RT @Jakailau7: A Sub Saharan African, heir of an extinct hominid species (probably Homo Erectus) with nothing of worth to his name has no r…
A Sub Saharan African, heir of an extinct hominid species (probably Homo Erectus) with nothing of worth to his name has no right to call ANYONE "subhůmån". You are literally subhůmån by DEFINITION. Closer to chimps compared to any other human groups. htt
@urgrl_fatemaa @Bngk42 https://t.co/WDljph6M6o They literally have 19% unknown hominid DNA . https://t.co/9P8CZZMIuQ
19% DNA of an unknown hominid species is significant !
@Dexteritybelive @nianello6 @melinated38640 @Joe__Bassey Wrong again. We have examples of Neolithic era buildings, for example of Orkney. We also have Vinča Culture as example of large cities with large populations. As for Neanderthal thing https://t.co/
@Dexteritybelive @nianello6 @melinated38640 @Joe__Bassey https://t.co/90n5zEEzj6 Who is this "Ramsey III"? Is he related to Gordon Ramsey?
@Texan_Jack They're literally in the twilight zone between man and beast. The Heirs of Homo Erectus. https://t.co/jiVhMvpbmT
"Fůckıng AI image to prove his Pseudo-science" 🤓 No you stupid twåt, it's real—the funny thing is that this thing looks so ugly, so archaic that you believe it's fake, lol. Pseudo-science is denying the existence of race and IQ. Read, for once: https:/
RT @robertsepehr: FACT CHECKED ✅ Sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry (DNA) to an extinct super-archaic hominin…
@FilthReacts @Smirktavious @KennyKurvecok @VitruvianCourt @lporiginalg Up to 20% of some extinct species of (archaic) hominin, is still up to 20% archaic hominin. Also, sub-saharans carrying no neanderthal is false. East africans (e.g., cushitic, maasai) a
RT @HamburgerPatch: Sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry (DNA) to an extinct archaic hominin species (Homo Erectu…
RT @robertsepehr: Present-day sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry to an extinct archaic hominid species, such as…
RT @HamburgerPatch: Sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry (DNA) to an extinct archaic hominin species (Homo Erectu…
RT @HamburgerPatch: @BIPOCracism Not fully incorrect I guess.
RT @HamburgerPatch: @BIPOCracism Not fully incorrect I guess.
RT @HamburgerPatch: @BIPOCracism Not fully incorrect I guess.
RT @AJF_Eire: Africans have naledi(2) and likely erectus(1) ancestry, they're not even 100% homosapien like they will often try to brag abo…
@BIPOCracism Not fully incorrect I guess.
@BIPOCracism Interesting take.
@trujillo_956 @WillyKennon @BluebirdFren @AntiWhiteWatch1 Did you ask this without realizes different races have different shaped skulls or did you actually want someone to identify this for you?
@SEliott30829 @pepito___1 @erreur502 @Aleksandros111 @ArnaultRaphael Le type t'explique qu'il n'existe aucune différence génétique chose complètement fausse même l'institut pasteur le confirme. Que l'on est exactement identique au africain que l'on possède
RT @AllStopThinking: @seeingpattern @Amara_Shamveil I found the original study: https://t.co/a4qTKqa0c1 What it's saying is that 2-19% hav…
@1989nicolas @MartinGfms @saitankusuru @jeanCule123 Toujours bon de rappeler qu’entre 2 et 19% du génome subsaharien provient d’une souche humaine archaïque inconnue. Ce qui remet d'ailleurs en cause la théorie qui avance qu'on viendrait tous d'Afrique, on
@Mrtheory5 @JoeBlow56852720 @nianello6 @ashiabiz @Tasetireloaded2 https://t.co/90n5zEF78E I'm not talking about Neanderthals here.
