'whole' cannot be a part of a 'whole'
So a whole isn't a whole? The fuck are you on?