# African Presence in Pre-Columbian Times



## Asclepias (Nov 5, 2013)

My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?  

There is a tribe in Louisiana that won a US court case and was given some of their land back and they are Africans.  Officially they are not recognized by the US despite this court case but are recognized by the UN.

RaceandHistory.com - BLACK CIVILIZATIONS OF ANCIENT AMERICA



> The experience of the Washitaw Nation (or Ouchita Nation) of the Southern United States is another piece of solid evidence for the fact of pre-Columbian African presence and settlement in the Americas and specifically in the United States. According to an article carried in the magazine, 'The Freedom Press Newsletter, (Spring, 1996), reprinted from Earthways, The Newsleter of the Sojourner Truth Farm School (August, 1995), the Washitaw were
> (and still are) a nation of Africans who existed in the Southern U.S. and Mississippi Valley region long before the 16th century Europeans arrived and even before there were "Native Americans" on the lands the Washitaw once occupied and still occupy today.


----------



## jwoodie (Nov 6, 2013)

Sounds a little like the alleged Welsh connection to the Mandan tribe in the upper Midwest.  The shortest route to the New World would have been to modern day Brazil, but it wasn't until the 1400's that anyone could figure out how to navigate around the western bulge of Africa, let alone cross the entire Atlantic Ocean.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> Sounds a little like the alleged Welsh connection to the Mandan tribe in the upper Midwest.  The shortest route to the New World would have been to modern day Brazil, but it wasn't until the 1400's that anyone could figure out how to navigate around the western bulge of Africa, let alone cross the entire Atlantic Ocean.



Actually if you know about the currents in the Atlantic ocean (formerly the Ethiopian Ocean) Africans sailing from West Africa would hit Mexico.  It has been said if you threw a stick in the ocean at a certain point it would float to the Americas in less than 2 months.  Africa is the closest and easiest to navigate to the Americas.

There is also evidence Africans were the Olmecs or greatly influenced the Olmec culture.  This would fall in line with the Black Indian tribes saying they came from the south.


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Actually if you know about the currents in the Atlantic ocean (formerly the Ethiopian Ocean)


LOL......the 'Ethiopian' Ocean.......   

Now I have heard it all .


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Actually if you know about the currents in the Atlantic ocean (formerly the Ethiopian Ocean)
> ...



It must hurt to be as stupid as you are.   At least look it up before you I clown you.



> The term Ethiopic Ocean, derived from Ethiopia, was applied to the southern Atlantic as late as the mid-19th century



Atlantic Ocean - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Again with the the name calling.  ...   

It was only the southern part of the Atlantic Ocean which some people over a century ago used that name.  .


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...



Thats why I said formerly.  Can you read?


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Your original statement said Atlantic Ocean (implying the entire ocean).

When in reality only a small part of the Southern Atlantic was referred to by this archaic name.  .


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 6, 2013)

Interesting thread


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 6, 2013)

There is zero evidence of west african's possessing ocean crossing sailing vessels.   .


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...



You implied that not me.  The part I am discussing was formerly called by that name. It also happens to be the majority of what is now the Atlantic.  Do you have trouble calculating size? Have you looked at a world map lately?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> There is zero evidence of west african's possessing ocean crossing sailing vessels.   .



Really?  How sure are you of that?


----------



## Godboy (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds a little like the alleged Welsh connection to the Mandan tribe in the upper Midwest.  The shortest route to the New World would have been to modern day Brazil, but it wasn't until the 1400's that anyone could figure out how to navigate around the western bulge of Africa, let alone cross the entire Atlantic Ocean.
> ...



Show us an example of an African ship design capable of navigating across the Atlantic for two months, without it sinking on day 1. Without that, all you have is a fantasy.


----------



## bodecea (Nov 6, 2013)

Godboy said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



The Kon-Tiki wasn't very big....the Ra II wasn't very big.


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > There is zero evidence of west african's possessing ocean crossing sailing vessels.   .
> ...


I am sure you can come up with some afrocentric nonsense about great African sailing vessels capable of crossing the oceans at will.

Although when Europeans conquered the 'Dark Continent' little evidence of african water navigation was discovered beyond wooden canoes with small sails.  ..


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Godboy said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...




The first one broke apart because of course he didnt know what he was doing.



> Heyerdahl wanted to demonstrate that ancient Mediterranean or African people could have crossed the Atlantic and reached the Americas by sailing with the Canary Current. *In 1969, Heyerdahl constructed a reed boat he named Ra after the ancient Egyptian sun god. Its design was based on ancient Egyptian models and drawings.*





> The following year, Heyerdahl organised the building of another similar boat, the Ra II. Boat builders from Lake Titicaca built this in Bolivia. Again, the vessel set sail from Morocco, succeeding this time and reaching Barbados



So after only 2 tries from someone inexperienced in making these boats.  he made it from Africa to the Americas.  How do you think a culture that built them all the time would do?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...



Of course.  It wouldn't do to let on on that the "animals" they were going to enslave actually could sail to the Americas and possibly usurp their claims on land.  No doubt they destroyed evidence and lied to cover it up.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

I'm guessing some heads are exploding in anger right now!


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Of course.  It wouldn't do to let on on that the "animals" they were going to enslave actually could sail to the Americas and possibly usurp their claims on land.  No doubt they destroyed evidence and lied to cover it up.


LOL......you are as bad as the racist NOI nutcases about making up absurd claims to prop up your bizarre Afrocentric agenda.

And then saying the europeans destroyed all the evidence of a whole continent when your bogus claims fall apart under scientific and historical scrutiny.   .


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Of course.  It wouldn't do to let on on that the "animals" they were going to enslave actually could sail to the Americas and possibly usurp their claims on land.  No doubt they destroyed evidence and lied to cover it up.
> ...



Thats what I would say if I wanted to discredit someone.  Call them a nut and hope everyone laughs with you.  The point is that its been done and the guy developed the plan off the egyptian design.  What about that is nuts?


----------



## Godboy (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Godboy said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Assuming your story is true, African boat builders didn't get "second tries". That guy had modern day boats waiting to pick him up at the first sign of trouble. He would have been dead if it was the year 1600, so he wouldn't have had the opportunity to fix his mistakes, and while I'm sure he used materials appropriate to the time, he was still armed with modern day knowledge. If it was the year 1600 and an African ship didn't return, they would have no idea that the problem was that wood swells after its been in the water for awhile, and the movent of the high seas simply pulled everything apart. Nails were the key to ocean worthy vessels, which is something they didn't have.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> 
> There is a tribe in Louisiana that won a US court case and was given some of their land back and they are Africans.  Officially they are not recognized by the US despite this court case but are recognized by the UN.
> 
> ...



Do you have any evidence, other than a hereditary delusion, that there were blacks in the Americas? Did it come from the Book of Mormon?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

I think I'd be a little embarrassed to admit a large group of people went from being able to sail the Atlantic for 2 months and settle in another area and not be smart enough to grow and influence the world are keep control of the land they settled in.


let alone devolve into people that cut off the arms of babies.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Godboy said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Godboy said:
> ...



I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone.  The information is out there.  If you want to believe then good if not too bad. So what they didn't get second tries.  They kept trying. They had plenty of people and know how.  Just because How many times did it take for Edison to invent the light bulb? Again you seem to have missed they used the same boat they Egyptians built.  You keep on believing the same people that told you Columbus discovered America.


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> I'm guessing some heads are exploding in anger right now!


Actually, they are bursting with laughter from your posts.  .


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Godboy said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



An egytian model?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> I think I'd be a little embarrassed to admit a large group of people went from being able to sail the Atlantic for 2 months and settle in another area and not be smart enough to grow and influence the world are keep control of the land they settled in.
> 
> 
> let alone devolve into people that cut off the arms of babies.



That would only be a problem if you not man enough to be embarrassed. However, you are wrong like a lot of the Eurocentrics.  You have been lied too for centuries that your ancestors created the first civilizations when its already been proven many times over Africa did it first and taught it to others. Europeans have been known to cannibalize and commit atrocities just like Africans so go sale that stuff somewhere else.  You mad bro?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Godboy said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Over 5000, but no one died trying to make the bulb


sorry, the eyptians didn't make.  The Pacific is called that b/c it's passive, calm and safe.  The trade winds and high seas would have killed any attempt in a reed boat.  They would have know that and not tried.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > I think I'd be a little embarrassed to admit a large group of people went from being able to sail the Atlantic for 2 months and settle in another area and not be smart enough to grow and influence the world are keep control of the land they settled in.
> ...



africa created civilization?

link please

cuz if I recall it came out of the ME.  Persians or Byzantines


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> ...



Well actually Cortez named California after a mythical African Queen Califia because he saw Blacks there.  How did black people get over here in the Americas way before Europeans if it wasn't with boats?  The Wright brothers had not invented the plane yet.

Explain this:


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I'm guessing some heads are exploding in anger right now!
> ...



Thats what nervous people do to relieve stress. I know it messes with your heads.


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Well actually Cortez named California after a mythical African Queen Califia because he saw Blacks there.


..................^^^ LOL... you are the gift that keeps on giving.  .


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Umm, are you posting drunk again?

California was named after a mythical land described in the book "Las Sergas de Esplandián." Califia was depicted as a Muslim Amazon, so the only reason to name California after her is he found some Amazons.

 Another point, Cortez never saw most of what was eventually named California. The only part he ever visited was two beaches on the southeastern coast of Baja California.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Well actually Cortez named California after a mythical African Queen Califia because he saw Blacks there.
> ...



The name "California" was applied to the territory now known as the state of California by one or more Spanish explorers in the 16th century and was probably a reference to a mythical land described in a popular novel of the time: Las Sergas de Esplandián. Several other origins have been suggested for the word "California", including Spanish, Latin, South Asian, and Aboriginal American origins. All of these are disputed.[1]

Origin of the name California - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


CA really is la la land


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Thats a sad answer.  Now answer the question or show proof that Africans did no exist in the Americas prior to Columbus.  How did African statues get over here?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Well actually Cortez named California after a mythical African Queen Califia because he saw Blacks there.
> ...



Look it up.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I don't need to prove that there were no Martians helping to build the pyramids, you have to prove it happened.


----------



## jwoodie (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



You seem to have a huge chip on your shoulder which obscures any intelligent thoughts you may have.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Way to be selective.  Its OK. It would bother the hell out of me too. 



> Know that on the right hand from the Indies exists an island called California very close to a side of the Earthly Paradise; and *it was populated by black women*, without any man existing there, because they lived in the way of the Amazons. They had beautiful and robust bodies, and were brave and very strong. Their island was the strongest of the World, with its cliffs and rocky shores. Their weapons were golden and so were the harnesses of the wild beasts that they were accustomed to domesticate and ride, because there was no other metal in the island than gold.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



thats an asian


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



I did. There are African artifacts and writing.  The boat has been proven to be able to make it.  What do you have other than your disbelief?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...



La La Land

gosh, how bad is it to know the best years of africa stopped thousands of years ago and only occurred b/c of egypt?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

there's no chance that someone traded for african goodies then traded them to the tribesmen in America

that's impossible

Far more likely that a people went from egypt, crossed the Med, then said "fuck It" lets keep going and see whats out there, and didn't die in an ocean they knew nothing about.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...





How about this?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



where was that found?

Looks early Aztec


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 6, 2013)

The only object I can think of that Africans invented was possibly the spear.....and even that's debatable.   .


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



How bad is it to know you would still be in the Dark ages without the Moors?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> The only object I can think of that Africans invented was possibly the spear.....and even that's debatable.   .



there's no chance of that

spears were in use pre-human


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



Its an Olmec head.  Earliest civilization in America. Oh I forgot this is the back of the Olmec head with African braids.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



zilch

since those times would have ended eventually


And thanks for all the bloodshed.  I'm sure the people that buried their families were totally forgiving b/c of the knowledge you brought


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Celts braided their hair as well

however that is interesting.


Where in America was that found?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



Is this an Asian?






or this


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Gotta go now kids but I will be back.  You should have enough to do your own research if you are the intelligent type.


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 6, 2013)

So only African people can wear their hair in braids??   

Bo Derek would disagree...........


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> 
> There is a tribe in Louisiana that won a US court case and was given some of their land back and they are Africans.  Officially they are not recognized by the US despite this court case but are recognized by the UN.
> 
> ...




You're a stupid guy - a racist. And like all racists, you're a complete and utter moron. 

There were Negroid people in America before the Asiatics arrived, this is well know, anthropological fact. 

BBC News | Sci/Tech | 'First Americans were Australian'

BUT the idiocy you promote that some African group circumnavigated the globe before the Europeans is an absurdity.

The black race in the Americas was indigenous, and related to Australian aborigines rather than to Africans. The Asiatic invaders (American Indians) engaged in a near total genocide of these first people.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 6, 2013)

Dot Com said:


> Interesting thread



Retardation from a racist - right down your alley!


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> ...



Thanks.  I never saw this.  I'll hit you back later on the Aboriginals.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...



What you want me to believe is that Cortez, who never saw California at any time during his entire search for a city made of gold, named it after an island where everything was made of gold because he saw blacks.

Good luck with that.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> ...



ok, that makes more sense, and would explain the asian eye slant

still, how would they get here?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



There are no pre Colombian artifacts that were made on Mars, nor were they made by Africans. I did like your picture of the Olmec head though, even if your racist idiocy makes you think it is black.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 6, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> ok, that makes more sense, and would explain the asian eye slant
> 
> still, how would they get here?



Cop out answer, the same way they got to Australia and Borneo.

There is a huge amount of speculation, drifting ice burgs; drifting land masses, a bridge between Australia and and South America via Antarctica. The last is the most likely, and geographical evidence supports the idea that continental shift is responsible for the dispersion of humans. 60,000 years ago, Antarctica was far North of it's present location and there could have been ice bridges linking both Australia and South America.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> 
> There is a tribe in Louisiana that won a US court case and was given some of their land back and they are Africans.  Officially they are not recognized by the US despite this court case but are recognized by the UN.
> 
> ...



i suppose it is possible that the vikings brought some along for the ride 

after one of their trips into  North Africa


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > ok, that makes more sense, and would explain the asian eye slant
> ...



I actually saw a special on how they got to Aus

They knew it was there, probably b/c they could see the smoke from forest fires.


Land bridge? from 60k years ago?



I'll need a link for that one.

People don't arrive by accident and set up jack shit


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



that thing on that guys head is a helmet 

a viking helmet 

the vikings did not wear "Horned" helmets 

but rather iron pots like this one


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



or, it could be how he cuts his hair




Link me another image of a LARGE stone face of a viking, and I'll buy what you say


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 6, 2013)

Olmecs were the ones who left behind artifacts w/ African-looking features and yes, they predated the Vikings forays into the America's by a country mile

Olmec - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> The Olmec flourished during Mesoamerica's Formative period, dating roughly from as early as 1500 BCE to about 400 BCE.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



--LOL


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Dot Com said:


> Olmecs were the ones who left behind artifacts w/ African-looking features and yes, they predated the Vikings forays into the America's by a country mile
> 
> Olmec - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> ...



yes they beat the vikings by a long shot 

but not the Solutrean


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



no size referance
cone head, not pot
one has a beard, typical of Vikings, the other is shaved, very not viking


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Two Thumbs said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



yes that was an artifact found depicting a dude with a helmet 

but do notice the little curly things going around the back 

there was several types of helmets the one in the first picture 

is a viking helmet as is this one






pretty much only the richer ones afforded a iron pot


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds a little like the alleged Welsh connection to the Mandan tribe in the upper Midwest.  The shortest route to the New World would have been to modern day Brazil, but it wasn't until the 1400's that anyone could figure out how to navigate around the western bulge of Africa, let alone cross the entire Atlantic Ocean.
> ...



Yeah I was going to post that.

well done


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > Olmecs were the ones who left behind artifacts w/ African-looking features and yes, they predated the Vikings forays into the America's by a country mile
> ...




Or the Soul Train!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qglBm-N-Lnw]Soul Train LIne Dance to Curtis Mayfield Get Down - YouTube[/ame]

You're missing the obvious. The Vikings were African.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Why is that black guy wearing a Viking helmet?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> ...



Why are the Aborigines called Australian?  Because white people made up racial categories. Thats why. I preface this by saying we already know this is wrong so how are you going to base anything on something thats wrong?

This guy isnt Black?






or this blond child?


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



actually dot com is correct it is group from mexico 

since the artifact was found in the southern United States 

as you may or may not know the vikings did travel to North Africa


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



I know the Viking were the first Europeans here.  Something stinks about that fact too. Why are we still celebrating Columbus day again?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Why are we still celebrating Columbus day again?



Go back and finish Jr high and you'll know.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > jwoodie said:
> ...



really


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 6, 2013)

some attribute this to the Vikings but it still wouldn't predate African southern contact in central America

Newport Tower (Rhode Island) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


> It is commonly considered to have been a windmill built in the mid-17th century. However, the tower has received attention due to speculation that it is actually several centuries older and represents evidence of pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact.



Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Why are we still celebrating Columbus day again?
> ...



I did. They told me he discovered America which is not named after him and i saw the picture in the history book of Native Americans peering out of the bushes.  I asked the teacher how was it he discovered America and the Indians were looking at him from the bushes?  I got sent to the office and the teacher got red in the face.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




*I know the Viking were the first Europeans here.* 

maybe not 

the Solutran may have been here about 17000 years ago 

with the notion that the Olmec may have been influenced by Africa 

where are the relative artifacts in Africa to support that


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...


No that was later in high school.  How can you misunderstand "Columbus discovered America"?  it was a lie. Face it. Everyone knows it. So smart guy why is Columbus day celebrated?


----------



## Dot Com (Nov 6, 2013)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Yeah I was going to post that.
> 
> well done


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

This Olmec dude with his Viking cap off must have had a bad ass hair day if he was white and not African.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



The Olmec script was believed by historians like Leo Weiner to be Mande script.  Thats pretty strong evidence for more recent arrival by ship.  Some of the pottery found was very similiar to West African pottery.

http://bafsudralam.blogspot.com/2008/04/cascajal-tablet-of-king-bi-po-po.html


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



No this was a female and I was in either first grade or kindergarten. She didn't hit me with a book.  She just got mad because she couldnt rationalize the lie to a little kid.  Anyway stay on topic or I will report you for trying to derail the thread asswipe.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



columbus did discover America 

he was not the first one to do so 

but he was the first one as far as the Spanish crown cared


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Do you mean rediscovered? In order to discover something shouldnt it be the first time a human encountered it?


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...













not very similar

many of the statues have oriental eyes 






researchers tend to say that the appearances shapes and such 

has more to do with the medium used


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



I'm not quite convinced it was an *all* African civilization even though Africa originated the slanted eyes.  Thats why I think some Africans sailed over and taught the inhabitants their ways. One of the anthropologists says only a small number of the skeletons were African that they found. BTW the guy that said the writing was similar was a linquist. Leo Weiner  He used the Mande language to decipher the Olmec writing from what I understand.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



no i mean *discovered *

as far as the crown was concerned he discovered it 

it was* new and shiny* something previously unknown 

the crown and the people of europe knew that others already lived there 

because of the stories and items they brought back


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > jon_berzerk said:
> ...



I don't let the crown define what words mean for me though.  I get what you are saying but that is a slap in the face of the people that lived there and got there before him. What nerve!


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



i suppose however it was a discovery to those folks at the time


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Africans, they couldn't come up with the wheel, but they circumnavigated the globe. Yea, a real master race they are, lol.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> many of the statues have oriental eyes
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Looks sort of like this beautiful young lady from Mali on the west coast of Africa.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Moors aren't black, lol.

Funny thing is, Arabs hate blacks far worse than Whites. They enslaved far more of you guys, killed and castrated far more of you guys, and real Muslims hate the NOI, you guys aren't even real Muslims. Why don't you hate on Arabs instead of Whitey?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Africans, they couldn't come up with the wheel, but they circumnavigated the globe. Yea, a real master race they are, lol.



No one knows for sure who exactly invented the wheel but my guess is that it was a Black person.  You have something that proves they didn't invent the wheel?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



But a lot of the Moors were Black.  How stupid do you want me to make you look?


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Africans, they couldn't come up with the wheel, but they circumnavigated the globe. Yea, a real master race they are, lol.



except there are no examples of boats from the time period


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > many of the statues have oriental eyes
> ...


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



North Africans are Caucasian.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



Lets start another thread so this one wont get off track.

post your entry here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/race-relations-racism/323029-how-black-were-the-moors.html#post8110834


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Africans, they couldn't come up with the wheel, but they circumnavigated the globe. Yea, a real master race they are, lol.
> ...


No need to guess:

"Evidence of wheeled vehicles appears from the mid-4th millennium BC, near-simultaneously in Mesopotamia(Sumerian civilization), Indus Valley (Mohenjodaro), the Northern Caucasus (Maykop culture) and Central Europe, so that the question of which culture originally invented the wheeled vehicle remains unresolved and under debate. The Ljubljana Marshes Wooden Wheel, the world's oldest known wooden wheel, dating from 5,250 ± 100 BP as part of Globular Amphora Culture, was discovered by Slovenian archeologists in 2002.[3]"
World's Oldest Wheel Found in Slovenia*|*Government Communication Office

Seems the world's oldest wheel was found in Slovenian. Slovenians are White, not black.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



Start another thread on this subject.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

The oldest human remains found until this date in North America are Caucasian.
Narrow skulls clue to first Americans


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> The oldest human remains found until this date in North America are Caucasian.
> Narrow skulls clue to first Americans



Never look for just one source.  You missed this earlier.

BBC News | Sci/Tech | 'First Americans were Australian'



> However, the new evidence shows that these people did not arrive in an empty wilderness. Stone tools and charcoal from the site in Brazil show evidence of human habitation as long ago as 50,000 years.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> The oldest human remains found until this date in North America are Caucasian.
> Narrow skulls clue to first Americans



from your article 

"*and more controversially, a group of Stone Age people from Europe made the perilous sea journey across the Atlantic Ocean many thousands of years before Columbus or the Vikings.*"

the Solutreans from what now is France

followed the seals along the glacial ice in the north Atlantic


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > The oldest human remains found until this date in North America are Caucasian.
> ...



My Article: "Scientists from Liverpool's John Moores University and Oxford's Research Laboratory of Archaeology have dated the skull to about 13,000 years old, making it 2,000 years older than the previous record for the continent's oldest human remains"

Your Article:"These Asian people have facial features described as mongoloid. However, skulls dug from a depth equivalent to 9,000 to 12,000 years ago are very different."

Conclusion: You need to read.

Also, the claims of the early habitation you speak of are disputed. The evidence you brought forward is inconclusive:

*"Among other South American locations proposed as human settlements well before North America&#8217;s Clovis culture, the most controversial is Brazil&#8217;s Pedra Furada rock-shelter. There, archaeologists unearthed burned wood and sharp-edged stones and dated them to more than 50,000 years ago. Pedra Furada&#8217;s excavators regard the finds as evidence of ancient human hearths and stone tools. Critics, and especially many Clovis investigators, say the Brazilian discoveries could have resulted from natural fires and rock slides.

The new discovery came at Toca da Tira Peia rock-shelter, which is in the same national park as Pedra Furada. It also has drawn skeptics. The site&#8217;s location at the base of a steep cliff raises the possibility that crude, sharp-edged stones resulted from falling rocks, not human handiwork, says archaeologist Gary Haynes of the University of Nevada, Reno. Another possibility is that capuchins or other monkeys produced the tools, says archaeologist Stuart Fiedel of Louis Berger Group, an environmental consulting firm in Richmond, Va.

The age of Toca da Tira Peia artifacts has also drawn debate. Dating the artifacts hinges on calculations of how long ago objects were buried by soil. Various environmental conditions, including fluctuations in soil moisture, could have distorted these age estimates, Haynes says."*

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/disputed-finds-put-humans-south-america-22000-years-ago


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...




This is from your own article dude. Conclusion you should learn to read the whole thing.

Dated 11:24 04 September 03



> Both had the long, narrow skulls that more resemble those of modern Australians and Africans than modern native Americans, or even the people living in northern Asia, who are thought to be native Americans' closest relatives.
> 
> Some researchers argued that they were simply unusual individuals, but scientists have now identified the same features in recent remains from the Baja California.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

jon_berzerk said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > The oldest human remains found until this date in North America are Caucasian.
> ...



I thought you were trying to be funny and mis spelled Soul Train!


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Don't call me dude. Read the preceding paragraph.

