posted
A few days ago, I had this exchange with Lioness.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: You make an excellent case for whites to continue to dominate blacks. If white people would allow black people to rise, black people will kill them and make them into leather products. -maybe you should keep this future leather industry thing hush hush.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Interesting comment with many disparate points, but is it really true? In particular, do Whites really dominate blacks? Seems to me, like the Albinism issue, we may be dealing with White fantasy rather than fact.
Being that it was Lioness, not exactly the sharpest tack, I let it go at that.
But then I read this newstory: Afghan pilot opens fire, killing 9 Americans.
Apparently all concerned said the same thing: he was not Taliban, on the contrary, he had bravely fought against the Taliban for many years. But he did have money troubles, and he, like many Afghans, were simply tired of the ongoing war. He wanted foreigners gone!
The undeclared end-game in Iraq and Afghanistan is "Nation-building". But history tell us that "Nation-building" happens as a result of local coalescence AGAINST the foreign occupiers. There is not one instance in history, where a foreign power has successfully established a stable, lasting government in a foreign country. Sooner or later, the locals drive them out, and replace it with their own.
So don't White people read their own history books? Of course they do! But then, why do they continue with policies that have been shown time, and time again, to be doomed to failure?
Then I thought about what Lioness had said: "You make an excellent case for whites to continue to dominate blacks". Now when I first read that, I thought, "Crazy Lioness" only a fool would really think that in this modern age - that's from a hundred years ago! And then it occurred to me, wait a minute, maybe Lioness is speaking the conventional White wisdom. I have always spoken of White myth and delusion, but I only meant that in regards to history. But maybe Whites really DO think that they can dictate to everyone else, even today. So I decided to look into it: Does White delusion and racial myth, play a part in White foreign policy?
As an interesting note, that has relevance, and speaks to White delusion: In all the White countries, they speak of Blacks as being "Minorities".
Total estimated World Population = 6.6 billion
Black of one kind or another = 3.8 Billion (conservative). Light Skinned Mixed (East Asians) = 1.4 billion Pure-White = 1.2 billion (generous). Light Skinned Mixed (North Africa, Middle East, etc.) perhaps 200 million.
So, as it turns out, those people that Whites call "Minorities" are actually the great majority of the worlds people.
Lets see how this White "Delusion" plays out in World affairs!
The Korean War (1950 -1953) was a military conflict between the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey, South Korea. And North Korea, supported by the People's Republic of China.
Result - Stalemate and armistice.
The Indochina War (Vietnam and France) 1946 - 1954.
Result: Vietnam divided between North and South Vietnam - French kicked OUT!
The Vietnam War (1965 - 1973) between North Vietnam and the United states, Canada, Thailand, Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines.
Result: All foreign forces withdrawn, the Nation of Vietnam RE-UNIFIED!
Europeans in Lebanon (1982-1983)
U.S. President Ronald Reagan organized a new MNF with France and Italy. On September 29, this new force entered Beirut. This new force consisted of 1,400 Marines (later increased to 1,800). France's contingent of 1,500 paratroopers. And 1,400 Italian troops.
The MNF was given a devastating blow on October 23, when truck bombs driven by suicide bombers hit the U.S. Marine and French Paratrooper barracks in Beirut, killing 241 American servicemen and 58 French soldiers. With this incident, the MNF suffered its greatest number of casualties and drew calls to withdraw from Lebanon.
Result: All foreign forces withdrawn.
The Soviet War in Afghanistan (1979 – 1989)
Result: Russian Withdrawal.
United States intervention in Somalia in (1992–1993).
Result: United States withdrawal.
The Iraq War (2003 - present)
Ongoing - No result.
Afghanistan (2001–present)
Ongoing - No result.
The United States occupation of Haiti (1915 -1934)
Result: Success!
The United States occupation of Haiti (1993 -1994)
Result: Success!
