No one here is making the argument that certain breeds do not exhibit similar characteristics within the breed itself at all. What the argument is is whether or not you can ascertain from genetic similarity a "personality" of the breed as a whole, and then go on to make legisliation based upon the determination that certain breeds are significantly and predictably predisposed to aggression from a "personality" standpoint. Not even the creators of the study agree with you:
In general, heritability is not necessarily a concept limited to just genetics; all it means is that a trait occurs across a group. Women have a higher heritability of wearing earrings than men. That doesn't mean women come out of the womb with earrings already in their ears, nor does it mean that a woman without earrings is some sort of genetic weirdo. Environment and sociology play a role in why group differences exist as well. This gets more into the weeds when you also consider that a "pit bull" is not actually a single fucking breed.
Why do all these experts on genetics and heritability always end up stacking shelves at CVS? Nepenthe has been doing linear regression models of phenotypical trait variation in sample populations her whole life - she's debunked the whole system. She discovered that certain dog breeds don't actually inherit genes that create a proclivity toward average differences in behavior, despite the conventional understanding. She cracked the code. She's fucking brilliant, why does nobody listen to them and give them a chance at a real professional job?! Either everyone on earth discovered they're an idiot or........ the whole world is in on a giant
jewish white conspiracy against them.
a "pit bull" is not actually a single fucking breed
It's funny, because rational people went ahead and did what your pedant mind couldn't do - grouped all these dogs into the same family based on average phenotypical and behavioral similarity.
