Because I don't say just anything coming out of my ass to insult people. Everything is just one google click away source-wise. I spoke of admixture, morphology, genetics; all published work. When it's a topic about black people feeling they're being slighted by society I'm the first to knock it down and say blacks bring all their poo to themselves. I think you only read my post when I'm talking about black people being the most genetically advantaged. Don't see why it's wrong to say there are some distances between Africans and non-Africans genetically and the subsequent expression of those genes on their phenotype and morphology.
Are you really insulted at the possibility that Africans and non-Africans might be different? Do you really want everyone to be 'the same' so much that you'd want to silence sciences and those who think otherwise? For what it's worth, this is a non-African world. You dominate it, don't see why you're crying that you're not the same as a mere minority on this planet. If it's any comfort to you, without those small advantages Africans would be near extinction by now due to all the crap they went through the last 400 years. Too bad the native Americans weren't as fortunate. If the bulb had turned on just one of your ancestors' head 400 years ago that we're 'the same' countless live would have be spared. Too late now, buddy! You're just a liberal hypocrite who tries to remove yourself from reality while benefiting from the atrocities of your ancestors.
I read most all of your posts, and they are almost universally reviling in the way you seek to divide.
I'd been trying to avoid this, but meh. You did draw me out again. Congratulations.
You speak of concepts that are common and legitimate in biology, but you misuse those concepts, bending them to support your view point, rather than building your view point to support them. When presented with evidence in opposition with your view point, you bury your hand in the sand and dismiss them. I gave you two sources of separate evidence of admixture in Africa in lineages that never left Africa and you disregarded it. You made up some nonsense about how there wasn't competition in Africa so humans didn't interbreed, which is... well, ridiculous, since it suggests that Africa was some Eden for Africans and other hominids, in which case, they wouldn't have left. The reality is that if admixture happened in any archaic human populations, it likely happened in all of them.
When you discussed a bunch of markers as if they were evidence of superiority and distinctiveness, I asked specifically for which markers were "superior" and you ignored me - understandably, those markers are just markers, but the concept that they somehow tell you about superiority highlights that you are searching for things to justify your pre-existing belief that some human group is innately superior to another. This just isn't the case. There's literally no scientific evidence this is the case. Immune system differences are largely minor when you talk about whether or not humans are meaningfully different in a way that is worthy of separating them into taxonomic units. There just hasn't been enough time evolutionarily to lead to meaningful differences in our genomes to give any one group a huge advantage over the other, which is unsurprising since the Smithsonian was quoting numbers that all human genomes are over 99.9% similar to one another...
Your nonsense about autism, auto immune diseases, etc being due to Neanderthal hybridization is ridiculous. For one, autism DOES happen in Africa, it is just currently impossible to study and is not exactly near the front of the line in terms of public health (see http://iase-biz1.web...009.pdf#page=13). What happens to Africans outside of Africa in terms of Autism rates? Some studies have reported extremely high rates in Sweeden, well above the population average there (see this review for this topic). For two, if higher rates of neanderthal genes caused all those problems, then you'd expect that Europeans IN Africa would maintain a high rate of MS - but strangely, that's not the case. It almost seems environmental, since Europeans that were born in South Africa or immigrated before their 16th birthdays had lower incidence of MS than Europeans that immigrated there after their 16th birthdays (see http://www.ncbi.nlm....02670-0064b.pdf for a reference.).
If "the bulb" had turned on in one of my Ancestors head 400 years ago, I doubt the Ottomans would really have cared what they had to say. I most certainly do benefit from how this society has been built, though, and pointing that out really doesn't bother me... considering I do it every few days myself, it's nice to see someone else agreeing with me. I'm glad we have some common ground on white privilege.