"Anthropologists once assumed the earliest Americans resembled modern native Americans. That changed with the discovery of a 10,500-year-old skeleton called Luzia in Brazil, and the 9000-year-old skeleton of Kennewick man in Washington state [and the dating of a 13,000 year old skull of a 26 year old woman called Peñon III found on the shores of Lake Texcoco in the valley of Mexico - bs].

Both had the long, narrow skulls that more resemble those of modern Australians and Africans than modern native Americans, or even the people living in northern Asia, who are thought to be native Americans' closest relatives."

Those are not as old as the 13,000 year old Caucasian remains.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...





Go back to Jr high and pay attention this time, dimwit.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



--LOL

it is an interesting  hypothesis though


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



Dude I did read it.



> Anthropologists once assumed the earliest Americans resembled modern native Americans. That changed with the discovery of a 10,500-year-old skeleton called Luzia in Brazil, and the 9000-year-old skeleton of Kennewick man in Washington state [and the dating of a 13,000 year old skull of a 26 year old woman called Peñon III found on the shores of Lake Texcoco in the valley of Mexico - bs].
> 
> Both had the long, narrow skulls that more resemble those of modern Australians and Africans than modern native Americans, or even the people living in northern Asia, who are thought to be native Americans' closest relatives.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



the  Browns Valley Man found in western Minnesota is 9000 years old 

is probably not a Native American his remains at this point are not 

to be studied 

in 2007 around 50 pieces of  pre Clovis  tools have been found in 

Walker Minnesota dating to 13,000 to 14,000 years ago


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Kennewick man another caucasian  guy.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



No you didn't. Or you would understand the 13,000 Caucasian remains are older than the 10,000 or 9000 year old remains that have "Australian" features. 

And we aren't dudes, that would imply we are friends. I would never be friends with a bow-tied NOI stooge like you.

Don't get me wrong, I support your ideas of black racial separation, but beyond that, I would rather not talk to you.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Kennewick man



This one is Caucasian. but that replica looks Inuit. Neither are African, that we can be certain of.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

The hypothesis of Caucasians being the first Americans is backed up by DNA evidence. Modern Native Americans have European DNA markers. 
Ancient DNA Links Native Americans With Europe


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

I need to look into this just in case.  Sounds interesting though.  I know the whole caucasian thing is just to make sure they classify everything advanced so people relate it to being white.



> Not every specialist, however, is convinced of the apparently mounting evidence of an early European migration. "I personally haven't found it very convincing," Professor Chris Stringer, the head of human origins at the Natural History Museum in London, said. "For a start, there are lots of examples in archaeology where various artefacts from different parts of the world can end up looking similar even though they have different origins," he said. "Most humans in the world at that time were long headed and it doesn't surprise me that Peñon woman at 13,000 years old is also long headed."


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> The hypothesis of Caucasians being the first Americans is backed up by DNA evidence. Modern Native Americans have European DNA markers.
> Ancient DNA Links Native Americans With Europe



Sounds interesting but it also sounds like they dont really know.  How can he be Native American but not be?



> One expected relationship was missing from the picture: The boy's genome showed no connection to modern East Asians. DNA studies of living people strongly suggest that East Asiansperhaps Siberians, Chinese, or Japanesemake up the major part of Native American ancestors. So how could the boy be related to living Native Americans, but not to East Asians? "This was kind of puzzling at first," Willerslev told the meeting. But there seemed little doubt that the finding was correct, he said, because nearly all Native Americans from North and South America were equally related to the Mal'ta child, indicating that he represented very deep Native American roots.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Don't get me wrong, I support your ideas of black racial separation.







Oh, so you're an idiot too. I see.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



Dude.  I am not in the NOI.  They are not really my cup of tea. You are not my friend.  You are someone on a message board.  I dont believe in racial separation as there is only one race. If you never talked to me again I dont know what I would do to myself.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Don't get me wrong, I support your ideas of black racial separation.
> ...



Yes, because blacks have been such a blessing on the western world. We really need them.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



And a NOI guy saying dude, that is funny. Kind of a cross between Elijah Muhammad and some cali surfer bro. That picture would be funny.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



You would not have internet access if not for a black man clown.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



I know dude. it is funny.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > The hypothesis of Caucasians being the first Americans is backed up by DNA evidence. Modern Native Americans have European DNA markers.
> ...



Native American isn't a race. They are sure this kid is European. They aren't sure why he doesn't have East Asian DNA.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> The hypothesis of Caucasians being the first Americans is backed up by DNA evidence. Modern Native Americans have European DNA markers.
> Ancient DNA Links Native Americans With Europe



Except Caucasian doesn't equal white in all cases.  Pretty convenient huh?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



Africans first populated Europe.  So he's black?

The Grimaldi or Negroid Type in Europe


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



The Fathers of the Internet are Vinton Cerf and Robert Khan. Neither are black, a White man and a Jewish man, that must piss you off. Try again.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



I thought they were both white.  You however would not be able to get on the Internet unless you had access to the IBM PC which Mark Dean owns 3 of the original 9 patents.  Black guy.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > The hypothesis of Caucasians being the first Americans is backed up by DNA evidence. Modern Native Americans have European DNA markers.
> ...



Not all Caucasians are White. However all Whites are Caucasian. Pretty simple.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



i checked other 

native american 

on the census form in front of a census worker that came to the door 

she demanded that i correct it 

i refused 

a couple of days later 

she showed back up at the door 

this time with her supervisor 

demanding that i change the status i once again refused 

they left with the form 

i imagine they simply changed it somewhere down the road 

f em 

i dont care what they think


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...




What the fuck makes you think any part of the world needs _your_ worthless ass, douchebag?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



So he could have been North African then?


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

This guy was part of some important innovation in the computer industry, but he had nothing to do with the internet. He didn't come on the scene until well after the advent of the internet. 
Mark Dean Biography - Facts, Birthday, Life Story - Biography.com


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



No, he had European DNA markers.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> This guy was part of some important innovation in the computer industry, but he had nothing to do with the internet. He didn't come on the scene until well after the advent of the internet.
> Mark Dean Biography - Facts, Birthday, Life Story - Biography.com



Do you know what access means dude?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



But Grimaldi man was Black and he populated Europe. So he was Black right dude?


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...


Well, I probably am not valued by most people outside my family and friends I am not a man of fame or fortune, but I don't have delusions of grandeur like most blacks(it is scientifically proven that African Americans have overinflated egos)
Margie Omero: Black Americans: Less Stress, More Self-Esteem, Yet More Worries?

But I can at least say I am not a financial burden on anyone.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 6, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



So you must be trailor trash then? You are not fit to talk to me then dude.  i have a multiple 6 figure income.  I cant waste time with people like you.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...


LOL. If you had six figure income, you would realize you aren't anyone of significance. That is how I know you don't make that much money. This is part of the inflated black ego.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



No. If the Grimaldi man was black(this is disputed, he could be of a hybrid race or cro-magnon), he would have african DNA markers.


----------



## Iceman (Nov 6, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > This guy was part of some important innovation in the computer industry, but he had nothing to do with the internet. He didn't come on the scene until well after the advent of the internet.
> ...



Yes. He did not give us access to the internet. He is a smart guy, but he didn't give us access to the internet.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 11, 2013)

ThePaleOrc said:


> If you actually went down to South America you will find all kinds of people just like everywhere else in the world. The indigenous people of that region have large noses and lips. Those status are of those indigenous people. Not Negroids from Africa.
> 
> Here is a YouTube link code: /watch?v=Q8JoFUxbEZ4



I'm not sure this is valid though, the presence of large numbers of African slaves in the 18th and 19th centuries makes the current genetic makeup a bit irrelevant. However the fossil record is very telling.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 11, 2013)

*African Presence in Pre-Columbian Times *

Oh, yes, undoubtedly, Meso-Americans brought civilization to West Africa.


----------



## Godboy (Nov 11, 2013)

ThePaleOrc said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > ThePaleOrc said:
> ...



This would have been a brilliant post, if it weren't for the "negroid" stuff. It smacks of racist trolling. That's unfortunate.


----------



## Godboy (Nov 12, 2013)

ThePaleOrc said:


> Godboy said:
> 
> 
> > ThePaleOrc said:
> ...



I think you know that the word "negroid" will be offensive to some people, and I think that's why you are using it. Again, its too bad, because I agree with what youre saying, I just don't see why you need to twist the knife as you say it. The facts should stand on their own without the added insults.


----------



## editec (Nov 12, 2013)

I think the WESTERN HEMISPHERE was been discovered many time by many people.

Africans settled here before Columbos?

Wouldn't doubt that one bit.


----------



## Godboy (Nov 12, 2013)

ThePaleOrc said:


> Godboy said:
> 
> 
> > ThePaleOrc said:
> ...


I admit its possible that I misjudged you, but I would still stay away from any word that resembles "******". Words like that will only muddle your valid points.

By the way, that's a cool avatar.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 12, 2013)

ThePaleOrc said:


> Did you watch the video? Just 20 seconds in it states:
> 
> *"Genetic and immunological studies over the past two decades have failed to yield evidence of pre-Columbian African contributions to the indigenous populations of the Americas. Additionally, the huge mortality associated with the spread of Old World disease introduced by Europeans suggest long-term immunological isolation which further shows the lack if any contact with African people in the Americas before Columbus."*
> 
> ...



You're arguing against what I didn't post. I said that any African DNA found in current inhabitants would be the result of slave populations.

Further, the anthropological evidence shows that the pre-Asian population was related to Australian, not African peoples.


----------



## ThirdTerm (Nov 12, 2013)

The Washitaw Nation is a Louisiana separatist group with around 200 Black American members and it's not recognised as a sovereign nation. The group's female leader involved in criminal activities but she is revered as the Empress by the cult members, who believe that they are indigenous to America. Apart from Native Americans arrived from Siberia through the Bering Strait that served as a land bridge for ancient migrants, there were Melanesian groups who reached Americas thousands of years ago and African-looking statues discovered in Latin America may have been left by ancient tribes from Melanesia. Melanesians such as Aboriginal Australians and Papua New Guineans are descended from the Denisovans, who contributed between 3 to 6 percent of their genetic material to the genomes of Melanesians, and they have physical features similar to Africans. 




> Denisovan Genetic Material as a Fraction of that in New Guineans
> 
> It has recently been shown that ancestors of New Guineans and Bougainville Islanders have inherited a proportion of their ancestry from Denisovans, an archaic hominin group from Siberia. However, only a sparse sampling of populations from Southeast Asia and Oceania were analyzed. Here, we quantify Denisova admixture in 33 additional populations from Asia and Oceania. Aboriginal Australians, Near Oceanians, Polynesians, Fijians, east Indonesians, and Mamanwa (a &#8216;&#8216;Negrito&#8217;&#8217; group from the Philippines) have all inherited genetic material from Denisovans, but mainland East Asians, western Indonesians, Jehai (a Negrito group from Malaysia), and Onge (a Negrito group from the Andaman Islands) have not. These results indicate that Denisova gene &#64258;ow occurred into the common ancestors of New Guineans, Australians, and Mamanwa but not into the ancestors of the Jehai and Onge and suggest that relatives of present-day East Asians were not in Southeast Asia when the Denisova gene &#64258;ow occurred. Our &#64257;nding that descendants of the earliest inhabitants of Southeast Asia do not all harbor Denisova admixture is inconsistent with a history in which the Denisova interbreeding occurred in mainland Asia and then spread over Southeast Asia, leading to all its earliest modern human inhabitants. Instead, the data can be most parsimoniously explained if the Denisova gene &#64258;ow occurred in Southeast Asia itself. Thus, archaic Denisovans must have lived over an extraordinarily broad geographic and ecological range, from Siberia to tropical Asia.
> http://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reich/Reich_Lab/Welcome_files/2011_AJHG_Stoneking_Denisova_Impact.pdf


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 16, 2013)

ThirdTerm said:


> The Washitaw Nation is a Louisiana separatist group with around 200 Black American members and it's not recognised as a sovereign nation. The group's female leader involved in criminal activities but she is revered as the Empress by the cult members, who believe that they are indigenous to America. Apart from Native Americans arrived from Siberia through the Bering Strait that served as a land bridge for ancient migrants, there were Melanesian groups who reached Americas thousands of years ago and African-looking statues discovered in Latin America may have been left by ancient tribes from Melanesia. Melanesians such as Aboriginal Australians and Papua New Guineans are descended from the Denisovans, who contributed between 3 to 6 percent of their genetic material to the genomes of Melanesians, and they have physical features similar to Africans.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thats why its so transparent early historians and anthropologists had ulterior motives.  Do you know what Melanesians are? They are Black people who themselves claim to have come from Africa. What does Melanesian mean?  give you a hint.  Melanin is the root word. This little guy is Melanesian.  Are you saying he is not Black/african?







Here is an example of a Negrito which is another way of saying "we dont want to call them Black or African".







The Washitaw Nation won a case in court against the US government for land. The US doesnt recognize them but the UN does. Funny how that happens isnt it?


----------



## ThirdTerm (Nov 16, 2013)

Genetically, most Africans belong to haplogroup E1b1b and E1b1b is predominant in Africa but it can also be found at high frequencies in southern Greece (40-50%). Adolf Hitler famously belonged to this African haplogroup that is largely responsible for Afro-Asiatic characteristics such as dark skin colour. Melanesians belong to haplogroups C, M or K as the map above shows and there is no trace of haplogroup E in their genetic makeup, which makes them non-Africans. It can be said that Hitler was genetically much closer to Africans than Aboriginal Australians are and it's also known that Africans had not admixed with Neanderthals and Denisovans. 





 Interpolated spatial distribution of the frequency of Denisova alleles at SNPs where Denisova is different from chimpanzee and Neandertal. Sample localities are indicated with rectangles.

A recent study titled "Archaic human ancestry in East Asia" (Skoglunda and Jakobssona 2011) found the presence of Denisova alleles in Latin America at moderate frequencies and it can be cited as evidence of Melanesian migration to Latin America.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 16, 2013)

ThirdTerm said:


> Genetically, most Africans belong to haplogroup E1b1b and E1b1b is predominant in Africa but it can also be found at high frequencies in southern Greece (40-50%). Adolf Hitler famously belonged to this African haplogroup that is largely responsible for Afro-Asiatic characteristics such as dark skin colour. Melanesians belong to haplogroups C, M or K as the map above shows and there is no trace of haplogroup E in their genetic makeup, which makes them non-Africans. It can be said that Hitler was genetically much closer to Africans than Aboriginal Australians are and it's also known that Africans had not admixed with Neanderthals and Denisovans.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You make the mistake many do.  All DNA types can come from Africa. Pictures dont lie.  Historians do and have.  The categories were created to seperate them from Africa but they still cant explain why Africans have the same Haplogroups in Africa. You couldnt pick a person from Fiji out of a group of Black americans or Africans if you tried.  According to what you are believing this lady has no African DNA then.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 16, 2013)

When you let other people define racial categories, you become confused and easily led.  They can divide Africans up into as many categories as they want to.  They are still Black Africans.  LOL at people that think they can dictate to me who is from African genes and who is not.  Here is another not Black African lady. LOL!!


----------



## jwoodie (Nov 17, 2013)

What is the point of this thread?  Why are some people so consumed with racial identity?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 17, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> What is the point of this thread?  Why are some people so consumed with racial identity?





That is the point.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 17, 2013)

jwoodie said:


> What is the point of this thread?  Why are some people so consumed with racial identity?



The point is to highlight the omission of true history in regards to what we are/were taught in school.  I thought my OP explained it pretty well. It should bother people more that we celebrate Columbus and he didn't do anything worth celebrating. Why do people get upset when you question the status quo?


----------



## whitehall (Nov 17, 2013)

Africans never set foot in the New World until the British dragged them here in chains.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 17, 2013)

whitehall said:


> Africans never set foot in the New World until the British dragged them here in chains.



Stop believing every lie someone tells you. Dont be so easily led.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 17, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> It should bother people more that we celebrate Columbus and he didn't do anything worth celebrating.





Of course he did.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > It should bother people more that we celebrate Columbus and he didn't do anything worth celebrating.
> ...




Like what?  Everyone else already knew about the Americas.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> ThirdTerm said:
> 
> 
> > Genetically, most Africans belong to haplogroup E1b1b and E1b1b is predominant in Africa but it can also be found at high frequencies in southern Greece (40-50%). Adolf Hitler famously belonged to this African haplogroup that is largely responsible for Afro-Asiatic characteristics such as dark skin colour. Melanesians belong to haplogroups C, M or K as the map above shows and there is no trace of haplogroup E in their genetic makeup, which makes them non-Africans. It can be said that Hitler was genetically much closer to Africans than Aboriginal Australians are and it's also known that Africans had not admixed with Neanderthals and Denisovans.
> ...



Your argumentation is cannibalistic: it eats itself.  Read ThirdTerm's comments again, check his link, read your comments and check your link.

The come tell us what you found out, or I am sure ThirdTerm will tell you him or herself what it means.

You are very confused.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...





Your obsession with race has clouded your ability to reason. That, or you really are as stupid as I initially thought.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Here are some more of those Melanesians pretending to be Africans when all the "white experts" say they are not. 

Vanuatu Photos/Vanuatu photos/The people of Vanuatu Tourism


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Dont avoid the question.  What did he do that was not done before?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




Why are you trying to change the question? You said "he didn't do anything worth celebrating."

Which is it?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Take your pick. He didn't do anything worth celebrating nor did he do anything first. If he did you would be able to say what it was instead of dodging the question.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...





Just to be clear: You are stating publicly that you really have no idea what Columbus did that has been considered "worth celebrating"? You are professing ignorance on this matter, correct?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



I dont know how to be more frank with you.  I have no clue what Columbus did that merits celebration or he did it first.  Stop running and answer the question wise one.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




Ok, just wanted to clarify that. 


The voyages of Columbus marked the beginning of what would soon become large-scale exploration and eventual settlement by European powers in the New World. They also signaled a breakthrough in understanding of the geography of the American continents. It was a watershed from which point a great many significant events and developments - both good and bad - would follow. It led, eventually, to the founding of the greatest nation the world has ever known based on the most sacred and sound principles by which man has ever engaged in the messy task of governing himself. That is more than worthy of celebration. Many Brazilians, Argentinians, Mexicans, etc. are equally proud of the nations they have built and the accomplishments that have, over the centuries, flowed from them. 

Were lots of other humans already long-established in the Americas by the time Columbus made his 'discovery'? Of course. Had some Vikings set up a few short-lived settlements long before? Seems so. Many other _theories_ abound about contact, exploration, and possible settlement/integration by other peoples in the Americas, but the voyages of Columbus marked a highly significant turning point in history regardless of how one chooses - from today's perspective - to judge the consequences of what followed.  

You really should have understood all this by the time  you were in Jr high. Maybe if you had paid attention in school instead of fantasizing about punching your teachers you wouldn't need me to teach it to you now. 

"A terrible thing to waste" and all that...


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



I congratulate you on your response being more than 1 sentence.  However, I thought you had something new to say on the subject.  His journey was only important to Spain who already knew from the Moors and Leif Ericsson's travels of the land mass now known as America. Columbus was a good salesman. He convinced the Spanish royalty they could possess the land other people were already living on. Strike one. His motives for taking the journey were to find a faster pathway to Asia. We all know he failed at that. Strike 2. His arrival in the Caribbean (he never set foot on North America or South America proper) killed off the natives.  Are you saying that his mistake and the reported extinction of the Taíno tribes are cause for celebrating him?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




Try actually reading my response. All of your 'points' have been addressed. You wanted - in your ignorance - to know what was worth celebrating, so I informed you. Your subjective views (and evident prejudice) on the matter do not change the answer.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



I did read your response.  To summarize you said it was great for white people without even qualifying  your remark. Are you saying that what white people think is what defines what we should celebrate?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...





*I said nothing of the kind, you dishonest fuck*. Are you back to this now? You have run out of anything to say relative to what has actually been posted so you resort to fabricating lies that you feel more comfortable responding to? Do you have any idea how completely you reveal your lack of character when you do that?


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



  I did some searches and all I came up with is the fact that the Ouachita indians took slaves as mates. 
  And the pics show indians that dont look as if they have any african roots.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Calm down Unk. Did you miss the part where I said to summarize...?  My question still stands.  What did Columbus do other than make a huge mistake in navigation and get entire societies wiped out?  If you want to congratulate him on being a good used car salesman give him an award. There is a reason the land mass is not named after him. Did you ever realize that?  Its named after the explorer Amerigo Vespucci.  Ask yourself why Columbus in his ineptitude and savageness got a holiday? Hell. The US is not even a Spanish or Portuguese country.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...



That's typically what happens when people want you to disappear. The Europeans just mixed them right in with the slaves brought in from West Africa or they mixed with the AmerIndians to escape slavery. They must have had some convincing proof as they won land rights from the US government in a lawsuit and recognition by the UN. They claim to be direct descendants of the Olmecs. Funny how they won the land but the US doesn't officially recognize them.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




That's not summarizing, that's _fabricating_, you dishonest piece of shit.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> My question still stands.  .





I already answered your question - in some detail. Your not liking or accepting the answer doesn't change it. Everyone knows that your agenda and  your racism trump all reason in that vast wasteland you call a mind, so nothing more is expected of you. You might do yourself the favor of not exposing your failings quite so often, though.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Sorry but its summarizing.  Your very first sentence:



> The voyages of Columbus marked the beginning of what would soon become large-scale exploration and eventual settlement by *European powers* in the New World.



Not everyone in the US is swayed by what Europeans think.  With that one sentence you effectively proclaimed your closet racism.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > My question still stands.  .
> ...



No you avoided it like you usually do by talking about something else.  I accept your refusal to answer the question as a concession.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




It most certainly is not "summarizing," you stupid, dishonest agenda-whore. It is you lying and fabricating yet again because you are too damn stupid to participate in an actual discussion without making up shit you feel comfortable responding to. *YOUR* racism, like your dishonesty, is entirely overt. 

If you had the least bit of reason or the slightest shred of character you'd withdraw your offensive accusation, but you possess none of either.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




I answered it directly and at length. It's right there for all to see. Don't you have _any_ self-respect?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



If you had the least bit of masculine DNA you would answer questions put to you and not try and change the subject and appear outraged you pansy. Are you claiming thats not what you said?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Dont play stupid Unk.  You know you avoided the question where I asked you if making a huge navigational mistake and being directly responsible for the extinction of the Taino Indians worthy of celebrating.  That question too is there for everyone to read since you need others support to make you feel good about yourself.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



  Well isnt that convenient......
Sounds more likely the slaves mated with the indians way back when,and current day african Americans are trying to cash in on the money for the native indians to me.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



Actually its not convenient since you cant just become a member just because you are Black.  You have to have proof of lineage.  Thats besides the point though. How did they win the land without proof of ownership?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I answered the question. You lied about my answer, claiming racism where there was none (none but what YOU injected). Those are the facts and they won't change no matter  how often you repeat your offensive and inappropriate lies, asshole. 

Do you think other people can't see very clearly what you're doing here, asshole?


----------



## HereWeGoAgain (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



  So you're now telling me these indians kept birth records? I want to see them.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



You have yet to answer the question but thats ok.  Its about what I expect from you. I was unaware that I was hiding what i was doing. I thought I very clearly outlined in my OP what i was talking about until you decided to champion Columbus as some hero when everyone knows he was a bumbling incompetent as well as a murderer.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Are you referring to that non-question? Even that was addressed in my initial response.

You asked what was worth celebrating. I answered your question. You responded with lies, accusations, and a completely illegitimate follow-up 'question' that was loaded with its own conclusion. Grow up, learn how to participate in a discussion like a big boy, or STFU and go play with your extra large Legos.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > HereWeGoAgain said:
> ...



They are not Indians.  They are Africans.  If you want to see their proof go ask them. What you want to see doesn't change the fact the government had to give them their land and the UN recognizes them.  Again you are side stepping the point.  How could this happen without proof?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




Keep lying, liar.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> I thought I very clearly outlined in my OP what i was talking about until you decided to champion Columbus as some hero .




Show me where I called him a "hero," you lying sack of shit.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



You wrote all that and still failed to answer the question.  SMH


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 18, 2013)

Unkotare said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I thought I very clearly outlined in my OP what i was talking about until you decided to champion Columbus as some hero .
> ...



When you man up and answer questions directly i will address you.  Until then you are dismissed.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...






Try reading again, moron.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




You're a lying sack of shit and everyone here knows it.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 19, 2013)

Pretty interesting link I found.  This pretty much proves there were Black Africans in the Americas way before Columbus.  There is also a population on the Pacific coast of Mexico called the NegroCostaChicanos.  Many of them claim to never have been slaves.

