/b/ - Random

Read about their internal conflicts before asking online, kthxbye.

>>314617 (OP) 
dad go to church. yesterday you were complainig that we are in 3 wars

Mongolians didn't have to face machine gun fire that could turn all your comrades into ground beef in seconds or artillery whose noise alone could rattle your brain and rupture your eardrums. Also they were actually allowed to get spoils from war as comfort instead of a small paycheck after being sent into the meat grinder.

>>314654
Mongolians invented machine guns retard

>>314660
The fuck are you on about? Gatling gun didn't originate in Asia.

>>314664
How about you read a fucking book before opening your mouth about something you obviously know absolutely jack shit about. Have you ever even heard of someone called Gengis Khan? Moron?

>>314617 (OP) 
The type of war they fought killed the weak men, the type of war that exists now kills the strong men.

>>314665
This is some lame bait

>>314617 (OP) 
PTSD is a psychological effect, back then, soldiers knew they were safe in the headquarters/encampment, so they could sleep peacefully. With the development of long range artillery, no one is no longer safe everywhere, even in the rearguard, this develops and state of constant alert, which degrades the mental health. Basically is an effect of being engaged constantly in war, while in ancient times, war was only on limited battlefields,

>>314666
>the type of war that exists now kills the strong men.
Because they refuse to draft the weak men. The last time that happened, they called it McNamaras Morons.
>>314668
>With the development of long range artillery, no one is no longer safe everywhere, even in the rearguard, this develops and state of constant alert, which degrades the mental health.
Living in an abusive household probably results in similar damages. Or am i being a fag for comparing an abusive household to a battlefield?

>>314667
No it's not you mongoloid

>>314669
>Living in an abusive household probably results in similar damages. Or am i being a fag for comparing an abusive household to a battlefield?
That's called CPTSD, the C stands for complex, because means that you are fatherless and got daddy issues (and that's more complex than "yeah, i killed 72 kids in 'nam back in the '73 lmao).

>>314671
No the "C" stands for "cum" and your trauma is from having your colon filled by another man's sexual organ. Disturbing and maladjusted behaviour!

Being a wageslave is probably worse for mental health than being sent into the normandy landings or verdun meatgrinder.

>>314671
>you are fatherless
No, he was present. Which is the problem.

>>314665
Ah yes, Ghengis Khan was known for his horse mounted mini guns and tactical use of artillery.

>>314676
Technically is still "fatherless", because can you call him a father?
>>314672
If your uncle raped you, you're prone to develop trauma, indeed.
<We included three additional items to consider traumatic experiences before age 18, specifically: childhood physical abuse (being hit, punched, or hurt by someone responsible for caregiving such as a parent, foster parent, teacher, or coach), childhood sexual abuse (being touched sexually or being sexually assaulted by someone older or a caregiver), and neglect (not being properly clothed or fed or being left without care). 
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8049462/

>>314669
>Because they refuse to draft the weak men
You can draft and try to force shit all you want.
Point is strong men will go if they think it is their group's genetic interests to do so, while weak men will be hyper focused on his safety and individual interests and will run from any war.

>>314704
>strong men will go if they think it is their group's genetic interests to do so
<group's interests were a consideration over self interest for those participating in conquests through history
<marauders and deserters are empty words

dad go to church

>>314712
Difference is now the lethality of war doesn't go after non cooperative selfish cowardly men like it did in preindustrial times, and very few strong men come back.
Also your group's interests are your individual interests if your group is kin

>>314715
<my autistic simplification is totally right

>>314716
It is, lick every bit of shit from my ass

>>314717
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimation_(punishment)
Carrot and stick. Lots of stick.

>>314718
Genetics are the most powerful motivation there is, for all life.
It was used like 11 times on record, and my previous posts didn't claim there was no weak men in preindustrial times, only that selection pressure changed, for the worst.

>>314719
Kin is not a binary concept.

>>314720
It is a visible and smelly one

dad you missed church again

>>314668
Any war had to stop for winter anyway. So mental burden from vigilance would be lessened. And for nomads war and peace were mostly nominal differences. Inter-clan blood vendettas tended to drag over decades, with multiple separate groups of foes at once, so someone who grew exposed to that burden would have it easier to experience a conflict of more imposing scale. More of the same is less taxing than something completely unknown before.

>>314722
It's a spectrum, with a different species on one end (for practical reasons, because all life on Earth is supposedly kin) to identical twins on the other. Triggering words for someone on another spectrum, huh?

>>314802
And that's a relative term, because any instance requires an "anchor" to compare to. Kin to whom? My mapping of kin is different from yours, and that's the same for anyone else. Without basic level of math you can't grasp the concept at all, so it's possibly futile to post this here.

>>314806
>the same for anyone else
Except identical twins. Or clones. Their mappings fit perfectly to each other.

>>314806
>my mapping of kin
*of kinship

>>314806
>Without basic level of math you can't grasp
Ahh, it the amount of genes,genetic sequences and the amount of common ancestors you share with the people.

>>314802
Expressed numerically, kinship is based on the number of generations to the last common ancestor. The higher that number, the less of kin you are to each other. It's up to you which particular value is enough to call that not-kin already. Maybe that would explain why I hate enmuttification so much. Because kinship is also stronger with the percentage of common ancestors in the generations prior to that last common one being higher as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedigree_collapse#Overview
might give you an explanation how.

>>314812
>percentage
of those shared in two different ways, or of shared in three different ways, ect
Not to those not shared at all, because by definition that would be impossible.

>>314813
Get some existing genealogical tree and try to count overlapping lines of descent from the same ancestor drawn with different colors. It's too difficult for me to express in easy words. Print a large ancestral tree and get some colored pencils. Or do that in imagination, if you manage. A line in two different colors is metaphorically twice as "thick" as one in a single color. That "thickness" of shared ancestry between two related people is also an expression of their kinship.

>>314816
Or make a distinction for yourself what particular value of 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_relationship
is the minimum threshold of kinship to be recognized by you. Too much headache for me to guess that for you.

>>314818
So how would you express that overlap between ancestry trees of two people needed to call them kin, huh? Or is that too trivial to mention?

>>314819
*kin to each other

>>314819
Come on, that requires some brainwork, but not too much. You can't always skirt around the issue with platitudes like these, lol. >>314811
This was only a single link away in Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-statistics#Fixation_index_in_human_populations
The direction of change among the estimations between early and later studies is especially interesting for me there. Try to notice things by yourself, lol. Some inferences won't be mentioned aloud by respectable figures just because of their politically incorrect implications.

>>314831
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixation_index#FST_in_humans
I dislike spoonfeeding. Notice that FST variable measures differences in "total genome", not in "the coding part of genome" specifically. Figure that out for yourself what significance that might have and what differences might be there if you only look at that specific part and why that might be important. Any up-to-date genetics textbook should be helpful, I guess.

>>314834
And notice why I was always typing "estimations". Because that's not "whole genome sequencing" needed for pan-genome studies.

>>314617 (OP) 
>Why does modern day armies pussy out over the idea of murdering the enemy’s citizens 
They don't but they pretend to. it's a way to stop other countries from being effective at war, so the US can keep it's world hegemony through "rules based order". For example if not for the US threatening sanctions, North Sudanese would've eradicated the southerners and kept their country intact, but since they couldn't it got split. Of course the more split weaker countries the better.

>>314854
>I don't know, therefor murica
I'm like 99% certain its your ancestor's fault regardless of what you say.

>>314831
>This was only a single link away in Wikipedia
That shit sounds like weasel words, like a nigger and I could share all the same genes, but those genes are in different sequences, and that make all the difference, and makes the nigger's reproduction at the expense of my own.

>>314861
>That shit sounds like weasel words
This greentexted shit sounds even more like weasel words.
Copypaste what you have a problem with, lol. Or name what is unacceptable there explicitly.

>>314884
Have something to read about that's not very clear to this day whether it might be needed or not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-coding_DNA
What I'm interested in is serving some purpose, but not everything has necessarily a purpose. Read nigger, read.

>>314885
This is a pajeet-friendly hint why estimations are generally unreliable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

>>314887
Especially when someone cheaps out using this method somewhere on the way. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_amplification_of_polymorphic_DNA
Other methods might be better, but anything short of sequencing the whole genome has to be misleading somewhere to some extent.

>>314889
Which should include one of these
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_sequencing#High-throughput_methods
producing a slew of results that need to be re-arranged into a whole with a computer program (not going into details, ackshually). Reliability is costly, can't be helped.

>>314891
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whole_genome_sequencing#Commercialization
As demonstrated here.

>>314892
>Whole genome sequencing has established the mutation frequency for whole human genomes. The mutation frequency in the whole genome between generations for humans (parent to child) is about 70 new mutations per generation.[87][88] An even lower level of variation was found comparing whole genome sequencing in blood cells for a pair of monozygotic (identical twins) 100-year-old centenarians.[89] Only 8 somatic differences were found, though somatic variation occurring in less than 20% of blood cells would be undetected. [citation needed]

>In the specifically protein coding regions of the human genome, it is estimated that there are about 0.35 mutations that would change the protein sequence between parent/child generations (less than one mutated protein per generation).[90]

Notice the dates of publication for studies cited above, all over a decade ago. Wikipedia is somewhat outdated because that's a volunteer project. I guess there are some later studies on the same issue published somewhere, using better refined equipment and methodology.  Learn to distinguish between mutation rates in somatic cells and germline cells in the greentext above. And not all non-coding DNA mutations have to be benign, because some of them can contribute to possible nondisjunction during meiosis later, for example.

>>314894
Promoter mutations don't change the sequence, but they can also be a problem due to influencing the quantity of produced proteins. The same problem regarding synonymous mutations in the coding DNA that affect codon usage bias, blah blah.

>>314894
This is especially prone to problems.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosomal_crossover#Non-homologous_crossover
And is not understood fully yet, as far as I know.

