>>22050681When you have a lot of inbreeding you evolve faster.
This means positive and negative.
Humans are so good already for any positive traits gained in inbreeding you are likely to gain several negative or lose existing positive ones. It takes a lot of selective pressure, and other culling of negative traits, to realize positive gains without negative, unlikely in modern times. When people inbreed too much they can hide the negative gained traits typically recessive with new dna reducing their expression. Undoing some evolution.
When you outbreed you give up the adaptions that evolved to make your people better for something random.
More complex, humans do not all have genes responsible for the same things in the same place on the genome.
Many genes work as a team for their ultimate expression, not accomplishing things alone.
When you recombine very different genes there is not room to include all the relevant genes, so you get a lot of genes without the important supporting genes. Making for a lot of dead weight.
How they recombine and what you end up with is so random genes meant to support genes not present end up taking up the spots needed to support genes that are present.
Rarely you get an amazing improvement, for a single individual, but that does not extend into the offspring.
Most people created by mixing are worse, but the occasional mutant with 'super powers' is created when very rarely supportive genes line up benefiting eachother in unique unintended ways.
They still then give birth to worse offspring than either parent though.
Similarly most of the most productive plants are specificly designed hybrids that wouldn't result by chance and required intent.They produce higher quantities of better fruit. But if you grow the next generation from their seed it is far worse with random negative traits, and low yield worse than the parents of the original hybrid and much worse than the hybrid. One improved generation, multiple worse
