...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
True History vs False History
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] There shouldn't be any confusion you question has been answered in this thread. There is essentially two school of thought. 1. All negroid "looking" people should be called African. . .wherever they are found. Thus those ancient Asians(and meso-America) statues etc are . . .African. and 2. These ancient Asians pieces are NOT african although they fit the modern/Stereotypical/"conventional" view of negro. Genetical the Aborigenee test farthest from continental Africans.. . .and us decendants (AA). Hense Explorer question: what are negro traits . . . which I think is pretty evident. I will take a leap and say ALL on this board agree that they are black skinned indegenous people. The conflict is should they be classified as African/negro or non-African/non-negro. Even Afronutslayer agrees they are black skinned indegenous people. . .right??? [QUOTE]Originally posted by StTigray: [qb] This is Question is only for those like me who are seeking the truth in history, and not an agenda. I was on Youtube and I saw a video discussing the origins of China were created by Africans. I then remembered various postings about Black Vikings, Blacks Greece, and Black Rome. I found this disconcerting because if Im not mistaken it seems that there are some that seek to perpetrate the same lies as Eurocentrics. What is an affective way to address this issue. I also want to know, am I missing something? [/qb][/QUOTE] [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3