>>314894
>during meiosis later
*a generation later

>>314895
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_dosage#Copy_number_variation
Gene dosage-affecting mutations also don't change the protein sequence itself, in general. That doesn't mean that's without issues,  exactly like in previous post.

>>314899
DNA repair methods are error-prone themselves to varying degree, unfortunately. That means using repair by recombination one might trade a serious problem with a less serious problem, not eliminate it entirely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homology_directed_repair#Meiosis
That explains how the supply of oocytes for women loses its quality as they age, lol.

>>314854
I'm sure the Tutsi versus Hutu drama (or the other way, Hutu versus Tutsi) led to more effective country lol.

>>314861
>like a nigger and I could share all the same genes
Fucking what is your understanding of "the same"? Place or sequence? Or both?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GguSAbRPJAU
Functionally you need the same proteins in the same quantity in the same developmental period in the same tissues for the same result. Work it out backwards starting from that.

>>314909
In my understanding any DNA misalignment (regarding both place and sequence) affecting those might be important, and anything else isn't. You are free to ignore it yourself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_mutation#Molecular_clocks
Any change in DNA that has zero impact on phenotype is negligible.

>>314913
Phenotype includes behavioral responses, to be clear.

>>314884
That humans are 99% genetically the same even among the different races

>>314936
durrrrrrrr 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolutionary_genetics#Modern_humans
dna peenotype go durrrrrr
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecophenotypic_variation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype#Phenotypic_variation

i am NOT an uneducated moron 
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/uneducated

>>314938
M'kay
Good luck with your links or whatever

>>314936
Guess what, 1% of a sum of $1 000 000 is still $10 000. Apply that to human genome too, lol.

>>314940
Not good enough, I need to be made out of different matter then niggers

>>314941
Then find the numbers expressing the genetic distance between animals and plants in general, if you can find it. Or between mammals and birds. To get a feel if that 1% is too little or not.

>>314617 (OP) 
the mongols were fairly chill with towns that surrendered or agreed to cooperate.
the ones that fought back however were the ones they raped to death

>>314942
I do not think you understand, I don't want to be carbon based.

>>314946
Then that's another 41% meme? Condolences.

>>314946
You can also switch to antimatter, lol. Theoretically.

>>314816
>It's too difficult for me to express in easy words.
How to call that "thickness" quality of kinship? Maybe similar to "relative term" >>314806, to call it also a "cumulative term"? It's something I struggle with, to express some present quality in a way that's both concise and hard to misinterpret. That difficulty reminds me how the qualities of a species in general are similar to the concept of ship of Theseus in philosophy, making the concept of species hard to define too. More or less the same problem with human identity staying the same despite the constituent body cells being constantly replaced throughout life. Hey, resident asshole polyglot, demonstrate your superiority here and make it look easy to express. Without vague references to Heraclitus with his πάντα ῥεῖ, if you could. I also wonder how my interest in some concepts makes me a fraud. To be a fraud you need to claim some formal title for yourself, or to plagiarize someone else's thoughts as something original to yourself.

>>315380
You can apply in some way the concept of "dependency hell" to genome as well, especially if you try to understand how "outbreeding depression" and "reproductive isolation" can manifest, lol. Is it better to post wiki links here, or rather to leave that for those interested enough to look up for the keywords? I also want to know if the resident petulant polyglot reads that initial sentence as fraudulent and why. And no, that has nothing in common with hell itself.

>>315461
Hey, maybe he could explain what introns are for, too. 
>Although introns are sometimes called intervening sequences, the term "intervening sequence" can refer to any of several families of internal nucleic acid sequences that are not present in the final gene product, including inteins, untranslated regions (UTR), and nucleotides removed by RNA editing, in addition to introns.
This complexity is something only peabrains struggle with, lol.

>>315467
I'm especially interested in what would kill me if nothing else will.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_damage_theory_of_aging#DNA_damage_and_mutation
I recall that lab mice that have somatic mutation rates several orders of magnitude higher than typically (due to human tampering with their DNA repair genes) don't age at particularly higher rates. I forgot where I saw that though.

>>315677
Let's talk semantics for a change. In link related
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_repair#Technology
there is a sentence:
>A technology named clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (shortened to CRISPR-Cas9) was discovered in 2012.
How can you discover a technology? You can discover something serving as a basis for a technology, but a technology is an invention, not a discovery. I guess anything related to a keyword CRISPR/Cas9 is a hoax, according to some polyglot.

>>314807
>perfectly
Now that I think about it, even that is not true considering the greentext here >>314894.
What's are the odds that those ~70 mutations would be exactly the same for both twins?

>>316416
Depends on when these mutations appear relatively to the event of splitting the initial early embryo in two. Somewhere between the stages of blastula and gastrula, I guess. Ask the artificial stupidity or look it up yourself, my memory is not that good.

>>316417
Germline mutations of one generation become shared legacy of the next one, roughly.

>>316763
And even finding the number of (possibly) functional genes per genome is a chore.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putative_gene
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_reading_frame
Estimations here, estimations there.