[5th MEB]

Your whole argument reminds me of the German political position in the 1930’s and 1940’s that the Germans were a separate and superior race, all others were untermensch.
Your argument holds about as much fact as theirs did.
You give two articles, both of which use dodge phrases and words such as, might, may, could, we think, our theory, while you chose to ignore all other research and and accepted literature on the subject.
You chose a paper and theory that is currently being disputed by some of the premier researchers in the field of genetics.
Just as a matter of interest, did you know that black people are more disposed to sickle cell anemia?
Does that make them a different race; NO, it's just a evolutionary adaptation to the conditions that they have lived in for generations..

[cuban leaf]

Your whole argument reminds me of the German political position in the 1930’s and 1940’s that the Germans were a separate and superior race, all others were untermensch.

---

My argument is that there are different races. “Jew” is one of them. This is starting to remind me of arguments I have with liberals. They argue what they have read between the lines in my posts while ignoring the lines themselves. And what they read between the lines is solely false inference.

I’m arguing a very, VERY simple point: “Jew” is a name for a race of people. “Jew” is also a name for a religious group.

[cuban leaf]

Just as a matter of interest, did you know that black people are more disposed to sickle cell anemia?

---

Yes. Since High school in 1972.

I’m amazed that people here are arguing that “race” means nothing. It is a fake word.

It’s like arguing with evolutionists and the conversation digresses into arguing theory vs hypothesis.