Is there any good reason for this?

>He doesn't know that Homo sapiens is polytypic and that the idea of human subspecies is, from a scientific standpoint, arbitrarily suppressed to keep racial tensions low.

Wew

>not knowing organisms are classed as subspecies because they tend not to interbreed due to geographic isolation, sexual selection, etc
>not knowing his white waifu is getting blacked as he reads this

same goes for foundations of math but we DO care don't we?

They're like the pathetic little voice in one's head, as one writhes in bed, saying "it's okay, I'm not going to throw up, I'm not going to throw up, it's okay" etc before, a few minutes later, you're throwing the fuck up like a mad genocidal cunt all over the floor.

Can't blame the human body for that voice. It's kind of a beautiful thing, honestly, that divine hope. You really want to believe in it--you do--but you know damn well you're going to throw up.

And holy hell does it feel nice afterward. We just have to really promise never to drink Semite® brand spirits again. Every time, the species either gets the shits or has to puke blood all over the place. Makes you want to go to the kitchen and pour the rest of the bottle down the drain. Never again.

t. insecure knee grow who unironically has a waifu

implying human halvsies are healthy

oops i dropped this >

literally what happened for 110-125k years before people started civilizations.

do you realize that the logical conclusion of race realism is that jews should control the world?

Yes. It's to scientifically justify reintroduction of segregation and to dehumanize certain groups so it can be easier to "remove" them from society without getting much flak for it.

>should
Not so fast, bucko.

There is nothing unethical about wishing to live among your own people. Its natural and people segregate themselves, anyways.

Science. If you set your mind to study it a little bit, you'll see that, despite the great phenotypical variance within humans, genetically we don't vary much if you compare with other species.

>African and Asiatic lions have been geographically isolated from each other for about 200,000 years.
>B-b-but they look the same so why are the Asiatic lions a subspecies

we vary more than other species and their subspecies though. taxonomy is a mess and practically pseudoscience at this point.

terrible argument.

>Is there any good reason for this?

Yes. You are retarded. The criteria for biological categorization isn't limited by your dull eyes and bigoted purpose.

Uuuuh... yes, it's hard to say whats a species or subspecies, a rule of thumb is something like the Haldane law and even when you say that a species is defined by its ability to have fertile offsrping only with members of their own species you can get very weird results.

Either way, one solution I saw to this is instead clasify species in morphospecies(acording to morphological characteristics), chronospecies(acording to ancestral traits) biological species(they fit perfectly the description).

The thing is, that you cannot draw barriers easily in nature, because everything is conected.

But either way, your example is wrong as stated and the only example that comes to my mind are some monkeys in central Africa(which name I don't remember, it was so long ago...) that acording to what you were paying attention to they could be considered subspecies or speices,

>Geography is more significant than phenotype

That's retarded.

Why would anyone want an unaccountable superintelligent group to run the world especially when they would inevitably run it by and large in their own interests?

Besides that, it's not even true because there are more superintelligent whites and asians than there are superintelligent Jews just as a product of their smaller population.

Pygmies were genetically isolated from others for about 60000 years. 60000 years ago, humans only started to move out of Africa

sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090410075110.htm

The people who arrived in Papua New Guinea have essentially been genetically and geographically isolated from every other human for 50000 years.

haaretz.com/archaeology/1.812694

200000 vs 50000 years, whats the difference? The difference is that lions don't have anti-racists so no one cares when placing the subspecies title on lions. If we were logical, humans definitely have subspecies and easily fall under the definition of subspecies, and the only reason people do not do this is because we have anti-racists cunts screeching about "racism" "bigotry" or other garbage.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens_idaltu

You know why this subspecies exist? Its because its extinct, so there is no controversy about calling this a subspecies. But if this population were still alive, there would be no Wikipedia page with this title, because no one would call it a subspecies. And if you did, you'll just have this cunt like calling you a bigot for suggest they should be called a subspecies. It'll just be another human. In fact, you'll find it hard to really differentiate it from other humans from face only, but thats the only reason why they call it a subspecies, because its a homo sapien skull with some more unusual archaic features.

However, its true that races have more in common with dog breeds/races then some people might even know. Dog breeds are less genetically "diverse" compared to gray wolves, but due to selection and breeding, dog breeds exhibit more extreme behavioral and phenotypical differences.

no amount of liberal faggotry will ever make our differences disappear.

If we kicked niggers back to Africa, blacking wouldn't be possible again.

reddit.com/r/AskAnthropology/comments/6yn549/why_is_homo_sapiens_idaltu_considered_a_separate/

>on nu/sci/ people try to counter wikipedia articles with reddit posts
>the reddit post doesn't even disagree with the original claim

it's not a question of if you want it or not. superintelligent people will just control the less intelligent people. it's true that there's more intelligent whites/asians but they are still less smart than the most smartest jews.