We're nor suicidally compassionate

Well, imagine only a certain population of cockroaches has an anti-radiation gene. A solar flare goes off and now they're the only ones left. 100% of roaches now have that allele. The question is, how devastating to our genome was civilization itself? Look at what civilization did to dogs vs. wolves in the last 10,000 years.

Some hard times should fix that right up, user.
Don't be nervous.
We'll be Wolves again.

Attached: WolfSage.jpeg (736x572, 103.02K)

From the 1800's a book called English Traits by Ralph Waldo Emerson:

"Man, never so often deceived, still watches for the arrival of a brother who can hold him steady to a truth, until he has made it his own. "

"The teutonic tribes have a national singleness of heart, which contrasts with the Latin races. The German name has a proverbial significance of sincerity and honest meaning. The arts bear testimony to it. The faces of clergy and laity in old sculptures and illuminated missals are charged with earnest belief. Add to this hereditary rectitude, the punctuality and precise dealing which commerce creates, and you have the English truth and credit. The government strictly performs its engagements. The subjects do not understand trifling on its part. When any breach of promise occurred, in the old days of prerogative, it was resented by the people as an intolerable grievance. And, in modern times, any slipperiness in the government in political faith, or any repudiation or crookedness in matters of finance, would bring the whole nation to a committee of inquiry and reform. Private men keep their promises, never so trivial. Down goes the flying word on the tablets, and is indelible as Domesday Book.

Their practical power rests on their national sincerity. Veracity derives from instinct, and marks superiority in organization. Nature has endowed some animals with cunning, as a compensation for strength withheld; but it has provoked the malice of all others, as if avengers of public wrong. In the nobler kinds, where strength could be afforded, her races are loyal to truth, as truth is the foundation of the social state. Beasts that make no truce with man, do not break faith with each other. ‘Tis said, that the wolf, who makes a _cache_ of his prey, and brings his fellows with him to the spot, if, on digging, it is not found, is instantly and unresistingly torn in pieces. English veracity seems to result on a sounder animal structure, as if they could afford it. They are blunt in saying what they think, sparing of promises, and they require plaindealing of others. We will not have to do with a man in a mask. Let us know the truth. Draw a straight line, hit whom and where it will. Alfred, whom the affection of the nation makes the type of their race, is called by his friend Asser, the _truth-speaker_; _Alueredus veridicus_. Geoffrey of Monmouth says of King Aurelius, uncle of Arthur, that “above all things he hated a lie.” The Northman Guttorm said to King Olaf, “it is royal work to fulfil royal words.” The mottoes of their families are monitory proverbs, as, _Fare fac_, — Say, do, — of the Fairfaxes; _Say and seal_, of the house of Fiennes; _Vero nil verius_, of the DeVeres. To be king of their word, is their pride. When they unmask cant, they say, “the English of this is,” &c.; and to give the lie is the extreme insult. The phrase of the lowest of the people is “honor-bright,” and their vulgar praise, “his word is as good as his bond.” They hate shuffling and equivocation, and the cause is damaged in the public opinion, on which any paltering can be fixed. Even Lord Chesterfield, with his French breeding, when he came to define a gentleman, declared that truth made his distinction: and nothing ever spoken by him would find so hearty a suffrage from his nation. The Duke of Wellington, who had the best right to say so, advises the French General Kellermann, that he may rely on the parole of an English officer. The English, of all classes, value themselves on this trait, as distinguishing them from the French, who, in the popular belief, are more polite than true. An Englishman understates, avoids the superlative, checks himself in compliments, alleging, that in the French language, one cannot speak without lying."

"In the power of saying rude truth, sometimes in the lion’s mouth, no men surpass them. On the king’s birthday, when each bishop was expected to offer the king a purse of gold, Latimer gave Henry VIII. a copy of the Vulgate, with a mark at the passage, “Whoremongers and adulterers God will judge;” and they so honor stoutness in each other, that the king passed it over. They are tenacious of their belief, and cannot easily change their opinions to suit the hour. They are like ships with too much head on to come quickly about, nor will prosperity or even adversity be allowed to shake their habitual view of conduct."

I don't necessarily think so, who reproduced and how much they did matters a lot even in just a century, depending on the out of ordinary events too. Think about all the criminals killed per year in all of the various European communities for whatever crimes for instance. Now I'm not saying these were "good" people, but they likely carried certain genetic traits that were perhaps bad for the type of high civilized environment they were in but at the same time good in terms of outgroup aggression and things like that. It's a complex picture. Often times burly individuals who would fare great in defending a community from outsiders are also maladaptive to heavily civilized environments and may end up reproducing little to none. Generally speaking, the engine of changes and anti-tradition have been urban centers, and these select for certain types of men too.

Also, one thing that should be clear is that history is largely written by the elites narrating events that interest the elites. When you read about ancient deeds of valor, you will most of the times be reading about well bred men of aristocratic classes. So one has to pay attention to the breeding patterns of those and whether some dysgenic behavior happened for this much smaller group of peoples. That isn't to say they were of different racial types altogether, but of the various European races, they were the very best, they were, in the case of western civilization, the descendants in large of the marauding bands of warriors that had established their rule on the ruins of the Roman Empire. So one has also to wonder which was the "basal" quality of Europeans taken collectively in the first place. The last centuries starting from the French revolution have ended up in a systematic extermination or neutralization of ancient European elites.

Same for instance is true I think for ancient Arabs. I think the Arab elites that accompanied the incredible expansion of Islam from Arabia all the way into threatening France were really high bred men, perhaps with a much higher quality gap so to speak with their subjects compared to what we can imagine in Europe. Once these lost their character, the Islamic world slowly fell into irrelevancy and was largely propped up only by new elites from Asia converting to Islam and establishing the Ottoman empire.

biblical jews and those that call themselves jews now are completely separate people. it's like how these "jews" pretend to be White. they usurp identity.

Attached: jews are the children of the devil.jpg (986x1268, 302.54K)

...

>>>/x/

...

...

cute when the tor schizos spam things they doesn't even remotely understand
aside from the fact that the links you posted prove that much of European's current genetic structure formed after bronze age invasions from the steppe, what those studies seek is genomewide patterns, aka they look at hundreds of thousands if not millions of markers as a whole, they don't look at specific genes and how the frequency of those changed unless in specific cases like pigmentation related ones, which ironically prove that Europeans only got lighter with time

Iberians were always mediterranean and this is exactly what you links prove, you poor snownigger ape