Britain's Biggest Family Is Expecting Their 20th Child!!

[Linebacker]

Im probably not the only one who upon entering the thread was surprised they are actually British.

[♥ Lily ♥]

Im probably not the only one who upon entering the thread was surprised they are actually British.

[Linebacker]

I was expecting to see a family of 20 Indians/Pakistanis

[♥ Lily ♥]

I was expecting to see a family of 20 Indians/Pakistanis

Population for England
2015 estimate = 54,786,300

Ethnic groups for England (2011 census)

85.4% White = 46,787,500
7.8% Asian = 4,273,331
3.5% Black = 1,917,520
2.3% Mixed = 1,260,084
0.4% Arab = 219,145
0.6% Other = 328,717

[DarkSecret]

No such thing

No white genocide or no preventing?

[Taiguaitiaoghyrmmumin]

No white genocide or no preventing?

No such thing as white genocide. The only exception is maybe in south africa and haiti. But even in haiti they accepted polish people but hated the french though. In south africa it was different because they were bitter from what both boers and english did to them before so they wanted revenge. But now aways no there isn't white genocide.

[♥ Lily ♥]

No white genocide or no preventing?

How do you think pale skin with a lack of pigmentation came to evolve in the first place! It's in order to absorb vitamin D more easily from low-levels of sunlight.

Why do you think people have different features and more melanin to protect them against skin-cancer when their ancestors have lived in very hot climates for a long time..?

If you want to preserve pale skin, then go and live somewhere cloudy and cold with little sunlight (in northern Europe for example) - and over many gererations and a long period of time, pigmentation will gradually be lost in the future generations so you can easily absorb vitamin D.

In the human race, darker skinned people are at a higher risk of developing rickets and bone problems in areas with little sunlight and require extra vitamin D supplements, whereas pale people can absorb vitamin D from a few minutes exposure to sunlight each day, but have a different problem of burning easily in strong sunlight and dying prematurely from skin cancer.

The hotter the climate, the darker the skin evolves to be over many generations and time so they can survive in such climates without burning and getting skin cancer.

Why do you think any plant, insect, or any living creature, adapts its features over the natural evolutionary process in order to camouflage itself and survive in a certain habitat or environment..?

Why do you think lions can camouflage in the sand, and a polar bear, snow leopard, and arctic fox can camouflage in the snow? They've evolved through the natural adaption process in nature to be able to camouflage and survive in their environments.

As environments change in a continuously changing world, the wildlife and plants and all other living species adapt through the natural adaption process in nature, even though nothing in nature lasts forever... not the dying flesh, nor the planet.






Anyway, 'DarkSecret'... if you want so much to worship dying flesh and save pale white flesh and blue-eyed blonds forever and ever and ever (forever's a very long time btw! ) .... then stay away from the sun and avoid visiting hot and sunny places, wear strong sunblocks, etc, in order to prevent the alarming rate of skin cancer deaths amongst white teenagers and white people in their twenties in Europe, Florida and Australia, etc.

(This doesn't apply to the native Aboriginal Australians whose very thick hair to protect their scalps and full lip features and skintone have adapted over a very long time of their ancestors living in such an environment in order to survive in the strong burning sun in Australia - but applies to the white European colonists in Australia whose features and skin haven't adapted to the very hot climate yet and who are burning to death in the strong sun.)

[DarkSecret]

How do you think pale skin with a lack of pigmentation came to evolve in the first place! It's in order to absorb vitamin D more easily from low-levels of sunlight.

That doesn't change the fact that European families are having far less children than migrant ones.

[♥ Lily ♥]

That doesn't change the fact that European families are having far less children than migrant ones.

Figures/data please.

We've got 500,000 Polish migrants in England, and 3-400,000 French migrants.... do you have any objection to them being migrants?

Anyway, humans have been moving around the globe for a long time, and they'll all adapt their features and skin tone to survive in different environments over the time of the adaption process in nature.

Btw, what do you think about European colonists to Australia, the US, Canada, NZ, etc vs the native Aboriginal and Amerindian populations...?

[Ryujin]

That doesn't change the fact that European families are having far less children than migrant ones.

Making so many babies is wrong in the first place. Europe should start going China and restricting families to two children at most.

EU governments are paying tremendous amount of money to baby-makers and that encourages migrant families even more. This policy should be abandoned as soon as possible. This is the biggest factor of EU economic crisis. Europe needs a comprehensive family planning policy.