The United States Invasion of Grenada (October 25 – December 15, 1983).
Result: Success!
The United States Invasion of Panama (December 20, 1989 – January 12, 1990).
Result: Success!
The Bosnian War or the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina (1994 - 1995) between Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina Republic and NATO.
Result: Success!
It seems clear to me, that if Whites want success, they must either fight other Whites, or only fight non-Whites with no Army.
But in any case, I don't think that there are any who are willing to accept White dominance. Sorry lioness, you're trippin!Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike, We have to be realistic. The whites exterminated the Native Americans[all the Americas] and the Aborigines[Australia and Tasmania] before the people there had time to kick them out.
I think you numbers for blacks is just too high. I know that Indians in India and and the people of places like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, etc. don't see themselves as related to blacks.
If you do the numbers then about 90% of the people who are under the black umbrella world-wide are in Africa.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: A few days ago, I had this exchange with Lioness.
The exchange was with Egmond not you.
Egmond's original comment:
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried:
I really feel we should incorporate new findings, and not get stuck in the same rut: black nobles were farming white Europeans for their lovely white skins, using them for bookbinding, clothing and shoes. This cruelty let to the fury of the French Revolution and the hatred of all blacks. whites are in great fear this might happen again to them, so they hate and oppres all blacks. even here on these pages.
I will never look at white leather goods in the same way....
But whites should get over their trauma, to be used to bind books and shoe leather, like blacks got over slavery.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: [qb]Typical "get over it" argument.
You make an excellent case for whites to continue to dominate blacks. If white people would allow black people to rise, black people will kill them and make them into leather products. -maybe you should keep this future leather industry thing hush hush.
posted
There are more light skin than dark skin people in the world. And as sexual selection continues to favor white/light skin, in a few centuries, the world will completely become white-washed.
posted
Lamin - Thank you for commenting. Please do not take my response personally. But you response does represent another facet of White fantasy and myth generation - African American programing.
Though AAs view themselves as the essential Black people, and the most knowledgeable and progressive Black people. The fact is, that a Black person from just about any other part of the world, will look at those numbers and say: Ya, that's just about right!
Obviously then, there is a difference in perception between AAs and other Blacks. My numbers are real, but not to you. The reason for that is quite simple, you have been socially programed to accept the White mans false reality for you and your kind.
I find it quite interesting that you think of Blacks as being continental Africans only. But that is not the reality for the billions of Blacks outside of Africa. Many of whom may not even like Africans, as a matter of fact, many don't like Africans - even though they are prototypical Africans! But they nonetheless identify themselves as Blacks.
My point being, that your perception has nothing to do with reality, it is what the White man trained you to think.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lamin and all others, please pay close attention to the map that Confirming Truth just posted.
I am sure that there are those like Jari, who have been almost completely programed by Whites, and turns a deaf ear to everything that I say.
But the map that Confirming Truth just posted, is THE PERFECT example of how the White man controls the thinking of gullible Blacks who are ignorant of the world.
It seems innocent enough doesn't it? What, just a statistical map of the worlds racial population - right?
But to the ignorant Black, doesn't it convey a sense of irrelevance and smallness? No accident there folks, that is it's purpose.
I can't spend too much time on it right now. But lamin, please do this, look up the demographics for Brazil. No need to do any other if you don't want to.
Then compare the data with that innocent White mans map!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, no. Europeans are reducing in numbers. Plus, natural selection works differently in different places.
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: There are more light skin than dark skin people in the world. And as sexual selection continues to favor white/light skin, in a few centuries, the world will completely become white-washed.
posted
^Western culture is exerting its influence throughout the 2nd and 3rd world. How is it that natural selection works differently in different places? You must not be aware of skin whitening problems in Africa, Asia and the West Indies.
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: ^Western culture is exerting its influence throughout the 2nd and 3rd world. How is it that natural selection works differently in different places? You must not be aware of skin whitening problems in Africa, Asia and the West Indies.
