Afro
Full Member
Posts: 248
|
Post by Afro on Jun 7, 2004 11:16:05 GMT -5
Graeme, I think your the one who needs to "cool it", I have already explained that my questioning of Europeans chizzling statues was mere folklore and speculation, nobody was stating anything as facts.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jun 7, 2004 11:34:54 GMT -5
It is not part of my folklore or speculation. Does not that, say something about the groups you belong to and why they have that type of speculation and folklore. Afterall I have never speculated about the negroness of Benin or Zimbabwe or the genius of Chaka, and I don't know anyone who does. How would you feel if I wrote a tome on the fact that Chaka was actually a Mexican with dark paint or that Zimbabwe was built by the Malays who travelled to Madagascar? Or Benin was created by Portugese. I am sure I could do that quite convincingly. Afterall Erich von Daniken made a lot of money saying it was extraterrestrials who built the Central/South American pyramids.
|
|
Afro
Full Member
Posts: 248
|
Post by Afro on Jun 7, 2004 12:02:21 GMT -5
It is not part of my folklore or speculation. Does not that, say something about the groups you belong to and why they have that type of speculation and folklore. Afterall I have never speculated about the negroness of Benin or Zimbabwe or the genius of Chaka, and I don't know anyone who does. How would you feel if I wrote a tome on the fact that Chaka was actually a Mexican with dark paint or that Zimbabwe was built by the Malays who travelled to Madagascar? Or Benin was created by Portugese. I am sure I could do that quite convincingly. Afterall Erich von Daniken made a lot of money saying it was extraterrestrials who built the Central/South American pyramids. This is your problem, what "groups" I belong to? I belong to no groups and hold no allegiences to anyone online. It was just something I brought up, why are you taking it to the extreme now. I thought that maybe someone else may have heard of something like that, Afrocentric or not. I hear about white nationalist blaming the fall of rome and greece and blacks too, does that mean I'm a nordicist???
|
|
|
Post by nordicyouth on Jun 7, 2004 13:15:21 GMT -5
yeah, chill out homeslice...
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Jun 7, 2004 16:33:08 GMT -5
Shaka Zulu was an Eskimo. What?! Prove that he wasn't!
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 8, 2004 2:06:33 GMT -5
Drama queen? I am his satanic majesty, if you want to come face to face with a fate worse than death, keep mocking satanic majesty's name. After all I created you and your line. Said introductory piece had the agenda to discredit the idea based on phenotypes that East Africans are a nego/caucasoid mix. He did this by quoting the study of Middle Eastern DNA from modern Middle Easterners and comparing it to modern East Africans. What does it prove? It proves that East African DNA markers are different from Middle Eastern DNA markers in the 21st century. So what! It does not prove or disprove that the modern East Africans have caucasian admixture because no-one knows which caucasian group contributed its DNA to East Africans. Yeah stupid, now you're biting and chewing on straws, need some salt to go with it? At first it was pre-Semitic speaking Middle Easterners that mixed with east Africans, now its some unknown Caucasian group that did it maybe it was caucasian Martians from outer space ;D Listen idiot, unless you can prove or show evidence for any of this your strawman argument is useless. You're making up ridiculous theories as we go along, and I keep setting them afire. And if you read what I posted in my original post it said that the Amhara have a strong Middle eastern element paternally(33%) are you reading impaired as well as a retard? Orientalid Caucasian, yeah that makes plenty of sense to say. You don't know alot of things, just like the rest of those good trolls like yourself. Shut up troll, we're going over the same crap again. I gave you a severe beating about Afro-Asiatic languages posting data from journals and eminent linguists and itstead of finding evidence to refute it you do what you do best, propose stupid theories and go into denial You have no proof that Semitic is the only true Afro_Asiatic language, you're just saying that crap because the majority of the languages in this group are spoken in Africa and you don't want to accept the fact that blacks speak most of them. You haven't posted anything except lame strawmen arguments. Your Satanic Strawmens keep getting set afire over and over again
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jun 8, 2004 10:22:23 GMT -5
Said, is that a self portrait? It looks very gorilla like. No wonder you are such a sour puss with a face like that.
