...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
Mohamed Hussein Tantawi
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by kenndo: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by argyle104: [qb] People, take a look at the thread below and view kenndo's racial pseudoscience get dismantled. Folks, kenndo is a black American negro. That explains much of his stupidity and dependence on white propaganda. [/qb][/QUOTE]I am not a american negro has you put it,but i am black.I guess you have to be american to be afro-centric or something,how dumb of you. no i am not using pseudoscience,but what i read so far. Most modern nubians today STILL look like most africans,meaning black. KEY -WORD STILL, GREEKS AND ROMANS WROTE WHAT THEY BASICALLY LOOK LIKE,in the nile valley south of egypt.they had kinky hair, thick lips, and on average dark skin. That's sound like what you see in most black africans basically,nothing pseudoscience about that to me. Nubians do look black and i just left at that,nothing pseudoscience about that.I would say the same thing when it comes to the mande. A CLEAR POINT ,if i was making a movie about the vikings, i would put in first to star in it folks who look like more a german or the english before i put in greek or white arab or a northern indian. If i can find anyone from these first groups then i put in a greek.so let's not pretend YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT.you know exactly what i mean. same with east asians. i would put in a person who looks more like the average chinese from japan to play in the role of a a person from han chinese period,before i put in someone from burma.yes they are all east asians in the end and look it,but you want to be a correct has you can. next in line would be some from burma then someone from poland,so let' not pretend.IN END ALL THESE folks look east asian even if they are diverse,you could tell a asian from a european,that' my main point. nobody ever goes around saying that a southeast asian looks nothing like a chinese.we see slight diferrences on average(not all the times)but there is a basic look on average the share,but when come to blacks we are so diverse we suppose to look nothing alike,and that basically not true. There is a basic look the average african does have or still share with each other and there is nothing to be ashamed OF WHEN SAYING THAT. read chancellor williams book destruction of black civilization . He knows how blacks are diverse because he spent time in africa ,but he also says there is a basic phenotype africans has a whole share,just like east asians and whites. Another point he never says the african peoples,he always says african people,meaning we are one people COMING FROM THE SAME ORIGIN. I will always believe that. Why you using negro? that term is out of date. ANYWAY the thread you brought up,That was years ago,when i still was going by some old info,the term flat noses i should have use instead of broad,and at the time i thought most amuxites were mixed going by old info that i have learn years ago. I since change a FEW views since then by coming here,but my overall views all still closer to dr.clarke,ben,chancellor williams and diop,with few modifications AND UPDATED INFO some of these scholars i just mention got wrong or were out of date,so my basic afro-centred views will not change for anybody here. I KNOW diop was not afro-centric like dr.williams,but he was basically afro-centred and a africanist. So my approach to history is closer to him and dr. williams,but my social views and politics is closer to dr. williams and if you read destruction of black civilization by him you will know where I am basically coming from. This means if they were alive today they would not be calling the fula mixed or axumites mixed either because back then they were going by outdated info,but their basic views on history and how to approach it will not have change either. I think in the end diop's views change on fula too and maybe the axumites,but am not sure. DR. williams book to me still is really good when it comes to early history and modern history,he made a few mistakes and has some outdated info,but i do not abandon my african scholars that i have respect for years. I take in the updated views to a point,while sticking the the basic view of these scholars. You just don't throw away the baby with the bath water just because a few mistakes and a few outdated info are in these books,because their overall approach when it comes to african history still hits the mark has far has i am concern. Even dr. clarke before he died change his views on the fula but he hardly change his views on modern africa,so when it did come to modern africa, AND WHERE IT WAS GOING he was really out of date,but that's another story. So my views are basically correct from reading from men like these and Carter G. Woodson. Leave it up to you to bring back the past.IT MUST HAVE TAKEN you alot of time,wasted time,to do that. so shut up. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3