Only an amateur doesn't know why natural selection works differently depending. Because, certain traits are advantageous in certain regions and thereby selected for. Like for example, light skin served no purpose in low latitude regions, therefore dark skin was selected for.
Skin whitening is not natural selection, that is non-seqitor. The fact remains, Europeans are reducing in numbers drastically.
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Only an amateur is too ignorant to know that the environment humans live in today is far less susceptible to natural environmental pressures. As well, human evolution is now being dictated by the technology, e.g., housing, which restricts the period humans are exposed to the sun. As such, the dark skin is no longer advantageous.
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: ^Only an amateur is too ignorant to know that the environment humans live in today is far less susceptible to natural environmental pressures.
Hm, lets see now. Who was it that suggested light skin was going to become predominant due to natural selection, you or me? Let me help, it was you. I simply showed you that
1)Europeans are a decreasing population
2)Natural Selection for light skin is improbable
3)How natural selection works differently (this was due to you asking *me*)
I know what you said is true. In the future populations will become more admixed. YOU made the claim that natural selection would effect modern populations, therefore you just contradicted yourself. I only responded to you with reasons why light skin wouldn't become predominant.
quote:As well, human evolution is now being dictated by the technology, e.g., housing, which restricts the period humans are exposed to the sun. As such, the dark skin is no longer advantageous.
That's stupid. I see no advantageous reason for white skin either based on what you said. The future population I'm guessing will be more admixed. Who knows.
Fact remains, Europeans are reducing in population size. Drastically
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see you are reading comprehension challenged.
This is what I said, "And as sexual selection continues to favor white/light ..."
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz':
Hm, lets see now. Who was it that suggested light skin was going to become predominant due to natural selection, you or me? Let me help, it was you. I simply showed you that
1)Europeans are a decreasing population
2)Natural Selection for light skin is improbable
3)How natural selection works differently (this was due to you asking *me*)
I know what you said is true. In the future populations will become more admixed. YOU made the claim that natural selection would effect modern populations, therefore you just contradicted yourself. I only responded to you with reasons why light skin wouldn't become predominant.
quote:As well, human evolution is now being dictated by the technology, e.g., housing, which restricts the period humans are exposed to the sun. As such, the dark skin is no longer advantageous.
That's stupid. I see no advantageous reason for white skin either based on what you said. The future population I'm guessing will be more admixed. Who knows.
Fact remains, Europeans are reducing in population size. Drastically
quote:I see you are reading comprehension challenged.
This is what I said, "And as sexual selection continues to favor white/light ..."
OK...
How does that change the fact that you were wrong? Sexual selection cannot be a reason for light skin increasing if there is a fertility decline in Europe.
-------------------- L Writes: Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
RFLOL!!!! You got to be kiddin me if you think Europeans are the only ones with light skin. RFLOL!!!!!
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz' How does that change the fact that you were wrong? Sexual selection cannot be a reason for light skin increasing if there is a fertility decline in Europe.
posted
That was never implicated. Nor is the issue of how many populations have light skin entirely relevant.
Point being that you argued white/light skin would increase due to sexual selection. Are we seeing that though? No. We are seeing the European population decreasing at a significant rate. Which argues against your suggestion that white/light skin is going to increase as a result of natural selection, when instead it is decreasing as a result of infertility in Europe. So that puts a big whole in your theory, or else the European population would not be reduced by such a significant amount and being replaced with immigrants
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Confirming Truth Mike did not posed the question on the various shade of skin he posed the question of "Whites" in the sense of them being European and their attitude towards others IE Non Whites Non Euros the fact is even in the U.S perhaps the largest collection of self identified whites will be out numbered in a few short yrs all that clamoring in France and as far north a Denmark and Sweden folks are creating laws to limit the migration of the dark peoples,Just last nite I had a bunch o Brits and they were peppered with dark faces..often times the colonialist became colonized.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Surprisingly few seem interested in the subject. I thought for sure that it would elicit spirited debate.
