I know Charles Darwin did and so did Einstein. I've read large portions of On the Origin of Species and The Descent of Man as well as the short Charles Darwin autobiography, so I know very well he married his cousin when she was about 14.
Even first cousin marrying is not that detrimental to a lineage if it only occurs a few times. The problem is if occurs over and over. If every single person marries their fourth cousin for generation after generation
that is not inbreeding, no inbreeding occurs there. Hybridization can often be much worse than light interbreeding (such as first cousins).
The way it occurs is by them all having common ancestors. People with blue eyes are all thought of have a common ancestors. Your maternal and paternal common ancestors can also be found.
Again, AlecHoran, I already talked about northern Brazil and southern Brazil. If you said that "northern Brazil and southern Brazil are all the same people", do you think I would say "a polite way of saying more inbred"??? No of course I wouldn't because it doesn't even make
sense . First of all, they're not inbred. Secondly, even if they WERE "inbred", more inbred than WHAT?! If you say "more <adjective>" you're comparing it to something else. I have no idea what you're trying to compare it to. So I'm sorry if I sound a little testy but you're making some weird allegations based on nonsensical and 100% false scientific extrapolations which could really be seen as offensive, even if you were just trying to make a light-hearted comment or whatever you were trying to do.
Originally Posted by nicegirlsarenice
Reply With Quote