Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. " what trends ? Show me your numbers ! (Mathmo geek here!) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. " Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. what trends ? Show me your numbers ! (Mathmo geek here!)" The UK as a typical example: The Birth rate of While People is 50% bellow replacement rate and shrinking further. Number of immigrants we need each year is higher than the number of born babies in the UK (including non white babies). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50?" There would be a tiny minority of elderly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50? There would be a tiny minority of elderly. " 50 is elderly now? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50? There would be a tiny minority of elderly. 50 is elderly now?" We're talking 50 years from now. Read the OP | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50? There would be a tiny minority of elderly. 50 is elderly now? We're talking 50 years from now. Read the OP" "Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50?" Was asked. You replied: "There would be a tiny minority of elderly." I definitely read the conversation. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50? There would be a tiny minority of elderly. " The current life expectancy in the uk is 80ish. We're talking about a huge change here if it's dropping to 50 or below. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50? There would be a tiny minority of elderly. 50 is elderly now? We're talking 50 years from now. Read the OP "Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50?" Was asked. You replied: "There would be a tiny minority of elderly." I definitely read the conversation. " Let's not get into a semantic tangents. Focus on addressing the subject of the thread. Some people in their 70's still consider themselves young. We're not debating that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. " Who is we and do not include me in that group, it reads like a human trafficker sales pitch trying to convince punters.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. Who is we and do not include me in that group, it reads like a human trafficker sales pitch trying to convince punters. " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50? There would be a tiny minority of elderly. 50 is elderly now? We're talking 50 years from now. Read the OP "Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50?" Was asked. You replied: "There would be a tiny minority of elderly." I definitely read the conversation. Let's not get into a semantic tangents. Focus on addressing the subject of the thread. Some people in their 70's still consider themselves young. We're not debating that. " If we wanna focus on the OP then it needs more detail. Until then, it's bullshit. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. " I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter?" It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. " The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism." If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have seen this type of headline before, it is usually finished with Mohammed will be the most popular boys name. " Muhammad already is the UK's most popular boys name. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. " Variety is always good, as is tolerance. But there is more to variety than skin colour. There are so many people who keep saying that they don’t see skin colour these days, and that “all lives matter” etc. that I can’t imagine there being anyone other than racists who will care. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think a thread got nuked yesterday. It related to islam (at least in some countries) permitting child brides. Assuming some degree of a link between ethnicity and religion, I wonder if the OP has an agenda with this topic?" There is another thread about Emotional biased thinking vs a Rational mind that addresses subjects with objectivity instead of trying to discredit the messenger because he doesn't support your team. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. Variety is always good, as is tolerance. But there is more to variety than skin colour. There are so many people who keep saying that they don’t see skin colour these days, and that “all lives matter” etc. that I can’t imagine there being anyone other than racists who will care." Are you saying that only a racist wouldn't want the white race wiped out? That's some backward racism  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. Variety is always good, as is tolerance. But there is more to variety than skin colour. There are so many people who keep saying that they don’t see skin colour these days, and that “all lives matter” etc. that I can’t imagine there being anyone other than racists who will care. Are you saying that only a racist wouldn't want the white race wiped out? That's some backward racism "Not at all, white people aren’t being ‘wiped out’ people are simply having relationships with people of other skin colours. If that naturally leads to there no longer being ‘white people’ then that is the result of people exercising free will. Only a racist would object to people having children together because of race. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think a thread got nuked yesterday. It related to islam (at least in some countries) permitting child brides. Assuming some degree of a link between ethnicity and religion, I wonder if the OP has an agenda with this topic? There is another thread about Emotional biased thinking vs a Rational mind that addresses subjects with objectivity instead of trying to discredit the messenger because he doesn't support your team. " Can you show where you objectively got your idea that there will be no more white Caucasian people in 50 years? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. Variety is always good, as is tolerance. But there is more to variety than skin colour. There are so many people who keep saying that they don’t see skin colour these days, and that “all lives matter” etc. that I can’t imagine there being anyone other than racists who will care. Are you saying that only a racist wouldn't want the white race wiped out? That's some backward racism
Not at all, white people aren’t being ‘wiped out’ people are simply having relationships with people of other skin colours. If that naturally leads to there no longer being ‘white people’ then that is the result of people exercising free will.
Only a racist would object to people having children together because of race."That us a much better explanation. However, if it's as you say then it would never occur naturally. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. Variety is always good, as is tolerance. But there is more to variety than skin colour. There are so many people who keep saying that they don’t see skin colour these days, and that “all lives matter” etc. that I can’t imagine there being anyone other than racists who will care. Are you saying that only a racist wouldn't want the white race wiped out? That's some backward racism
Not at all, white people aren’t being ‘wiped out’ people are simply having relationships with people of other skin colours. If that naturally leads to there no longer being ‘white people’ then that is the result of people exercising free will.
Only a racist would object to people having children together because of race.
That us a much better explanation.
However, if it's as you say then it would never occur naturally. "Which is why I’m not in any way worried about it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. Variety is always good, as is tolerance. But there is more to variety than skin colour. There are so many people who keep saying that they don’t see skin colour these days, and that “all lives matter” etc. that I can’t imagine there being anyone other than racists who will care. Are you saying that only a racist wouldn't want the white race wiped out? That's some backward racism
Not at all, white people aren’t being ‘wiped out’ people are simply having relationships with people of other skin colours. If that naturally leads to there no longer being ‘white people’ then that is the result of people exercising free will.
Only a racist would object to people having children together because of race.
Mixed race relationships is not the main reason why the white race is on the way to extinction. Very low birthrates are. "White people will only cease to be when white people stop having children with other white people altogether. There being fewer white people does not mean no white people. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. Variety is always good, as is tolerance. But there is more to variety than skin colour. There are so many people who keep saying that they don’t see skin colour these days, and that “all lives matter” etc. that I can’t imagine there being anyone other than racists who will care. Are you saying that only a racist wouldn't want the white race wiped out? That's some backward racism
Not at all, white people aren’t being ‘wiped out’ people are simply having relationships with people of other skin colours. If that naturally leads to there no longer being ‘white people’ then that is the result of people exercising free will.