Skulls in South America Tell New Migration Tale | LiveScience


----------



## ThirdTerm (Nov 19, 2013)

Another study (Friedlaender et al. 2007) found the spotty distribution of E1b in New Britain (the Papuan-speaking Ata and Sulka) and across a number of Oceanic speaking groups in the region and some of those Melanesians are partially of African descent. But it's unlikely that they had reached Americas via the Bering Strait prior to North Asian migrations as the Live Science article suggests and they may have migrated to Latin America by taking sea routes and there is no evidence of Melanesian colonisation in North America.   






The haplogroup variation in the core region of Northern Island Melanesia (table S2 shows the actual haplogroup incidences). While there is an island-by-island distinction, New Britain is considerably more internally diverse than Bougainville, with both New Ireland and Malaita considerably less so.





Spatial frequency distribution of haplogroup E1b in Island Southeast Asia and the western Pacific (7a), and details for Northern Island Melanesia (7b). 

PLOS ONE: Melanesian mtDNA Complexity


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 19, 2013)

ThirdTerm said:


> Another study (Friedlaender et al. 2007) found the spotty distribution of E1b in New Britain (the Papuan-speaking Ata and Sulka) and across a number of Oceanic speaking groups in the region and some of those Melanesians are partially of African descent. But it's unlikely that they had reached Americas via the Bering Strait prior to North Asian migrations as the Live Science article suggests and they may have migrated to Latin America by taking sea routes and there is no evidence of Melanesian colonisation in North America.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't think they came via the Bering Strait.  During the ice age that access was blocked. Africans were there before that opened up.  The easiest way from point A to point B in this case is Africa to South America by boat across the Ethiopic/Atlantic ocean.  This has happened by accident before.  i'm sure if someone purposely attempted to do it they would make it. Such a crossing would also make sense as to why Columbus himself wrote that the natives told him that they traded with Black Africans from the South East across the ocean.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 19, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> I don't think they came via the Bering Strait.  During the ice age that access was blocked. .




Huh?


----------



## abu afak (Nov 29, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Asclepias, You post on Race alot, and from an afro-centric racialist reference point of view.
Your posts are comical though.
Willy Nilly Claiming great cultures, peoples, etc.
Fabricated BS throughout.

Now you unwittingly go Off the deep end. 
Though one can use 'Black' and 'African' somewhat interchangeably in the Sub-Saharan African/Black-American context...
'Black' is NOT a Singular group for the purpose of understanding Race in general.
'Black', or rather darker skin color, Can evolve separately (or stay because of) response to environment.. and did.

There is greater Genetic distance between sub-Saharan Africans and Australian Aboriginals than there is between either and Europeans.
In fact, I believe Suhsaharan Blacks and Australian aboriginals are The two genetically Furthest apart 'races.'
https://www.google.com/search?q=gen...+sub+saharans+aborigines+greatest&safe=active

'White' people didn't just "make that up", 'white' people Discovered and researched it.. like so much else Real knowledge on which the world lives today.
And with which we Help Sub-Saharan Africans through their perennial epidemics of disease, hunger, poverty, and ignorance. (on at least two continents)

So the upshot of all your anti-racist posting is YOU made a very telling Racist-like mistake of equating mere color as such in the name of claiming America for Black Africans. (and Central America too from a wide-nosed sculpture!)
The Irony and Hypocrisy of such posting is NOT to be underestimated.
`
`


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 29, 2013)

abu afak said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Uncensored2008 said:
> ...



Reading your post was very humorous. I appreciate your post so very much because it speaks resoundingly to the lengths that a person that is a racist will go to in an attempt to try and dictate the rules of reality. 

Your premise depends on someone accepting that racist European historians and anthropologist actually had a clue.  Its been proven that they don't.  Its also been proven (for now) that all life originated in Africa. You can divide Black Africans anyway you want to but they still come out as Black Africans originating from the continent of Africa.

Lets go with your premise that genetically the Aborigines and the sub-saharan Africans are the farthest apart.  What exactly do you think that proves? That tells me 2 things. You think that only one group of Africans can be called African/Black in origin and that the Aborigines made up the first wave of Black African people to leave Africa. Whats a head scratcher is if they left *Africa* and they retained their melanin content how did they turn into white people with a very dark tan and how are they suddenly not Black Africans? Can you explain that great mystery?

Now to address your statement about what whites made up and discovered. From what I remember DNA testing did not exist back when the "racial" groups were formed.  What did these white people have to separate the supposed "races" but their prejudices? its glaringly obvious what their agenda was so I wouldn't be too hasty in proudly proclaiming that they fucked up massively and got caught in their racism. For christ sake they were claiming the Egyptians were white. Yet you are proud of this?

This was so priceless I had to quote it!  You unwittingly revealed your inner big daddy with this one. 



> Though one can use 'Black' and African' pretty interchangeably in the Sub-Saharan African/Black-American context...
> 'Black' is not a Race for the purpose of understanding Race in general.



Who died and left you in charge? You don't dictate what people use for the purpose of understanding race. i dictate what I use. Whenever I as a black man allow a white person to dictate what is "acceptable" and what is not somehow I come out on the losing end. Funny how that happens isnt it? 

In short your attempt to debunk is just that....another failed attempt.

Here are some more white people with intense tans. 

the Agta tribe in the Philippines.






Solomon islands






Genetically distant Melanesian guy. I could easily pick this gut out at a MLK day parade!


----------



## abu afak (Nov 29, 2013)

Aceplias said:
			
		

> Reading your post was very humorous. I appreciate your post so very much because it speaks resoundingly to the lengths that* a person that is a racist will go to in an attempt to try and dictate the rules of reality. *


What do you mean by calling me "racist"?
(I may choose to own it (!) or reject it depending on your usage, but lets have it)
What I see in this string and others is YOU taking afro-centrism to new and absurd highs in .. umm.. "RACIAL pride".
I'm not "dictating anything, Though I, at least, Back my opinions with logic or links.



			
				Acseplias said:
			
		

> Your premise depends on someone accepting that racist European historians and anthropologist actually had a clue. Its been proven that they don't. Its also been proven (for now) that all life originated in Africa. You can divide Black Africans anyway you want to but they still come out as Black Africans originating from the continent of Africa.


Huh?
Because life originated in Africa doesn't mean there aren't races. (!)
Because life started with one cell animals doesn't mean we are one cell animals either.
comprende?
Apparently not.
Early Euros were indeed "racist" in a superiority sense, but then again, look at what you're attempting in your own posts.



			
				Asceplias said:
			
		

> Lets go with your premise that genetically the Aborigines and the sub-saharan Africans are the farthest apart. What exactly do you think that proves? That tells me 2 things. You think that only one group of Africans can be called African/Black in origin...


That's again a Nonsensical/moot claim.
No one is arguing our journey from primates to humans to races thereof didn't start in Africa.
This 'argument' is So transparently bad one wonders if it's ignorance or disingenuity.



			
				Asceplias said:
			
		

> and that the Aborigines made up the first wave of Black African people to leave Africa.Whats a head scratcher is if they left Africa and they retained their melanin content how did they turn into white people with a very dark tan and how are they suddenly not Black Africans? Can you explain that great mystery?


It's very Possible they migrated North first and through the Middle East and Asia. Some continued south and East over the generations, while others staid and got lighter in tone, especially those who moved further North and got lighter yet. Equatorial peoples tend to be dark; adaptation to the strong sun. 



			
				Asceplias said:
			
		

> Now to address your statement about what whites made up and discovered. From what I remember DNA testing did not exist back when the "racial" groups were formed. What did these white people have to separate the supposed "races" but their prejudices? its glaringly obvious what their agenda was so I wouldn't be too hasty in proudly proclaiming that they fucked up massively and got caught in their racism. For christ sake they were claiming the Egyptians were white. Yet you are proud of this?


Early on, 'White' people, indeed Euro-centric, made almost the same race-simplism mistakes you do. (tho not so bad). They did have agendas. Yours are blatant and far worse ....at THIS stage in history, where science can and has identified races.




			
				Asceplias said:
			
		

> This was so priceless I had to quote it! You unwittingly revealed your inner big daddy with this one.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not "dictating", I'm explaining the Genetic basis for race while you say/img "Oh look, he's dark, he's on my team".
Then, when caught in your Goofy inaccuracy, you Revert to the childish/meaningLess pointing out that humanity started in Africa. 
I explained the fallaciousness of that red herring above. (with "one cell" example)

I might also add, these early and admittedly Eurocentrics, basically had it right because Race/Subspecie delineation IS Dictated merely by morphological differences among the same Specie of animals in different geography. 
Even before Darwins Finches, where Mere small beak size differences gave these animals different subspecie/race, there was delineation.

Indeed, there are greater Morphological differences among human Races than there are among Gorilla and Chimp species/subspecies. But in the case of the latter there isn't the PC politics of humanity, just unemotional taxonomy. 
But there are certainly races. 

I must say I've never seen such Blatant, even simplistic racism ("Oh he looks dark, he's my team") in someone claiming to be anti-racist while accusing others.
`


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 29, 2013)

abu afak said:


> What do you mean by calling me a "racist"?
> (I may choose to own it or reject it depending on your usage, but lets have it)
> What I see in this string and others is YOU taking afro-centrism to new and absurd highs in .. umm.. "RACIAL pride".
> I'm not "dictating anything, Though I, at least, Back my opinions with logic or links.
> _"everyone is entitled to his own opinion but Not his own facts"_



Fair enough. If you are not a racist, your comments certainly appeared headed in that direction.  I can admit it was a knee jerk assumption on my part.



abu afak said:


> Huh?
> Because life originated in Africa doesn't mean there aren't races. (!)
> Because life started with one cell animals doesn't mean we are one cell animals either.
> comprende?
> ...



There are other races but homo sapiens sapiens are what all currently living humans fall under. Therefore if there is no full blooded 100% neanderthal man walking around somewhere we are all the same race.



abu afak said:


> Really?
> LINK?



No problem. Aborigines: The First Out of Africa, the First in Asia and Australia - Hans Villarica - The Atlantic



abu afak said:


> Early on, White people, indeed Euro-centric, made almost the same race-simplism mistakes you do. (ths not so bad). They did have agendas. Yours are blatant and far worse and funnier ....at THIS stage in history, where science can and has identified races.



I'm glad i was able to amuse you. You are pretty amusing yourself.




abu afak said:


> ]I'm not "dictating, I'm explaining the Genetic basis for race while you say "Oh look, he's dark, he must be African".
> Then, when caught in your Goofy inaccuracy, you Revert to the childish/meaningLess pointing out that humanity started in Africa.
> I explained that fallaciousness of that red herring above. (with "one cell" example)
> 
> ...



In order to explain something you would need to know what you are talking about. Its pretty apparent that you don't but think you do.  This is one of the reasons I assumed you are racist.  Most come with this sense of speaking their version of the truth not realizing its ...really just their version.  Your use of subspecies/race to prove your point was... puerile to say the least. Its not the same thing. For example a bulldog and a poodle is the exact same species. Race is a social or political construct used to differentiate physical differences in humans. Lets use something a little more relevant to the complexities of human beings. Myself and my 2 brothers have as parents the same 2 people with the last name of Africa. We may have different hair textures or my arms may be longer than his.  Point being we are not carbon copies physically. We all move to different parts of the globe and populate the earth. How are we not the same?  The genetic distance issue is only because my 2 brothers were isolated and unable to return to the family get togethers. Does that turn my brothers into a different race? The answer is a resounding hell no.

Your confusion about "Black" is also amusing.  I cant fault you because you just dont know what you dont know.  Tell me if I'm wrong or not. Do you think that "Black" only applies to African Americans or sub-saharan Africans?  You would be badly mistaken if you do.  I have to admit you didn't fall into the usual blathering I have come to expect of some people on this board. I really hope you have some surprises in store for me that can further outline the truth.


----------



## abu afak (Nov 29, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> There are other races but homo sapiens sapiens are what all currently living humans fall under. Therefore if there is no full blooded 100% neanderthal man walking around somewhere we are all the same race.


Yes and I Already explained why.
It's a Political decision more than a scientific/taxonomic one.
If the same or even less differentials were seen in Other animals/Species they would, and DO get subspecie/race designation. Race and subspecie are basically interchangeable.
more later. 



			
				Ascelepias said:
			
		

> In order to explain something you would need to know what you are talking about. Its pretty apparent that you don't but think you do.  This is one of the reasons I assumed you are racist.  Most come with this sense of speaking their version of the truth not realizing its ...really just their version.  Your use of subspecies/race to prove your point was... puerile to say the least. Its not the same thing. For example a bulldog and a poodle is the exact same species.


 Race and subspecie are indeed the same/interchangeable terms
The Dogs you name are 'Breeds', a short term human-created different appearance.

This whole thing is beyond absurd if you are familiar with any other group of plants or animals.
I am. I collect seashells. At the drop of a hat (add a single dot to ten and move over ten miles) and they'll pop another subspecie/race on it.
You couldn't tell em apart. There are thousands and more created all the time.
I also gave the example of Finches and Chimps/gorillas.



			
				Asceplias said:
			
		

> Race is a social or political construct used to differentiate physical differences in humans.


This is, again, wrong.
I'll give you some more easy examples, less muddied than your anecdote below.

In a room with 300 Naked people: 100 Finns, 100 Japanese, 100 Pygmies, what do you suppose your error rate would be in telling them apart? 
ZERO
Why? Because of Race. You think that's a social/political construct?
In order to avoid being called a Racist should we say _"Pygmies are just Coincidentally/Perchance short Black people"_.. OR... is there Genetic Group Determinism involved? 
That's Race/subspecie. 
(in ALL Other flora and fauna)



			
				Asceplias said:
			
		

> Lets use something a little more relevant to the complexities of human beings. Myself and my 2 brothers have as parents the same 2 people with the last name of Africa. We may have different hair textures or my arms may be longer than his.  Point being we are not carbon copies physically. We all move to different parts of the globe and populate the earth. How are we not the same?  The genetic distance issue is only because my 2 brothers were isolated and unable to return to the family get togethers. Does that turn my brothers into a different race? The answer is a resounding hell no.


But Races were determined Before common World travel!
They are indeed mixing now.
Again, Would someone confuse you or Any of your brothers with Mongols? Scandinavians? 

In fact, if you send your Blood and $130 into National Geographic's *Gen*ographic project, they'll send you back a letter telling you what Percent of each more technically and PC "Indigenous people"/RACE (11) you are.
No 'social construct' in Blood.



			
				Asceplias said:
			
		

> Your confusion about "Black" is also amusing.  I cant fault you because you just dont know what you dont know.  Tell me if I'm wrong or not. Do you think that "Black" only applies to African Americans or sub-saharan Africans?  You would be badly mistaken if you do.  I have to admit you didn't fall into the usual blathering I have come to expect of some people on this board. I really hope you have some surprises in store for me that can further outline the truth.


You were using 'Black', indeed this string and others, as in African accomplishment, until Censor brought up it was the Aborigines who populated North America early. I was the one who made the discernment that many peoples are "dark", especially in the equatorial belt. That doesn't mean they are of the same Race.
That was the point you're mixing and matching now.
`
More later in article/best authority form
`


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 29, 2013)

abu afak said:


> Yes and I Already explained why.
> It's a Political decision more than a scientific/taxonomic one.
> If the same or even less differentials were seen in Other animals/Species they would, and DO get subspecie/race designation. Race and subspecie are basically interchangeable.
> more later.


Except its not. Race is actually a more specific definition than subspecies that again is political and applies to absolutely no one. Homo sapiens sapiens itself is a subspecies of homo sapiens. In my research I have found that basically all this stuff is political posturing but at some point we have to agree on a common point to start discussing it.



abu afak said:


> Race and subspecie are indeed the same/interchangeable terms
> The Dogs you name are 'Breeds', a short term human-created different appearance.
> 
> This whole thing is beyond absurd if you are familiar with any other group of plants or animals.
> ...



Sorry but breeds would be more analogous with race. Canis lupus familiaris (dog) is the subspecies of Canis lupus (wolf). Look it up. Its freely available on the internet.  I grow plants and raise dogs. I am very familiar with the terminology.  Never ever heard anyone refer to a specific dog breed as a subspecies/race or a cultivar as a subspecies/race.



abu afak said:


> In a room with 300 Naked people: 100 Finns, 100 Japanese, 100 Pygmies, what do you suppose your error rate would be in telling them apart?
> ZERO
> Why? Because of Race. You think that's a social/political construct?
> In order to avoid being called a Racist should we say _"Pygmies are just Coincidentally/Perchance short Black people"_.. OR... is there Genetic Group Determinism involved?
> ...


 Your example is severely flawed.  In the first 2 groups you have used nationalities and confused them with what you call races. For example we could have a African Bushman (pygmy) that has citizenship in Finland or Japan.  In the last group, pygmies are in several different places in the world and may look entirely different from each other. The Japanese can look like any of the other Asian ethnicities which coincidently can look like a Negrito which is a name used to describe some South east asian pygmies and literally means little Negro.



abu afak said:


> But Races were determined Before common World travel!
> They are indeed mixing now.
> Again, Would someone confuse you or Any of your brothers with Mongols? Scandinavians?


What does _when_ the races were determined have to do with it? Also what makes  you think you know when people first traveled the globe? Yes some of my brothers could be confused with Mongols and or Scandinavians.



abu afak said:


> In fact, if you send your Blood and $130 into National Geographic's *Gen*ographic project, they'll send you back a letter telling you what Percent of each more technically and PC "Indigenous people"/RACE (11) you are.
> No 'social construct' in Blood.



I am well aware of that.  What does that have to do with the fact that they decided to say for whatever reason that Black Africans that left Africa early are not African and expect me to believe it when they blend in with my people spiritually and physically?  When you look at those photos I posted what clue do you have that they are genetically distant from say an African American and what does that actually mean? There is greater genetic diversity on the sub-saharan part of Africa than any other place in the world combined. Why are these guys different because the moved out of the neighborhood?  Why is it racist to call these people Black?








abu afak said:


> You were using 'Black', indeed this string and others, as in African accomplishment, until Censor brought up it was the Aborigines who populated North America early. I was the one who made the discernment that many peoples are "dark", especially in the equatorial belt. That doesn't mean they are of the same Race.
> That was the point you're mixing and matching now.
> `



Its not an accomplishment its a description of our spirit and physical attributes.  Where did you get the idea i was using a stroke of evolutionary genius by mother nature to pat my own back? Its an all encompassing term that I personally dont allow others to define for me. Those dark people you are speaking about all descended from Africans and have maintained their ability to produce melanin at whatever rate is necessary to keep their skin dark.  Show me one dark ethnicity that did not descend from people first in Africa and you may have a case. There are also Black africans which are albino or light skinned.


----------



## abu afak (Nov 30, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> abu afak said:
> 
> 
> > Yes and I Already explained why.
> ...


You understand how this/mb debate works?
Try a Link instead of your pointLess picture book. 
I'm going to Bury you shortly.
Merely claiming something, especially when it's Laughable.. IS Laughable.



abu afak said:


> Race and subspecie are indeed the same/interchangeable terms
> The Dogs you name are 'Breeds', a short term human-created different appearance.
> 
> This whole thing is beyond absurd if you are familiar with any other group of plants or animals.
> ...





			
				Ascepialus said:
			
		

> Sorry but breeds would be more anaologous with race while Canis lupus familiaris (dog) is would be the subspecies of Canis lupus (wolf). Look it up. Its freely available on the internet.  I grow plants and raise dogs. I am very familiar with the terminology.  Never ever heard anyone refer to a specific dog breed as a subspecies or a cultivar as a subspecies.


This is wildly ignorant or Dishonest.
I already explained to you Why recently human-manipulated dog 'breeds' are Not analogous to subspecies in Nature.
I'm disappointed in your reply but not surprised.





			
				Asclepias said:
			
		

> Your example is severely flawed.  In the first 2 groups you have used nationalities and confused them with what you call races. For example we could have a African Bushman (pygmy) that has citizenship in Finland or Japan.  In the last group, pygmies are in several different places in the world and may look entirely different from each other. The Japanese can look like any of the other Asian ethnicities which coincidently can look like a Negrito which is a name used to describe some South east asian pygmies.


I tried to make it simple for you. 
It works just a well with Scandinavians/N. Euro; East Asians; and Pygmies.
You Wasted yet more space being Disingenuous.




abu afak said:


> In fact, if you send your Blood and $130 into National Geographic's *Gen*ographic project, they'll send you back a letter telling you what Percent of each more technically and PC "Indigenous people"/RACE (11) you are.
> No 'social construct' in Blood.





			
				Asclepias said:
			
		

> I am well aware of that.  What does that have to do with the fact that they decided to say for whatever reason that Black Africans that left Africa early are not African and expect me to believe it when they blend in with my people spiritually and physically?  When you look at those photos I posted what clue do you have that they are genetically distant from say an African American and what does that actually mean? There is greater genetic diversity on the sub-saharan part of Africa than any other place in the world combined. Why are these guys different because the moved out of the neighborhood?  Why is it racist to call these people Black?


No you weren't well aware of it.
If you were and still are you are being Dishonest because there is, again, NO'social construct' in Blood. NatGeo in fact is quite careful to get pure 'native populations/Races.
You Lose.. Officially now.





abu afak said:


> You were using 'Black', indeed this string and others, as in African accomplishment, until Censor brought up it was the Aborigines who populated North America early. I was the one who made the discernment that many peoples are "dark", especially in the equatorial belt. That doesn't mean they are of the same Race.
> That was the point you're mixing and matching now.
> `





			
				Asclepias said:
			
		

> Its not an accomplishment its a description of our spirit and physical attributes.  Where did you get the idea i was using a stroke of evolutionary genius by mother nature to pat my own back? Its an all encompassing term that I personally dont allow others to define for me. Those dark people you are speaking about all descended from Africans and have maintained their ability to produce melanin at whatever rate is necessary to keep their skin dark.  Show me one dark ethnicity that did not descend from people first in Africa and you may have a case. There are also Black africans which are albino or light skinned.


More, now Dishonest, argumentative *non sequitur.*
AGAIN, the fact that humans came out of Africa does NOT preclude Races/subspecies any more than it does in Apes and Chimps. 
This is Clownish and increasingly Dishonest posting/gratuitous Last-wording.


*
EDIT: 
Note the Clownish one-liners/gratuitous but empty last-wording that Asclepias has been Reduced to.
He was utterly Porked... Again
Not only not in my league, but not in any league. *
`
`


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 30, 2013)

abu afak said:


> You understand how this/mb debate works?
> Try a Link.
> I'm going to bury you shortly.
> Merely claiming something, especially when it's Laughable.. IS Laughable.



You need to watch that pesky big daddy complex. It turns me off to further debate.  I keep telling you that you dont define the rules. I was waiting for you to post a link that had something in it backing up your claim. You cant bury anything until you have a shovel and the object you are burying is dead. You fail on both counts.





abu afak said:


> This is wildly ignorant or Dishonest.
> I explained to you why recently human-manipulated dog 'breeds' are Not analogous to subspecies in Nature.
> I'm disappointed in your reply but not surprised.



And I explained to you that you cant explain anything until you know what you are talking about. I am sorely disappointed in your lack of ability to comprehend this sticking point. I never said breeds were analogous to subspecies. In fact I pointed out that they were more analogous to race.





abu afak said:


> I tried to make it simple for you.


You merely made it wildly irrelevant and down right scatter brained without any substance at all. You are beginning to waste my time.






abu afak said:


> No you weren't well aware of it.
> If you were and still are you are being Dishonest because there is, again, NO'social construct' in Blood. NatGeo in fact is quite careful to get pure 'native populations/Races.
> You Lose.. Officially now.



That was almost convincing.  i almost believed I lost....just kidding. 




abu afak said:


> More now Dishonest, argumentative *non sequitur.*
> AGAIN, the fact that humans came out of Africa does NOT preclude Races/subspecies any more than it does in Apes and Chimps.
> This is Clownish and increasingly Dishonest posting/gratuitous Last-wording.



Except it does preclude that. Those Aborigines left as homo sapiens sapiens.  You have Aborigines that left Africa first and remained isolated. They represent a branch of Black Africans. What are you missing on this? Please lets not talk about dishonesty.  I noticed you removed your request for a link regarding the Aborigines after i had already started working on my reply.  Why did you do that? Did you think I wouldn't notice?  You lose on that rookie move alone.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 30, 2013)

abu afak said:


> on the "Subspecie/Race" points:
> Perhaps the countries Foremost expert on Evolution and AUTHOR of the Standard text 'Speciation'.
> It doesn't get any better than this guy.
> 
> ...



I think you will find as you grow up and become an adult that people have a hard time agreeing on terms because they are words and subject to human interpretation. I really dont know how to put this to you but I am sorely disappointed in this conversation. You posted and typed all that but managed to link me to someone that merely has a different interpretation of what "race" means. He said nothing in that link that I don't already know about. Not to say I agree with all of it but I understand where he is coming from. One day when you can think for yourself please stop elevating someone elses opinion over your own.  There is only one race.  There is no difference in people genetically of any consequence. .1% differences is nothing to get excited about.  There is nothing I can do that you cant and vice versa. Wake up and stay away from Storm Front.


----------



## abu afak (Nov 30, 2013)

on the "Subspecie/Race" points:
Perhaps the countries Foremost expert on Evolution and AUTHOR of the Standard text 'Speciation'.
It doesn't get any better than this.

Credentials:
Why Evolution is True: About the Author



> ....
> 
> Jerry A. Coyne, Ph.D is a Professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago and a member of both the Committee on Genetics and the Committee on Evolutionary Biology.
> Coyne received a B.S. in Biology from the College of William and Mary.
> ...



Credentials II: Wiki


			
				http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Coyne said:
			
		

> Jerry Allen Coyne (born December 30, 1949[2]) is an American professor of biology, known for his commentary on the intelligent design debate. A prolific scientist, he has published dozens of papers, elucidating on the theory of evolution. He is currently a professor at the University of Chicago in the Department of Ecology and Evolution. *His concentration is speciation and ecological and evolutionary genetics,* particularly as they involve the fruit fly, Drosophila.[3] *He is the author of the standard text 'Speciation'* and the bestselling science popularization Why Evolution Is True and maintains a website by the same name.
> 
> Coyne graduated with a B.S. in biology from the College of William & Mary in 1971. He started graduate work at Rockefeller University under Theodosius Dobzhansky before logistical complications (draft) forced a hiatus.
> He then earned a Ph.D. in biology at Harvard University, studying under Richard Lewontin, and went on to do a postdoctoral fellowship at the University of California, Davis with Timothy Prout.
> ...


Article
Are there human races? « Why Evolution Is True
Jerry Coyne



> *Are there human Races?*
> 
> One of the touchiest subjects in human evolutionary biology &#8212;or human biology in general &#8212; is the question of whether there are human races. Back in the bad old days, it was taken for granted that the answer was not only &#8220;yes,&#8221; but that there was a ranking of races (invariably done by white biologists), with Caucasians on top, Asians a bit lower, and blacks invariably on the bottom. The sad history of biologically based racism has been documented in many places, including Steve Gould&#8217;s book The Mismeasure of Man (yes, I know it&#8217;s flawed).
> 
> ...


So because we are humans and have an unfortunate 20th C politics/history, the human species has avoided what certainly would qualify as Race/subspecie in other animals.
As someone who  as I already elucidated, collects seashells, I can assure what is said above is true. You add an extra spot and move over ten miles.. they'll pop another sub-species or even species.
There are Many subspecies much closer than the so-called single human subspecie.

I hope you learning something even whille being Emptily argumentative.
Nah, I really don't care, just wanted to hold your genetic Ignorance and grotesque afrocentric racial bias posts up for the abuse they deserve.

*EDIT:
More Clownery/Another Goofy non sequitur picture below.
we do NOT know the ancestry, recent or otherwise, of the subjects. (!)
Asclepias could NOT answer me and certainly not a 1000% Rebuttal from a good a source as there is on the Planet.
Perhaps he'd like this 'debate' scored by a mod or group of them?
I would.*
`


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 30, 2013)

FYI abu afa. The reason I use pictures is to frustrate the crap out of people that like to use extremely long and elaborate ruses to try and convince people to believe in Storm Front theories and those that try and define others realities.  They say a picture is worth a thousand words and leaves a hell of a mental imprint. it wakes them up to how stupid people like you sound. Thats why TV is so effective in moving the masses. So when you say things like Melanesians and Aborigines are the furthest away genetically from Africans I post pictures and say so what? They still look like my homies or home girls that lives down the street. Does that make sense?

Warning! These people are not Africans. They are Melanesian. They are genetically the furthest from Africans.






Sombody tell these indigenous guys from India they are not African at all. They are called the Andamanese. They are Negrito which means "Little negro" but not the black kind from Africa. Wait...what?


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 30, 2013)

abu afak said:


> I hope you learning something even whille being Emptily argumentative.
> Nah, I really don't care, just wanted to hold your genetic Ignorance and grotesque afrocentric racial bias posts up for the abuse they deserve.
> 
> *EDIT:
> ...



I only learned that you are another in a long line of clowns that believe whatever instead of trusting your common sense, eyes, and God given intellect. Understand that your "sources" are human and prone to having biases just like you and I. They put on their pants on just like you do.

I have no problem having someone score this "debate" as you call it. i'm sure it will either lower your self worth or raise it. Unfortunately it wont do anything for me regardless of the outcome. That will be the day I seek validation on a message board! You have officially become a loser with that statement. You are free to drag the photos into Google images or do your own research on the names I provided. Again the information is freely available on the internet. You have to be willfully stupid to miss it.


----------



## abu afak (Nov 30, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> abu afak said:
> 
> 
> > I hope you learning something even while being Emptily argumentative.
> ...


1. As to "seeking validation" here.
YOU have made 4000 posts in under 4 months here, avg 33.6 a day!
Me? 387 posts in 7+ Years. 

2. It's illogical to use any 'dark' people as proof they are closely related to other different Race of same or more closely related than they are to other lighter groups.
Darkness, as I said, earlier can evolve independently. 
It's rather Ironic we have black person claiming: All blacks look alike.

2a. If one understands this, and still then goes out and _Cherry Picks_ a few pictures from hundreds to 'prove' his point, it's Grossly Dishonest.
All your posts are Fallacies that are so bad even you must understand they are intentionally deceptive non sequiturs.

2c. [Even] if one as to "trust his lyin eyes" then YOU would have to acknowledge MY example of the even More obvious Racial differences between N Euros/Scandies vs East Asians vs Pygmies.
Instead you dishonestly pointed to nationality to try and get off the hook. 

As to the specific case of Melanesians v subsaharans:

Global genetic variation at OAS1 provides evidence of archaic admixture in Melanesian populations.[Mol Biol Evol. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI

Mol Biol Evol. 2012 Jun;29(6):1513-20. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msr301. Epub 2012 Jan 16.
*Global genetic variation at OAS1 provides evidence of archaic admixture in Melanesian populations.*
Mendez FL, Watkins JC, Hammer MF.
Source
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, USA.
Abstract


			
				Abstract said:
			
		

> *Recent analysis of DNA extracted from two Eurasian forms of archaic human shows that more genetic variants are shared with humans currently living in Eurasia than with anatomically modern humans in sub-Saharan Africa.* Although these genome-wide average measures of genetic similarity are consistent with the hypothesis of archaic admixture in Eurasia, analyses of individual loci exhibiting the signal of archaic introgression are needed to test alternative hypotheses and investigate the admixture process. Here, we provide a detailed sequence analysis of the innate immune gene OAS1, a locus with a divergent Melanesian haplotype that is very similar to the Denisova sequence from the Altai region of Siberia. We resequenced a 7-kb region encompassing the OAS1 gene in 88 individuals from six Old World populations (San, Biaka, Mandenka, French Basque, Han Chinese, and Papua New Guineans) and discovered previously unknown and ancient genetic variation. The 5' region of this gene has unusual patterns of diversity, including
> 1) higher levels of nucleotide diversity in Papuans than in sub-Saharan Africans, 2) very deep ancestry with an estimated time to the most recent common ancestor of >3 myr, and 3) a basal branching pattern with Papuan individuals on either side of the rooted network. A global geographic survey of >1,500 individuals showed that the divergent Papuan haplotype is nearly restricted to populations from eastern Indonesia and Melanesia. Polymorphic sites within this haplotype are shared with the draft Denisova genome over a span of &#8764;90 kb and are associated with an extended block of linkage disequilibrium, supporting the hypothesis that this haplotype introgressed from an archaic source that likely lived in Eurasia.


Yes, Another big Oucher for you.
Research/Google for me is finding great science, for you it's Disingenuously cherry-picking look-alikes from a larger set of Non-look-alikes. 

Of course, even Honest Amateurs understand the 'all blacks are not alike'/necessarily more closely related than some are to ie Eurasians just because one can find look alike pictures. 

From Topix African-American Forum.
OP and some selected replies
Papua New Guineans (Melanesian)...African descendents? - Topix



> *Papua New Guineans (Melanesian)...African descendents?
> Posted in the African-American Forum*
> 
> 
> ...


So even among non-pure-science replies in a community of black posters we have some very logical straightforward people.
I bet they don't claim the Olmecs either because of a broad-nosed sculpture.
How grotesquely Dishonest your posts are in the service of Afro-centrism/race.
`


----------



## Sunshine (Nov 30, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Actually if you know about the currents in the Atlantic ocean (formerly the Ethiopian Ocean)
> ...



     [MENTION=11674]Sunni Man[/MENTION]

Isn't that the God's honest truth.  
No doubt in Ethiopia they thought a good sized pond was an ocean. Blacks like to claim that the slave traders nabbed them and tied them  up on ships to bring them here.  Then in the same breath they will claim that the yam was brought here by slaves.  WTF?  Did the potential slaves say, 'whoa dar, le' me go grab my yams fo' we go.'  ???  They are beyond stupid.  And I am amazed at the number of people who believe their bullshit.  Blacks were sold by other blacks for liquor.  And the sellers would drink it on the shore so they wouldn't have to share it.  The broken glass where they smashed the bottles is still there.


----------



## Asclepias (Nov 30, 2013)

abu afak said:


> 1. As to "seeking validation" here.
> YOU have made 4000 posts in under 4 months here, avg 33.6 a day.
> Me? 387 posts in 7+ Years.
> 
> ...



1. Yes you seek validation.  You want a 3rd party to prove you right. You dont have enough within yourself to *know* you are right. The difference is i do  I post because its fun and because I can make my money from anywhere but preferable home. Posting is a pastime for me. I have never once asked for assistance in proving I won a debate. Thats loser language. You have totally destroyed any respect I had for your opinions.

2. I already explained to you that there is no such thing as different races. There is only one. There is no difference of any consequences in what you call races. I cant force you to be intelligent but please understand that the use of that terminology is risible to say the least. What you are doing is setting the ground work for more racism. Name 1 thing that I can do that you cant? 

 All Blacks do not look alike. We are the most varied looking group on the planet even in Africa. Stooping to lying about what i said pretty much seals your fate.

Why dont you just admit you screwed up and confused nationality with race? As you have now changed the question you are still wrong for reasons I have already outlined.  So no... I dont have to acknowledge your poor attempt to piece together something that you screwed up and now are trying to change to fit your aborted argument. 

Now what i am going to do is show you how its done rookie.  If you take a Melanesian, an African American and a sub-saharan African what degree of confidence will you have that you can put them in the right category without bleeding them out for their haplogroup?





abu afak said:


> As to the specific case of Melanesians v subsaharans:
> 
> Global genetic variation at OAS1 provides evidence of archaic admixture in Melanesian populations.[Mol Biol Evol. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI



Please understand this same information has already been posted in this thread. You are trying way too hard and failing mightily.  i am afraid you are going to pop a blood vessel in your eye dude.




abu afak said:


> Yes, Another big Oucher for you.
> 
> Of course, even Honest Amateurs understand the 'all blacks are not alike'/necessarily more closely related than some are to ie Eurasians just because one can find look alike pictures.



I dont think you get how this works.  What *you* have to do is *show me* where the Aborigines, Negritos or Melanesians *did not migrate from Africa*. if you can pull that off you wont have to type an encyclopedia everytime you post. Showing me testimonials does not sway me one bit. Show me something that proves that those groups do not share the same DNA I do at all.  Can you accomplish your mission?


----------



## abu afak (Dec 1, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> abu afak said:
> 
> 
> > *1. As to "seeking validation" here.
> ...


You couldn't answer a single thing I posted. When I posted the Sientific paper on Melanesians proving they were Not subshran Race, you merely said "it was posted previously" in the string. *YOU, as always could NOT answer.*
You Never can.
You are a juvenile last-worder with NO content.

If a post is short it's not substantial, when long you 'criticize' it as "encyclopedic". (they do this in the 'hood too)
IOW, you NEVER have Anything of substance to say.. ever. 
You imagine your empty and Obnoxious _last-wording is 'winning'._ Duh.

One more thing.

Throughout the string Asclepias Claims Melanesians are Subsaharan Black [RACE].
That Olmecs are also Subsharan Black [RACE] he claims because of a photo of a stone sculpture with a Wide Nose/Black features.

and He does all his "scholarship" with Look-alike pictures as 'Proof'. Bandwidth waste galore.
Oh my, the brilliance/Ignorant Bigotry of it all!

Of course, one could do the same with East Asians and North Europeans.
And similarly post pictures of THEM/other groups to prove they are NOT subsaharan africans by look-alike standard HE uses, they are their Own race. 

Apparently the Only Race (since he ALSO Claims Race is a "social" NOT Physical Construct) is Asclepias' own race, and he, unlike everyone else, is entitled to 'prove' it with pictures.
*Trusting his "lying eyes" only works with Blacks.* 
Tell me who the biggest RACIST on the board is and tell me he's not the most OBTUSE and Hypocritical poster on USMB, perhaps the internet.

And he's so Biased he doesn't even realize how Ignorant his Hypocrisy is.

*Gratuitous ContentLESS last-word/nonsense to follow Asclepia Destruction*
.
`


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 1, 2013)

abu afak said:


> You couldn't answer a single thing I id. When I posted the Sientific pper on Melanesians proving they wre Not subshran Race, you merel;y said it was posted previously in the string. YOu, as alay could NOT answer.
> You Never can.
> You are a juvenile last-worder with NO content.
> 
> ...



No need to get upset and start increasing the font size. You better go check your blood pressure too while you are at it. No need to get so emotional. 

First you posted some bizarre scenario with a mix of nationalities and ethnicities to prove your aborted point. You got busted and were butt hurt.  now your claiming I said Melanesians had sub saharan DNA. Please post it if I did and I will admit it was an error on my part. I said that they were from Africa. You have already been exposed as a racist so now i am going to bury you in your tangle of lies and mistold stories. Step up to the plate coward.

 BTW thats not an answer. I refer you to my challenge in the last  post. Show where the Aborigines, Negritos or Melanesians *did not migrate from Africa*.  You are so stupid you don't even realize you are missing some things. I will wait until you spot them. Go ahead you Stormfront reject. Show me how these people did not descend from people that originated in Africa.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 16, 2013)

More evidence of the African presence in pre-columbian times. This article speaks to the findings of Leo Weiner who used a philogistic approach and found that some of the languages in the Americas are related to west african tribes.

Bryan Wilhite: Africa and the Pre-Columbian Contacts with America


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Dec 16, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> More evidence of the African presence in pre-columbian times. This article speaks to the findings of Leo Weiner who used a philogistic approach and found that some of the languages in the Americas are related to west african tribes.
> 
> Bryan Wilhite: Africa and the Pre-Columbian Contacts with America



Philology is the study and comparison of written languages. Funny thing, other than Mayan, which is untranslated to this day, there were no pre Columbian written languages. That doesn't give him a lot to compare, does it?


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 16, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > More evidence of the African presence in pre-columbian times. This article speaks to the findings of Leo Weiner who used a philogistic approach and found that some of the languages in the Americas are related to west african tribes.
> ...



I've never done this before but I am tempted to copy your post and put it in my signature. You cant possibly be that stupid Quantum. The Mayan language was deciphered a few years ago.

NOVA | Cracking the Maya Code

Also the Olmecs had their own written language which is related to the Mande family in West Africa. You should try reading the link instead of running your mouth and proving your stupidity.


----------



## jazzwatch (Dec 22, 2013)

I assume the Flying Black Gypsums took over Egypt 4500 BC and ruled their until they were evicted or eradicated each other? Another fairy tale from the Black Mambo comic book.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 22, 2013)

jazzwatch said:


> I assume the Flying Black Gypsums took over Egypt 4500 BC and ruled their until they were evicted or eradicated each other? Another fairy tale from the Black Mambo comic book.




You got anything to back up anything you have to say i would be glad to see it. Otherwise you're just another shit stain i will have to clean from my thread.


----------



## Godboy (Dec 22, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> jazzwatch said:
> 
> 
> > I assume the Flying Black Gypsums took over Egypt 4500 BC and ruled their until they were evicted or eradicated each other? Another fairy tale from the Black Mambo comic book.
> ...



No one buys into your bullshit revisionist history. Quit trying to steal other peoples accomplishments. You must be ashamed of your race if feel the need to do this, but I guess you can only tell the Goerge Washington Carver story so many times.


----------



## Iceman (Dec 22, 2013)

How come there is no negro genetic component within native americans, whereas there is a european component. This would speak to Europeans, not Negros, being here in pre columbian times.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 22, 2013)

Iceman said:


> How come there is no negro genetic component within native americans, whereas there is a european component. This would speak to Europeans, not Negros, being here in pre columbian times.



But there is. Thanks for asking. Here you go son.

The King Tut Gene



> Also African in its ultimate source, the King Tut Gene finds modest distribution in *East Coast American Indians*, the Himalayas, Northeast Europe and scattered other populations, including Jews.  - See more at: The King Tut Gene


----------



## Iceman (Dec 22, 2013)

King Tut was of European DNA, so it would make sense he relates to the East Coast American Indians.

Indo-Europeans(Aryans), spread throughout the world in ancient times.
The Tutankhamun DNA Project


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 22, 2013)

Iceman said:


> King Tut was of European DNA, so it would make sense he relates to the East Coast American Indians.
> 
> Indo-Europeans(Aryans), spread throughout the world in ancient times.
> The Tutankhamun DNA Project



So you got fooled by IGENEA getting their results of the Discovery channel too?  What a fucking moron!! 

Scam Alert: King Tut?s DNA | Doug's Archaeology



> Maybe you saw the recent headlines about how scientists at iGENEA discovered that King Tutankhamun (Tut) was related to half of Western Europe&#8217;s Males, that looks like it is the set up for a scam. Turns out real researchers have conducted work on King Tut&#8217;s DNA and that iGENEA got their supposed DNA evidence by copying it off of a Discovery TV Program on the subject.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 22, 2013)

Is sickle cell a white mans disease or Black?


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 22, 2013)

Here is another genetic firms report on the DNA evidence. Note the rich full Blackness of the genes. 96% sub-saharan.

http://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2013-02-01.pdf


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

What proof does this random guy with a blog say the info is wrong? He presented none of it.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> What proof does this random guy with a blog say the info is wrong? He presented none of it.



Look above you dumbass. I just posted the results from 2 different genetic firms.  Besides he is not the only one so thanks for challenging. This is fun. Here is another site. How many others should I post.  I thought everyone knew this already? 

King Tut Related to Half of European Men? Maybe Not | Personal Genomics | Tutankhamen's Relatives | LiveScience



> Swiss genomics company iGENEA has launched a Tutankhamen DNA project based on what they say are genetic markers that appeared on a computer screen during a Discovery Channel special on the famous pharaoh's genetic lineage.


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

"But Carsten Pusch, a geneticist at Germany's University of Tubingen who was part of the team that unraveled Tut's DNA from samples taken from his mummy and mummies of his family members, said that iGENEA's claims are "simply impossible.""

That is conclusive evidence to the contrary, lol. 

Is this the best you have?


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> "But Carsten Pusch, *a geneticist at Germany's University of Tubingen who was part of the team* that unraveled Tut's DNA from samples taken from his mummy and mummies of his family members, said that iGENEA's claims are "simply impossible.""
> 
> That is conclusive evidence to the contrary, lol.
> 
> Is this the best you have?



What would be better? *The guy from the team that extracted the DNA *says they were full of shit and I just posted 2 other firms that actually tested the samples. They did not get them off of the TV. So thats 3 different sets of people to your one that got it off a TV show. Just say you chose to remain ignorant. You dont have to play like your stupid. I know you feel like a big ass about right now.


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > "But Carsten Pusch, *a geneticist at Germany's University of Tubingen who was part of the team* that unraveled Tut's DNA from samples taken from his mummy and mummies of his family members, said that iGENEA's claims are "simply impossible.""
> ...



It would be better if he said why it was impossible. He has yet to provide any evidence to the contrary.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



It was impossible because that wasn't the result the original team came up with. What do you call 2 different firms proving them wrong by testing the actual samples and not reconstructing it off of a Discovery channel show? You are reaching now. Thats sad.


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Interestingly enough R1b1a2 is most heavily grouped in the Stonehenge region. His line goes back to the builders of the pyramids. Very interesting that these wonders of the world were built by the same Aryan line.


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Dec 23, 2013)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Actually if you know about the currents in the Atlantic ocean (formerly the Ethiopian Ocean)
> ...



There are no words that adequetley describe the absurdity of this claim.
I see an exploratory mission to Mars to 'find the flag planted by American astronauts' in somebody's future. Perhaps a solution to the imminent 'capsizing of Guam' will be a future endeavor as well.
Hey, maybe they just flew to the Americas?


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0C151dnDqg]The People Could Fly - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Those results you showed have nothing to do with King Tut, they just show the genetic make-up of Egyptians during the later periods. In fact, your study notes they are genetically distinct from the Egyptians of the Predynastic and Eatly Dynastic period. They seem to show that Nubians came in in the later periods, leading to the decline of a once great civilization.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Truthseeker1 said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



At least look it up first before I make you look like an ass! Youre a stupid hill billy 

Atlantic Ocean - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



So now you have reading comprehension issues?   Read the entire PDF and the 2 links from the other firm. They both clearly show you how wrong you are.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

I'll leave you 2 clowns to ponder how stupid you are. That was too easy.


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



No, just reading the link you posted.

Nubian migration to Egypt coincided with it's decline, what a coincidence, lol.


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Dec 23, 2013)

Godboy said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > jazzwatch said:
> ...




I've learned so many things from these threads in the last few days. Things like my Jewish ancestors were  just 'white people that adopted the belief'; the original Jews were Black.
I'm of mixed ancestory [including some Pawnee], so does that mean I'm African American as well?


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



Most people seem to understand this. I don't have a B.S. degree in Douchebaggery Revisionist Theory, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night. I plan on going to Clown Camp this summer with some Flyin Egyptians from the hood.
Hey look.....he 'flew' right out of here.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Smwr24UCRXo]I Ain't Lying: Mississippi Folktales - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> King Tut was of European DNA, so it would make sense he relates to the East Coast American Indians.
> 
> Indo-Europeans(Aryans), spread throughout the world in ancient times.
> The Tutankhamun DNA Project



Damn you are stupid. It even says on your link they got if off a recording. 



> iGENEA was able to reconstruct the Y-DNA profile of Tutankhamun, his father Akhenaten and his grandfather Amenhotep III *with the help of a recording of the Discovery Channel.* The astonishing result:



Here is the Tut PDF

http://www.dnatribes.com/dnatribes-digest-2012-01-01.pdf


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Truthseeker1 said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...



 Judging by your grammatical skills and sentence structure, you appear to have missed a few English classes.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Truthseeker1 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Truthseeker1 said:
> ...



Judging by your inability to look stuff up you never made it past 1rst grade.


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Truthseeker1 said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I've never majored in 'stuff' or 'sheeit'.  Excuse me, I never made it past the what? Can you tell me what the 1rst grade is? I'm not fluent in bable.


As you can see, I'm perfectly capable of "looking up 'stuff".


1stuff
 noun \&#712;st&#601;f\

: materials, supplies, or equipment

: a group or pile of things that are not specifically described

&#8212;used to speak in a general way about something that is talked about, written about, etc.


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > King Tut was of European DNA, so it would make sense he relates to the East Coast American Indians.
> ...



Your study doesn't mention anything about Y-DNA or MT-DNA. What exactly are they measuring? Your study does nothing to disprove the European lineage of King Tut.


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Dec 23, 2013)

The jenkem is strong with this one.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



The burden of proof is on IGENEA. The other 2 firms and *the original testers* don't have to prove anything. IGENEA got their results off the Discovery Channel. They even said so themselves. The Discovery Channel. Say that 3 times in a row. 

