>>1013105
>You've had the axioms defined for you
Not really, no.
You just said that species is classified at one threshold by ENTIRETY OF TAXONOMY without ever actually giving the specific number,
This whole time, >we've be taking your word for it that "THE ENTIRETY OF TAXONOMY" classifies species agrees on one threshold, that FST is sole or even primary determinant of species boundaries, that the generic variant between different races is as great as other species, that the other species
which you haven't named either their FST values are apparently equal to are actually are substantially different from one another, etc, and it still doesn't matter because you haven’t said what this FST value is based on that makes not arbitrary. You can pick any threshold and objectively measure what does meet or cross it, being able to objectively measure by a number you chose doesn’t make the number itself any less arbitrary.
<you haven't replied to my argument
Hard to reply to something that doesn't exist.
As for your claims, apart from the supposed objectivity of your picked FST value, I haven't refuted any of the shit above because there's no point since you've already said that you'll dismiss everything after the 20th century as political propaganda.
Even if I found some studies showing that the FST between races wasn't whatever value you're claiming, you'd just say the study's outcome was influenced or outright changed by jewish politics. Except for the concept of FST itself, of course.
What unbiased sources could I actually go to in order to find info that confirms or denies your claims on the definition of species, FST, etc?
<It does, though.
What a compelling argument!
>healthy breeding isn't arbitrary
If that's what this is about then just say so instead of all this retarded shit. You don't have to convince people impregnating someone with Osteogenesis Imperfecta is bestiality to convince them its dysgenic.
Do you know what else isn't arbitrary? Reproductive isolation, but whenever people bring that up you just say <NUH UH that's outdated. Because outdated things, and I'm again taking your word for how "outdated" it is too, are incorrect when it suits you and new stuff is jewish propaganda except for when its suits you.
<And yet… everyone before that already knew about the study of the genetic composition of populations, including distributions and changes in genotype and phenotype frequency in response to the processes of natural selection, genetic drift, mutation and gene flow.
I get what you're trying to imply, but people knowing about inheritance of traits isn't population genetics any more than people knowing that dead corpses pollute water is germ theory. It is the prelude to it.
<<YOU are the one whose feelings are hurt!
No, I said last time you did this you said the people who disagreed with
<YOU are the one making subjective claims
You objectively are, yes
:^}