Only a racist would object to people having children together because of race."In a mixed relationship world there would be no black people either. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. Does this mean that white Caucasians born now won't live beyond 50? There would be a tiny minority of elderly. 50 is elderly now?" It better bloody hadn't be, still a kid in my head, Mrs x | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. " All of BLM? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think a thread got nuked yesterday. It related to islam (at least in some countries) permitting child brides. Assuming some degree of a link between ethnicity and religion, I wonder if the OP has an agenda with this topic? There is another thread about Emotional biased thinking vs a Rational mind that addresses subjects with objectivity instead of trying to discredit the messenger because he doesn't support your team. Can you show where you objectively got your idea that there will be no more white Caucasian people in 50 years?" I didn't mean that in 2075 you wouldn't find any white people around. Probably a tiny minority most of whom are elderly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think a thread got nuked yesterday. It related to islam (at least in some countries) permitting child brides. Assuming some degree of a link between ethnicity and religion, I wonder if the OP has an agenda with this topic? There is another thread about Emotional biased thinking vs a Rational mind that addresses subjects with objectivity instead of trying to discredit the messenger because he doesn't support your team. Can you show where you objectively got your idea that there will be no more white Caucasian people in 50 years? I didn't mean that in 2075 you wouldn't find any white people around. Probably a tiny minority most of whom are elderly. " I’m trying to work out why that would be a particular problem. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think a thread got nuked yesterday. It related to islam (at least in some countries) permitting child brides. Assuming some degree of a link between ethnicity and religion, I wonder if the OP has an agenda with this topic? There is another thread about Emotional biased thinking vs a Rational mind that addresses subjects with objectivity instead of trying to discredit the messenger because he doesn't support your team. Can you show where you objectively got your idea that there will be no more white Caucasian people in 50 years? I didn't mean that in 2075 you wouldn't find any white people around. Probably a tiny minority most of whom are elderly. " Okay, can you show where you objectively got the information that led to your idea that white people will be a tiny minority, most of whom are elderly? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think a thread got nuked yesterday. It related to islam (at least in some countries) permitting child brides. Assuming some degree of a link between ethnicity and religion, I wonder if the OP has an agenda with this topic? There is another thread about Emotional biased thinking vs a Rational mind that addresses subjects with objectivity instead of trying to discredit the messenger because he doesn't support your team. Can you show where you objectively got your idea that there will be no more white Caucasian people in 50 years? I didn't mean that in 2075 you wouldn't find any white people around. Probably a tiny minority most of whom are elderly. I’m trying to work out why that would be a particular problem. " I wouldn't want a world without Native Americans, or Japanese in it. Similarly it's sad to see the white race disappear. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. " What's much more interesting is whether the positive aspects of Western society will prevail in the face of the explosive population growth within those demographics who would tear it down, wholesale. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? " All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with?" Well I’d disagree with anyone who says that white skin (in humans) is a defect, and is utterly incomparable with leicism (orange tigers can birth leucistic tigers, same as normal alligators can birth leucistics). Interesting though that you’d lump all of BLM with what their leader says. Do you do the same with all parties/movements? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with?" But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" In a mixed relationship world there would be no black people either." Good point ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? Well I’d disagree with anyone who says that white skin (in humans) is a defect, and is utterly incomparable with leicism (orange tigers can birth leucistic tigers, same as normal alligators can birth leucistics). Interesting though that you’d lump all of BLM with what their leader says. Do you do the same with all parties/movements? " I didn't try to compare it to leucism, I just said defect, which is what they said. I would do the same with all parties/movements if I see no pushback yeah. Is that allowed? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? Well I’d disagree with anyone who says that white skin (in humans) is a defect, and is utterly incomparable with leicism (orange tigers can birth leucistic tigers, same as normal alligators can birth leucistics). Interesting though that you’d lump all of BLM with what their leader says. Do you do the same with all parties/movements? I didn't try to compare it to leucism, I just said defect, which is what they said. I would do the same with all parties/movements if I see no pushback yeah. Is that allowed?" Just seeing where you stand, that’s all. You know, I wouldn’t suggest that all Tories agree with Johnson about the Burka, for example. And the leucism point came about through someone saying about species going extinct, using the white tiger as an example. I simply pointed out that it was a bad example for the reasons established. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think a thread got nuked yesterday. It related to islam (at least in some countries) permitting child brides. Assuming some degree of a link between ethnicity and religion, I wonder if the OP has an agenda with this topic? There is another thread about Emotional biased thinking vs a Rational mind that addresses subjects with objectivity instead of trying to discredit the messenger because he doesn't support your team. Can you show where you objectively got your idea that there will be no more white Caucasian people in 50 years? I didn't mean that in 2075 you wouldn't find any white people around. Probably a tiny minority most of whom are elderly. Okay, can you show where you objectively got the information that led to your idea that white people will be a tiny minority, most of whom are elderly?" . Simple maths. White European populations are declining. Average birth rate per white woman is 1 and shrinking further. Half the minimum replacement rate. To compensate that deficit Western countries have no choice but bring in a high flow of immigrants. The only continent that have healthy birth rates is Africa. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? Well I’d disagree with anyone who says that white skin (in humans) is a defect, and is utterly incomparable with leicism (orange tigers can birth leucistic tigers, same as normal alligators can birth leucistics). Interesting though that you’d lump all of BLM with what their leader says. Do you do the same with all parties/movements? I didn't try to compare it to leucism, I just said defect, which is what they said. I would do the same with all parties/movements if I see no pushback yeah. Is that allowed? Just seeing where you stand, that’s all. You know, I wouldn’t suggest that all Tories agree with Johnson about the Burka, for example. And the leucism point came about through someone saying about species going extinct, using the white tiger as an example. I simply pointed out that it was a bad example for the reasons established." This is where it just get fucking stupid. I said according to BLM, have since explained about their leader and no pushback, then I'll speak about 'the organisation' when I'm speaking. I didn't speak about singulars. You're more than happy to say 'Tories' when it suits. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think a thread got nuked yesterday. It related to islam (at least in some countries) permitting child brides. Assuming some degree of a link between ethnicity and religion, I wonder if the OP has an agenda with this topic? There is another thread about Emotional biased thinking vs a Rational mind that addresses subjects with objectivity instead of trying to discredit the messenger because he doesn't support your team. Can you show where you objectively got your idea that there will be no more white Caucasian people in 50 years? I didn't mean that in 2075 you wouldn't find any white people around. Probably a tiny minority most of whom are elderly. Okay, can you show where you objectively got the information that led to your idea that white people will be a tiny minority, most of whom are elderly?. Simple maths. White European populations are declining. Average birth rate per white woman is 1 and shrinking further. Half the minimum replacement rate. To compensate that deficit Western countries have no choice but bring in a high flow of immigrants. The only continent that have healthy birth rates is Africa. " Can you show your workings that white people will be a tiny, mostly elderly, population in 50 years? Because I don’t think your maths adds up. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation." Mutation isn't the same as defect though. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation." Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? Well I’d disagree with anyone who says that white skin (in humans) is a defect, and is utterly incomparable with leicism (orange tigers can birth leucistic tigers, same as normal alligators can birth leucistics). Interesting though that you’d lump all of BLM with what their leader says. Do you do the same with all parties/movements? I didn't try to compare it to leucism, I just said defect, which is what they said. I would do the same with all parties/movements if I see no pushback yeah. Is that allowed? Just seeing where you stand, that’s all. You know, I wouldn’t suggest that all Tories agree with Johnson about the Burka, for example. And the leucism point came about through someone saying about species going extinct, using the white tiger as an example. I simply pointed out that it was a bad example for the reasons established. This is where it just get fucking stupid. I said according to BLM, have since explained about their leader and no pushback, then I'll speak about 'the organisation' when I'm speaking. I didn't speak about singulars. You're more than happy to say 'Tories' when it suits. " It got fucking stupid when you attempted to drag BLM into someone pointing out that white tigers are not a great example of a species going extinct | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? Well I’d disagree with anyone who says that white skin (in humans) is a defect, and is utterly incomparable with leicism (orange tigers can birth leucistic tigers, same as normal alligators can birth leucistics). Interesting though that you’d lump all of BLM with what their leader says. Do you do the same with all parties/movements? I didn't try to compare it to leucism, I just said defect, which is what they said. I would do the same with all parties/movements if I see no pushback yeah. Is that allowed? Just seeing where you stand, that’s all. You know, I wouldn’t suggest that all Tories agree with Johnson about the Burka, for example. And the leucism point came about through someone saying about species going extinct, using the white tiger as an example. I simply pointed out that it was a bad example for the reasons established. This is where it just get fucking stupid. I said according to BLM, have since explained about their leader and no pushback, then I'll speak about 'the organisation' when I'm speaking. I didn't speak about singulars. You're more than happy to say 'Tories' when it suits. It got fucking stupid when you attempted to drag BLM into someone pointing out that white tigers are not a great example of a species going extinct "You didn't say anything about it not being any sort of example initially. I keep telling you mate, do better. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? Well I’d disagree with anyone who says that white skin (in humans) is a defect, and is utterly incomparable with leicism (orange tigers can birth leucistic tigers, same as normal alligators can birth leucistics). Interesting though that you’d lump all of BLM with what their leader says. Do you do the same with all parties/movements? I didn't try to compare it to leucism, I just said defect, which is what they said. I would do the same with all parties/movements if I see no pushback yeah. Is that allowed? Just seeing where you stand, that’s all. You know, I wouldn’t suggest that all Tories agree with Johnson about the Burka, for example. And the leucism point came about through someone saying about species going extinct, using the white tiger as an example. I simply pointed out that it was a bad example for the reasons established. This is where it just get fucking stupid. I said according to BLM, have since explained about their leader and no pushback, then I'll speak about 'the organisation' when I'm speaking. I didn't speak about singulars. You're more than happy to say 'Tories' when it suits. It got fucking stupid when you attempted to drag BLM into someone pointing out that white tigers are not a great example of a species going extinct
You didn't say anything about it not being any sort of example initially. I keep telling you mate, do better. "I thought that was obvious. Why would I have talked about leucism otherwise?
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Mutation isn't the same as defect though. " All genetic defects are believed to be the result of mutations. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol" You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? Well I’d disagree with anyone who says that white skin (in humans) is a defect, and is utterly incomparable with leicism (orange tigers can birth leucistic tigers, same as normal alligators can birth leucistics). Interesting though that you’d lump all of BLM with what their leader says. Do you do the same with all parties/movements? I didn't try to compare it to leucism, I just said defect, which is what they said. I would do the same with all parties/movements if I see no pushback yeah. Is that allowed? Just seeing where you stand, that’s all. You know, I wouldn’t suggest that all Tories agree with Johnson about the Burka, for example. And the leucism point came about through someone saying about species going extinct, using the white tiger as an example. I simply pointed out that it was a bad example for the reasons established. This is where it just get fucking stupid. I said according to BLM, have since explained about their leader and no pushback, then I'll speak about 'the organisation' when I'm speaking. I didn't speak about singulars. You're more than happy to say 'Tories' when it suits. It got fucking stupid when you attempted to drag BLM into someone pointing out that white tigers are not a great example of a species going extinct
You didn't say anything about it not being any sort of example initially. I keep telling you mate, do better.
I thought that was obvious. Why would I have talked about leucism otherwise?
"How should I know? You expect me to know what's in your head? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Mutation isn't the same as defect though. All genetic defects are believed to be the result of mutations." So white people are defective? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah?" I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Mutation isn't the same as defect though. All genetic defects are believed to be the result of mutations. So white people are defective?" White skin is the result of a genetic mutation, after that it’s a matter of deciding which mutations are beneficial and which are not. I don’t see white skin as a defect but there is an argument to say it is. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces." Yes, and originally all Homo sapiens were dark skinned, then there was a gene mutation and some homo sapiens began to get lighter skin. Melanin production determines skin tone now but only because there was a genetic mutation which took us from our original dark skin. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Mutation isn't the same as defect though. All genetic defects are believed to be the result of mutations. So white people are defective?" It's an advantage if you live in less sunny geographical location. A defect if you live in a hot country | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. " Well you will find most of Western Europe has a slowing birth rate Japans birth rate is already in a negative figure….. I would argue it’s more about the work life balance being wrong …. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Yes, and originally all Homo sapiens were dark skinned, then there was a gene mutation and some homo sapiens began to get lighter skin. Melanin production determines skin tone now but only because there was a genetic mutation which took us from our original dark skin." And this mutation only affects white people even thou every human being living produces it naturally in differing amounts. Okey dokey. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. Well you will find most of Western Europe has a slowing birth rate Japans birth rate is already in a negative figure….. I would argue it’s more about the work life balance being wrong …." Vice president harris, " when we invest in clean energy electric vehicles and reduce population. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think a thread got nuked yesterday. It related to islam (at least in some countries) permitting child brides. Assuming some degree of a link between ethnicity and religion, I wonder if the OP has an agenda with this topic? There is another thread about Emotional biased thinking vs a Rational mind that addresses subjects with objectivity instead of trying to discredit the messenger because he doesn't support your team. " Au contraire I was/am trying to understand the complexity, contradiction, and at times apparent hypocrisy in your posts across multiple threads in the politics forum. I seem to recall it was you who resorted to name calling and labelling when messengers (despite having been polite) didn’t support your team so, hey  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I think a thread got nuked yesterday. It related to islam (at least in some countries) permitting child brides. Assuming some degree of a link between ethnicity and religion, I wonder if the OP has an agenda with this topic? There is another thread about Emotional biased thinking vs a Rational mind that addresses subjects with objectivity instead of trying to discredit the messenger because he doesn't support your team. Au contraire I was/am trying to understand the complexity, contradiction, and at times apparent hypocrisy in your posts across multiple threads in the politics forum. I seem to recall it was you who resorted to name calling and labelling when messengers (despite having been polite) didn’t support your team so, hey "Je suis désolé mais je me rappelle pas avoir insulté personne  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So while we can't say anything about UK born, we also can only go so far with assuming non UK born means non white. " What about North and East Europe eg Poland, Romania, Ukraine ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Yes, and originally all Homo sapiens were dark skinned, then there was a gene mutation and some homo sapiens began to get lighter skin. Melanin production determines skin tone now but only because there was a genetic mutation which took us from our original dark skin. And this mutation only affects white people even thou every human being living produces it naturally in differing amounts. Okey dokey. "I’ll explain it again, once upon a time ALL Homo sapiens (our species) were dark skinned, at some point there was a genetic mutation and some Homo sapiens began to appear with lighter skin. Up until this point there were no white people, only dark skinned people. So yes, the mutation only affects lighter skinned people because if it affected dark skinned people they wouldn’t be dark skinned anymore. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. " " "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces." Yes I believe so. Is it not just nature adapting to the environment. As has been said dark skin is well suited to a hot climate but less so to a Uk type climate. Nature will adapt and over time reprogram to suit the local environment. The scientific name may be mutating but not all mutations are bad. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’m still not understanding the point of this thread." It’s to promote the white genocide/great replacement theory racist nonsense, or so it would seem. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So while we can't say anything about UK born, we also can only go so far with assuming non UK born means non white. What about North and East Europe eg Poland, Romania, Ukraine ?" not sure what your point is... I'm saying non UK doesn't mean non white. Which is also how I'm reading your question. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. " Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’m still not understanding the point of this thread. It’s to promote the white genocide/great replacement theory racist nonsense, or so it would seem." I figured it was fishing for that nonsense. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. " also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Yes, and originally all Homo sapiens were dark skinned, then there was a gene mutation and some homo sapiens began to get lighter skin. Melanin production determines skin tone now but only because there was a genetic mutation which took us from our original dark skin. And this mutation only affects white people even thou every human being living produces it naturally in differing amounts. Okey dokey.
I’ll explain it again, once upon a time ALL Homo sapiens (our species) were dark skinned, at some point there was a genetic mutation and some Homo sapiens began to appear with lighter skin. Up until this point there were no white people, only dark skinned people. So yes, the mutation only affects lighter skinned people because if it affected dark skinned people they wouldn’t be dark skinned anymore.
"Oris it because the human race started to spread out northwards over time with less sunlight shorter days the human body produced less melanin whitening the skin to absorb uvb more easily, I would call it natural evolution | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Yes, and originally all Homo sapiens were dark skinned, then there was a gene mutation and some homo sapiens began to get lighter skin. Melanin production determines skin tone now but only because there was a genetic mutation which took us from our original dark skin. And this mutation only affects white people even thou every human being living produces it naturally in differing amounts. Okey dokey.
I’ll explain it again, once upon a time ALL Homo sapiens (our species) were dark skinned, at some point there was a genetic mutation and some Homo sapiens began to appear with lighter skin. Up until this point there were no white people, only dark skinned people. So yes, the mutation only affects lighter skinned people because if it affected dark skinned people they wouldn’t be dark skinned anymore.
"Homo Sapiens migrating out of Africa interbred with Neanderthals in Europe, this would have potentially led to a lighter skinned offspring and the move north into Europe would have favoured those with lighter skin for the production of vitamin D and no need for a darker skin to protect against the sun. Neanderthal DNA can be found in modern day humans today who originate outside of Africa. As for DNA mutation in skin colour, it is what makes us all unique and certainly not a defect in almost all people. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). " AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find" And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find" Add to all this the rapid change in culture with wokism and it's 500 genders diminishing the desire for family building and making babies even further. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find Add to all this the rapid change in culture with wokism and it's 500 genders diminishing the desire for family building and making babies even further. " Can you describe ‘wokism’ for us? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find Add to all this the rapid change in culture with wokism and it's 500 genders diminishing the desire for family building and making babies even further. " This is not the first time in history we have headed along this path, take a look at Roman or Greek history, it was certainly a sexual society, very exploratory too in some quarters, you would have loved it.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find" did I say that ? If we assume no white births, then an estimate would be 15+pc. So extinct is hyperbole. And that's with using 30 as the age cut off c 1 in 4 45yo will get to 95. So there's going to be a fair number more from the 30-45 group which makes up 30pc of the UK born population. Do I think the population is going to be more diverse. Quite probably. But some kind of white extinction ? Less likely. And that's before we discuss whether this matters or not. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find Add to all this the rapid change in culture with wokism and it's 500 genders diminishing the desire for family building and making babies even further. This is not the first time in history we have headed along this path, take a look at Roman or Greek history, it was certainly a sexual society, very exploratory too in some quarters, you would have loved it.. " Our hindu cousins beat that I think with the kama sutra. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? " In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. " Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. " I'm not bothered about their colour. Pyramids were African and algebra was Babylonian. But I agree that we should consider the long term effects of our actions and think in generations. But this can extend to climate change and over population... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? " As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Yes, and originally all Homo sapiens were dark skinned, then there was a gene mutation and some homo sapiens began to get lighter skin. Melanin production determines skin tone now but only because there was a genetic mutation which took us from our original dark skin. And this mutation only affects white people even thou every human being living produces it naturally in differing amounts. Okey dokey.
I’ll explain it again, once upon a time ALL Homo sapiens (our species) were dark skinned, at some point there was a genetic mutation and some Homo sapiens began to appear with lighter skin. Up until this point there were no white people, only dark skinned people. So yes, the mutation only affects lighter skinned people because if it affected dark skinned people they wouldn’t be dark skinned anymore.
Oris it because the human race started to spread out northwards over time with less sunlight shorter days the human body produced less melanin whitening the skin to absorb uvb more easily, I would call it natural evolution "Genetic mutations are the driving force of evolution. It’s the genetic mutations that allow evolutionary changes to take place. Homo sapiens were once all dark skinned, had there not been genetic mutation it wouldn’t have mattered where they moved to, we would’ve remained dark skinned. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Yes, and originally all Homo sapiens were dark skinned, then there was a gene mutation and some homo sapiens began to get lighter skin. Melanin production determines skin tone now but only because there was a genetic mutation which took us from our original dark skin. And this mutation only affects white people even thou every human being living produces it naturally in differing amounts. Okey dokey.
I’ll explain it again, once upon a time ALL Homo sapiens (our species) were dark skinned, at some point there was a genetic mutation and some Homo sapiens began to appear with lighter skin. Up until this point there were no white people, only dark skinned people. So yes, the mutation only affects lighter skinned people because if it affected dark skinned people they wouldn’t be dark skinned anymore.
Oris it because the human race started to spread out northwards over time with less sunlight shorter days the human body produced less melanin whitening the skin to absorb uvb more easily, I would call it natural evolution
Genetic mutations are the driving force of evolution. It’s the genetic mutations that allow evolutionary changes to take place.
Homo sapiens were once all dark skinned, had there not been genetic mutation it wouldn’t have mattered where they moved to, we would’ve remained dark skinned.
"The Dark skin origins is just an assumption because the oldest human fossil was found in Ethiopia. They assumed Lucy is Black. Even giving her a European name lol. Now they found a much old human fossil in Morocco. North Africans are basically white. 100 of 1000's of years ago you could literally walk from Morocco to Spain in 8 hours | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. " And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Yes, and originally all Homo sapiens were dark skinned, then there was a gene mutation and some homo sapiens began to get lighter skin. Melanin production determines skin tone now but only because there was a genetic mutation which took us from our original dark skin. And this mutation only affects white people even thou every human being living produces it naturally in differing amounts. Okey dokey.
I’ll explain it again, once upon a time ALL Homo sapiens (our species) were dark skinned, at some point there was a genetic mutation and some Homo sapiens began to appear with lighter skin. Up until this point there were no white people, only dark skinned people. So yes, the mutation only affects lighter skinned people because if it affected dark skinned people they wouldn’t be dark skinned anymore.
Oris it because the human race started to spread out northwards over time with less sunlight shorter days the human body produced less melanin whitening the skin to absorb uvb more easily, I would call it natural evolution
Genetic mutations are the driving force of evolution. It’s the genetic mutations that allow evolutionary changes to take place.
Homo sapiens were once all dark skinned, had there not been genetic mutation it wouldn’t have mattered where they moved to, we would’ve remained dark skinned.
The Dark skin origins is just an assumption because the oldest human fossil was found in Ethiopia. They assumed Lucy is Black. Even giving her a European name lol. Now they found a much old human fossil in Morocco. North Africans are basically white. 100 of 1000's of years ago you could literally walk from Morocco to Spain in 8 hours"It’s thought that Cheddar man was dark skinned, was he not? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely?" There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. " But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Skin colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Mutation lol You are aware that homo sapiens were all dark skinned originally, yeah? I never said they were not, but skin hair eye colour is down to the amount of melanin the body produces. Yes, and originally all Homo sapiens were dark skinned, then there was a gene mutation and some homo sapiens began to get lighter skin. Melanin production determines skin tone now but only because there was a genetic mutation which took us from our original dark skin. And this mutation only affects white people even thou every human being living produces it naturally in differing amounts. Okey dokey.
I’ll explain it again, once upon a time ALL Homo sapiens (our species) were dark skinned, at some point there was a genetic mutation and some Homo sapiens began to appear with lighter skin. Up until this point there were no white people, only dark skinned people. So yes, the mutation only affects lighter skinned people because if it affected dark skinned people they wouldn’t be dark skinned anymore.
Oris it because the human race started to spread out northwards over time with less sunlight shorter days the human body produced less melanin whitening the skin to absorb uvb more easily, I would call it natural evolution
Genetic mutations are the driving force of evolution. It’s the genetic mutations that allow evolutionary changes to take place.
Homo sapiens were once all dark skinned, had there not been genetic mutation it wouldn’t have mattered where they moved to, we would’ve remained dark skinned.
The Dark skin origins is just an assumption because the oldest human fossil was found in Ethiopia. They assumed Lucy is Black. Even giving her a European name lol. Now they found a much old human fossil in Morocco. North Africans are basically white. 100 of 1000's of years ago you could literally walk from Morocco to Spain in 8 hours"Do you have a link for the Morocco fossil, because as far as I am aware the oldest Homo sapiens fossil is still Kibish Omo I, found in Ethiopia. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"humans have been on the planet for approximately 0.006% of its history, consider that…" What bakes my bean is that we are traveling 60 something thousand miles an hour around the sun, at the same time falling through space at 1.5 million miles an hour. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. " You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. "And yet humans (and indeed all species) adapt. And white skinned, blonde haired, blue eyed folks aren’t going extinct. Ever. But we will see a broader mix. I’m tapping out now because I’m perilously close to saying something that I’ll regret. It’s been…..interesting. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Minor styling advice around duplicating terms. If you say “white”, you then don’t have to say “Caucasian” imho "It’s for emphasis, super-whiteness | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Minor styling advice around duplicating terms. If you say “white”, you then don’t have to say “Caucasian” imho "There is White Chinese, white North African ect. I wanted to be specific. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Minor styling advice around duplicating terms. If you say “white”, you then don’t have to say “Caucasian” imho
It’s for emphasis, super-whiteness "Pink lol | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. "unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !!
"What about 2100? When there is 1 unique Caucasian girl at Oxford University | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !!
What about 2100? When there is 1 unique Caucasian girl at Oxford University"I hope she is studying maths so she realises there are others. Replacement rate has been the same for about the last fifty years. Afaik Brits are still the majority. I don't see why you think the next 50 years will result in cataclysmic outcomes. But again who cares. If white folk want to contracept themselves into oblivion, shouldntbwe let them ? They aren't worried. Why should you be ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"humans have been on the planet for approximately 0.006% of its history, consider that… What bakes my bean is that we are traveling 60 something thousand miles an hour around the sun, at the same time falling through space at 1.5 million miles an hour. "And here we are talking about hypotheticals, with little regard to answers, or intent. People love to have a row | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !!
What about 2100? When there is 1 unique Caucasian girl at Oxford UniversityI hope she is studying maths so she realises there are others.
Replacement rate has been the same for about the last fifty years. Afaik Brits are still the majority. I don't see why you think the next 50 years will result in cataclysmic outcomes.
But again who cares. If white folk want to contracept themselves into oblivion, shouldntbwe let them ? They aren't worried. Why should you be ?
"Birth rates for the whole UK, may be has been the same (I need to verify that). But the rate of immigration has been increasing and first generation immigrants have a much higher birth rates. Which explains why. However the birth rates of white people has been steadily on the decline. Rarely you'd find a British woman in the 1980's who'd say before dating: "I don't want kids". It's a common trend today. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. " Well originally it was bc of a mutation, like every organism in existence today | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !!
What about 2100? When there is 1 unique Caucasian girl at Oxford UniversityI hope she is studying maths so she realises there are others.
Replacement rate has been the same for about the last fifty years. Afaik Brits are still the majority. I don't see why you think the next 50 years will result in cataclysmic outcomes.
But again who cares. If white folk want to contracept themselves into oblivion, shouldntbwe let them ? They aren't worried. Why should you be ?
Birth rates for the whole UK, may be has been the same (I need to verify that). But the rate of immigration has been increasing and first generation immigrants have a much higher birth rates. Which explains why. However the birth rates of white people has been steadily on the decline. Rarely you'd find a British woman in the 1980's who'd say before dating: "I don't want kids". It's a common trend today. "Is that unique to white women, British women, western women in general? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !!
What about 2100? When there is 1 unique Caucasian girl at Oxford UniversityI hope she is studying maths so she realises there are others.
Replacement rate has been the same for about the last fifty years. Afaik Brits are still the majority. I don't see why you think the next 50 years will result in cataclysmic outcomes.
But again who cares. If white folk want to contracept themselves into oblivion, shouldntbwe let them ? They aren't worried. Why should you be ?
Birth rates for the whole UK, may be has been the same (I need to verify that). But the rate of immigration has been increasing and first generation immigrants have a much higher birth rates. Which explains why. However the birth rates of white people has been steadily on the decline. Rarely you'd find a British woman in the 1980's who'd say before dating: "I don't want kids". It's a common trend today. "https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/bulletins/birthsummarytablesenglandandwales/2021#live-births-and-fertility-rates The gap between UK and non UL isn't huge ATM "In 2019, the non-UK-born TFR was 1.97 children per woman while the UK-born TFR was 1.57 children per woman. The gap between UK-born and non-UK-born TFRs has been generally closing since 2004 but over the past two years has widened slightly again" (this is the latest data I can find with fertility) https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/bulletins/parentscountryofbirthenglandandwales/2019 And it seems it's the non EU bit of Europe that has the highest rates of births. Although tbf Africa isn't far behind. What data have you been looking at ? Irrc you had fertility at 1 for UK born mothers, which is a way of the ONS numbers. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !!
What about 2100? When there is 1 unique Caucasian girl at Oxford UniversityI hope she is studying maths so she realises there are others.
Replacement rate has been the same for about the last fifty years. Afaik Brits are still the majority. I don't see why you think the next 50 years will result in cataclysmic outcomes.
But again who cares. If white folk want to contracept themselves into oblivion, shouldntbwe let them ? They aren't worried. Why should you be ?
Birth rates for the whole UK, may be has been the same (I need to verify that). But the rate of immigration has been increasing and first generation immigrants have a much higher birth rates. Which explains why. However the birth rates of white people has been steadily on the decline. Rarely you'd find a British woman in the 1980's who'd say before dating: "I don't want kids". It's a common trend today.
Is that unique to white women, British women, western women in general? "Not exclusively unique, but it's unique to western modern culture and societies heavily influenced by the west. Such as South Korea and Japan. 1st generation immigrants have much higher birth rates and building a family is a priority in their list of achievements. This tends to start fading away gradually with the next generations as they pursue the western life style and must abide by the system, finances and laws that are soo not favourable to marriage and raising kids. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !!
What about 2100? When there is 1 unique Caucasian girl at Oxford UniversityI hope she is studying maths so she realises there are others.
Replacement rate has been the same for about the last fifty years. Afaik Brits are still the majority. I don't see why you think the next 50 years will result in cataclysmic outcomes.
But again who cares. If white folk want to contracept themselves into oblivion, shouldntbwe let them ? They aren't worried. Why should you be ?
Birth rates for the whole UK, may be has been the same (I need to verify that). But the rate of immigration has been increasing and first generation immigrants have a much higher birth rates. Which explains why. However the birth rates of white people has been steadily on the decline. Rarely you'd find a British woman in the 1980's who'd say before dating: "I don't want kids". It's a common trend today.
Is that unique to white women, British women, western women in general?
Not exclusively unique, but it's unique to western modern culture and societies heavily influenced by the west. Such as South Korea and Japan.
1st generation immigrants have much higher birth rates and building a family is a priority in their list of achievements. This tends to start fading away gradually with the next generations as they pursue the western life style and must abide by the system, finances and laws that are soo not favourable to marriage and raising kids. "So I fail to see why this is a ‘white’ thing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !!
What about 2100? When there is 1 unique Caucasian girl at Oxford UniversityI hope she is studying maths so she realises there are others.
Replacement rate has been the same for about the last fifty years. Afaik Brits are still the majority. I don't see why you think the next 50 years will result in cataclysmic outcomes.
But again who cares. If white folk want to contracept themselves into oblivion, shouldntbwe let them ? They aren't worried. Why should you be ?
Birth rates for the whole UK, may be has been the same (I need to verify that). But the rate of immigration has been increasing and first generation immigrants have a much higher birth rates. Which explains why. However the birth rates of white people has been steadily on the decline. Rarely you'd find a British woman in the 1980's who'd say before dating: "I don't want kids". It's a common trend today.
Is that unique to white women, British women, western women in general?
Not exclusively unique, but it's unique to western modern culture and societies heavily influenced by the west. Such as South Korea and Japan.
1st generation immigrants have much higher birth rates and building a family is a priority in their list of achievements. This tends to start fading away gradually with the next generations as they pursue the western life style and must abide by the system, finances and laws that are soo not favourable to marriage and raising kids.
So I fail to see why this is a ‘white’ thing."Well Japan, South Korea and China also are in the brink of population implosion due to dwindling birth rates. But these countries are not replacing their populations with immigrants to solve that issue. However I don't see how they will continue to exist by the end of the century if they keep closing their doors to immigration. Byt if they do. The west will be in big trouble. As Africa can not supply the rest of the world with youth for a sustainable long time. And if Africa manages somehow to achieve financial independence. Both Europe and Asia are in trouble. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !!
What about 2100? When there is 1 unique Caucasian girl at Oxford UniversityI hope she is studying maths so she realises there are others.
Replacement rate has been the same for about the last fifty years. Afaik Brits are still the majority. I don't see why you think the next 50 years will result in cataclysmic outcomes.
But again who cares. If white folk want to contracept themselves into oblivion, shouldntbwe let them ? They aren't worried. Why should you be ?
Birth rates for the whole UK, may be has been the same (I need to verify that). But the rate of immigration has been increasing and first generation immigrants have a much higher birth rates. Which explains why. However the birth rates of white people has been steadily on the decline. Rarely you'd find a British woman in the 1980's who'd say before dating: "I don't want kids". It's a common trend today.
Is that unique to white women, British women, western women in general?
Not exclusively unique, but it's unique to western modern culture and societies heavily influenced by the west. Such as South Korea and Japan.
1st generation immigrants have much higher birth rates and building a family is a priority in their list of achievements. This tends to start fading away gradually with the next generations as they pursue the western life style and must abide by the system, finances and laws that are soo not favourable to marriage and raising kids.
So I fail to see why this is a ‘white’ thing.
Well Japan, South Korea and China also are in the brink of population implosion due to dwindling birth rates. But these countries are not replacing their populations with immigrants to solve that issue. However I don't see how they will continue to exist by the end of the century if they keep closing their doors to immigration. Byt if they do. The west will be in big trouble. As Africa can not supply the rest of the world with youth for a sustainable long time. And if Africa manages somehow to achieve financial independence. Both Europe and Asia are in trouble. "But now you’re talking about birth rates in general - not about specific race birth rates. Falling birth rates with ageing populations are an economy problem (but an environmental bonus). I just don’t see how race changes anything, and I don’t see why it’s an important factor. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" While I don't have replacement ratio by race, the UK is at about 1.6. Not 1. Even extrapolating trends would suggest that we'd not be there for another 20 years. 1.6 is the UK total birth rate. Non white people account for the 0.6 on top of 1. I have checked the 2021 sensus results and calculated it myself. Assuming that the UK born non white mothers compensate the immigration white mothers. "Half of the white people living today wil be alive in 50 years" That can't be possible since only 20% of white people are under 30. While the Median age of mixed and non whites is 16. Your quotes are confusing ! I don't understand your point of 0.6 on top of the 1. What's your calculated replacement rate for non UK ? And the second bit looks to be replying to me, but editing what I said. also, taking your 20pc as correct, that's still 20pc of 75pc. So 15pc of the entire population is under 30 and white. The medium age of 16 is for two of the 19 ethic groups. Asian and African are around 30. British is 45. (So something like 30pc.must be between 30 and 45, many of who will also be alive in 50 years). AsI said there will be a small minority mostly elderly. Add few decades after that and they become a rare find And since none of us will be here to see it. And since (I’m assuming) none of us are particularly bothered about skin colour…. Why is that an issue? In most cases the man who plants a tree doesn't live to harvest its fruits. Some pyramids took many generations to finish. The men who invented the Algorithm didn't live to use computers. There would be no civilisation if people where not bothered about the next generation as you do. Oh I’m bothered about the next generation, I just don’t see what their skin colour has to do with anything? Can you explain it to us all? As I said, a diverse world is more beautiful and more interesting. My DNA heritage is a mix of 3 different races from 4 different geographical locations. Only 23% of it European. It's not coming from a racist point of view. And future generations will have an even more diverse DNA mix, if trends continue, so you should be celebrating that, surely? There is no lack of mixed races around the world. We would be lacking of white people who have there merit in this beautiful diverse world. If I want to visit China, it's more interesting to meet Chinese People there instead of white Europeans. We have lost a big deal by destroying the Native American civilisations and cultures. But you said it was about diveraity and used your DNA heritage to back it up. You’re all over the place here. Look. Cultures change. Racial mixes change. The world is becoming more interwoven, and that’s a good thing. Will white people ever be extinct? No. Black peopel? No. Will we see an increase in mixed races? Yes. Will it hold the global population back? No. Society is going to be just fine, no matter what its genetic makeup is. You can't make a cocktail of Apple and Orange juice if all you have is a hybrid trees made of extinct Apple and Orange. There is more diversity if you keep the Apple trees non extinct. Imagine someone living in the year 3000. If you're attracted to black people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to brown people you can mate with them. If you're attracted to Blondes and red haired, you look in the video archives of Pornhub and wank yourself till death do you apart. unlikely you'd be attracted to something that went extinct 900 years earlier !!
What about 2100? When there is 1 unique Caucasian girl at Oxford UniversityI hope she is studying maths so she realises there are others.
Replacement rate has been the same for about the last fifty years. Afaik Brits are still the majority. I don't see why you think the next 50 years will result in cataclysmic outcomes.
But again who cares. If white folk want to contracept themselves into oblivion, shouldntbwe let them ? They aren't worried. Why should you be ?
Birth rates for the whole UK, may be has been the same (I need to verify that). But the rate of immigration has been increasing and first generation immigrants have a much higher birth rates. Which explains why. However the birth rates of white people has been steadily on the decline. Rarely you'd find a British woman in the 1980's who'd say before dating: "I don't want kids". It's a common trend today.
Is that unique to white women, British women, western women in general?
Not exclusively unique, but it's unique to western modern culture and societies heavily influenced by the west. Such as South Korea and Japan.
1st generation immigrants have much higher birth rates and building a family is a priority in their list of achievements. This tends to start fading away gradually with the next generations as they pursue the western life style and must abide by the system, finances and laws that are soo not favourable to marriage and raising kids.
So I fail to see why this is a ‘white’ thing.
Well Japan, South Korea and China also are in the brink of population implosion due to dwindling birth rates. But these countries are not replacing their populations with immigrants to solve that issue. However I don't see how they will continue to exist by the end of the century if they keep closing their doors to immigration. Byt if they do. The west will be in big trouble. As Africa can not supply the rest of the world with youth for a sustainable long time. And if Africa manages somehow to achieve financial independence. Both Europe and Asia are in trouble.
But now you’re talking about birth rates in general - not about specific race birth rates.
Falling birth rates with ageing populations are an economy problem (but an environmental bonus). I just don’t see how race changes anything, and I don’t see why it’s an important factor. "1- We're in the UK. In Europe, in the west. Addressing a western situation. 2- The end of China, Japan and South Korea is not the end of the Asian race. 3- You might see the population as an environmental problem. I disagree. Capitalism, unfair distribution of wealth, greed, modern wars and inequality are the main problem to the environment. 4- This population issue is not a simple economic problem. It's a civilisational destroyer problem. Japan survived 2 nuclear bombs and the destruction of 8 of its major cities. But a demographic implosion? I hardly doubt they will survive this if the culture doesn't change. As for the west. It has reached a cross road, we need millions of immigrants every year but we want them to renounce their values and cultures as soon as they step into Europe. Basically renounce who they are. It's not looking sustainable in the long run. And history tend to repeat itself. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I'm impressed, a spurious and loaded thread draws so much attention. Well done OP " The worst is the use of the word "Caucasian": (Wikipedia) The Caucasian race (also Caucasoid,[a] Europid, or Europoid) is an obsolete racial classification of humans based on a now-disproven theory of biological race. The Caucasian race was historically regarded as a biological taxon which, depending on which of the historical race classifications was being used, usually included ancient and modern populations from all or parts of Europe, Western Asia, Central Asia, South Asia, North Africa, and the Horn of Africa. What is meant is white-skinned, or generally European-looking. With an underlying implication that racial pollution is if a bad thing. And it's not enough to say "it's okay, I'm mixed race" to take away from the underlying racist undertones. It's shit-stirring and, you're right, spurious. As mentioned above, What's much more interesting is whether positive Western values will survive a demographic shift, rather than Western eye/hair/skin colour. There is no extinction of white people on the horizon unless non-white people decide to kill them off. White people are still having children, perhaps not at the same rate as Africans, but while they're still breeding, AT WHATEVER RATE, they will not become extinct. More of a minority? Quite possibly. Will there be more mixed race children? Yes, also due to demographic mobility. Is that a bad thing? Most of the people who believed that it was died or went quiet 80 years ago, although there are still a few holdouts. Why someone would invite a forum to debate this is perplexing. Putting it onto a politics forum smells like shit stirring, but it could be the OP working through some personal issues. Next we might get "is homosexuality killing off our kids - should we enforce family values?", "what do we do about the gypsy issue?, "does Jew money control Western politics?", "it's communism still a threat?" and "how to preserve the white race". | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I'm impressed, a spurious and loaded thread draws so much attention. Well done OP The worst is the use of the word "Caucasian": (Wikipedia) The Caucasian race (also Caucasoid,[a] Europid, or Europoid) is an obsolete racial classification of humans based on a now-disproven theory of biological race. The Caucasian race was historically regarded as a biological taxon which, depending on which of the historical race classifications was being used, usually included ancient and modern populations from all or parts of Europe, Western Asia, Central Asia, South Asia, North Africa, and the Horn of Africa. What is meant is white-skinned, or generally European-looking. With an underlying implication that racial pollution is if a bad thing. And it's not enough to say "it's okay, I'm mixed race" to take away from the underlying racist undertones. It's shit-stirring and, you're right, spurious. As mentioned above, What's much more interesting is whether positive Western values will survive a demographic shift, rather than Western eye/hair/skin colour. There is no extinction of white people on the horizon unless non-white people decide to kill them off. White people are still having children, perhaps not at the same rate as Africans, but while they're still breeding, AT WHATEVER RATE, they will not become extinct. More of a minority? Quite possibly. Will there be more mixed race children? Yes, also due to demographic mobility. Is that a bad thing? Most of the people who believed that it was died or went quiet 80 years ago, although there are still a few holdouts. Why someone would invite a forum to debate this is perplexing. Putting it onto a politics forum smells like shit stirring, but it could be the OP working through some personal issues. Next we might get "is homosexuality killing off our kids - should we enforce family values?", "what do we do about the gypsy issue?, "does Jew money control Western politics?", "it's communism still a threat?" and "how to preserve the white race". " isnt Caucasian how the old bill describe white people? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" isnt Caucasian how the old bill describe white people? " Some Germans a few hundred years ago decided that there were three original races, that whites were descended from the Caucasian one. It became part of the rather unpalatable 20th century German ideology. It's wrong and outdated. It's still used by North Americans to mean "white", or "non black" in some cases. In correct use, it would mean people from around the Caucasus region, i.e. Georgia. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"isnt Caucasian how the old bill describe white people? " No. That's what you see on American films and TV shows. The UK police use Identity Codes: IC1 - White, North European IC2 - White, South European IC3 - Black IC4 - Asian IC5 - Chinese, Japanese, or other South East Asian IC6 - Arab or North African | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I'm impressed, a spurious and loaded thread draws so much attention. Well done OP The worst is the use of the word "Caucasian": (Wikipedia) The Caucasian race (also Caucasoid,[a] Europid, or Europoid) is an obsolete racial classification of humans based on a now-disproven theory of biological race. The Caucasian race was historically regarded as a biological taxon which, depending on which of the historical race classifications was being used, usually included ancient and modern populations from all or parts of Europe, Western Asia, Central Asia, South Asia, North Africa, and the Horn of Africa. What is meant is white-skinned, or generally European-looking. With an underlying implication that racial pollution is if a bad thing. And it's not enough to say "it's okay, I'm mixed race" to take away from the underlying racist undertones. It's shit-stirring and, you're right, spurious. As mentioned above, What's much more interesting is whether positive Western values will survive a demographic shift, rather than Western eye/hair/skin colour. There is no extinction of white people on the horizon unless non-white people decide to kill them off. White people are still having children, perhaps not at the same rate as Africans, but while they're still breeding, AT WHATEVER RATE, they will not become extinct. More of a minority? Quite possibly. Will there be more mixed race children? Yes, also due to demographic mobility. Is that a bad thing? Most of the people who believed that it was died or went quiet 80 years ago, although there are still a few holdouts. Why someone would invite a forum to debate this is perplexing. Putting it onto a politics forum smells like shit stirring, but it could be the OP working through some personal issues. Next we might get "is homosexuality killing off our kids - should we enforce family values?", "what do we do about the gypsy issue?, "does Jew money control Western politics?", "it's communism still a threat?" and "how to preserve the white race". " You got sensibilities about this subject. I don't. Go ahead make assumptions and judge me. You're only showing a narrow minded attitude. Just like "It's forbidden to compare the Holocaust to the genocide in Gaza" and shit l | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources." This bit needs more explanation given we have established Japan etc aren't accepting as many immigrants. Why can't we survive if they can ?" Demographers predict Japan and South Korea will disappear as a nation by the end if the century | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources." This bit needs more explanation given we have established Japan etc aren't accepting as many immigrants. Why can't we survive if they can ? Demographers predict Japan and South Korea will disappear as a nation by the end if the century" if true, then it's not immigration that's causing a risk to extinction. Also, can you point at sources? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources." This bit needs more explanation given we have established Japan etc aren't accepting as many immigrants. Why can't we survive if they can ? Demographers predict Japan and South Korea will disappear as a nation by the end if the centuryif true, then it's not immigration that's causing a risk to extinction. Also, can you point at sources? " I never claimed immigration is causing the extinction. Dwindling birth rates is the cause | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources." This bit needs more explanation given we have established Japan etc aren't accepting as many immigrants. Why can't we survive if they can ? Demographers predict Japan and South Korea will disappear as a nation by the end if the centuryif true, then it's not immigration that's causing a risk to extinction. Also, can you point at sources? I never claimed immigration is causing the extinction. Dwindling birth rates is the cause " And…? So what? What is the point of this thread? What exactly are you looking to discuss? All feels a bit “erm yeah okay and?” | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources." This bit needs more explanation given we have established Japan etc aren't accepting as many immigrants. Why can't we survive if they can ? Demographers predict Japan and South Korea will disappear as a nation by the end if the centuryif true, then it's not immigration that's causing a risk to extinction. Also, can you point at sources? I never claimed immigration is causing the extinction. Dwindling birth rates is the cause And…? So what? What is the point of this thread? What exactly are you looking to discuss? All feels a bit “erm yeah okay and?”" If you don't like the thread go to a more interesting one. Looks like you're here to troll and judge and condemn the messenger. Not interested. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources." This bit needs more explanation given we have established Japan etc aren't accepting as many immigrants. Why can't we survive if they can ? Demographers predict Japan and South Korea will disappear as a nation by the end if the centuryif true, then it's not immigration that's causing a risk to extinction. Also, can you point at sources? I never claimed immigration is causing the extinction. Dwindling birth rates is the cause And…? So what? What is the point of this thread? What exactly are you looking to discuss? All feels a bit “erm yeah okay and?” If you don't like the thread go to a more interesting one. Looks like you're here to troll and judge and condemn the messenger. Not interested. " But the messenger seems to have sent mixed messages. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You got sensibilities about this subject. I don't. Go ahead make assumptions and judge me. You're only showing a narrow minded attitude. Just like "It's forbidden to compare the Holocaust to the genocide in Gaza" and shit l " Narrow-minded how? Debate is great. But some loaded topics smell a bit off. Like "do blacks really commit more crimes", "are Muslims all sympathetic to terrorism", as well as the ones listed above. This topic comes up every now and again with racist undertones, as a way to scare white people into xenophobia. Hence the scepticism. " I never claimed immigration is causing the extinction. Dwindling birth rates is the cause " Extinction comes about through destruction or complete lack of breeding. Arguably it could come about through cross-breeding, which is kind of an evolution (perhaps). While white people (assuming that's what you mean) are still having children, then extinction is simply not happening. What is happening, however, is a proportional redistribution of ethnic, cultural and value-systems, both in quantity and location. It has occurred for all time, and will continue to occur. Demographic shifts are basically the story of humanity. That's why many are confused as to the point of this topic (if not just stirring). | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources." This bit needs more explanation given we have established Japan etc aren't accepting as many immigrants. Why can't we survive if they can ? Demographers predict Japan and South Korea will disappear as a nation by the end if the centuryif true, then it's not immigration that's causing a risk to extinction. Also, can you point at sources? I never claimed immigration is causing the extinction. Dwindling birth rates is the cause " okay. I suspect the fact you mentioned immigration in your first couple of posts has confused the what your point is. It has for me. I'm back to UK birth rates are about 1.5. So while accepting these won't all be "white" the extinction point is a mile off. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You got sensibilities about this subject. I don't. Go ahead make assumptions and judge me. You're only showing a narrow minded attitude. Just like "It's forbidden to compare the Holocaust to the genocide in Gaza" and shit l Narrow-minded how? Debate is great. But some loaded topics smell a bit off. Like "do blacks really commit more crimes", "are Muslims all sympathetic to terrorism", as well as the ones listed above. This topic comes up every now and again with racist undertones, as a way to scare white people into xenophobia. Hence the scepticism. I never claimed immigration is causing the extinction. Dwindling birth rates is the cause Extinction comes about through destruction or complete lack of breeding. Arguably it could come about through cross-breeding, which is kind of an evolution (perhaps). While white people (assuming that's what you mean) are still having children, then extinction is simply not happening. What is happening, however, is a proportional redistribution of ethnic, cultural and value-systems, both in quantity and location. It has occurred for all time, and will continue to occur. Demographic shifts are basically the story of humanity. That's why many are confused as to the point of this topic (if not just stirring). " I already mentioned I am not white and I have no racist hidden agenda. If anyone is open to discuss the subject without making baseless judgements and personal attacks they're welcome. Some people here can't have a normal civilised discussion with people they disagree with and turn a normal question into a court room for bullies. As for "Whites are still having babies so extinction is simply not happening" Wrong! Extinction happens when birth rates are bellow replacement rate of 2.1 children per women and stays that way for generations. If economic immigration wasn't happening in the past 70 years, the west would have seized to exist a long time ago from economic and social collapse. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources." This bit needs more explanation given we have established Japan etc aren't accepting as many immigrants. Why can't we survive if they can ? Demographers predict Japan and South Korea will disappear as a nation by the end if the centuryif true, then it's not immigration that's causing a risk to extinction. Also, can you point at sources? I never claimed immigration is causing the extinction. Dwindling birth rates is the cause okay. I suspect the fact you mentioned immigration in your first couple of posts has confused the what your point is. It has for me. I'm back to UK birth rates are about 1.5. So while accepting these won't all be "white" the extinction point is a mile off. " 1.5 is the birth rate for the UK. Not UK white white Mothers. The 1/3 of the babies born in the UK are from a minority non whites. I did my own estimation of the birth rate of only white mothers (assuming the father is also white which is not the case for many) and it came to 1 child per women. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources." This bit needs more explanation given we have established Japan etc aren't accepting as many immigrants. Why can't we survive if they can ? Demographers predict Japan and South Korea will disappear as a nation by the end if the centuryif true, then it's not immigration that's causing a risk to extinction. Also, can you point at sources? I never claimed immigration is causing the extinction. Dwindling birth rates is the cause And…? So what? What is the point of this thread? What exactly are you looking to discuss? All feels a bit “erm yeah okay and?” If you don't like the thread go to a more interesting one. Looks like you're here to troll and judge and condemn the messenger. Not interested. " Nah I’ll post in whatever threads I want thanks. I also think you do not understand what trolling means, ironically! Also, how exactly have I “condemned the messenger”? I think you are being overly defensive. We all build a picture of posters across multiple threads/posts. Yours are, well rather odd so far! Just trying to figure out your angle. You made yourself fair game when you started accusing people of supporting genocide just because they really do not see why people should be boycotting McDonald due to the actions of one franchisee. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Extinction happens when birth rates are bellow replacement rate of 2.1 children per women and stays that way for generations." This misconception is probably at the heart of the issue. You might be confusing a country not being able to support itself and extinction, which are two very different things. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources." This bit needs more explanation given we have established Japan etc aren't accepting as many immigrants. Why can't we survive if they can ? Demographers predict Japan and South Korea will disappear as a nation by the end if the centuryif true, then it's not immigration that's causing a risk to extinction. Also, can you point at sources? I never claimed immigration is causing the extinction. Dwindling birth rates is the cause okay. I suspect the fact you mentioned immigration in your first couple of posts has confused the what your point is. It has for me. I'm back to UK birth rates are about 1.5. So while accepting these won't all be "white" the extinction point is a mile off. 1.5 is the birth rate for the UK. Not UK white white Mothers. The 1/3 of the babies born in the UK are from a minority non whites. I did my own estimation of the birth rate of only white mothers (assuming the father is also white which is not the case for many) and it came to 1 child per women. " While I know UK isn't the same as UK white, one says "while the UK-born TFR was 1.57 children per woman". If we assume 75pc of UK population is white, then if white mothers are at 1, then non white are at 3.3 to get this. But ONS non UK is far below this. But, even if the ratio was 1, then if 75pc of today's 70m are white, then even when we all die, that will leave 25m from the replacement and 12m from the next replacement. The maths of a population halving every 80 years doesn't lead to extinction as quick as you are suggesting. And that's assuming your ratio is spot on. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Extinction happens when birth rates are bellow replacement rate of 2.1 children per women and stays that way for generations. This misconception is probably at the heart of the issue. You might be confusing a country not being able to support itself and extinction, which are two very different things." It's not a misconception. It's basic demographics and basic maths. A population of one million people with a 1 per woman birth rate becomes a half million population after few decades. 1/4 million after another few decades, and they keep diminishing until they are no more. The economic side of it is another factor that will accelerate the collapse of such society. At some point the younger generation will not be able to support a much more numerous elderly generation. Or protect the community fron foreign threats. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Extinction happens when birth rates are bellow replacement rate of 2.1 children per women and stays that way for generations. This misconception is probably at the heart of the issue. You might be confusing a country not being able to support itself and extinction, which are two very different things. It's not a misconception. It's basic demographics and basic maths. A population of one million people with a 1 per woman birth rate becomes a half million population after few decades. 1/4 million after another few decades, and they keep diminishing until they are no more. The economic side of it is another factor that will accelerate the collapse of such society. At some point the younger generation will not be able to support a much more numerous elderly generation. Or protect the community fron foreign threats. " Even in basic maths there would an assumption that a variable, will vary especially over 50 years. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have seen this type of headline before, it is usually finished with Mohammed will be the most popular boys name. Trolling? If not what is the point of such a post?" Mohammed Is the most popular boys name | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have seen this type of headline before, it is usually finished with Mohammed will be the most popular boys name. Trolling? If not what is the point of such a post? Mohammed Is the most popular boys name " It's a good name. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Extinction happens when birth rates are bellow replacement rate of 2.1 children per women and stays that way for generations. This misconception is probably at the heart of the issue. You might be confusing a country not being able to support itself and extinction, which are two very different things. It's not a misconception. It's basic demographics and basic maths. A population of one million people with a 1 per woman birth rate becomes a half million population after few decades. 1/4 million after another few decades, and they keep diminishing until they are no more. The economic side of it is another factor that will accelerate the collapse of such society. At some point the younger generation will not be able to support a much more numerous elderly generation. Or protect the community fron foreign threats. " isn't the few decades 80 tho? Eg the 1 million have to all die off, with only their children remaining. So we are looking at 150 to see a population quarter. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have seen this type of headline before, it is usually finished with Mohammed will be the most popular boys name. Trolling? If not what is the point of such a post? Mohammed Is the most popular boys name It's a good name." It was confusing when I was at school having others with your first name. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Extinction happens when birth rates are bellow replacement rate of 2.1 children per women and stays that way for generations. This misconception is probably at the heart of the issue. You might be confusing a country not being able to support itself and extinction, which are two very different things. It's not a misconception. It's basic demographics and basic maths. A population of one million people with a 1 per woman birth rate becomes a half million population after few decades. 1/4 million after another few decades, and they keep diminishing until they are no more. The economic side of it is another factor that will accelerate the collapse of such society. At some point the younger generation will not be able to support a much more numerous elderly generation. Or protect the community fron foreign threats. isn't the few decades 80 tho? Eg the 1 million have to all die off, with only their children remaining. So we are looking at 150 to see a population quarter. " A 1 million population has elderly % in it too. Elderly people don't wait another 50 years to die all at once. And the half million babies are not all born at once. I am trying to simplify the maths. You don't need to comp | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have seen this type of headline before, it is usually finished with Mohammed will be the most popular boys name. Trolling? If not what is the point of such a post? Mohammed Is the most popular boys name It's a good name. It was confusing when I was at school having others with your first name. "Lots of "Johns" at your school? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have seen this type of headline before, it is usually finished with Mohammed will be the most popular boys name. Trolling? If not what is the point of such a post? Mohammed Is the most popular boys name It's a good name. It was confusing when I was at school having others with your first name.
Lots of "Johns" at your school?"A good strong hebrew name there was a few johns in my year yes. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have seen this type of headline before, it is usually finished with Mohammed will be the most popular boys name. Trolling? If not what is the point of such a post? Mohammed Is the most popular boys name It's a good name. It was confusing when I was at school having others with your first name.
Lots of "Johns" at your school?
A good strong hebrew name there was a few johns in my year yes."The Hebrew name is Yohannan. John is the Westernized distortion of it | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Extinction happens when birth rates are bellow replacement rate of 2.1 children per women and stays that way for generations. This misconception is probably at the heart of the issue. You might be confusing a country not being able to support itself and extinction, which are two very different things. It's not a misconception. It's basic demographics and basic maths. A population of one million people with a 1 per woman birth rate becomes a half million population after few decades. 1/4 million after another few decades, and they keep diminishing until they are no more. The economic side of it is another factor that will accelerate the collapse of such society. At some point the younger generation will not be able to support a much more numerous elderly generation. Or protect the community fron foreign threats. isn't the few decades 80 tho? Eg the 1 million have to all die off, with only their children remaining. So we are looking at 150 to see a population quarter. A 1 million population has elderly % in it too. Elderly people don't wait another 50 years to die all at once. And the half million babies are not all born at once. I am trying to simplify the maths. You don't need to comp" I was gonna allow for a spread starting point but thought that would over complicate. Okay, let's keep it simple and call it 40 years. So we quarter over 80. That's still would leave 12m grand kids of people alive today. And that assumes your 1 is correct. Given ONS numbers I'm not convinced. With these pessimistic assumptions and simple maths we are still a long way from extinction of Britain whites in 50 years. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I have seen this type of headline before, it is usually finished with Mohammed will be the most popular boys name. Trolling? If not what is the point of such a post? Mohammed Is the most popular boys name It's a good name. It was confusing when I was at school having others with your first name.
Lots of "Johns" at your school?
A good strong hebrew name there was a few johns in my year yes.
The Hebrew name is Yohannan. John is the Westernized distortion of it" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"White people are a global minority, they will decrease over time anyway. They won’t go “extinct” and are not an “endangered species”. People are having more interracial relationships now than ever and the world will be more and more brown, so what? You can’t force people to pro create with who you like. " Nobody is suggesting that. You're missing the whole point. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"White people are a global minority, they will decrease over time anyway. They won’t go “extinct” and are not an “endangered species”. People are having more interracial relationships now than ever and the world will be more and more brown, so what? You can’t force people to pro create with who you like. Nobody is suggesting that. You're missing the whole point." It seems you are. Because what exactly would you like people to do about something happening naturally? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If trends continue then the human race will all ultimately become a melting pot of varying coffee colour shades. And that’s fine. " Don't you think that would be sad in a way? We would loose alot of the diversity of the human race. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"If trends continue then the human race will all ultimately become a melting pot of varying coffee colour shades. And that’s fine. Don't you think that would be sad in a way? We would loose alot of the diversity of the human race." No we won’t. We’ll lose some diversity in skin colour. That’s it. And none of us will be around, and humans are remarkably adaptable. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"White people are a global minority, they will decrease over time anyway. They won’t go “extinct” and are not an “endangered species”. People are having more interracial relationships now than ever and the world will be more and more brown, so what? You can’t force people to pro create with who you like. Nobody is suggesting that. You're missing the whole point. It seems you are. Because what exactly would you like people to do about something happening naturally?" It's politically induced culture. Hardl | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Mutation isn't the same as defect though. All genetic defects are believed to be the result of mutations. So white people are defective? White skin is the result of a genetic mutation, after that it’s a matter of deciding which mutations are beneficial and which are not. I don’t see white skin as a defect but there is an argument to say it is." What is argument to say it is? One of the most ridiculous things I have ever read.. YES random changes in DNA or how it is expressed is a mutation. It is only a "defect" if it is an undesirable mutation. Having white skin gave people at higher latitudes an advantage over people with darker skin hence why the genes for white skin propergated and where selected for.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Your thoughts? If the trends don't change, there will be no more white Caucasians within 50 years. And we can't survive without generous Africa's supplies of immigrants/human resources. I don’t believe this whole great replacement fear mongering rubbish, but even if it were true does it matter? It depends how you look at it. Does it matter if the white tiger go extinct? The world is more interesting with diversity of ethnicities and cultures. The white tiger’s colour is due to a mutation/defect, called leucism. If you listen to BLM, white skin is also due to a defect. All of BLM? All of them? I have no idea. I'm happy to lump them all in when it's one of their leaders that says it. I'm not sure if all of 'black history month' website/magazine think that way too, but they published it, so I'll lump them together too. Or is it only allowed in certain circumstances that you agree with? But white skin is due to a genetic mutation. Mutation isn't the same as defect though. All genetic defects are believed to be the result of mutations. So white people are defective? White skin is the result of a genetic mutation, after that it’s a matter of deciding which mutations are beneficial and which are not. I don’t see white skin as a defect but there is an argument to say it is." What is argument to say it is? One of the most ridiculous things I have ever read.. YES random changes in DNA or how it is expressed is a mutation. It is only a "defect" if it is an undesirable mutation. Having white skin gave people at higher latitudes an advantage over people with darker skin hence why the genes for white skin propergated and where selected for.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
