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! Posted by astenb (Member # 14524) on :
Best read all day. ^
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
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.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
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 by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
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 by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
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.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
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!
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
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 by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^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.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
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.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^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.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
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
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
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
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
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.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^Interesting - No self-identified Black members are responding.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
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 by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
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
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
UV Radiation as a Selective Force in the Evolution of Pigmentation
quote:Originally posted by Jabolinski: "The mechanism of evolution can be completely understood from skin color."
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz':
Natural Selection for light skin is improbable
what do you mean?
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
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.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^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. Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
BTW - Quick question for AAs.
How many of you believe that the U.S. Black population figures, put out by the census are true?
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
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.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
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"
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
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'
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
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.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Timely article Arwa
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.. Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: whites will be out numbered in a few short yrs
Sweden folks are creating laws to limit the migration of the dark peoples,
other states might attempt to limit immigration
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
Arwa
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.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
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.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
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.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
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
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
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!
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
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.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
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
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^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!
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
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.
Posted by Gigantic (Member # 17311) on :
^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?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
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
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^It's not surprising that a person needing an alias to engage in discourse, would lack the ability to think through a concept.
See here is the thing whoever:
There is no question that "Some" Black men, show sexual preference for White females.
The fact that Europeans are almost exclusively evenly divided between Y-dna haplogroups "I" and "R" attests to this.
The fact that Turkey and the middle East is almost exclusively Mulatto, also attests to this.
But in the middle east and Europe, you had Black men taking White females who had no choice in the matter.
Contrast that with India, and Turkey, where invading White males were the power factor.
But the result is the same, a very large mulatto (Hindu) population in India.
And a totally Mulatto population in Turkey.
See, it really is quite complicated.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^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?!
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^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.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
All populations have those who wish to be something else.
Males wanting to be Females.
Females wanting to be Males.
Blacks bleaching.
Whites Tanning.
Damn Boy, you sure are stupid!
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^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.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
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.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
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! Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
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
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^^Idiot, for the most part, Whites tan naturally. Stop hating on their ability to be sunkissed! Damn! You are such a jealous, silly boy!
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
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.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^Excuse me? Sun tanning is a natural biological process of human photosynthesis. It ain't socially engineered (LOL)!!
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
UV Radiation as a Selective Force in the Evolution of Pigmentation
quote:Originally posted by Jabolinski: "The mechanism of evolution can be completely understood from skin color."
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz':
Natural Selection for light skin is improbable
why?
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Why do you think I said 'Exactly'? That is called 'agreement'. My point was that light skin tanning is natural whereas dark skinned people getting light is *not* natural. Therefore, your skin lightening argument fails.
Tanning may or may not be natural however. Many white people go to tanning Salons etc.,
Lioness...
quote:why?
Because, light skin is not an advantageous trait in every populations. Therefore, replacement of dark skin due to natural selection or sexual selection is improbably.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': Because, light skin is not an advantageous trait in every populations. Therefore, replacement of dark skin due to natural selection or sexual selection is improbable.
what is
1) the process responsible for
2) and reason for
replacement of dark skin?
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
Calabooz, dark skin getting light is a natural process, and I have the history of evolution to back that up.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
^I was referring specifically to the use of skin lightening cream amongst dark-skinned population. That should have been perfectly obvious given the nature of this discussion
quote:what is
1) the process responsible for
Loss of fur of our hominid ancestors in equilateral Africa. Dark skin was a necessary trait (Jablonski)
quote:2) and reason for
replacement of dark skin?
There has been no replacement of dark skin, so what are you talking about? I was saying that dark skin is not going to be replaced due to either natural selection or sexual selection
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
lioness, the question is rather easy to answer. In advance societies, light skin replaces dark skin. In primitive society, there is no light skin because dark skin is most advantageous.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: 2) and reason for
replacement of dark skin?
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
Uhhh... I put forward the argument that society is moving toward a predominantly light skin one. It is both a natural and artificial process. Do you get it now?
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^I was referring specifically to the use of skin lightening cream amongst dark-skinned population. That should have been perfectly obvious given the nature of this discussion
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
lamin - As I said earlier, you are quite content to accept that which you are told, and that's your business. So rather than do a back and forth, please consider this.
I did not say that the Turk mulatto peoples were Black, and I did not count them as Black.
How could anyone possibly know the population of Africa?
You may not consider Black Indians and other south Asians Black, but they do. They just don't want to be lumped with Africans.
The United States; In 1860 Blacks (Slaves and freemen) were 17% of the population. There was also a very large Mulatto population in the south.
Since that time, about two million White males (most of whom were of young breeding age) were lost in wars, with probably another two to four million seriously debilitated by their injuries.
But that was more than offset by massive migrations from Europe.
But at the same time there was also large migrations (mostly illegal) of Blacks and Mulattoes from the southern Americas and other places.
The last American census states that 60 million Americans (these are the documented ones) are immigrants or the descendants of immigrants (some Blacks are legal immigrants too you know).
So then: Blacks are known to breed like Rabbits. They suffered no major losses in Wars. Yet they are 11-12% percent of the population?
As to the Southern Americas, you just don't know what you are talking about.
But perhaps Mindless's people might help you understand. I posted this earlier.
The population of Puerto Rico has been shaped by Amerindian settlement, European colonization, slavery, economic migration, and Puerto Rico's status as unincorporated territory of the United States.
Population and racial makeup Royal Decree of Graces, 1815
Continuous European immigration during the 19th century helped the population grow from 155,000 in 1800 to almost a million at the close of the century. A census conducted by royal decree on September 30, 1858, gives the following totals of the Puerto Rican population at this time: 341,015 as Free colored; 300,430 identified as Whites; and 41,736 as Slaves.
During the 19th century hundreds of Corsican, French, Lebanese, Chinese, and Portuguese families arrived in Puerto Rico, along with large numbers of immigrants from Spain (mainly from Catalonia, Asturias, Galicia, the Balearic Islands, Andalusia, and the Canary Islands) and numerous Spanish loyalists from Spain's former colonies in South America. Other settlers included Irish, Scots, Germans, Italians and thousands others who were granted land by Spain during the Real Cedula de Gracias de 1815 ("Royal Decree of Graces of 1815"), which allowed European Catholics to settle in the island with land allotments in the interior of the island, provided they agreed to pay taxes and continue to support the Catholic Church.
Between 1960 and 1990 the census questionnaire in Puerto Rico did not ask about race or color. However, the 2000 United States Census included a racial self-identification question in Puerto Rico. According to the census, most Puerto Ricans self-identified as White and few declared themselves to be Black or some other race. A recent study conducted in Puerto Rico suggests that around 52.6% of the population possess Amerindian mtDNA. Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:In advance societies, light skin replaces dark skin.
Don't you consider Europe an advanced society?
What about America?
Because in both light skin descent people are being replaced by low fertility rates and immigrants alone respectively
quote:Uhhh... I put forward the argument that society is moving toward a predominantly light skin one. It is both a natural and artificual process. Do you get it now?
No, dark skin is not being replaced in favor of white skin. I have demonstrated why several times now. Or else you would *not* see a major light skin population decreasing due to infertility, and you would *not* see Chinese having a disproportionate amount of males in respect to females , in China.
Instead we have Indians soon to become the most populous regions of the world.
And we have Hispanics becoming the majority in the US
And immigrants (Islam mainly) replacing the European populations
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
Calabooz, if dark skin replaces light skin than society retrogresses to the primitive state. It is that simple. In advance societies, you will never find dark skin as the dominant complexion.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Calabooz, if dark skin replaces light skin than society retrogresses to the primitive state. It is that simple. In advance societies, you will never find dark skin as the dominant complexion.
Laughable and exposes your racism. I'm done with you now.
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^Name one advance dark skin society.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
Ta-Seti
Axsum
Egypt/Kemet
Kush
Nubia
Sokoto
Ancient Ghana
Mali
Nok
Songhay
Almoravids
Kanem-Borno
Aksum
Swahili States
Zimbabwe
Rwanda Empire
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: 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.
On a related note:
PRAISE THE LORD, MARIAH CAME HOME!!!
He, he.
NEW YORK - Mariah Carey and Nick Cannon celebrated their third anniversary with another milestone — becoming parents to a baby girl and boy.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
lamin - In my previous post I mentioned a large population of Mulattoes in the American South. Perhaps you might be interested in this.
The presence of mulattoes is supposed to support the old notion of the plantation-as-harem. Northern travellers in the South often remarked at how light-skinned the slaves were, certainly much lighter than the robust black skin of the Guinea coast Africans.
But mulattoes were not evenly distributed through the South; they were concentrated in the cities, and especially among freemen. According to the 1860 census, 39 percent of freedmen in Southern cities were mulattoes. Among urban slaves, the proportion of mulattoes was 20 percent. One out of every four black people in a Southern city was a mulatto. The travellers who noted a high proportion of mulattoes in the South evidently had much more contact with city populations, and freedmen, which makes sense given the nature of travel. But 95 percent of the slaves did not live in the cities.
As a legal or census definition, "mulatto" meant not just the product of a union of a white parent and a black one, but also of the union of a black and a mulatto. The child of any slave who had one white grandparent, whether by a white or black spouse, would be a mulatto.
Other bodies of data support the conclusion from the census. In the W.P.A. survey of former slaves, of those who identified parentage, only 4.5 percent indicated a white parent. And the work of geneticists lowers the number even further: measures of DNA mutations that are identifiably African or European among modern Southern rural blacks indicate that the share of black children fathered by whites on slave plantations probably averaged between 1 and 2 percent.
And as far as the others, they were colonized and taught by Arabs.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Calabooz, ancient Egypt was not dark skin.
Look in your own image retard. They are distinguished from Middle Easterners and Libyans who have lighter skin and themselves have dark brown skin. This is because the Egyptians themselves knew they had a common origin with populations to the south. From ancient Egyptian text:
quote:Horus says to the creatures of Ra who dwell in the Black Land (Kemet, Egypt) and in the Red Land (the deserts which lie on each side of the Black Land) "Magical protection be over you, O creatures of Ra, who have come into being from the Great One who is at the head of heaven. Let there be breath to your nostrils, and let your linen wrappings be loosened. You are the tears of the eye of my splendour in your name of Reth. Mighty of issue you have come into being in your name of Aamu; Sekhmet has created them, and it is she who delivers (avenges) their souls. I masturbated (to produce you), and I was content with the hundreds of thousands (of beings) who came forth from me in your name of Nehesu; Horus made them to come into being, and it is he who avengeth their souls. I sought out mine Eye, and you came into being in your name of Themenu; Sakhmet has created them, and she avenges their souls
--Book of Gates (Ancient Egyptian funerary text)
So the ancient Egyptians knew they shared common origin with the Nehesu but not with other peoples
In the image you posted, the Egyptians are lots darker than I am. Obviously dark-skinned unless you are color blind
quote:And as far as the others, they were colonized and taught by Arabs.
You can provide absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support you claim, as there is no evidence. Are you saying that Nubians, Kushites, Abyssinians, Zimbabweans, Ghanians, etc., were all taught by Arabs even when there is no evidence?
No, the only reason you say that is because of Timbuktu. However, all or most of Timbuktu's scholars were African, Timbuktu itself is in Africa, this it is an African society. Dumbass
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^He he, Oh oh, HERE WE GO!
Fellas, almost every thread has this same nonsense.
This is like the Albino debate, it doesn't matter how much proof you provide booz, he will forever come back with the same nonsense.
Please remember the subject of this thread.
WHITE DELUSION!
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:Fellas, almost every thread has this same nonsense.
You're right. Sorry for taking this off topic
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
There is only one Black person in that wall scene and that is the Negro (Nubian). All others are lighter. Like I said, you cannot provide one advance civilization in history that was populated by dark people.
Posted by Calabooz' (Member # 18238) on :
quote:There is only one Black person in that wall scene and that is the Negro (Nubian)
Lol, the Egyptians stated that they share common origin with Nubians
quote:All others are lighter. Like I said, you cannot provide one advance civilization in history that was populated by dark people.
What do you make of all the societies I posted then? Were all of them white people? I'm done with you, if you can't even address the given information
Posted by KING (Member # 9422) on :
wow confirming truth, you can't even make sense when it comes to looking at pics of brown Egyptians.
You claim they are not Dark because they are lighter then the Nubian....Thats got to be the dumbest thing I have read on these forums in awhile.
Anyone with sense can see that the Egyptians are dark brown like majority of Africans.
Really man grow up....Your self hate is showing and it's pathetic.
Peace
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
^Hey nitwit, the Egyptians were tawny complected as evidenced on the murials.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Hay ^nitwit thanks for derailing this tread with the same ol played out bull-**** the thread header Are modern Wars a result of White delusion? not your phobia on how dark Kemetians were http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGLhx3oiU3M For all ya young-uns clik here. .. Thats ^ the real reason... Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
Dravidian Albinos who had originally migrated from Africa into India and then continued North into Central Asia, to escape the Burning Sunshine found at lower latitudes returned to India.
CONFIRMATION THAT THE WHITE (CAUCASIAN RACE) IS DERIVED FORM DRAVIDIAN ALBINOS, IS DOCUMENTED IN THE FINDINGS FROM THE GENETIC ANALYSIS OF Y-DNA HAPLOGROUP "R":
Haplogroup R (Y-DNA)
In human genetics, Haplogroup R is a Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup, a subgroup of haplogroup P, defined by the M207 mutation.
This haplogroup is believed to have arisen around 26,800 years ago, somewhere in Central Asia or South Asia, where its ancestor Haplogroup P is most often found at polymorphic frequencies. Cambridge University geneticist Kivisild et al. (2003) suggests that southern and western Asia might be the source of this haplogroup:
Given the geographic spread and STR diversities of sister clades R1 and R2, the latter of which is restricted to India, Pakistan, Iran, and southern central Asia, it is possible that southern and western Asia were the source for R1 and R1a differentiation.
The R haplogroup is common throughout Europe and western Asia and the Indian sub-continent, and in those whose ancestry is from within these regions. It also occurs in North and Sub-Saharan Africa. The distribution is markedly different for the two major subclades R1a and R1b.
Haplogroup R1a is typical in populations of Eastern Europe, Indian Subcontinent and parts of Central Asia. R1a has a significant presence in Northern Europe, Central Europe, Altaians and Iran as well as in Siberia. R1a can be found in low frequencies in the Middle East, mostly in Indo-European speakers or their descendants.
Haplogroup R1b predominates in Western Europe. R1b can be found at high frequency in Bashkortostan (Russia). R1b can be found at low frequency in Central Asia, Middle East, South Asia as well as North Africa. There is an isolated pocket of R1b in Sub Saharan Africa. In Europe, R1b coincides with areas of Celtic influence. [QB]
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^Oh look everybody, Confirming Truth was right, Blacks ARE turning lighter, Lioness is now White!!!
He,he.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
Mike,
There are many ways you can know the size of a population. You can look at statistics such as live births, voting records, deaths, student populations, ID card numbers, etc.
Mike you know that all humans are related in the sense that the furthest familial connection is 16th cousins. So Mike, you are a 16th cousin removed of the recently married idle Prince William.
In terms of the contentious issue of "racial classification" I go mainly on phenotype and peoples' reactions to such.
I go on phenotype because that's what really counts for how one is treated in any country. Indians in India range widely in terms of phenotype and pigmentatation but even though most range from very dark to medium brown--I have direct access to Indian TV by satellite--so I have a good idea of what they look like on average. With rare exceptions I would not classify them as "African". Pigmentation is only one phenotypical marker and it varies much especially in groups that live within the tropics and subtropics. In the case of being "Africa" I would say that hair type is a major marker-perhaps the major marker. In that regard, relatively few Indians qualify.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
Your post is on the white propensity to make war in our modern times. You are right, but I doubt it's delusional. They know exactly what they are doing. They just simply believe that they are some kind of "master race" that can murder non-whites--blacks especially--as they see fit.
But the amazing thing is that most non-white nations react very meekly to this. Hard to understand.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Calabooz': ^I was referring specifically to the use of skin lightening cream amongst dark-skinned population. That should have been perfectly obvious given the nature of this discussion
quote:what is
1) the process responsible for
Loss of fur of our hominid ancestors in equilateral Africa. Dark skin was a necessary trait (Jablonski)
quote:2) and reason for
replacement of dark skin?
There has been no replacement of dark skin, so what are you talking about? I was saying that dark skin is not going to be replaced due to either natural selection or sexual selection
why do some humans have light skin and what is the process that made them get light skin?
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Well congratulations Confirming Truth,Lioness and Mike you guys managed to turn this interesting thread into yet another biology thesis Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Mike,
There are many ways you can know the size of a population. You can look at statistics such as live births, voting records, deaths, student populations, ID card numbers, etc.
Mike you know that all humans are related in the sense that the furthest familial connection is 16th cousins. So Mike, you are a 16th cousin removed of the recently married idle Prince William.
In terms of the contentious issue of "racial classification" I go mainly on phenotype and peoples' reactions to such.
I go on phenotype because that's what really counts for how one is treated in any country. Indians in India range widely in terms of phenotype and pigmentatation but even though most range from very dark to medium brown--I have direct access to Indian TV by satellite--so I have a good idea of what they look like on average. With rare exceptions I would not classify them as "African". Pigmentation is only one phenotypical marker and it varies much especially in groups that live within the tropics and subtropics. In the case of being "Africa" I would say that hair type is a major marker-perhaps the major marker. In that regard, relatively few Indians qualify.
Lamin, Letting the disagreements go:
Like I said, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
But on a personal level, as you know, I have serious issues with continental Africans for their past, and even present behaviors. If it was within my power, many past and present Africans would have to have my shoes surgically removed from their anuses.
And if it was within my power, I would certainly slap the current S.A. president upside his head, for his stupidity in the Libyan matter.
But all that being said, and being true: I think that you cheat yourself, when you do not celebrate "ALL" Blacks in their infinite variety.
I was just perusing this page, and the thought came over me, as to how fascinating they all were - Regardless!
I have serious issues with continental Africans for their past, and even present behaviors.
================================================== Are modern Wars a result of White delusion? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 29 April, 2011 2 Russia: Racism against Blacks and abuse in asylum centres (post #0) Ancient Egypt 24 April, 2011 3 Gadhafi starting to put Black faces forward - wonder why (post #0) Ancient Egypt 18 April, 2011 4 Rev. Energy, If you're still here, your thoughts please. (post #0) Ancient Egypt 08 April, 2011 5 Does anyone know when these people STOPPED being Algerians? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 04 April, 2011 6 Why are there so many Europeans? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 02 April, 2011 7 The legend of Saint Maurice and the Theban legion (post #0) Ancient Egypt 31 March, 2011 8 Egmond, a few pieces that the Albino revisionists missed (post #0) Ancient Egypt 28 March, 2011 9 WHY DO ALL OF THESE PEOPLE LOOK "EXACTLY" ALIKE? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 27 March, 2011 10 Now it will get interesting: African Union demands 'immediate' halt to Libya attacks (post #0) Ancient Egypt 19 March, 2011 11 Black history via Coin (post #0) Ancient Egypt 18 March, 2011 12 Gadhafi pushes ahead as Arab (Turk) League calls for help (post #0) Ancient Egypt 12 March, 2011 13 How much of our thinking is our own? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 11 March, 2011 14 Libya: Gadhafi forces show growing confidence (post #0) Ancient Egypt 11 March, 2011 15 Does anyone know why Mau's thread got deleted? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 08 March, 2011 16 Kid Rock will use Confederate flag at NAACP event. (post #0) Ancient Egypt 06 March, 2011 17 Ancient Americas cultural and Racial Affinities with Africa (post #0) Ancient Egypt 03 March, 2011 18 African dictator's son orders luxury superyacht (post #0) Ancient Egypt 27 February, 2011 19 Why are the same people Everywhere? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 21 February, 2011 20 The History of North Africa (post #0) Ancient Egypt 19 February, 2011 21 Looters destroy mummies in Egyptian Museum (post #0) Ancient Egypt 29 January, 2011 22 We are at their MERCY! And there is rarely Mercy (post #0) Ancient Egypt 28 January, 2011 23 Is IronLion right, were the original Romans Black? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 21 January, 2011 24 South Africans accept Wal-Mart bid (post #0) Ancient Egypt 17 January, 2011 25 Super Negros, and other flights of fantasy (post #0) Egyptology 12 January, 2011 26 Clyde, Shang China - Modern South Africa, do you see an analogy? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 03 January, 2011 27 Tropically Adapted verses Cold Adapted Humans (post #0) Ancient Egypt 29 December, 2010 28 Tropically Adapted verses Cold Adapted Humans (post #0) Egyptology 29 December, 2010 29 The consequences of having Whites in charge of Black history (post #0) Egyptology 23 December, 2010 30 The Gullibility Index (post #0) Egyptology 21 December, 2010 31 The Gullibility Index (post #0) Ancient Egypt 21 December, 2010 32 Demolishing the false history of Whites and Turks (post #0) Ancient Egypt 10 December, 2010 33 Assyrian relief: Conquest of Egypt (post #0) Ancient Egypt 07 December, 2010 34 GET THE TURKS OFF OF BLACK LANDS! (post #0) Egyptology 03 December, 2010 35 GET THE TURKS OFF OF BLACK LANDS! (post #0) Ancient Egypt 03 December, 2010 36 FINALLY! Full-faced view of the Hyksos! (post #0) Ancient Egypt 01 December, 2010 37 Misguided Africans? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 27 November, 2010 38 Reference thread: Only one Egyptian Mummy is verifiable, thus real (post #0) Ancient Egypt 21 November, 2010 39 Israeli who trained Colombian militias goes home (post #0) Ancient Egypt 20 November, 2010 40 The Mods are doing SUCH a great job (post #0) Egyptology 17 November, 2010 41 The Turks (post #0) Egyptology 17 November, 2010 42 Seriously? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 13 November, 2010 43 Minoan females were NOT White! (post #0) Egyptology 13 November, 2010 44 What do you think of Yazdgerd III's response? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 26 October, 2010 45 Clyde, looks like the Egyptians agreed with you about the Sumerians being Kushites (post #0) Ancient Egypt 19 October, 2010 46 How to Kill Blacks with Impunity. (post #0) Ancient Egypt 09 October, 2010 47 Yoga; anti-Christian, anti-Muslim? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 07 October, 2010 48 What kind of government allows foreigners to horribly abuse its own citizens? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 02 October, 2010 49 Were Whites a part of the Ancient American population? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 30 September, 2010 50 Black Blood in Ancient Greece (post #0) Ancient Egypt 27 September, 2010 Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
lamin et al.
Is it just me, or do others swear that they see a family member in those pictures on the linked page. Or feel a personal connection with some piece of ancient Black literature?
Every time I look at the Andaman Islands man, I swear that he is family. And the Taiwanese Paiwan King with Mongol wife, at the bottom of the page, looks related to the Andaman Islands man.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Lioness.: I have serious issues with continental Africans for their past, and even present behaviors.
================================================== Are modern Wars a result of White delusion? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 29 April, 2011 2 Russia: Racism against Blacks and abuse in asylum centres (post #0) Ancient Egypt 24 April, 2011 3 Gadhafi starting to put Black faces forward - wonder why (post #0) Ancient Egypt 18 April, 2011 4 Rev. Energy, If you're still here, your thoughts please. (post #0) Ancient Egypt 08 April, 2011 5 Does anyone know when these people STOPPED being Algerians? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 04 April, 2011 6 Why are there so many Europeans? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 02 April, 2011 7 The legend of Saint Maurice and the Theban legion (post #0) Ancient Egypt 31 March, 2011 8 Egmond, a few pieces that the Albino revisionists missed (post #0) Ancient Egypt 28 March, 2011 9 WHY DO ALL OF THESE PEOPLE LOOK "EXACTLY" ALIKE? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 27 March, 2011 10 Now it will get interesting: African Union demands 'immediate' halt to Libya attacks (post #0) Ancient Egypt 19 March, 2011 11 Black history via Coin (post #0) Ancient Egypt 18 March, 2011 12 Gadhafi pushes ahead as Arab (Turk) League calls for help (post #0) Ancient Egypt 12 March, 2011 13 How much of our thinking is our own? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 11 March, 2011 14 Libya: Gadhafi forces show growing confidence (post #0) Ancient Egypt 11 March, 2011 15 Does anyone know why Mau's thread got deleted? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 08 March, 2011 16 Kid Rock will use Confederate flag at NAACP event. (post #0) Ancient Egypt 06 March, 2011 17 Ancient Americas cultural and Racial Affinities with Africa (post #0) Ancient Egypt 03 March, 2011 18 African dictator's son orders luxury superyacht (post #0) Ancient Egypt 27 February, 2011 19 Why are the same people Everywhere? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 21 February, 2011 20 The History of North Africa (post #0) Ancient Egypt 19 February, 2011 21 Looters destroy mummies in Egyptian Museum (post #0) Ancient Egypt 29 January, 2011 22 We are at their MERCY! And there is rarely Mercy (post #0) Ancient Egypt 28 January, 2011 23 Is IronLion right, were the original Romans Black? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 21 January, 2011 24 South Africans accept Wal-Mart bid (post #0) Ancient Egypt 17 January, 2011 25 Super Negros, and other flights of fantasy (post #0) Egyptology 12 January, 2011 26 Clyde, Shang China - Modern South Africa, do you see an analogy? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 03 January, 2011 27 Tropically Adapted verses Cold Adapted Humans (post #0) Ancient Egypt 29 December, 2010 28 Tropically Adapted verses Cold Adapted Humans (post #0) Egyptology 29 December, 2010 29 The consequences of having Whites in charge of Black history (post #0) Egyptology 23 December, 2010 30 The Gullibility Index (post #0) Egyptology 21 December, 2010 31 The Gullibility Index (post #0) Ancient Egypt 21 December, 2010 32 Demolishing the false history of Whites and Turks (post #0) Ancient Egypt 10 December, 2010 33 Assyrian relief: Conquest of Egypt (post #0) Ancient Egypt 07 December, 2010 34 GET THE TURKS OFF OF BLACK LANDS! (post #0) Egyptology 03 December, 2010 35 GET THE TURKS OFF OF BLACK LANDS! (post #0) Ancient Egypt 03 December, 2010 36 FINALLY! Full-faced view of the Hyksos! (post #0) Ancient Egypt 01 December, 2010 37 Misguided Africans? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 27 November, 2010 38 Reference thread: Only one Egyptian Mummy is verifiable, thus real (post #0) Ancient Egypt 21 November, 2010 39 Israeli who trained Colombian militias goes home (post #0) Ancient Egypt 20 November, 2010 40 The Mods are doing SUCH a great job (post #0) Egyptology 17 November, 2010 41 The Turks (post #0) Egyptology 17 November, 2010 42 Seriously? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 13 November, 2010 43 Minoan females were NOT White! (post #0) Egyptology 13 November, 2010 44 What do you think of Yazdgerd III's response? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 26 October, 2010 45 Clyde, looks like the Egyptians agreed with you about the Sumerians being Kushites (post #0) Ancient Egypt 19 October, 2010 46 How to Kill Blacks with Impunity. (post #0) Ancient Egypt 09 October, 2010 47 Yoga; anti-Christian, anti-Muslim? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 07 October, 2010 48 What kind of government allows foreigners to horribly abuse its own citizens? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 02 October, 2010 49 Were Whites a part of the Ancient American population? (post #0) Ancient Egypt 30 September, 2010 50 Black Blood in Ancient Greece (post #0) Ancient Egypt 27 September, 2010
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'
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
[/qb]
