posted
How can the Elamites be darker than the Egyptians? They were the original people in their land, right?
Also, where are the original locations of any medium (caramel) skinned people. It seems like complexion just skipped from black to white, in certain longitudes, although I know this is not the case. I know of the blacks in Greece (not claiming Greece as black), but on what latitudes were there mid-complexioned people indigenous to those latitudes? Just wondering.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Box. Please check out post by Supercar... "Forces behind geographical Skin color gradients". It is a VEry Very good post that should answer most of your question. If you still have questions after review I strongly suggest calling out Super for guidance/further comments. You will not be disappointed
-------------------- anacalypsis Posts: 142 | From: University Height, NJ, USA | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
How can the Elamites be darker than the Egyptians? They were the original people in their land, right?
Also, where are the original locations of any medium (caramel) skinned people.
It seems like complexion just skipped from black to white, in certain longitudes, although I know this is not the case. I know of the blacks in Greece (not claiming Greece as black), but on what latitudes were there mid-complexioned people indigenous to those latitudes? Just wondering.
The archaeological and craniometric evidence make it clear that the Elamites were Negroes. The fact that they were Negroes, along with textural and linguistic evidence make it clear that the Elamites were members of the African populations.
But bones can not tell us the skin color of the Elamites. What we can do is study the skin tone of Elamite iconography and speculate on the color of the Elamites. But we can not be sure what the skin color of the Elamites was without skin samples from Elamite skeletons.
posted
What published studies are there of ancient Elamite remains? Could you please provide references to this Mr. Winters?
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
What published studies are there of ancient Elamite remains? Could you please provide references to this Mr. Winters?
I read the book some time ago, but you can find information on this matter in:
Dieulafoy, Marcel A. L'acropole de Suse, d'après les fouilles exécutées en 1884, 1885, 1886; sous les auspices du Musée du Louvre (1890-1892) Paris: Hachette, 1892
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you have anything a little more recent than the 1800's?
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
hypothesis testing, as one element of scientific objective criteria starts from some simple observation. How does my hypothesis measure up to the comparison? As example, who were the Phoenicians? and which modern day groups approximate their ethnicity? a. Libyans b. Lebanese c. Greeks (a stretch but that will work)
Why? We test the 3 groups and compare as much as we can and even add a group not known to be associated with Phoenicians and extrapolate from there.
Take another case-Scythians. Modern day Sikhs amongst others lay claim to this group and perhaps SIlk ROad remains found in desert area! show/point to Scythian influence! We follow a similar pattern for determining fact from fiction. Obviously not all people in a population will show that link that solidifies claim but certainly a strong linkage will determine the location they inhabited.
Elamites and others follow a similar path. Lost in Antiquity, we may say but it is more of a whitewash of antiquity and FEAR (false evidence appearing real)!!!!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Do you have anything a little more recent than the 1800's? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. The contemporary sites just discuss the fact that the Elamites were of the ancient Mediterranean type.
Elamite
quote: Researches done on the Elamite skeletons show their racial closeness to the Sumerians and Dravidians of Indus Valley, while their language, at least in its latest form, shows very little connections with these cultures.
If we analyse the features of pre-dynastic Egyptian or Sumerian skeletons, then the physical anthropology shows a skeletal type consistent with that found in Swiss cist graves, the London plague pits or the tumulus mounds of Europe. The craniological evidence of pre-dynastic Egyptian or Sumerian skeletons alone shows the long faces of European Caucasoid skull types. Egypt and Mesopotamia were, amongst several other countries in the Middle East and Near East, European homelands before a mass exodus from those increasingly parched territories in about 5000-4000 BC.
Negroid Dravidians In his acceptance of a Negroid origin for Dravidians, Iyengar has foreshadowed modern thought by several decades. Several eminent linguists have now put forth the concept of an Afro-Dravidian language family or macro-group (Winters 1979). Thus, Iyengar notes,
"Topinard [footnote: Anthropology] divides the population of the Indian peninsula into three strata, (viz) the Black, Mongolian, and the Aryan. The remnants of the first are the Yenadis and Kurumbas. The second has spread over the plateaux of Central India by two lines of way, one to the north-east and the other to the north-west. The remnants of the first invasion are seen in the Dravidian or Tamil tribes, and those of the second in the Jhats. The third was the Aryan." (Iyengar 1925, p.24). He continues, "According to Haeckel [ftn. History of Creation], three of the twelve species of man - the Dravidas, Nubians and Mediterranese - agree in several characteristics which seem to establish a close relationship between them, and to distinguish them from the remaining species." (Iyengar 1925, p.29)
Foreshadowing McAlpin's establishment of an Elamo-Dravidian linguistic family, our savant notes, "According to the theory of Elamite origin for the Dravidian races, India was originally occupied by two batches of Elamite invaders, one taking the sea-route by the Persian Gulf and settling on the west coast of India, and the {p.28} other choosing the land-route through the Bolan Pass and occupying North India. The theory is based on the Puranic myths of the deluge and the Ark common to India and Elam, and on the so-called philological identity of words in Tamil and Accadian tongues." (Iyengar 1925 p.27-28) This should lay to rest any speculation that Iyengar entertained the unscientific Lemuria theory.
Iyengar further elaborated these concepts:
"Prof. A.H.Sayce, [ftn `The Remarkable Discoveries in India' Illustrated London News, Sep. 27, 1924 ] the famous Assyriologist, finds the inscribed `seals' or plaques brought to light at Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro identical with the Proto-Elamite "tablettes de comptibilite" discovered by De Morgan at Susa, and notices striking resemblance in the form and size of the plaques, the `unicorns', the pictographs, and numerals. The tablets {p.38} belong to the third millenium BC and extend from the age of the Babylonian king Manistusu (BC 2600) to that of the third Dynasty of Ur (BC.2300). Prof Sayce therefore believes that there was intercourse between Susa and the north-west of India in the third millenium BC." (Iyengar 1925, p.37-38) He continues,
"Z.A.Ragozin [ftn. vide Vedic India] regards the connection between the Dravidians and the first Babylonian Empire - the Babylonians of Shumero-Accad before the advent of the Semites as capable of easy explanation. Archaeological evidences establish the connection of India with Persia and Assyria. The Indian oblong sarcophagi discovered at Chingleput and North Arcot resemble those of Bagdad. The author of Manimekalai [ftn. M.Srinivasa Iyengar's Tamil Studies p.39] enumerates five methods of disposing of the dead as prevalent in his time among the Tamils. They were cremation, exposure in an open place to be eaten by jackals and vultures, burial, stuffing the corpse in natural pits, and the covering of it up with big earthen jars." (Iyengar 1925, p.28) Indeed, he question of Dravidian origins was one of the most important of Iyengar's work. "According to James Hornell, the Proto-Dravidians were a Mediterranean people who brought into India from their original home certain boat-types found in Egypt and the Levant. These settled for some time in Mesopotamia, and then came to India, the Brahui language in Baluchistan marking their presence there at one time. They absorbed politically and linguistically the Negritoes and a Proto-Polynesian stock, whom they found in South India. The result of this fusion of the incomers with the older inhabitants is the Dravidians of the historical period." (Iyengar 1925, p.30)
Marcellin Boule and Henri Vallois, in Fossil Man indicate that the Swiss skeletons were of Negroes as well as other skeletons found in ancient Europe . They note that "To sum up, in the most ancient skeletons from the Grotte des Enfants we have a human type which is readily comparable to modern types and especially to the Negritic or Negroid type" (p.289). They continue, "Two Neolithic individuals from Chamblandes in Switzerland are Negroid not only as regards their skulls but also in the proportions of their limbs. Several Ligurian and Lombard tombs of the Metal Ages have also yielded evidences of a Negroid element. Since the publication of Verneau's memoir, discoveries of other Negroid skeletons in Neolithic levels in Illyria and the Balkans have been announced. The prehistoric statues, dating from the Copper Age, from Sultan Selo in Bulgaria are also thought to protray Negroids. In 1928 Rene Bailly found in one of the caverns of Moniat, near Dinant in Belgium, a human skeleton of whose age it is difficult to be certain, but seems definitely prehistoric. It is remarkable for its Negroid characters, which give it a reseblance to the skeletons from both Grimaldi and Asselar (p.291).
Poe (1997), Keita (1993,1996), Carlson and Gerven (1979)and MacGaffey (1970) have made it clear that the so called ancient Mediterranean , Anatolian and Armenoid terms are euphemisms for the so-called "Brown Race" "Dynastic Race", "Hamitic Race",and etc. =African. These terms were used to deny any role of Black Africans in founding civilization., Racist Europeans claimed these Brown skinned whites the were the founders of civilization in Africa.
This racist view that came from the European idea that Blacks with European features should be classified and "caucasian". Africans or Negroes with so-called 'caucasian probably features' result from genetic drift and microevolution, not race mixing (Keita, 1996; Poe, 1997).
Around 7000 B.C. the first ancient Mediterranean people of a fairly tall stature not devoid of Negroid characteristics appears in the Sahara at Capsa (now Cafsa).These Mediterranean's are called Capsians.
This group of Africans flourished in an area extending from the western borders of North Africa into the southern Sahara. They lived on hillocks or slopes near water. But some Capsians lived on plains, which featured lakes and marshes. Their way of life continued from the Neolithic era up to the time of the Garamante.
Skeletons of the Mediterranean type have been found throughout Middle Africa, Southwest Asia, Mesopotamia, Indo-Pakistan, Central Asia and China. It is no secret that the founders of ancient Egypt, Elam, Sumer and the Indus Valley were all of the ancient Mediterranean type.
References
Carlson,D. and Van Gerven,D.P. (1979). Diffussion, biological determinism and bioculdtural adaptation in the Nubian corridor,American Anthropologist, 81, 561-580.
Keita,S.O.Y. (1993). Studies and comments on ancient Egyptian biological relationships, History in Africa, 20, 129-131.
Keita,S.O.Y.& Kittles,R.A. (1997). The persistence of racial thinking and the myth of racial divergence, American Anthropologist, 99 (3), 534-544.
MacGaffey,W.(1970). Comcepts of race in Northeast Africa. In J.D. Fage and R.A. Oliver, Papers in African Prehistory (pp.99-115), Camridge: Cambridge University Press.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Winters, when I ask for contemporary studies I don't mean fringe websites with no bibliography or external references. The term Mediterranean race was coined by Guilselpi Sergi to mean a brown skinned person with narrow features. He included many groups such as eastern Africans into their group. Nobody in anthropological circles uses the term Mediterranean race nor argues for the existence of such.
Most of the studies you cite go by outdated methdology that fell out of use after World War II such as the cephallic index and etc.
The Elamite languages is somewhat a mystery which some linguist point to a possible relation to Dravidian or other Austric languages. Sumerian also has been proposed to be Dravidian in origin.
btw, not all Elamite artifacts look Africoid to me. Lets observe this Elamite head:
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hello. There’s evidence the Elamites were black-skinned when instead of colorless rock they left their image in painted reliefs (see 5 and 6 and maybe 9):
Most of the studies you cite go by outdated methdology that fell out of use after World War II such as the cephallic index and etc.
Not really, you can compare the measurements done by these early scholars to contemporary indexs and determine the reliablity of the findings relating to Elamite skulls. I believe this is what Keita did in his craniometric studies of the Egyptians.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
The Elamite languages is somewhat a mystery which some linguist point to a possible relation to Dravidian or other Austric languages. Sumerian also has been proposed to be Dravidian in origin.
[/quote]
Not really the linguistic evidence indicates that Elamite is closely related to Dravidian and African languages . Linguistic evidence supporting this reality can be found in the following articles.
McAlpin, David. Elamite and Dravidian: Further Evidence of Relationship. Current Anthropology March, 1975 Vol.16(1):105-115.
Winters, Clyde Ahmad, "The Proto-Culture of the Dravidians ,Manding and Sumerians", Tamil Civilization 3, no1 (March 1985a) ,pages 1-9.
Winters, Clyde Ahmad, "The Indus Valley Writing and related Scripts of the 3rd Millennium BC", India Past and Present 2, no1 ( 1985b), pages 13-19.