@JoeBlow56852720 @nianello6 @Mrtheory5 @ashiabiz @Tasetireloaded2 Did it, though? And we know that West Africans split off before even Out of Africa migration. And there is genetic evidence of mixing with unspecified hominids there. https://t.co/90n5zEEzj6
RT @pytheas_nautes: @arthoefootjob You don't need a degree 90% of twitter racists are basically just referencing these several studies: 1)…
@Neanderthal314 @NegloTeegs @TruthSpeaker658 @ChrisStringer65 Okay, so it was that paper. The results from Durvasula & Sankararaman (already published in Science Advances: https://t.co/iEs7FNtCyV) do not support your assertion. Other papers highlightin
@FrancosSon3 https://t.co/90n5zEF78E Evidence shows that there was mixing in West Africa. Either way, West Africans are clearly no "tree trunk" of human race. No modern population is. Unless you think that there is a human group that have never evolved, mi
Africans have naledi(2) and likely erectus(1) ancestry, they're not even 100% homosapien like they will often try to brag about, ironically more admixed with small brained hominids than Eurasians who mixed with neanderthal. https://t.co/vRxS7bvTHN #BlackTw
@ScientificBrony @creamsoduhhh @G4RL1CB0Y @TheYesManX @iamyesyouareno This is jewish propaganda, and not true at all. "Humans" aren't a single species, we are a collection of hominid species with very closely related DNA, close enough to interbreed. Blacks
@BioTerrorGreen @DWKUSMC2111 @LeesWarhorse Here's more recent research. The info graphic sums it up. https://t.co/pqCsLjGnqc https://t.co/Y31i75C6G9
@Azza88o7 @AntiAntifragil @KirkegaardEmil Obviously. However, there is no evidence that Bantu migration has spread said Ghost DNA all over Africa. https://t.co/90n5zEEzj6 And that guy made obvious joke about black people inventing white people.
RT @HamburgerPatch: Sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry (DNA) to an extinct archaic hominin species (Homo Erectu…
@DavidDSwank @NIgahLizard @ProperLabels @BIPOCracism @BAmexam Hey man. Next time you find yourself in this debate, just quote this tweet I made for you.
Sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry (DNA) to an extinct archaic hominin species (Homo Erectus or Habilis) that is not found in the DNA of present-day Asians or present-day Caucasians. Published DNA study: https://t.co/aHVT91ayn7
@eyeslasho sub saharan africans have significant admixture (2-18%) from an archaic ghost hominid that split from the main human evolutionary tree 600,000 years ago. No other human group on earth has admixture from this specific hominid or at this high of
@obyvatel7 @MagicBelle1 It's the genes, unfortunately https://t.co/4TuN8sF2GY
@Texan_Jack @MagicBelle1 It's the archaic admixture. Latest research shows they have a significant amount of ancestry (2-18%) from a ghost hominid that no other human group on earth does. sub saharan africans are not fully human. They are basically living
@drkimthemm Also the content in the Data irrefutably disputes the notion that the ghost hominid was Homoerectus due to the fact that the ghost DNA split from its predecessors and emmerged at around 360kya - 975kya with a mean of 650000 years ago https://
RT @robertsepehr: @ancientorigins Present-day sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry to an extinct archaic hominin…
@Isarl_Vagon @ThibaudD__ @ZiakOni @kamilabderrahmn @DamienRieu Donc pour toi des populations génétiquement différentes cela ne donne pas de race différente. 🤷🏻. Ducoup qu'en en t'il quand on ne possède pas les mêmes espèces hominidés ? https://t.co/TDWQSY
@Sfirx426 @MattGaetzPress Not sure what you're arguing. Race is real, and we aren't the same. This is true for the entire animal kingdom and it's true for us too, human's aren't special and nature doesn't care about you. https://t.co/ddsHg3u6N4
RT @robertsepehr: @ancientorigins Present-day sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry to an extinct archaic hominin…
RT @robertsepehr: @ancientorigins Present-day sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry to an extinct archaic hominin…
Culotté sachant que https://t.co/LOt81VDgTT
@AKaiser47 @KelsiKash_ @MUSICANDBUILDS https://t.co/0HEytQJglZ Your article from the first photo btw lol Imagine that Homo sapiens mated with another hominid lol that’s exactly why you have Neanderthal/Denisovan blood. Lol that’s literally the same shit.
RT @FaiseurDeVeuves: @azyaze190229 @NativaEuropa Ça paraît fou mais c’est pourtant vrai: https://t.co/wjkkVFhl6I
@maygmayg_ @CSchneef Oh and I know it will go over your head, but this is the link..https://t.co/FQ30PAYjxi
@GregLuk05357935 @fmtobz @zanzibarcitizen @BIPOCracism It conveniently left out that the 2-19% is only from four West African populations not all Sub-Saharan Africans. Same exact link too https://t.co/F4gmihMcO7 https://t.co/LTC9GchVAx
@kindpaulson @Raven6675620680 @SilverDragon98 @Alphafox78 I just read the article. It’s actually very interesting. https://t.co/ImXEi4pRsn
@techy_07 @JTruiss27757 @AsianDawn4 Hello science https://t.co/ZbrA6YghU5
@Alphafox78 It's not about morals, it's about genetics : https://t.co/ZbrA6YfK4x
https://t.co/ZbrA6YfK4x L'explication
@Skywatcher1600 @SportsIsAll2000 Actually this is not true, blacks specifically are far detached from other races. While Caucasians, Asians, etc are relatively similar enough to label them as a single "Human race", the same is not true for blacks, see: ht
@richandfuture @dufrianord if you subhuman n*gger could use proper english, which btw is much worse than a simple erratum, and just clearly state what you want to convey, this all would be much easier. retarded n*gger fuck. and here, you subhuman cunt: htt
@maiastid @Belleduseigneu2 @docteurbagarre @LRavaillac https://t.co/TDWQSYWZEi l'adn dit tout le contraire. Bonne continuation
@cdi1325 @docteurbagarre @LRavaillac Un peu de lecture pour éviter ce tweet ridicule. https://t.co/TDWQSYWZEi
@LCadoreau @docteurbagarre @LRavaillac Logique puisque vous racontez de la merde. https://t.co/TDWQSYWZEi
@seeingpattern @Amara_Shamveil I found the original study: https://t.co/a4qTKqa0c1 What it's saying is that 2-19% have ancestry from hominids from before the split into Neanderthals and modern humans. Well duh, Africa has the most generic variation among
@Amara_Shamveil @AlchemicalH8 @dr_duchesne Actually it's both. https://t.co/ddsHg3u6N4
@Sharpthingy @PunishedFredda 😂 https://t.co/vRxS7bvlSf I can link you as much as you'd like on the subject. "Humans" ARE hybrids of archaic hominids. Neanderthal admix across N.Eurasia is common knowledge. https://t.co/t6IzXkbloa
@Revenant300 @danteherald Golly geez, Science . org, now that's a pretty darn respectable site. https://t.co/LON3Z9Agzb
@rigpa07 You should check your citations before posting them. That quote is not even in there. Which makes sense because Caucasian isn't a scientific word, it doesn't even mean white. In scientific papers they just say European. Caucasian is not mentioned
RT @robertsepehr: Present-day sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry (DNA) to an extinct archaic hominin species (H…
RT @Creolus_Magnus: Zum Verständnis: Bis zu teilweise 20% der DNA von Westafrikanern könnte von Menschengruppen stammen, die älter sind als…
@stratusflush @stevewotton @AngloHeretic @Frances_Coppola @English78905490 off course this was misleading, https://t.co/TIsX73a0iB, - ghost archaic dna and its about west africa, not all of africa and lastly. Found outside africa. https://t.co/RiV9SkNuFx
RT @SkepticalWaves: If you've been paying attention, the genomics revolution has been dropping big hints for a while. https://t.co/rB4xITMT…
If you've been paying attention, the genomics revolution has been dropping big hints for a while. https://t.co/rB4xITMTGE
@cristinaaaat4 @5000fed1 @NsPostingFs You should read the article and understand the difference between a "component" and "substantial". The issue here, is that you're trying to argue about something you don't understand. You didn't even know all humans
@Bikeman386970 @dracoguardian30 @empireenjoyer10 @NsPostingFs That the markers are found ONLY in the African populations is a FALSE statement https://t.co/diC3bm2Qb4 https://t.co/YNJk4p4kKM
@Sourin401 @jojoboy719 @DVATW Been debunked. https://t.co/AyYsOgrdYs
RT @robertsepehr: FACT CHECKED ✅ Sub-Saharan Africans trace up to 19% of their genetic ancestry (DNA) to an extinct super-archaic hominin…