Whats really funny is how all the white people rejoiced and started blogs but now they and the media are very silent on the subject


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Well they do, they said IGENEA was wrong. What is their proof?


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




Uhhh, that. That. That.
Please don't ask me 'Say what'.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



They actually had the DNA. IGENEA didn't. Closed case.  IGENEA needs to prove the recording on the Discovery Channel was even King Tuts data.


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



What DNA did they use?


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...




IGENEA didn't use DNA. They used a screenshot of data off the Discover Channel recording. They even admitted it. To date they have not explained to the scientific community how they could have possibly come up with their findings.  Meanwhile their testing kits for white guys are selling like hot cakes. it cant possibly be this hard for you to understand.  I know it hurts and you have to feign ignorance. It will be ok.


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



What is your proof the Discovery Channel findings were wrong? What DNA did the DNATribes study use?


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...


----------



## Meathead (Dec 23, 2013)

Asc, shut up. You obviously don't have a clue of what you're talking about. Sub-Saharan Africans never discovered nearby islands like Cape Verde and Canaries, but you've got them transiting the great Atlantic to found cultures they couldn't come close to in Africa.

Your premise is idiotic and based on incredible inferiority complex. Above all, it is deeply insulting to the Indians  by suggesting they could not have developed a civilization without diffusion from the most backward stone aged tribes in the world.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 23, 2013)

*African Presence in Pre-Columbian Times*

Of course there were pre-Columbian Toltecs and Mayans in Africa.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Meathead said:


> Asc, shut up. You obviously don't have a clue of what you're talking about. Sub-Saharan Africans never discovered nearby islands like Cape Verde and Canaries, but you've got them transiting the great Atlantic to found cultures they couldn't come close to in Africa.
> 
> Your premise is idiotic and based on incredible inferiority complex. Above all, it is deeply insulting to the Indians  by suggesting they could not have developed a civilization without diffusion from the most backward stone aged tribes in the world.



You shut up Meathead. The Canary Islands? What does that have to do with South America you retard. The fact you are so upset proves how your inferiority complex is kicking in. I'm simply wondering how a Black NA tribe is recognized by the UN and won a lawsuit against the US government for their land got here based on them having the land before any Europeans were here. They didn't float on air. Show me some proof they didn't come on boats or shut it clown.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> *African Presence in Pre-Columbian Times*
> 
> Of course there were pre-Columbian Toltecs and Mayans in Africa.



You got a link?  Never heard that one before.


----------



## Meathead (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Asc, shut up. You obviously don't have a clue of what you're talking about. Sub-Saharan Africans never discovered nearby islands like Cape Verde and Canaries, but you've got them transiting the great Atlantic to found cultures they couldn't come close to in Africa.
> ...


You might as well ask me to show proof that Africans did not land on the moon before 1969.

This is seriously too stupid for words. Insecurities are not much of an excuse for such a ridiculous reach of the achievements of primitive tribes.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Interesting

Ancient African Writing Systems and Knowledge: Black Gods of the Maya


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Well then shut up unless you have some proof. I have some. You dont. Guess who I'm going to believe?


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Blacks are the pettiest race. The one group who can&#8217;t take a joke because deep down they know they are far uglier and less civlized than us.


----------



## Meathead (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Interesting
> 
> Ancient African Writing Systems and Knowledge: Black Gods of the Maya


Now there's a link!

FFS, give it up!


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Holy crap!  Here is a white guy that found Egyptian hieroglyphics in Australia. This looks exactly like the god Anubis from Egypt.

Egyptian Hieroglyphics in Australia


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting
> ...



I still haven't seen anything from you refuting it except your opinion. Why is that?


----------



## GHook93 (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> 
> There is a tribe in Louisiana that won a US court case and was given some of their land back and they are Africans.  Officially they are not recognized by the US despite this court case but are recognized by the UN.
> 
> ...



Let me get this straight. Africans who could build even mediocre ships to sail to Europe, some how build amazing vessels to the new world! LOL, who you crappin.

I know your a black supremacist and all and everything black is beautiful and everything white is bad, but before you go off on you we brothers conquered the new world before you, you should start with African and get your get you first African economy and civilization that is worth a damn. Until then STFU!


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Blacks are the pettiest race. The one group who cant take a joke because deep down they know they are far uglier and less civlized than us.



Whites have a serious inferiority complex. Look at how they try to attack any findings. The get bent out of shape at the mere suggestion someone did something before them.


----------



## Shaarona (Dec 23, 2013)

There are a mixed race people called Melungeons or Redbones and some DNA studies have been attempted..  Some of them called themselves "Portugee". There are also reports of Colombus coming upon some people who wore cotton and their women veiled.

There is also the possibility that very early in 1492 Muslims evicted from Spain made their way to the new world. They were quite the navigators for the times.. using an instrument called the Kamal.


----------



## Meathead (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Holy crap!  Here is a white guy that found Egyptian hieroglyphics in Australia. This looks exactly like the god Anubis from Egypt.
> 
> Egyptian Hieroglyphics in Australia


I actually looked at your link. The silliness of someone scratching out something on sandstone a few years prior is about as abjectly stupid. 

Give it up. No one is buying. Regardless, the most futile is trying to link Egyptian culture to blacks.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

GHook93 said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> ...



Exhibit A. Look at all the tension in the post. Such butt hurtedness. Again lets see some proof from all the KKK crew. If you don't have any sit back and learn.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Holy crap!  Here is a white guy that found Egyptian hieroglyphics in Australia. This looks exactly like the god Anubis from Egypt.
> ...



Kindly depart the thread if you are not buying it. You can choose to be ignorant or you can learn. Makes me no difference.....unless you have proof to the contrary?


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Blacks are the pettiest race. The one group who cant take a joke because deep down they know they are far uglier and less civlized than us.
> ...



You proved your inferiority by responding. You know I am right deep down as well.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Shaarona said:


> There are a mixed race people called Melungeons or Redbones and some DNA studies have been attempted..  Some of them called themselves "Portugee". There are also reports of Colombus coming upon some people who wore cotton and their women veiled.
> 
> There is also the possibility that very early in 1492 Muslims evicted from Spain made their way to the new world. They were quite the navigators for the times.. using an instrument called the Kamal.



I saw that too. They found out the Melungeons are the offspring of free Africans and white women back in the colonial period.

Melungeon DNA Study Reveals Ancestry, Upsets 'A Whole Lot Of People'

When you look at the Olmec heads there is no doubt Africans were over here long before Europeans. I mean what other ethnic group could this be?


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...


Dont be mad bro. Prove me wrong.


----------



## Iceman (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



History proves you inferior.


----------



## Meathead (Dec 23, 2013)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Why on earth would you think I would try to disprove your dingbat theories? I don't get into these endless exchanges with you as you do with others, I just occasionally drop in to chip in on their stupidity.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



I thought maybe you had a leg to stand on. Carry on then.


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

You guys are about to piss yourself with this one.



> Columbus himself acknowledged this historical truism when he wrote in his diary on his second voyage in September 1493 as follows: "The natives of Hispaniola (Now Haiti) came to me and told me that Blacks (Africans) had come from the South and Southeast trading with them in gold-tip medal spears. They (Africans) came in large boats."


----------



## Asclepias (Dec 23, 2013)

OK this is starting to get erie.  The XI dynasty in China is said to be founded by Negritos. Check out the alignment to Orions belt by pyramids built in Egypt, China, and Mexico.  thats too much of a coincidence.


----------



## longly (Dec 27, 2013)

Please my Lord God give me strength. The ancient people of  Sub-Saharan Africa had no sea going technology or heritage. Their  dough out canoes would not have made it.  They didn&#8217;t even occupy the Canary islands and they are only about a hundred miles from the coast.  Afro-centrics claim all kind things that just don&#8217;t stand up to logic.  Sub-Saharan Africa was not  a highly advanced Society, but there is no disgrace in that neither was the land that later became the U.S.


----------



## Gracie (Dec 27, 2013)

Fascinating. Who knows what was capable way back when? The vikings got here before Columbus but there isn't a whole lot of proof. And how did egyptians build those huge pyramids? What about easter island and the statues? And Stonehenge?

I find it a fascinating topic, myself, mulling over what if's. Great thread.


----------



## longly (Dec 27, 2013)

longly said:


> Please my Lord God give me strength. The ancient people of  Sub-Saharan Africa had no sea going technology or heritage. Their  dough out canoes would not have made it.  They didnt even occupy the Canary islands and they are only about a hundred miles from the coast.  Afro-centrics claim all kind things that just dont stand up to logic.  Sub-Saharan Africa was not  a highly advanced Society, but there is no disgrace in that neither was the land that later became the U.S.





Iceman said:


> Blacks are the pettiest race. The one group who cant take a joke because deep down they know they are far uglier and less civlized than us.





That is not true either, blacks have the same potential as other people, but it would help them if they would concentrate on practical advancements instead of inventing myths.


----------



## longly (Dec 27, 2013)

Gracie said:


> Fascinating. Who knows what was capable way back when? The vikings got here before Columbus but there isn't a whole lot of proof. And how did egyptians build those huge pyramids? What about easter island and the statues? And Stonehenge?
> 
> I find it a fascinating topic, myself, mulling over what if's. Great thread.




The Vikings had a sea going technology  because of  Roman and Greek influence. They had traded in Northern Europe for hundred of years and had come in contact with the people of the north. The disadvantage that the sub-Saharan Africans  had was that they were isolated from these influences by the Sahara desert.  The people of  Eurasia, the Eurasian landmass, had a great advantage over all the other peoples of  the earth due to the unique characteristics of the continent.   The Eurasians developed their societies earlier not because they were mentally or physically superior, but because they were born in the right place.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 1, 2014)

longly said:


> Please my Lord God give me strength. The ancient people of  Sub-Saharan Africa had no sea going technology or heritage. Their  dough out canoes would not have made it.  They didnt even occupy the Canary islands and they are only about a hundred miles from the coast.  Afro-centrics claim all kind things that just dont stand up to logic.  Sub-Saharan Africa was not  a highly advanced Society, but there is no disgrace in that neither was the land that later became the U.S.




How do you know this?


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 1, 2014)

longly said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> > Fascinating. Who knows what was capable way back when? The vikings got here before Columbus but there isn't a whole lot of proof. And how did egyptians build those huge pyramids? What about easter island and the statues? And Stonehenge?
> ...



You totally missed the fact that before there was a Sahara desert that same area was very green as proven by the ancient lakes and river in the area.  You also forget the DNA evidence that the Egyptians are from South and Central Africa.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 1, 2014)

Truthseeker1 said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Truthseeker1 said:
> ...



Please post just one revisionist statement of mine.  Better yet prove it is revisionist. Your claim is weak unless you can prove my statement is not true.


----------



## BDBoop (Jan 1, 2014)

Happy New Year, A!


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 1, 2014)

BDBoop said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Truthseeker1 said:
> ...



Hey BD. Happy New year to you too beautiful.


----------



## Iceman (Jan 1, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



He likes da white womenzzz. Even the old hags, whatever he can get his hands on, lol.


----------



## BDBoop (Jan 1, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> BDBoop said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



/twinkle


----------



## Unkotare (Jan 1, 2014)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > BDBoop said:
> ...





You getting excited, freak?


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 1, 2014)

I hunted down the "Egyptians in Australia" information and it appears its most likely a hoax. It did get me thinking though about how the Islands like Hawaii and Polynesia became populated by those same Aborigine type people.  How did this happen without them having some sort of sea going vessels?


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 1, 2014)

Interesting links:

Americas Settled by Two Groups of Early Humans, Study Says

http://austhrutime.com/aborigines_new_world.htm


----------



## JWBooth (Jan 1, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> 
> There is a tribe in Louisiana that won a US court case and was given some of their land back and they are Africans.  Officially they are not recognized by the US despite this court case but are recognized by the UN.
> 
> ...



Old folks like to tell fairy tails to the young ones.

Here's another one:

THE WONDERFUL TAR BABY STORY


					"Didn't the fox never catch the rabbit, Uncle Remus?" asked the little boy
					the next evening.

					"He come mighty nigh it, honey, sho's you born--Brer Fox did. One day atter
					Brer Rabbit fool 'im wid dat calamus root, Brer Fox went ter wuk en got 'im
					some tar, en mix it wid some turkentime, en fix up a contrapshun w'at he
					call a Tar-Baby, en he tuck dish yer Tar-Baby en he sot 'er in de big road,
					en den he lay off in de bushes fer to see what de news wuz gwine ter be. En
					he didn't hatter wait long, nudder, kaze bimeby here come Brer Rabbit pacin'
					down de road--lippity-clippity, clippity -lippity--dez ez sassy ez a
					jay-bird. Brer Fox, he lay low. Brer Rabbit come prancin' 'long twel he spy
					de Tar-Baby, en den he fotch up on his behime legs like he wuz 'stonished.
					De Tar Baby, she sot dar, she did, en Brer Fox, he lay low.

					"`Mawnin'!' sez Brer Rabbit, sezee - `nice wedder dis mawnin',' sezee.

					"Tar-Baby ain't sayin' nuthin', en Brer Fox he lay low.

					"`How duz yo' sym'tums seem ter segashuate?' sez Brer Rabbit, sezee.

					"Brer Fox, he wink his eye slow, en lay low, en de Tar-Baby, she ain't
					sayin' nuthin'.

					"'How you come on, den? Is you deaf?' sez Brer Rabbit, sezee. 'Kaze if you
					is, I kin holler louder,' sezee.

					"Tar-Baby stay still, en Brer Fox, he lay low.

					"'You er stuck up, dat's w'at you is,' says Brer Rabbit, sezee, 'en I;m
					gwine ter kyore you, dat's w'at I'm a gwine ter do,' sezee.

					"Brer Fox, he sorter chuckle in his stummick, he did, but Tar-Baby ain't
					sayin' nothin'.

					"'I'm gwine ter larn you how ter talk ter 'spectubble folks ef hit's de las'
					ack,' sez Brer Rabbit, sezee. 'Ef you don't take off dat hat en tell me
					howdy, I'm gwine ter bus' you wide open,' sezee.

					"Tar-Baby stay still, en Brer Fox, he lay low.

					"Brer Rabbit keep on axin' 'im, en de Tar-Baby, she keep on sayin' nothin',
					twel present'y Brer Rabbit draw back wid his fis', he did, en blip he tuck
					'er side er de head. Right dar's whar he broke his merlasses jug. His fis'
					stuck, en he can't pull loose. De tar hilt 'im. But Tar-Baby, she stay
					still, en Brer Fox, he lay low.

					"`Ef you don't lemme loose, I'll knock you agin,' sez Brer Rabbit, sezee, en
					wid dat he fotch 'er a wipe wid de udder han', en dat stuck. Tar-Baby, she
					ain'y sayin' nuthin', en Brer Fox, he lay low.

					"`Tu'n me loose, fo' I kick de natal stuffin' outen you,' sez Brer Rabbit,
					sezee, but de Tar-Baby, she ain't sayin' nuthin'. She des hilt on, en de
					Brer Rabbit lose de use er his feet in de same way. Brer Fox, he lay low.
					Den Brer Rabbit squall out dat ef de Tar-Baby don't tu'n 'im loose he butt
					'er cranksided. En den he butted, en his head got stuck. Den Brer Fox, he
					sa'ntered fort', lookin' dez ez innercent ez wunner yo' mammy's
					mockin'-birds.

					"`Howdy, Brer Rabbit,' sez Brer Fox, sezee. `You look sorter stuck up dis
					mawnin',' sezee, en den he rolled on de groun', en laft en laft twel he
					couldn't laff no mo'. `I speck you'll take dinner wid me dis time, Brer
					Rabbit. I done laid in some calamus root, en I ain't gwineter take no
					skuse,' sez Brer Fox, sezee."

					Here Uncle Remus paused, and drew a two-pound yam out of the ashes.

					"Did the fox eat the rabbit?" asked the little boy to whom the story had
					been told.

					"Dat's all de fur de tale goes," replied the old man. "He mout, an den agin
					he moutent. Some say Judge B'ar come 'long en loosed 'im - some say he
					didn't. I hear Miss Sally callin'. You better run 'long."


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 1, 2014)

An interesting read from a book printed in the early 1920's:

Africa and the Discovery of America - Leo Wiener - Google Books


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 1, 2014)

Pheonixops said:


> An interesting read from a book printed in the early 1920's:
> 
> Africa and the Discovery of America - Leo Wiener - Google Books



There is lots of evidence. This guy Leo Weiner being just one of many that have found evidence that simply cannot be disputed but is instead buried.  However, people still whine about Black people being revisionists when white guys like this found the same things long ago.


----------



## Godboy (Jan 1, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > An interesting read from a book printed in the early 1920's:
> ...



Yes, the evidence is so overwhelming that literally only a handful of quacks believe it.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 1, 2014)

Godboy said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...



Sort of like the people he knew the earth was round instead of flat. 

You or the others still have nothing disputing these findings. Why is that?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jan 2, 2014)

Pheonixops said:


> Interesting links:
> 
> Americas Settled by Two Groups of Early Humans, Study Says
> 
> The suggested origin of the pre-Clovis Australoid population of the Americas



Thanks.

The fact that Aborigine peoples very similar to Australian Aborigines inhabited America well before the Mongol invasion (Indians) is well documented. That the Indians engaged in virtual genocide of these people is also well documented.

Kind of kills the whole "evil European" meme, though. Culturally and technologically advanced people conquer more backward people. The Indians conquered the Aborigines and in turn were conquered by the Europeans.


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 2, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting links:
> ...



Yeah, I have been trying to find a documentary that featured that premise. I don't know if it was on NatGeo or Discovery,etc. They showed actual cave or rock drawings that depicted the conflict between a darker people (Aborigines or Africans or some native race) and the lighter assailants (most likely Asian conquerors). I do think that some Africans may have gone there (The Americas) on purpose or by accident. The coast of Brazil is pretty close to the continent of Africa, the statues of the Olmecs are quite interesting, and one of the E-books I cited has an interesting theory with a lot of citations. "Proposed claims for an African presence in Mesoamerica rest on attributes of the Olmec culture, the presence of an African plant species in the Americas, and interpretations of certain European and Arabic historical accounts.

"The Olmec culture existed from roughly 1200 BCE to 400 BCE. The idea that the Olmecs are related to Africans was suggested by José Melgar, who discovered the first colossal head at Hueyapan (now Tres Zapotes) in 1862.[66] More recently, Ivan van Sertima has argued that these statues depict settlers or explorers from Africa, but his views have been the target of severe scholarly criticism.[67]

North African sources describe what some consider to be visits to the New World by a Mali fleet in 1311.[68] According to these sources, 400 ships from the Mali Empire discovered a land across the ocean to the West after being swept off course by ocean currents. Only one ship returned, and the captain reported the discovery of a western current to Prince Abubakari II; the off-course Mali fleet of 400 ships is said to have conducted both trade and warfare with the peoples of the western lands. It is claimed that Abubakari II abdicated his throne and set off to explore these western lands. In 1324, the Mali king Mansa Musa is said to have told the Arabic historian, Al-Umari that "his predecessors had launched two expeditions from West Africa to discover the limits of the Atlantic Ocean."

According to the abstract of Columbus' log made by Bartolomé de las Casas, the purpose of Columbus third voyage was to test both the claims of King John II of Portugal that canoes had been found which set out from the coast of Guinea [West Africa] and sailed to the west with merchandise as well as the claims of the native inhabitants of Hispaniola that from the south and the southeast had come black people whose spears were made of a metal called guanín...from which it was found that of 32 parts: 18 were gold, 6 were silver, and 8 copper.
Bartolomé de las Casas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 2, 2014)

They have a video on youtube from the BBC talking about the Aborigines in the ancient Americas.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6IrMjfbh6E]First Americans were Black Aborigines - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 2, 2014)

Pheonixops said:


> North African sources describe what some consider to be visits to the New World by a Mali fleet in 1311.[68] According to these sources, 400 ships from the Mali Empire discovered a land across the ocean to the West after being swept off course by ocean currents. Only one ship returned, and the captain reported the discovery of a western current to Prince Abubakari II; the off-course Mali fleet of 400 ships is said to have conducted both trade and warfare with the peoples of the western lands. It is claimed that Abubakari II abdicated his throne and set off to explore these western lands. In 1324, the Mali king Mansa Musa is said to have told the Arabic historian, Al-Umari that "his predecessors had launched two expeditions from West Africa to discover the limits of the Atlantic Ocean."



This is the one that caught my attention. Specifically because I met a young lady from South America that claimed to be related to some of the people in this fleet.  There are a lot of citations regarding this voyage by people from Mali. Its already known they were traders, extremely wealthy, and had the seafaring knowledge to make the trip.  I think however even they were preceded by other African civilizations even before the Egyptian dynasties.


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 2, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> They have a video on youtube from the BBC talking about the Aborigines in the ancient Americas.
> 
> First Americans were Black Aborigines - YouTube




Thank you very much! This was the video that I was referring to. I went and joined Natgeo to no avail, then you have it right here! Notice that this find was in Brazil, now I don't know what part of Brazil these discoveries were found in yet, but it's no coincidence that Brazil is closer to Africa. If it was in Peru, Ecuador, or Chile, I can definitely see the Australian Aboriginal connection.  Now I am going to check out the movie and try to kick my wife's ass in final Jeopardy at the same time.


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 2, 2014)

Pheonixops said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > They have a video on youtube from the BBC talking about the Aborigines in the ancient Americas.
> ...



Ok, it was in Northeast Brazil, I think that makes the case;check out these Trade Wind Patterns:


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 3, 2014)

Pheonixops said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



What makes me laugh is the European scholars insistence that Africans couldn't not have sailed to South America from West Africa but somehow the Aborigines originally from Africa could sail to the South America and the Melanesian, Fijian, and Polynesian Islands tens of thousands of years earlier.  When you think about in those terms there either has to be a serious cover up or willful denial of the facts.


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 3, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...



Yep, it's actual quite sad, though there are people like that French lady in the video (approx 10:28 in the video) you posted that seemed to imply African origins there by bringing up the example of African fishermen who were blown off course and possibly arrived in Brazil. I'm pretty sure they were found close to where they were excavating and found those pictures. Here's what I think she was referring to:

Three African fishermen rescued in Brazilian waters. | HighBeam Business: Arrive Prepared

Check out Natal Brazil on the map and compare to those trade winds. 

Another interesting article:
http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~legneref/ethnic/ethnic1.htm


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 3, 2014)

Pheonixops said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...



Yeah that's a lot of lost people accidently getting blown off course.   I'm sure that did happen but not enough to account for all the evidence.  Its what I call the WAD moving of the goal posts.  Eventually someone will admit it in our lifetime but with a caveat like aliens guided them or a Kraken swallowed then spit them out on the Brazilian coast line.  I dont know if you saw earlier in the thread regarding the Ra and Ra II.  Some guys built a boat using Egyptian blue prints and made it across the Ethiopic ocean to South America on the *second try.*

Thor Heyerdahl - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> The papyrus craft, Ra, sailed 5000 km (2700 nautical miles) in 56 days until storms and deficiencies in the construction caused the team to abandon their target only one week short of Barbados.
> 
> Ten months later, Heyerdahl tried the same voyage with the smaller (12 meter) Ra II. This vessel crossed the widest part of the Atlantic 6100 km (3270 nautical miles) in 57 days, from Safi to Barbados. Once again, this voyage showed that modern science under-estimated long-forgotten aboriginal technologies. The theory that Mediterranean vessels built prior to Columbus could not have crossed the Atlantic was thrown on its head.


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 3, 2014)

Interesting:

Dafuna Canoe; Africa?s Oldest Known Boat | Originalpeople.org


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 3, 2014)

Graveyard DNA rewrites African American history - life - 16 September 2010 - New Scientist


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 3, 2014)

Pheonixops said:


> Graveyard DNA rewrites African American history - life - 16 September 2010 - New Scientist



I knew about this but never heard of scientific proof.  I'm pretty convinced Columbus had some undisclosed knowledge from the Black Moors. One thing people forget is that Jan 2 *1492* was the day the Moors were expelled from Europe.  What happened later on that very year?

http://www.historyorb.com/events/date/1492


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 3, 2014)

Well here is one of the African Moors that sailed with Columbus.

Pedro Alonso Niño - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 3, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Well here is one of the African Moors that sailed with Columbus.
> 
> Pedro Alonso Niño - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



He and his brothers have an interesting history. Here's an interesting video series; I disagree some of the assertions but, they provide some reference and excerpts from books to further one's research.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 3, 2014)

Pheonixops said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Well here is one of the African Moors that sailed with Columbus.
> ...



I've never seen that specific video even though I have watched some of the footage in it before.  When you start looking at it from a global perspective you get a better picture of just how much misinformation, omissions, and out right lies that abound out there regarding African history. Some of these people on the board actually believe you are considered Black African only if you are sub-saharan for instance.  I love how they think they can define what Black is without our consent.


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 3, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



LOL, no doubt! When their "assertions" are put into practical application, for instance a description given to the authorities, Jim crow, etc. , those same "non-Black" people suddenly become............"Black".


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 3, 2014)

Pheonixops said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...



LOL. Goal post movers.  Here is the first video I found by Dr Rashidi. Opened my eyes pretty wide.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPjcAKIhuoY]DR. RUNOKO RASHIDI: The Original Man - The History Of The Ancient Black Peoples? - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 4, 2014)

More proof of seafaring knowledge of the Egyptians. 

Ancient Egyptian technology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Meathead (Jan 4, 2014)

Good thing we have pictures of Neil Armstrong because doubtless he'd be black too.

Now I'm waiting to hear from our Afrocentric luminaries that blacks reached the moon before them. What the hell, in for a penny, in for a pound.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 4, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Good thing we have pictures of Neil Armstrong because doubtless he'd be black too.
> 
> Now I'm waiting to hear from our Afrocentric luminaries that blacks reached the moon before them. What the hell, in for a penny, in for a pound.



Neil was definitely a white boy.  However, I wonder if its possible that some ancient African civilization did make it to the moon?  After all Africans have been around for hundreds of thousands of years and white boys are a relatively new occurrence that only got to the moon based on the sciences founded by Black Africans.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 4, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Good thing we have pictures of Neil Armstrong because doubtless he'd be black too.
> ...


Sure, why not! Prehistoric trans-oceanic blacks to prehistoric black astronauts is not that much of a stretch, especially given their high tech sharpening of wooden sticks to make spears and all.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 4, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



So how did Black people get to Melanesia and Fiji? Did they swim? Your weak attempts to assuage your fear are funny though. I appreciate your posts because I know it is messing with your head.


----------



## syrenn (Jan 4, 2014)




----------



## longly (Jan 4, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Please read Professor Jared Diamond&#8217;s book, &#8220; Guns, Germs and Steel&#8221;. they got to Fiji and the other places because they came into contact with  people who had developed sea going technology.  Those blacks, before they moved future east,  had the advantage of living in Eurasia. Eurasia in ancient time was a place where ideas readily spread from one end of the continent to the other.  That was the great advantage that the people of Eurasia, including my own, had over the peoples of all the other continents.

Afrocentrics call it stealing ideas and we call it borrowing ideas and we the people of  and from Eurasia  have been doing it for  thousands of years. We have never been too proud to adopt someone else&#8217;s way of doing things when it worked better.  Our way of learning from others has worked out very well for us; how has the sub-Saharan African  way of doing things worked out?


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 4, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



I will see what I can find on his book but I can see from your post you are already off track and I hope its not due to the book you are recommending.  You totally miss the fact that at that time when the Aborigines came out of Africa over 70,000 years ago there were no white people. Everyone was Black.  

Aborigines: The First Out of Africa, the First in Asia and Australia - Hans Villarica - The Atlantic



> "Aboriginal Australians descend from the first human explorers," explains lead author and University of Copenhagen professor Eske Willerslev in a news release.* "While the ancestors of Europeans and Asians were sitting somewhere in Africa or the Middle East, yet to explore their world further, the ancestors of Aboriginal Australians spread rapidly ... traversing unknown territory in Asia and finally crossing the sea into Australia.*"



Point being if they got any seafaring knowledge from anyone else they were Black as well.  I understand people borrow ideas from other cultures. Everyone has borrowed from the Black culture and have not given credit. That is when it is called stealing.

As far as the sub-saharan way of doing things it has worked out quite well. The foundation of all knowledge was sourced from there. That is where the first humans on the planet started. Learn your history. Dont just fall for any wild story someone white wrote in a book. They also claimed Columbus discovered America and to this day still insist on celebrating him. Think.


----------



## longly (Jan 5, 2014)

If that is true, why is Africa south of the Sahara in such a mess.  There is not a country  there in which I would invest any money.   Titles and deeds are not worth the paper they are written on; Botswana is probably the only half way decent country in the area for an investor.


----------



## GreenBean (Jan 5, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> 
> There is a tribe in Louisiana that won a US court case and was given some of their land back and they are Africans.  Officially they are not recognized by the US despite this court case but are recognized by the UN.
> 
> ...



I don't give much credibility to the Washitaw fairytale but there are many other proofs ...

There is significant evidence that Africans of antiquity at one time traveled to the Americas. 



> [Ivan Van Sertima] hypothesizes that Africans reached America in at least two pre-Columbian stages. The first being ancient Egyptians and Nubians, who reached the Gulf of Mexico between 1200 BC and 800 BC.
> 
> The second Theoretical wave, Circa 1310 AD, the Mande/Mende people of Western Africa arrived along eastern Mexico, Panama, Ecuador, Colombia, Peru and various Caribbean islands, some 180 years before Columbus.  Although there is indications that other Mende migrations, perhaps in pre-history preceded the 14th Century wave.
> 
> Historian / linguist Leo Weiner, in his book, Africa and the Discovery of America "  wrote that Columbus was well aware of the Mandinka [Mandinga/Mande] presence in the New World, and that the West African Muslims had spread throughout the Caribbean, Central and South America, North America and even into Canada, where they were trading and intermarrying with the ...Indians. "  *Africans in Ancient America*



The Olmecs   Mende  Black Tribe of Panama  Black California Tribe
The Washitaw  The Gullahs   King Jubas Treasure  ......


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 5, 2014)

longly said:


> If that is true, why is Africa south of the Sahara in such a mess.  There is not a country  there in which I would invest any money.   *Titles and deeds are not worth the paper they are written on*; Botswana is probably the only half way decent country in the area for an investor.



Do you see what you did there? White boy thinking.  Look no further than Europe colonizing Africa as the reason. Also after the nations achieved independence Europe and the US using the new colonization tool. Money. They lend money to corrupt leaders and buy influence to start wars keeping the nations in a state of what is the equivalent of attempting to payoff a payday loan or in a constant state of strife. How or why you cant figure that out for yourself is amazing.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 5, 2014)

GreenBean said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > My grand parents on both sides told me stories of Native American ancestors and also Africans that were here before Europeans found their way over. I am not descended from any of the original Blacks that I know of but I was wondering if anyone else was aware of this?
> ...



I didnt at first either until I found out they won a court case against the US government and are recognized by the UN. How do you suppose that happened if they didn't have proof of land ownership prior to the arrival of Columbus?


----------



## GreenBean (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



 [/B].

*Wichita Kansas* [Ouachita] was actually named for this tribe - but the original people the Wichita, [Washtaw] were native Americans, Indian of the same racial stock as other Indigenous Native North Americans .  The African genes within the extant descendants of this tribe is the result of interracial breeding over the last several Centuries.

They present on their websites blatantly and ridiculously Africanized , Egyptianized artifacts as proof of their lineage from African and ancient Egyptian colonists of antiquity. * Any aspects which could point to Egyptian or African origins on these artifacts is highly accentuated.* 

Various Courts have held that the Washitaw Nation is "fictional" and that it is not recognized as a sovereign nation - [United States District Court, Eastern District Of Michigan, Southern Division Ernest Joseph Davis, Plaintiff, V. United States Of America, Et Al., Defendants. Case No. 2:08-cv-246 July 19, 2010]

That Africans migrated to North America is undeniable , but they were certainly not the ancestors of the Washitaw.

The Mende expedition is much more credible evidence of African colonization and migration, as well as the OLmecs and the Black Californians.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

GreenBean said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


*

I am aware of their claims and that's why I thought them not very credible until I found out what they had accomplished in getting at least a percentage of their land back. I know the US doesn't recognize them and that makes a ton of sense. My point and why I even started this thread is how did they win the court case for their land without proof and how is it they are recognized by the UN? That doesn't make any sense that the US would give away land to a nation they claim to not recognize unless they just wanted to shut them up.  It also doesn't make sense that the UN would recognize them.  They are literally considered a nation within the US internationally. In light of those facts I am much more inclined to give their claims some credence. To me its a very interesting subject because it only makes sense if their story is true. Check this PDF out of their UN creds.

http://www.nationalrepublicregistry.com/public/2012/FL/08.16.000003.pdf*


----------



## GreenBean (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


*

They won the case in 1991 as descendants of of the WIchita / Washtaw  but the case doe not lend any credibility to the claims of African Ancestry.

The Black Mojave are an anomaly - they were not  of the same racial stock as Native Americans - they appeared to be Black - possibly migrated from the pacific or more likely from further south and descended of Olmec and or Mende stock. But notably African .




*


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

GreenBean said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...


*

See thats what is not making sense. Why are they not recognized by the US like the other Native American tribes are then?

I have not taken a hard look at the Black Mojave yet. Do you have any good links you would recommend?*


----------



## GreenBean (Jan 6, 2014)

Not a tremendous amount on the Web re: this topic that is credible, there  are two links below but you should aso try *They Came Before Columbus: The African Presence in Ancient America* ISBN: 0812968174


[ame=http://youtu.be/3FqbXLgIXx0]Dr Ivan Van Sertima The African Presence In Ancient America part 1 of 5 - YouTube[/ame]

Sculptures Showing Africans in the Americas before Columbus

Africans in Ancient America


----------



## GreenBean (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



They are, but their gene pool is now mixed with all post-Columbian migrants . They are lumped together with other "Mojave" groups  and some reside at the Fort Mojave Indian Reservation

Black Californians

Black Californians or Black Mojave were an indigenous group of Amerindians who once occupied parts of California. The enigmatic part of their existence is that they were not of the same racial stock as the typical Amerindian, they were Negro.



> They fought the Spaniards, the Mexicans and Anglo-Americans up to the mid 1800's. Many were enslaved and later freed after slavery was abolished. Many others continued fighting and were eventually subdued. Their Descendants melted into the afro populations of the  inner cities of southwestern US and Mexico where many continue to resist civilization to this very day.  African Presence in Ancient America


----------



## westwall (Jan 6, 2014)

I think that man (of all races) has been traversing the oceans far longer than scientists and historians give them credit for.  There is substantial evidence to support a theory that there was a Celtic colony in the northeast of North America at least 1000 years before Christ.  Likewise the Chinese were here long before Columbus, etc. 

The trade between Hawaii and the other Polynesian islands is now being documented etc.

Man is a traveler.  Has always been a traveler, and will always _be_ a traveler.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

GreenBean said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



No I meant the Washitaw. Thanks for the link though.


----------



## GreenBean (Jan 6, 2014)

westwall said:


> I think that man (of all races) has been traversing the oceans far longer than scientists and historians give them credit for.  There is substantial evidence to support a theory that there was a Celtic colony in the northeast of North America at least 1000 years before Christ.  Likewise the Chinese were here long before Columbus, etc.
> 
> The trade between Hawaii and the other Polynesian islands is now being documented etc.
> 
> Man is a traveler.  Has always been a traveler, and will always _be_ a traveler.



Romans in In Ancient America

Ancient Egyptians in America

Did the Irish Discover America

Viking Discovery of America


----------



## Meathead (Jan 6, 2014)

Seems to me you dingbats are trying to convince each other; you might even succede.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Seems to me you dingbats are trying to convince each other; you might even succede.



Seems to me it really bothers the hell out of you.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Seems to me you dingbats are trying to convince each other; you might even succede.
> ...


It's a bit like watching a  train wreck which would bother me, yet is compelling. That even more so when you realize it's is self-inflicted.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Somehow i don't believe you.  When your attempts to refute evidence fail and your own evidence is ground in the dust the typical reaction is one of dismay and worry not amusement. Amusement is what I feel every time you get shot down.


----------



## Iceman (Jan 6, 2014)

I heard Columbus and Shakespeare were Aborigines...


----------



## Iceman (Jan 6, 2014)

And that Jesus was a black man, or he didn't exist.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


 I cannot bring myself to refute unbridled idiocy.

It is somewhat akin to asking me to refute this:




----------



## Meathead (Jan 6, 2014)




----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Iceman said:


> I heard Columbus and Shakespeare were Aborigines...



You need to cite something. Never heard of such a claim.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Iceman said:


> And that Jesus was a black man, or he didn't exist.



Jesus was either Black or mixed if he existed, which I believe he did. Read your bible. Its as plain as day if you are really interested.


----------



## Iceman (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > And that Jesus was a black man, or he didn't exist.
> ...



Denzel Washington said so in Malcolm X


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



I understand intelligence is indecipherable to you. Europeans felt the same way when they first experienced the Egyptian hieroglyphics. Don't sale yourself short. Give it a swing. This should be fun.


----------



## Iceman (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > I heard Columbus and Shakespeare were Aborigines...
> ...



The Nation of Islam told me


----------



## Meathead (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Blacks, who had never had a written language and were and are still unfortunately primitive people would never have had the ability to either formulate, much less decipher an ancient language. Like it or not, there are few who believe anywhere in the world that sub-Saharan blacks are anything but the simplest of Gods creatures.


----------



## westwall (Jan 6, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Seems to me you dingbats are trying to convince each other; you might even succede.








Convince each other of what?  The base of knowledge is constantly being increased.  Some people with vested interests will ignore current research and when that happens someone will come along and slap them upside the head.  That was certainly the case with the experts views on Hawaii.

This group was founded to show the experts just how wrong they were.  These folks have navigated from Tahiti (and other places) to Hawaii without the benefit of navigational aids.  Something the experts said could not be done.

Polynesian Voyaging Society

Voyages: 1976-2003

Hokule'a I by Herb Kawainui Kane

The voyages sponsored by the Polynesian Voyaging Society have provided a wealth of information for scientists, anthropologists and archaeologists about traditional Polynesian migrations, documenting one of the greatest achievement of humanity--the exploration and settlement of islands in an area of over 10 million square miles during a period of over 1,000 years. 

At the same time, as Hokule'a and Hawai'iloa traveled throughout Polynesia, they inspired among Polynesians an increased awareness and native pride in their seafaring heritage. They also sparked a revival of canoe building and sailing, arts that had not been practiced in over a hundred years. Hokule`a, the first modern replica of a voyaging canoe to make the voyage from Hawai'i to Tahiti and back, became a symbol of the richness of Polynesian culture and the seafaring heritage which links together all of the peoples of the Pacific.


2003: Voyage to Northwestern Hawaiian Islands: Click on top links on the navigation bar on the left for current information.

1999-2000: Voyage to Rapa Nui: Hokule'a reached the far southeastern corner of Polynesia, completing its modern exploration of the Polynesian Triangle.


Summer 1995: Hokule'a's West Coast Tour / Hawai'iloa's Northwest Tour: In the summer of 1995, the voyaging canoesHokule'a and Hawai'iloa were shipped to Seattle; Hokule'a travelled down the West Coast to San Diego to share the mana of the canoe with Hawaiians, native Americans, and other Americans living there. Hawai'iloa, meanwhile, went from Seattle to Juneau Alaska to visit the land of the Tlingit, Haida, and Tshimshian, who donated the logs for its hulls.


Spring 1995: Na 'Ohana Holo Moana/The Voyaging Family of the Vast Ocean: the voyaging canoes Hokule'a, Hawai'iloa, and Makali'i sailed from Hawai'i to the Marquesas and back via Tahiti and Ra'iatea. Early settlers to Hawai'i are believed to have come from the Marquesas because of the similarities of the Hawaiian and Marquesan languages.


1992: No Na Mamo/For the Children: Hokule'a sailed from Hawai'i to Rarotoga and back via Tahiti and Ra'iatea. In Rarotonga, the canoe participated in the Sixth Pacific Arts Festival celebrating the revival of traditional canoe building and navigation in the Pacific. Called "The Voyage for Education," this voyage incorporated an educational program that allowed students to follow the canoe on its journey through live, daily radio reports.


1985-87: The Voyage of Rediscovery: took Hokule'a on a 16,000 mile journey along the ancient migratory routes of the Polynesian Triangle--from Hawai`i to the Society Islands, the Cook Islands, New Zealand, Tonga, Samoa, and back home via Aitutaki, Tahiti, and Rangiroa in the Tuamotu Archipelago. This voyage showed that it was possible for Polynesian canoes to sail from west to east in the Pacific when the prevailing easterly tradewinds were replaced by seasonal westerlies.


1980: Hawai`i to Tahiti and Back:  Nainoa Thompson, who studied under Satawalese navigator Mau Piailug (see "1976: Hawai'i to Tahiti and Back" below), became the first Hawaiian navigator in over 500 years to guide a canoe over this traditional route without instruments.


1978: Voyage to Tahiti Cancelled After Canoe Swamping In 1978, a voyage to Tahiti was cancelled because Hokule'a swamped south of Moloka'i in heavy seas; crew member Eddie Aikau, who attempted to paddle on a surfboard to get help on land, was lost at sea.


1976: Hawai`i to Tahiti and Back; Satawelese navigator Mau Piailug,with a Hawaiian crew, guided Hokule'a without instruments to Tahiti, a distance of 2400 miles. Piailug was called upon to navigate because no Hawaiian knew the ancient art of guiding canoes by the celestial bodies and ocean swells.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



He did but that was a movie. Read your bible and follow the lineage. If you need help let me know.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



NOI has to my knowledge never made such a claim. As a matter of fact they hate Columbus with a passion. I need a link.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



You cant even refute anything so your opinion at this point is worthless regarding your post. If I cared what few thought I would not be successful.  Let me know when you care to step up to the plate with facts not fairy tales.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



Thats not a bible. The bible is a book with words and sentences. Like I said no shame asking for help if you cant read.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Iceman said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Iceman said:
> ...



Thats not a link.  A link is a web url that upon me clicking on it goes to a website that provides the information you claim the NOI stated.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 6, 2014)

westwall said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Seems to me you dingbats are trying to convince each other; you might even succede.
> ...


I did mention dingbats, right? 

I understand about the sea-fairing capabilities of Polynesians, but I have a very hard time with Africans who never discovered nearby islands like the Canaries or Cape Verde.

However, we are discussing two very different peoples, especially in terms of ability.


----------



## Iceman (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Iceman said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



The link is up yo ass yo. I can't be babyin yo uncle tom ass to read up on yo history. 

Read the dictionary, copy all the words down yo.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Meathead said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Who told you that Africans never discovered the islands?


----------



## Meathead (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


You've already lost, and you know it,


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Lost what?  Thats not an answer.  Who told you Africans never discovered the Canary islands?


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

Crickets?


----------



## westwall (Jan 6, 2014)

Meathead said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...










Well, they made it to Crete at least 100,000 years ago... And the first inhabitants of the Canaries were from northeast Africa....so who were _those_ people


ANAHEIM, Calif.  Human ancestors that left Africa hundreds of thousands of years ago to see the rest of the world were no landlubbers. Stone hand axes unearthed on the Mediterranean island of Crete indicate that an ancient Homo species  perhaps Homo erectus  had used rafts or other seagoing vessels to cross from northern Africa to Europe via at least some of the larger islands in between, says archaeologist Thomas Strasser of Providence College in Rhode Island.

sciencenewsSeveral hundred double-edged cutting implements discovered at nine sites in southwestern Crete date to at least 130,000 years ago and probably much earlier, Strasser reported January 7 at the annual meeting of the American Institute of Archaeology. Many of these finds closely resemble hand axes fashioned in Africa about 800,000 years ago by H. erectus, he says. It was around that time that H. erectus spread from Africa to parts of Asia and Europe.


Hominids Went Out of Africa on Rafts - Wired Science

Canary Islands History - The Early History of the Canary Islands


----------



## westwall (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Crickets?





I think he finally googled the history of the islands and figured out he was......wait for it.....WRONG!


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

westwall said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Not to mention they made it 1077 miles to Madagascar as well.


----------



## GreenBean (Jan 6, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Sub Saharan Africa boasts some of the most primitive civilizations on Earth , it is still largely a Hunter-Gatherer society save for Westernization.  But I believe that is irrelevant to the OP , Africans are probably the original Human Beings from which the rest of us have been descended and they migrated extensively - across the Indian Ocean to Austrailia and region, and across the Atlantic to the Americas.



> The ruler of the West African Empire of Mali had been assured by scholars that the world was round and new lands lay on the other side of the vast ocean. This ruler decided to find out , he assembled enough soldiers ,craftsmen and supplies to build an armada of ships of all types and sizes.  The fleet sailed, the following year only one ship returned, that of a captain who had reversed course just as the fleet was caught by a powerful westward-flowing current . The captain bore no news other than that he had seen the rest of the ships continue westward.
> 
> Obsessed ,The ruler  would try again with a similar fleet paid for with the gold and sweat of his empire. The ships of this voyage carried colonists and trade goods. On the deck of the "Flag ship" was placed a throne. The ruler would lead the second voyage himself.  When all preparations were made, he handed over the government of Mali to his brother [Mansa Musa] and departed. The ruler and his fleet never returned .  Where or If  Malis ruler ever landed is uncertain, but there is some speculation that he finally arrived in the New World, and settled with hundreds of followers.
> 
> ...


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 6, 2014)

GreenBean said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I'm surprised you give this any credence. I've met many that need stuff like this to be peer reviewed by 10 different university PHD's before believing it without adding a "but.." to it.

 Remember that primitive is not a fact its a viewpoint. People look at Western civilization and call it primitive. Also its not probably There is no doubt. DNA has already proven that everyone comes from Africa.


----------



## GreenBean (Jan 6, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



DNA has only proven that African genes / Mitochondria. are present in all Human beings - *it's not a proven fact* It's an accepted theory - and that's all it can ever be - unless you invent some magical time travel device.

Primitive - is just that PRIMITIVE in relation to TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED - *Cut the Semantics will you !?  *


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 7, 2014)

GreenBean said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



Thats correct. That DNA was mapped back to a person in Africa named Eve. There is no other theory that makes sense unless you are saying they may still discover older homo sapiens DNA that Eve descended from.  

I'm not using semantics I am expanding your mind set. Technology is only good if you can use it. If your lifestyle dictates you have no use for a computer how is it more technologically advanced to create one?  For example if you were lost in the desert would you use your cell phone to locate water under the surface or the technology that natives have been using with success for centuries. Its a matter of perspective not fact.


----------



## Godboy (Jan 7, 2014)

"Mitochondrial Eve" is estimated to have lived between 99,000 and 200,000 years ago. They just found human remains in Spain that date back 400,000 years. Sorry, but that predates your eve by 200,000 years. You lose.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 7, 2014)

Godboy said:


> "Mitochondrial Eve" is estimated to have lived between 99,000 and 200,000 years ago. They just found human remains in Spain that date back 400,000 years. Sorry, but that predates your eve by 200,000 years. You lose.



No I didn't lose if you have a link. I like learning the truth no matter what.

Edit

Thats not homo sapiens sapiens dip shit. Those are the Denisovans. They went the way of the Neandrathals.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/science/at-400000-years-oldest-human-dna-yet-found-raises-new-mysteries.html?_r=0



> *Humans&#8217; ancestors, meanwhile, stayed in Africa*, giving rise to Homo sapiens about 200,000 years ago. Humans then expanded from Africa into Asia and Europe about 60,000 years ago. *They then interbred not only with Neanderthals, but with Denisovans, too. Later, both the Denisovans and Neanderthals became extinct.*


----------



## Godboy (Jan 7, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Godboy said:
> 
> 
> > "Mitochondrial Eve" is estimated to have lived between 99,000 and 200,000 years ago. They just found human remains in Spain that date back 400,000 years. Sorry, but that predates your eve by 200,000 years. You lose.
> ...



How could you have missed this? It was pretty big news. http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/09/health/oldest-human-dna/

I take it back though, because it isn't EXACTLY a human remain, but it is a close relaitive.


----------



## JQPublic1 (Jan 7, 2014)

Godboy said:


> "Mitochondrial Eve" is estimated to have lived between 99,000 and 200,000 years ago. They just found human remains in Spain that date back 400,000 years. Sorry, but that predates your eve by 200,000 years. You lose.



NOPE... he doesn't lose! The Mitochrondial Eve is still the mother of all humans living today.
Other humans preceded her and lived along side her but their gene pools died out while her's survived.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 7, 2014)

Godboy said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Godboy said:
> ...