Afro, you missed the point. You brought up the topic of the defacement of sculptures of "negroes" by caucasians in order to deny the "negro" contribution to Egypt and wherever else. I did not bring that up. I actually found what you wrote offensive and one of those conspiracy theories. In Australia there are white racists who cannot believe that Australian Aborigines built certain structures and made certain artworks or rock carvings because it goes against their racist views. Don't you see that by voicing the alteration of history and artifacts by caucasian against negroes is also racist and frankly dishonourable to all those people who made their vocations the uncovering of ancient history, the deciphering of hieroglyphics by Jean Champollion, the rediscovery of Queen Hatshepsut and Pharoah Akenaten. Afterall why bother they were not European or whiter than a paper bag or English? Are you like Said? Do you think that Africa is just full of negroes? It isn't, and there are other races there. The Bushmen are the true aborigines of Africa. They are not negroes. The North Africans, including the Egyptians, have occupied North Africa before negroes left what Said calls tropical africa. The East Africans, Cushites and other dark skinned inhabitants of the eastern parts of Africa are not negroes. Having a dark skin is not the sole criteria for being negro. Whether the East Africans are unmixed or mixed with caucasians does not alter the fact that they have little to do with Said's tropical africans aka negroes. They are separate from negroes as Indonesians are from Papuans. Of course people have transmigrated in historic times so that there are negroes in North African countries like Libya and there has been mixing in the Sahel regions so that some Tuareg tribes are only Berber in culture/language not in phenotype. Negroes mainly Bantus have migrated to East and South Africa and have affected indigenous peoples such as Bushmen. The thinking that Africa is negro is wrong, Africa has been multi racial from the beginning and it is morally incorrect to deny the existence of indigenous non negro aka tropical africans races such as the KhoiSan groups, the Berbers and Egyptians. Africa is not negro.
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Jun 8, 2004 10:52:39 GMT -5
In fact, from now on, I'll call this 'Negrocentrism'.
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 8, 2004 10:59:09 GMT -5
Said, is that a self portrait? It looks very gorilla like. No wonder you are such a sour puss with a face like that. I thought posting a picture of something that looks close to your mama might make you act right ;D Stupid dumbass, when did I ever say that? Pull that pitchfork out of your ass and quit telling lies. East Africans are tropical Africans you jackass, can you properly define what is a Negroid and do you have proof that East Africans are not Negroes? east Africans have more than just dark skin shithead, your knowledge about anthropology is very limited. Genetically east Africans aren't sepaarate from Negroes stupid, they genetically group with other black Africans as for Egypt read this you troll: J Hum Evol. 2000 Sep;39(3):269-88. Related Articles, Links The position of the Nazlet Khater specimen among prehistoric and modern African and Levantine populations. Pinhasi R, Semal P. Department of Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3DZ, U.K. The morphometric affinities of the 33,000 year old skeleton from Nazlet Khater, Upper Egypt are examined using multivariate statistical procedures. In the first part, principal components analysis is performed on a dataset of mandible dimensions of 220 fossils, sub-fossils and modern specimens, ranging in time from the Late Pleistocene to recent and restricted in space to the African continent and Southern Levant. In the second part, mean measurements for various prehistoric and modern African and Levantine populations are incorporated in the statistical analysis. Subsequently, differences between male and female means are examined for some of the modern and prehistoric populations. The results indicate a strong association between some of the sub-Saharan Middle Stone Age (MSA) specimens, and the Nazlet Khater mandible.) Furthermore, the results suggest that variability between African populations during the Neolithic and Protohistoric periods was more pronounced than the range of variability observed among recent African and Levantine populations. Results also demonstrate a general reduction in the degree of sexual dimorphism during the Holocene. However, this pattern of reduction pattern varies by geographic location and is not uniform across the African continent. Copyright 2000 Academic Press.
|
|
|
Post by Vitor on Jun 8, 2004 12:07:46 GMT -5
I don't know about etihiopia... but there are one big fact I thought you should know:
1. humans arise from africa.
And that makes a lot of implications...
the most important is more time to genetic divergence...
That is why there are a lot more genetic diversity in sub-saharan africa, than in the rest of the world.
Europeans are more closer to each other, than some black africans are with each other ...even in a neighbour tribe... that is a fact!
My opinion? there are a lot more "races" in "black" africa than all the other races outside africa combined...
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Jun 8, 2004 12:49:02 GMT -5
Said, you can stuff your negrocentric congoid negro quotes and links up your ugly black arse. And make some room for Greenberg and Ehret, they deserve pride and place up your rectum.
Keep posting negrophilic, negromaniacal, negrocentric congoid BS you piece of infated, pigmented integument - I will keep attacking. I am immuned to cyberkooks like you. I am sure that there are many millions of your muslim brethrens in Egypt who will have your guts for garters for denying their ancestors achievements and racial rights. And East Africans are very anti Congoid. They hate negroes like you because you are negro and they are not. Don't kid yourself, you are a type of gorilla to them. Same with the North Africans, they hate negroes. Same in Arabia, the Levant, Turkey - they hate congoids. It is called xenophobia, hatred of what is foreign or different.
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 8, 2004 12:58:52 GMT -5
Said, you can stuff your negrocentric congoid negro quotes and links up your ugly black arse. And make some room for Greenberg and Ehret, they deserve pride and place up your rectum. You don't want to be alone with your pitchfork so now you want me to join you. East Africans are very anti-Congoid? ? Prove it bitch! Another stupid, fruitless graeme theory and quote North Africans hate Negroes? Yeah stupid, the Satanic troll tries to speak for other people Bitch go back to hell, you with your pitchfork shoved up your identity crisis confused ass. My last post was pure knowledge with studies and what do your bitch ass does? make up more bullshit like the shit you just said above. bitch slapping you is fun because you make up more shit as we go along
|
|
|
Post by Said Mohammad on Jun 8, 2004 13:01:10 GMT -5
In fact, from now on, I'll call this 'Negrocentrism'. Rephrase: In fact, from now on, I'll call this 'ad-hominem argument strawmanism"
|
|
|
Post by Agrippa on Jun 8, 2004 14:45:04 GMT -5
What does this say about other Caucasoid admixture?
Or selective trends?
So or so, Aethiopids are no typical Negrids but have a intemediate although somewhat more on the Negrid side position.
|
|
Afro
Full Member
Posts: 248
|
Post by Afro on Jun 8, 2004 17:13:17 GMT -5
Graeme, I think you need to calm down. I already explained my input on the statue thing, it was just something I brought up, nothing more nothing less. And I also said that I don't believe Egypt was Negroid either. And I never mentioned any specific names so its therefore appearent that I wasn't trying to downgrade any certain archeologist or Anthropologist work. Its appearent from what else you have said in this topic though that you have no problem with just degrading negroids. I take it that you believe blantant racism is somehow better then Nordicism or Afrocentrism though.... I don't know about etihiopia... but there are one big fact I thought you should know: 1. humans arise from africa. And that makes a lot of implications... the most important is more time to genetic divergence... That is why there are a lot more genetic diversity in sub-saharan africa, than in the rest of the world. Europeans are more closer to each other, than some black africans are with each other ...even in a neighbour tribe... that is a fact! My opinion? there are a lot more "races" in "black" africa than all the other races outside africa combined... I remember hearing of tribes in Black Africa being more GENETICALLY closer to Nordic Swedes then other Black Africans, but that doesn't mean these tribes are related to caucasians though. Don't you think that ancestry plays a bigger part in whose more related to who then genetics??? And I'm not saying that Ethiopians are or are not related to Negroids, but they due probably share more in common physically then either does with North Africans or Europeans.
|
|