...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
"The Base" at work- spreading the word and schooling hapless chumps
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Trollkillah # Ish Gebor: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [qb] ^^ The lack of archaeological research alone in West Africa is ridiculous and pathetic. Some make the excuse that political conflicts in that region make archaeology difficult, yet conflicts in the Western part of Africa are not as big a problem as they are in Central Africa or even parts of the Nile Valley. The truth is the (predominantly white) Western archaeological scholars have little to no interest in West Africa no doubt due to ignorance on that very region. I mean look how recent sites like the [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=004711]Eredo Ramparts[/URL] and [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=print_topic;f=15;t=003635]Tichitt-Walata[/URL] were discovered and seem to only [i]scratch the surface[/i] of West Africa's ancient history and advanced civilizations of the past. [URL=http://www.suppressedhistories.net/articles/racism_history.html]Eurocentric Doctrine #s 6 & 9:[/URL][i] IF IT WAS GREAT, IT MUST HAVE BEEN WHITE: If advanced science, art, or architecture is found in Africa or South America, then Phoenecians, Greeks, Celts, Vikings (or, in the extreme case, space aliens) must be invoked to explain their presence. (Here, whiteness often functions as a relative concept, as "lighter than.") This bias gives rise to a pronounced tendency to date American or African cultures later than warranted, and as a result dating for these regions is constantly having to be revised further back into the past as evidence of greater antiquity piles up. The AFRICAN GAP DOCTRINE: After examining the first humans hundreds of thousands of years ago, this historical approach completely skips over most of the African archaeological record. It discusses ancient Egypt but ascribes its civilization to "the Middle East," denying its African identity and archaeological connections with Saharan and southern Nilotic civilizations. Saharan civilization, Ile-Ife or Mwanamutapa are not discussed at all. Africa is simply dropped from historical consideration until the era of European slaving and colonization, when it is portrayed as culturally and technologically deficient. The existence of female spheres of power in Africa is ignored.[/i] ^ Of course in the case of #6, Euronuts now attribute Africa's ancient achievements to prehistoric Eurasians. [b]LOL[/b] :D [/qb][/QUOTE]As you spoke on conflict areas. East Africa is the place where mostly conflict are, subduing Central Africa. This is why it surprises me when genetic studies profile the Horn of Africa. Especially those studies I from during the 90s and the late studies we see now are usually based on early studies from the 90s. I have always wondered how they did those studies under such horrific conditions. Especially when you balance cost vs effectiveness and efficiency. "1982 Ethiopian-Somali Border War Djiboutian Civil War 1991 - 1994 Ethiopian-Eritrean War 1998 - 2000, between Eritrea and Ethiopia Somali Civil War 1986–present (several issues involved) Operation Restore Hope - 1992 - 1993, UN intervention War in Somalia - 2006 - 2009, Ethiopian intervention" [QUOTE]result dating for these regions is constantly having to be revised further back into the past as evidence of greater antiquity piles up [/QUOTE]Awesome statement. The most recent claim by them is, caucasoids entered Africa 40-Kyr ago. [/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