Anyway, I shall endeavor to persevere.
Lets consider this skin color map that Confirming Truth so generously provided. It reflects the work of Felix von Luschan (1854-1924) and Renato Biasutti (1878-1965).
.
.
If anyone was so moved as to look-up the demographics of Brazil or many other countries, they found that the map has absolutely no basis in reality or fact.
Here I offer a quote from a qualified White source.
Von Luschan's chromatic scale is a method of classifying skin color. It is also called the von Luschan scale or von Luschan's scale. It is named after its inventor, Felix von Luschan. The equipment consists of 36 opaque glass tiles which were compared to the subject's skin, ideally in a place which would not be exposed to the sun (such as under the arm). Though the von Luschan scale was used extensively throughout the first half of the twentieth century in the study of race and anthropometry, it was considered problematic, even by its practitioners, because it was very inconsistent. In many instances, different investigators would give different readings of the same person. It was largely abandoned by the early 1950s, replaced instead by methods utilizing reflectance.
Did everyone get that? In the first instance we had two supposed White scientists producing crack-pot White nonsense. That was then replaced by other supposed White scientists, producing new crack-pot White nonsense.
Now lets go to Confirming Truths argument with Calabooz'. Confirming Truth said this:
"There are more light skin than dark skin people in the world. And as sexual selection continues to favor white/light skin, in a few centuries, the world will completely become white-washed."
But here again, this White persons assertion has absolutely no basis in reality or fact.
I offer a Newstory from: The New York Times
By RUSSELL SHORTO Published: June 29, 2008 A Dying Breed? As the birthrate in European countries drops well below the "replacement rate" — that is, an average of 2.1 children born to every woman — the declining population will first be felt in the playgrounds.
So what does Confirming Truth and the people doing the skin color maps and other studies, have in common?
Their work and assertions reflect what they WANT to believe, not what is fact. Whites have become so deluded by their own Bullsh1t, that they can no longer distinguish between Fact and Fantasy. It's what they want to believe, therefore it must be true. And when the truth is so strong that it cannot be ignored - they simply make something up - they lie!
I was greatly amused this morning, when xyyman confidently declared that he had discovered the definitive answer to the question as to whether or not Whites were Albinos.
And that goes back to my earlier statements about AAs. The ridiculous thing, is that xyyman really expects some White scientist to produce data and exclaim "There it is, I have proven that White people are Albinos". er xyyman, their job is to hide it!
And that is why I made my comments about AAs. I could be wrong on this, but I really don't think that there is another population of Blacks in the world, who would really expect Whites to provide data proving that they are Albinos.
I mean, that goes against universal concepts of common sense. Yet many AAs would really expect it. Since AAs are not stupid people, the answer must be that their minds have been conditioned to accept White pronouncements, without independent though.
Naturally, I am of course not talking about all, or perhaps not even the majority of AAs, but I do see it.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Confirming Truth Mike did not posed the question on the various shade of skin he posed the question of "Whites" in the sense of them being European and their attitude towards others IE Non Whites Non Euros the fact is even in the U.S perhaps the largest collection of self identified whites will be out numbered in a few short yrs all that clamoring in France and as far north a Denmark and Sweden folks are creating laws to limit the migration of the dark peoples,Just last nite I had a bunch o Brits and they were peppered with dark faces..often times the colonialist became colonized.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: in a few short yrs all that clamoring in France and as far north a Denmark and Sweden folks are creating laws to limit the migration of the dark peoples,
many of the migrants in question lil Mikey refers to as "Turks"
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: the largest collection of self identified whites will be out numbered in a few short yrs all that clamoring in France and as far north a Denmark and Sweden folks are creating laws to limit the migration of the dark peoples
Like this law:
quote: Exclusive: French football chiefs' secret plan to whiten 'les Bleus'
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: in a few short yrs all that clamoring in France and as far north a Denmark and Sweden folks are creating laws to limit the migration of the dark peoples,
many of the migrants in question lil Mikey refers to as "Turks"
I hope so, get them out of the south.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Fance national team coach Laurent Blanc said he was "favourable" for a change in the selection criteria for youth talent as of the age of 12 to 13 years in order to favour those who sources said he described as having "our culture, our history". The sources added that Blanc cited the current would football champions Spain, reportedly saying: "The Spanish, they say ‘we don't have a problem. We have no blacks'"
Exclusive: French football chiefs' secret plan to whiten 'les Bleus' But off curse the coach last name is White.. Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
All I can say is WOW...Could not even read the whole article because it's just an disgusting idea.
