Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
Anonymous commenting is allowed
#17 - mraye (07/28/2013) [-]
White people are less human than black people by 2.5% but Aboriginals are less human by 5%.

Because Europeans interbred with Neanderthals and Aboriginals interbred with Denisovians.

Fun facts are fun.
#274 to #17 - Logicaltightrope (07/29/2013) [-]
why the hell is he getting thumbed to oblivion? It's true. Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens DID breed in Europe, creating much of the genetic difference between Europeans and Africans.

By saying non-human, he's not insulting anyone. He's talking about the genetic and evolutionary tree.
#314 to #274 - mraye (07/29/2013) [-]
I find it funny that I'm being thumbed down on a post that is trying to spread tolerance about opinions.
#216 to #17 - devout feminist (07/29/2013) [-]
Except all of the species you just named are, get this, HUMAN. Learn some paleoanthropology you ignorant **** .
#310 to #216 - mraye (07/29/2013) [-]
Actually they're hominids. They're not human, merely strains from the same genus homo.
#212 to #17 - devout feminist (07/29/2013) [-]
You realize Neanderthals and Denos were our cousins right? Interbreeding with our own species doesn't make us less human lol, in any case it would make us more human.
User avatar #155 to #17 - Fgner (07/29/2013) [-]
I'm just putting this out there: But I believe when scientists decided to classify the human being, the predominant race of the world were whites, and the bodies being studied as human were white, and the blacks were not considered the same species as whites.

Whites would be the "humans" and everything else would be the non-humans. Regardless of whose got what inside them from 50,000 years ago.

No offense to anyone, of course.
#311 to #155 - mraye (07/29/2013) [-]
No, homosapiens of all kinds are under the classification of "modern humans" everything else is a neanderthal or denisovian, or whatever else is out there.
#136 to #17 - tabarzins (07/29/2013) [-]
Everyone on this thread doesn't realise that if these facts are true everyone here is just getting mad that he's saying something like the first chicken was less chicken than the second chicken.
He just mis-phrased it. He should have said something like Europeans have more Homo neanderthalensis DNA while Aboriginals have more Denisovian DNA. And both have less Homo sapiens DNA than those from Africa. The actual validity of this is unknown by me and I'm too lazy to look it up but I did see that Denisovians are a sub-species of Homo sapiens so that one might not be 5%.
I also don't like how he said "Black people" because "Black people" refers to people of dark skin of African decent, but it's dumb because Obama is "Black" and he's half white, yet that falsifies his statement because he would be (by his standards) 1.25% "Not Human".

tl;dr using the words "human" and "black people" in his statement was stupid and made his whole argument stupid
#83 to #17 - devout feminist (07/29/2013) [-]
he's right you know.
#102 to #83 - devout feminist (07/29/2013) [-]
#samefag
User avatar #37 to #17 - Nightinear **User deleted account** (07/29/2013) [-]
Seems like some Neanderthal DNA only was a good thing
User avatar #22 to #17 - metalmind ONLINE (07/28/2013) [-]
Well, another fact that is fun is that both homo neanderthalensis and homo deinisovas were just subspecies of humans, but still human.
And regarding the Amount of Neandethal DNA that can be found in europeans there are no final numbers out yet.
#312 to #22 - mraye (07/29/2013) [-]
Not subsets, but another branch of the evolutionary tree that died out.
#20 to #17 - decoyoctopus (07/28/2013) [-]
Are they? Are they really? That must be why Africa is such a dominant global power then, huh...
0
#265 to #20 - swiftykidd **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#188 to #20 - devout feminist (07/29/2013) [-]
yeah because you pasty ***** come in, spread disease, steal cultures, and commit genocide. But it's k though, cuz you guys are tops ^_^
User avatar #146 to #20 - alltimetens (07/29/2013) [-]
It's not like Europeans didn't colonize the **** out of Africa and enslave them for 356 years or anything.
#182 to #146 - devout feminist (07/29/2013) [-]
China went from a disorganized ******** to a world superpower in 60 years, slavery ended 150 years ago, africa has no excuse.
User avatar #308 to #182 - alltimetens (07/29/2013) [-]
Oh AND China was also helped by Russia whereas African countries aren't being helped at all for the most part.

User avatar #307 to #182 - alltimetens (07/29/2013) [-]
China had all of its resources and was ruled by a Communist dictator. Aside from that, the European countries had already drawn their borders and already stolen a great deal of the resources in Africa. The damage would be irreversible.
#196 to #182 - jakols (07/29/2013) [-]
Speaking of facts...   
Not a single 100% African person, and im not talking about Black people who live in a western country and call themselves African because they feel like being an African that day.   
Not a single 100% purebred born and raised  in Africa, African has ever invented anything after the invention of straw-huts.   
IQ the program based on fun-facts. (and mocking Allan)
Speaking of facts...
Not a single 100% African person, and im not talking about Black people who live in a western country and call themselves African because they feel like being an African that day.
Not a single 100% purebred born and raised in Africa, African has ever invented anything after the invention of straw-huts.
IQ the program based on fun-facts. (and mocking Allan)
User avatar #309 to #196 - alltimetens (07/29/2013) [-]
Africans developed harvesting, clothing, and controllable fire, all of which are the only reasons you (and the rest of the human race) can still exist. What else is there? Africans were the first humans to hunt (amazing, right?). Turns out that before a certain point in human history, prehistoric humans were vegetarians, but with the expanded variety in food and the fact that meat has very high energy properties, the brain could develop even more.
#200 to #196 - devout feminist (07/29/2013) [-]
They invented harvesting fire. Tribes. First types of clothing. They are the origin of our species.

As cultures moved on, it became easier for them to invent new things. They could pull from resources and technology around them. Africans in tribes have more important things to deal with rather than a new type of media device.. such as starvation, genocide, and dehydration. So, by saying 100% pure blood African, you mean the ones that are fighting with Malaria, poverty on the nth most scale, and children soldiers on a daily basis? No **** they don't have time to sit around toying with screwdrivers and spare technology.
#217 to #200 - devout feminist (07/29/2013) [-]
Literally every race on earth has dealt with genocide and starvation, and during those times have still managed to invent and discover important things. The real difference between africa and every other country is those countries get their **** together after a period of misfortune, meanwhile africa has been a consistent ******** since antiquity.
#277 to #217 - mrcinnamon (07/29/2013) [-]
Not technically true though... even assuming we're talking about Sub-Saharan African. There were numerous very advanced empires in Africa throughout history: Mali, Aksum, Songhai, Sokoto, Benin, Ashanti and Ethopia. That's a very small number of the total. We know less about them because there are less extant written records both because paper or parchment or papyrus or anything you can write extensively was a) likely to degrade quickly in the hot climate and b) difficult to make or buy given the surrounding natural resources. But it is wrong to say that pre-colonial Africa was a wasteland of Civilisation. The empire of Mali was so rich that when its emperor Mansa Musa went on pilgrimage to Mecca he spent so much that it caused uncontrolled inflation across the mediterranean. One of the earliest known universities the University of Sankore was founded in Timbuktu. Just adding this is to the discussion...
#213 to #200 - jakols (07/29/2013) [-]
Is still doesn't make it less true...   
And if you are by convincing that all Africans live in strawhuts, fighting AIDS, Malaria and Child solidiers... then you my friend need to take a trip down to South Africa and see for your self.    
All that "EXTREME POVERTY, EVERYONE IS STARVING" the media spits out, quickly turns out to be false advertising when you see for yourself.    
Cape Town kinda reminds me of Boston, but with a lot more ghettos... but it is still a functioning beautiful Million City. Most Africans are NOT aids-plagued Tarzan-looking people who live on the savannas.
Is still doesn't make it less true...
And if you are by convincing that all Africans live in strawhuts, fighting AIDS, Malaria and Child solidiers... then you my friend need to take a trip down to South Africa and see for your self.
All that "EXTREME POVERTY, EVERYONE IS STARVING" the media spits out, quickly turns out to be false advertising when you see for yourself.
Cape Town kinda reminds me of Boston, but with a lot more ghettos... but it is still a functioning beautiful Million City. Most Africans are NOT aids-plagued Tarzan-looking people who live on the savannas.
User avatar #97 to #20 - threeeighteen (07/29/2013) [-]
Even if the Europeans didn't colonize Africa (ahh, the good old days) the Africans would still find some way to blame us for their problems. Coolest ******* continent, coolest animals, amazing historical sites and.... ******* ****** .
#21 to #20 - mraye (07/28/2013) [-]
Maybe that extra spot of DNA made a whole lotta difference?
 Friends (0)