I didnt miss it. It just has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Let me give you a tip though. it wont hurt my feelings if they find out that Eves descendant came from another continent.  I like true history no matter what.



> "It's quite clear that this is not a direct ancestor of people today," said Svante Paabo, a biologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and senior author of the study.
> Instead, he said, *this representative of an early humanlike species*, called Homo heidelbergensis, could be an ancestor of both Neanderthals and another group called the De nisovans.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 7, 2014)

Who cares. The people that remained in Africa, along with their Aboriginal cousin, became the primitive people in the world while others developed civilizations and made huge advances. Even the Maya, Aztec and Inca were light years ahead of sub-Saharan Africa without infusion from other civilizations.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Who cares. The people that remained in Africa, along with their Aboriginal cousin, became the primitive people in the world while others developed civilizations and made huge advances. Even the Maya, Aztec and Inca were light years ahead of sub-Saharan Africa without infusion from other civilizations.



As usual you are too stupid for your own good. Olmecs were influenced by Africans. They later influenced every advanced society in South and probably North America.


----------



## JQPublic1 (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Who cares. The people that remained in Africa, along with their Aboriginal cousin, became the primitive people in the world while others developed civilizations and made huge advances. Even the Maya, Aztec and Inca were light years ahead of sub-Saharan Africa without infusion from other civilizations.



Just because Blacks seem to have been in a perpetual primitive state in Africa doesnt mean ALL Blacks were. Here is a parallel that illustrates
how  groups who look almost identical can develop socially  and technologically in diametrically opposite ways

Indian Civilization was well established by the time Europeans arrived in South America. The great pyramids of Mexico had been built and,  in some ways, Indian technology was superior to that of the invaders specifically in the field of astronomy. Even then, that which would later be called Mexico city was a sprawling metropolis.


Still, other Indians lived in and roamed the nearby forests; content to live a primitive lifestyle. Such tribes are still being discovered today. A closer look at photographs shows a  phenotype  similar to the civilized people in the cities.

My question is: Could the same phenomenon have happened in Africa? I believe the original people of KMT(Egypt) were Black and lived along side primitive tribes who looked just like them. In time, though, wars and other interactions with outsiders from Asia and Arabia diluted the Black gene pool and a race of mulattos emerged ... ensconcing  themselves among the populace even unto the ruling elite.

Eventually the Macedonians conquered the new cosmopolitan KMT and  the Greeks renamed it Egypt, symbolically erasing all connections with the original Black founders and the name KMT: an ancient name that means land of the Blacks. 

Nevertheless, the Rulers of KMT may have been involved in Ocean expeditions. After all, according to scripture, they were brothers of the Phoenicians... the people of the sea!

Now before someone figures out the time lines don't match, let me say this. There is new evidence that suggests that the OLMECS thrived in the Americas as early as 3100 BCE... NOT 1200 BCE or 1500 BCE as recorded for posterity. That date would put them in the same era as the Black rulers of KMTand we have a new ball game!


----------



## GreenBean (Jan 7, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Actually goes back to 7 variations - 7 daughters of Eve 
I like my Divining stick - lol


----------



## Meathead (Jan 7, 2014)

JQPublic1 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Who cares. The people that remained in Africa, along with their Aboriginal cousin, became the primitive people in the world while others developed civilizations and made huge advances. Even the Maya, Aztec and Inca were light years ahead of sub-Saharan Africa without infusion from other civilizations.
> ...


Problem here is the ancient Egyptians were not black and neither were the Olmecs and repeating that they were is not going to change anything.

It's a bit pathetic and more than a bit sleazy trying to take credit for the achievements of others.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 7, 2014)

Sunni Man said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Well actually Cortez named California after a mythical African Queen Califia because he saw Blacks there.
> ...



Before you spend much time ridiculing him, you might want to do some research.

The idea that Africans were among the first to immigrate to these continents is becoming more and more accepted.  Anthropologists are finding more evidence.

RaceandHistory.com - BLACK CIVILIZATIONS OF ANCIENT AMERICA

In Brazil found skulls that are clearly African and predate any European settlers.  (Scientific American, Sept 2000)

Who Were the First Americans?

Of course, you are free to laugh at these scientists as well.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Yet you swear you dont care.  The only problem (for you at least) is that you are sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the DNA evidence that emphatically says the genetic make up the ancient Egyptians is 96% sub-Saharan (I'm only 72%) and that they come from the Great Lakes region of Africa which is located in central Africa.  Funny thing is that this where they said they came from in the first place and what so called Afrocentrists have been saying for years. DNA pretty much shuts down all arguments unless you are stupid. I cannot force you to not be ignorant.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 7, 2014)

WinterBorn said:


> Sunni Man said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


|Scientific American is something I might give credence to, but there is nothing there to suggest or support your claim. The other ditzy sites posted by Asc and yourself are simply fodder for mind numbing Afrocentrics. Hell, Madagascar, a huge island off the African coast was first populated peoples from Borneo and other islands off the African coast remained undiscovered until the arrival of Europeans. The first Africans to make the trans-Atlantic voyage were in slave ships

Facts suck, eh?


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...



In the words of Godboy you lose...again.



> Initial human settlement of Madagascar occurred between 350 BCE and 550 CE by *Austronesian peoples arriving on outrigger canoes from Borneo. These were joined around 1000 CE by Bantu migrants crossing the Mozambique Channel.*



Madagascar - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Austronesian people are descendents of Negritos/Aboriginal people. They are Black. Bantus are Black.  Let me give you some European code words for Black so you don't get fooled so easily next time.

Melanesian
Negrito
Australoid
Austronesian
Moor
Canaanites
Carthaginians
Egyptian
Bantu
Khoi-san
Bushmen

I know from personal experience that they were there long before what Wiki says. The Bantu natives of Madagascar claim they have been there for far longer.  The French have helped the the  Indonesian contingent control the politics in a caste system much like India.


----------



## WinterBorn (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Sunni Man said:
> ...



My apologies.  When I posted that link I forgot that I have a membership that allows me to see full archives.  The link did not show that.


----------



## westwall (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Who cares. The people that remained in Africa, along with their Aboriginal cousin, became the primitive people in the world while others developed civilizations and made huge advances. Even the Maya, Aztec and Inca were light years ahead of sub-Saharan Africa without infusion from other civilizations.









And the sub Saharan Africans were light years ahead of you apparently.  Here's a clue, if you're going to make disparaging comments about a whole race of people I suggest you actually do some research beyond what you find in the toilet bowl after you take a dump.

Look up Great Zimbabwe sometime....


----------



## Meathead (Jan 7, 2014)

Some developed glorious civilizations while others remained stone-aged. If truth ruffles feathers, so be it.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Some developed glorious civilizations while others remained stone-aged. If truth ruffles feathers, so be it.



Translation. "Smoke is pouring from my ears. I will never admit it but I cant believe how stupid I am."


----------



## Pheonixops (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Some developed glorious civilizations while others remained stone-aged. If truth ruffles feathers, so be it.



At least you are saying "some" now instead of hurling inaccurate blanket generalizations.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 7, 2014)

Pheonixops said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Some developed glorious civilizations while others remained stone-aged. If truth ruffles feathers, so be it.
> ...


The aboriginals of Australia and pockets elsewhere who did not have the opportunity of infusion from other cultures, including South American tribes, New Guinea and so on. Sub-Saharan Africa stands alone because there could have been diffusion from Arab traders but that was found only on the periphery in places like Timbuktu. Civilization spread elsewhere as did writing, but never manifested itself in the dark continent.


----------



## westwall (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...








The ruins of Great Zimbabwe show that statement to be utterly false.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Depends on what you call civilization. Your civilization may not appear to be civilization to someone else. Who said what you think civilization consists of is how everyone else defines it? For instance a lot of the African civilizations placed heavy emphasis on oral history. You may not believe they are legit but who put you in charge of that determination for someone else?


----------



## Meathead (Jan 7, 2014)

westwall said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...


The ruins of "great" Zimbabwe show nothing more than some were able to stone walls. It is indeed odd that the ability to do so is heralded by Afrocentrists as a landmark achievement considering the  breadth of the continent. It is akin to my boasting that my child was able to stack three bricks together
without knowing that he actually did so.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Thats usually how ruins look. Thats why they are called that. You have to use your imagination to see it as it was in its full glory. The pyramids don't look too hot either compared to how they looked in their hay day. But whatever.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 7, 2014)

Damn look how old this article is. Back in 2000. What do you have to do to get this stuff on the news instead of all the doom and gloom the media likes reporting? A whole fleet of 60-80 ft boats found in Egypt dated to 3000 BC.

After 5,000 Year Voyage, World&#39;s Oldest Built Boats Deliver -- Archeologists&#39; First Look Confirms Existence Of Earliest Royal Boats At Abydos


----------



## westwall (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...







Well, I must say...you ARE aptly named!


----------



## JQPublic1 (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Pheonixops said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Meathead, if the Sphinx became animated and gave a news conference declaring his Black African roots, people like you would still deny it. Your career of excoriating Blacks is readily available for all to see. You arent here to discuss the issue objectively, you are here to spread your seeds of hatred, to disrupt  rationale, and disrespect  blacks and their friends who will give you audience.

Even as you recklessly attempt to exclude Egypt from the Dark Continent it remains firmly implanted in Africa. Egypt is African, not European. And, although the Sahara is used as a dividing line to buttress that falsehood  Egypt is still an African country. BTW, the Sahara was green about 12 to 10 thousand years ago which would have allowed people from the South to live, hunt and travel freely between North and South!


BTW since we are talking about 12000 years ago consider this:

Some scientists date the Sphinx back to 10,000 BC due to erosion said to have been caused by heavy rains that occurred back thenwhen the Sahara was GREEN
That means KMT started over 12000 years ago when "sub=Saharan" Africans were not hindered by the burning sands of the Sahara.


----------



## GreenBean (Jan 7, 2014)

Meathead said:


> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



It's mot certain whether the Olmecs were black or not - but there is circumstantial evidence that lends credibility to the theory



> The Olmec Writing is Unique. The Signs are similar to the writing used by the Vai people of West Africa. The Olmecs spoke an aspect of the Manding (Malinke-Bambara) language spoken in West Africa.
> 
> Both the Olmec and epi-Olmec had hieroglyphic writing systems. Olmec is a syllabic writing system used in the Olmec heartland from 900 BC- AD 450.
> Olmec writing





> It has been claimed that the Olmecs used the Mending/Mende script, a writing system used among Africans in West Africa . Controversy surrounds the presence of writing among the Olmecs. Some scholars have maintained that the Olmec writing was identical to the Manding writing used in West Africa. While others believe that the Olmecs possessed an iconography but not a writing system.
> 
> An important paper on the Mayan writing that helped in the decipherment of the Olmec Writing was published by a Nineteenth Century scholar named Rafinesque . In this paper he discussed the fact that the Mayan glyphs were broken down into their constituent parts, they were analogous to the ancient Libyco-Berber writing, which originated in North Africa.
> 
> African Presence in Ancient America




*Your claim that the Egyptians were not Black is highly Debunkable*

Greek Scholar Herodotus, called by some the "father of history", wrote that Egyptians had *black skin and woolly hair*.

While Strabo, an ancient Greek geographer and writer wrote that the Egyptians resembled the people of northern India. Who although they were part of the Indo-Aryan race- they were Dark Skinned.

and below you will see an ancient Egyptian Graphic depicted both Eurasian and African races


----------



## Meathead (Jan 8, 2014)

JQPublic1 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Pheonixops said:
> ...


Hatred has nothing to do with any of this. Silly pseudo-history concocted in desperation for a legacy for sub-Saharan Africans is not going to fly, no way, no how. Get over it.


----------



## JQPublic1 (Jan 8, 2014)

Meathead said:


> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Oh yes; your hatred clouds your mind and narrows your tunnel vision even more. You continue to nurture your deep seated prejudices while apparently losing contact with the real world around you.

Africa and Africans have changed a lot since the 1800s, an era in which your racist mind seems to be stuck. I know you are aware that African immigrants to the USA and UK and excelling in Academiaoutperforming even the Asians!



> March 19, 2007
> 
> Black Immigrants, An Invisible 'Model Minority'
> 
> ...





Black Immigrant Model Minorities | Far Outliers

If the above article is true, and there is no reason to believe it isnt, it brings into focus chilling revelations for low level historians like yourself. The high achievements of these Blacks suggests that their ancestors were just as capable as they are. The Sphinx, the Pyramids and KMT itself have been reaffirmed as the products of purely Black African genius and imagination by this. No matter what low opinion you put forward from now on concerning Africa everyone knows that YOU, as an individual, are inferior to millions of them. Remember, a dumb mind wrapped in a white body is no better than the  primitive he/she disdains and a damn sight worst than high cognitive Blacks.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 8, 2014)

JQPublic1 said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > JQPublic1 said:
> ...


WTF does any of that have to do with the history of sub-Saharan blacks? Appropriating the history of other cultures and races is just sleazy, not to mention desperate.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 8, 2014)

Meathead said:


> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



The Egyptians were sub-saharan. You just dont want to admit it despite the DNA evidence.  Its ok but you do look pretty stupid denying it.


----------



## longly (Jan 8, 2014)

If you really want to know who the ancient Egyptians were look at the hair of the ancient Egyptian mummies.  If the cross section is flat, only Negroid* peoples have flat spiral hair, they were black if the cross section is not flat they were not black.  This has been done and it showed that they were not, for the most part, black. If  you believe that the scholar got it wrong, redo the study and prove her wrong, it is called peer review.   

*I am not trying to be offensive; it is a good descriptive word. I would be just as willing to use the African term Congoid if it was more generally understood.


----------



## JQPublic1 (Jan 8, 2014)

CLUELESS MEATHEAD said:
			
		

> WTF does any of that have to do with the history of sub-Saharan blacks? Appropriating the history of other cultures and races is just sleazy, not to mention desperate.



 You didn't see the answer staring you in the face? I guess I have to hold your hand like a little baby and make it easier for you to comprehend... READ!!



			
				JQPUBLIC1 and repeated for the daffy!  said:
			
		

> Black Immigrant Model Minorities | Far Outliers
> 
> If the above article is true, and there is no reason to believe it isnt, it brings into focus chilling revelations for low level historians like yourself. The high achievements of these Blacks suggests that their ancestors were just as capable as they are. The Sphinx, the Pyramids and KMT itself have been reaffirmed as the products of purely Black African genius and imagination by this. No matter what low opinion you put forward from now on concerning Africa everyone knows that YOU, as an individual, are inferior to millions of them. Remember, a dumb mind wrapped in a white body is no better than the primitive he/she disdains and a damn sight worst than high cognitive Blacks.


----------



## JQPublic1 (Jan 8, 2014)

longly said:


> If you really want to know who the ancient Egyptians were look at the hair of the ancient Egyptian mummies.  If the cross section is flat, only Negroid* peoples have flat spiral hair, they were black if the cross section is not flat they were not black.  This has been done and it showed that they were not, for the most part, black. If  you believe that the scholar got it wrong, redo the study and prove her wrong, it is called peer review.
> 
> *I am not trying to be offensive; it is a good descriptive word. I would be just as willing to use the African term Congoid if it was more generally understood.



Give us a link! When you say "ancient Egyptian mummies" I wonder what dynasty you are referring to. I would also like to know if any Black scientists were present during the study.
Also, have you  considered that mullatos may have hair that may not show the flat spiral you seem so anxious to focus on? But, beyond that, some Blacks have naturally straight hair.

Another thing. Since you said "for the most part" the hair samples were not those of Blacks
does that mean some were?


----------



## JQPublic1 (Jan 8, 2014)

HERE IS ONE OF THOSE AFRICANS WITH NATURALLY STRAIGHT HAIR


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 8, 2014)

longly said:


> If you really want to know who the ancient Egyptians were look at the hair of the ancient Egyptian mummies.  If the cross section is flat, only Negroid* peoples have flat spiral hair, they were black if the cross section is not flat they were not black.  This has been done and it showed that they were not, for the most part, black. If  you believe that the scholar got it wrong, redo the study and prove her wrong, it is called peer review.
> 
> *I am not trying to be offensive; it is a good descriptive word. I would be just as willing to use the African term Congoid if it was more generally understood.



I never heard this.  How does hair appearance trump DNA?  That's like genetics. You know like the genetics that prove we all came from a women in Africa? Either way not only do some Black Africans have straight hair without being mixed, the embalming process would have straightened the hair of someone with kinky textured hair as well.


----------



## JQPublic1 (Jan 8, 2014)

IS IT POSSIBLE THAT  ANTHROPOLOGICAL SCIENTISTS LOOKING AT MUMMIES IN EGYPT BASING RACE ON HAIR TYPE COULD BE EXAMINING ONE OF THIS KID"S ANCESTORS?


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 8, 2014)

This is from another company that tested Tuts DNA

Tut Gene  Note that NA's on the east coast of the US have this gene. More evidence
The King Tut Gene

The Thuya Gene
The Thuya Gene


----------



## longly (Jan 9, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> I never heard this.  How does hair appearance trump DNA?  That's like genetics. You know like the genetics that prove we all came from a women in Africa? Either way not only do some Black Africans have straight hair without being mixed, the embalming process would have straightened the hair of someone with kinky textured hair as well.



 Mathilda's Anthropology Blog: The vast majority of hair samples discovered at the site were cynotrichous (Caucasian) in type as opposed to heliotrichous (Negroid), a feature which is standard through dynastic times .

I it is the Cross section of the hair that matters not the straightness.

It means so much to you Afrocentrics that I would like to tell you that your Afrocentric theories are correct. But I cant, I am personally dedicated to the concept science and I cant say something that I dont believe to be true.  The truth is the truth and should be honored for its own sake. This philosophy has given us the standard of living that we have in the West.


----------



## longknife (Jan 9, 2014)

Ohmahgawd! Don't you have anything else to do but post trash like this?


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 9, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I never heard this.  How does hair appearance trump DNA?  That's like genetics. You know like the genetics that prove we all came from a women in Africa? Either way not only do some Black Africans have straight hair without being mixed, the embalming process would have straightened the hair of someone with kinky textured hair as well.
> ...



You claim to to be dedicated to science but you dispute DNA evidence?  Somehow that doesn't make sense. Us "Afrocentrics" did not run the DNA tests.  White people did. How do you explain 3 different sources coming back with same findings that the Egyptians were South and Central African in origin? Where is your scientific proof that they were not Black Africans?  I'll be waiting.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 9, 2014)

Afrocentrics are probably the most dogmatic and simple people possible. Africa's relevance to the advancement of human civilization is incredibly modest.

I do like watermelon, and I do believe in giving credit where credit is due. That's about it.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 9, 2014)

BTW Logly I checked out your girls blog and I about fell out laughing. i was wondering why you didn't link your source.  This is from 2008 and she has been clearly debunked by DNA evidence.  Not that she was ever even a valid source in the first place but she was clearly prejudiced against the notion that the Egyptians were Black.  

About me and my blog | Mathilda's Anthropology Blog.



> Personally *Im currently an anthropology student,* now my youngest has started school. Hence the lighter blogging schedule these days. Ive been blogging nearly two years now.



Didnt you say you were into science? Let me get this straight. You believe the word of an anthropology *student* over trained geneticists from 3 different sources? Is this what you are really saying?


----------



## longknife (Jan 9, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Afrocentrics are probably the most dogmatic and simple people possible. Africa's relevance to the advancement of human civilization is incredibly modest.
> 
> I do like watermelon, and I do believe in giving credit where credit is due. That's about it.



And don't forget frying. Before that, civilized people either roasted or stewed their meats.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 9, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Afrocentrics are probably the most dogmatic and simple people possible. Africa's relevance to the advancement of human civilization is incredibly modest.
> 
> I do like watermelon, and I do believe in giving credit where credit is due. That's about it.



Egyptian Rhind Mathematical papyrus

BBC Radio 4 - A History of the World in 100 Objects, The Beginning of Science and Literature (1500 - 700 BC), Rhind Mathematical Papyrus

Egyptian Medical Papyrus

Egyptian medical papyri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 9, 2014)

longknife said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Afrocentrics are probably the most dogmatic and simple people possible. Africa's relevance to the advancement of human civilization is incredibly modest.
> ...



Ramesses III - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> Ancient Genetics
> According to a genetic study in December 2012, Egyptian Monarch Ramesses III belonged to Y-DNA haplogroup E1b1a with an East Africa Origin, a YDNA haplogroup that *predominates in most Sub-Saharan Africans*.[26]


----------



## Meathead (Jan 9, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Afrocentrics are probably the most dogmatic and simple people possible. Africa's relevance to the advancement of human civilization is incredibly modest.
> ...


Your only problem there, and it is a big one, is that Egyptians weren't black. I am Greek, and ""melachrinos" meant dark-skinned and and still does today. In antiquity "Ethiopian" was used for blacks and the term "mavros" (black) is today.

As much as you may wish it, there is no way any people with straight and lighter-colored hair could be sub-Saharan Africans.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 9, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



DNA says you are wrong. How did you miss that? 



> The interesting thing about what Herodotus wrote is that had he believed the Egyptians to be any other color than black like other Africans he could have chosen other Greek words than the one he chose. *His word is melaschroes, black-skinned*. *If Herodotus thought the Egyptians were white he would have used leucochroes*. Had they been simply brown, like so many African Americans, he may have used phrenychroes, but he chose the word melaschroes. *This word comes from the same root as Melanesia, the black island, or melanite, a black garnet. The ancient Greek use of "melas" was precise.* Egypt is in Africa. Why shouldn't the ancient Egyptians be anything other than black?



You must be lying about being Greek or you are ignorant of your own language.  BTW you are correct about one thing. The Greeks did use Ethiopian to describe the Nubians. That is another Black civilization down the road from Egypt.  I got some more info on that coming so you have no doubt about what the Greek thought.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 9, 2014)

Physiognomonica - Aristotle - Google Books



> The Greek philosopher Aristotle writes in the 4th century B.C. in Physiognomonica that the *"Egyptians and Ethiopians were very black."*



Any other concerns you need covered?


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 9, 2014)

Hey MeatHead check this one out.


----------



## longly (Jan 9, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> BTW Logly I checked out your girls blog and I about fell out laughing. i was wondering why you didn't link your source.  This is from 2008 and she has been clearly debunked by DNA evidence.  Not that she was ever even a valid source in the first place but she was clearly prejudiced against the notion that the Egyptians were Black.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am not refuting anything.  I am not able to post links because I have not posted here enough, but I would be willing to look at your  link if you are be willing  post it here so I dont have to look for it; I am short of time. My search came up with nothing.  If you have irrefutable proof that settles it; I have no investment one way or the other in this subject. But I dont believe  that is true for Afrocentric scholars they seemed to be prejudiced towards finding that help them sell book to Afrocentric readers. In order for them to sell books they have to tell their readers what they want to hear..

I believe that grad students general work under the supervision of a professor and that it is a generally accepted practice.


----------



## JQPublic1 (Jan 9, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I never heard this.  How does hair appearance trump DNA?  That's like genetics. You know like the genetics that prove we all came from a women in Africa? Either way not only do some Black Africans have straight hair without being mixed, the embalming process would have straightened the hair of someone with kinky textured hair as well.
> ...



You still haven't revealed the site of your illusions. If the bodies examined were from the time of Ptolemy's rule they are going to be Greek. Those found way before KMT became Egypt would be Black... woolly or straight haired. 

Your crude hair analysis is not a good determinant of race. Although KMT was originally founded and built by  Black Kings and Pharaohs, later racial admixture would void any positive conclusion concerning cross sections of hair except for those that were positively  identified as Black African.
                                     ++++++++

You say you are dedicated to the concept of science yet you ignore the DNA factor that 
Asclepias has been so kind to present for us. That is irrefutable science that ought to be evidence enough for even the most fastidious empiricist. Why don't you accept it? Is it because you are harboring something more sinister inside?


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 9, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > BTW Logly I checked out your girls blog and I about fell out laughing. i was wondering why you didn't link your source.  This is from 2008 and she has been clearly debunked by DNA evidence.  Not that she was ever even a valid source in the first place but she was clearly prejudiced against the notion that the Egyptians were Black.
> ...



It just seems weird you think an anthropology student working under a professor knows more about DNA than trained geneticists.  Scroll up and you will see at least 1 link right on this page showing Rameses III  DNA. I also posted a 2 links from a genetic company called DNAConsultants. wiki is available to you correct?


----------



## longly (Jan 14, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...




I looked at your link and you are correct in what it says, but Family Tree DNA is an enterpriser that is dependent on black customers, it may be a case of telling the customers what they want to hear.  I would like to see academic confirmation in the from of peer review. I am not saying it is not true; I am saying that I am suspicious. But even if it is true one man does not make a whole nation. Few people disagree that ancient Egypt was a mixed country with the south being more black the rest of the country.   I believe ancient Egypt looked a lot like it does today which is predominantly  Caucasian.  

Afrocentrics have lost credibility for some the outrageous things that they have claimed. Afrocentric have claimed that both the Carthaginians and Cleopatra were black neither of which is true. So I remain suspicious of any Afrocentric claim. 

Also, I was not talking about DNA but cross sections of hair; something much easier to review than DNA and in this case just as valid and all one needs is a microscope.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 14, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...



Maybe you completely missed the implications of just that one man being that percentage of sub-saharan DNA.  That would mean his father, grandfather, great grandfather etc were also Black. Are you saying their was a ruling class of Blacks over a mixed society? If so were is your proof of this? Early white historians have zero credibility as they have been caught in several serious breaches, omissions, and outright lies.


----------



## longly (Jan 16, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Maybe you completely missed the implications of just that one man being that percentage of sub-saharan DNA. That would mean his father, grandfather, great grandfather etc were also Black. Are you saying their was a ruling class of Blacks over a mixed society?

Lonely wrote: At more time yes, stranger things have happen in history. There once was an ancient Roman emperor whos father was a slave.  





 If so were is your proof of this? Early white historians have zero credibility as they have been caught in several serious breaches, omissions, and outright lies.

Longly wrote: I try not to imply all of anything; everybody cant be wrong. 

You know that genes are swapped randomly during conception. A person could be Caucasian in all appearances and still have some black, Negroid, Congoid DNA and the opposite is also true. According to USA DNA Most Southern white in the US from old southern families probably have at least two to three percent black DNA.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 16, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...



I think you got confused somewhere along the line.  White were in Europe during the time the pyramids were built.  There is no record of whites ever being in Egypt until after Greece became the first country in Europe around 800 BCE.  Where did these whites come from and where did they go leaving absolutely no record?  You have to have something other than you think this is what happened.  As I pointed out:


> The Greek philosopher Aristotle writes in the 4th century B.C. in Physiognomonica that the "Egyptians and Ethiopians were very black."


He never mentioned anyone being very white.  How do you explain this enigma?  What makes more sense to you? That white people rose up from the Ice ages in Europe, traveled to Africa, built a great civilization in Africa under the supervision of a Black ruling class and then left and went back to Europe and never built anything like Egypt or that the Black people that actually lived there built, developed and governed Egypt?  And yes "everybody" can be wrong. Remember the flat earth crowd? The ironic thing is your claim of "everybody" is not even true. There are plenty of white scholars and historians that advocate an all Black Egypt.


----------



## longly (Jan 17, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



You either are confused or bad at exaggerating.  When I agreed that is was possible that a black could be a Egyptian pharaoh I did not mean that all Pharoses were black.  The Bible states that Joseph , a Hebrew , rose in Egypt to be only second to the pharaoh himself. A cleaver and unscrupulous man capable of rising that high from slavery could seize power for himself. 


Also, I never said or implied the that ancient Egyptians where white. There were some whites in ancient Egypt if the wall painting are to be believed, but they were a minority , most likely war captives.   The majority of ancient Egyptians were  Caucasians, but not whites. There actually is no such thing as a white race; white is just another term for Europeans and Europeans are just one group of Caucasians. All Caucasians no matter where they live or what their skin tone is originate from one tribe of people form prehistoric Central Asia. 

They came from the Eurasian steppes and settled in the Middle East  either before and just after the last Ice Age and displaced the few Negroid peoples who lived in the area.  Sometime later they moved into North Africa including the a Nile valley and did the same thing there. This is a recurring migration pattern through out history. There have been numerous migration invasion from the North, but there has only been one from the South, the Nubians.  

The people of present day Egypt are predominately Caucasians it is much more logical to believe they came  from the Eurasian steppes than to believe that a mythical black population was exterminated by  invading Islamic Arabs. The Arabs were not interested in exterminating but converting.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 22, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...



Where is your proof that the majority of ancient egyptians were Caucasians? Do you have anything at all that proves this?  Also you are wrong about there being only one migration out of Africa. The facts point to the first migration which resulted in the Aborigines and the Negritos.  What would much later become the so called caucasian migrated next, followed by the same Black people that populated Nubia, Kemet, India, and Sumer. Whites came about as a result of the Ice Age. All the Pharaohs were Black until Persia invaded.  Please show me the evidence that refutes the mountains of evidence that the egyptians were Black sub-saharans as the Greek historians said themselves.  Do you have even 1 link?

http://atlantablackstar.com/2013/10/25/10-arguments-that-proves-ancient-egyptians-were-black/2/


----------



## longly (Jan 24, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



What happened to all those hypothetical black Egyptians, extermination camps?  In ancient times Egypt was the most  populated country in their part of the world. The Persians were Caucasians but they were a minority in Egypt. They didnt defeat the Egyptian because they out numbered them but because  the Egyptian couldnt get their act together. 


The problem with Afro-Centric sources is that  Afrocentrics  are so invested in  the outcome that some invent their own facts. Just because a people have live in Africa for thousands of years does not make them black. 

I know that you wont believe  me, but it means so much to you that I would like to tell you that you are right, but I cant lie.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 24, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...



Its not that I don't believe you. Its that so far you have yet to show me any proof.  Not even 1 link except to claim hair samples from mummies that have been DNA tested to be Black sub-saharan Africans.  The problem with that is that you lack any credibility. If you want to claim something please back it up like I did.  I know you would like to be right but I'm sorry. You just haven't proven your claim. Not even a little bit.  How could I possibly believe you without any evidence that refutes what I have?


----------



## Godboy (Jan 24, 2014)

No one believes you Asclepias. When are you going to understand that? We dont buy your made up history.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 24, 2014)

Godboy said:


> No one believes you Asclepias. When are you going to understand that? We dont buy your made up history.


Amen, few are that ignorant and overwhelmingly the few who are really want to believe.

Asc can babble til he's white in the face.


----------



## longly (Jan 25, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Do you agree that that the people of present day Egypt are predominantly Caucasian?

How do you explain that? And by the way I think you are an ok guy and reasonably intelegant you just want to believe it, the Afrocentric line, too badly.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 26, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...



What does the modern population of Egypt have to do with the ancient Black Africans that built Kemet?  Thats like asking me if the if the predominant people in the US are Caucasian.  

Its not a line I believe. Its the preponderance of evidence i believe.  So far all you have is hair from mummies already proven by DNA to be sub-saharan.  I think you want to stay with the fable that the Egyptians were caucasian against all the facts showing they weren't.  All I am asking is for evidence that refutes the evidence I have. Do you have anything?


----------



## longly (Jan 26, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



My job is so demanding that I have little time for research, but when  I do find something that is not  Afrocentric there is greater chance that it is valid. The problem with Afrocentric sources is that there is a small army of black researchers out there both professional and amateur that are determine to prove that  all good things came from Africa.  The professionals a have an  additional motivation in that it could lead to a book; blacks buy books that validate what they want to believe.  A scientist with a vested interest makes for a very poor scientist.  

And, when was this done: Not even 1 link except to claim hair samples from mummies that have been DNA tested to be Black sub-Saharan Africans.  


It would be very easy to determine if the ancient Egypt were a black nation or not, just look at the cross section of  a wide range of  hair samples from ancient Egyptian Mummies;  if the cross section of the hair is flat they wee black if not they were Caucasian. It  would be just that simple. 


Egypt has always been mixed to some extent so if an afrocentric scholar was willing to pick and chose test samples he can prove anything he wants on paper, but not in reality.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 26, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...



You see I feel the exact same way about Eurocentric researchers.  They have already been caught lying about history so many times that they lack credibility.  For instance they taught for about 40-50 years that life begin in Europe during the early 1900's. They did this with a fake find called Piltdown man

Piltdown Man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> The Piltdown hoax is perhaps the most famous paleoanthropological hoax ever to have been perpetrated. *It is prominent for two reasons: the attention paid to the issue of human evolution, and the length of time (more than 40 years) that elapsed from its discovery to its full exposure as a forgery.*



How did they not realize it was a forgery for 40 plus years?  They had an agenda like you claim the Afrocentrist do. if I am going to be fooled, it will be in my favor.  Since DNA is more reliable than hair analysis your suggestion is simply silly. Why would we examine hair when we have DNA that already says they are Black?  Egypt was not mixed until after Persia invaded. Even then the Greek historians still called the Egyptians Black as I pointed out earlier.  What i dont understand is if you dont have time to research what makes you think you know what you are talking about?


----------



## JQPublic1 (Jan 26, 2014)

Longly said:
			
		

> Egypt has always been mixed to some extent so if an afrocentric scholar was willing to pick and chose test samples he can prove anything he wants on paper, but not in reality.



These findings are from objective White scholars who are neither Afrocentric OR Eurocentric. BTW I doubt if the Curator of Egyptian Antiquities would let a black scholar get anywhere 
near a mummy. Arabs, want to  keep the illlusion that they were the original people of KMT... They don't want some Black scientist snooping around disproving that fallacy.

However, the old school scientists who made policy identifying all of Ancient Egypt as Caucasian have died out. Their young white replacements are far more objective and are armed with better tools.
Therefore, one of the Arabs worst fears have been realized...Blacks  built and ruled KMT..DNA proves it!


----------



## Meathead (Jan 27, 2014)

Sure, now your only problem is getting anyone to believe it, except each other of course.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 27, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Sure, now your only problem is getting anyone to believe it, except each other of course.



Thats not a problem. I was alerted to this news 4 years ago. Millions of people already know this as fact. You dont get much news in your trailer park I see.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 27, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Sure, now your only problem is getting anyone to believe it, except each other of course.
> ...


Trailer parks won't help you. You'd have to go to the "inner cities" to find that kind of ignorance. Better yet, try some black message boards. You might get a smatter of a following. I never thought this to anyone, but trailer parks and this site are a bit too high-brow for you and your message. Here, you're just pissing in the wind.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 27, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Thanks for the warning but several people of different ethnicities have already thanked me for letting them know about things like this. Its reaching its intended audience. Cave apes like you do not have to participate in acquiring knowledge.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 27, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


I am not a descendant of sub-Saharan Africans. I'm sorry that your heritage is one of subjugation and little achievement, but your attempts to purloin the accomplishments of others is pathetic. If it's any conciliation, others experienced slavery and little achievement, though not to the extent of your fore-bearers. I believe in giving credit where credit is due, so thanks for the watermelon.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 27, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



I know you are not sub saharan. That why I called you a cave ape.  I apologize that I left out melanin deprived, inbred,  and feral so you would have no doubt i was referring to white racists like you.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 27, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Whatever. My ancestors were not slaves. In fact they were building edifices like the Acropolis and developing philosophy while yours were living in trees and selling each other as slaves. All tha, of course is still happening, except they've progressed to lean-tos and huts. Sucks, eh?


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 27, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Yes your ancestors were enslaved. Your ancestors built nothing until after they were taught by Africans.  Greece didn't become a country unil 800 BC. Most of their gods were Black. Then they lost their minds and forgot their history which the Moors had to save for them. Dont you wonder why the other white races despise you? They dont even think you are really white.


----------



## Meathead (Jan 27, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


Crack? Lighten up on that stuff ffs!


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 27, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Only if you leave your Meth alone first.


----------



## longly (Jan 30, 2014)

Let go back to the hair samples of the ancient Egyptian mummies. You claimed that the same samples were DNA tested and were shown to be Negroid. I find that highly unlikely.  Yes it is possible for a black person to have naturally straight hair in the same way it is possible for a black person to be born albino, but. not very likely. The only Congoid like people to have straight hair are the aborigines of Australia and they are a long ways from Africa.


----------



## longly (Jan 30, 2014)

Why is it disturbing to Afrocentrics for ancient Sub-Saharan Africa to have been an undeveloped region? If the region south of the Sahara had been so develop in ancient times, where are the ruined cities? Where are the example fine ancient stone works? Where are the ancient coins depicted ancient black rulers?. Where are the ancient bronze artifacts? Where are the examples ancient Sub-Saharan writings? Why are all these things centered around the Mediterranean Sea.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 30, 2014)

longly said:


> Let go back to the hair samples of the ancient Egyptian mummies. You claimed that the same samples were DNA tested and were shown to be Negroid. I find that highly unlikely.  Yes it is possible for a black person to have naturally straight hair in the same way it is possible for a black person to be born albino, but. not very likely. The only Congoid like people to have straight hair are the aborigines of Australia and they are a long ways from Africa.



I didn't claim anything. I linked the DNA results that specify that Rameses III was sub-saharan.  Why are talking about hair when we have DNA. DNA is used to solve crimes and determine paternity.  Its 99.999% accurate. What is the accuracy rate with hair?

Also you are flat out wrong about Aborigines being the only Africans with straight hair. We are the most genetically diverse people in the world. We have all the features exhibited in all other ethnicities just in Africa. You need to get out more and travel.



> Forensic testing can determine if distinctive patterns in the genetic material found at a crime scene matches the DNA in a potential perpetrator with better than 99% accuracy.
> 
> Read more: A Brief History of DNA Testing - TIME A Brief History of DNA Testing - TIME


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 30, 2014)

longly said:


> Why is it disturbing to Afrocentrics for ancient Sub-Saharan Africa to have been an undeveloped region? If the region south of the Sahara had been so develop in ancient times, where are the ruined cities? Where are the example fine ancient stone works? Where are the ancient coins depicted ancient black rulers?. Where are the ancient bronze artifacts? Where are the examples ancient Sub-Saharan writings? Why are all these things centered around the Mediterranean Sea.



Afrocentrics are probably disturbed because what you are saying is a lie. There are ruined cities. There are stoneworks. There is sub-saharan writing.  The reason these things appear to be confined to the mediterranean is because you just haven't bothered to research it. Another thing that may disturb them is the assumption that what white people consider civilization is their opinion and not the end all be all.  It would be like someone telling you the only way you can be considered a real man is if you were Black.


----------



## longly (Jan 31, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Why is it disturbing to Afrocentrics for ancient Sub-Saharan Africa to have been an undeveloped region? If the region south of the Sahara had been so develop in ancient times, where are the ruined cities? Where are the example fine ancient stone works? Where are the ancient coins depicted ancient black rulers?. Where are the ancient bronze artifacts? Where are the examples ancient Sub-Saharan writings? Why are all these things centered around the Mediterranean Sea.
> ...



The word civilization is not a pejorative, but merely a label.  I am sure you know that it denotes a society that has reached a certain level of  cultural, technical and societal development. How is that insulting to anyone anywhere?

If there are ancients ruins in sub-Saharan Africa they would be easily visible; building stones produced by skilled stone masons are not easily over looked.   Nature does not produce large rocks of uniform size with smooth sides and square corners.


----------



## Asclepias (Jan 31, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...



Its insulting because white people made it up without consulting anyone. Nobody cares what a white person thinks is civilization. That determination is made by the people that created their version of what a white person calls civilization.  Its presumptuous to assume white people have any clue.  They were eating each other while black people were building Egypt. if they knew what civilization was why, is Greece the first European one?

I believe I mentioned there are some still left. Those civilizations are so old that they are off the radar for whites. Just because whites have not found this out is your problem to deal with. I don't seek validation from what white people think. However, I dont see what this has to do with the Egyptians being Black and your lack of any kind of evidence they were white. Where is your evidence? I get the sense you are either afraid to present it or you have nothing. Be a man and show your proof or I will have to consider you a troll and unworthy of discussing things with. We cant move on until you show me something regarding white Egyptians prior to Persia invading Egypt.


----------



## longly (Feb 1, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



What do you think civilization means?  I does not mean all things good. In some ways primitive societies were better. Civilization does not always mean a humane society. Both the ancient Romans and the  Aztecs civilizations where brutal societies.  A Roman slave master during the early empire was not legally or socially restricted any way in what the could do to his slaves.  And by the way, the few black slaves  they had were most likely treated very well; they were too expensive to risk with hard labor where as the German and Celts had little more value than a dog.  The Aztecs honored their war captives, as well as some  their own people some times,  by sacrificing them to their gods whether they wanted their hears cut out of their chest or not.  

I am not a troll; I have no desire to upset anyone; I just like anthropology.  I am out of time I will try to respond to the rest of your post later.


----------



## westwall (Feb 1, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...








The word you're attempting to use is CONSOLATION.

Conciliation means...

1.  To overcome the distrust or animosity of; appease.

2.  To regain or try to regain (friendship or goodwill) by pleasant behavior.

3.  To make or attempt to make compatible; reconcile.



If you're going to try and act like an arrogant ass may I suggest you use the ENGLISH LANGUAGE properly while doing so.

It makes you look like an ignorant jackass when you don't


----------



## westwall (Feb 1, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...







So, in addition to your ignorance of the English language you are likewise ignorant of the history of slavery under the ancient Greeks.  How unsurprising.  Bet you didn't know that homosexuality was considered normal either....

"Sklaven im Antiken Griechenland

A free man?&#8212;There is no such thing! All men are slaves; some, slaves of money; some, of chance; others are forced, either by mass opinion, or the threatening law, to act against their nature. Euripides, Hecuba. The word slave comes from Slav, the name of a group of Eastern European peoples. In antiquity, Germanic tribes captured Slavs and sold them to the Romans as slaves ( (from Interesting Facts )


Slavery in Ancient Greece


----------



## westwall (Feb 1, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...







Actually the Romans saved the Greek history.


----------



## westwall (Feb 1, 2014)

longly said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...







Look up Great Zimbabwe and be educated....


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 1, 2014)

westwall said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Do you have a source?  The below is basically what I know about it.

Transmission of the Classics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> In the Western Provinces (what today is considered the Western Europe's heartland), *the collapsing Roman empire lost many Greek manuscripts which were not preserved by monasteries] But even there scribes sometimes recycled old parchment, scraping off old texts in order to create new books.[11] After a while, only a few monasteries in the west had Greek works, and even fewer of them copied these works (mainly the Irish).[12] Irish monks had been taught by Greek and Latin missionaries who probably had brought Greek texts with them.*





> *Arab logicians had inherited Greek ideas after their invasion of southern portions of the Byzantine Empire.* Their translations and commentaries on these ideas worked their way through the Arab West into Spain and Sicily, which became important centers for this transmission of ideas. *This work of translation from Islamic culture, though largely unplanned and disorganized, constituted one of the greatest transmissions of ideas in history.*[1]
> Western Arab translations of Greek works (found in Iberia and Sicily) originates in the Greek sources preserved by the Byzantines. These transmissions to the Arab West took place in two main stages.


----------



## westwall (Feb 2, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...






Look up Pliny the Elder (who died during the eruption and destruction of Pompeii) who wrote about early Roman history.  The Romans conquered Greece and adopted Greek culture that suited them.  That included preserving their history.  The Moors didn't come along until long, long after the Romans, and after them, the Byzantines saved Greek history.

You too have a lot of reading to catch up on!

And truly, avoid Wiki like the plague.  The amount of disinformation on that site is legendary.  No institute of higher learning allows it to be used as a source.  It's that bad.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 2, 2014)

westwall said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



My knowledge of Rome is pretty sketchy but I do know the fall of Rome was before the Moors and brought on the Dark Ages in Europe.  Everything I have researched shows the Moors took the work of the Greeks and translated it into Arabic and taught it in Europe which brought Europe out of the Dark Ages. The nobility before the coming of the Moors were illiterate.  Are you saying the Romans were the *first* to save Greek History?


----------



## longly (Feb 3, 2014)

westwall said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I am familiar with Great Zimbabwe to me it appears similar to the ruins of the Anasazi Indian culture of the western US.  But, look at those stones does that look like the work of skilled stone masons. Those stones look naturally formed to me. To build great  Zimbabwe would have only required  the ability to stack stones, no need for years of  apprenticeship to a master stone mason. Hex I could do that, anyone who could stack dominoes could do it.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 3, 2014)

longly said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...




Thanks for admitting it looks like the Anasazi.  That brings us back to the OP.  If you look at the NA culture their languages and names for places sound very West African.  I believe there is a link.


----------



## GreenBean (Feb 3, 2014)

westwall said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



African Empires , like European and Asian ones have risen and fallen - Mali, Songhay, Ghana. By Great Zimbabwe I believe you are referring to the Kingdom of Mutapa  which I think fell under early European colonialism.

Not all Africans were running around the jungle chucking spears and beating bongo drums - they had some admirable civilizations - some which probably sent expeditions as far as the Americas.


----------



## Meathead (Feb 4, 2014)

longly said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...


Clearly then, the Anasazi went to the West coast and sailed their canoes clear to Africa where they proceeded to build Great Zimbabwe since Africans seemed incapable of doing it on their own. This is according the Asc model of diffusion and an all together more likely scenario than the reverse.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 4, 2014)

Meathead said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Except you forget that the stuff built in Africa proceeds the NA's ever having been in the americas.  Learn what a timetable is.


----------



## Meathead (Feb 4, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...


Hell, we're dealing with an imaginary African civilization sailing on imaginary boats. And no, the Anasazi  had their heyday at about before Zimbabwe. Who cares, this diffusion from/to sub-Saharan Africa is all make-believe anyway.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 4, 2014)

Meathead said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



Whatever it takes for you not to feel threatened. Just keep repeating that to yourself.


----------



## westwall (Feb 4, 2014)

Asclepias said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...










Actually the Catholic Church preserved a great deal of Greek culture after the fall of Rome.
You make far to general of statements when it comes to European culture.  The nobility were all literate for the most part.  ALL of the clergy was literate.  

I think more advanced culture came from the Arabs than the Moors.  During the Crusades the medieval knights witnessed the excellent living conditions of the Arabs as regards baths and beds etc. and brought that back with them when they went home.

The Moorish influence was predominantly in Spain and Portugal, with a little in Sicily.  The Reconquista took around 700 years to accomplish so the Moors were well entrenched in Spain, but their influence north of the Pyrenees was very, very limited.


----------



## westwall (Feb 4, 2014)

longly said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...








You couldn't do that in a million years.  It is FAR more difficult to assemble walls with stones such as those than it is with brick.  And I doubt you could do it with brick either.

No, Great Zimbabwe is a masterclass in stone masonry.


----------



## longly (Feb 4, 2014)

GreenBean said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > longly said:
> ...



That is partially true the Negroid peoples of  Africa south the Sahara did have their share of  kingdoms and empires, but I have seen no evidence of civilization. It is not necessary to have a civilization in order to have an empire. The Comanche Indians of the US southern plains had an extensive empire  but no elements of civilization.

I would like to digress a little say some against civilization. Some people  give a positive connotation  to the word Civilization so consider this: A sadistic slave master during the early Roman empire could openly purchase slaves for the sole purpose of raping and torturing to death. And  if the slaves rebelled against such treatment the entire household of slaves ,regardless of guilt, would be crucified under Roman law.  To me that is not positive, but horrible, despicable and disgusting. That it is only one of the negative attributes of the ancient Roman civilization.


----------



## westwall (Feb 4, 2014)

longly said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...








And you would be wrong.  Civilization is implied in an empire.  No group can maintain an empire for any period of time without laws and a codified hierarchy.  It can be stated that no agriculture of any substance can be accomplished without agriculture.  

The oldest known beer production (which implies both civilization AND education) dates from 19,000 years ago in Africa.


----------



## Meathead (Feb 4, 2014)

longly said:


> GreenBean said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Agreed, but "civilization" departs from the "uncivilized" in that there are the manifestation of rules and law which are not uniformly dictated only by the strongman of the moment. The Romans, Greeks, Egyptians, and the slave-owners in other more civilized counties gave rise to a higher degree of civilization which ultimately led to abolition.

The same cannot be said of those less "civilized", parts of Africa and even Asia today which are unfortunately still an example

Yours is not a "digression", but a simple statement of fact.


----------



## longly (Feb 6, 2014)

Meathead said:


> longly said:
> 
> 
> > GreenBean said:
> ...



Well, I agree with you even though I cant have confidence in our assertion that a civilization as opposed to a primitive society tends to have conditions that usually result in improved, humane, treatment of the individual.  In a primitive society without law individuals are usually only regulated by force and familial relationship. If one has enough force to impose his will on another he can do it and that is limited, for the most part, only by his affection for his family. However there have been times when one killed his own brother, but was not common. However there was nothing to prevent the tribe from attacking their neighbors across the river.


----------