Winters,Clyde Ahmad, "The genetic Unity between the Dravidian ,Elamite, Manding and Sumerian Languages", P Sixth ISAS ,1984, (Hong Kong:Asian Research Service,1985d) pages 1413-1425.
Winters,Clyde Ahmad,"Tamil,Sumerian and Manding and the Genetic Model",International Journal of Dravidian Linguistics,18,(1989) nol.
I also have a website where some of the linguistic data is discussed at :
posted
Mr. Winters, where is the contemporary peer reviewed journal articles discussing the affinities of Elamite remains? Everything you cited is from 1800's-1960's.
Even if we accept the old data is correct then where is the comparison using new computer models instead of old cephallic index studies?
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The archaeological and craniometric evidence make it clear that the Elamites were Negroes. The fact that they were Negroes, along with textural and linguistic evidence make it clear that the Elamites were members of the African populations.
I haven't heard of any sources on Elamite remains, but one thing is for certain and that is the Elamites were NOT Africans!!
Elamites are indigenous populations of Asia.
And as it has been said many times before black does NOT = African.
And "negro" is a dubious term as is "caucasian". Melanesians were called "negroes" while Ethiopians were called "caucasians".
Clyde is still stuck in his scholarly rut. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
You're talking over his head. Perhaps you should explain the differnce between multivariates and measurements for those who are not down with modern anthropology.
Maybe then he, and others, can understand that moderns like Keita, when comparing crania and post-cranials, don't at all subscribe to the thinking of those like Dixon of nearly a century ago.
There's a lesson there for those ready and willing to learn.
quote:Originally posted by ausar: Mr. Winters, where is the contemporary peer reviewed journal articles discussing the affinities of Elamite remains? Everything you cited is from 1800's-1960's.
Even if we accept the old data is correct then where is the comparison using new computer models instead of old cephallic index studies?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
I haven't heard of any sources on Elamite remains, but one thing is for certain and that is the Elamites were NOT Africans!!
Elamites are indigenous populations of Asia.
And as it has been said many times before black does NOT = African.
You are wrong the Elamites were not only Black they were also Negro/African. They were African because people studying the Elamite skeletal remains note that they were of the Mediterranean type . These Mediterranean's are called Capsians. Given the fact that the Elamites were Capsian we can logically say they were Black, and they were Black Africans.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
PREMISE 1: Elam is metal age. PREMISE 2: Capsian is stone age. INFERENCE: Elamite culture is not Capsian culture.
Elamites were eastern Aithiopians/Kushites not western Aithiopians/Kushites.
Theirs was a phenotype of pre-recent extra-continental African pleistocene blacks.
They were not descendants of recent intra-continental African holocene blacks.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: PREMISE 1: Elam is metal age. PREMISE 2: Capsian is stone age. INFERENCE: Elamite culture is not Capsian culture.
Elamites were eastern Aithiopians/Kushites not western Aithiopians/Kushites.
Theirs was a phenotype of pre-recent extra-continental African pleistocene blacks.
They were not descendants of recent intra-continental African holocene blacks.
You know that many people have recognized a continuity between the Capsian and other populations. As a result, the Elamites would still fall into the range of the Mediterranean type.
quote:
Anatomically, the Capsians (to use a loose expression) were modern Homo sapiens, classed in two "racial" types: Mechta-Afalou and Protomediterranean. Some (eg Ferenbach 1985) have argued that they were immigrants from the east, whereas others (eg Lubell et al. 1984) argue for population continuity based on physical skeletal characteristics.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: You know that many people have recognized a continuity between the Capsian and other populations. As a result, the Elamites would still fall into the range of the Mediterranean type.
LMAO Clyde, I hope you know that the only continuity the Capsian had with other cultures, if any at all, was within Africa, particularly North Africa.
There is NOTHING to connect the STONE AGE Capsian culture of Northwest Africa to the BRONZE AGE Elamite culture of IRAN.
I hope you also know that "Mediterranean" has also been traditionally used to mean CAUCASOID!! In fact Mediterranean has been used to describe everyone from southern Europeans, to East Africans, to Indians, to even Filipinos and Polynesians!!
You are a perfect example of what Rasol says is the folly of using Eurocentric terms even if to further ones own agenda against Eurocentrics! Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
You're talking over his head. Perhaps you should explain the differnce between multivariates and measurements for those who are not down with modern anthropology.
Maybe then he, and others, can understand that moderns like Keita, when comparing crania and post-cranials, don't at all subscribe to the thinking of those like Dixon of nearly a century ago.
There's a lesson there for those ready and willing to learn.
Multivariate or cluster analysis is just a method to classify two or more variables into groups. You still have to have the craniometric measurements before you can disaggregate the data.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Capsians were from Gafsa, littoral North Africa.
Ergo similar cultures in Eburru, Kenyan East Africa, are Eburran not Capsian.
Outdated inaccurate erroneous diffusion macrodesignation replaced by current accurate local designation.
Welcome to the 21st century and its paradigms.
Emanuel Thomas Kessy The relationship between the Late Stone Age and Iron Age Cultures of Central Tanzania a doctoral dissertation Burnaby: Simon Fraser University, 2005 p.35
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is there anyone who doesn't know that cranial multivariate analysis replaced and disconfirmed the findings of simple craniometric cephalic indices well before the turn of the millenium?
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Takruri
quote:
You're talking over his head. Perhaps you should explain the differnce between multivariates and measurements for those who are not down with modern anthropology.
Maybe then he, and others, can understand that moderns like Keita, when comparing crania and post-cranials, don't at all subscribe to the thinking of those like Dixon of nearly a century ago.
There's a lesson there for those ready and willing to learn.
Multivariate or cluster analysis is just a method to classify two or more variables into groups. You still have to have the craniometric measurements before you can disaggregate the data.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
I hope you also know that "Mediterranean" has also been traditionally used to mean CAUCASOID!! In fact Mediterranean has been used to describe everyone from southern Europeans, to East Africans, to Indians, to even Filipinos and Polynesians!!
This is due to the fact that many anthropologist have labled blacks with so-called European features caucasian. These researchers fail to note that their is a variety of Africans.
_________________________________
"The oldest remains of Homo sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery. A similar association is presumed for a skeleton found at Olduvai, which resembles those from Gamble's Cave. The date of Upper Kenya Capsian C is not precisely known (an earlier phase from Prospect Farm on Eburru Mountain close to Gamble's Cave has been dated to about 8000 BC); but the presence of pottery indicates a rather later date, perhaps around 4000 BC. The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region. "Many authors regard these people as physically akin to the Mediterraneans, hence the label of 'Caucasoids' (or European-like) generally attached to them. However, all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions... "From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. Now, as mentioned in Chapter 3, the fossil record tells of tall people with long and narrow heads, faces and noses who lived a few thousand years BC in East Africa at such places as Gamble's Cave in the Kenya Rift Valley and at Olduvai in northern Tanzania. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans.' Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to Caucasoids of Europe and western Asia, as they usually are in literature."
Jean Hiernaux The People of Africa (Peoples of the World Series) pgs 42-43, 62-63
_________________________________
Keita, Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships, 1993, notes
"...Wiercinski (1965) noted an increase in the "African" (Negroid) element in crania recovered from the early dynastic tombs of Abydos as compared to the previous period. His taxonomy, like others, seems to have a narrow conception the of the range of real "African" variability. In general, this restricted view presents all tropical Africans with narrow noses and faces as being related to or descended from an external, ultimately non-African peoples. However, narrow-faced, narrow-nosed populations have long been resident in Saharo-tropical Africa (Gabel 1966; Hiernaux 1975; Rightmire 1975; Schepartz 1987) and their origin need not be sought elsewhere. These traits are also indigenous. The variability in tropical Africa is expectedly naturally high. Given their longstanding presence, narrow noses and faces cannot be deemed "non-African"..." Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
But narrow noses are certainly not negroid, hence, neither African nor black are synonymous with negro, ergo, we eschew that inaccurate outdated repugnant term.
Africans, even inner Africans, whether tropical or sub-tropical, do not all conform to the so-called negro phenotype. See Hierneaux's charts.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Is there anyone who doesn't know that cranial multivariate analysis replaced and disconfirmed the findings of simple craniometric cephalic indices well before the turn of the millenium?
Multivariate analysis is just a research technique, the fact that you don't understand this method of statistical analysis makes it clear you have never published a research paper in your life.
Why do you talk about subjects you know nothing about?
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're ignorant and disrespectful resorting to personal attack when your ideas' bankruptcies are unveiled, lashing out like a wounded beast instead of calmly and professionally building a watertight case.
All of us here, without published papers, have taught you what you had no idea even existed in Africana studies. You never lasted a minute on ANE where other professionals hung out and you haven't contributed jumpin-jack-flash here but confusion. We all know that what of our teaching you could digest will appear in your future publications in a form so distorted and so jumbled our lids will flip.
What you wrote below is you talking to yourself about yourself.
Everyone's remarked how the quality of ES AE&E has deteriated since you got on board.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Why do you talk about subjects you know nothing about?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You're ignorant and disrespectful resorting to personal attack when your ideas' bankruptcies are unveiled, lashing out like a wounded beast instead of calmly and professionally building a watertight case.
You're the ignorant person . The minute someone contradicts what you say you begin calling people names. I have not called anyone a name unless thewy called me one first.
My work will survive long after I am dead. But your discussions on this forum will not.
My work will survive because I had the boldness to set it before the public. You on the otherhand, like a coward attack people for no other reason--than they disagree with you--and even post to the thread in assumed names so that it can appear as if there are several people supporting your conclusions.
You have been discussing this material for years and yet I don't believe, you have published one article to make people aware of how genetics impact on the history of Black People. If you have please name it. You are a coward.
That's why your comments run off my back like water. I have contributed to the writing of the history of Blacks worldwide. You have not. This hurts you because you remain on this forum afraid to make your knowledge known to the world.
I on the otherhand, keep on bringing new knowledge to the world and promoting the factual basis of Afrocentrism, while you publish half-truths and personally attack people when they point out the weaknesses in your knowledge base. You're a sad man so much potential--but full of even more fear....
Aluta continua.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:We all know that what of our teaching you could digest will appear in your future publications in a form so distorted and so jumbled our lids will flip.
Yep. Dr. Winters made this point in his 'why we need afrocentrism' thread, in which he made it clear that 'truth' was of minimal value to him, and ideology was all that mattered.
Any truth Dr. Winters learns here, will be converted into ideological propaganda by him, without the feintest care by Winters as to whether he is true to his sources or not.
Where such things are concerned, Dr. Winters simply has no conscience.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: You're the ignorant person . The minute someone contradicts what you say you begin calling people names. I have not called anyone a name unless thewy called me one first.
My work will survive long after I am dead. But your discussions on this forum will not.
My work will survive because I had the boldness to set it before the public. You on the otherhand, like a coward attack people for no other reason--than they disagree with you--and even post to the thread in assumed names so that it can appear as if there are several people supporting your conclusions.
You have been discussing this material for years and yet I don't believe, you have published one article to make people aware of how genetics impact on the history of Black People. If you have please name it. You are a coward.
That's why your comments run off my back like water. I have contributed to the writing of the history of Blacks worldwide. You have not. This hurts you because you remain on this forum afraid to make your knowledge known to the world.
I on the otherhand, keep on bringing new knowledge to the world and promoting the factual basis of Afrocentrism, while you publish half-truths and personally attack people when they point out the weaknesses in your knowledge base. You're a sad man so much potential--but full of even more fear....
]
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Yep. Dr. Winters made this point in his 'why we need afrocentrism' thread, in which he made it clear that 'truth' was of minimal value to him, and ideology was all that mattered.
Any truth Dr. Winters learns here, will be converted into ideological propaganda by him, without the feintest care by Winters as to whether he is true to his sources or not.
Where such things are concerned, Dr. Winters simply has no conscience.
Unfortunately so.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Clyde, you're only making a fool of yourself! 
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
As long as the general forum readership 
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Clyde, I hope you know that the only continuity the Capsian had with other cultures, if any at all, was within Africa, particularly North Africa.
Printer-friendly view of this topic