I have always wondered why Africa: the birthplace of modern man, the landmass with the longest continual habitation of humans, has never advanced to any great degree. It has always been that Africans achieved greatness AFTER they left Africa. (Egyptians and Nubians excepted).
Forgetting all the great Black civilizations all over the world for a moment: Even the Berbers, once they left Africa they did this:
But once back in Africa they did nothing comparable.
Which leads me to believe that there is something inherent in African tribalism and it's jealousies which acts to stifle advancement.
I have proven this in the behavior of the ignorant Negro. His mindset is obvious: since he is Black and ignorant, then how could anyone like him (Black) be smart? And he acts on this belief, you would find that he will ignore the teaching of another Black in favor of the teachings of an Albino.
Now in answer to your question:
They lived in Europe, they spoke the European languages, they created the European cultures, they were the nobility and the elites.
What logical reason could you possibility have for doubting that they were indigenous Europeans?
The fact is there is no logical reason; you are merely displaying African tribalism and it's jealousies. [/QB]
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Mike you are judging Africa from a white European perspective and standard
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
Mike overlooks the obvious (purposefully, of course). Blacks outside Africa are admixed with European Whites. It is the European blood in these Blacks that gives them the cognitive means to achieve levels of success true African Negroes can't.
Posted by malibudusul (Member # 19346) on :
Mike, you should consider that Africa was European colony for a long time and today continues to be exploited by Europe and the USA (neo-colonialism). In Zimbabwe for example there is the economic blockade. All this hinders the growth and development of Africa
Posted by malibudusul (Member # 19346) on :
The africa was the source of slaves to Europe and their colonies. Africans in the diaspora have done great things contributed in music, inventions, etc.. Africa is still struggling for their independence
Posted by You Are Bored. (Member # 6729) on :
deal with it Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@confirming truth Mike overlooks the obvious (purposefully, of course). Blacks outside Africa are admixed with European Whites. It is the European blood in these Blacks that gives them the cognitive means to achieve levels of success true African Negroes can't.
Your comment reveals some sort of mental illness. Get help.
But before you do, maybe you could explain why Nigerians and other West Africans educationally do better than African-Americans and British Afro-Caribbeans?
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: Mike overlooks the obvious (purposefully, of course). Blacks outside Africa are admixed with European Whites. It is the European blood in these Blacks that gives them the cognitive means to achieve levels of success true African Negroes can't.
So this explains why you are so dumb! lol
This is the earliest known image of a person of African descent living in London. 'John Blanc' first appears in the records in 1507 as a musician at the court of Henry VII paid 8d a day. He is seen here at a tournament to celebrate the birth of a son to King Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon. (reproduced with permission from the College of Arms)
02. Burial of Margaret, a Moor, St Martin-in-the-Fields, 1571
Parish registers are one of the best sources for tracing black people in London. This burial entry is the earliest known reference to a black woman living in Westminster.
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @confirming truth Mike overlooks the obvious (purposefully, of course). Blacks outside Africa are admixed with European Whites. It is the European blood in these Blacks that gives them the cognitive means to achieve levels of success true African Negroes can't.
Your comment reveals some sort of mental illness. Get help.
But before you do, maybe you could explain why Nigerians and other West Africans educationally do better than African-Americans and British Afro-Caribbeans?
lol I was about the write that. But you thankfully already did! However, statistically they do even better than Asian groups.
quote:Originally posted by malibudusul: Mike, you should consider that Africa was European colony for a long time and today continues to be exploited by Europe and the USA (neo-colonialism). In Zimbabwe for example there is the economic blockade. All this hinders the growth and development of Africa
Except for south Africa, in most places European colonization lasted for less than a hundred years. Their condition is what makes it seem like it was a lot longer.
The fact is that European colonization may have been the best thing that could have happened to them. It allowed them to jettison the old ruling classes, attain some level of common purpose in fighting the Europeans, and establish some level of participatory government.
Now if they could only shake loose from the tribalism and Islam, then they would probably be okay.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by malibudusul: Mike, you should consider that Africa was European colony for a long time and today continues to be exploited by Europe and the USA (neo-colonialism). In Zimbabwe for example there is the economic blockade. All this hinders the growth and development of Africa
Except for south Africa, in most places European colonization lasted for less than a hundred years. Their condition is what makes it seem like it was a lot longer.
The fact is that European colonization may have been the best thing that could have happened to them. It allowed them to jettison the old ruling classes, attain some level of common purpose in fighting the Europeans, and establish some level of participatory government.
Now if they could only shake loose from the tribalism and Islam, then they would probably be okay.
Mike what is your definition of tribalism?
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^What a silly question.
Rwanda is the perfect example of tribalism.
Nigeria is a good example of the problem with Islam.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^What a silly question.
Rwanda is the perfect example of tribalism.
Nigeria is a good example of the problem with Islam.
I know Nigerians. The problem there is no so tribal, but more so religious.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^What a silly question.
Rwanda is the perfect example of tribalism.
Nigeria is a good example of the problem with Islam.
i would like an explanation not a example
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^What, you're Lioness Jr. now? Get lost.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^What, you're Lioness Jr. now? Get lost.
Thats what i thought you cant even explain yourself,now stop worrying about African people and go worry about your 'Black Europeans ancestors' lol
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
Why is it when whites (Irish & English) are at war or fighting with each other they call it ethnic conflict yet when two black groups (Asante & ewe) are at war or fighting they call it tribalism??
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
asante-Korton - It is bad enough that you are such an ignorant Negro that you do not know what "Tribalism" means.
But to compound that, by publicly showing that you even lack the intelligence to look-up words that you do not understand - and see nothing wrong with showing such laziness and dim-witted stupidity!
Well, doesn't that, and you, prove what I said about "The Ignorant Negro"?
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: asante-Korton - It is bad enough that you are such an ignorant Negro that you do not know what "Tribalism" means.
But to compound that, by publicly showing that you even lack the intelligence to look-up words that you do not understand - and see nothing wrong with showing such laziness and dim-witted stupidity!
Well, doesn't that, and you, prove what I said about "The Ignorant Negro"?
I am sorry im not very familiar with the albinos dictionary perhaps you can answer this for me?
quote:Why is it when whites (Irish & English) are at war or fighting with each other they call it ethnic conflict yet when two black groups (Asante & ewe) are at war or fighting they call it tribalism??
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^Everything must be measured in relation to the Albinos eh?
How one can be such a captive slave (mentally), and seemingly have no clue of it, is a mystery to me.
Posted by cassiterides (Member # 18409) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: Mike overlooks the obvious (purposefully, of course). Blacks outside Africa are admixed with European Whites. It is the European blood in these Blacks that gives them the cognitive means to achieve levels of success true African Negroes can't.
Yep.
African-Americans are on average 12 - 15 % White.
It's why their IQ's are higher than pure-blooded Negroids in sub-sahara africa -
Still though the African-American is far lower in IQ than a pure-blooded Caucasoid/White.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^Everything must be measured in relation to the Albinos eh?
How one can be such a captive slave (mentally), and seemingly have no clue of it, is a mystery to me.
Notice how you cant answer this question?
quote:Why is it when whites (Irish & English) are at war or fighting with each other they call it ethnic conflict yet when two black groups (Asante & ewe) are at war or fighting they call it tribalism??
Posted by cassiterides (Member # 18409) on :
quote:Originally posted by You Are Bored.: deal with it
Disgusting.
Kim Kardashian however isn't even white, she's heavily Cherokee (Amerindian) admixed, its what gives her an alleged 'exotic' look which apparently many men like. I personally though think she is ugly. Google image kim without makeup on, and you will see her real face. She looks even more amerindian without her makeup on and her face isn't pleasant.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides:
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: Mike overlooks the obvious (purposefully, of course). Blacks outside Africa are admixed with European Whites. It is the European blood in these Blacks that gives them the cognitive means to achieve levels of success true African Negroes can't.
Yep.
African-Americans are on average 12 - 15 % White.
It's why their IQ's are higher than pure-blooded Negroids in sub-sahara africa -
Still though the African-American is far lower in IQ than a pure-blooded Caucasoid/White.
Do African immigrants make the smartest Americans? The question may sound outlandish, but if you were judging by statistics alone, you could find plenty of evidence to back it up.
In a side-by-side comparison of 2000 census data by sociologist John R. Logan at the Mumford Center, State University of New York at Albany, black immigrants from Africa average the highest educational attainment of any population group in the country, including whites and Asians.
For example, 43.8 percent of African immigrants had achieved a college degree, compared to 42.5 of Asian Americans, 28.9 percent for immigrants from Europe, Russia and Canada, and 23.1 percent of the U.S. population as a whole.
That defies the usual stereotypes of Asian Americans as the only “model minority.” Yet the traditional American narrative has rendered the high academic achievements of black immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean invisible, as if it were a taboo topic.
Instead, we should take a closer look. That was my reaction in 2004 after black Harvard law professor Lani Guinier and Henry Louis Gates Jr., chairman of Harvard’s African-American studies department, stirred a black Harvard alumni reunion with questions about precisely where the university’s new black students were coming from.
About 8 percent, or 530, of Harvard’s undergraduates were black, they said, but somewhere between one-half and two-thirds of black undergraduates were “West Indian and African immigrants or their children, or to a lesser extent, children of biracial couples.”
If we take a closer look, I said then, I bet we’ll find that Harvard is not alone. With all of the ink and airwaves that have been devoted to immigration these days, black immigrants remain remarkably invisible. Yet their success has long followed the patterns of other high-achieving immigrants.
As one immigrant Jamaican friend once told me, “I’m too busy working two jobs to worry about the white man’s racism.”
Now comes a new study that finds a consistent pattern of Ivy League and other elite colleges and universities boosting their black student populations by enrolling large numbers of immigrants from Africa, the West Indies and Latin America.
Immigrants, who make up 13 percent of the nation’s college-age black population, account for more than a quarter of black students at Ivy League and other elite universities, according to the study of 28 selective colleges and universities. The authors of the study, published recently in the American Journal of Education, included Douglas S. Massey of Princeton University and Camille Z. Charles of the University of Pennsylvania. The proportion of immigrants was higher at private institutions, 28.8 percent, than at the public ones, where they comprised 23.1 percent of enrollment.
Are elite schools padding their racial diversity numbers with black immigrants who do not have a history of American slavery in their families? This development immediately calls into question whether affirmative action admission policies are fulfilling their original intent.
But as Walter Benn Michaels, a professor of English at the University of Illinois at Chicago, writes in his book “The Trouble With Diversity: How We Learned to Love Identity and Ignore Inequality,” the original intent of affirmative action morphed back in the 1970s from reparations for slavery into the promotion of a broader virtue: “diversity.” Since then, it no longer seems to matter how many of your college’s black students had slavery in their families. It only matters that they are black.
That said, I don’t begrudge black immigrants or any other high-achieving immigrants for their impressive achievements. I applaud them. I encourage more native-born American children, particularly my own child, to take similar advantage of this country’s hard-won opportunities.
But I also think we need to revisit the meaning of “diversity.” Unlike our current system of feel-good game-playing, we need to focus on the deeper question of how education can be improved and opportunities opened up to those who were left behind by the civil rights revolution.
We tend to look too often at every aspect of diversity except economic class. Yet, the dream of upward mobility is an essential part of how we Americans like to think of ourselves.
It’s also why a lot more people are trying to get into this country than trying to get out
quote:Originally posted by You Are Bored.: deal with it
Disgusting.
Kim Kardashian however isn't even white, she's heavily Cherokee (Amerindian) admixed, its what gives her an alleged 'exotic' look which apparently many men like. I personally though think she is ugly. Google image kim without makeup on, and you will see her real face. She looks even more amerindian without her makeup on and her face isn't pleasant.
Kim kardashian is Armenian not Amerindian you idiot, she only has 6% native American DNA and 94% as you would say Caucasoid DNA
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
quote:As one immigrant Jamaican friend once told me, “I’m too busy working two jobs to worry about the white man’s racism.”
Yeah because A.Americans are all sitting around not working worrying about the White man. Last I checked AA have our own middle and upper classes, and we pretty much paved the way for his Jamaican ass to come here and "Work two Jobs"...
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@cassiterides
You're another one nursing some sort of mental illness...
You haven't answered the question as to why Nigerians and other West Africans tend to be educationally more successful than African-Americans and UK Afro-Caribbeans. Why is that?
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
^^^ You're asking the wrong question..
Immigrants tend to do better than native populations in general, because of the selectivity. An Immigrant is also has more to lose so they will work harder than natives. Other than that, the fact that Africans our preform Asians and other immigrants simply blows the whole I.Q debate out the water...
The question should be why are Africans outpreforming other immigrants.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@Jari
Don't think I am.
My question is specifically targetted at the suggestion that admixed blacks in the diaspora are more intelligent than 'pure' black Africans.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
quote:As one immigrant Jamaican friend once told me, “I’m too busy working two jobs to worry about the white man’s racism.”
Yeah because A.Americans are all sitting around not working worrying about the White man. Last I checked AA have our own middle and upper classes, and we pretty much paved the way for his Jamaican ass to come here and "Work two Jobs"...
It was only one guys opinion im sure he doesn't speak for all Jamaicans
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
A friend of mine, Nigerian-American, privately educated in the UK and whose father was a diplomat, told me that Nigerians in the US have been able to piggy-back off the civil rights movement.
It also should go without saying that despite the sometimes macabre socio-economic realities impacting on African-American communities, they do have the largest black middle-class in the world.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: A friend of mine, Nigerian-American, privately educated in the UK and whose father was a diplomat, told me that Nigerians in the US have been able to piggy-back off the civil rights movement.
It also should go without saying that despite the sometimes macabre socio-economic realities impacting on African-American communities, they do have the largest black middle-class in the world.
How did they get a piggy back off the civil rights movement?
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
I would imagine it's because the ending of legalised racism opened up opportunities for them.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
That's retarded though, that all blacks in the Americas and Europe are mixed..
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @Jari
Don't think I am.
My question is specifically targetted at the suggestion that admixed blacks in the diaspora are more intelligent than 'pure' black Africans.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Yes, but alot of these articles are written by folks trying to uplift Africans/Black Immigrants at the expense of African Americans. Im all for black Immigrants doing well, but African Americans have our middle and Upper class.
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
quote:As one immigrant Jamaican friend once told me, “I’m too busy working two jobs to worry about the white man’s racism.”
Yeah because A.Americans are all sitting around not working worrying about the White man. Last I checked AA have our own middle and upper classes, and we pretty much paved the way for his Jamaican ass to come here and "Work two Jobs"...
It was only one guys opinion im sure he doesn't speak for all Jamaicans
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^What, you're Lioness Jr. now? Get lost.
Thats what i thought you cant even explain yourself,now stop worrying about African people and go worry about your 'Black Europeans ancestors' lol
quote:Notice how you cant answer this question?
Why is it when whites (Irish & English) are at war or fighting with each other they call it ethnic conflict yet when two black groups (Asante & ewe) are at war or fighting they call it tribalism??
lol Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by TruthAndRights:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^What, you're Lioness Jr. now? Get lost.
Thats what i thought you cant even explain yourself,now stop worrying about African people and go worry about your 'Black Europeans ancestors' lol
quote:Notice how you cant answer this question?
Why is it when whites (Irish & English) are at war or fighting with each other they call it ethnic conflict yet when two black groups (Asante & ewe) are at war or fighting they call it tribalism??
lol
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^Everything must be measured in relation to the Albinos eh?
How one can be such a captive slave (mentally), and seemingly have no clue of it, is a mystery to me.
TruthAndRights - Why did you leave my answer out?
He,he,he, You didn't understand it, and neither did he.
Which brings me to another observation on "The Ignorant Negro".
The Cockney will have his say, but with a certain guarded restrain, because he knows that there are people far more knowledgeable than he, and he fears ridicule if he goes too far. He knows that he is ignorant in other words.
The American southerner will have his say, but with a certain guarded restrain, because he knows that there are people far more knowledgeable than he, and he fears ridicule if he goes too far. He knows that he is ignorant in other words.
"The Ignorant Negro" shows no such restrain, because he doesn't know that he or she is ignorant.
The reason for this is because "The Ignorant Negro" is rarely corrected. Blacks, especially in Albino societies, have a tendency to be "Overly" tolerant of "The Ignorant Negro", ostensibly in the interests of unity. But in my opinion, it just serves to "Dumb Down" the entire populations.
Therefore, please consider yourself corrected.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: [QUOTE]Originally posted by claus3600: A friend of mine, Nigerian-American, privately educated in the UK and whose father was a diplomat, told me that Nigerians in the US have been able to piggy-back off the civil rights movement.
It also should go without saying that despite the sometimes macabre socio-economic realities impacting on African-American communities, they do have the largest black middle-class in the world.
How did they get a piggy back off the civil rights movement? [/QUOTE
By being identified as African Americans.
.
Posted by cassiterides (Member # 18409) on :
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Kim kardashian is Armenian not Amerindian you idiot, she only has 6% native American DNA and 94% as you would say Caucasoid DNA
Only her ancestry on her fathers side is Armenian. Secondly 6% is high admixture.
It only takes a very small % to alter someone's phenotype. Kim is phenotypically not Caucasoid, her bone structure, especially in the face looks Mongoloid. This has been discussed all over the net on most anthropology forums.
No anthro forum i have ever been on classifies Kim as Caucasoid.
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
Therefore, please consider yourself corrected.
No, I won't....Yuh mussi drink mad puss piss this mawnin...
now...
I didn't post your answer because it wasn't relevant in that I was LAUGHING OFFA YUH LOONY RASS...dem ah tek it tuh yuh baxide and yuh know it yuh mad clown....
In the bigger picture, you're a sorry-azz Black Man who doesn't even real-eyes his own deep feelings of inferiority and self-hatred; who has no sense of Black Unity has no real apparent care for the Black Community nor respect for Black Women...who clearly thru his own words thinks more like the same yte people he claims to hate so much...no one cuda ever mistake you for a Conscious Black Man...yet...you have the nerve to parade round 'ere like you are the Ambassador of Blackness- and that you are certainly not smh lol...that being said, guh suck yuh madda wid a straw...
now...
Therefore, please consider yourself dismissed...(which shouldn't be anything new to you)...I suggest from here on out you continue to go back to see me but no see me...ok...
now...
Have a Nice Day Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@jari
That's retarded though, that all blacks in the Americas and Europe are mixed..
Who said anything about all blacks in the Americas and Europe being mixed? I'm speaking specifically about African-Americans and UK Afro-Caribbeans. Most of the people in these two groups do have admixture. (Along with most of the black people found in the Americas.)
To recall. The suggestion is that admixed blacks are more intelligent than 'pure-blooded' black Africans. Admixed blacks are more representative of the black population in the AA and UK Afro-Carribean communities, and Non-admixed blacks are more representative of the Nigerian/West African community.
So the question stands. Why are (generally 'unmixed') Nigerians/West Africans educationally more succesful than (generally admixed) African-Americans and UK Afro-Carribeans?
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@cassiterides
No anthro forum i have ever been on classifies Kim as Caucasoid
Leaving aside my disbelief that Kim Kardashian's racial 'category' is the widespread topic of discussion on anthro forums, I thought you argued that despite having dark brown skin, the Egyptians could still qualify as caucasian/caucasoid or whatever catch-all you resort to.
But not Kim in this instance?
(Note to self: do not waste time debating with mentally ill white racists on the internet.)
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@TruthandRights
I wonder at the true identity of Mike111. They're too incredibly outlandish.
Posted by You Are Bored. (Member # 6729) on :
BLOCKHEADS Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by TruthAndRights:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
Therefore, please consider yourself corrected.
No, I won't....Yuh mussi drink mad puss piss this mawnin...
now...
I didn't post your answer because it wasn't relevant in that I was LAUGHING OFFA YUH LOONY RASS...dem ah tek it tuh yuh baxide and yuh know it yuh mad clown....
In the bigger picture, you're a sorry-azz Black Man who doesn't even real-eyes his own deep feelings of inferiority and self-hatred; who has no sense of Black Unity has no real apparent care for the Black Community nor respect for Black Women...who clearly thru his own words thinks more like the same yte people he claims to hate so much...no one cuda ever mistake you for a Conscious Black Man...yet...you have the nerve to parade round 'ere like you are the Ambassador of Blackness- and that you are certainly not smh lol...that being said, guh suck yuh madda wid a straw...
now...
Therefore, please consider yourself dismissed...(which shouldn't be anything new to you)...I suggest from here on out you continue to go back to see me but no see me...ok...
now...
Have a Nice Day
The "The Ignorant Negro" also thinks that failure to master the native language is in some way denoting "Authenticity" of some kind. "The Ignorant Negro" fails to understand that slaves spoke like that because they could no better do, NOT because they wanted to. In their native languages, they spoke fluently and normally in every way.
Which of course begs the question: Why would a rational person want to emulate the language of uneducated slaves from centuries past, when the slaves themselves wanted so much to receive education and thusly improve their chances of success?
It only makes sense to "The Ignorant Negro".
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
Originall written by an africa group
Tribe has no coherent meaning. What is a tribe? The Zulu in South Africa, whose name and common identity was forged by the creation of a powerful state less than two centuries ago, and who are a bigger group than French Canadians, are called a tribe. So are the !Kung hunter-gatherers of Botswana and Namibia, who number in the hundreds. The term is applied to Kenya's Maasai herders and Kikuyu farmers, and to members of these groups in cities and towns when they go there to live and work.
Tribe is used for millions of Yoruba in Nigeria and Benin, who share a language but have an eight-hundred year history of multiple and sometimes warring city-states, and of religious diversity even within the same extended families. Tribe is used for Hutu and Tutsi in the central African countries of Rwanda and Burundi. Yet the two societies (and regions within them) have different histories. And in each one, Hutu and Tutsi lived interspersed in the same territory. They spoke the same language, married each other, and shared virtually all aspects of culture. At no point in history could the distinction be defined by distinct territories, one of the key assumptions built into "tribe."
Tribe is used for groups who trace their heritage to great kingdoms. It is applied to Nigeria's Igbo and other peoples who organized orderly societies composed of hundreds of local communities and highly developed trade networks without recourse to elaborate states. Tribe is also used for all sorts of smaller units of such larger nations, peoples or ethnic groups. The followers of a particular local leader may be called a tribe. Members of an extended kin-group may be called a tribe. People who live in a particular area may be called a tribe. We find tribes within tribes, and cutting across other tribes. Offering no useful distinctions, tribe obscures many. As a description of a group, tribe means almost anything, so it really means nothing.
If by tribe we mean a social group that shares a single territory, a single language, a single political unit, a shared religious tradition, a similar economic system, and common cultural practices, such a group is rarely found in the real world. These characteristics almost never correspond precisely with each other today, nor did they at any time in the past.
Tribe promotes a myth of primitive African timelessness, obscuring history and change.
The general sense of tribe as most people understand it is associated with primitiveness. To be in a tribal state is to live in a uncomplicated, traditional condition. It is assumed there is little change. Most African countries are economically poor and often described as less developed or underdeveloped. Westerners often conclude that they have not changed much over the centuries, and that African poverty mainly reflects cultural and social conservatism. Interpreting present day Africa through the lens of tribes reinforces the image of timelessness. Yet the truth is that Africa has as much history as anywhere else in the world. It has undergone momentous changes time and again, especially in the twentieth century. While African poverty is partly a product of internal dynamics of African societies, it has also been caused by the histories of external slave trades and colonial rule.
In the modern West, tribe often implies primitive savagery.
When the general image of tribal timelessness is applied to situations of social conflict between Africans, a particularly destructive myth is created. Stereotypes of primitiveness and conservative backwardness are also linked to images of irrationality and superstition. The combination leads to portrayal of violence and conflict in Africa as primordial, irrational and unchanging. This image resonates with traditional Western racialist ideas and can suggest that irrational violence is inherent and natural to Africans. Yet violence anywhere has both rational and irrational components. Just as particular conflicts have reasons and causes elsewhere, they also have them in Africa. The idea of timeless tribal violence is not an explanation. Instead it disguises ignorance of real causes by filling the vacuum of real knowledge with a popular stereotype.
Images of timelessness and savagery hide the modern character of African ethnicity, including ethnic conflict.
The idea of tribe particularly shapes Western views of ethnicity and ethnic conflict in Africa, which has been highly visible in recent years. Over and over again, conflicts are interpreted as "ancient tribal rivalries," atavistic eruptions of irrational violence which have always characterized Africa. In fact they are nothing of the sort. The vast majority of such conflicts could not have happened a century ago in the ways that they do now. Pick almost any place where ethnic conflict occurs in modern Africa. Investigate carefully the issues over which it occurs, the forms it takes, and the means by which it is organized and carried out. Recent economic developments and political rivalries will loom much larger than allegedly ancient and traditional hostilities.
Ironically, some African ethnic identities and divisions now portrayed as ancient and unchanging actually were created in the colonial period. In other cases earlier distinctions took new, more rigid and conflictual forms over the last century. The changes came out of communities' interactions within a colonial or post-colonial context, as well as movement of people to cities to work and live. The identities thus created resemble modern ethnicities in other countries, which are also shaped by cities, markets and national states.
Tribe substitutes a generalized illusion for detailed analysis of particular situations.
The bottom-line problem with the idea of tribe is that it is intellectually lazy. It substitutes the illusion of understanding for analysis of particular circumstances. Africa is far away from North America. Accurate information about particular African states and societies takes more work to find than some other sorts of information. Yet both of those situations are changing rapidly. Africa is increasingly tied into the global economy and international politics. Using the idea of tribe instead of real, specific information and analysis of African events has never served the truth well. It also serves the public interest badly.
Thinking just like your albino mike
Posted by Bring It On Player. (Member # 6729) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: "The Ignorant Negro" fails to understand that slaves spoke like that because they could no better do, NOT because they wanted to. In their native languages, they spoke fluently and normally in every way.
"The Ignorant Negro" does not know that the tendency for Black people to slang their language exists in every African language and culture.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: So the question stands. Why are (generally 'unmixed') Nigerians/West Africans educationally more succesful than (generally admixed) African-Americans and UK Afro-Carribeans?
This is a stupid question. The Africans in the US, are not the average African.
First of all West Africans had to have had money to emmigrate to the US. This means that they were Middle Class before they came here.
Given their financial background and ability to live in many areas--native born Afro-Americans are not allowed to live they would recieve a better education. It is no secret that the more money a group has the better the education they recieve.
LOL. Their IQ scores and success reflect their social economic status--not special ability.
.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton:
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides:
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: Mike overlooks the obvious (purposefully, of course). Blacks outside Africa are admixed with European Whites. It is the European blood in these Blacks that gives them the cognitive means to achieve levels of success true African Negroes can't.
Yep.
African-Americans are on average 12 - 15 % White.
It's why their IQ's are higher than pure-blooded Negroids in sub-sahara africa -
Still though the African-American is far lower in IQ than a pure-blooded Caucasoid/White.
Do African immigrants make the smartest Americans? The question may sound outlandish, but if you were judging by statistics alone, you could find plenty of evidence to back it up.
In a side-by-side comparison of 2000 census data by sociologist John R. Logan at the Mumford Center, State University of New York at Albany, black immigrants from Africa average the highest educational attainment of any population group in the country, including whites and Asians.
For example, 43.8 percent of African immigrants had achieved a college degree, compared to 42.5 of Asian Americans, 28.9 percent for immigrants from Europe, Russia and Canada, and 23.1 percent of the U.S. population as a whole.
That defies the usual stereotypes of Asian Americans as the only “model minority.” Yet the traditional American narrative has rendered the high academic achievements of black immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean invisible, as if it were a taboo topic.
Instead, we should take a closer look. That was my reaction in 2004 after black Harvard law professor Lani Guinier and Henry Louis Gates Jr., chairman of Harvard’s African-American studies department, stirred a black Harvard alumni reunion with questions about precisely where the university’s new black students were coming from.
About 8 percent, or 530, of Harvard’s undergraduates were black, they said, but somewhere between one-half and two-thirds of black undergraduates were “West Indian and African immigrants or their children, or to a lesser extent, children of biracial couples.”
If we take a closer look, I said then, I bet we’ll find that Harvard is not alone. With all of the ink and airwaves that have been devoted to immigration these days, black immigrants remain remarkably invisible. Yet their success has long followed the patterns of other high-achieving immigrants.
As one immigrant Jamaican friend once told me, “I’m too busy working two jobs to worry about the white man’s racism.”
Now comes a new study that finds a consistent pattern of Ivy League and other elite colleges and universities boosting their black student populations by enrolling large numbers of immigrants from Africa, the West Indies and Latin America.
Immigrants, who make up 13 percent of the nation’s college-age black population, account for more than a quarter of black students at Ivy League and other elite universities, according to the study of 28 selective colleges and universities. The authors of the study, published recently in the American Journal of Education, included Douglas S. Massey of Princeton University and Camille Z. Charles of the University of Pennsylvania. The proportion of immigrants was higher at private institutions, 28.8 percent, than at the public ones, where they comprised 23.1 percent of enrollment.
Are elite schools padding their racial diversity numbers with black immigrants who do not have a history of American slavery in their families? This development immediately calls into question whether affirmative action admission policies are fulfilling their original intent.
But as Walter Benn Michaels, a professor of English at the University of Illinois at Chicago, writes in his book “The Trouble With Diversity: How We Learned to Love Identity and Ignore Inequality,” the original intent of affirmative action morphed back in the 1970s from reparations for slavery into the promotion of a broader virtue: “diversity.” Since then, it no longer seems to matter how many of your college’s black students had slavery in their families. It only matters that they are black.
That said, I don’t begrudge black immigrants or any other high-achieving immigrants for their impressive achievements. I applaud them. I encourage more native-born American children, particularly my own child, to take similar advantage of this country’s hard-won opportunities.
But I also think we need to revisit the meaning of “diversity.” Unlike our current system of feel-good game-playing, we need to focus on the deeper question of how education can be improved and opportunities opened up to those who were left behind by the civil rights revolution.
We tend to look too often at every aspect of diversity except economic class. Yet, the dream of upward mobility is an essential part of how we Americans like to think of ourselves.
It’s also why a lot more people are trying to get into this country than trying to get out
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: "The Ignorant Negro" fails to understand that slaves spoke like that because they could no better do, NOT because they wanted to. In their native languages, they spoke fluently and normally in every way.
"The Ignorant Negro" does not know that the tendency for Black people to slang their language exists in every African language and culture.
lol
"The Ignorant Knee-Grow" also does not know that (and since so many here like wickipedia I'll indulge them) [note: certain ones and ones here are not worth my taking the time to sit down type out the lesson so, copy and paste it is]:
quote: Jamaican Patois, known locally as Patois (Patwa) or Jamaican, and called Jamaican Creole by linguists, is an English-lexified creole language with West African influences spoken primarily in Jamaica and the Jamaican diaspora. It is not to be confused with Jamaican English nor with the Rastafarian use of English. The language developed in the 17th century, when slaves from West and Central Africa were exposed to, learned and nativized the vernacular and dialectal forms of English spoken by their masters: British English, Scots and Hiberno-English. Jamaican Patois features a creole continuum (or a linguistic continuum)[2][3][4]—meaning that the variety of the language closest to the lexifier language (the acrolect) cannot be distinguished systematically from intermediate varieties (collectively referred to as the mesolect) nor even from the most divergent rural varieties (collectively referred to as the basilect). Jamaicans themselves usually refer to their dialect as patois, a French term without a precise linguistic definition.
Significant Jamaican-speaking communities exist among Jamaican expatriates in Miami, New York City, Toronto, Hartford, Washington, D.C., Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama (in the Caribbean coast), and London.[5] A mutually intelligible variety is found in San Andrés y Providencia Islands, Colombia, brought to the island by descendants of Jamaican Maroons (escaped slaves) in the 18th century. Mesolectal forms are similar to very basilectal Belizean Kriol.
Jamaican Patois exists mostly as a spoken language. Although standard British English is used for most writing in Jamaica, Jamaican Patois has been gaining ground as a literary language for almost a hundred years. Claude McKay published his book of Jamaican poems Songs of Jamaica in 1912. Patois and English are frequently used for stylistic contrast (codeswitching) in new forms of internet writing.[6]
Jamaican pronunciation and vocabulary are significantly different from English, despite heavy use of English words or derivatives. Jamaican Patois displays similarities to the pidgin and creole languages of West Africa, due to their common descent from the blending of African substrate languages with European languages.
quote: Is Jamaica Patois a language? by Karl Folkes
I am a Jamaican educator and linguist and a frequent user of Jamaicans.com website, which I find fascinating, necessary, and culturally uplifting. I am particularly interested in the use of patois (qua patwa) as an active and vibrant medium of communication by a number of Jamaicans; and even by other friends of Jamaica. From a linguist's perspective the language referred to as "Patois/Patwa" is officially labeled as "Jamaican Creole", or even better as simply "Jamaican". This designation is understandable in the larger context in which languages are usually named -- after the country in which the language initially evolved and developed. Thus, as examples, we have the following: England/English; Germany/German; Sweden/Swedish; France/French; Spain/Spanish; China/Chinese; Russia/Russian. Occasionally languages are named after an ethnocultural grouping or region, thus: Arabia/Arabic; Judisch=Jewish/Yiddish. Even when there appears to be no direct connection between a nation or country and the designation of its language we can trace some historic connection that can provide a logical explanation for the current name of the language. The United States (America) is a typical example. We do not normally refer to the language as "American" (although some people may do so), but simply as "English". The rational explanation for this is that the original 'American' speakers and users of "English" were actually English men and women during the colonial and pre-independence era in the first half of the 18th century -- and certainly before that -- under King George III. Thus 'American' English bears the colonial legacy as an indelible imprint in the naming of the language.
Back to the case of Patois/Patwa/Jamaican Creole/Jamaican! From linguistic experience we know that creole languages worldwide developed out of earlier forms, described as a 'Pidgin' as a result of the contact (e.g., from trading, commerce, bartering, even slavery) betwen and among speakers of mutually incomprehensible languages: French and African languages; English and African languages; Dutch and African languages; Some European language and Chinese, Native American, or African languages, etc.
In the case of Jamaica (during an extended period of slavery and colonialism) the mutually incomprehensible languages were English (and Spanish prior to English) and a combination of several West African languages primarily from West Africa and pertaining to the Niger-Congo family of languages. Out of this fertile linguistic soup a common 'primitive' or pseudolanguage ('pseudosprache') emerged -- spoken by our Jamaican ancestors from Africa who, themselves, possessed such native languages as Twi, Fante, Ibo, Yoruba -- which, under harsh and severe penalty, they were forbidden to speak in the presence of their European masters. However, this 'convenient' pseudotalk by our African ancestors in Jamaica and the rest of the Caribbean, in time was developed by the children of our African ancestors into a full-fledged language with its autonomous grammar bearing strong African roots and stocked with the lexicon of English words and those from Spanish, French, Native American, and, of course, African sources.
This new language became known generically as 'Creole' to identify its genesis from multilinguistic sources (involving, as a requirement, three or more languages to contribute to the development of the new language. Today we have creole languages all over the world. Some better known ones are Jamaican, Haitian, Sranan Tongo, Garifuna (in the Caribbean) , Tok Psin (in the Malaysian Peninsula), Afrikaans (in South Africa), Yiddish (in Germany and around the world). Interestingly, many of these languages now enjoy official recognition and status; and encourage literacy development in these various languages. I believe that Jamaican is moving steadily in that direction.
The ultimate question as to whether these Creole languages are indeed "languages" or "dialects" is moot and in fact a distraction. Again, from a linguistic perspective, all "languages" are comprised of "dialects", which are the distinct variations in form, utterance, meaning, and syntax of a particular language. What we sometimes describe as 'standard' English is itself a variant form of the family of dialects we refer to collectively as "English". Some dialects of "English" are: 'Bostonian', 'Southern', 'New England', 'Australian', 'Yorkshire', 'Cockney ', 'Canadian', etc. Some of these dialects of English will be arbitrarily assigned more 'prestige' than others; but this is a sociological choice rather than a linguistic choice. When, however, a dialect 'shift' is so great that the differences from the 'uniform' language family make communication difficult or perhaps even impossible, we recognize, at least psychologically, culturally, and socially that this 'strange', 'crude', 'vulgar' dialect has indeed become another language, yet bearing historic connection with the language that it -- way in the past -- had membership.
Again classical examples are Latin and Italian; Latin and Spanish; Latin and French; Latin and Portuguese; Germanic and English; Germanic and Dutch; Germanic and Swedish; Germanic and Germanic; Germanic and Norwegian/Danish, etc. The point to all of this is to recognize that Jamaican is distinct enough to be recognized as a language of African origins that has sufficiently evolved to become an autonomous language. What has not quite happened so far is to have a uniform orthographic representation of the language; and therefore to give it the respect it fully deserves. As linguists we note that all human languages started out in oral form (Sign Language is an exception); and many of these languages were later ascribed written phonetic representations in order to preserve some written consistency of the language, recognizing at the same time that (again largely because of dialect distinctions), in their oral expression, there would always be a degree of variation that demonstrated the vibrancy of the language in different linguistic communities. Literacy (and perhaps in relation to the development of movable type and the Printing Press) soon developed and became a widespread phenomenon among those languages that employed a uniform written form. These languages even gained prestige and a 'standard' associated with them. Unfortunately, those languages which are quite capable of being represented orthographically in a uniform way, but have not done so for a number of reasons (repression by the 'prestige' languages that they are in contact with; discouragement by 'those in power' to see these languages orthographically represented; social, cultural, historical, political, economic clashes, etc) are criticized, frowned on, scorned -- in a similar way in which we regard the speakers of these languages as societal 'outcasts' or 'rejects'.
Let's examine briefly some structures in Jamaican and compare them with English:
JAMAICAN ENGLISH
Dem a fi mi They're mine Kuyaman, awara? Say, what's up?
Unu a fi nuo seh a soh wi tan You must know that's the way we are
A wan dege sinting smadi a gi mi It's a measly thing that someone is giving me
A nyam im nyamop di breshi! He(she) really ate up the breadfruit!
Of course, I could go on. But the point I wish to make here is that Jamaican is quite distinct from English, is rule-governed (has a grammar of its own); has its own 'standard', has a community of native speakers, is capable of expressing in writing any concept that can be expressed in English or any other language; and certainly can be expressed orthographically in a uniform way that can -- and should-- encourage literacy development.
quote:Jamaican is an English-based Creole with influences from languages of West and Central Africa. It developed during the 17th century and includes significant influences from various dialects of English, especially those of Scotland and Ireland. Over 4 million people speak Jamaican, most of whom live in Jamaica. There are also many speakers in parts of the USA, Canada, Brazil, Costa Rica, Panama, Nicaragua and the UK.
Jamaican is used mainly as a spoken language, though has been used to some extent as a literary language for over a century. The is no written standard, though increased use of the language in writing, especially in schools, has led to a partial standardisation. Some schools in Jamaica use both English and Jamaican as mediums of instruction and have found that children taught in this way tend to achieve better results than those taught only in English.
Translation
The speech of the average Jamaican is variously described as a patois or creole, or even as bad English, depending on the degree of pride or disdain of the describer. Jamaicans' attitudes themselves are very divided over the language they all speak most, if not all, of the time. Although English is the official language of the country, and a variant known as Jamaican English is acknowledged, it is mostly heard only in formal situations, unless one wants to impress with "speaky-spoky." Common usage ranges from Jamaican English to broad patois with about three degrees of separation, often within a single speaker's conversation.
Stupid jancro.....
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bring It On Player.:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: "The Ignorant Negro" fails to understand that slaves spoke like that because they could no better do, NOT because they wanted to. In their native languages, they spoke fluently and normally in every way.
"The Ignorant Negro" does not know that the tendency for Black people to slang their language exists in every African language and culture.
Could you give me an example please. I know many Africans, and their use of language (native and English) seems impeccable to me.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
^Mike111 Quote: "The Ignorant Negro does not know that he is ignorant".
Posted by Confirming Truth (Member # 17678) on :
What economic blockade, idiot? The very same people that you accuse of exploiting the Africans, have decided to not do business with them. This should make you happy, right? LOL!! What a fvcking self-contradicting buffoon!
quote:Originally posted by malibudusul: Mike, you should consider that Africa was European colony for a long time and today continues to be exploited by Europe and the USA (neo-colonialism). In Zimbabwe for example there is the economic blockade. All this hinders the growth and development of Africa
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
TruthAndRights - So now the backward Jamaican underclass represents all of Jamaica eh?
I know many Jamaicans, and their use of the English language seems impeccable to me.
Geez from the time I looked at this post till I decide to post, this thread just...!! o well it was meant to be a throw away anywayz but below is a conversation at ESR that pretty much explain some of what goes on and how things came to be.
This is all the more telling by the increased privatizing of prisons. What is extremely painful is those ex slaves who rolled up their sleeves went to work were as industrious as any new comer immigrant community ,were forced or kept into poverty by laws meant to re-enslave them,they had their communities destroyed if they showed any sign of progress or independence (Black Wall Street) many of them ended up in ghettos abandoned called lazy and used as an example of an inferior human being,the reason why the black elites following the decades of reconstruction concentrated on the political was because they had no choice,if they wanted to forge ahead they had to try and change the system what was the use if they had money but at any moment Anglo Europeans could confiscate property at will for back then Black people had no rights White people were bound to respect, and what new comer communities need to understand, is because the African Americans fought for those changes they could come and concentrate on the economic or education,so knowing this pains me when I hear folks even from my own community pointing fingers saying look at these "yankees" who have been here so long and yet remain in poor and under educated. http://video.pbs.org/video/2176766758 Read more: http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=hist&action=display&thread=1080#ixzz1n8FUl3kk Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: TruthAndRights - So now the backward Jamaican underclass represents all of Jamaica eh?
I know many Jamaicans, and their use of the English language seems impeccable to me.
"The Ignorant Negro does not know that he is ignorant". This is true; that being said: POOR YOU.
Yuh come een like mosquito: insignificant and slightly irritating same time wid yuh bzzz bzzzz...like I said, see me and no see me....cah trust me, YOU are quite easy to overlook, as I do it most of the time (you only get my attention, when you do, outta boredom and need fe amusement, like the duo CAH-SH*T-HE-RIDES and CONFIRMED EEDIAT-BWOY)...since I'm such a poor confused ignorant Negro, I'm sure you can see me and no see me with no problem Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by Bring It On Player.:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: "The Ignorant Negro" fails to understand that slaves spoke like that because they could no better do, NOT because they wanted to. In their native languages, they spoke fluently and normally in every way.
"The Ignorant Negro" does not know that the tendency for Black people to slang their language exists in every African language and culture.
Could you give me an example please. I know many Africans, and their use of language (native and English) seems impeccable to me.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: "The Ignorant Negro" fails to understand that slaves spoke like that because they could no better do, NOT because they wanted to. In their native languages, they spoke fluently and normally in every way.
"The Ignorant Negro" does not know that the tendency for Black people to slang their language exists in every African language and culture.
Could you give me an example please. I know many Africans, and their use of language (native and English) seems impeccable to me.
What him really need fe duh is jus lo weh him nuh know bout, and gwan continue fe chase afta look ina fe him Black European heritage... Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: What economic blockade, idiot? The very same people that you accuse of exploiting the Africans, have decided to not do business with them. This should make you happy, right? LOL!! What a fvcking self-contradicting buffoon!
quote:Originally posted by malibudusul: Mike, you should consider that Africa was European colony for a long time and today continues to be exploited by Europe and the USA (neo-colonialism). In Zimbabwe for example there is the economic blockade. All this hinders the growth and development of Africa
Yup, indeed you confirm your stupidity once more. I rest my case.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
African-born blacks comprise 16 percent of the U.S. foreign-born black population and are considerably more educated than other black immigrants (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). The vast majority of these immigrants come from minority white countries in East and West Africa (e.g. Kenya and Nigeria), and less than 2 percent originate from North or South Africa (World Factbook, 2004; Yearbook of immigration Statistics, 2003). In an analysis of Census Bureau data by the Journal of Blacks in higher education, African immigrants to the United States were found more likely to be college educated than any other immigrant group, which included those from Europe, North America and Asia (also see U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). African immigrants have also been shown to be more highly educated than any native-born ethnic group including white and Asian Americans (see also, Logan & Deane, 2003; Williams, 2005; The Economist, 1996; Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998).
Most current data suggest that between 43.8 and 48.9 percent of all African immigrants in the United States hold a college diploma (Charles, 2007; U.S. Census, 2000). This is slightly more than the percentage of Asian immigrants to the U.S., nearly “double” the rate of native-born white Americans, and nearly four times the rate of native-born African Americans (Williams, 2005; The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000). Black immigrants from Africa have also been shown to have rates of college graduation that are “more” than double that of the U.S.-born population, in general (Williams, 2005). For example, in 1997, 19.4 percent of all adult African immigrants in the United States held a “graduate degree”, compared to 8.1 percent of adult whites (a difference of “more than” double) and 3.8 percent of adult blacks in the United States, respectively (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000). This shows that America has an equally large achievement gap between white Americans and African born immigrants as between native born white and black Americans.
In the UK, 1988, the Commission for Racial Equality conducted an investigation on the admissions practices of St. George's, and other medical colleges, who set aside a certain number of places for minority students. This informal quota system reflected the percentage of minorities in the general population. However, minority students with Chinese, Indian, or black African heritage had higher academic qualifications for university admission than did whites (Blacks in Britain from the West Indies had lower academic credentials than did whites). In fact, blacks with African origins over the age of 30 had the highest educational qualifications of any ethnic group in the British Isles. Thus, the evidence pointed to the fact that minority quotas for University admissions were actually working against students from these ethnic groups who were on average more qualified for higher education than their white peers (Cross, 1994; Also see, Dustmann, Theodoropoulos, 2006).
Dustmann and Theodoropoulos (2006) provide a first thorough investigation of educational attainment and economic behavior of ethnic minority immigrants and their children in Britain. They studied how British born minorities perform in terms of education, employment and wages, when compared to their parent generation as well as to comparable groups of white natives, using 27 years of LFS data (Labour Force Survey). In terms of educational attainment their results showed a strong educational background for Britain’s ethnic minority immigrant population. In addition, they showed that second generation ethnic minorities do better than their parents, and substantially better than their white peers! For both generations Black Africans topped the list in both years of schooling/educational qualifications and wages/employment (ibid).
Again, when comparing immigrants in the United States one quickly finds that the racialist models adopted by many Psychologists do not always predict outcomes in the way one might expect. For example, it has been shown that black immigrants born from Zimbabwe (96.7 percent), Botswana (95.5 percent) have high school graduation rates that far exceed all white immigrant and native born groups. Moreover, the average Nigerian immigrant (58.6 percent) living in the United States is “eight times” more likely to have obtained a bachelors degree than the average Portuguese born (7.3 percent) (Dixon D, 2006; Dixon D, 2005)!
The African born in the United States are concentrated in management or professional and sales or office-related occupations. Of the employed population age 16 and older in the civilian labor force, the African born are much more likely than the foreign born in general to work in management and professional occupations as well as sales and office occupations (i.e. clerical/administrative). Additionally, the African born are less likely to work in service, production, transportation, material moving, construction, and maintenance occupations than the foreign born in general (Dixon D, 2006). In the UK a study by Dr Yaojun Li, from Birmingham University, and Professor Anthony Heath, from Oxford University, found that Africans are more likely to be in professional and managerial jobs than white British men, with a large proportion, about 40%, holding these positions (Li and Heath, 2006).
Something else to note, according to the New York Times (Roberts, 2005) , for the first time in history more blacks are coming to the United States from Africa than during the slave trade. Immigration figures show that since 1990 more Africans have arrived voluntarily than the total who disembarked in chains before the United States outlawed international slave trafficking in 1807. For example, it has been shown that nearly 15% of Ghana’s 20million citizens live aboard (Owusu-Ankomah 2006) and similar trends can be observed among several other African states. In other words: black African achievement can not simply be dismissed as that of a “small group” of elites entirely unrepresentative of the greater continent. Moreover, the academic attainment and occupational achievements of black Africans are documented in the UK (Li and Heath, 2006; Dustmann, Theodoropoulos, 2006) as well as in Canada (Guppy and Davies, 1998; Boyd, 2002).
The information presented above suggests that African born blacks residing in western countries as a group possess IQs that are between 5 points and a full standard deviation (15 IQ points) above that of whites living in these countries. So that the median IQ for African blacks residing in the west should be about 110, if one accepts that research suggesting direct casual relationships between academic attainment levels and IQ (e.g. Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999)!
Research also shows that when African Americans are matched as to linguistic behavior (e.g. black vs. standard English), literacy levels and to the comprehension of sayings requiring specific knowledge, that African Americans perform as well or better than do Whites on IQ tests.
By Bernie Douglas (April 10, 2008), Revised February 17, 2009
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
^TruthAndRights - I will let the Nigerian forum members defend themselves.
But it does speak to the point of the proceedings. It was definitely not to be mean. Let me relay a story: Many years ago I was in the company of an elderly gentleman. Having been offended by an Ignorant Negro, I was just about to lay into him, when my elderly companion stopped me by saying: "They already feel bad enough about themselves, why make them feel worst". Seeing as to who I was getting the advice from, how could I see it as other than sage advice, I complied with his request.
But what he didn't understand, is that the ignorant are like "Locust" if left unchecked, that is to say educated to the fact that they are merely ignorant Negroes, they will think that they are "Right" AND "Mainstream" thus they will usurp everything, turn it into their simple-minded version of what they think it should be, and claim it all as their own.
Above TruthAndRights wants to claim that normal Nigerians speak pidgin, before that she claimed that normal Jamaicans spoke creole.
The fact is that in years past, Jamaicans were the best educated, most competent Blacks in the Caribbean. Jamaican doctors and educators ranged far and wide, and were highly valued. As the video shows, they speak perfect English.
In the United States, Black entertainers were the height of Chic and Cool, and their creative genius was unquestioned.
But then the Ignorant Negroes were allowed a foothold, and then they spread - like Locust. Now this is what Black American music looks like.
In my opinion, "The Ignorant Negro" is a greater threat to Black communities than any Albino. Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mike there is a difference between pop culture and high culture One of the most prominent brain surgeon in the world.
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Mike there is a difference between pop culture and high culture One of the most prominent brain surgeon in the world.
@ Brada smh...but yuh done know how di bwoy stay already lol:
Mi seh, poor him Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Mike there is a difference between pop culture and high culture
Actually in it's time, that WAS pop culture. But giving you a break: Please show some examples of current "HIGH" culture.
Posted by kenndo (Member # 4846) on :
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Kim kardashian is Armenian not Amerindian you idiot, she only has 6% native American DNA and 94% as you would say Caucasoid DNA
Only her ancestry on her fathers side is Armenian. Secondly 6% is high admixture.
It only takes a very small % to alter someone's phenotype. Kim is phenotypically not Caucasoid, her bone structure, especially in the face looks Mongoloid. This has been discussed all over the net on most anthropology forums.
No anthro forum i have ever been on classifies Kim as Caucasoid.
All your other comments are incorrect cassiterides.
Now for this point. kim father may have black admixture since the dna test jessica alba's took was flawed. Mr. mark shriver a dna expert said so to me on the phone.
He said the george lopez show messed up.
Has for whites it may take little admixture to change phenotype,who knows. 6% is little admixture,for whites it may be high. For those that are not white that is low. I know for other groups it will take much higher admixture to change phenotype,more like 20% or higher,and this is not always the case,of course the higher the more likely.
Anyway has for whites i think it make take that same level 20% or more as well,but i am not sure,the problem is i think kim has more admixture and it's really from the father side most likely since we all know that there were blacks in Armenia in ancient times from ancient egypt.
If look at her father you will see why.
Her father could have some east asian admixture,who knows or combined black or east asian admixture.Another test for kim and jessica should taken.
Posted by cassiterides (Member # 18409) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @cassiterides
No anthro forum i have ever been on classifies Kim as Caucasoid
Leaving aside my disbelief that Kim Kardashian's racial 'category' is the widespread topic of discussion on anthro forums, I thought you argued that despite having dark brown skin, the Egyptians could still qualify as caucasian/caucasoid or whatever catch-all you resort to.
But not Kim in this instance?
(Note to self: do not waste time debating with mentally ill white racists on the internet.)
Its got nothing to do with skin colour.
Her facial features are partially Mongoloid.
Race isn't solely about pigmentation and never has been. An anthropologist can determine with 100% accuracy the race of a skeleton, and of course there is no skin pigment on it.
Posted by Mike111 (Member # 9361) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Mike there is a difference between pop culture and high culture
Actually in it's time, that WAS pop culture. But giving you a break: Please show some examples of current "HIGH" culture.
I see that you are stuck, so let me try and help you out.
Posted by cassiterides (Member # 18409) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Mike there is a difference between pop culture and high culture One of the most prominent brain surgeon in the world.
This scientist is probably African-American, and not living in Africa.
African-Americans have higher IQ's than Blacks living in Africa, because they have 12 - 15% white admixture.
IQ (Lynn, 2006a, p 37) -
Black African: 67-70 African-American: 85 White: 100
Half of all Whites have an IQ over the white average, but only 16% of African Americans do (i.e., 5 out of 6 Blacks have an IQ below the white average) and only 1.3% of Africans would be expected to have an IQ above the white average.
^ The black guy you posted is just that 1.3%...
Only 1% of the black (African American) population has an IQ over 120, but 9% of the white population does.
About 2.3% of whites have an IQ of at least 130 (gifted), 20 times greater than the percentage of blacks who do; only 0.00044% of Black Africans would be expected to have an IQ over 130.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Mike
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: quote: Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Mike there is a difference between pop culture and high culture Actually in it's time, that WAS pop culture. But giving you a break: Please show some examples of current "HIGH" culture. I see that you are stuck, so let me try and help you out.
Well the above is nouveau below are AA's traditon that goes back over a century The African-American Elite Hi, fellow educated black-Americans. For those of you who aren't familiar with the book Our Kind Of People by Lawrence Graham it potrays the lives of the upper class black families that basically lead their lives completely out of public eye. Similarly to the parallel white "high society" many of the activities conducted by the black upper class are considered elitist by middle and lower class blacks, and remain unknown to white American's. The book talks about the Divine Nine: particularly the oldest most coveted five(Alphas, Omegas, Kappas, AKAs and Deltas), The Boule, Links, Jack and Jill of American, Girl Friends, Spelman, Howard, Morehouse, Camp Atwater(oldest historically black summer camp that is very costly ie. $750 per week), and the black summer enclaves such as Sag Harbor and Oak Bluffs. It also places strong emphasize on participating in the "right" debutante cotillion: with the most acceptable ones being Delta's, Link's, and AKA's. Now, I was wondering what other educated black Americans think about this book. I myself plan to attend Spelman College, I currently attend prep school, have a mother who is an AKA, hope to also be an AKA, am participating in a AKA debtante cotillion, my great grandmother was the first black woman to attend Roosevelt University in Chicago, my grandfather was the first black council man in my state etc, but this book is quite controversial. Especially now that the author is putting out a Black American Social Register that will feature the 800 most prominent black families in America. It will feature politicians, socialites, lawyers, doctors, CEOs etc. It however will not feature actors, basketball and football players, etc. I believe it is good that there will finally be something in large capacity that shows blacks in a positive image other than them being movie stars. The controversy is that not only do you have to be well educated by the top hbcu's or ivy league(better yet both), but you have to come from the right family, marry into the right family, summer in the right location, and even have the right look, while belonging to the correct social clubs. So it is extremely similar to the "white" social register listing people such as the Kennedy's and Vanderbilts. Many people of the black upper class have been calling him a wannabe and are angry that their lives are going to be out for public display. Many lower class blacks feel this is a disgrace to publish something so elitist.
NOTE ACTORS AND ATHLETES NEED NOT APPLY
The Elite of Our People is an important addition to the literature on free black northern society, for it goes beyond historians’ interest in white antebellum abolitionists to allow a young African American to speak for his community and himself.” When I said that they exist for a hundred or so yrs I meant it. “The black upper class has most often been associated with the Episcopal Church,” says Rev. Harold T. Lewis, the author of Yet with a Steady Beat: The African American Struggle for Recognition in the Episcopal Church and rector of Calvary Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh. Despite earlier affiliations with the Baptist and Methodist denominations and the larger numbers of blacks who currently make up those congregations, the black elite have often selected the more formal high Episcopal Church or Congregational Church.
The Episcopal faith was attractive because of its formality, and both faiths were appealing because they were known for having well-educated clergy and a small number of members. Well-to-do black Americans with roots in the West Indies had natural historic ties to the Episcopal Church, which had served a major role in Jamaica and other former British colonies for several generations. The Congregational Church’s popularity among the black elite grew from the fact that it was the denomination that had given the greatest support to the American Missionary Association’s efforts in establishing secondary schools and colleges for southern blacks in the late 1800s.
And for some of the most cynical and status-conscious members of the black elite, the two denominations were particularly appealing simply because most blacks were not of that faith.
In every city where there are members of the black elite, there is an Episcopal or a Congregational Church that dominates the upper-class black religious scene: In Chicago, it is St. Edmund’s or Good Shepherd; in Detroit, St. Matthew’s; in Philadelphia, St. Thomas; in Memphis, Second Congregational; in Charleston, St. Mark’s; in Washington, St. Luke’s; in Atlanta, First Congregational; and in New York, St. Philip’s. Some say that the black upper class disdains the open display of emotions that are often shared in Baptist and AME [= African Methodist Episcopal] churches, while others say that Episcopal and Congregational denominations have better-educated church leaders.
For whatever the reason, the choice does keep the elite separated. And just as there have been special churches for the black upper class, so are there special social groups that separate men, women, and children of different classes. http://faroutliers.wordpress.com/2007/07/18/gimme-that-upscale-religion/ Off course they are mostly Greek pledged in collage Oak Bluffs One of the places they liked to vacation,and not on the boardwalk in Jersey or Coney Island.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Cassis pluezzz shut da fuk up! when your broke azz living in your mom's basement can't match any of these so-called true Knee-Grows from Nigeria given the fact that you are supposed to carry super doper red headed genes and was born and bred in a super doper Wyt nation, how come your income and education can't match any of these gentlemen,what makes you!! inferior.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
ScienceDaily (Jan. 21, 2010) — The controversial study on African IQ levels conducted by psychologist Richard Lynn is deeply flawed. This conclusion is the outcome of studies by Jelte Wicherts, Conor Dolan, Denny Borsboom and Han van der Maas of the University of Amsterdam (UvA) and Jerry Carlson of the University of California (Riverside).
Their findings are set to be published in Intelligence, Personality and Individual Differences, and Learning and Individual Differences
In an oft-quoted literature study conducted in 2006, Lynn concluded that black Africans have an average IQ of less than 70 (compared to an average western IQ of 100). Lynn suggested that these low IQs are indicative of a low intelligence level, claiming this offered an explanation for the low level of economic development in sub-Saharan countries.
Lynn's study is well known among psychologists, and has been referenced by academics such as Nobel laureate James Watson, and the authors of the controversial book The Bell Curve -- Intelligence and Class Structure in America (Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray: Freepress, 1994).
African IQ scores prove flawed
Wicherts and his colleagues examined over 100 published studies, concluding that there is no evidence to back up Lynn's claims. Amongst other flaws, Lynn used selective data by systematically ignoring Africans with high IQ scores. The researchers also claim that African IQ test scores cannot be interpreted in terms of lower intelligence levels, as these scores have different psychometric characteristics than western IQ test scores. Until now, the incomparability of Western and African IQ scores had never been systematically proven.
The scientists point out that the average African IQ is currently comparable to the average level in the Netherlands around 1950. However, IQ scores in Western countries have risen sharply over the course of the 20th century. In view of this trend, Wicherts and his colleagues claim there are no reasonable grounds to conclude that sub-Saharan countries are poor due to the lower IQ scores of their populations. As it turns out, the average IQ of African adults is seeing a similar rising trend, which is expected to continue if living conditions in Africa improve in future.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@cassiterides
You still fail to answer why Nigerians/West Africans are educationally more successful in the US and UK than African-Americans and UK Afro-Carribeans. Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Claus he also need to answer why these Africans with their inferior genes and place of birth got their own Lear Jets and he who was born with superior genes for rednecks,born and raised in a wyt country atleast majority still lives with his moms.. Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@clydewinters
So the question stands. Why are (generally 'unmixed') Nigerians/West Africans educationally more succesful than (generally admixed) African-Americans and UK Afro-Carribeans?
This is a stupid question. The Africans in the US, are not the average African.
First of all West Africans had to have had money to emmigrate to the US. This means that they were Middle Class before they came here. Given their financial background and ability to live in many areas--native born Afro-Americans are not allowed to live they would recieve a better education. It is no secret that the more money a group has the better the education they recieve. LOL. Their IQ scores and success reflect their social economic status--not special ability.
Of course, I know this...the point of my repeatedly raising the question was to force cassiterides to admit the socio-economic basis for educational achievement and debunk his racist theory that intelligence in blacks is based on racial admixture.
Oh, forget it.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@brada anansi
I'm glad you at least saw where I was coming from with my question.
I'm disappointed that Clyde and Jari thought I was endorsing some idea that Africans are inherently more intelligent than Afican-Americans and Afro-Caribbeans. I don't understand how they couldn't see where I was going with the question. Why the defensive responses?
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
In the United States today, most claims regarding differences between ethnic ‘populations’ in relationship to IQ test performance are based on statistically derived data that relate to scholastic aptitude tests (e.g. Flynn, 2006). With this in mind, and acknowledging the superior educational attainment of African blacks in the United States (and elsewhere) it can thus be argued, because of their superior educational attainment levels, that they must also surmount far more in number and more difficult scholastic aptitude tests, in general, which in turn would require higher level IQs (see Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999). As whites on average do not, or are unable to attain the same levels of academic achievement within these (their own!) academic institutional frameworks, they must also by the racialist thinking employed by some, possess significantly lower cogitative indices on the group level (e.g. Jensen, 1980; Gottfredson, 1986, 1998). In fact, attainment differences of these ‘grand’ magnitudes would suggest that American whites, in particular, are at a significant intellectual handicap when matched against immigrants of black African, East Indian, and East Asian descent. Incidentally, most American whites themselves are the children or grandchildren of “self-selected,” voluntary immigrants from Europe (Ogbu and Simons, 1998), and thus these trends can not be said to result from immigrant selectivity.
Flynn J.R., Dickens W.T. (2006). Black Americans Reduce the Racial IQ Gap: Evidence from Standardization Samples. Psychological Science, October 2006
Q: who discovered America?lol
Posted by kikuyu22 (Member # 19561) on :
Why are you sniping at ecah other? A difference of opinion may be caused by misunderstanding or ignorance not necessarily foolishness. But, I've seen first hand what Ignorant Negroes are capable of-they need to be checked with the quickness.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @brada anansi
I'm glad you at least saw where I was coming from with my question.
I'm disappointed that Clyde and Jari thought I was endorsing some idea that Africans are inherently more intelligent than Afican-Americans and Afro-Caribbeans. I don't understand how they couldn't see where I was going with the question. Why the defensive responses?
It was not a defensive response. The USA has always been a land of immigrants. It is a society based on who has and who does not have money.
As a result, people with money are going to advance further than people without. So it is only natural that the West Africans who come to America will money are going to do better than native born AAs who are an underclass.
I am an Ed Psychologist. This discussion about IQ test is irrelevant because results on these test are the result of the socio-economic status of the test taker--since the SES of the test taker will determine their education and training it is only natural that people with a higher SES will score higher than people with a lower SES.
In addition IQ test are not stagnant. Research indicates that they can improve given the education and training of the test taker.
.
Posted by Clyde Winters (Member # 10129) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @clydewinters
So the question stands. Why are (generally 'unmixed') Nigerians/West Africans educationally more succesful than (generally admixed) African-Americans and UK Afro-Carribeans?
This is a stupid question. The Africans in the US, are not the average African.
First of all West Africans had to have had money to emmigrate to the US. This means that they were Middle Class before they came here. Given their financial background and ability to live in many areas--native born Afro-Americans are not allowed to live they would recieve a better education. It is no secret that the more money a group has the better the education they recieve. LOL. Their IQ scores and success reflect their social economic status--not special ability.
Of course, I know this...the point of my repeatedly raising the question was to force cassiterides to admit the socio-economic basis for educational achievement and debunk his racist theory that intelligence in blacks is based on racial admixture.
Oh, forget it.
This is a legitimate goal. But you waste your time most outsiders don't know that an IQ test tells us nothing about a person's intelligence. It only shows how well a person/test taker did on a test.
.
Posted by kenndo (Member # 4846) on :
cassiterides everything you said is still incorrect,and I gave facts in this thread about African Americans already.
I am bringing that up again here.
Clarence Walker encourages black Americans to discard Afrocentrism
quote:African-born blacks comprise 16 percent of the U.S. foreign-born black population and are considerably more educated than other black immigrants (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). The vast majority of these immigrants come from minority white countries in East and West Africa (e.g. Kenya and Nigeria), and less than 2 percent originate from North or South Africa (World Factbook, 2004; Yearbook of immigration Statistics, 2003). In an analysis of Census Bureau data by the Journal of Blacks in higher education, African immigrants to the United States were found more likely to be college educated than any other immigrant group, which included those from Europe, North America and Asia (also see U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). African immigrants have also been shown to be more highly educated than any native-born ethnic group including white and Asian Americans (see also, Logan & Deane, 2003; Williams, 2005; The Economist, 1996; Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998).
1)The percentage of U.S. blacks that are foreign born--including African born--is approximately 8%, not 16%--according to U.S. census reports.
2) Blacks from Africa who travel to the U.S. is a self-selecting group hence the higher academic achievements. Compare with blacks from Africa who travel to France in terms of educational achievement.
3) To Cass--ides: If, as you claim, blacks in Africa average 70 on IQ tests and whites 100 with U.S. blacks averaging 85. If your race based theory of IQ were valid then that would suggest that U.S. blacks were 50% white in DNA. But you said that blacks were on average 12-15% admixed with whites. This would imply that the black American IQ should be no more than 73. The remaining 12 points can be ascribed only to cultural sources. Clearly the race theory of IQ is invalidated thusly.
Posted by BIT (Member # 6729) on :
Don't you think someone who has reached a certain age should try certain drugs that's usually off limits (e.g. most class A stuff)? You know, since consequences are fairly limited at that point, if any.
Do you really want to restart without knowing what it felt like!!!? DO IT and let me know if it was worth it
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
Which leads me to believe that there is something inherent in African tribalism and it's jealousies which acts to stifle advancement.
I have proven this in the behavior of the ignorant Negro. His mindset is obvious: since he is Black and ignorant, then how could anyone like him (Black) be smart? And he acts on this belief, you would find that he will ignore the teaching of another Black in favor of the teachings of an Albino.
Mike, using these terms Black, Albino, Ignorant Negro, etc is tribalism
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
^^^lol. West Africa vs West Europe.
Augustin F.C. Holl et al.
Museum of Anthropology, The University of Michigan, 2009.
Coping with uncertainty: Neolithic life in the Dhar Tichitt-Walata, Mauritania, (ca. 4000–2300 BP)
Abstract
The sandstone escarpment of the Dhar Tichitt in South-Central Mauritania was inhabited by Neolithic agropastoral communities for approximately one and half millennium during the Late Holocene, from ca. 4000 to 2300 BP. The absence of prior evidence of human settlement points to the influx of mobile herders moving away from the “drying” Sahara towards more humid lower latitudes. These herders took advantage of the peculiarities of the local geology and environment and succeeded in domesticating bulrush millet – Pennisetum sp. The emerging agropastoral subsistence complex had conflicting and/or complementary requirements depending on circumstances. In the long run, the social adjustment to the new subsistence complex, shifting site location strategies, nested settlement patterns and the rise of more encompassing polities appear to have been used to cope with climatic hazards in this relatively circumscribed area. An intense arid spell in the middle of the first millennium BC triggered the collapse of the whole Neolithic agropastoral system and the abandonment of the areas. These regions, resettled by sparse oasis-dwellers populations and iron-using communities starting from the first half of the first millennium AD, became part of the famous Ghana “empire”, the earliest state in West African history.
For more, here is an excellent thread by Jari, elaborating on this particular aspect.
England not too long ago, prior and during the Roman invasion and enslavement. Traditional Celtic huts.
Posted by BIT (Member # 6729) on :
^ Exudes Priceless Peace.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by lamin:
quote:African-born blacks comprise 16 percent of the U.S. foreign-born black population and are considerably more educated than other black immigrants (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). The vast majority of these immigrants come from minority white countries in East and West Africa (e.g. Kenya and Nigeria), and less than 2 percent originate from North or South Africa (World Factbook, 2004; Yearbook of immigration Statistics, 2003). In an analysis of Census Bureau data by the Journal of Blacks in higher education, African immigrants to the United States were found more likely to be college educated than any other immigrant group, which included those from Europe, North America and Asia (also see U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). African immigrants have also been shown to be more highly educated than any native-born ethnic group including white and Asian Americans (see also, Logan & Deane, 2003; Williams, 2005; The Economist, 1996; Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998).
1)The percentage of U.S. blacks that are foreign born--including African born--is approximately 8%, not 16%--according to U.S. census reports.
2) Blacks from Africa who travel to the U.S. is a self-selecting group hence the higher academic achievements. Compare with blacks from Africa who travel to France in terms of educational achievement.
3) To Cass--ides: If, as you claim, blacks in Africa average 70 on IQ tests and whites 100 with U.S. blacks averaging 85. If your race based theory of IQ were valid then that would suggest that U.S. blacks were 50% white in DNA. But you said that blacks were on average 12-15% admixed with whites. This would imply that the black American IQ should be no more than 73. The remaining 12 points can be ascribed only to cultural sources. Clearly the race theory of IQ is invalidated thusly.
I haven't looked up the census report of year 2000 before. If truly so, thanks for correcting.
quote:Originally posted by BIT: ^ Exudes Priceless Peace.
The same historic assessment can be made when it comes to illiteracy and literacy (higher education) of West Africa vs West Europe. Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
Woman wins the 2012 national Dutch IQ-test and wins with 159. The highest score thus far.
The second hightest score was by her, with 132.
Prior to this, 2009, she scored 118.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
When we partnered with the A&E Television Network by sponsoring a school contest to launch the KNIGHTS OF THE SOUTH BRONX – the inspirational story of how one teacher made a dramatic difference in the lives of inner city kids using the game of chess – we knew we would receive equally inspirational entries.
7. "....If chess can give kids from the Bronx of New York a vision and a way out, it could do the same for the kids from rural Mississippi. They are not dumb kids - they just have never been told differently."
15. “…Our school was once known for having city chess champions. This software would give me the tools to begin rebuilding that empire. As an inner-city school, we need to give these children every opportunity to excel. By playing chess, these often volatile students learn to discuss, plan and negotiate, rather than reacting with anger. The lessons learned in chess go way beyond the game, as evidenced in “The Knights of the South Bronx.” As a staff, we have discussed how to build our chess program. This software is the missing piece. Please help us help our students”
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @brada anansi
I'm glad you at least saw where I was coming from with my question.
I'm disappointed that Clyde and Jari thought I was endorsing some idea that Africans are inherently more intelligent than Afican-Americans and Afro-Caribbeans. I don't understand how they couldn't see where I was going with the question. Why the defensive responses?
It was not a defensive response. The USA has always been a land of immigrants. It is a society based on who has and who does not have money.
As a result, people with money are going to advance further than people without. So it is only natural that the West Africans who come to America will money are going to do better than native born AAs who are an underclass.
I am an Ed Psychologist. This discussion about IQ test is irrelevant because results on these test are the result of the socio-economic status of the test taker--since the SES of the test taker will determine their education and training it is only natural that people with a higher SES will score higher than people with a lower SES.
In addition IQ test are not stagnant. Research indicates that they can improve given the education and training of the test taker.
.
I do see your point,
Just 20 years ago, American students were among the best in the world, routinely coming in first in test results. Now, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, students in the richest country on earth are in 24th place in math. That's behind Canada, Germany, France, Korea...but also smaller, poorer countries like Poland, Hungary and Slovakia.
With a net worth of about $51 billion, Microsoft founder and world's richest man, Bill Gates, and his wife, Melinda (two of Time magazine's "Persons of the Year" in 2005), are determined to use their fortune to change the crisis in American schools. Through their influential Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, they are trying to revolutionize an education system that, if it were a business, Bill says, "would be bankrupt."
Melinda adds that this is not an isolated problem of poverty. "This is affecting all schools," she says. "Kids are falling through the cracks and nobody notices it. That to me is what's wrong with the school system."
In Part 1 of our report, Bill and Melinda Gates highlighted some of the biggest problems facing America's schools—obsolete education, high dropout rates and underperforming graduates. With the help of former basketball all-star and education advocate Kevin Johnson, they have launched a new campaign, Stand Up, to address the crisis.
While playing for the Phoenix Suns, Kevin took his team to the playoffs 10 years in a row. During the NBA off-season, Kevin returned to his hometown of Sacramento, California, to make a difference. He saw that life in his old neighborhood was still a struggle.
To combat the influences of drugs, jail and unemployment on kids in Sacramento, Kevin opened an after-school program called St. Hope Academy designed to keep high-risk kids off the streets. During his time off, he routinely spent 12 hours a day, six days a week working at St. Hope. He quickly realized this was his true calling.
In 2000 Kevin retired to focus on education. "I couldn't wait to get out of the game so that I could do something bigger and more important than basketball," he says. He now works full-time running the six schools that make up the St. Hope Public School System in Sacramento.
In Washington, D.C., CNN's Anderson Cooper found a school that has turned students' lives around. "Most of these kids were two grades behind when they transferred here from some of the lowest performing schools in the country," he says. "Now they're outscoring every public middle school in Washington."
The school is called KIPP—short for Knowledge Is Power Program—part of a growing network of schools around the country. It's the brainchild of Mike Feinberg and Dave Levin, two Ivy League grads and Teach for America alumni who thought they could do a better job than the public school system.
Now with 46 KIPP schools across the country, they're out to prove that they are right.
^ Excellent. Excellent.Excellent.
Posted by element (Member # 19569) on :
Cassiterides is toying with all of you.
He believes Africa consists of many races & believes high iq in African Americans is due to admixture..
He will inject caucasoid admixture into everything relating to Africans..
The onus is on him to provide data on African iq scores between his African races.
He will also have to explain his flawed East African are 40 % caucasoid study..
Those East Africans who have 40% caucasoid admixture should be top of the league by his rules
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
quote:Originally posted by lamin:
quote:African-born blacks comprise 16 percent of the U.S. foreign-born black population and are considerably more educated than other black immigrants (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). The vast majority of these immigrants come from minority white countries in East and West Africa (e.g. Kenya and Nigeria), and less than 2 percent originate from North or South Africa (World Factbook, 2004; Yearbook of immigration Statistics, 2003). In an analysis of Census Bureau data by the Journal of Blacks in higher education, African immigrants to the United States were found more likely to be college educated than any other immigrant group, which included those from Europe, North America and Asia (also see U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). African immigrants have also been shown to be more highly educated than any native-born ethnic group including white and Asian Americans (see also, Logan & Deane, 2003; Williams, 2005; The Economist, 1996; Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998).
1)The percentage of U.S. blacks that are foreign born--including African born--is approximately 8%, not 16%--according to U.S. census reports.
2) Blacks from Africa who travel to the U.S. is a self-selecting group hence the higher academic achievements. Compare with blacks from Africa who travel to France in terms of educational achievement.
3) To Cass--ides: If, as you claim, blacks in Africa average 70 on IQ tests and whites 100 with U.S. blacks averaging 85. If your race based theory of IQ were valid then that would suggest that U.S. blacks were 50% white in DNA. But you said that blacks were on average 12-15% admixed with whites. This would imply that the black American IQ should be no more than 73. The remaining 12 points can be ascribed only to cultural sources. Clearly the race theory of IQ is invalidated thusly.
I haven't looked up the census report of year 2000 before. If truly so, thanks for correcting.
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: ^ Excellent. Excellent.Excellent.
Icing on the cake.
Poverty, socio-economic position, social capital and the health of children and adolescents with intellectual disabilities in Britain: a replication
Abstract
Background When compared with their nonintellectually disabled peers, people with intellectual disabilities (IDs) have poorer health and are more likely to be exposed to poverty during childhood. Given that exposure to child poverty has been linked to poorer health outcomes, we attempted to estimate the extent to which the health inequalities faced by children and adolescents with IDs may be accounted for by their more disadvantaged socio-economic position.
Methods Secondary analysis of data on a nationally representative sample of 12 160 British children aged under 17 years extracted from the Department of Work and Pensions' Families and Children Study.
Results After controlling for age and sex, children with IDs were significantly more likely (corrected odds ratio = 2.49) to be reported to have less than good health than their nonintellectually disabled peers. However, 31% of the elevated risk for poorer health was accounted for by between-group differences in socio-economic position and social capital.
Conclusions A socially and statistically significant proportion of the increased risk of poorer health among children and adolescents with IDs may be attributed to their increased risk of socio-economic disadvantage.
A family's socioeconomic status is based on family income, parental education level, parental occupation, and social status in the community (such as contacts within the community, group associations, and the community's perception of the family), note Demarest, Reisner, Anderson, Humphrey, Farquhar, and Stein (1993). Families with high socioeconomic status often have more success in preparing their young children for school because they typically have access to a wide range of resources to promote and support young children's development. They are able to provide their young children with high-quality child care, books, and toys to encourage children in various learning activities at home. Also, they have easy access to information regarding their children's health, as well as social, emotional, and cognitive development. In addition, families with high socioeconomic status often seek out information to help them better prepare their young children for school.
Crnic and Lamberty (1994) discuss the impact of socioeconomic status on children's readiness for school:
"The segregating nature of social class, ethnicity, and race may well reduce the variety of enriching experiences thought to be prerequisite for creating readiness to learn among children. Social class, ethnicity, and race entail a set of 'contextual givens' that dictate neighborhood, housing, and access to resources that affect enrichment or deprivation as well as the acquisition of specific value systems."
Ramey and Ramey (1994) describe the relationship of family socioeconomic status to children's readiness for school:
"Across all socioeconomic groups, parents face major challenges when it comes to providing optimal care and education for their children. For families in poverty, these challenges can be formidable. Sometimes, when basic necessities are lacking, parents must place top priority on housing, food, clothing, and health care. Educational toys, games, and books may appear to be luxuries, and parents may not have the time, energy, or knowledge to find innovative and less-expensive ways to foster young children's development.
Even in families with above-average incomes, parents often lack the time and energy to invest fully in their children's preparation for school, and they sometimes face a limited array of options for high-quality child care--both before their children start school and during the early school years. Kindergarten teachers throughout the country report that children are increasingly arriving at school inadequately prepared." (p. 195)
Families with low socioeconomic status often lack the financial, social, and educational supports that characterize families with high socioeconomic status. Poor families also may have inadequate or limited access to community resources that promote and support children's development and school readiness. Parents may have inadequate skills for such activities as reading to and with their children, and they may lack information about childhood immunizations and nutrition. Zill, Collins, West, and Hausken (1995) state that "low maternal education and minority-language status are most consistently associated with fewer signs of emerging literacy and a greater number of difficulties in preschoolers." Having inadequate resources and limited access to available resources can negatively affect families' decisions regarding their young children's development and learning. As a result, children from families with low socioeconomic status are at greater risk of entering kindergarten unprepared than their peers from families with median or high socioeconomic status.
A new report, billed as one of the most comprehensive studies to date of how low-income and minority students fare in college, shows a wide gap in graduation rates at public four-year colleges nationwide and "alarming" disparities in success at community colleges.
The analysis, released Thursday, found that about 45 percent of low-income and underrepresented minority students entering as freshmen in 1999 had received bachelor's degrees six years later at the colleges studied, compared with 57 percent of other students.
Fewer than one-third of all freshmen entering two-year institutions nationwide attained completion -- either through a certificate, an associate's degree or transfer to a four-year college -- within four years, according to the research. The success rate was lower, 24 percent, for underrepresented minorities, identified as blacks, Latinos and Native Americans; it was higher, 38 percent, for other students.
Only 7 percent of minority students who entered community colleges received bachelor's degrees within 10 years.
The report provides a statistical starting point for 24 public higher-education systems that pledged two years ago to halve the achievement gap in college access and completion by 2015. Together, the systems represent two-fifths of all undergraduate students in four-year public colleges.
"This is not just research for research's sake," said Kati Haycock, president of the Education Trust, the District-based nonprofit group that prepared the report, "Charting a Necessary Path." "This is the base line for a very aggressive action initiative among a number of institutions that have said, 'We're going to make this better.' "
The Access to Success Initiative, announced in 2007, predates President Obama's American Graduation Initiative announced this year, which calls for the United States to regain the global lead in college degrees by 2020. Any progress charted by the 24 college and university systems, which include the University System of Maryland and state university systems in California and New York, will dovetail "very neatly" with the president's goal, said Haycock, whose organization advocates for disadvantaged students.
Within the University System of Maryland, the report found a 51 percent graduation rate among low-income students and a 46 percent rate among underrepresented minorities, compared with a graduation rate of about 64 percent for higher-income students and 67 percent for whites and Asians.
William E. Kirwan, chancellor of the Maryland system, said in a statement that closing the achievement gap "is not just a competitiveness issue for our nation, it is also the civil rights issue of our day."
One bright spot in the research was the Pell Grant, the federal program to help low-income students through college. The study found that Pell recipients at community colleges completed their studies at a rate of 32 percent, the same as other students. Pell students who transferred to four-year colleges also graduated at the same rate, 60 percent, as other students.
A bill pending in Congress would strengthen the Pell program by raising the maximum grant and tying the program to inflation for the first time.
The research released Thursday includes part-time students and transfer students, significant groups that aren't included in federal data on college completion, the report's authors said.
Halving the gap by 2015 would mean narrowing the disparity in six-year graduation rates from 12 percentage points to 6 and shrinking the gap in community college success from 14 points to seven.
"If these guys make the improvements they intend to make . . . it really changes the trajectory of higher education in this country," Haycock said.
quote:Originally posted by element: Cassiterides is toying with all of you.
He believes Africa consists of many races & believes high iq in African Americans is due to admixture..
He will inject caucasoid admixture into everything relating to Africans..
The onus is on him to provide data on African iq scores between his African races.
He will also have to explain his flawed East African are 40 % caucasoid study..
Those East Africans who have 40% caucasoid admixture should be top of the league by his rules
The one who is being played here is getsh*tty.
Immigrant blacks more likely to attend elite colleges
By Amy Lunday, Homewood
Sociologists examine possible explanations for race, nativity gaps in U.S.
A larger proportion of immigrant black high school graduates attend selective colleges and universities than either native black or white students in America, according to a study by sociologists at Johns Hopkins and Syracuse universities.
Pamela R. Bennett of Johns Hopkins and Amy Lutz of Syracuse examined the destinations for those who attend college as reported by the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, a nationally representative study of students who were in the eighth grade in 1988 and who were followed for 12 years. Bennett and Lutz found that among immigrant black students—those who either immigrated with their families or are American-born children of immigrants—9.2 percent were enrolled in elite colleges, such as those in the Ivy League, compared with 2.4 percent of other black students and 7.3 percent of white students.
Pamela Bennett
Published by the journal Sociology of Education, Bennett and Lutz’s study, “How African-American Is the Net Black Advantage? Differences in College Attendance Among Immigrant Blacks, Native Blacks and Whites,” puts a finer point on previous, well-known studies that demonstrated that black high school graduates are more likely to attend college than white high school graduates with similar socioeconomic backgrounds.
Bennett and Lutz investigated whether the immigrant population could be driving blacks’ relatively higher odds of college enrollment compared to those of similar whites, particularly in light of high levels of educational attainment among the adult black immigrant population.
High levels of educational attainment are but one of several factors that make black immigrants one of the most interesting groups at the intersection of race and immigration in the United States today, the researchers say. While America’s identity has been shaped by its immigrant-achievement narrative, in which newcomers are historically incorporated into the culture, black immigrants are also affected by the country’s historical racial hierarchy.
Differentiating between immigrant and native-born blacks revealed that immigrant blacks have the highest college attendance rate (75.1 percent), followed by whites (72.5 percent) and native-born blacks (60.2 percent). To examine possible explanations for these race and nativity gaps, Bennett and Lutz compared immigrant blacks to native-born blacks and whites to see what background characteristics the groups have in common.
The sociologists found that both groups of blacks were disadvantaged relative to whites in socioeconomic background, yet the educational experiences of immigrant blacks are more closely aligned with those of whites than native blacks. Immigrant black and white children are more likely than native black children to come from two-parent households and to attend private schools, two factors that have been shown to have a positive impact on attending an elite college.
Findings reveal that if immigrant blacks and whites were able to bring the same social and economic resources to the college-going process, immigrant blacks would be 3.9 times more likely than whites to attend four-year colleges and 17 times more likely than whites to attend selective colleges. Similarly, if native-born blacks and whites had similar social and economic resources, native-born blacks would be 2.9 times more likely than whites to attend four-year colleges and 3.7 times more likely than whites to attend selective colleges. In contrast to concerns that immigrant blacks may be outperforming native-born blacks due to cultural differences with respect to college attendance, the authors found no significant differences in the chances of enrolling in college between immigrant and native-born blacks from similar socioeconomic backgrounds.
“Our study shows that much of what prevents native-born black students from attending college can be found in disadvantages in their family socioeconomic background,” Bennett said. “Were it not for those disadvantages, we would very likely observe proportionately more black high school graduates than white graduates attending college.
“As we strive to achieve President Obama’s goal of leading the world in college graduates by 2020,” she said, “we can ensure that native black students are part of that progress by investing more federal resources in narrowing gaps in the family social and economic resources that native blacks and whites bring to the college-going process. Current proposals to expand the Pell Grant Program, if passed, along with a shift in student aid packages for low-income families from loans to grants would likely disproportionately assist black students with paying for college and contribute to a narrowing of the race gap in college attendance.”
“In thinking about the lower college enrollment rates of native-born blacks compared to their white and immigrant peers, researchers and the public often turn to the popular explanation that native-born black youth maintain a cultural stance that devalues higher education,” Lutz said. “However, the results of our research highlight the need to pay greater attention to the structural inequalities faced by native-born black students. In particular, we should think about the kinds of educational needs that native-born black youth from single-parent families and from public schools encounter, and which are perhaps not being met, as these youth complete high school.
“For example,” she continued, “one such need is a greater emphasis on college preparation in public schools, starting as early as middle school. Such preparation should include information about course work to prepare for college, counseling on the variety of college options available to students, assistance with filling out college applications and financial aid forms, preparation for college interviews and entrance exams, and better linkages between public school counselors and colleges and universities.
“This type of high-quality preparation for college is usually less available to public school students than private school students,” she said, “and single parents often have a limited amount of time and financial resources to pursue this with their children on their own. Because higher education is so important for the future of the United States, it is critical that all students have the best information about, and preparation for, the college-going process.”
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Cassiterides is toying with all of you.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
Getsh*tty,
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Cassiterides is toying with all of you.
Poor children a year behind in language skills
Reading to children and taking them to libraries can limit effects of disadvantage, Sutton Trust study shows
The vocabulary of children from the poorest backgrounds lags more than a year behind that of their classmates from richer homes by the time they start school, a major new study showed today.
The Sutton Trust, the charity which sponsored the research, said the divide was a "tragic indictment of modern society", showing how educational inequality starts young and leaves children from the most disadvantaged homes struggling to keep up throughout their school years.
The poorest children face multiple challenges, being less likely to be born to well-educated parents, have a regular bedtime or live with both their biological father and mother, the study found. However, it also concluded that "good parenting can triumph", with families able to limit the effects of poverty by, for example, reading to their children daily.
Researchers from Bristol and Columbia universities analysed the performance of a representative sample of 12,644 British five-year-olds in a "naming vocabulary test" during 2006 and 2007. They then produced a "developmental age" score for each child, comparing their test results to the average achieved in the study.
The gap between rich and poor children, and even between middle-income and poor, was striking. Those from the poorest 20% of homes, where household annual incomes averaged £10,300 before tax, had an average developmental age of 53.6 months. The comparable figure for those from middle-income families, on around £30,000 a year, was 64.6 months, or 11 months ahead. Children from families in the richest 20% , on around £80,000, reached a development age of 69.8, a further five months ahead. Income itself accounted for only around a third of the differences in test scores, with some 48% caused by differences in parenting between the income groups.
Reading to a child every day was found to improve performance in the test – among children in the same income group, it raised scores by around two months – while regular library visits improved performance by 2.5 months. But only 45% of children from the poorest fifth of families were read to daily at the age of three, the study found, compared to 78% among the richest fifth.
More than a third of children from the poorest fifth of families were born to parents without a single GCSE A-C grade, while four in five of the richest families had at least one parent educated to degree level.
Some two thirds of children in the poorest income group did not live with both biological parents, compared to only one in 10 in middle-income families. Sir Peter Lampl, chairman of the Sutton Trust, said: "These findings are at once both shocking and encouraging, revealing the stark educational disadvantage experienced by children from poorer homes before they have even stepped into the school classroom, but also the potential for good parenting to overcome some of the negative impacts that poverty can have on children's early development."
The trust is now urging the government to abandon its plans to increase the amount of free nursery education it offers to all three-and-four-year-olds from 12.5 hours to 15 hours a week this year. Instead, it should provide 25 hours a week of education to the 15% most disadvantaged families. The trust also wants improvements in parenting classes for poorer families.
The children's minister, Delyth Morgan, said: "A huge amount has happened in recent years and it's a shame the Sutton Trust fails to reflect much of this. Many of its key recommendations have already been addressed. While there is much more to do, the gap between rich and poor in early years is closing, with the lowest-achieving children not only keeping pace but improving faster than the rest."
Poverty is the backdrop to the riots in Northern Ireland It's no coincidence this violence has erupted in some of the UK's poorest areas. Deprivation is sectarianism's partner in crime
You've probably read a lot about Northern Ireland over the last few days – primarily about the rioting that has erupted and the condemnations and concern expressed about it. You may even have caught some of the videos on YouTube and watched (mainly) young men and teenagers bombard police with petrol bombs and whatever other makeshift weaponry comes to hand.
However, chances are that unless you know a lot about what is unfolding, or you regularly pay close attention to developments in Northern Ireland, you'll be understandably baffled and wondering why, when peace is supposed to have taken root, there are images reminiscent of the "bad old days" being "beamed around the world", as one police spokesman put it.
There are plenty of other reporters and writers on this site and elsewhere outlining the immediate backdrop to the riots, including the role of the Orange Order, the Parades Commission, dissidents and so-called "recreational rioters". While this is all absolutely essential to making sense of what's happening, it is nevertheless worth stepping back for a moment to examine it through a slightly different prism.
It is impossible for someone like myself, who grew up in one of the worst-affected areas during the Troubles, not to notice that the areas now reeling from riots, burning cars and confrontations with the police are the very same ones that suffered most in previous decades. This is no coincidence. It is no coincidence either that these riots are not taking place in more well-to-do parts of the province, just as they didn't in the past.
I watch these youngsters and, all but for a change of fashion, they could be the same people who were on the streets in the 70s and 80s. It is soul-destroying to observe.
There are considerable and complex reasons why the current generation are mimicking the last one, but one factor that is all too often ignored in the coverage is their life circumstances. The thing is, that for all the progress – and boy, has there been much to celebrate in recent years – districts such as the Ardoyne and parts of west Belfast remain areas of incredible, entrenched deprivation. For all the admirable work by individuals, local groups and communities at large to turn things around, sectarianism remains and poverty and social exclusion are its willing partners in crime.
It is too easy, and it is frankly irresponsible in the longer-term, to dismiss those rioting as "thugs" or "bigots" or "criminal elements" or, indeed, "recreational rioters" (and believe me, I know from bitter experience that all of these will have a part to play). If, as many of those analysing the situation as it unfolds suggest, the riots are the direct response of young people having their strings pulled by dissidents, that is still only one aspect. The fact is there has to be a considerable degree of frustration, hopelessness and anomie mixed in there with the old tribalism to be stoked up in the first place.
For all the investment of the post-Good Friday years and the political transformation, the parts of Northern Ireland you are reading about are among the most deprived in the UK. In some parts of north and west Belfast, unemployment is rampant (and was even during the boom), while the same areas are routinely at the bottom of almost every index for deprivation and exclusion. If we are serious about dealing with social exclusion, with poverty, with youth criminality, with knife crime – whatever manifestation of a troubled society we are talking about in Northern Ireland, or anywhere else for that matter – we need to start with asking "why", and we need to finish with an answer that doesn't simply reinforce the miserable status quo.
Make no mistake, this is not some kind of attempt to explain away violence, or to condone what's been happening in recent days. It is simply recognising the fact that the people who have lived in the areas affected deserve better. They have lived far too long with this.
In October last year, Alex Attwood of the SDLP (Social Democratic and Labour Party), talking about west Belfast in particular, summed up eloquently in an early day motion at the Northern Ireland Assembly a few hard truths that we should all bear in mind.
"I have offered some solutions to the problem of the lack of development in west Belfast, but the question is why it is so. It is not just because this part of our country has suffered, along with north Belfast, the greatest loss of life and the greatest upset and disorder through the years of conflict; it is also because west Belfast, when measured across virtually every multiple deprivation index, comes out bottom or near bottom of the league. That is confirmed by figures released in August [2009], which state that the west Belfast constituency … has the fourth highest unemployment rate of any Westminster constituency. That rate includes 22·6% of males and 7·3% of females: 15·8% overall. Imagine a street where 22·6% of the adult male population are not in work.
"Although those figures are harsh, they do not begin to tell the story of the struggle that some people face in order to live in those conditions. Those figures cannot convey the hopelessness and exasperation of people in that condition. They cannot and do not convey how alienating life can be for people in that condition. They cannot measure the damage done to the soul of an individual or of a community that has displayed such resilience in the face of adversity in every other way over the past 30 or 40 years."
Determinants of crime rates: Crime Deterrence and Growth in post-liberalized India
Dutta, Mousumi and Husain, Zakir (2009): Determinants of crime rates: Crime Deterrence and Growth in post-liberalized India. Unpublished.
Abstract
Becker’s analysis of crime and punishment has initiated a series of theoretical and empirical works investigating the determinants of crime. However, there is a dearth of literature in the context of developing countries. This paper is an attempt to address this deficiency. The paper investigates the relative impact of deterrence variables (load on police force, arrest rates, charge sheet rates, conviction rates and quick disposal of cases) and socio-economic variables (economic growth, poverty,, urbanization and education) on crime rates in India. State-level data is collected on the above variables for the period 1999 to 2005.Zellner’s SURE model is used to estimate the model. Subsequently, this is extended by introducing endogeneity. The results show that both deterrence and socioeconomic factors are important in explaining crime rates. However, some of their effects are different from that observed in studies for developed countries
Low socio-economic position is associated with poor social networks and social support: results from the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study
Simone Weyers1*, Nico Dragano1, Susanne Möbus2, Eva-Maria Beck2, Andreas Stang4, Stephan Möhlenkamp3, Karl H Jöckel2, Raimund Erbel3 and Johannes Siegrist1
It becomes obvious that there is a difference between the number of reported ties and the number of ties with persons who are actually seen. Another interesting finding is that this difference widens with increasing socio-economic position.
The debate on poverty in the EU is often closely associated with social exclusion. The term social exclusion is used to emphasise the processes which push people to the edge of society, which limit their access to resources and opportunities, curtail their participation in normal social and cultural life leaving them feeling marginalised, powerless and discriminated against. Another common term associated with poverty is vulnerability. People are in a vulnerable situation when their personal well-being is put at risk because they lack sufficient resources, are at risk of being in debt, suffer poor health, experience educational disadvantage and live in inadequate housing and environment. These are important related concepts. However, not all people who are socially excluded or vulnerable are poor and EAPN in this note wishes to focus on the specific dimension of poverty.
Jonathan Kozol author of "Shame of the Nation; The Restoration of Apartheid Schooling in America" visits SSU for the Andrea Neves and Barton Evans Social Justice Lecture Series.
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Kim kardashian is Armenian not Amerindian you idiot, she only has 6% native American DNA and 94% as you would say Caucasoid DNA
Only her ancestry on her fathers side is Armenian. Secondly 6% is high admixture.
It only takes a very small % to alter someone's phenotype. Kim is phenotypically not Caucasoid, her bone structure, especially in the face looks Mongoloid. This has been discussed all over the net on most anthropology forums.
No anthro forum i have ever been on classifies Kim as Caucasoid.
6% is high admixture? Guess your ass can't have Greece and Rome or the middle east. LOL Name me a true blanco "civilization" as valued by Eurocentrism? I'll be over here waiting since you've been unable to provide a pure Europen lineage and oh this will be great, margin of admixture can't be any higher than 6%. Go ahead buddy! Good luck! You say "pure negroes" never made a "civilization" but cannot cite an example of "pure whites" being able to make one and always rely on mixed groups to show the superiority of pure European lineages. Let me make the importance of your answering question in depth clear to you. Everyone else has gotten it but you, and now its your turn: If you cannot find a pure European lineage you have no room to really say anything do you? No I think not. You cannot attribute in "mixed communities" things like "civilization" and "intellect" as a by product of their Euro heritage if you cannot prove they were frequently able to achieve these alleged things without admixture either. And we would assuming your racist theory true also need proof that not only was their "pure Euro civilization" but that these Euros fared better than mixed population. After all a pure, superior biologically lineage would by default fare better than one mixed with lesser lineages yes? Well, good luck with proving all that too. Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by element:
He will also have to explain his flawed East African are 40 % caucasoid study..
Those East Africans who have 40% caucasoid admixture should be top of the league by his rules
East Africans on average score higher in IQ tests than Negroids....
West Africa Countries: 20 Studies: 15 IQ: 67
Central Africa Countries: 5 W/ Data: 3 (60% coun/80% pop) Studies: 9 IQ: 64
East Africa Countries: 8 W/ Data: 5 (63% coun/93% pop) Studies: 16 IQ: 72
- Lynn 2006
As you can see East Africans are 5-8 points higher in intelligence than pure-blooded Negroids.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides:
quote:Originally posted by asante-Korton: Kim kardashian is Armenian not Amerindian you idiot, she only has 6% native American DNA and 94% as you would say Caucasoid DNA
Only her ancestry on her fathers side is Armenian. Secondly 6% is high admixture.
It only takes a very small % to alter someone's phenotype. Kim is phenotypically not Caucasoid, her bone structure, especially in the face looks Mongoloid. This has been discussed all over the net on most anthropology forums.
No anthro forum i have ever been on classifies Kim as Caucasoid.
6% is high admixture? Guess your ass can't have Greece and Rome or the middle east. LOL Name me a true blanco "civilization" as valued by Eurocentrism? I'll be over here waiting since you've been unable to provide a pure Europen lineage and oh this will be great, margin of admixture can't be any higher than 6%. Go ahead buddy! Good luck! You say "pure negroes" never made a "civilization" but cannot cite an example of "pure whites" being able to make one and always rely on mixed groups to show the superiority of pure European lineages. Let me make the importance of your answering question in depth clear to you. Everyone else has gotten it but you, and now its your turn: If you cannot find a pure European lineage you have no room to really say anything do you? No I think not. You cannot attribute in "mixed communities" things like "civilization" and "intellect" as a by product of their Euro heritage if you cannot prove they were frequently able to achieve these alleged things without admixture either. And we would assuming your racist theory true also need proof that not only was their "pure Euro civilization" but that these Euros fared better than mixed population. After all a pure, superior biologically lineage would by default fare better than one mixed with lesser lineages yes? Well, good luck with proving all that too.
Negroid admixture in Europe ranges from non-existant to barely detectable.
Even in places like Portugal and Spain which are places most assume have high levels of black admixture are less than 2% Negroid. The only Negroid marker is Haplogroup E(not including E1b1b). Cruciani et al. 2004, report such lineages at 2% in Southern Portugal, 0.5% across the Mediterranean and 2.9% in Istanbul. Everywhere else has no Negroid admixture, this admixture however is modern, with the slave trade. Europe is the most homogenous continent in the world.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
^ Did you bother to read the posts above on why Nigerians/West Africans are educationally more successful than generally admixed African-Americans and UK Afro-Carribeans?
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by element:
He will also have to explain his flawed East African are 40 % caucasoid study..
Those East Africans who have 40% caucasoid admixture should be top of the league by his rules
East Africans on average score higher in IQ tests than Negroids....
West Africa Countries: 20 Studies: 15 IQ: 67
Central Africa Countries: 5 W/ Data: 3 (60% coun/80% pop) Studies: 9 IQ: 64
East Africa Countries: 8 W/ Data: 5 (63% coun/93% pop) Studies: 16 IQ: 72
- Lynn 2006
As you can see East Africans are 5-8 points higher in intelligence than pure-blooded Negroids.
Do African immigrants make the smartest Americans? The question may sound outlandish, but if you were judging by statistics alone, you could find plenty of evidence to back it up.
In a side-by-side comparison of 2000 census data by sociologist John R. Logan at the Mumford Center, State University of New York at Albany, black immigrants from Africa average the highest educational attainment of any population group in the country, including whites and Asians.
For example, 43.8 percent of African immigrants had achieved a college degree, compared to 42.5 of Asian Americans, 28.9 percent for immigrants from Europe, Russia and Canada, and 23.1 percent of the U.S. population as a whole.
That defies the usual stereotypes of Asian Americans as the only “model minority.” Yet the traditional American narrative has rendered the high academic achievements of black immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean invisible, as if it were a taboo topic.
Instead, we should take a closer look. That was my reaction in 2004 after black Harvard law professor Lani Guinier and Henry Louis Gates Jr., chairman of Harvard’s African-American studies department, stirred a black Harvard alumni reunion with questions about precisely where the university’s new black students were coming from.
About 8 percent, or 530, of Harvard’s undergraduates were black, they said, but somewhere between one-half and two-thirds of black undergraduates were “West Indian and African immigrants or their children, or to a lesser extent, children of biracial couples.”
If we take a closer look, I said then, I bet we’ll find that Harvard is not alone. With all of the ink and airwaves that have been devoted to immigration these days, black immigrants remain remarkably invisible. Yet their success has long followed the patterns of other high-achieving immigrants.
As one immigrant Jamaican friend once told me, “I’m too busy working two jobs to worry about the white man’s racism.”
Now comes a new study that finds a consistent pattern of Ivy League and other elite colleges and universities boosting their black student populations by enrolling large numbers of immigrants from Africa, the West Indies and Latin America.
Immigrants, who make up 13 percent of the nation’s college-age black population, account for more than a quarter of black students at Ivy League and other elite universities, according to the study of 28 selective colleges and universities. The authors of the study, published recently in the American Journal of Education, included Douglas S. Massey of Princeton University and Camille Z. Charles of the University of Pennsylvania. The proportion of immigrants was higher at private institutions, 28.8 percent, than at the public ones, where they comprised 23.1 percent of enrollment.
Are elite schools padding their racial diversity numbers with black immigrants who do not have a history of American slavery in their families? This development immediately calls into question whether affirmative action admission policies are fulfilling their original intent.
But as Walter Benn Michaels, a professor of English at the University of Illinois at Chicago, writes in his book “The Trouble With Diversity: How We Learned to Love Identity and Ignore Inequality,” the original intent of affirmative action morphed back in the 1970s from reparations for slavery into the promotion of a broader virtue: “diversity.” Since then, it no longer seems to matter how many of your college’s black students had slavery in their families. It only matters that they are black.
That said, I don’t begrudge black immigrants or any other high-achieving immigrants for their impressive achievements. I applaud them. I encourage more native-born American children, particularly my own child, to take similar advantage of this country’s hard-won opportunities.
But I also think we need to revisit the meaning of “diversity.” Unlike our current system of feel-good game-playing, we need to focus on the deeper question of how education can be improved and opportunities opened up to those who were left behind by the civil rights revolution.
We tend to look too often at every aspect of diversity except economic class. Yet, the dream of upward mobility is an essential part of how we Americans like to think of ourselves.
It’s also why a lot more people are trying to get into this country than trying to get out
Now explain why 43.8 percent of African immigrants had achieved a college degree and why only 28.9 percent of European, Russian and Canadian immigrants have achieved college degrees
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:Negroid admixture in Europe ranges from non-existant to barely detectable.
Even in places like Portugal and Spain which are places most assume have high levels of black admixture are less than 2% Negroid.
Greeks are a fourth African with Italians about 1/8th. Spain and Portugal were originally influenced by Moors. There's also Asiatic ancestry which can also be found in significant degrees in Greece and Rome even if we were to ignore the African heritage. I said find a "civilization" that had not relied upon mixed populations nor was mixed. This means just about all of modern European "civilizations" which include Spain and Portugal as they took plenty of their knowledge both philosophical and scientific from the Greeks and Romans.
quote:Europe is the most homogenous continent in the world. [/QB]
As a whole yes. This does not change however that it was heavily influenced by it's less homogenous populations if not from the outside. We won't even get into Europe's reliance on behavior like hand outs which sit contrary to their own standards for how to achieve anything. Is theft achievement? No one says a starving African child in Africa achieved anything in their wage through donations or when a black man steals your car. But let a European take out massive hand outs through pillaging the land and stealing and it's suddenly praise worthy? wtf..Europe ignoring it's own principles which makes it more questionable whether or not to attribute to them a "civilization" by their own standards. Whether it's physical resources or philosophy, math or science there have always been major contributions to the more homogenous areas of Europe via its more mixed populations as well as the Moors. Say what you will about moors not being fully black but trying to argue they were fully European would absurd. They would at the very least qualify as mixed. You get no Spain and you get no Portugal either though without Greece and Rome you're pretty much sunk anyway.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Greeks are a fourth African with Italians about 1/8th.
The African E1b1b carriers who moved into Europe during the Mesolithic and Neolithic were fully Caucasoid.
Caucasoid – E (only subclade E1b1b is a Caucasoid marker, but all other sublades of E are Negroid haplomarkers).
You loose...
Negroid genetic admixture (E other than E1b1b) is non-existant in Europeans, unless you include modern admixture during the slave trade which is at its highest is only 2% in Portugal. Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
What the African E1b1b carriers looked like when they came to Europe, similar to the original Berbers of N. Africa today:
^ Fully Caucasoid.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Greeks are a fourth African with Italians about 1/8th.
The African E1b1b carriers who moved into Europe during the Mesolithic and Neolithic were fully Caucasoid.
Caucasoid – E (only subclade E1b1b is a Caucasoid marker, but all other sublades of E are Negroid haplomarkers).
You loose...
Negroid genetic admixture (E other than E1b1b) is non-existant in Europeans, unless you include modern admixture during the slave trade which is at its highest is only 2% in Portugal.
Wells says. "Race, in terms of deep-seated biological differences, doesn't exist scientifically. We are 99.9 per cent identical roughly, at the genetic level. That's actually a remarkably low level of genetic diversity compared to other species of large primates. It represents a population bottleneck event some 70,000 years ago when the population dropped down to as few as 2,000 people. We came back from that, and our genome reflects that."
keep ignoring facts
Posted by kenndo (Member # 4846) on :
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
Greeks are a fourth African with Italians about 1/8th. Spain and Portugal were originally influenced by Moors. There's also Asiatic ancestry which can also be found in significant degrees in Greece and Rome even if we were to ignore the African heritage.
[/QB]
Posted by kikuyu22 (Member # 19561) on :
The African E1b1b carriers who moved into Europe during the Mesolithic and Neolithic were fully Caucasoid.
quote:
The time has come to ask:"negroes,why do you insist on arguing with this delirious individual???" Its like debating a doorknob!
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
^ retard.
E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.” - Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by kikuyu22: The African E1b1b carriers who moved into Europe during the Mesolithic and Neolithic were fully Caucasoid.
quote:
The time has come to ask:"negroes,why do you insist on arguing with this delirious individual???" Its like debating a doorknob!
"Frigi et al.(2010) suggest these possibilities as factors in their consideration of the asymmetric assimilation of females of non-African origin into Berber-speaking populations whose males currently have a predominance of lineages defined by the African M35/81 biallelic marker.
Quote; whose males currently have a predominance of lineages defined by the African M35/81 biallelic marker.
Predominance of lineages defined by "the African M35/81 biallelic marker."
It is interesting that these “non-African”mtDNA lineages are usually predominant while being diverse (Coudray et al. 2009; Fadhlaoui-Zid et al. 2004; Khodjet-el-Khil et al. 2008).
A history of the Maghrib in the Islamic period
By Jamil M. Abun-Nasr
Cambridge University Press, 1987 - page 5.
..."it is important to bear in mind that over the centuries the Maghreb has been a melting-pot of many other ethnic groups and cultures"
"We conclude that the origins and maternal diversity of Berber populations are old and complex, and these communities bear genetic characteristics resulting from various events of gene flow with surrounding and migrating populations."
"The Berber tribes were far removed from each other and this was one reason why Morocco was often invaded".....
1807, from Caucasus Mountains, between the Black and Caspian seas; applied to the "white" race 1795 (in Ger.) by Ger. anthropologist Johann Blumenbach, because their supposed ancestral homeland lay there; since abandoned as a historical/anthropological term. Lit. meaning "resident or native of the Caucasus" is from 1843.
The mountain range name is from Gk. kaukhasis, said by Pliny ("Natural History," book six, chap. XVII) to be from a Scythian word similar to kroy-khasis, lit. "(the mountain) ice-shining, white with snow." But possibly from a Pelasgian root *kau- meaning "mountain."
Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.” - Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
Bwa ha aha aha ahahah. you pathetic dolt, and a stinking liar as well. Cruciani's article is available online. It does not have the bogus "quote" you doctored above. Anyone can verify it here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181964/?tool=pubmed
You simply made up the quote and threw in a citation like the pitiful buffoon you are, not knowing the article has been posted and discussed numerous times here on ES.
You are so pathetic now you are making up quotes. HEre is what Cruciana actually says: "The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81, and E-M34) and the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously distributed on the African continent: E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa, E-M81 is restricted t o northern Africa, E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and E-M35* is shared by eastern and southern Africans (Cruciani et al. 2002)" --Cruciani What a retard you are. But that's nothing new. LEt's recap shall we- ONE MORE FOR THE ROAD:
THE FAKER'S BOGUS QUOTES AND CITATIONS - PART 16
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist/Cassiterides: posted 28 February, 2012 02:52 AM [QB] E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.” - Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
The dumb faker doctored the quote, not knowing the article has been much discussed at ES. Testifying even more to his incompetence, Cruciani actually does show E3b or E1b1b occurring in numerous places within "sub-Saharan" Africa. Quote: "The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81, and E-M34) and the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously distributed on the African continent: E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa, E-M81 is restricted t o northern Africa, E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and E-M35* is shared by eastern and southern Africans (Cruciani et al. 2002)" --Cruciani
THE FAKER AND BUFFOON IS AGAIN BUSTED IN A LIE!
THE FAKER'S BOGUS CLAIM PART- 15 - QUOTE: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiterides: posted 14 January, 2012 11:41 AM If you are a white heterosexual male in Britain you have virtually zero chance of getting a job. All the jobs go to blacks or other immigrants.
^^LOL - Idiotic nonsense. As of 2001, 92.1% of the UK population identified themselves as White, leaving 7.9%[270] of the UK population identifying themselves as mixed race or of an ethnic minority. The population of the United Kingdom in the 2001 census was 58,789,194, UK Office for National Statistics- 2001.
That leaves approx 54 million white people. About 33% of that population were adult men. Let's take away 8% or so for minorities. So you are saying then that 25% of the approx 54 million white people in the UK are all unemployed? Damn you are dumb, but you only expose the bankruptcy of your racism.
The Fake C-Ass -Hole exposed PART 14 - BOGUS "NORDIC BLONDS FLITTING AROUND EGYPT
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiterides: posted 29 December, 2011 06:05 AM
Hetepheres II was a blonde
^^Hapless dullard, you are exposed in another lie. Your own reference was checked. It yielded detailed citations which revealed a quite different story. Scholars say in the mainstream Cambridge Ancient History:
"We must give up the idea that she was of Libyan origin, an attractive theory which was based on blond hair of Hetepheres II, who was then thought to be her daughter. It is now evident that the yellow wig is part of a costume worn b other great ladies." --I. Edwards, C. Gadd, N. Hammond. 1971. The Cambridge Ancient History. 3ed Volume 1, Part 2, Early History of the Middle East
Yet another history says: "The walls of this interior room are decorated with hunting and fishing scenes, including a charming image of Meresankh and her mother, Hetepheres II picking lotus flowers from the river.. The pillars have images of Meresankh wearing a blond wig." --P. Lacovara. 2004. The pyramids and the SPhinx: tombs and temples of GIza
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 13- HIS BOGUS CLAIM OF "NORDIC" EGYPTIAN ROYALTY
quote:Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiterides: posted 28 December, 2011 05:40 PM Early dynastic & old kingdom royalty was Nordic (blonde and fair skinned)
^^^Ha hahahahah you stupid mass of camel vomit! Up above you reference scholar Frank Yurco, but here is what Yurco said about the 12th Dynasty, debunking your claim of "Nordic" Egyptian royalty. You dumbass.... You are again debunked, with your own "supporting" references... lmao...
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region.4 As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne... Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989)
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 12 HE says Egyptologists like Frank Yurco says the Egyptians were "Caucasoid" --- "Virtually every egyptologist believes the egyptians were Caucasoid" --
BUt Yurco says nothing of the sort.. Here for example, is what he says about the 12the Dynasty rulers aho were Nubian descent: They seem really "Caucasoid"... yeah, right.. - quote-
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region.4 As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne... Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989) -
Another dodge is to twist an old chat/forum discussion statement by conservative Egyptologist Frank Yurco out of context. Yurco rejected those who "a priori" claimed the Egyptians were "black", that is, a dogmatic claim without presenting empirical evidence. He never rejected reasonable argument with data showing the Egyptians were an indigenous African population -QUOTE: .. basically a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times.. (Yurco 1996- An Egyptological Review, in Black Athena Revisited)
The Faker exposed- part 11
quote: Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiterides: ^You claim Vanessa Williams is a black woman when her heritage is white welsh and native american
quote:Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiterides: ^ Eurafrican is Caucasoid.
^^You are once again exposed. You said EurAfrican is Caucasoid, and cited Serti in support. But using your own citation any reader can see that Sergi considers EurAfricans to be an amalgamation or mixture of many types, directly contradicting your claim.
SErgi says: QUOTE: "This human species, with cranial and facial characters thus well determined, I call Eurafrican; and this because, having had its origin in Africa, where it is still represented by many peoples, it has been diffused from prehistoric times in Europe... The Eurafrican species thus falls into three races: the African, with red-brown and black pigmentation.. Thus the Mediterranean stock is a race or variety of the Eurafrican species." --G. Sergi
You have again failed and are once again exposed. ------------------------------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED PART 9- HE CLAIMS ALL THESE HIGGINS "DISTORTIONS" BUT WHEN ASKED TO NAME THE SPECIFIC WEBSITES OF THIS ALLEGED "AFROCENTRIC' HORROR, HE RUNS AWAY. WHY IS THAT FAKER?
In fact, Godfrey Higgins ALSO says this about "negroes"
quote: "I believe all the Blavk bambinos of Italy are negroes- not merely blacks; this admitted, it would prove they very early date of their entrance into Italy." pg 286 pg 434 "the ancient Eturians had the countenances of Negroes, the same as the images of Buddah in INdia." pg 166 pg 474- "They aere in fact, all one nation, with one religion, that of Buddah, and they were originally NEgroes" pg 59: "nor can it be reasonably doubted, that a race of Negroes formerly had power and pre-eminence in India" pg 59- AS TO ETHIOPIA: And it is probable that an Ethiopian, a negro, correctly speaking, may have been meant, not merely a black person; and it seems probable that the following may have ben the real fact, viz, that a race of NEgroes or Blacks, but probably of the former, came to India to the west."
Anglo-Pyr/CassiRETEDES own source debunks him. Note the footnote by his own author- QUOTE: "may not have been Negroes, though Blacks, though it is probably they were so."
His own source says they may not have been Negroes then adds: THOUGH IT IS PROBABLY THEY WERE SO."
^The Faker once again, debunks himself. And he seems not to realize that Ethiopia is in "sub-Saharan" Africa.. lol.. pathetic incompetent..
And he never shows these massive number of websites "all over the internet". Like what? How many? If they are "all over" then he should at least be able to give direct links to 6 showing pages where the "Afrocentrics: are "distorting" Higgins work. LEt's say what the faker has besides hot air. Post DIRECT LINKS to 6 of the huge number of alleged "Afrocentric" websites where the Afrocentrics are "distorting" Higgins. SHow how they are distorting Higgins with specific quotes and specific context.
Watch the Faker duck and run when he is again called on a claim, or make up yet another lie to cover his exposure... -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- part 8:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes: "Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of Europe."
But then, in your own thread, by your own hand, you present a picture of an African albino that has pale skin, light brown or hazel eyes and fair hair. You said it was impossible, but then debunk yourself with your own posted picture.. This is like the 8-9th time you keep tripping over yourself with lies, contradictions, and bogus claims.
RECAP The Faker exposed- part 7 Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes: "Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of Europe."
^^Your claim is is completely bogus. Native diversity or albinism causes some tropical Africans to have light eyes and light hair. You fail againn..
================================================
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6 1-- ^^Faker! In your initial posts you claimed that it was Cavalli-Sforza talking 'bout negroes "mutating" from Pygmies. Now in your "corrected" post, YOU STILL APPEAR A FAKE. You now remove Cavalli- Sforza's name on the "mutant" claim, admitting that you were lying all along! Bwa ha aha a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah..
2-- Second point- Peter Frost is debunked by Cavalli-Sforza who says as to his so-called "mutation" theory: QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
Frost mentions Cavalli-Sforza in connection with sexual selection, and movement of some groups from Nigeria-Cameroon to other parts of Africa. He never says Cavalli Sforza talks bout any "negro mutation" and in fact any mutation claim is directly contradicted by Sforza. Sucka, you not only lied bout Cavalli-Sforza, you lied about your own white writer- Peter Frost, and misrepresented him.
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6 Anglo-Pyr/CassiREDES says: ''There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty''
^^LMAO! Totally fake! Credible up to date sources note that blondism is prevalent in early life BUT, contrary to your claim that: "There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty", the shade of color varies. In maturity the hair usually turns a darker brown color, but sometimes remains blond. See: "Gene Expression: Blonde Australian Aboriginals". Gnxp.com. http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2005/08/blonde-australian-aboriginals.php.
^^Here is one of your Australians over 20 years old who does have blonde hair. YOu are caught out spinning bogus claims AGAIN!. Bwa ha aha a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah.. -
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 5a [b]So where are these tropical african peoples with pale white or fair skin? blonde red hair?
^^You fail again. African populations can readily produce blond or reddish blond hair as noted by hair study author Hrdy 1978 himself, and he references Nubia as an example. Albinism is another source of red or blond hair in Africa, and albinism is much more prevalent in African populations than among Europeans. Even African Americans produce more albinos than white Americans. (The pigmentary system: physiology and pathophysiology- By James J. Nordlund 2006: 603) (E. Roach and V. Miller 2004. Neurocutaneous disorders.) QUOTE: "In general, the prevalence of albinism in Africa is much higher, in the range of 1 in 1 100 to 1 in 3900."
So Africa can and does routinely produce red and blond hair. All non-Africans are MORE LIMITED subsets of ORIGINAL African diversity. THe originals have more built-in diversity than the limited sub-set populations. This is straight science as noted by the quote from TIshkoff 2000.
Nor are Africans the only tropical peoples who can produce reddish hair or blond hair. Among Australian Aborigines, some tropical groups produce 100% of individuals with blond hair. Melanesians can also produce blond or reddish hair, and do so routinely.
White people have no monopoly at all on that hair color. They merely show more of it, but even among whites, red hair for example is minor- occurring in less than 5% of the overall European populations, mostly in northern Europe.
So the claim that there are no tropical Africans with such variation is once again, proved fake. You made the claim.
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 4 ime and time again, you stand debunked and exposed for falsifying claims and references. Let's recap:
Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/CassiFAKedes::
quote: The source is Cavalli-Sforza's book on the Pygmies entitled 'African pygmies' (Academic Press, 1986).
This work shows that Negroids mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 9,000 BC in West Africa. So the 'true' Black African today is a recent mutation. Caucasoids and Mongoloids predate them. [Wink] Negroids only migrated into other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion or slightly earlier. Prior to them, Caucasoids inhabited North Africa and Bushmen (Capoids) to the south who were displaced by the Caucasoids from the Mediterranean around 12,000 BC.
^^A bogus reference. Why should anyone take your word for it given past bogus references? Quote where Cavalli-Sforza says these so-called "negroids" "mutated" from Pygmies. The burden of proof is on you, since you made the claim.
While you scurry to cover your tracks with yet more bogus claims, Cavali Sforza, in his well known The History and Geography of Human Genes, 1994 Cavalli-Sforza summarizes his 1986 work on Pygmies and specifically debunks the "Pygmy as ancestor" theory held by other older writings. QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
SO much for your lying claims of "mutations" from "Pygymy" ancestors. In short, you lied about Cavalli-Sforza, creating a falsified claim and a bogus "supporting" reference to a claim that is nowhere supported in his work. You are once again exposed as yet another racist faker You are not fooling anyone.
------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED-PART 3- YOu then tried to cover up your lie with even more bogus nformation and STILL fail
You "modified" your Cavalli Sforza claim by including page numbers, and then changing some wording to "adaptive radiation" hoping to divert attention from your exposure.. lmao..
However pages 361-362 of Cavalli Sforza's 1986 book says absolutely nothing about any Negroes "mutating" from pygmies, nor any "adaptive radiation." It merely discusses Pygmy history and geography. You picked out a page at random, not knowing it can be verified via Google Books. You were asked to provide a direct quote but are still running. Now why is that?
""It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
--------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 2 And Your pathetic "modification" STILL turned out to be bogus. You then said:
"True" Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population — a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996).
^^But in fact, Watson 1996 has nothing to do with osteological data and does not even mention it. It has to do with mtDNA.
----------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 1C YOU THEN PROFFERED ANOTHER FAKE CLAIM BELOW: He says:
quote: "Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships.."
^^Complete Nonsense. In the Old Testament, the tribe of Zebulun is mentioned as specifically associated with ships and maritime elements. QUOTE:
Genesis 49:13 "Zebulun will dwell at the shore of the seas; Yea, he will be at the shore of the ships, And his side toucheth upon Sidon. "
Anglo-Pyr/Cassi-Fakdes: MULTIPLE TIMES AT BAT, MULTIPLE EXPOSURES AS A FAKE...
--fake claim that no Australian Abo over 20 is blonde
-- fake claim that NO tropical Africans have any diversity in hair, skin or eye color
-- fake Cavalli-Sforza citation
-- 2nd fake Cavalli-Sforza reference
-- Faked Watson reference
-- Faked Biblical reference
-- FAke representation of Peter Frost's work
-- Fake claim that "studies" say "egyptians were dark are not like 'light-skinned Europeans". COnveniently, the alleged study is missing..
--Fake Higgins claims
--Fake claim that Guiseppe Sergi's EurAfrican race concept is negro-free
--Fake claim that Vanessa Williams has no black ancestry but is "white and Indian"
--Fake claim that Egyptologists like Yurco consider the Egyptians "Caucasoid"
--Fake claim of white Nordic Egyptian royalty
--Fake claim of "blond" Hetepheres
--Fake claim of white males in BRitain "unable to get jobs"
--FAKE Cruciani "quote" with "citation"
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: What the African E1b1b carriers looked like when they came to Europe, similar to the original Berbers of N. Africa today:
^ Fully Caucasoid.
Care to explain these E3B E-M78 carries? lol
Recurrent mutation in SNPs within Y chromosome E3b (E-M215) haplogroup: A rebuttal
Fulvio Cruciani1, Beniamino Trombetta1, Andrea Novelletto2, Rosaria Scozzari1,*
DOI: 10.1002/ajhb.20790
American Journal of Human Biology Volume 20, Issue 5, pages 614–616, September/October 2008
Abstract
In a previous issue of AJHB, Fernandes et al. (2008. Am J Hum Biol 20:185–190.) describe instances of identity by state at multiple short tandem repeat loci between human Y chromosomes belonging to different E-M35 sub-haplogroups.
They interpret these findings as evidence for multiple mutational events in at least two loci (M78 and M81). Here, we introduce a novel polymorphic marker (V68), potentially useful to investigate the issue. This marker and sequence data, reported here for the first time, reinforce our previous interpretations on the phylogenetic structure of the E3b haplogroup.
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Greeks are a fourth African with Italians about 1/8th.
The African E1b1b carriers who moved into Europe during the Mesolithic and Neolithic were fully Caucasoid.
Caucasoid – E (only subclade E1b1b is a Caucasoid marker, but all other sublades of E are Negroid haplomarkers).
You loose...
Negroid genetic admixture (E other than E1b1b) is non-existant in Europeans, unless you include modern admixture during the slave trade which is at its highest is only 2% in Portugal.
E3b originated in East Africa and expanded into the Near East and northern Africa at the end of the Pleistocene (Underhill et al. 2001).
E3b lineages would have then been introduced from the Near East into southern Europe by farmers, during the Neolithic expansion (Hammer et al. 1998; Semino et al. 2000; Underhill et al. 2001).
Subtyping of Y-chromosomal haplogroup E-M78 (E1b1b1a) by SNP
Here, we describe a system for the molecular dissection of haplogroup E-M78 (E1b1b1a), consisting of multiplex polymerase chain reaction and minisequencing of M78 and nine population-informative Y-SNPs (M148, M224, V12, V13, V19, V22, V27, V32, V65) in a single reaction.
E1b1b1a, subhaplogrouping for population-of-origin prediction, the distribution of E-M78 and its derived variants was determined in an Italian population sample (n = 326).
—PN2 clade (E3) bearers in the vicinity of the Sudanese-Central African Republic -Ugandan-Kenyan region give rise to E3a ~ between 21 and 18 ky ago [pending additional or new info]; E3b-M35* would have likely arose relatively earlier than E3a*[as evidenced by its near absence in some the populations that carry this], sometime prior to the Ogolian and the LGM period. At this time, it was likely the M78 derivative that came about ~ between 19 and 15 ky ago. It was also likely during this period, that some E3b-M35 variants spilled over to the "southwest Asia", which would be identified as E-M34. The E-M78* likely arose somewhere in the bidirectional-migration route between Northeast and sub-Saharan East Africa; this location was likely in the region straddling upper Egypt and Sudan of the eastern Sahara, amongst earlier E-M35 migrants from sub-Saharan East Africa. These M78 bearers were increasingly pressured to move further south due to progressive aridity, possibly as far as Uganda-Kenya and/or Tanzanian general region.
Paragroup E-M78 represents 74.5% of haplogroup E*, the highest frequencies observed in Masalit and Fur populations.
I reintroduce to you the FUR! lol
lol CARE TO EXPLAIN? lol
The downstreams.
Albania 27.5% Greece 27% Serbia 24% Macedonia 23% Cyprus 20% Bulgaria 16% Bosnia-Herzegovina 14.5% Portugal 12.5% Italy 11% Turkey 11% Austria 9% Belarus 9% Slovakia 9% Switzerland 9% Ukraine 8% France 7% Croatia 6% Czech Republic 6% Romania 6% Spain 6% Germany 5.5% Netherlands 4.5% Belgium 4% Poland 3.5% Slovenia 3% Denmark 2.5% Estonia 2.5% Russia 2.5% England 2% Ireland 2% Wales 2% Scotland 1.5% Finland 1% Lithuania 1% Norway 1% Sweden 1% Latvia 0.5% Iceland 0%
Care to explain?lol
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Bwa ha aha aha ahahah. you pathetic dolt, and a stinking liar as well. Cruciani's article is available online. It does not have the bogus "quote" you doctored above. Anyone can verify it here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181964/?tool=pubmed
You simply made up the quote and threw in a citation like the pitiful buffoon you are, not knowing the article has been posted and discussed numerous times here on ES.
err.... retard
That is the ABSTRACT only.
The exact quote is on page 74.
Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74.
Check it for yourself.
You say the same about Cavalli-Sforza, despite the fact i gave you the page numbers.
It's not my problem you don't have access to these works... Just because you lack access doesn't mean i make the quotes up you fucking moron. Go troll elsewhere.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Care to explain?lol
Y-DNA and MtDNA have no direct link to phenotype. They are only markers of geographical origin. Phenotype = autosomal DNA.
However if you can identify indigenous carriers of a certain region and you know their phenotype, then it correlates. We know E1b1b originated in the Horn of Africa, 26k years ago.
Prehistoric East Africans were not Negroid:
quote:.W. Howells' study of world craniometric variation is especially relevant to the racial affinity of East Africans before the expansion of Negroids into the region. Howells studied some 2,500+ skulls from 28 populations of recent Homo sapiens based on 57 metric variables, including skulls from the Teita tribe of East Africa. These recent Teita tribesmen (and women) clustered with other Sub-Saharan Africans, indicating that (as is obvious) recent Kenyans belong primarily to the Negroid race.
Howells then studied prehistoric East Africans and other humans from around the world to determine whether or not they show any affinities with living races. He did this to examine whether the morphological complexes of modern races can be discerned in remote times. Using the same multivariate approach he studied the Elmenteita, Nakuru and Willey's Kopje skulls from Kenya. His conclusion was that there is no racial continuity between recent Negroid East African skulls and these prehistoric remains.
- Howells WW (1989) Skull shapes and the map: craniometric analyses in the dispersion of modern Homo. Peabody Museum Papers 79:1-189. - Howells WW (1995) Who's Who in skulls: ethnic identification of crania from measurements. Peabody Museum Papers 82:1-108.
===
E1b1b was taken into Europe by Caucasoids.
All craniometric analysis of prehistoric Ethiopians proves they were non-Negroid.
Negroids only moved into Ethiopia as late as the Bantu expansion, and modern east africans are Aethiopid (Caucasoid-Negrid admixed).
Though Ethiopians are generally Negroid in pigmentation and sometimes hair type, their Caucasoid (Mediterranean) accretions are evident in their cranial and facial morphology, which distinguishes them from pure West African Negroids (Coon, 1939) -
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Care to explain?lol
Y-DNA and MtDNA have no direct link to phenotype. They are only markers of geographical origin. Phenotype = autosomal DNA.
However if you can identify indigenous carriers of a certain region and you know their phenotype, then it correlates. We know E1b1b originated in the Horn of Africa, 26k years ago.
Prehistoric East Africans were not Negroid:
quote:.W. Howells' study of world craniometric variation is especially relevant to the racial affinity of East Africans before the expansion of Negroids into the region. Howells studied some 2,500+ skulls from 28 populations of recent Homo sapiens based on 57 metric variables, including skulls from the Teita tribe of East Africa. These recent Teita tribesmen (and women) clustered with other Sub-Saharan Africans, indicating that (as is obvious) recent Kenyans belong primarily to the Negroid race.
Howells then studied prehistoric East Africans and other humans from around the world to determine whether or not they show any affinities with living races. He did this to examine whether the morphological complexes of modern races can be discerned in remote times. Using the same multivariate approach he studied the Elmenteita, Nakuru and Willey's Kopje skulls from Kenya. His conclusion was that there is no racial continuity between recent Negroid East African skulls and these prehistoric remains.
- Howells WW (1989) Skull shapes and the map: craniometric analyses in the dispersion of modern Homo. Peabody Museum Papers 79:1-189. - Howells WW (1995) Who's Who in skulls: ethnic identification of crania from measurements. Peabody Museum Papers 82:1-108.
===
E1b1b was taken into Europe by Caucasoids.
All craniometric analysis of prehistoric Ethiopians proves they were non-Negroid.
Negroids only moved into Ethiopia as late as the Bantu expansion, and modern east africans are Aethiopid (Caucasoid-Negrid admixed).
Though Ethiopians are generally Negroid in pigmentation and sometimes hair type, their Caucasoid (Mediterranean) accretions are evident in their cranial and facial morphology, which distinguishes them from pure West African Negroids (Coon, 1939) -
lol but weren't "you" first claiming caucasoid traits came from the caucasus? You do know where that is I hope?lol
Here is what your ancestor looked like when they left Africa. Eye-to-eye.lol
For your information, c.coon has become outdated biased debunked anthropology. Next time ask your cohorts to inform you better over what has been discussed, already. Otherwise it becomes boring repeating the some over and over.
Repeat mode: Omo Kibish!
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
Prehistoric East Africans were not Negroid:
lol
^
quote: "From the Mesolithic to the early Neolithic period different lines of evidence support an out-of-Africa Mesolithic migration to the Levant by northeastern African groups that had biological affinities with sub-Saharan populations. From a genetic point of view, several recent genetic studies have shown that sub-Sabaran genetic lineages (affiliated with the Y-chromosome PN2 clade; Underhill et al. 2001) have spread through Egypt into the Near East, the Mediterranean area, and, for some lineages, as far north as Turkey (E3b-M35 Y lineage; Cinniogclu et al. 2004; Luis et al. 2004), probably during several dispersal episodes since the Mesolithic (Cinniogelu et al. 2004; King et al. 2008; Lucotte and Mercier 2003; Luis et al. 2004; Quintana-Murci et al. 1999; Semino et al. 2004; Underhill et al. 2001). This finding is in agreement with morphological data that suggest that populations with sub-Saharan morphological elements were present in northeastern Africa, from the Paleolithic to at least the early Holocene, and diffused northward to the Levant and Anatolia beginning in the Mesolithic.
Indeed, the rare and incomplete Paleolithic to early Neolithic skeletal specimens found in Egypt - such as the 33,000-year-old Nazlet Khater specimen (Pinhasi and Semai 2000), the Wadi Kubbaniya skeleton from the late Paleolithic site in the upper Nile valley (Wendorf et al. 1986), the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980) - show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens.
This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators (Angel 1972; Berry and Berry 1967, 1972; Keita 1995) and has been recently reinforced by the study of Brace et al. (2005), which clearly shows that the cranial morphology of prehistoric and recent northeast African populations is linked to sub-Saharan populations (Niger-Congo populations). These results support the hypothesis that some of the Paleolithic-early Holocene populations from northeast Africa were probably descendents of sub-Saharan ancestral populations...... This northward migration of northeastern African populations carrying sub-Saharan biological elements is concordant with the morphological homogeneity of the Natufian populations (Bocquentin 2003), which present morphological affinity with sub-Saharan populations (Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005).
In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005), in concordance with a process of demie diffusion accompanying the extension of the Neolithic revolution (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994)."
---Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements F. X. Ricaut, M. Waelkens. Human Biology, Volume 80, Number 5, October 2008, pp. 535-564
Göbekli Tepe - 11,500 B.C. Which is a hilltop sanctuary built on the highest point of an elongated mountain ridge about 15km northeast of the town of Şanlıurfa (Urfa) in southeast Turkey.
German Archaeologist Klaus Schmidt discovered: Gobeki Tepe.
This is actually what the author mentioned:
..."and would have attracted hunter-gatherers from Africa and the Levant."...
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Care to explain?lol
E1b1b was taken into Europe by Caucasoids.
All craniometric analysis of prehistoric Ethiopians proves they were non-Negroid.
Negroids only moved into Ethiopia as late as the Bantu expansion, and modern east africans are Aethiopid (Caucasoid-Negrid admixed).
Though Ethiopians are generally Negroid in pigmentation and sometimes hair type, their Caucasoid (Mediterranean) accretions are evident in their cranial and facial morphology, which distinguishes them from pure West African Negroids (Coon, 1939) -
Explain why they are tropical adapted and not extensive hairy? lol
The Northeast Africa-based E1b1b1a subclade is defined by SNP M78. Somalia, Sudan and Egypt are among the present day countries with very high frequencies (60-90%) of the E1b1b1a M78 subclade. The STR data also support its origin in this area with a TMRCA estimated at 14-23 kya.
The E1b1b1a1b (V32) subclade is a descendant of E1b1b1a1 (V12). E1b1b1a1b/V32 is highest in Somalia (47-75%),
This somewhat rare haplogroup, E1b1b1e (V6), has only been observed in East Africa with the most appreciable levels seen in Ethiopia (4-17%). Kenya and Somalia also harbor a moderate frequency (5%) of this subclade.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: Explain why they are tropical adapted and not extensive hairy? lol
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
lol at this "African American black woman" lol
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: Explain why they are tropical adapted and not extensive hairy? lol
Melanin (En español: Melanina)
Say: mel-uh-nun
Ever wonder where your skin gets its color? It comes from the magic "m" word: melanin! This natural pigment is what gives your skin its special hue. The darker your skin, the more melanin you have.
People with light complexions have less melanin (say: meh-luh-nun) in their skin. Melanin is a chemical produced by certain skin cells (called melanocytes); it helps protect the skin from sun damage by reflecting and absorbing ultraviolet (UV) rays.
The more melanin you have in your skin, the tanner you look! People with fair skin have less melanin in their skin to begin with, but some of their melanocytes make more melanin when exposed to the sun. So instead of easily getting an even suntan, they sometimes get freckles.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:For your information, c.coon has become outdated biased debunked anthropology.
Wrong. Coon is still valid, at least so according to the National Academy of Sciences.
Those who dislike the findings and racial classifications of Coon will try to write him off as outdated.
But an appreciation written a few years after his death by a modern anthropologist disproves these claims and affirms the continuing value and influence of his work. It also shows that he was already dealing with the kind of unscientific race-denial that's so rampant today, and defending himself against the accusations of "racism" that go with it:
''He was exasperated by what he called the "hide-race" attitude of people who, from social or philosophical motives, seemed to deny the existence of obvious biological differences. He became indignant at any suggestion that his interest in race derived from racist motives. Although a good many articles had been written about environmental adaptation of such traits, this book was the first to address the problem as a whole.
[...]
After holding several serious ailments at bay for some years, Carl died on June 3, 1981, at his West Gloucester home, shortly before his seventy-seventh birthday. His brilliance left a lasting mark on a generation of anthropologists.''
- W. W. Howells. "Biographical Memoirs V.58". National Academy of Sciences, 1989.
I'm interested in truth like Coon was, so i take his research serious.
Afrocentrism in contrast is a lie. All you do is spam the same crap over and over with Zaharan, no one reads it...
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: Explain why they are tropical adapted and not extensive hairy? lol
Caucasoids are not extensive hairy, your cherry picked picture spams are irrelevant. The most hairy race is the Australoid.
Most Caucasoids just have a light scattered amount of body hair on the chest -
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: [QB]
quote:Care to explain?lol
Y-DNA and MtDNA have no direct link to phenotype. They are only markers of geographical origin. Phenotype = autosomal DNA.
However if you can identify indigenous carriers of a certain region and you know their phenotype, then it correlates. We know E1b1b originated in the Horn of Africa, 26k years ago.
So if E1b1b originated in the Horn of Africa 26k years ago...what was before that? lol
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
quote:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: Explain why they are tropical adapted and not extensive hairy? lol
Caucasoids are not extensive hairy
By European standards, of course Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: Explain why they are tropical adapted and not extensive hairy? lol
Caucasoids are not extensive hairy
By European standards, of course
lol
Why are they now ignoring the facts. You have multiple articles were they brag about it.
Brad may shaved his chest. For all we know. This happens too. This is also in multi articles.
I have to go. Have fun with this character.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol: Explain why they are tropical adapted and not extensive hairy? lol
Caucasoids are not extensive hairy, your cherry picked picture spams are irrelevant. The most hairy race is the Australoid.
Europeans are most hairy, right after Eurasians. This is a fact! Deal with it.
The northern coastal aborigines are “tall, dark, less hairy, and very lanky.” (Howells, 1959, p. 326).lol
Autosomal microsatellite variability of the Arrernte people of Australia
M. A. Alfonso-Sánchez1,2, A. M. Pérez-Miranda1,2, R. J. Herrera1,*
Article first published online: 23 OCT 2007
DOI: 10.1002/ajhb.20685
American Journal of Human Biology Volume 20, Issue 1, pages 91–99,
Abstract
The genomic diversity of the Arrernte people of Australia or caterpillar people was investigated utilizing 13 autosomal short tandem repeat (STR) markers. Significant departures from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium were detected at the D18S51, TPOX and CSF1PO loci, which persisted after applying the Bonferroni correction. Gene diversity values oscillate between 0.6302 (CSF1PO) and 0.8731 (D21S11). Observed heterozygosity (Ho) ranges from 0.2632 (D18S51) to 0.8333 (vWA) and is lower than the expected heterozygosity (He) for 12 of the 13 loci analyzed.
The genetic relationships of the Arrernte with Middle Eastern, East Asian, South Asian and Indian populations were analyzed by distance-based methods, including Neighbor-Joining trees and nonmetric multidimensional scaling.
In addition, the genetic contribution of the populations included in the analysis to the Arrernte gene pool was estimated utilizing weighted least square coefficients. Although the Arrernte population exhibits a remarkable level of genetic differentiation, results of the phylogeographic analyses based on autosomal microsatellite data suggest a certain degree of genetic relatedness between the Arrernte tribe of Australia and populations from the Indian subcontinent.
In contrast, the STR diversity analyses failed to detect substantial East Asian contribution to the genetic background of the Arrernte group. Am. J. Hum. Biol.,
1)." Autraliods" are early Eurasians. They moved into Eurasia and from there furher east. Hg C, D arose/ mutated in Eurasia and coastal Arabian Peninsula.
2). While other early migrationist like Negritos migrated via the coastal route.
You lose again. Keep trying!
Stanley H. Ambrose Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois,
Journal of Human Evolution (1998) 34, 623–651
Late Pleistocene human population bottlenecks, volcanic winter, and differentiation of modern humans
The cause, timing and location of bottleneck releases
If population release was due to the natural increase (logistic population growth) of disease-resistant populations following epidemics, then growth could have been relatively rapid, a function of the intrinsic rate of increase of disease-resistant popula-tions, and the duration of the bottleneck relatively brief. Its date could have been at any time, but would presumably have been relatively soon after the bottleneck. Release could have occurred wherever disease-resistant individuals survived.
If release was due to natural increase in founder population size after dispersing across land bridges or narrow straits (Lahr, 1996; Lahr & Foley, 1994) then release dates would vary from 70–50 ka for the early Australasian dispersal, to 45 ka for the second Levantine dispersal. In the epidemic and dispersal scenarios the dura-tion of the bottleneck would have been brief.
If bottlenecks were caused by the cold, arid climate of isotope stage 4 then their duration was approximately 10 ka and release could have been as late as 60 ka.
The failure of early modern humans to survive in the Levant during the early last glacial implies they were not yet physiologically and/or behaviorally well-adapted to cold climates and Palearctic environments, or at least not as well-adapted as neanderthals.
The Multiple Dispersals model (Figure 3) proposes that a population bottleneck occurred during oxygen isotope stage 6, when cold, dry climates caused isolation and differentiation of populations within Africa.
If bottlenecks were caused by the cold, arid climate of isotope stage 4 then their duration was approximately 10 ka and release could have been as late as 60 ka.
Global climate change could have reduced populations during the early last ice age, oxygen isotope stage 4
... As noted above, the replacement of modern humans by neander- thals in the Levant, suggests African modern humans were rather poorly-adapted to cold climates.
lol
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Troll Patty, you prefer your men smooth?
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: TP, you prefer your men smooth?
Yes, I am smooth, if that's you question. The smooth oparator.
How about you?lol
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
^ You can't have it both ways...
You claim body hair is a cold adaptive trait, but by the same logic so has to be straight-wavy hair, yet you claim straight hair is a feature of the hot tropics...
You are just picking and choosing.
Negroids are wooly haired, not straight.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ^ You can't have it both ways...
You claim body hair is a cold adaptive trait, but by the same logic so has to be straight-wavy hair, yet you claim straight hair is a feature of the hot tropics...
You are just picking and choosing.
Negroids are wooly haired, not straight.
Extensive body hair is a trait of cold adaption lol
Short limb portion is a trait of cold adaption.lol
It's really that simple.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
lol
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Australoids are the most hairy race. I gave you sources before. They have extensive hair all over their body, mostly including their arms. Some look like wolf-men...
Caucasoids don't have anywhere near this amount of hair growth.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Australoids are the most hairy race. I gave you sources before. They have extensive hair all over their body, mostly including their arms. Some look like wolf-men...
Caucasoids don't have anywhere near this amount of hair growth.
I don't know if you are blind or what. But I posted a study to you, with the proper elaboration. Or can't you comprehend it?lol at the distractions.
Now stop picture spamming, it's irrelevant. lol
What is the Hg of them?
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ^ You can't have it both ways...
You claim body hair is a cold adaptive trait, but by the same logic so has to be straight-wavy hair, yet you claim straight hair is a feature of the hot tropics...
You are just picking and choosing.
Negroids are wooly haired, not straight.
I did not mention the word straight wavy hair. It's you who did.lol
Get real!lol
I am speaking of body hair and cold limb portions.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
The what's happening to my body? book for boys: a growing up guide for ... - page 68
Lynda Madaras, Dane Saavedra - 1987 - 251 pagina’s The amount of body hair you'll have is determined by two things : your racial or ethnic group and your family. As a group, Caucasian (white) men generally have more body hair than Oriental or Negro (black) men.
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
For it not to be so common for yte men to have excessive body hair as the idiot yte bwoy would like to think and/or try to tell us, funny there are so many websites re; men wanting to remove excess hair- yet it's not common in yte people Does his dumb azz not real-eyes that it's a trend amongst yte males to wax their chests and other parts, sometimes completely for a 'smooth look'? While it's true there are some Black Men who have nuff body hair, there are no shortage of yte men with the kind of excessive body hair as the pictures I've seen of yte men or yte men I've seen out in public with the hair bursting from out of their shirts everywhere it can from their Natural sweater (worse if it's summer and they're not wearing a shirt uggggghhh)...The majority of men we see with excessive body hair like that are not Black Men- that is the reality of it....I've come across clips on television of men having competitions re; their 'sweaters'...as in, who has the most body hair...it was disgusting...and...whyyyyyyy I didn't see a Black Man anywhere in any of those clips I came across...ijs...
Why Do Men Want to Remove Excess Hair From Their Bodies Published February 4, 2012
Though men usually don’t think about removing excess hair from their body, in today’s professional and competitive lifestyle, it’s emerging as a growing trend not only among celebrities or athletes, but also a common man.
When it comes to Hollywood actors like Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt, in order to get that extra sex appeal, they leave their chests spotless in front of the camera. It is a general notion that most women desire men with clean-shaven body and smooth-skin look. Body hair removal for athletes holds a total different purpose and is done entirely for other reasons. Swimmers get rid of extra body hair to reduce hydrodynamic drag resistance caused by them. As a result, their movements under the water become more fluid for better performance. Hair No More cream is a number one choice of most people, who want a clear and smooth hairless skin.
The reason why most cyclists want to keep their legs hair-free is that after any crash, more asphalt is grabbed by their legs, which can lead to severe skin tears. Also, it becomes easier to clean and bandage hair-free skin when you get road injuries. Most cyclists think that smooth and clean legs can move more quickly to slow them down. Although, there are mixed beliefs among most people about the extent to which hair can affect the speed of their movements. But when it comes to hair removal for men, they shouldn’t feel ashamed or hesitate to de-forest unwanted and excess hair from their bodies. In 1920, the earliest bodybuilders understood the benefit of a clean-shaven hairless body as it allowed them to show off every single bulky muscle on their bodies. One of them was Charles, who became famous with a clean body after modelling on a video showing his entire spotless body for others to admire. Many men want most parts of their body free from any hair to avoid any skin irritation or itching due to sweating.
Having a perfectly muscle tone Stress Free body also means regular body grooming appearence is essential for the perfect professional business male & athlete.
Hairy untrimmed backs,chest, arm pits , glutes & yes, your private area are unprofessional & a turn off to all women. Reality Check; You will be the butt of jokes; Your wife, girlfriend,your team mates/frat buddies are talking behind your back saying you look like Grizzly Adams or caveman. The hours you train to buff your body, should be display were the world can see your ripped body & not buried under wild hair.
Smooth, neat & trim is in. for the athletic & professional young male in the 21st century
Please take the time to read below,
Strip & stand totally naked in the mirror, raise your arms,turn at ever angle, fromt & back, look at your full body & take inventory of yourself. Does your hair look like a uncut lawn?
"If the Body hair is wild, You are not in style"
The new professional male knows that a well groom Trim, Smooth Shaved body appearence from head to toe, will increase their popularity & self esteem. If you have abs & Chest, do not let excess body hair cover up the body you worked so hard to get.
Never be afraid of change to improve yourself, mentality & physicially. Now that you have experience a professional massage & feel good on the inside, now let's take it a step futher, Let Energize Sports Massage groom your body appearence to let you look good on the outside.
At Energize Sports Massage we offer FREE Body Grooming with our 90 or 120 min. Sports Supreme Massage Combo; Call us for additional details
Do -- Trim armpit hair
The first do of our male body hair dos and don’ts concerns the fact that most men have hair under their arms and women expect and accept it. This doesn’t mean that you should let your armpit hair turn into an unkempt jungle, though. Keep your underarm hair trimmed to a reasonable length. It will not only look better this way, but you’ll also notice that you’ll sweat less and therefore smell better. Don't -- Shave armpits bare
As stated above, women expect to see hair beneath a man’s arms. It’s probably not going to be the first thing she notices, but she’ll eventually realize that you have no hair under your arms and she’s bound to question your masculinity because of it. So, unless you’re a male model, keep some hair under there. Do -- Groom chest hair
Plenty of women like to see some hair on a man’s chest, but most prefer to avoid the fuzzy carpet variety. Thinning out your chest hair is a good idea, but leave some hair for her to run her fingers through. On the other hand, there are some women who like a perfectly hairless chest. If you’re going to go with this option, be sure to shave regularly as the bristly stubble length will be uncomfortable for you and unappealing for her. Don't -- Go Brazilian or bare everywhere
It might be OK once in a while for something different, but a man who constantly removes every hair from his genital area will be seen by women as either sex-obsessed or incredibly vain.
The only men who should ever consider going completely hairless over their entire bodies are competitive bikers or swimmers. If it’s not done for the purposes of increased speed, it’s just kind of weird. If you do plan to get rid of the hair on your torso and genitals, you might as well go all the way and shave your legs too (two hairy stalks under your smooth, shaved body would look ridiculous). Do -- Get rid of shoulder, back hair & Hairy Glutes
Most will agree that hair on your back or shoulders is unsightly at best in the summer when most of you will be showing more skin. How can you show off your tan when your body looks like a wild forest. There doesn’t seem to be any logical reason why your girlfriend or wife will run her fingers wantonly through your chest hair and recoil disgustedly at your back hair -- that’s just the way it is. Do yourself a favor and get rid of all the hair back there. Do -- Keep it trimmed down there
Just as you appreciate a clean field of play when you go down on your girl, so will she be pleased to see a well-groomed area around your genitals If your hair is wild & long enough to cover your private parts, you are due for a groom. I guarantee once you are professionally groom, you will see a big difference on how women or your partner will react.No matter how young,or in shape you are, a ungroom hairy body is a major turnoff for most & many will laugh behind your back . Anything that will make her more willing and enthusiastic to visit your nether regions should be done consistently. So keep it neatly trimmed down there. Keeping your pubic hair under control also helps to make you look bigger and controls unpleasant odors.Leave everything else alone. A little light trimming of the hair on the ams, legs, and other places is fine, just make sure you leave them natural looking. Unless you're a competitive swimmer or cyclist, arms and legs can be left a little hairy Don't -- Shave patterns
Unless it’s for the purposes of a joke and is going to be immediately shaved after the laughter dies down, men should never shave any of their hair into patterns of any kind. This applies especially to pubic hair. You don’t need to point your woman in the right direction with arrows, triangles or lightning bolts shaved into your pubes. She knows where she’s going. A simple undisturbed treasure trail will do if you really want to orient her to the right body part. what women or your partner may want
It’s not necessary to base all your grooming choices on what women or your partner will think, of course (feel free to shave your balls if it feels good to you), but since your other half will be the one who will see you naked, you should at least take their opinions into account when you reach for your razor. Even if you do make a grooming faux pas and your girlfriend can’t look at you without laughing, remember that hair grows back and you’ll get back to normal soon.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ^ You can't have it both ways...
You are just picking and choosing.
Negroids are wooly haired, not straight.
quote:Morphological characteristics ...like skin color, hair form, bone traits, eyes, and lips tend to follow geographic boundaries coinciding often with climatic zones . This is not surprising since the selective forces of climate are probably the primary forces of nature that have shaped human races with regard not only to skin color and hair form but also the underlying bony structures of the nose, cheekbones, etc. (For example, more prominent noses humidify air better.) As far as we know, blood-factor frequencies are not shaped by these same climatic factors
Gill, George W. Does Race Exist? A Proponent's Perspective. University of Wyoming, 2000
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol
have you actually ever been to these locations yourself?
I always find it hilarious when internet Africanists and anthropologists hold forth on Africa, but have never been there.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: ^ Ha, ha, ha, ha!!!
I always find it hilarious when internet Africanists and anthropologists hold forth on Africa, but have never been there.
Even funnier, by this meth addict.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ^ retard.
E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.” - Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Care to explain?lol
Y-DNA and MtDNA have no direct link to phenotype. They are only markers of geographical origin. Phenotype = autosomal DNA.
LooooooooooL
Posted by chronicler (Member # 20147) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
I have always wondered why Africa: the birthplace of modern man, the landmass with the longest continual habitation of humans, has never advanced to any great degree. It has always been that Africans achieved greatness AFTER they left Africa. (Egyptians and Nubians excepted).
Forgetting all the great Black civilizations all over the world for a moment: Even the Berbers, once they left Africa they did this:
But once back in Africa they did nothing comparable.
Which leads me to believe that there is something inherent in African tribalism and it's jealousies which acts to stifle advancement.
I have proven this in the behavior of the ignorant Negro. His mindset is obvious: since he is Black and ignorant, then how could anyone like him (Black) be smart? And he acts on this belief, you would find that he will ignore the teaching of another Black in favor of the teachings of an Albino.
Now in answer to your question:
They lived in Europe, they spoke the European languages, they created the European cultures, they were the nobility and the elites.
What logical reason could you possibility have for doubting that they were indigenous Europeans?
The fact is there is no logical reason; you are merely displaying African tribalism and it's jealousies.
[/QB]
Posted by chronicler (Member # 20147) on :
What is Mike talking about?!?!?!?! After so many brilliant posts, I am struck that he could reach that sort of conclusion. First off, it's a lie that brown and black people came from Africa. Black people are the original inhabitants of this planet. We have been here since the very beginning. Once the continents drifted, then we separated. Otherwise, we were one people and one culture. That's why anthropologists point to an even more ancient and remote civilization to account for the similarities between Egypt, Babylon, the Olmec civilization and many others. Also keep in mind that the meaning of the word Africa has changed frequently, in terms of the land masses it is supposed to represent. In fact, according to "An Introduction to African Civilizations," the author mentions that when the Greeks referred to Ethiopian, or land of the "burned faces," they were referring to all land from what is now West Africa and all the way east to the farthest extent of Asia.Everything we have been taught is a lie. Pick up "When Rocks Cry Out," "America B.C.", and "They Came Before Columbus." But besides that, the place currently referred to as Africa has always had rich and global civilizations. Ethiopia (the Axumite empire) comes to mind. Mali comes to mind. Songhai comes to mind. Carthage comes to mind. Morocco comes to mind. And let's never forget Egypt!!! Why is it that Time magazine named ancient Egypt as the most important city of the world in its 2011 issue? Pick up "Introduction to African Civilizations" and the "Wonderful Ethiopians of the Cushite Empire." Don't fall victim to the groundless bullshit these monsters try to teach us. Your research is brilliant. There is only one human race and we are it. Everyone else came much much later.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by chronicler: What is Mike talking about?!?!?!?! After so many brilliant posts, I am struck that he could reach that sort of conclusion. First off, it's a lie that brown and black people came from Africa. Black people are the original inhabitants of this planet. We have been here since the very beginning. Once the continents drifted, then we separated. Otherwise, we were one people and one culture. That's why anthropologists point to an even more ancient and remote civilization to account for the similarities between Egypt, Babylon, the Olmec civilization and many others. Also keep in mind that the meaning of the word Africa has changed frequently, in terms of the land masses it is supposed to represent. In fact, according to "An Introduction to African Civilizations," the author mentions that when the Greeks referred to Ethiopian, or land of the "burned faces," they were referring to all land from what is now West Africa and all the way east to the farthest extent of Asia.Everything we have been taught is a lie. Pick up "When Rocks Cry Out," "America B.C.", and "They Came Before Columbus." But besides that, the place currently referred to as Africa has always had rich and global civilizations. Ethiopia (the Axumite empire) comes to mind. Mali comes to mind. Songhai comes to mind. Carthage comes to mind. Morocco comes to mind. And let's never forget Egypt!!! Why is it that Time magazine named ancient Egypt as the most important city of the world in its 2011 issue? Pick up "Introduction to African Civilizations" and the "Wonderful Ethiopians of the Cushite Empire." Don't fall victim to the groundless bullshit these monsters try to teach us. Your research is brilliant. There is only one human race and we are it. Everyone else came much much later.
Blacks are not ''the original people of the planet'' on the contrary, you are a RECENT mutation...
''On the basis of genetic and archaeological data, black Africans seem to have radiated from a relatively small West African and possibly pygmy population within the last 20,000 years (Coon, 1962, pp. 651-656; Spurdle et al., 1994; Watson et al., 1996). The time and place of origin can be further narrowed down with linguistic data. Speakers of proto-Niger-Congo broke up c. 10,000 BP and the oldest derived group appear to be proto-Mande speakers, whose descendants inhabit the Niger's headwaters near the Mali-Guinea border (Blench, 1984, pp. 128-129; Ehret, 1984; Murdock, 1959, pp. 44, 64-68).''
''All of these physical and hormonal characteristics seem to have arisen within a narrow timeframe. In sub-Saharan Africa, the beginnings of proto-agriculture cannot be pushed back much further than 12,000 BP. A tall, clearly black African skeleton has been dated to 6,500 BP (Camp, 1974, p. 241; Coon, 1962, pp. 649-650). This leaves a window of barely six thousand years for the changes that differentiate black Africans from their hunter-gatherer ancestors,''
''By 6,000 to 7,000 years ago, the transition to agriculture had been completed in West Africa and these early agriculturalists were able to support much higher population densities than they had as hunter-gatherers. Inevitably, this nucleus of farming populations began to spread outward at the expense of more sparsely distributed Khoisan and pygmy peoples. By about 4,000 BP, the expansion had reached as far east as the middle Nile, when black Africans first appear in paintings from Pharaonic Egypt and in skeletal remains from Nubia (Junker, 1921). About 3,000 BP, another wave of advance began along the Nigerian-Cameroon border and spread rapidly throughout central, eastern, and southern Africa (Cavalli-Sforza, 1986c, pp. 361-362; Diamond, 1997; Oliver, 1966). By 300 AD, pioneering groups had advanced as far south as KwaZulu-Natal''
Frost, quite correctly concludes:
''Thus, black Africans were still absent from most of sub-Saharan Africa even within historic times.''
- * Negroids (Black Africans) are a recent mutation. * They mutated from an ancestral Pygmy population around 10,000 BC in West Africa. * Until 2,000 BC they were absent from North Africa and only appeared in Egypt around 2000 BC. * Caucasoids predate Blacks in Egypt by 10,000 years.
Posted by Firewall (Member # 20331) on :
Stop telling lies Thule.
Posted by Narmerthoth (Member # 20259) on :
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: Mike overlooks the obvious (purposefully, of course). Blacks outside Africa are admixed with European Whites. It is the European blood in these Blacks that gives them the cognitive means to achieve levels of success true African Negroes can't.
WTF!?! (Smacks head at ignornace!) Posted by Narmerthoth (Member # 20259) on :
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides:
quote:Originally posted by Confirming Truth: Mike overlooks the obvious (purposefully, of course). Blacks outside Africa are admixed with European Whites. It is the European blood in these Blacks that gives them the cognitive means to achieve levels of success true African Negroes can't.
Yep.
African-Americans are on average 12 - 15 % White.
It's why their IQ's are higher than pure-blooded Negroids in sub-sahara africa -
Still though the African-American is far lower in IQ than a pure-blooded Caucasoid/White.
WTF!?!
One of the highest achievers in African-American history was Marcus Garvey, a man who created the largest African-American movement in the nation's history.
How much European influence do you believe was in Garvey as opposed to the #2 dude, W.E.B.DuBois, who didn't actually start the NAACP, but took orders from it's real creators, Ashkenazi Jews?
That's right, I'm back, and I have loads of new OCA gene information to drop on those flat-lined noggins.
Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
"I.Q" is merely a metric derived from environmental/cognitive responses to particular stimuli.
In the West, IQ tests are generally administered by "pencil and paper" tests.
The above claims that AAs are 12-15% European in ancestry. Simple logic will demonstrate the invalidity of the claim that IQ measures innate intelligence.
Assuming a strict genetic IQ model then the IQ of a African/European biracial would be 85---the average of 100 and 70.
On that basis the true score of the AAs should be 72-74--not 85. So there's an ~ 12 point gap. Only environmental inputs can explain that gap.
So if the average AA is 85 then simply add 12 points to 85 to get 97. 97 is well within the statistical margin of error of an average of 100.
So much for repeating dumb thinking on the part of the now late and departed Cassiterides. RIP.
Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
There is no reason to assume that a "biracial" would have a "true" IQ of 85. Based on what? The 12-15% of Aa admix? Do not fall into the trap of the racists with such dubious logic. Consider the scholarship below. --------------------------------------------------------
ALL HBD AND "RACIAL REALITY" CLAIMS DEBUNKED IN DETAIL BY HARD SCHOLARSHIP Oubre, A (2011) Race Genes and Ability: Rethinking Ethnic Differences, vol 1 and 2. BTI Press http://raceandgenesbook.com/synopsis-and-chapter-titles.html ----------------------------------------------
jp RUSHTON'S "RACIAL EVOLUTION" NOTIONS DEBUNKED Race and other misadventures: essays in honor of Ashley Montagu... By Larry T. Reynolds, Leonard Lieberman
SCIENTIST ALAN TEMPLETON DEBUNKS BIOLOGICAL RACE USING HARD DATA Race and intelligence: separating science from myth. By Jefferson M. Fish. Routledge 2002. See Templeton's detailed article referenced above also inside the book
LYNN AND VANHAVEN'S IQ AND THE WEALTH OF NATIONS DEBUNKED http://mises.org/daily/2677 ---------------- -------
HBD "SELECTION" AND EVOLUTION CLAIMS DEBUNKED- Sarich and Miele's "Race: the reality of Human Differences" Oubre, A (2011) Race Genes and Ability: Rethinking Ethnic Differences, vol 1 and 2. BTI Press For summary see: http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/05-02-18/ ---------------- -------
HBD RACE AND INTELLIGENCE CLAIMS DEBUNKED J. FiSh (2002) Race and Intelligence: Separating scinnce from myth.
------------------------------------------
MORE HBD DEBUNKING -------------------------------- ---------------------
HBD EVOLUTION, BRAIN SIZE AND NATIONAL IQ CLAIMS DEBUNKED Evolution, brain size, and the national IQ of peoples ... - Jelte Wicherts 2010 http://wicherts.socsci.uva.nl/wichertsPAIDrejoinder.pdf ------------------------------------
"EVOLUTIONARY" NATIONAL IQ NOTIONS DEBUNKED Why national IQs do not support evolutionary theories of intelligence - WIcherts, Borsboom and Dolan 2010 Personality and Individual Differences 48 (2010) 91-96 http://wicherts.socsci.uva.nl/wicherts2010.pdf ----------------------------- -------------
DUBIOUS HBD "STATIC IQ" CLAIMS DEBUNKED Are intelligence tests measurement invariant over time? by JM Wicherts - ?2004 --Dolan, Wicherts et al 2004. Investigating the nature of the Flynn effect. Intelligence 32 (2004) 509-537 http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/wicherts2004.pdf -------------------------------------------
--Joseph Graves, 2006. What We Know and What We Don’t Know: Human Genetic Variation and the Social Construction of Race http://raceandgenomics.ssrc.org/Graves/
HBD GENETICS, RACE AND INTELLIGENCE CLAIMS FURTHER DEBUNKED BY CREDIBLE SCHOLARS R. Sternberg, E. Grigorenko, K. Kidd 2005. Intelligence, Race, and Genetics. American Psychologist, Vol. 60, No. 1, 46–59 http://medicine.yale.edu/labs/kidd/440.pdf Posted by lamin (Member # 5777) on :
I just used their own model to show the absurdity of their claims. Or maybe you didn't understand what I argued--on the basis of strict logic.
Posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova (Member # 15718) on :
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
I'll indulge them) [note: certain ones and ones here are not worth my taking the time to sit down type out the lesson so, copy and paste it is]:![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
DO IT and let me know if it was worth it 
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)