...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
ot: - Black Africa
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mystery Solver: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by rasol: [QUOTE]I don't see your answer to this... How many people here, *who find "black Africans" offensive. *will agree with the term "tropical Africans"? ...other than going off on a tangent with a bunch of red herrings. [/QUOTE]Taken literally, the question is obtuse.[/QUOTE]Taken literally,...because you are too dense to understand it. It is like someone asking for an answer to 2+2, and you coming up with an answer of 'elephant' for it; just utter intellectual depravity. [QUOTE]rasol: But if you want a silly answer[/QUOTE]I knew that you could be counted on that...to a question which would otherwise be a no-brainer to even someone who has never been to school, much less literate. [QUOTE]rasol: [b] 'how many',[/b]? the answer is [b]1.[/b][/QUOTE]Ah, your classic sub-intelligent signature of cutting 'complete' comments into just one or two word pieces, as the 'maximum' load of words that can penetrate your skull at a time. So let me see if I can help you out, rasol: Rasol's answer to: "How many people here, who find "black Africans" offensive, will agree with the term "tropical Africans?" is "1". So the only two words that you can understand from the question at hand, is 'how many', for which you came to the conclusion "1". Does this mean that you're this "1" who finds 'black African offensive', or you just randomly spat out '1', because it was the single random thing that mindlessly popped up? [QUOTE]rasol: Now what?[/QUOTE]So now, try your very best to read the questions above as "completely" as you can, bypassing your maximum mental capacity of aborbing just one or two words out of an entire question. Let's see where that takes you first. [QUOTE]rasol: I treated the question as if it were intelligent.[/QUOTE]And I treated you as if you were capable of being trained to read a full sentence and complete question, rather than just absorbing just one or two words out of them. [QUOTE]rasol: As if you were asking if tropical african, is a suitable substitute term for Black African.[/QUOTE]Now, follow me rasol carefully, and I know this can be a monumental task for you: Carefully read... "How many people here, who find "black Africans" offensive, will agree with the term "tropical Africans?" Please wear those huge goggles, if it will help: Were you on Pluto, when you were supposed to be educated on the idea that, while 'black African' can simply be used as a euphemism [albeit a subjective term] for dark skinned Africans who bear considerable skin pigmentation as a response to intense UV radiation levels of the tropics, it is also known to be used as an ethnic identifier in certain societies...while tropical Africans [Saharo-tropical Africans] would be in reference to Africans who are indigenous to or have recent ancestry in the tropics of Africa? The latter [tropical Africans] is 'objective' terminology used in bio-anthropology, whereas the former [black Africans] isn't. So of course, they can't be substituted with respect to the other, in that regard. However, outside of the science, they can. Tropical Africans are inclusive of what is called 'black African', whereby 'black' is merely alluding to skin shade. Other groups who are still called 'black' in sub-tropical Africa and supra-tropical Africa, are so because of relatively recent ancestry in the tropics and have not ventured considerably away from the tropics, either sub-wise or supra-wise. As localized socio-ethnic identifier in certain societies, it still alludes to dark skin at the most basic level, but more meaning is attached to this than just the issue of skin description. Here common recent ancestry to a single region(s), usually perceived to be where the ancestry emanates from dark skin peoples [of the tropics], is used to provide additional meaning to the socio-ethnic identifier, that transcends the mere issue of skin description. [QUOTE]rasol: This is and interesting question rather than and obtuse one. The answer to this question is [b]no.[/b][/QUOTE]For a person who proclaims to identify something obtuse when he sees one, you sure can't see through the obtuseness of your incapacity to differentiate the most basic elements of grammar, i.e. between [i]'an'[/i] & [i]'and'[/i], just like in the following, amongst many thousands of such examples in your posts over the years: [i]This is [b]and[/b] interesting question rather than [b]and[/b] obtuse one[/i] Don't tell me that public money is used your country to fund such sorry English work. Anyway, go on... [QUOTE]rasol: this is indeed a red herring.[/QUOTE]From the only two words that you've managed to decipher from an entire question, I must say that you haven't done a bad job of assuring us that your severe intellectual deficit was able to allow you to at least draw up a red herring for an answer. Indeed, I figured so. But hey, you can try again, and see if you will make some progress in addressing the specifics of the question, by deciphering more than [i]one[/i] or [i]two words[/i] from it. Good luck. [/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