View Single Post
Old March 3rd, 2013 #22
Joe_Smith
Senior Member
 
Joe_Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,778
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by N.M. Valdez View Post
I haven't been to Argentina or Uruguay, but I have been to Brazil, and to Spain. And of course I've been to Mexico.
Why are you rolling your eyes? Your tourist resort experiences in Mexico and Brazil don't mean anything.

How can you give a sure opinion of a nations demographics, if you've never even been there?

Quote:
It's strange that the first study I posted would be called "Characterization of Admixture in an Urban Sample from Buenos Aires, Argentina," then. But if that's really how you feel, here are some more to add weight to that evidence.
Where? The neighborhoods? Wouldn't it skew a DNA sample if scientists took them from the Bronx, Manhattan, and Queens without accounting for self-description of race?

I wasn't talking about that study in particular.

Quote:
1. Relevant genetic contribution of Amerindian to the extant population of Argentina: "Over 50% of the individuals tested carried either mtDNA or Y Amerindian markers, 10% both, 20% were of Amerindian patrilineage and less than 40% denoted non-Amerindian contribution in the uniparentally inherited markers. By this simple approach a different contribution can be suggested within the most European country of Latin America."
So is Argentina a mestizo country or is it one that has a 50-60% of mestizos and 40% of thorough bred whites? If you were to take a nation-wide study of America, you'd probably get very similar results. Do you consider America a mestizo country?

Quote:
2. Amerindian ancestry in Argentina is associated with increased risk for systemic lupus erythematosus: "The Argentine population is predominantly European with approximately 20% Amerindian admixture, and a very small (<2%) contribution from West Africa."
So everyone in Argentina is exactly 78% European, 20% Amerindian, and 2% West African?

Quote:
3. Inferring Continental Ancestry of Argentineans from Autosomal, Y-Chromosomal and Mitochondrial DNA: "Argentineans carried a large fraction of European genetic heritage in their Y-chromosomal (94.1%) and autosomal (78.5%) DNA, but their mitochondrial gene pool is mostly of Native American ancestry (53.7%); instead, African heritage was small in all three genetic systems (<4%)."
"Sample came from eight provinces from three geographical regions of the country (Fig. 1): Formosa (AFO, N = 11), Chaco (ACA, N = 1), Misiones (AMI, N = 28) and Corrientes (ACO, N = 21) from the north-eastern Argentinean region (N = 61); Santa Fe (ASF, N = 3) and Buenos Aires (ABS, N = 150) from the central Argentinean region (N = 153), as well as Río Negro (ARN, N = 31) and Chubut (ACH, N = 1) "


Here is the problem:

The overwhelmingly European Santa Fe has 3 times more people than Mendoza (the place where people are concentrated in Central Argetina, which is more similar racially and hence culturally, to Chile, they even speak differently than other Argentinians more similar to Chileans) , so why did they only use 3 samples from Santa Fe and 153 from Northern Argentina? And North-Eastern Argentina, which is very densely populated and culturally distant from most Argentinians (they are more similar to neighboring countries) has 61 samples?

To add more hilarious bias, the "North Eastern" provinces of Argentina, which are culturally and racially closer to Paraguay, Formosa and Santiago Del Estero (since Chaco has its own category, in this "study") have less than a million people in population when combined (out of 40 million people in Argentina), yet they used 61 (note the total of samples is 246 according to your study) from this region. Meanwhile, Rio Negro, which is the traditional Germanic stranglehold in Argentina, has an equal number of population to North Eastern Argentina and yet only used 31 samples from this region .

I can go on and on. There's more

Quote:
4. African ancestry of the population of Buenos Aires: "The results of this analysis suggest that 2.2% (SEM = 0.9%) of the genetic ancestry of the Buenos Aires population is derived from Africa."
Yes a well known troll study. 2.2% is statistical static, "rounded up" to make some political point about how Argentina needs more niggers.

Quote:
5. Argentine population genetic structure: Large variance in Amerindian contribution: "Using the Bayesian clustering algorithm STRUCTURE, the mean European contribution was 78%, the Amerindian contribution was 19.4%, and the African contribution was 2.5%. Similar results were found using weighted least mean square method: European, 80.2%; Amerindian, 18.1%; and African, 1.7%."
So everyone in Argentina is exactly these proportions?

Quote:
6. Population structure and admixture in Cerro Largo, Uruguay, based on blood markers and mitochondrial DNA polymorphisms: "Based on 18 autosomal markers and one X-linked marker, we estimated 82% European, 8% Amerindian, and 10% African contributions to their ancestry, while from seven mitochondrial DNA site-specific polymorphic markers and sequences of hypervariable segment I, we determined 49% European, 30% Amerindian, and 21% African maternal contributions."
Without asking people to identify their race this is irrelevant. Besides someone who is 82% European and the rest euro-asian (Amerindians of the southern cone are different from the squat block-heads in your home of Oaxaca, by the way, they were known in Argentina, Uruguay and Chile of being metrically reminding of Aryans like the cherokees in America, probably from mixing with the first whites that came before Siberians crossed the landbridge) is white by every colonial standard.

Quote:
7. Frequencies of the Four Major Amerindian mtDNA Haplogroups in the Population of Montevideo, Uruguay: "Abstract mtDNA Amerindian polymorphisms were studied in 108 inhabitants of Montevideo, Uruguay, using PCR RFLP analysis. Amerindian haplogroups were found in 20.4% of the sample."
So Amerindian haplogroups were found in 20% of Uruguayans and that makes it a "mestizo country", yet you could probably find similar Abo or Asiatic results in Australia, New Zealand, or even areas of Hungary.

Quote:
In the first study that I posted, the researchers did not sample the "purer" Amerindian population, and therefore did not incorporate their average admixture levels into the gene pool proportions.
What pure Amerindian community exists in Uruguay?

Quote:
Martinez-Marignac et al. write that, "Because no historical records of direct admixture of La Plata inhabitants with Amerindians exist, we decided not to include in the study samples from donors with Amerindian surnames to avoid bias resulting from atypical and recent Amerindian gene incorporations to the ‘‘main La Plata’’ genetic pool. The number of samples of Amerindian origin not included in our analysis was low (2%); therefore the biological material used for this study can be considered a random sample representing the population of ‘‘main La Plata’’ city. The La Plata sample was represented by 87 DNA samples (64 males and 23 females) obtained from donors whose surnames were all of European origin (Table 1)."

Yet they still find that, "The average European contribution at the individual level was 67.7% (4.5%), the Native American contribution was 25.6% (4.35%), and the African average contribution was 6.7% (0.9%). These values are similar to the population admixture levels estimated with Chakraborty’s gene identity method."
Propaganda addressed above.


Quote:
Really? How about two? Three? Four? Five? Where is the line drawn?
Easy, familiarize yourself to how the early colonists to the new world identified race.
Casta Casta

From what we know about Mendellian genetics, the principles were sound. The laws in North America, despite popular belief, were pretty similar to the spanish casta.

A person that was 7/8 European and 1/8 Amerindian (who are Euro-Asian to begin with) was considered Aryan. Some who are 1/4 Amerindian can be considered Aryan as well, in my view, but it's not that important. The people who care most about that, are ironically antifa darkies like you, Jews with a multi-culti agenda ("there are some Argentinians who are 1/8 or 1/16 Amerindian, so let's let millions of low IQ indios from Peru in and make them citizens!"), or a Christian Identity tard here and there.


Quote:
Do you understand that these studies measure the admixture proportions of specific individuals? You seem to think that they take 10 Europeans and 10 Indians and declare 50/50 admixture on average.


Technically, any sort of mixture makes a "mestizo." That's what the word means.

Mestizos (1/2 Amerindian & 1/2 Spanish)

Persons with one Spanish parent and one Amerindian parent. The term was originally associated with illegitimacy because in the generations after the Conquest, mixed-race children born in wedlock were assigned either a simple Amerindian or Spanish identity, depending with which culture they were raised. (See Hyperdescent and Hypodescent.) The number of official Mestizos rises in censuses only after the second half of the 17th century, when a sizable and stable community of mixed-race people with no claims on being either Amerindian or Spanish appeared.


Casta Casta



Quote:
So if you're 12.5% Indian, you're all right? How about 13.5%? 14.5? 15.5? 16.5? Where is the line drawn, again?
Is Val Kilmer a white? He has about the same proportion of Amerindian heritage as above. Looks indistinguishable from millions of Northern Europeans :




Ditto for Kevin Costner. You are just being facetious with that question, i'm frankly shocked when ANTIFA's manage to use this canned trick and it works on some of the dumber "white nationalists".

The key now is damage control for the whites whose ancestors committed an error at some undetectable point, and thankfully Mendel's laws means your weak indian blood gets bred out and disappears pretty fast. Also, some people, who may have an Amerindian ancestor, do not show up on various tests.

It's a complex topic , but I think the Nuremberg laws are the best model, refer to that if you'd like.



Quote:
I don't believe that Europeans should go back to Europe.

Most Uruguayan genomic heritage is European. However, a significant minority is Amerindian, and a smaller minority is African.

The typical inhabitant of northern Mexico is majority European and minority Amerindian. Your problem is that you consider phenotype rather than genotype.
How is it possible that the average Uruguayan looks like a normal white person from Italy, Spain or Germany when you visit Uruguay, while some of the "white" Mexicans look strange and non-European?


Quote:
I never claimed that southern Mexico had high living conditions; I merely said that it was far safer than northern Mexico and many areas of the U.S. Obviously, there is immigration, as trade liberalization deepened cross-country inequities and created push and pull factors for southern Mexicans to migrate.
That's right, just change the rocks and the 80 IQ beaner becomes a rocket scientist.

Quote:
The real problem is that you don't actually understand the research methods used in these genetic studies. You just understand that you dislike the conclusions, so your only recourse is to call the studies "politically motivated" and attack the "Jew" authors without actually refuting anything they have written.
The problem is that they are political, not objective. See my explanation above.

Quote:
That study said that 62% of mtDNA haplogroups were of Native American descent, which is not surprising given the historical legacy of pairings of European men and Indian women. It did not say 62% of the total population, because if you didn't know this, Y DNA also factors into the picture.
The european man indian woman thing is more common in countries that had few European women like Colombia. For Argentina this is not true.

Argentina became 35-40% nonwhite (not just Amerindian from Peru and Bolivia, but also Asian, Negroes from Africa and Dominican Republic, it's a multicultural shithole like America today) after WWII.

Anyone who tells you it's 97% is out of date or lying, anyone who tells you its 30% white is lying too. The truth is whites are a plurality in Argentina, just like in every other new world Western nation. The only reason American WN's dismiss Argentina or Uruguay (the latter which is more Western and in better shape racially than the Jew S A) is because they speak a dialect of Spanish and Americans are mentally retarded.