To think that African and North African players will not be able to play for the country they are born in is just stupid, foolish and ignorant.
They tried to make it "hush hush" yet the article has been thrown open to all people who would read it. Hopefully this racist idea stops before it gets any steam....To me they leaked this article just to see how people would react to this nonsense claims.
Makes all those racism commercials seem like nothing...All the build up of stamping out racism and the French team wants to do something like this??? Really. Unity is the way to go and you hope the French people wakeup and slam what was written.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There have been various empires. The Egyptians had the longest, the Romans a thousand years. There are countries today which have the most powerful hardware and bombs. Usually they don't use the maximum force and kill everybody they can unless their own survival is at stake, "total war" as in WWI and II. However they do still kill a lot of people. But Being the most powerful does not mean you can achieve every type of war objective. That is the delusion. Sometimes the wars are a total failure. Other times part failure, part success a mixed result. Many wars are started where even the more powerful nation cannot predict the outcome. Full colonization can be easier to do than "nation building" but it is more unethical.
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
But again with colonization the colonizer often become the colonized as people from different parts of the empire have a tendency to migrate to the colonizer's capitol cities and carve out residence at times out numbering the locals and flex political,cultural and economic will.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: But again with colonization the colonizer often become the colonized as people from different parts of the empire have a tendency to migrate to the colonizer's capitol cities and carve out residence at times out numbering the locals and flex political,cultural and economic will.
today it's done with client states and puppets another item is assimilation, case in point Obama and Colin Powell
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lioness - I was just looking over the skin color map by Felix von Luschan (1854-1924) and Renato Biasutti (1878-1965) again.
The more you look at it, the stupider it becomes. And then it occurred to me: What would make grown men, whose time is valuable, spend incalculable time (I don't know how many years they spent on it), creating such nonsense? And still doing it!
Better yet, why would institutions spend their limited research money, on such projects? I mean think about it, these people spent years running around the world, measuring the reflectance of peoples skin.
Why on Earth would anyone want to do such nonsense?
But then clarity came to me: Every investigation tries to answer a question.
So what was the question they were trying to answer?
WHY ARE WE DIFFERENT?
And here is the really stupid part of it.
Instead of measuring the reflectance of Black peoples skin.
They should have simply ASKED Black people:
WHY ARE WE DIFFERENT?
The simple and truthful answer would have been immediate!
BECAUSE YOU'RE AN ALBINO ASSHOLE!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok, if he restricts "white" to the continent of Europe then he has a case to make. There are studies which show that the birth rate of Whites in Europe is on a decline. But if we go outside the bounds of Europe and look at the "white" paradigm from a global perspective, then I will continue to assert that white/light skin will become the prevailing complexion due to sexual selection and technology.
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Confirming Truth Mike did not posed the question on the various shade of skin he posed the question of "Whites" in the sense of them being European and their attitude towards others IE Non Whites Non Euros the fact is even in the U.S perhaps the largest collection of self identified whites will be out numbered in a few short yrs all that clamoring in France and as far north a Denmark and Sweden folks are creating laws to limit the migration of the dark peoples,Just last nite I had a bunch o Brits and they were peppered with dark faces..often times the colonialist became colonized.
quote:Ok, if he restricts "white" to the continent of Europe then he has a case to make
I did no such thing.
quote:There are studies which show that the birth rate of Whites in Europe is on a decline. But if we go outside the bounds of Europe and look at the "white" paradigm from a global perspective, then I will continue to assert that white/light skin will become the prevailing complexion due to sexual selection and technology.
This is so stupid.
The point is that sexual selection is not favoring light skin because you see light skin decreasing significantly as opposed to increasing. Which argues against your entire position that light skin would be increasing.
Now explain why technological advances would favor light skin of dark skin? And then explain how your desirous suggestion that dark skin would decrease due to less time outdoors makes any sense
PS, you actually see Indians rising in population size along with Hispanics in the US and Europe is being replaced by Immigrants. Not to forget how China's one child policy may have a drastic effect since females are being killed in favor of males
Males>females=bad probable decrease
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
Housing, clothing, air climate control, diet, whitening skin cream, more jobs located indoors, and et cetera diminish the effects of environmental pressures that would normally cause the skin to darken. As well, light skin is preferred by most dark men so they seek out light women, thus, the breeding out of dark skin genes. Dude, you have got to be kidding if you need me to explain this to you. Common fvcking sense would tell you in prehistoric to historic period, the dominant skin type was dark skin. Fast fwd to modern, technological time and what do you have? AN EXPLOSION OF LIGHT SKIN RIVALING DARK SKIN.
YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING!
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: ^Surely you fvcking jest! Right?
Housing, clothing, air climate control, diet, whitening skin cream, more jobs located indoors, and et cetera diminish the effects of environmental pressures that would normally cause the skin to darken. As well, light skin is preferred by most dark men so they seek out light women, thus, the breeding out of dark skin genes. Dude, you have got to be kidding if you need me to explain this to you. Common fvcking sense would tell you in prehistoric to historic period, the dominant skin type was dark skin. Fast fwd to modern, technological time and what do you have? AN EXPLOSION OF LIGHT SKIN RIVALING DARK SKIN.
YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING!
Confirming Truth - A few days ago Lioness came up with a lucid thought, and I nearly fell out of my chair - and now YOU!!! Will wonders never end.
But typical of White delusionary thinking, you over extended!
Just curious, did you come up with this yourself, or are you just rewording my concepts, visa vie ancient Europe and the middle East?
In any case, why not try to flesh-out your point. It should make for interesting debate.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^What is there to flesh-out? I believe I was succint in what I had to say. I mean, sexual selection favors white/light over black/dark. Do you contest this, Mike? Technology has thwarted the effects of the sun on human skin. Do you disagree with this, Mike?
Posts: 2025 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gigantic: ^What is there to flesh-out? I believe I was succint in what I had to say. I mean, sexual selection favors white/light over black/dark. Do you contest this, Mike? Technology has thwarted the effects of the sun on human skin. Do you disagree with this, Mike?
America may become more Hispanic in the future, Mexicans and others, browner Black people assume, well that must not be as bad at least they are closer in complexion to us. This is because we have have been trained to look at all conflict as based on skin color. But some of the worst wars come out of people of the same color killing each other.
If America and Europe become browner, eventually over thousands of years if they remain in Northern latitudes their skin will lighten
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^You freggin idiot! You are making my point! If the phoenotype trend is leaning to the mulatto type, then ytf are you disagreeing with me, nimcompoop?!
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Settle down Albino boy. You fail to consider the other parts of the equation.
Since we have no demographics for the other related areas like North Africa and Arabia. We must use India - which by the way, has the longest history for this dynamic.
In India, there is still a very large Pure-Black population (after 3,500 years of available admixture). And in Bangladesh (which was until recently, part of India), the population is likewise, for the most part unmixed.
Therefore the rise of Mulatto societies, has more to do with the availability of choice-less females (females that can be taken on a whim), than it does with sexual selection.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Hey turd, wanting to be light skin is PERVASIVE in India; 2/3rds Indian women apply skin bleaching cream, numbnut! Females wanting to be males is not pervasive in any society. Whites tanning is fvcking natural, that is how their skin reacts to the sun, retard.
You sir are an epic fail.
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike, I am not brainwashed by anybody. I have seen all kinds of people and here in Africa nobody ever takes an Indian from India as black. In South Africa people can easily tell who is white(European), Indian, and African. The so-called "coloureds" are a problematic group because many look just like South African African while others do not.
I don't know why you want to lump West Asians into the African group. I have seen many Turks and many, many Lebanese and I just don't count them as black.
Africa's population is some 1 billion. The black population in the U.S. is some 40 million; the black population in Central America and the Caribbean area is some 15 million; the black population of South America[ I have been to Brazil a few times--Salvador and Sao Paolo] and I would say that about 20% of South America's population of 400 million is black.
Obviously, if 80% of someone's ancestors are European and Native American and the rest African I will not classify them as black.
So all in all my numbers still count: the vast majority of blacks in this world live in Africa. North Africa has about 160 million people of which some 30% are blacks.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: ^Hey turd, wanting to be light skin is PERVASIVE in India; 2/3rds Indian women apply skin bleaching cream, numbnut! Females wanting to be males is not pervasive in any society. Whites tanning is fvcking natural, that is how their skin reacts to the sun, retard.
You sir are an epic fail.
The Idiots quote: "Whites tanning is fvcking natural"
Oh Ya, 100% NATURAL!!!!
.
Damn Boy, you sure are stupid!Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Housing, clothing, air climate control, diet, whitening skin cream, more jobs located indoors, and et cetera diminish the effects of environmental pressures that would normally cause the skin to darken.
None of this is sexual selection, sorry. Further, you have yet to demonstrate how any of these would make the dark skinned population decrease.
Skin bleaching is a sort of mentality that seems to be brought on by European domination, in my opinion. If Africans had the same type of influence, then I'm sure you would see peopled darkening their skin. Europeans already tan so much, should I then take that as an argument that dark skin will increase? No. And neither should you for skin bleaching, not genetic, but social
quote:As well, light skin is preferred by most dark men so they seek out light women, thus, the breeding out of dark skin genes
Not true according to the statistics which shows 3.7% of married Black American women and 8.4% of married Black American men had a non-Black spouse:
That's for 2006. And so called 'black genes' are actually pigmentation genes that every human carries. I highly doubt that a specific phenotype will be gone forever.
quote:Common fvcking sense would tell you in prehistoric to historic period, the dominant skin type was dark skin. Fast fwd to modern, technological time and what do you have? AN EXPLOSION OF LIGHT SKIN RIVALING DARK SKIN.
Lol... sure. One of the major light skinned populations, European, is have a serious population decline. I suppose you take that as meaning a 'population boom'. Meanwhile, in places like China, they have a one child policy. Unfortunately, males are preferred over females, so what happens when a female is born there? Guess. The end result being more males than females, what do you think will happen?
In the mean time, dark skinned populations like Indian are soon about to take over China as being most populated.
Light skinned populations are actually in a decline
-------------------- L Writes: Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Idiot, for the most part, Whites tan naturally. Stop hating on their ability to be sunkissed! Damn! You are such a jealous, silly boy!
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:^^Idiot, for the most part, Whites tan naturally. Stop hating on their ability to be sunkissed! Damn! You are such a jealous, silly boy!
Exactly, and darker skinned people don't get light naturally. Which means it isn't a natural things, which means it is social. So stop using 'skin bleaching' as justification for your desirous statements.
Posts: 1502 | From: Dies Irae | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Excuse me? Sun tanning is a natural biological process of human photosynthesis. It ain't socially engineered (LOL)!!
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic