Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-18-2021, 02:49 AM
 
6,829 posts, read 2,115,831 times
Reputation: 2591

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanQuest View Post
WRONG!!

They can tell the region of the world your ancestors came from and extrapolate from there. Race is a social construct. I mean when white people get tans, they become a different race? Lol

It’s superficial skin/hair melanin content and texture for environmental adaptation, that’s it. Like I stated, humans can even tan on demand to handle more extreme conditions. The human race is malleable. We would have gone extinct by now otherwise.
Your response was so stupid, I will just laugh at you
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-18-2021, 04:56 AM
 
3,852 posts, read 2,223,743 times
Reputation: 3127
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
Only if each and every ancestor in the last 200 years was also 26% white
This is really not difficult to understand. I'm trying to figure out a better way to explain this basic concept. If 26% of your ancestors 200 years ago were white, you would have 26% white ancestry today.

Let's say 6 generation ago (about 150-200 years), a person has 64 different ancestors. If 16 out of 64 of those ancestors were white and the rest were black, that person would have 25% white ancestry today. And they likely wouldn't know about it. There would be no traces nor rumors of those white ancestors because it was 150 years ago.

This is the case with black Americans. We have fractions of distant white ancestry from all sides of our family, and not a single white ancestor after the civil war. It adds up to about 20-25% on average.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2021, 05:19 AM
 
3,852 posts, read 2,223,743 times
Reputation: 3127
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
Census takers in 1860 marked very few as mulatto in Southern states and almost 3x as many proportionally in free states close to today's average. So that suggest free choice mostly explains admixing https://www2.census.gov/prod2/decenn...s/1860a-02.pdf
In 1860, southern black people were mostly slaves and don't appear in the census until 1870.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2021, 05:32 AM
 
12,265 posts, read 6,466,132 times
Reputation: 9430
Quote:
Originally Posted by madison999 View Post
Look at most black Americans.

Now look at the african tribes who kidnapped and sold them.

They look like different races. That didn't ALL happen after the civil war.

It's something interesting to throw in the faces of american black supremacists.
Without white buyers....you can figure out the rest. It was a 9th grade Economics class that taught me about buyers and sellers and having a market for your product.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2021, 05:35 AM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,866,332 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tritone View Post
This is really not difficult to understand. I'm trying to figure out a better way to explain this basic concept. If 26% of your ancestors 200 years ago were white, you would have 26% white ancestry today.

Let's say 6 generation ago (about 150-200 years), a person has 64 different ancestors. If 16 out of 64 of those ancestors were white and the rest were black, that person would have 25% white ancestry today. And they likely wouldn't know about it. There would be no traces nor rumors of those white ancestors because it was 150 years ago.

This is the case with black Americans. We have fractions of distant white ancestry from all sides of our family, and not a single white ancestor after the civil war. It adds up to about 20-25% on average.
No, if your ancestry was 26% white autosomal DNA 200 years ago and no white ancestry since the white ancestry would be reduced by half each generation and by the 3rd or 4th generation likely less than a 100 years the white ancestry would be reduced to a trace and probably wouldn't even register on an genetic ancestry test.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2021, 05:39 AM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,866,332 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tritone View Post
In 1860, southern black people were mostly slaves and don't appear in the census until 1870.
That's not true, In the first census of 1790 counted all whites, free non-whites and slaves in all the states. I just linked you to the 1850 census where by that time the categories were white, black or mulatto and it lists the number of each by their name for every state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2021, 05:43 AM
 
3,852 posts, read 2,223,743 times
Reputation: 3127
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
No, if your ancestry was 26% white autosomal DNA 200 years ago and no white
No, 26% of your ancestors 200 years ago. Like the example I gave you. 6 generations ago you have 64 different ancestors. If 16 out of 64 of those ancestors were white and the rest were black, you would have 25% white ancestry, but no white living close relatives.

I don't know what other way to explain that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2021, 06:00 AM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,866,332 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenPineTree View Post
Why do you talk about things you don't understand?

No, that's not true. The Black gene pool in the USA is very much closed. Black Americans date and have kids with other Black Americans. This is changing now.

Since the Black gene pool is closed, this 26% remains static across generations.

Think of it this way.

If Black person A is really 26% White, and Black person B is also 26% White, their kids will not be 13% White, but in fact 26% White. You're assuming that person A is finding someone whose 100% Black, they won't find such person in the African-American gene pool.
I'm assuming that there were plenty probably 85% of blacks in 1860 that were between 100% or at least more than 74% black and if it weren't white ancestry added after then white ancestry would've been diluted. The Census Beauru believed in 1860 that only about 15% blacks had white ancestry and around 85% had none.

You are assuming that every black person had around 26% white ancestry in 1860. There's no reason to believe most blacks then had white ancestry. If blacks had 26% average white ancestry in 1860 they would have much more than the 26% white ancestry average today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2021, 06:07 AM
 
19,387 posts, read 6,497,447 times
Reputation: 12310
The problem with the leftists’ focus on slavery is that they are indoctrinating our children to think that America was a horrible, evil country for enslaving people - and using that to drive hate for our country as a necessary step in destroying it to replace it with Marxism. What they fail to teach is that was the more of the day, prevalent throughout the world, and that America was doing what was typical 500 years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2021, 06:11 AM
 
3,852 posts, read 2,223,743 times
Reputation: 3127
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1 View Post
The Census Beauru believed in 1860 that only about 15% blacks had white ancestry and around 85% had none.
The census recorded people as "mulatto" from looking at them. Those were just the people who were substantially mixed race, and appeared so.

People who had mostly black ancestry and look black, were recorded as black. This is where the hidden white ancestry is coming from.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:34 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top