quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Rasol and Djehuti both of your are liers and have not presented any evidence that the ancient Europeans were "white", Here is the true reality of the ancient European population.
LOL and the good 'Dr.' calls US liars!
Why should we present to you evidence of plain and basic knowledge when YOU haven't even presented to us evidence that ancient Europeans weren't white?!!
Non of the evidence you cited ever said that ancient Europeans were anything else BUT white people! Posts: 26361 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Which is sad because it's possible to show the evolution of depigmentation in Europeans - which did not reach present levels until the mesolithic - thru both genetics and skeletal anthropology.
But, with Winters, that would be like trying to teach calculus to someone who can't even understand why 2x2x2 is 8 and not 6. lol.
There is continuity between modern Euopeans and ancient ones - - > genetic continuity, which by definition affirms one's actual ancestry.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rasol and Djehuti both of you are liars and have not presented any evidence that the ancient Europeans were "white". This is my last response to your ignorant post.
The Truth:
There were no whites in Europe until the coming of the Indo-European speaking people.
Sokal et al
quote: Origins of the Indo-Europeans: Genetic Evidence
RR Sokal, NL Oden and BA Thomson
Two theories of the origins of the Indo-Europeans currently compete. M. Gimbutas believes that early Indo-Europeans entered southeastern Europe from the Pontic Steppes starting ca. 4500 B.C. and spread from there. C. Renfrew equates early Indo-Europeans with early farmers who entered southeastern Europe from Asia Minor ca. 7000 BC and spread through the continent. We tested genetic distance matrices for each of 25 systems in numerous Indo-European-speaking samples from Europe. To match each of these matrices, we created other distance matrices representing geography, language, time since origin of agriculture, Gimbutas' model, and Renfrew's model. The correlation between genetics and language is significant. Geography, when held constant, produces a markedly lower, yet still highly significant partial correlation between genetics and language, showing that more remains to be explained. However, none of the remaining three distances-time since origin of agriculture, Gimbutas' model, or Renfrew's model-reduces the partial correlation further. Thus, neither of the two theories appears able to explain the origin of the Indo-Europeans as gauged by the genetics- language correlation.
The "whites" or Caucasians are not native to Europe as noted by Sokal. Although this was written in 1992, Haak et al (2006) make it clear that the IE speakers are not related to the ancient Europeans who were Negroes/Sub-Saharan Africans.
Brace et al wrote: “What does come as a surprise is that the Neolithic samples tend to tie with Neolithic samples across the entire range from east to west but do not cluster with the living people in many of the areas tested."
In the next line Brace et al contradicts themselves in an attempt to make it appear that continuity exist between the ancient and contemporary groups when they write: "There is more of a link between the prehistoric and modern samples in southern Europe as opposed to the picture in central and northern Europe. Much the same is true for the Bronze Age samples, although these do tend to tie to the preceding Neolithic in the same part of the range tested. Unlike the Neolithic, Bronze Age, and modern samples, the Palaeolithic samples are not from single sites. There is no single European Upper Palaeolithic sample large enough to run as a single twig in a dendrogram. Instead, we had to use Cro-Magnon 1, La Ronde du Barry, Abri Pataud, Saint Germain-La Rivie`re, and Le Placard, all from southwestern France, plus Obercassel 1 from western Germany, and Predmostı3 and 4 from the Czech Republic. Measurements of the latter two specimens were taken on casts because the originals had been destroyed by retreating Germans near the end of World War II (33). The same kind of problem of finding more than one individual in a burial site also tended to be true for some of the available Mesolithic of Europe. Individual specimens from Brittany to Monaco (Gramat, Rastel, Recheril and Téviec) were lumped together to make the European Mesolithic sample. There are larger Mesolithic samples, but we were not able to get permission to work on them. The North African Epipalaeolithic sample was made on the basis of specimens from Afalou in Algeria and Taforalt in Morocco. The Natufian sample from Israel is also problematic because it is so small, being constituted of three males and one female from the Late Pleistocene Epipalaeolithic (34) of Israel, and there was no usable Neolithic sample for the Near East. The difficulty in making comparisons with Neolithic and Palaeolithic samples is the result of the very different treatment of the deceased. Neolithic communities established cemeteries where the remains of the departed accumulated in some numbers. Most Upper Palaeolithic peoples tended to bury the dead singly and in widely separated locations. Furthermore, Neolithic pottery became fractured with considerable frequency, leaving potsherds in quantity at Neolithic sites. Consequently there may well have been a tendency to overestimate the size of Neolithic populations vis-a`-vis the contemporary surviving foragers (6, 35, 36). Despite the small numbers and scattered locations of the Late Pleistocene specimens, they tend to cluster with each other rather than with any groups of more recent date.”
Although Brace et al , found no relationship between the ancient Europeans and contemporary group he still tries to maintain that these people were not related to Sub-Saharan Africans by implying that the Egyptians and other African groups were non-African.
Brace et al wrote: “When the samples used in Fig. 1 are compared by the use of canonical variate plots as in Fig. 2, the separateness of the Niger-Congo speakers is again quite clear. Interestingly enough, however, the small Natufian sample falls between the Niger-Congo group and the other samples used. Fig. 2 shows the plot produced by the first two canonical variates, but the same thing happens when canonical variates 1 and 3 (not shown here) are used. This placement suggests that there may have been a Sub-Saharan African element in the make-up of the Natufians (the putative ancestors of the subsequent Neolithic), although in this particular test there is no such evident presence in the North African or Egyptian samples. As shown in Fig. 1, the Somalis and the Egyptian Bronze Age sample from Naqada may also have a hint of a Sub-Saharan African component. That was not borne out in the canonical variate plot (Fig. 2), and there was no evidence of such an involvement in the Algerian Neolithic (Gambetta) sample.”
This is false Keita and others have already proven that these people were related to Sub –Saharan Africans.
Brace et al continue and note that: “ There are some generalizations that are apparent from the picture presented in both the greater individual numbers of twigs shown in Fig. 1 and the combined pattern shown in Fig. 3. When the maximum number of twigs is plotted, despite the very small numbers involved, the Late Pleistocene samples from Israel, Europe, and North Aftica tend to link to each other before they tie to the modern representatives of each of the areas in question, as shown in Fig. 1. In that run, the Natufian of Israel ties to the French Mesolithic and then to the Afalou Taforalt sample from North Africa. These then link with the European Upper Palaeo- lithic sample and, somewhat surprisingly, with the Chandman (the Mongolian Bronze Age sample) and finally, at the next step, with the Danish Neolithic. One of the things that these geo- graphically diverse groups clearly have in common is a degree of robustness that sets them apart from the recent inhabitants of the areas in which they are found.” Apart from the quantitative relationships shown in Figs. 1–4, most of the Neolithic samples in Europe share nonmetric features of the lateral edge of the orbit, the shape of the gonial angle of the mandible, and the configuration of menton that are present even when degrees of size and robustness vary between the regions represented. These nonmetric attributes all support the view that most of the Neolithic inhabitants of Europe tie more closely together with each other than with the living representatives of the areas in question.”
Brace adds that the only skeletal remains that link contemporary Europeans to an ancient population come from A late Neolithic site in Germany:
“The principal exception to this generalization is one of the two small samples of the German Neolithic, the Mühlhausen sample, which ties closer metrically to the living inhabitants of the Middle East and North Africa. Metrically the other German Neolithic sample, Tauber- bischofsheim, links with the living Central European samples. Nonmetrically, those two small German Neolithic samples also appear strikingly different from each other.”
The findings of Brace et al make it clear that there were no “whites’ in ancient Europe as you claim. There were only Negroes living there until the coming of the Europeans as noted by DuBois, Diop and Boule & Vallois.
The Paleolithic Europeans were Blacks. This is supported by the fact that the ancient genes of these Blacks both as Cro-Magnon and farmers belong to hg N. This gene is rarely found in contemporary Europeans. It originated in Africa and is an indication of African people.
The skeletal remains of these people as noted by Boule and Vallois were Negro, and Brace et al mention that these Negroes were supplemented by Sub-Saharan Africans as represented by the Natufians. There are no skeletons of the Caucasian type. Brace et al make it clear that the craniometrics for ancient European foragers and farmers are not analogous to contemporary Europeans. As a result, there were no "whites" in Europe until the coming of the Indo- Europeans.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^*yawn* You are presenting the exact SAME sources, and NON of them say what YOU are saying.
Show me where Sokal said that IE speakers were white while pre-IE peoples were not! Show me where he said the pre-IE peoples were "negroid"!!
Show me where Brace says the same thing. All you highlighted was what all the guys in this forum have been saying all along-- that Neolithic peoples did NOT resemble modern Europeans because they are of recent African ancestry whereas the pre-Neolithic peoples (indigenous European foragers) were NOT.
Show us where any of your sources specify what YOU are saying!! This is your last chance!!
Posts: 26361 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Since Winters has failed. Let's get some answers from current peer review science, while ignoring Winters "spammings", jive talkings and attempts to 'hustle' the ignorant:
The Peopling of Europe:
Definition R1B: Haplogroup R1b is an offshoot of Haplogroup R1 (M173), characterised by the M343 marker.:
quote:Present-day Europeans with M343 also have the markers P25 and M269. This defines the more precise subgroup R1b1c. The members of R1b are believed to be descendants of the Cro-Magnon people, the first modern humans to enter Europe, approximately 35,000 years ago. The Cro-Magnons were contemporaries of European Neandertals, who died out not long after the first modern humans spread out.
^ By being ignorant of genetics, Winters free's himself of the need to make his wild hypothesis concordant to facts.
Geneticist Peter Underhill refines the facts:
quote:About 80 percent of Europeans arose from primitive hunters who arrived about 35,000 years ago, endured the long ice age and then expanded rapidly to dominate the continent, a new study shows. Researchers analyzing the Y chromosome taken from 1,007 men from 25 different locations in Europe found a pattern that suggests four out of five of the men shared a common male ancestor about 40,000 years ago.
The basic pattern had some changes that apparently developed among people who once shared a common ancestor and then were isolated for many generations.
This scenario supports other studies about the Paleolithic European groups.
Those studies suggest that a primitive, stone-age human came to Europe, probably from Central Asia and the Middle East, in two waves of migration beginning about 35,000 years ago.
Their numbers were small and they lived byhunting animals and gathering plant food. They used crudely sharpened stones and fire.
"About 24,000 years ago, the last ice age began, with mountain-sized glaciers moving across most of Europe.
The Paleolithic Europeans retreated before the ice, finding refuge for hundreds of generations in three areas: what is now Spain, the Balkans and the Ukraine.
"When the glaciers melted, about 16,000 years ago, the Paleolithic tribes resettled the rest of Europe. Y chromosome mutations occurred among people in each of the ice age refuges.
About 8,000 years ago a more advanced people, the Neolithic, migrated to Europe from the Middle East, bringing with them a new Y chromosome pattern and a new way of life - agriculture. About 20 percent of Europeans now have the Y chromosome pattern from this migration [African Y chromosome E3b and SouthWest Asian J].
The above is clear, but Winters can't understand it because he learned about "race" from 19th century Europeans.
Outdated anthropology views race as a static typology system which would have developed 100's of thousands or even millions of years ago.
The reason that most people don't exactly fit these static typologies was then attributed to 'admixture' which would have occurred within the last 100 thousand years.
^ The above model was destroyed by RAO - recent African origins of *all human beings*.
quote:all non-africans descend from a small subset of East Africans [60kya~]
- S. Tishkoff.
This common ancestry POST DATES what early anthropologists surmised as the separation and subsequent bastardisation of their static race types.
And this is why race typologies are internally contradictory, and have been abandoned by most anthropologists seeking to understand human variation.
Winters can't understand the above, and so can only remain mired in parodox.
For example - Winters can't explain how modern Europeans can be white, when none of the Upper Paleolithic Eurasians were.
Dr. Shomarka Keita sums up what Winters can't grasp:
quote:Populations should be viewed processually as dynamic entities over time and not “static” entities. The presence of E3b lineages and the Benin sickle cell variant in southern Europe illustrates this well.
^ And this is why you can't find physical 'race matches' between 35 thousand year old populations and current ones. Peoples change physically over time - adapting to their environment.
This process includes skin color:
quote:a substantial portion of the differences of skin color between Europeans and Africans resides in a single gene, SLC24A5 the threonine-111 allele of which was found in 98.7 to 100% among several European samples, while the alanine-111 form was found in 93 to 100% of samples of Africans, East Asians and Indigenous Americans 2005)
- Lamason, 2005, the origin of mutations on European skin color receptors are dated to between 12,000 and 30,000 kya.
In contrast Africans of various dark shades, have unmutated skin color receptors that date back to the original loss of body hair by hominids and the development of dark skin to protect from the sun, over 1 million years ago. -[Harding 2000]
This explains the following:
* why Nordic Europeans have lighter skin tones than any other people - this condition developed AFTER their separation from other peoples, reaching it's present stage during the mesolithic.
* why paleolithic Europeans still show tropical skeletal adaptations that modern ones don't have - because they had not yet adapted to their cold climate.
* Why the most isolated and direct descendants of the original Eurasians outmigrants from Africa have dark skin - the Andaman Islanders have been isolated 100s of miles off the coast of thailand, since they migrated out of Africa and the sea levels fell.
They have the same genes for skin color as the Oromo and Somali [the most direct descendants of the original E3b East Africans], or Batwa, or Dinka, or Khoisan, because they continue to live in and equatorial climate that selects for dark skin.
* These people are Black because they always have been, as determined by geography and proven by genetics.
* Why precise skin color varies even in Africa, and in the absense of evidence of any 'extra african' influence - because dark skin always did vary - with lighter tones toward Africa's coasts, and darker tones near the equator. Skin color variation among melanoderms [dark skinned peoples] is and ancient adaptive trait, not a fixed racial one.
Skin color does not equate to race, bone morphology does not equate to race, genetics does not equate to race.
Wake up Dr. Winters, you've been sleeping for 100 years and modern science has mooted your race ideology. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Dr. Winters. You mention DuBois. There is a huge amount of archeological evidence supporting DuBois’ comment that Africans spanned throughout much of the ancient world. In the web page above, the focus is on a specific type of body incision practiced in three continents of the Neolithic world. These [the incised diamond] appear to possibly serve as a tribal marking. The web page text is below in the event it’d be easier to read.
There has been a long recognized African presence in Eurasia. As Dr. Clyde Winters writes: “Marcellin Boule and Henri Vallois, in Fossil Man, provide an entire chapter on the Africans/Negroes of Europe. Anta Diop also discussed the Negroes of Europe in Civilization or Barbarism , pp.25-68. Also W.E. B. DuBois, discussed these Negroes in the The World and Africa , pp.86-89. DuBois noted that ‘There was once an ’uninterrupted belt' of Negro culture from Central Europe to South Africa’ (p.88).”
DuBois’ words are bourn out in the fact that the archeological record tells us that there is evidence of single people using a diamond-incised abdominal tribal marking that spanned the Eurasian world at least from 9000 years ago [4] that coincided with the outset of the agricultural revolution in Europe. Diamond incision is seen in Crete of the 6th millennium BC [1], Bulgaria [2, 3]; with the African-faced figurine of Yugoslavia [4], Moldavia [5], Romania [6, 7], Hungary [8] and among the Efe of the Congo today. And the use of not a single diamond [5, 7] but multiple or concentric diamond [1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9] would appear to leave open the possibility that the use of the motif is intentional purposeful. As the Efe [9] of the Belgian Congo also use this unique sign may serve as the last living representatives of a people that once spanned at least three continents.
To put the above page in the perspective of African presence in Europe, I am re-posting the two previous pages below:
quote:Marc Washington: I am re-posting the two previous pages below:
Don't bother, unless you mean to demonstrate that you share Dr. Winters fondness for making bad arguments repetitively: ad nauseum fallacy.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Another dumb thread arguing over fallacious unproven theories. One side believes in partially black Southern Euros the other side believes in Northern European prehistoric Negroes. Its surprising that you both argue considering how much you both have in common.
Posts: 2601 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dr. Winters, for all of your quoting of Brace you forgot one thing, the Mesolithic and Upper Paleolithic crania of Europe do *NOT* cluster with Sub-Saharans nor modern Europeans so stop taking studies out of context to imply something else other than what it really means. Don't do the same things that rasol and Supercar routinely do, that is, making untrue interpretations of studies and then cry that the opposing view cannot understand what he/she is reading when it is they who don't understand what they are reading.
Posts: 2601 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Xross Breed: Don't do the same things that rasol and Supercar routinely do, that is, making untrue interpretations of studies and then cry that the opposing view cannot understand what he/she is reading when it is they who don't understand what they are reading.
For every discussion we've had, in swiftly destroying your easily refutable senseless assertions on genetics, as well as in trying to teach you the basics of genetics and biology, you learn nothing; instead, you every now and then pop up, with lies about how people view Europeans as partially "black", when in fact no such comment has ever been made, showing your talent in how to read. So much for fake face-saving apologies, that no intelligent person ever took seriously to begin with.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Xross Breed: Don't do the same things that rasol and Supercar routinely do, that is, making untrue interpretations of studies and then cry that the opposing view cannot understand what he/she is reading when it is they who don't understand what they are reading.
For every discussion we've had, in swiftly destroying your easily refutable senseless assertions on genetics, as well as in trying to teach you the basics of genetics and biology, you learn nothing; instead, you every now and then pop up, with lies about how people view Europeans as partially "black", when in fact no such comment has ever been made, showing your talent in how to read. So much for fake face-saving apologies, that no intelligent person ever took seriously to begin with.
Listen fool, I've efuted your garbage so many times, the only reason I've stopped is because those said topics inspire no interest from me. You wanna get my attention? say something relevant, don't bore me with repeated rants about how mythological neolithic African E3b bearers coming into Europe, a claim that you haven't validated as of yet. In short, just shut the hell up.
Posts: 2601 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Listen fool, I've efuted your garbage so many times, the only reason I've stopped is because those said topics inspire no interest from me. You wanna get my attention? say something relevant, don't bore me with repeated rants about how mythological neolithic African E3b bearers coming into Europe, a claim that you haven't validated as of yet. In short, just shut the hell up.
Asshole, how about actually not using lies to make empty claims. It seems that your best cowardly approach, is to fabricate claims, and then claim that you've refuted something, when in fact, you have not come remotely close.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
Listen fool, I've efuted your garbage so many times, the only reason I've stopped is because those said topics inspire no interest from me. You wanna get my attention? say something relevant, don't bore me with repeated rants about how mythological neolithic African E3b bearers coming into Europe, a claim that you haven't validated as of yet. In short, just shut the hell up.
Asshole, how about actually not using lies to make empty claims. It seems that your best cowardly approach, is to fabricate claims, and then claim that you've refuted something, when in fact, you have not come remotely close.
Now we're getting eomtional are we? I'm not making up lies, you know that you have made those claims. I must have pointed out to you numerous times that Neolithic E3b lineages in Europe came from the Near East, but being the stubborn jackass that you are you still insist it was an African Neolithic from Africa that brought E3b lineages into Europe. its even posted in published data for God's sake but for whatever reason you still insist those lineages are indicative of an African Neolithic migration, now how retarded are you to still hold up something as fact that even isn't stated? Just shut the hell up and quit making a fool out of yourself.
Posts: 2601 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
...you certainly seem to be, since it is no one but you, who just popped up from nowhere, like those unwanted filthy internet spamming ad windows, virtually saying nothing but psychotically insulting folks.
quote:Charles: I'm not making up lies, you know that you have made those claims.
Hey, your first name is "lie". For instance, your claim about "mythical" E3b, is nothing short of lunacy, since it is apparently present in the said populations.
quote:Charles: I must have pointed out to you numerous times that Neolithic E3b lineages in Europe came from the Near East, but being the stubborn jackass that you are you still insist it was an African Neolithic from Africa that brought E3b lineages into Europe. its even posted in published data for God's sake but for whatever reason you still insist those lineages are indicative of an African Neolithic migration, now how retarded are you to still hold up something as fact that even isn't stated? Just shut the hell up and quit making a fool out of yourself.
...You can't read; stop making a fool of yourself, you trolling whore. I suspect, this will be followed by more of your emotional rantings. Do bring it on.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keep tapdancing fool, whenever wanna do this just bring it, just have you ducks in order because mine are. You are the trolling whore, i saw your thread on the new forum, seems you just can't get enough tap dancing. You're due for a smackdown anyways.
Posts: 2601 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Keep tapdancing fool, whenever wanna do this just bring it, just have you ducks in order because mine are. You are the trolling whore, i saw your thread on the new forum, seems you just can't get enough tap dancing. You're due for a smackdown anyways.
Now the best you can do, is to parrot words. What a filthy cockroach you truly are, not to mention a lying one, since I have produced no new threads outside this board. Lol.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
Keep tapdancing fool, whenever wanna do this just bring it, just have you ducks in order because mine are. You are the trolling whore, i saw your thread on the new forum, seems you just can't get enough tap dancing. You're due for a smackdown anyways.
Now the best you can do, is to parrot words. What a filthy cockroach you truly are, not to mention a lying one, since I have produced no new threads outside this board. Lol.
So, "Mystery Solver" isn't you right? Stop trolling and lying you idiot!
Posts: 2601 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
So, "Mystery Solver" isn't you right? Stop trolling and lying you idiot!
How about taking up your own advice about trolling, you vagabond hussy still with the mind of a slave.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Xross Breed: Another dumb thread arguing over fallacious unproven theories. One side believes in partially black Southern Euros the other side believes in Northern European prehistoric Negroes. Its surprising that you both argue considering how much you both have in common.
^ The above post is and example of straw man attack, ridicule, cheap shots and bitter vindictiveness.
It imparts no facts, and avoids all specifics out of cowardice.
It's like something Horemheb would write.
You've humiliated yourself again Charles.
How long before you're forced to write anothr phony apology?
Your post is dismissed.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
For every discussion we've had, in swiftly destroying your easily refutable senseless assertions on genetics, as well as in trying to teach you the basics of genetics and biology, you learn nothing; instead, you every now and then pop up, with lies about how people view Europeans as partially "black", when in fact no such comment has ever been made, showing your talent in how to read. So much for fake face-saving apologies, that no intelligent person ever took seriously to begin with.
Charles behavior is predictable in it's neurotic obsession.
He cares less about anthropology than in revenge for past humiliations, which are in fact self inflicted.
Thus trapped in a vicious cycle, he debases himself again
You need to spend less time arguing on the internet Charles, and possibly seek another outlet for your anger.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see tweedle dee and tweedle dumm are still paqtting each other on the back giving each other big ups over debates they got smnoked in. When both of you clowns are ready just bring it.
Posts: 2601 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: You continue to clown yourself. Your behavior is not healthy.
You need help Charles.
It is you who needs help, I simply say my piece and the chips fall. If you're not going to do anything or say anything worthwhile just step off.
Posts: 2601 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Charles got CHUMPED big time! You would think that his comparison to Hore was bad enough!
Posts: 26361 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Charles got CHUMPED big time! You would think that his comparison to Hore was bad enough!
LOL, "Charles got chump" yeah fool, go along and jump on the bandwagon right along with tweedle dee and tweedle dumb. Moron!
Posts: 2601 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^LOL Now now, Charles don't get hostile at me since I wasn't the one to chump you so much as Rasol (and yourself)! Posts: 26361 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Those "chips" are your own feces coming out of your mouth and falling to the ground.
You then wallow in it.
Keep humiliating yourself.
I'm thru with you.
When you're ready to bring it just step into the realm coward. The choice is yours. Refuting weak claims by Winters and Washington doesn't make you some kind of prima donna of debate.
Posts: 2601 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:When you're ready to bring it just step into the realm coward. The choice is yours. Refuting weak claims by Winters and Washington doesn't make you some kind of prima donna of debate.
Speaking of Clyde and Marc, where are they? They seem to lay low when there complete opposites show up.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^LOL Now now, Charles don't get hostile at me since I wasn't the one to chump you so much as Rasol (and yourself)!
The defeated clown has been reduced to a total mental break down, which presents itself in the form of his panic-driven name calling antics. Very classic of a true troll. LOL.
-------------------- Truth - a liar penetrating device! Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
You are presenting the exact SAME sources, and NON of them say what YOU are saying.![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic