# Blacks who do not believe in integration or Interracial marriage



## 52ndStreet (Jun 18, 2008)

I read an article about Barack Obamma, and how he felt , and many other mixed race people, that it is a benefit to be a Mulatto, or of mixed race.
But I must say, contrary to popular belief, many Blacks that I know, are not
for integration,or interracial marriage.

I think the media has this misconception that interracial marriage, is on the rise.It is not on the rise.


----------



## ReillyT (Jun 18, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> I read an article about Barack Obamma, and how he felt , and many other mixed race people, that it is a benefit to be a Mulatto, or of mixed race.
> But I must say, contrary to popular belief, many Blacks that I know, are not
> for integration,or interracial marriage.
> 
> I think the media has this misconception that interracial marriage, is on the rise.It is not on the rise.



It appears by some metrics, it is on the rise.  Further, cohabitation generally is more acceptable than it used to be, so it is quite possible that marriage statistics understand dramatically the number of mixed-race relationships in the United States.



> The number of interracial marriages in the United States has been on the rise: from 310,000 in 1970, to 651,000 in 1980, and 1,161,000 in 1992, according to the US Census of 1993. Interracial marriages represented 0.7% of all marriages in 1970, rising to 1.3% in 1980 and 2.2% in 1992. With the introduction of the mixed-race category, the 2000 census revealed interracial marriage to be somewhat more widespread, with 2,669,558 interracial marriages recorded, or 4.9% of all marriages.[2]. It should be noted that these statistics do not take into account ethnic groups within the same broad categories - for example a marriage involving a person of Japanese origin and a person of Indian origin would not be considered 'mixed'. Nor is hispanic status taken into account[2].


Interracial marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Contessa_Sharra (Jun 18, 2008)

ReillyT said:


> It appears by some metrics, it is on the rise. Further, cohabitation generally is more acceptable than it used to be, so it is quite possible that marriage statistics understand dramatically the number of mixed-race relationships in the United States.
> 
> 
> Interracial marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


 

Well, as for the "Hispanic" thing, in consideration of the fact that "Hispanic" denotes *a language category*, rather than a "race" any marriage between people of like race but differnt 1st language could not be called "interracial".....

Like, if an Irish Catholic marries a Polish Catholic, that isn't a "mixed" marriage either, just possibly a strange one!


from the August 28, 2003 edition

*All in the (mixed-race) family: a US trend*

Data show a significant rise in mixed-race families due to interracial marriages and multiracial adoptions. 

By Mary Wiltenburg and Amanda Paulson | Staff writers of The Christian Science Monitor 

Five years ago, Ann Tollefson says, her family was stared at. Nobody was openly hostile, but often enough they'd point to her children - adopted from China, India, and Vietnam - and ask, "How much did they cost?" 
Today it's a different story. There are more mixed-race families in America than ever before - even in Mrs. Tollefson's St. Louis suburb. 






 MIXED FAMILY: Carmen (center) who was adopted by Russell and Jan Walgamott of Carey, Idaho, reads to Caitlyn (l.) who was adopted from China, and Colton, one of the parents' biological children. 
GERRY MELENDEZ/THE IDAHO STATESMAN/AP 



*Related stories* 

01/15/03 
The changing face of love 


New 2000 Census data show that more than 1 in 6 adopted kids is of a different race from their parents. And according to new analysis by William Frey, a demographer with the Brookings Institution in Washington, about 1 in 15 marriages in the US is interracial - up from 1 in 23 in 1990. 

America "has always, obviously, had people of color," says adoption expert Adam Pertman. "The bigger notion is that America is ... starting to accept that it is a nation of color. We see that now not just within cities, but within the family."

Tollefson sees it in her parish. Hers was the only mixed-race family there when she and her husband first adopted in 1995. Today, three other families have adopted kids from China, and several more from Guatemala. It makes a difference, she says: Her kids are happy, but they seem to relax just a little more when they're around other mixed-race families.

"They warm up faster. They're not as clingy. They try new things more when they're around people who look like us," she says.

And she notices a difference, too, in the way people look at her family: "People are much more accepting today.... You know the ripple thing, a drop in the water and the rings go out? It's hard to find somebody who hasn't been touched by international adoption."

According to the first-ever profile of America's adopted children, released in a Census report Friday, 1.6 million US children under 18 are in adoptive families. Of those, 17 percent of adoptees make their families multiracial, and 13 percent were born abroad.

Mr. Pertman, director of the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, estimates that the number of US adoptions from abroad has tripled in the past decade.

"When you look at the number of people adopting from Asia, from Latin America - more than half are adopting from countries where the kids aren't going to look anything like their parents," he says. "That's starting to make a difference in the way people think of families, of inheritance, of nurture versus nature, you name it."

More people are marrying people who don't look anything like them, as well. But Mr. Frey, who analyzed detailed microsamples of census data, found that the numbers varied highly from state to state. In New Mexico, for instance, 16 percent of all marriages were interracial, whereas in Mississippi it's 2 percent.

"There are two ways of looking at this," Frey says. "One is, it's gone real fast. And two: It's pretty concentrated in just a few states.... It's still a pretty small share of all marriages, especially those involving whites."
It's worth noting that unlike most census analysts, Frey treated Latinos as a racial group, and nearly half of the 3.7 million interracial marriages he counts include a Latino.

Frey calls some of the states with the highest percentages of mixed-race marriages - such as New Mexico, California, and Hawaii - "melting pot" states: All have several significant minority groups, not just one.

That's something Brigitte Ball can attest to. A corporate librarian in Boston, Ms. Ball has been married for two years. She is African-American; her husband, Jeff, is white. They met in Seattle, Brigitte's hometown. There, she says, she grew up with far less segregation by neighborhood than she sees in cities like Boston. Her best friends include women who are biracial, Jewish, and Latina.

"We're like a United Nations bunch," she laughs.

Recently, Brigitte has been reading "Interracial Intimacies" by Harvard law professor Randall Kennedy, which examines America's long and troubled history with both marriage and adoption across racial lines.
\
"Some of the stories he brings up - you can't look at the way things are today and not think there hasn't been progress," she says. Still, she and Jeff are thinking of moving back to Seattle when they decide to have children. "I would never want my kid to be in a situation where he's one child surrounded by only black, or only white," she explains.

That segregation by neighborhood, which still exists in many American cities, may help explain another of Frey's findings: that blacks are far less likely than other groups to marry across racial lines. While nearly 30 percent of marriages involving a Latino or Asian is interracial, only about 12 percent of marriages involving an African-American is.

America's two major racial barriers, he says, are more intimate ones: living next door to someone of a different race and marrying someone of a different race. "And those are the areas where black segregation has continued to remain high."

Still, Frey found that even states with the lowest percentages of interracial marriages have seen substantial growth. They increased in Tennessee by 133 percent since 1990, and doubled in West Virginia and Vermont. "It's a trend on the rise in every place," Frey says. "But it will be a long time before West Virginia or Vermont or North Dakota will be in the 'postracial America' kind of scenario."

In the end, both adoption and marriage may help break down some racial barriers that persist. With adoption in particular, Pertman finds that it's tough for people to hang onto prejudices.

"We're a polyglot nation. Adoption just makes that more intimate, within a family. So a racist who doesn't think black and white people should marry suddenly has a Chinese niece. Suddenly it's their family, suddenly it's hard to argue with."
All in the (mixed-race) family: a US trend | csmonitor.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/washington/01census.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Interesting blog on the issue: Light-skinned-ed Girl: Mixed Race Babies Sent to the U.S.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 18, 2008)

I really fail to see your point.I still say many Blacks that I know in my community, are againts interracial marriage. Having mixed race children brings
on many additional problems. Many claime indentity,chioce problems.Or not being accepted by Blacks or Whites.


----------



## ReillyT (Jun 18, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> I really fail to see your point.I still say many Blacks that I know in my community, are againts interracial marriage. Having mixed race children brings
> on many additional problems. Many claime indentity,chioce problems.



The point is that you said that interracial marriage is not on the increase when it is.  

You should not be too upset that people aren't willing to extrapolate grand conclusions from your personal experience.  There is no reason that they should.  If you should think otherwise, it is merely a manifestation of your monstrous ego.  Read a newspaper and find out about the world outside of 52nd street.

I guess I will find out if you are right about mixed-race children when I have kids.  If it is a problem, we will deal with it.  Lots of fucked up people come from parents of the same racial background.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 18, 2008)

The Bible says" Do not mix your seeds". I would never have any mixed race 
Children.They get called all kinds of names,like Zebra,or mongrel,Get my
point.Who would want to subject their child to a lifetime of abuse and name calling. I think the thats whats makes us all unique, the beauty of diffrent and unique races,not this mixed up melting pot stew,that some people are trying to promote.It just doesn't look right. The Black Panthers does not sleep with the Lions or Chetahs in the Jungle.Animals don't intermix,I feel humans should not mix around also.


----------



## ReillyT (Jun 18, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> The Bible says" Do not mix your seeds". I would never have any mixed race
> Children.They get called all kinds of names,like Zebra,or mongrel,Get my
> point.Who would want to subject their child to a lifetime of abuse and name calling. I think the thats whats makes us all unique, the beauty of diffrent and unique races,not this mixed up melting pot stew,that some people are trying to promote.It just doesn't look right. The Black Panthers does not sleep with the Lions or Chetahs in the Jungle.Animals don't intermix,I feel humans should not mix around also.



If it weren't for nuts like you who raise their children to believe in racial purity, no one would call any children names.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 18, 2008)

There is nothing wrong with promoting racial purity. Interbreading can create
problems in offspring.This is how the races came about. They were separated,after the initial creation.The Black race was the original race.
We have 1.The Black Race
             2.The Asian Race
             3.The Indian Race
             4.The Caucasian Race
             5.The Aboriginal Race.

These are the 5 major classification.


----------



## ReillyT (Jun 18, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> There is nothing wrong with promoting racial purity. Interbreading can create
> problems in offspring.This is how the races came about. They were separated,after the initial creation.The Black race was the original race.
> We have 1.The Black Race
> 2.The Asian Race
> ...



I don't want to be disrespectful, because I am sure that you were brought up to believe exactly these things, but I think you should know that most people would find you to be a bit crazy.  Promoting racial purity hasn't really been _en vogue_ since at least the 1960s, and quite possibly 1945.  Just an fyi.


----------



## Annie (Jun 18, 2008)

ReillyT said:


> I don't want to be disrespectful, because I am sure that you were brought up to believe exactly these things, but I think you should know that most people would find you to be a bit crazy.  Promoting racial purity hasn't really been _en vogue_ since at least the 1960s, and quite possibly 1945.  Just an fyi.



Seems to me that even dog breeders aren't too keen on 'purity', as it tends to lead to all sorts of genetic problems. As 52nd St probably illustrates.


----------



## dilloduck (Jun 18, 2008)

Kathianne said:


> Seems to me that even dog breeders aren't too keen on 'purity', as it tends to lead to all sorts of genetic problems. As 52nd St probably illustrates.



I think races could interbreed for centuries and wouldn't have to worry about genetic bs


----------



## Gunny (Jun 18, 2008)

Contessa_Sharra said:


> Well, as for the "Hispanic" thing, in consideration of the fact that "Hispanic" denotes *a language category*, rather than a "race" any marriage between people of like race but differnt 1st language could not be called "interracial".....
> 
> Like, if an Irish Catholic marries a Polish Catholic, that isn't a "mixed" marriage either, just possibly a strange one!
> 
> ...



You'll have a hard time with that one.  I grew up thinking Mexican kids I went to school with and played with were white.  Lo and behold, there IS a segment out there that considers them a different race which learned later in life.  I was kind of shocked.

it doesn't help that a segment of the Hispanic community presents themselves as being "brown," not white.  

I think everyone is the same color.  You can either hump ammo or you can't. Your value to me lies in the answer to that question.


----------



## wayne (Jun 18, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> The Bible says" Do not mix your seeds". I would never have any mixed race
> Children.They get called all kinds of names,like Zebra,or mongrel,Get my
> point.Who would want to subject their child to a lifetime of abuse and name calling. I think the thats whats makes us all unique, the beauty of diffrent and unique races,not this mixed up melting pot stew,that some people are trying to promote.It just doesn't look right. The Black Panthers does not sleep with the Lions or Chetahs in the Jungle.Animals don't intermix,I feel humans should not mix around also.



Actually there is no such thing as a black panther. It is in fact a leopard that was born black instead of brownish; it is a mutation.


----------



## wayne (Jun 18, 2008)

ReillyT said:


> I don't want to be disrespectful, because I am sure that you where brought up to believe exactly these things, but I think you should know that most people would find you to be a bit crazy.  Promoting racial purity hasn't really been _en vogue_ since at least the 1960s, and quite possibly 1945.  Just an fyi.



I don&#8217;t know if he is all that crazy and ant any rate he is entitled to his opinion.  To the scientist, people can be categorized like any other animal. Face it the only real biologically difference between us and dogs, cats, and cows is we are smarter; however, sometimes I am not so sure about me.


----------



## editec (Jun 19, 2008)

I just got out of a mixed marriage.

I was married to a woman.


----------



## Shogun (Jun 19, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> The Bible says" Do not mix your seeds". I would never have any mixed race
> Children.They get called all kinds of names,like Zebra,or mongrel,Get my
> point.Who would want to subject their child to a lifetime of abuse and name calling. I think the thats whats makes us all unique, the beauty of diffrent and unique races,not this mixed up melting pot stew,that some people are trying to promote.It just doesn't look right. The Black Panthers does not sleep with the Lions or Chetahs in the Jungle.Animals don't intermix,I feel humans should not mix around also.


----------



## casper402032 (Jun 19, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> The Bible says" Do not mix your seeds". I would never have any mixed race
> Children.They get called all kinds of names,like Zebra,or mongrel,Get my
> point.Who would want to subject their child to a lifetime of abuse and name calling. I think the thats whats makes us all unique, the beauty of diffrent and unique races,not this mixed up melting pot stew,that some people are trying to promote.It just doesn't look right. The Black Panthers does not sleep with the Lions or Chetahs in the Jungle.Animals don't intermix,I feel humans should not mix around also.



Americans have been mixing races since the settlement at Jamestown.  For instance, my mother was a fair skinned black woman and my father, her husband was a medium brown complexion. So you tell me how the heck I was born very fair skinned, blue eyes and black hair then around the age of two my eyes turned green and my hair lightened. It's obvious to me what happened. . .can you guess?


----------



## editec (Jun 19, 2008)

How can you _mix the races _when there is only one _human race?_


----------



## Shogun (Jun 19, 2008)

um. 


does the tower of babel have anything to do with it?


----------



## editec (Jun 19, 2008)

> does the tower of babel have anything to do with it?



I don't think so, since everyone there who suddenly was speaking a different tongue was a Babylonian.

Good question though.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 19, 2008)

casper402032 said:


> Americans have been mixing races since the settlement at Jamestown.  For instance, my mother was a fair skinned black woman and my father, her husband was a medium brown complexion. So you tell me how the heck I was born very fair skinned, blue eyes and black hair then around the age of two my eyes turned green and my hair lightened. It's obvious to me what happened. . .can you guess?



Did the Black Female Slave have a Choice when they were raped by the White Slave masters?!.The answer is NO.Did the White Slave master ask her
if he could mix his White genes with her Black genes.The answer is NO.
So all of you who think the races have been mixing since Jamestown Virginia,
need to look back at the History of America.All this interbreding was not done
by two willing partners.!!


----------



## jillian (Jun 19, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> The Bible says" Do not mix your seeds". I would never have any mixed race



And?



> Children.They get called all kinds of names,like Zebra,or mongrel,Get my point.



Wouldn't happen in my neighborhood....and if it happens in yours, perhaps the blame is on the idiots, and not on the biracial kids.



> Who would want to subject their child to a lifetime of abuse and name calling.



Do you live in 1950?



> I think the thats whats makes us all unique, the beauty of diffrent and unique races,not this mixed up melting pot stew,that some people are trying to promote.It just doesn't look right. The Black Panthers does not sleep with the Lions or Chetahs in the Jungle.Animals don't intermix,I feel humans should not mix around also.



okie dokie....


----------



## wayne (Jun 20, 2008)

casper402032 said:


> Americans have been mixing races since the settlement at Jamestown.  For instance, my mother was a fair skinned black woman and my father, her husband was a medium brown complexion. So you tell me how the heck I was born very fair skinned, blue eyes and black hair then around the age of two my eyes turned green and my hair lightened. It's obvious to me what happened. . .can you guess?



I am curious; what is your hair Texture, cross section?  I find it slightly amusing when I meet white racist who has spiral, flat cross seection, hair.  Of course, I dont point it out to him that he got his hair from a black ancestor.


----------



## wayne (Jun 20, 2008)

editec said:


> How can you _mix the races _when there is only one _human race?_



Edited, that is philosophy not science.   If a scientist studied dogs for example, he would point out that a Collie and German Sherman are both large dogs. However, there are physical differences between the two, with the obvious difference being hair.


----------



## wayne (Jun 20, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> Did the Black Female Slave have a Choice when they were raped by the White Slave masters?!.The answer is NO.Did the White Slave master ask her
> if he could mix his White genes with her Black genes.The answer is NO.
> So all of you who think the races have been mixing since Jamestown Virginia,
> need to look back at the History of America.All this interbreding was not done
> by two willing partners.!!



People are not that simple. Some black women were willing and others were not, for example Thomas Jefferson and Sallie Hemmings. 


Also, not all slave owners where white. Ever wonder how so many blacks came to have Indian ancestry when almost all where confined to plantations until long after the Indians where moved west? There where Indians who own plantations and slaves in the old south, until Jackson moved them west of course.


----------



## editec (Jun 20, 2008)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by editec
> How can you mix the races when there is only one human race?





> Edited, that is philosophy not science. If a scientist studied dogs for example, he would point out that a Collie and German Sherman are both large dogs. However, there are physical differences between the two, with the obvious difference being hair.



There is one _species _of human beings.

The fact that humans have slightly different physical characteristics is completely irrelevant to the question of what species they belong to.

The very fact human being belonging to the Caucasian, Mongoloid and Negroid "races" can interbreed is proof positive that they are all the same species.

There is absolutely nothing "philosophical" about that statement.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 20, 2008)

editec said:


> There is one _species _of human beings.
> 
> The fact that humans have slightly different physical characteristics is completely irrelevant to the question of what species they belong to.
> 
> ...



"Slightly different characteristics",please give me a break,we are not all the same ,as some would like us to believe.For example Asians are known to have 
a larger skull, when compared to other races.Blacks have more muscles in the 
legs, when compared to other races.ect,ect,.As I said,the beauty in the races lies in our 
unique diffrences.Those who prefer an undifferentiated mixed smorgasboard
stew of the races,destroy the unique beauty of each individual race,or are unhappy with the state of their own race,wheather Black or White.


----------



## Gunny (Jun 20, 2008)

casper402032 said:


> Americans have been mixing races since the settlement at Jamestown.  For instance, my mother was a fair skinned black woman and my father, her husband was a medium brown complexion. So you tell me how the heck I was born very fair skinned, blue eyes and black hair then around the age of two my eyes turned green and my hair lightened. It's obvious to me what happened. . .can you guess?



You were abducted by aliens and genetically experimented on?


----------



## Gunny (Jun 20, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> The Bible says" Do not mix your seeds". I would never have any mixed race
> Children.They get called all kinds of names,like Zebra,or mongrel,Get my
> point.Who would want to subject their child to a lifetime of abuse and name calling. I think the thats whats makes us all unique, the beauty of diffrent and unique races,not this mixed up melting pot stew,that some people are trying to promote.It just doesn't look right. The Black Panthers does not sleep with the Lions or Chetahs in the Jungle.Animals don't intermix,I feel humans should not mix around also.



I agree with part of your argument anyway.  Children of interracial marriages are the ones who suffer, and all too often the adults are in complete denial about it, just as you will find those whose agenda it does not support to recognize it are also in denial.

I DO think however, it doesn't hold the social stigma it once did.  I had a friend as a teen who half-black half-white, but at 6'10" 250lbs not too many people wanted to discuss his genetic makeup with him, but I was one of his only friends.  he accepted neither by whites not blacks.  His aunt was black and she always called him a "moo-latto."  

As far as your opinion on "mixing" goes, you are entitled to it.  I really don't care if people do or don't.  

And say what you want, I have seen some jaw-dropping absolutely beautiful women who happened to also be black.


----------



## Gunny (Jun 20, 2008)

editec said:


> How can you _mix the races _when there is only one _human race?_



Human is our species, not race.


----------



## Gunny (Jun 20, 2008)

wayne said:


> I am curious; what is your hair Texture, cross section?  I find it slightly amusing when I meet white racist who has spiral, flat cross seection, hair.  Of course, I dont point it out to him that he got his hair from a black ancestor.




When I run into racists I don't hang around long enough to check out their hair.  They really don't have anything to say I want to hear, and can be quite embarrassing.

I had an associate in the Marine Corps who was my friend, but I later learned he was racist.  I don't recall how the topic came up, but he made the statement that he actually believed blacks were mentally inferior to white just because of the color of their skin.  Probably one of the few times I did a Jillian and asked all wide-eyed "You actually beleive that?"

Next time I saw him was in Okinawa and we shared a honcho (cab) to go to Nago.  He was so verbally abusive to the Okinawan driver I was embarrassed and apologized for his dumb ass.  Last time I ever let him or any other racist around me by choice.


----------



## Gunny (Jun 20, 2008)

editec said:


> There is one _species _of human beings.
> 
> The fact that humans have slightly different physical characteristics is completely irrelevant to the question of what species they belong to.
> 
> ...



I agree completely.  No one that I can see is arguing that humans are not all one species.  You however made the statement that all humans belonged to the "human race."  Your own statement refutes that.  Humans are one species, but further divided by race.  Species and race are not interchangeable words.

Unless you know something I don't; which, probably wouldn't be all that hard.  I would be more than happy to look at any supporting documentation that says otherwise.


----------



## editec (Jun 20, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> "Slightly different characteristics",please give me a break,we are not all the same ,as some would like us to believe.For example Asians are known to have
> a larger skull, when compared to other races.Blacks have more muscles in the
> legs, when compared to other races.ect,ect,.As I said,the beauty in the races lies in our
> unique diffrences.Those who prefer an undifferentiated mixed smorgasboard
> stew of the races,destroy the unique beauty of each individual race,or are unhappy with the state of their own race,wheather Black or White.


 
In the greater scheme of things, those ARE minor differences. 

They are all still part of the human genome we ALL share. 

Those so called racial  differences which loom so large to some of us are so minor that we can interbreed with any human no matter how different they appear to us "racially"


----------



## wayne (Jun 20, 2008)

GunnyL said:


> When I run into racists I don't hang around long enough to check out their hair.  They really don't have anything to say I want to hear, and can be quite embarrassing.
> 
> I had an associate in the Marine Corps who was my friend, but I later learned he was racist.  I don't recall how the topic came up, but he made the statement that he actually believed blacks were mentally inferior to white just because of the color of their skin.  Probably one of the few times I did a Jillian and asked all wide-eyed "You actually beleive that?"
> 
> Next time I saw him was in Okinawa and we shared a honcho (cab) to go to Nago.  He was so verbally abusive to the Okinawan driver I was embarrassed and apologized for his dumb ass.  Last time I ever let him or any other racist around me by choice.



Racism is a dangerous philosophy for a warrior.  In WW II it was a common belief at the beginning of the war that the Japanese soldier was physically inferior.  He was small and half blind which made him a bad shot.  The survivors soon learned he could shoot good enough to kill you and was big enough to be dangerous.


----------



## William Joyce (Jun 20, 2008)

ReillyT said:


> Promoting racial purity hasn't really been _en vogue_ since at least the 1960s, and quite possibly 1945.  Just an fyi.



Fyi, _promoting_ it is out of vogue, but _actually doing it_ is statistically almost as in vogue in 2008 as it was in 1945.  Interracial marriages "on the rise" is pretty relative -- yes, there are more than there used to be, but most folks feel sick to their stomachs when they see interracial couples and the offspring.  It just isn't natural, fyi.


----------



## William Joyce (Jun 20, 2008)

wayne said:


> Racism is a dangerous philosophy for a warrior.  In WW II it was a common belief at the beginning of the war that the Japanese soldier was physically inferior.  He was small and half blind which made him a bad shot.  The survivors soon learned he could shoot good enough to kill you and was big enough to be dangerous.



If true, then that was but a half-baked understanding of another racial group.  More complete understanding shows that Asians have the highest IQ's of any other racial group, especially Japanese, and when you add to that their extreme cohesion and willingness to sacrifice for the group a la the kamikazees, you have a very dangerous enemy.

An actual "racist" would have accounted for that.

And "racism", in fact, is the ONLY philosophy for a warrior.  Men do not fight for policies or plans.  They do not fight for ideas.  They fight for the BLOOD OF THEIR PEOPLE, their women, their children, their soil.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 21, 2008)

As a black man of African-American and Native American descent, the Bass is not for interracial marriages if the offspring turns out mentally deranged like this:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnZp4tyvdj0&feature=related]YouTube - Dark Skin men and Light skin women[/ame]


----------



## editec (Jun 21, 2008)

William Joyce said:


> Fyi, _promoting_ it is out of vogue, but _actually doing it_ is statistically almost as in vogue in 2008 as it was in 1945. Interracial marriages "on the rise" is pretty relative -- yes, there are more than there used to be, but most folks feel sick to their stomachs when they see interracial couples and the offspring. It just isn't natural, fyi.


 
They _do?_

News to me.


----------



## Shogun (Jun 22, 2008)

William Joyce said:


> Fyi, _promoting_ it is out of vogue, but _actually doing it_ is statistically almost as in vogue in 2008 as it was in 1945.  Interracial marriages "on the rise" is pretty relative -- yes, there are more than there used to be, but most folks feel sick to their stomachs when they see interracial couples and the offspring.  It just isn't natural, fyi.



How is it not natural?  do you think your blood is pure, joyce?


----------



## William Joyce (Jun 22, 2008)

Shogun said:


> How is it not natural?



As an instinctive matter, it isn't -- the vast majority of people don't want to engage in miscegenation, and, figures bear that out.  They don't.  They are happier emotionally, physically and everything else with someone of their own racial or ethnic group.  It's probably also got some kind of evolutionary function.

It just looks so goddamn wrong to see a white male or female with a black male or female... like some kind of freak of nature.  It's fetish porn for a reason:  it's weird.  Sure, it's _possible_, but so is copulation with animals, wearing plaid with stripes or serving a good Bordeaux in a Dixie cup.

And, it's often forced... the white is usually trying to shock the family or prove how liberal he or she is.  This happens a lot.  That's not true love.

The Asian/white pairing is less jarring to the senses, but anyone who's ever laid eyes on Sean Lennon has visual proof that banging that Asian chick might be fun, just don't go that extra step.

As for this question about "the purity of my blood," I don't know what to tell ya.  I am white American.  What do you hope to accomplish by asking that question?  To demonstrate that if nobody can be categorized with precision, no category is valid?  It's a fool's errand.  People just don't seem to be all that confused about the general question of what race a person is, despite the presence of racially or ethnically mixed people in the world.  When Barack Obama litigated racial districting questions as a lawyer in Chicago, no judge ever stopped him and said, "but does race really exist"?  Nah.  Nope.  Only when whites start to assert themselves as a race do they start nitpicking at that.


----------



## jillian (Jun 22, 2008)

William Joyce said:


> It just looks so goddamn wrong to see a white male or female with a black male or female... like some kind of freak of nature.



only to a nazi nutcase like you. the rest of us don't give it much thought.

perhaps it's time for you to acknowledge *your* malfunction.


----------



## William Joyce (Jun 22, 2008)

jillian said:


> only to a nazi nutcase like you. the rest of us don't give it much thought.



Even if "us" means the reform Jewish community of New York, you sure as hell _do_ give it a lot of thought.  In fact, Jews are so concerned about their own declining demographics that rabbis of that persuasion came out AGAINST marriage to gentiles, along with conservatives and Orthodox.  And if you can point to some famous black-Jewish couples, let's see 'em!


----------



## Shogun (Jun 23, 2008)

William Joyce said:


> As an instinctive matter, it isn't -- the vast majority of people don't want to engage in miscegenation, and, figures bear that out.  They don't.  They are happier emotionally, physically and everything else with someone of their own racial or ethnic group.  It's probably also got some kind of evolutionary function.
> 
> It just looks so goddamn wrong to see a white male or female with a black male or female... like some kind of freak of nature.  It's fetish porn for a reason:  it's weird.  Sure, it's _possible_, but so is copulation with animals, wearing plaid with stripes or serving a good Bordeaux in a Dixie cup.
> 
> ...





I totally disagree and the pedigree of humanity, even your own, seems to say otherwise.  The Original humans were dark skinned.  environmental variation have happened since then but races have ALWAYS mixed.  I think that you lose credibility when you use words like "most" without providing a source that conveys such.  If "figures bear this out" then post them. 

If interracial unions are not "happy" it's due to the society that creates a stigma, not the natural behaviour of humanity.  Do you think Tiger Woods grew up unhappy?  Lenny Kravitz?  The list goes on.  Would a Mulato kid from the deep south circa 1956 be teased?  sure, LOOK AT THE ENVIRONMENT.  


I don't think it looks so goddamn wrong at all.  YOU may think so and so be it.  But, until you start skinning some sources all you have in your quiver is your opinon.  Black men are not animals.  They are human just like you are.  If a white woman finds love with a brother then so be it.  don't be jealous or threatened; go find yourself a beautiful black woman and move beyond what is only skin deep.


disgruntled kids trying to shock parents happen all over the place.  sure, THEY may not be examples of love.  But, THEY are not mutually exclusive to those who HAVE found love in another race anymore than some farcial las vegas wekkend wedding does not diminish the unions of everyone else that gets married.


so, whats wrong with sean lennon?  The same thing that was wrong with Branden Lee?  Tiger Woods?  John Lennon was in love with that bitch enough to kill the beatles.  Are you telling me that their interracial union was NOT based on mutual love and that sean is less viable as a person than julian?



Yea, you are "white" insomuch that you are not as dark as those you want to demonize...  BUT, you are no more pure than anyone else in this husbandry of genetics from origin to today.  Im white too, but i know that I have native american and black ancestors.  If getting it on with a black woman makes you sick then so be it: don't go fucking black chicks.  But, at least support your claims with evidence when tossing around words like "most" because, historically, your argument falls on its face.


----------



## Shogun (Jun 23, 2008)

William Joyce said:


> Even if "us" means the reform Jewish community of New York, you sure as hell _do_ give it a lot of thought.  In fact, Jews are so concerned about their own declining demographics that rabbis of that persuasion came out AGAINST marriage to gentiles, along with conservatives and Orthodox.  *And if you can point to some famous black-Jewish couples, let's see 'em!*



Roxie Roker + Seymour "Sy" Kravitz = Lenny Kravitz


----------



## AllieBaba (Jun 23, 2008)

Genetics are strange and wonderful things.
Yes, we are genetically different. Yes, we all have strengths and weaknesses, and they vary. Yes, generally beings thrive when they are gathered with those who are like themselves.
Does that mean genetic purity is something to be fanatic about? No way.

Hybrids are always strongest. Dogs, horses, cats, humans, whatever. Any line does better with outside blood.

We've almost reached the point where the only difference between people will be between the ones who do believe in Jesus..and those who don't.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 23, 2008)

I agree with you William Joyce.The races look better separate and unique.Mixed raced people look strange, and seem to have confused racial indentities.And they never bond
with the Black or the White race. The tend to want to play both sides of the fence.
I would not want to go through life confused,never accepting my race,weather Black or White.You have to accept one race or the other.I don't believe in this "Were all the Same crap", We are not all the same.Those race mixer posters don't know what the heck
they are talking about.We don't need a smorgasboard race of people in the World!, confused, and looking strange.


----------



## Shogun (Jun 23, 2008)

yea, but you are a fucking idiot though.  Remember what I said about chumming it up with people who enjoy ****** jokes?


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Jun 23, 2008)

52nd street you need to get with William Joyce and decide between you where all those not black enough and not white enough people go when you divide American in to containment areas.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 24, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> I agree with you William Joyce.The races look better separate and unique.Mixed raced people look strange, and seem to have confused racial indentities.And they never bond
> with the Black or the White race. The tend to want to play both sides of the fence.
> I would not want to go through life confused,never accepting my race,weather Black or White.You have to accept one race or the other.I don't believe in this "Were all the Same crap", We are not all the same.Those race mixer posters don't know what the heck
> they are talking about.We don't need a smorgasboard race of people in the World!, confused, and looking strange.



Most mixed race people in the US identify with one so calld "race" because the US is a predominately monoracial identifying nation. The Bass' mother is one half mulatto8but black] and Native American and she identifies as solely black, though acknowledging her obvious Native American ancestry, so not all mixed race people are confused. True, you have some people who do seem confused about how to identify, but so are white Americans who want to identify as Aryans or members of the so called "Aryan race", when in reality they're just white Americans or Eurodescendant Americans, no more no less. Like it or not the world is already a smorgasboard of people of different mixtures and if the one drop rule still really existed over one third of white Americans would be non-white.

And William Joyce, do some reading on the genetic and phenotypic variation of people of African descent, we have the highest phenotypic and genetic variation of anyone in the world, well at least in Africa, sub-Saharan Africa, so black people by default do not all look alike and or similar. You have black Africans with naturally straight hai, some with nappy hair, some with lighter skin, some with very dark skin, some with thin lips and some with full lips, all of this exists in sub-Saharan Africa.


----------



## wayne (Jun 24, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> Most mixed race people in the US identify with one so calld "race" because the US is a predominately monoracial identifying nation. The Bass' mother is one half mulatto8but black] and Native American and she identifies as solely black, though acknowledging her obvious Native American ancestry, so not all mixed race people are confused. True, you have some people who do seem confused about how to identify, but so are white Americans who want to identify as Aryans or members of the so called "Aryan race", when in reality they're just white Americans or Eurodescendant Americans, no more no less. Like it or not the world is already a smorgasboard of people of different mixtures and if the one drop rule still really existed over one third of white Americans would be non-white.
> 
> And William Joyce, do some reading on the genetic and phenotypic variation of people of African descent, we have the highest phenotypic and genetic variation of anyone in the world, well at least in Africa, sub-Saharan Africa, so black people by default do not all look alike and or similar. You have black Africans with naturally straight hai, some with nappy hair, some with lighter skin, some with very dark skin, some with thin lips and some with full lips, all of this exists in sub-Saharan Africa.



What tribe of black Africans is that has straight hair? The Bushmen do have very light skin for an unmixed Negroid people, but straight hair, I missed that.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 24, 2008)

wayne said:


> What tribe of black Africans is that has straight hair? The Bushmen do have very light skin for an unmixed Negroid people, but straight hair, I missed that.





You have East Africans like Somalis who have straight hair for example.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> yea, but you are a fucking idiot though.  Remember what I said about chumming it up with people who enjoy ****** jokes?



And your someone with a School yard mentality, who can not have conversation without the use of some kind of mentally deranged profaine language. Why don't you commit suicide like some of the other metal heads
nut jobs.What was that heavy  metal group "mega Death", had a song where
the bugged out whiteboys listened to it and started commiting suicide during the 1980's?,why don't you get that record weirdo.Play it backwards if you have to.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 24, 2008)

Listen Iam a Black person that is not for Interracial marriage. I have my reasons!.
The Blacks with the Blacks ,you whites with Whites ,get it?.


----------



## Shogun (Jun 24, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> And your someone with a School yard mentality, who can not have conversation without the use of some kind of mentally deranged profaine language. Why don't you commit suicide like some of the other metal heads
> nut jobs.What was that heavy  metal group "mega Death", had a song where
> the bugged out whiteboys listened to it and started commiting suicide during the 1980's?,why don't you get that record weirdo.Play it backwards if you have to.



HAHAHAHA!!


i'll go ahead and let the laurels of your own stupid post stand on it's own, dude.


Indeed, we really saw a lot come out of that whole debil worshipping load of shit that you and geraldo fell for hook line and sinker too, didn't we?


and it was Judas Priest you dumb bastard.


----------



## Shogun (Jun 24, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> Listen Iam a Black person that is not for Interracial marriage. I have my reasons!.
> The Blacks with the Blacks ,you whites with Whites ,get it?.



no. I don't. Thats about as fucking ignorant as segregated schools and water fountains.  But i'll let your good ole boy neighbors share that punchline with you.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> HAHAHAHA!!
> 
> 
> i'll go ahead and let the laurels of your own stupid post stand on it's own, dude.
> ...



Well get that "Judas Priest" "Suicide Solution" Album, and crank it up on your Ipod or surround sound system will ya?.


----------



## Shogun (Jun 24, 2008)

suicide solution was OZZY, brainiac.  google is your friend.


and, I do all the time.  I think I'll go ahead and stick around and haunt your dreams instead.



BOOO!


----------



## BrianH (Jun 24, 2008)

wayne said:


> What tribe of black Africans is that has straight hair? The Bushmen do have very light skin for an unmixed Negroid people, but straight hair, I missed that.









Sorry, couldn't resist.


----------



## Shattered (Jun 24, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> Listen Iam a Black person that is not for Interracial marriage. I have my reasons!.
> The Blacks with the Blacks ,you whites with Whites ,get it?.



Dummies with dummies, smarties with smarties?

You were one of those kids that spent your entire school "career" ripping off the white kids lunch money, and sneakers, weren't you?  You sure as hell weren't busy becoming literate.


----------



## William Joyce (Jun 24, 2008)

Shogun said:


> I think that you lose credibility when you use words like "most" without providing a source that conveys such.  If "figures bear this out" then post them.



You know it's never a good idea to tangle with an _informed_ Nazi nut case:

interracial marriage

_The rate of interracial marriage, however, is still relatively uncommon: in 2002, only 2.9 percent of all marriages were interracial, according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census._

I believe the rate of black/white marriages, within that fraction, is even smaller... based on eyeballing it from Kansas City to Brooklyn, I bet most are Asian woman/white man.  And I'll wager my fake "Got Mitt Uns" belt buckle from the flea market the Roxie Roker/Sy Kravitz pairing is probably one of fewer than 1,000 black/Jewish couples in the world.


----------



## Shogun (Jun 25, 2008)

William Joyce said:


> You know it's never a good idea to tangle with an _informed_ Nazi nut case:
> 
> interracial marriage
> 
> ...





Do you think that the statistics behind a minute ethnic sample of the American demogrpahic is all that impressive?  Why would you figure that 20% (blacks) paired with 2.5% (jews) would compare at all to the 75-80% of whites that pair up?  Do you doubt the validity of their affection or the success of their offspring?  I guess I wouldnt expect minority populations to reflect a similar union rate as the majority.  Does that mean that "MOST" people find inter-racial unions [fill in the blank]?  Hardly.


Here is the title of the source you provided
*
Interracial relationships are on the increase in U.S., but decline with age, Cornell study finds*

Older Americans may have a whole myriad of reasons for differeing from younger generations instead of what you are assuming.  I guess I didn't see where your source said that "most" reflect the motivation or mentallity that you suggest, dude.  


I know you are not a stupid guy.. far from it.  However, you are gonna have to try a bit harder with your sources.


----------



## wayne (Jun 25, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> You have East Africans like Somalis who have straight hair for example.



I believe that the Somalis are a mixed people. The Arabs have been in the area for at least two thousand years, trading, taking slave, and mixing with the local people. . They, the  Somalis,  could have easily picked up the straight hair gene from the Caucasoid Arabs.


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 25, 2008)

wayne said:


> I believe that the Somali&#8217;s are a mixed people. The Arabs have been in the area for at least two thousand years, trading, taking slave, and mixing with the local people. . They, the  Somalis,  could have easily picked up the straight hair gene from the Caucasoid Arabs.



Other than Ethiopians, they are probably the most mixed group of people still considered "black". Ethiopians are 30-60% caucasian, depending on the tribe. Both, as you suggest, are highly mixed with arabs, but in the case of Somalis also the Berbers.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 25, 2008)

wayne said:


> I believe that the Somalis are a mixed people. The Arabs have been in the area for at least two thousand years, trading, taking slave, and mixing with the local people. . They, the  Somalis,  could have easily picked up the straight hair gene from the Caucasoid Arabs.



Um, no, Somalis are the least admixed people in the Horn of Africa and Arabs themselves have more mixture from sub-saharan Africa. Somalis are mostly East African paternally and maternally, though straight hair isn't very common in the Horn amongst Somalis, they're mostly curly and wavy haired peoples. Do some reading up on the physical anthropology of SSA.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 25, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> Other than Ethiopians, they are probably the most mixed group of people still considered "black". Ethiopians are 30-60% caucasian, depending on the tribe. Both, as you suggest, are highly mixed with arabs, but in the case of Somalis also the Berbers.




No, Ethiopians are not 30-60% Caucasian, totally bogus, any mixture Ethiopians had didn't come from Arabs anyways and Somalis are not the most mixed people in SSA. If you would like the Bass can get an Ethiopian who posts on another forum that will explain this to you better than the Bass can.


----------



## Ravi (Jun 25, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> Um, no, Somalis are the least admixed people in the Horn of Africa and Arabs themselves have more mixture from sub-saharan Africa. Somalis are mostly East African paternally and maternally, though straight hair isn't very common in the Horn amongst Somalis, they're mostly curly and wavy haired peoples. Do some reading up on the physical anthropology of SSA.



I think you got one right there, Chaz.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> I think you got one right there, Chaz.





Are you East African?


----------



## Ravi (Jun 25, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> Are you East African?


No, I was reading up on gene mapping. IIRC, the Somalians and Ethiopians have pretty much the same ancestry as well.


----------



## ReillyT (Jun 25, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> Somalis are not the most mixed people in SSA.



Are you sure that they aren't mixed (forget the bit about most)?  I know that shit about Ethiopians being caucasian is crock, but I wouldn't be surprised if the people of Somalia don't have a lot of mixed ancestry (especially Arab) in their background.  They are a very homogenous group, but that doesn't mean that they don't share a common ancestry mixed with all the peoples moving back and forth through the Horn of Africa.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 25, 2008)

ReillyT said:


> Are you sure that they aren't mixed (forget the bit about most)?  I know that shit about Ethiopians being caucasian is crock, but I wouldn't be surprised if the people of Somalia don't have a lot of mixed ancestry (especially Arab) in their background.  They are a very homogenous group, but that doesn't mean that they don't share a common ancestry mixed with all the peoples moving back and forth through the Horn of Africa.



No, Arabs have left virtually no genetic impact on the Somali genepool, but other Africans like Bantu speakers have left a significant impact on the Arab genepool, I have tons of studies that confirm this. Most of the mixture that is in Ethiopia and Somalia is very old, during the Early Holocene/ late Paleolithic timeframe.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 25, 2008)

Ravi said:


> No, I was reading up on gene mapping. IIRC, the Somalians and Ethiopians have pretty much the same ancestry as well.




The Oromo Ethiopians are virtually the same or close to the same as Somalis and indeed they're very closely related.


----------



## ReillyT (Jun 25, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> No, Arabs have left virtually no genetic impact on the Somali genepool, but other Africans like Bantu speakers have left a significant impact on the Arab genepool, I have tons of studies that confirm this. Most of the mixture that is in Ethiopia and Somalia is very old, during the Early Holocene/ late Paleolithic timeframe.



Apparently, you are correct.



> Genetic genealogy, although a new tool that uses the genes of modern populations to trace their ethnic and geographic origins has also helped pinpoint the possible background of the modern Somalis. According to one prominent study published in the European Journal of Human Genetics, the Somalis are closely related to certain Ethiopian and Eritrean groups:
> The data suggest that the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population &#8722; closely related to the Oromos in Ethiopia and North Kenya &#8722; with predominant E3b1 cluster lineages that were introduced into the Somali population 4000&#8722;5000 years ago, and that the Somali male population has approximately 15% Y chromosomes from Eurasia and approximately 5% from sub-Saharan Africa.[12]



Somali people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 25, 2008)

ReillyT said:


> Apparently, you are correct.
> 
> 
> 
> Somali people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



I have rthe actual full text study from where that citation comes from in my yahoo group.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 25, 2008)

I still feel the races of the World should not be mixing with each other.The White and Black Race should stay separate. The White gene pool must stick with the White gene pool, and the Black African gene pool should marry within the Black gene pool. We must stop this insane cross breading.It is unnatural. The White race went into Africa, and purchased slaves,to intermingle their genes, and it was a big mistake.We should try,
to reverse what the slave traders started 700 years ago.Their abomination can be repaired over time,Gods willing.It is a sin what the Europeans did,genetically,creating a 
race of mullatos,and mixed up people, who still suffer a tremendous insult even today
in 2008, from Whites, and pure Blacks.
When will White America realize what their ancestors did to the Black race,our women were raped,and the offspring was ,and will always be seen as a child of "Rape".
For all to see,with their mixed race features.Do you all realize what that means to be seen as a Child of "Rape", and a decendant of a "Slave" master system?
So, please,you people preaching race mixing between Blacks and Whites,think a little before you make those insane posts,saying "Oh it's all right that the Races mix with each other,well it is not all right!"Its all wrong!!.
We don't need to revisit the past with mixed race offspring,from the slave masters plantation.


----------



## ReillyT (Jun 25, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> I still feel the races of the World should not be mixing with each other.The White and Black Race should stay separate. The White gene pool must stick with the White gene pool, and the Black African gene pool should marry within the Black gene pool. We must stop this insane cross breading.It is unnatural. The White race went into Africa, and purchased slaves,to intermingle their genes, and it was a big mistake.We should try,
> to reverse what the slave traders started 700 years ago.Their abomination can be repaired over time,Gods willing.It is a sin what the Europeans did,genetically,creating a
> race of mullatos,and mixed up people, who still suffer a tremendous insult even today
> in 2008, from Whites, and pure Blacks.
> ...



Get over it.

The species is strengthened from variation in the gene pool.  

Children today are not viewed as descendants of the Slave/Master system except by nutcases like you.  We don't need to revisit the past.  Look forward to our mixed-race future.  Hooray!


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 25, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> The Oromo Ethiopians are virtually the same or close to the same as Somalis and indeed they're very closely related.



Don't waste my god damn time with your fantasies.The Oromo are about 60% caucasian. They are the most caucasian ethnic group from Ethiopia. As a whole, the ethiopians are about 40% caucasian.  See Poloni et al. 1997.


Get this afro-shit the fuck out, before I put the beatdown on "your bass" like your dumb ass has never seen.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 26, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> Don't waste my god damn time with your fantasies.The Oromo are about 60% caucasian. They are the most caucasian ethnic group from Ethiopia. As a whole, the ethiopians are about 40% caucasian.  See Poloni et al. 1997.
> 
> 
> Get this afro-shit the fuck out, before I put the beatdown on "your bass" like your dumb ass has never seen.



You know what? Bring it on and as a matter of fact I can get an Ethiopian here to confirm what I say you idiot, Oromo aren't 60% "Caucasian", no group in Ethiopia is 60% Caucasian you dummy, how many studies have you actually read?


----------



## casper402032 (Jun 26, 2008)

ReillyT said:


> Get over it.
> 
> The species is strengthened from variation in the gene pool.
> 
> Children today are not viewed as descendants of the Slave/Master system except by nutcases like you.  We don't need to revisit the past.  Look forward to our mixed-race future.  Hooray!



Exactly.  Just about everywhere you go nowadays you see white/black children being pushed in strollers by young white mothers or black grandmothers. Ppl can hate it all they want but it's here and its not going anywhere anytime soon.


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 26, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> You know what? Bring it on and as a matter of fact I can get an Ethiopian here to confirm what I say you idiot, Oromo aren't 60% "Caucasian", no group in Ethiopia is 60% Caucasian you dummy, how many studies have you actually read?



On eithiopians specifically? At least 5-6, most by Paloni or Sforza. And, sorry to say, but, yes, the Oromo are "more white" than they are black. Cry about it. Or go to sleep and dream your little afro-fantasies. A little dancing sambo in Egypt and the horn of Africa no doubt.


----------



## wayne (Jun 26, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> You know what? Bring it on and as a matter of fact I can get an Ethiopian here to confirm what I say you idiot, Oromo aren't 60% "Caucasian", no group in Ethiopia is 60% Caucasian you dummy, how many studies have you actually read?



Just because someone is Ethiopian does not mean that have any more knowledge than anyone else. For example, many people believe that men have always worn pants or that people have always been world travelers.

It would seem that anywhere Caucasians, whites and Arabs, colonized they would have left some genetic imprint. Some people will always mix that is just they do and have always done.


----------



## 52ndStreet (Jun 26, 2008)

ReillyT said:


> Get over it.
> 
> The species is strengthened from variation in the gene pool.
> 
> Children today are not viewed as descendants of the Slave/Master system except by nutcases like you.  We don't need to revisit the past.  Look forward to our mixed-race future.  Hooray!



Who species is strenthened?,the Caucasian race has many genetic mutations
in their gene pool. Who's species is strenthened Reilly T?.I for one feel the Black race contaminates its gene pool by mixing
with other races.The Black race being the oringinal, and oldest gene pool, according to anthropological studies.


----------



## Shogun (Jun 26, 2008)




----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 26, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> Who species is strenthened?,the Caucasian race has many genetic mutations
> in their gene pool. Who's species is strenthened Reilly T?.I for one feel the Black race contaminates its gene pool by mixing
> with other races.The Black race being the oringinal, and oldest gene pool, according to anthropological studies.



The first homo sapiens could have had purple skin for all we know. This is just a bunch of nonsense you are spewing. And mixing genetic pools really is not all that beneficial in all cases. Assume you have two bird breeds that can interbreed:

Birdus longus
and
Birdus shortus

The longus species has a long beak and it can easily suck the nectar out of certain local flowers very well and does so to substain itself.

The shurtus breed has a short. stout beak that can break local nuts open, which it then 6eats to substain itself.

However, over the years they interbreed, and they create a species of medium beaked birds that can neither get to the nectar nor crack the nuts open without cracking their own beaks. 

The species goes extinct.

Humans have survived as a species and climbed to the top of the food change not because of any great phsysical traits. In fact, we are pretty weak, clumsy and myopic compared to the rest of the animal kingdom. But we have that big fat brain on our shoulders. Our one great asset. 

Speaking of myopia, its interesting that things like myopia, which is genetically based, is highly correlated with greater intelligence. Maybe the slower, weaker, and blinder we become as a species, the smarter we will get. It's doubtful now, though, because social programs have alrgely circumvented survival of the fittest when it comes to humans.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 26, 2008)

wayne said:


> Just because someone is Ethiopian does not mean that have any more knowledge than anyone else. For example, many people believe that men have always worn pants or that people have always been world travelers.
> 
> It would seem that anywhere Caucasians, whites and Arabs, colonized they would have left some genetic imprint. Some people will always mix that is just they do and have always done.



Arabs and whites have never colonized Ethiopia, no evidence exists for that and the Ethiopian I know has genetic studies that prove this and we have both discussed this topic ad-naseum for the last 3 years.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 26, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> On eithiopians specifically? At least 5-6, most by Paloni or Sforza. And, sorry to say, but, yes, the Oromo are "more white" than they are black. Cry about it. Or go to sleep and dream your little afro-fantasies. A little dancing sambo in Egypt and the horn of Africa no doubt.




Oromo are *NOT* more white than black and not even white in anyway at all. lets me school your stupid self:

Oromo are mostly E3b1 paternally, which is an East African male haplogroup, only 3.8% of Oromo have any mixture indicative of West Eurasia and this infusion of West Eurasian mixture came very early before there were any people called Arabs and from a people who's phenotype we don't even know. Arabs are mostly haplogroup J-M267, which is high, but not predominant in Ethiopian Amharas due to *FOUNDER EFFECT and GENETIC DRIFT*, not an influx of Arabs. In fact, Ethiopian J-M267 predates the Arab language and any group called "Arabs".


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 26, 2008)

Say good-bye to dancing sambo.


Notably, 62% of the Ethiopians fall in the first cluster, which encompasses the majority of the Jews, Norwegians and Armenians, indicating that placement of these individuals in a Black cluster would be an inaccurate reflection of the genetic structure. Only 24% of the Ethiopians are placed in the cluster with the Bantu and most of the Afro-Caribbeans. (Passarino et al. 1998)  

On the basis of historical, linguistic, and genetic data, it has been suggested that the Ethiopian population has been strongly affected by Caucasoid migrations since Neolithic times. On the basis of autosomal polymorphic loci, it has been estimated that 60% of the Ethiopian gene pool has an African origin, whereas ~40% is of Caucasoid derivation. Our Ethiopian sample also lacks the sY81-G allele, which was associated with 86% and 69% of Senegalese and mixed-African YAP+ chromosomes, respectively. This suggests that male-mediated gene flow from Niger-Congo speakers to the Ethiopian population was probably very limited  Caucasoid gene flow into the Ethiopian gene pool occurred predominantly through males. Conversely, the Niger-Congo contribution to the Ethiopian population occurred mainly through females.  (Poloni et al. 1997)

Ethiopian mitochondrial DNA heritage: tracking gen...[Am J Hum Genet. 2004] - PubMed Result
Human Biology 75.2 (2003) 293-300  
 The occurrence of E*5 212 and E*5 204 alleles in two populations of the Mediterranean basin (Turkey and Italy) but not in West Africans can be explained by taking into account that the Ethiopian gene pool was estimated to be >40% of Caucasoid derivation (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994). In addition, more recent phylogenetic analysis based on classical protein polymorphism (Tartaglia et al. 1996) and Y-chromosome sequence variation (Underhill et al. 2000) showed that Ethiopians appear to be distinct from Africans and more closely associated with populations of the Mediterranean basin.

Genetic Variation at Apolipoprotein E Locus in Ethiopia:
An E5 Variant Corresponds to Two Different Mutant Alleles: E*5 (Glu212Lys) and E*5 (Gln204Lys; Cys112Arg) R. Scacchi et al. 
Approximately 10 miles separate the Horn of Africa from the Arabian Peninsula at Bab-el-Mandeb (the Gate of Tears). Both historic and archaeological evidence indicate tight cultural connections, over millennia, between these two regions. High-resolution phylogenetic analysis of 270 Ethiopian and 115 Yemeni mitochondrial DNAs was performed in a worldwide context, to explore gene flow across the Red and Arabian Seas. Nine distinct subclades, including three newly defined ones, were found to characterize entirely the variation of Ethiopian and Yemeni L3 lineages. Both Ethiopians and Yemenis contain an almost-equal proportion of Eurasian-specific M and N and African-specific lineages and therefore cluster together in a multidimensional scaling plot between Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African populations. Phylogeographic identification of potential founder haplotypes revealed that approximately one-half of haplogroup L0-L5 lineages in Yemenis have close or matching counterparts in southeastern Africans, compared with a minor share in Ethiopians. Newly defined clade L6, the most frequent haplogroup in Yemenis, showed no close matches among 3,000 African samples. These results highlight the complexity of Ethiopian and Yemeni genetic heritage and are consistent with the introduction of maternal lineages into the South Arabian gene pool from different source populations of East Africa. A high proportion of Ethiopian lineages, significantly more abundant in the northeast of that country, trace their western Eurasian origin in haplogroup N through assorted gene flow at different times and involving different source populations. (Toomas Kivisild et al.)

Though present-day Ethiopia is a land of great ethnic diversity, the majority of Ethiopians speak different Semitic, Cushitic, and Omotic languages that belong to the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum. Maternal lineages of Semitic- (Amharic, Tigrinya, and Gurage) and Cushitic- (Oromo and Afar) speaking populations studied here reveal that their mtDNA pool is a nearly equal composite of sub-Saharan and western Eurasian lineages. This finding, consistent with classic genetic-marker studies (Cavalli-Sforza 1997) and previous mtDNA results, is also in agreement with a similarly high proportion of western Asian Y chromosomes in Ethiopians (Passarino et al. 1998; Semino et al. 2002), which supports the view (Richards et al. 2003) that the observed admixture between sub-Saharan African and, most probably, western Asian ancestors of the Ethiopian populations applies to their gene pool in general. (Am. J. Hum. Genet., 75:000, 2004)

The present composition of the Ethiopian population is the result of a complex and extensive intermixing of different peoples of North African, Near and Middle Eastern, and south-Saharan origin. The two main groups inhabiting the country are the Amhara, descended from Arabian conquerors, and the Oromo, the most important group among the Cushitic people.  The genetic distance analysis showed the separation between African and non-African populations, with the Amhara and Oromo located in an intermediate position. (De Stefano et al. 2002)


Non sub-Saharan African samples are all grouped togetherwiththe Ethiopian Amharic sample [on the Y-chromosome]. Ethiopians are not statistically differentiated from the Egyptian and Tunisian samples, in agreement with their linguistic affiliation with the Afro-Asiatic family. (Scacchi et al. 2003)


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 26, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> Say good-bye to dancing sambo.
> 
> 
> Notably, 62% of the Ethiopians fall in the first cluster, which encompasses the majority of the Jews, Norwegians and Armenians, indicating that placement of these individuals in a Black cluster would be an inaccurate reflection of the genetic structure. Only 24% of the Ethiopians are placed in the cluster with the Bantu and most of the Afro-Caribbeans. (Passarino et al. 1998)
> ...



You idiot, I know where you got that information from, and I personally debated the person who wrote that nonsense.


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 26, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> You idiot, I know where you got that information from, and I personally debated the person who wrote that nonsense.



S'ok afropuff, even Sambos have to die sometime.

The person did not "write it"; it's almost entirely copied verbatim from the studies listed. I guess you have a problem with some of the greatest population geneticists on the planet, eh?


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 26, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> S'ok afropuff, even Sambos have to die sometime.
> 
> The person did not "write it"; it's almost entirely copied verbatim from the studies listed. I guess you have a problem with some of the greatest population geneticists on the planet, eh?




No, you copied and pasted that info from this site liar:


Racial Reality - Ethiopians


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 26, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> No, you copied and pasted that info from this site liar:
> 
> 
> Racial Reality - Ethiopians



I sure did. And I verified half the exceprts. It's legit. You are not. You are a pathological lieing afropuff of dogshit. 

Verify for your own dumb ass self:
http://ucl.ac.uk/tcga/tcgapdf/Wilson-NatGen-01-GDR.pdf

Search for "notably" and kiss Sambo good-bye. Do I need to hold your hand to check all the other cites?


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 26, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> S'ok afropuff, even Sambos have to die sometime.
> 
> The person did not "write it"; it's almost entirely copied verbatim from the studies listed. I guess you have a problem with some of the greatest population geneticists on the planet, eh?




"Notably, 62% of the Ethiopians fall in the first cluster, which encompasses the majority of the Jews, Norwegians and Armenians, indicating that placement of these individuals in a Black cluster would be an inaccurate reflection of the genetic structure. Only 24% of the Ethiopians are placed in the cluster with the Bantu and most of the Afro-Caribbeans. (Passarino et al. 1998)"

I actually emailed and got and got a response from Wilson et al, on that 62% figure and this is what he said:


Dear Mr. Rigaud,

Thank you for your email. I am interested to know more about your 
project. What are its aims? Where are you reading Anthropology? Who is 
supervising you?

The link you provided is broken, but I presume it related to Table 2 of

my paper where the proportion of Ethiopian ancestry lying in cluster A 
is given as 62%. This corresponds to what is often called Western 
Eurasian ancestry.

I am sure that the origin of non-Africans in East Africa is part of the

reason for this finding, but it is also likely that more recent (within

the last 20,000 years) gene flow across the Bab el Mandeb will 
contribute to this situation. *The degree to which the 'mixed' ancestry 
is due to recent vs ancient mixing/separation could be estimated with a

series of genealogical genetic systems such as the Y chromosome, but
 not 
with lots of unlinked loci each of which gives very little gene 
genealogical information. Unfortunately we are not at that stage yet
 and 
there are still a large number of unsolved multifurcations even in the
 Y 
tree which pertain directly to this question. And the Y is only one 
genetic locus. There are also hints from mtDNA of course. It should 
eventually be able to take the lineages that we see in E Africa and 
dissect out those that are due to what I am calling recent 
(back-)migration (as they would descend from lineages originating 
outside Africa), we could probably identify those that provide evidence

that E Africa is the homeland of non-Africans (those which are the 
closest in the gene tree to the non-African lineages, closer than all 
the other African lineages, and perhaps not found outside E Africa, or 
at least with much lower diversity) and finally the aboriginal African 
lineages which are found across Africa. As E Africa may also be the 
place where our species arose, there may also be a fourth type of 
lineage which would also be more diverse in East Africa, the deepest 
lineages of all, the first branches in the gene tree. This is an 
idealised situation and not all gene trees would show it but given 
enough of them we should begin to pick out whether this scenario or 
another represents our history.*

It is a great shame that the human genome diversity panel does not 
include any samples from the horn of Africa, as we would probably then 
have seen the same pattern in Noah Rosenberg's Science paper using 
Structure. There are a number of areas around the world in which 
admixture has occurred in pre-Colombian times between indigenous 
populations, eg Island South East Asia and Central Asia, the Malagasy 
etc. Then of course the colonial legacy has left millions of much more 
recently admixed populations in the Americas and all over. But the horn

of Africa and around is unique in that non-Africans descend from 
populations in this area. This is what makes this particular case of 
admixture very interesting.

*I certainly did not intend to give anyone the impression that Ethipians

were 62% "Caucasian" or somehow 'not black'. The entire point of the 
paper is to show that labels such as Caucasian and black do not reflect

the underlying genetics very well and it is the underlying genetic 
structure that matters for things like drug response and disease 
susceptibility.*

I hope this clarifies things for you.
Don't hesitate to get in touch if I can be of further assistance.
All best wishes,
Jim


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 26, 2008)

That's right. What he's saying, which you are probably too stupid to understand, is that he classified them on the basis of the Y-chromosome, which would only gauge a male gene flow. But, then you need to calibrated for the mtDNA, which goes through the female line. This is why Sforza came to a ~40% caucasian admixture when he calculated both and not a 62% caucasian figure.

You clearly don't know wtf you are talking about, and I doubt emailing anyone will rectify the problem.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 26, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> I sure did. And I verified half the exceprts. It's legit. You are not. You are a pathological lieing afropuff of dogshit.
> 
> Verify for your own dumb ass self:
> http://ucl.ac.uk/tcga/tcgapdf/Wilson-NatGen-01-GDR.pdf
> ...



Did you read the entire study or did you just verify the quotes? For example you quoted this study:

Ethiopian mitochondrial DNA heritage: tracking gen...[Am J Hum Genet. 2004] - PubMed Result

I debated the idiots who posted the snippet you posted and exposed their stupidity:

"In contrast, the similarity of Amharas and Oromos, also expressed in other genetic loci (Fort et al. 1998; Corbo et al. 1999), supports the idea that amharization may have been largely a sociocultural rather than a genetic phenomenon. Yet, it is important to add here that Y-chromosomal haplogroup J1-M267, which is widespread throughout Arab-speaking countries and encompasses a third of Amharan Y chromosomes, has hardly penetrated the Cushitic-speaking Oromo population (Semino et al. 2004)."


"Several mtDNA haplogroupssuch as (preHV)1, U6, and some subbranches of L3 that Ethiopians share with North African populationsdisplay coalescent times in the early Holocene (table 3) a similar period to that estimated for North and East African Y chromosomes in haplogroup E3b1-M78, which is abundant and may have originated in Ethiopia (Cruciani et al. 2004; Luis et al. 2004). It is interesting that, like E3b1-M78, these mtDNA haplogroups are infrequent or absent in our Yemeni sample (table 1). Note that the identified time window is close to the proposed division of the Semitic and Cushitic branches of Afro-Asiatic languages (Militarev 2003) and corresponds broadly to the beginning of deep environmental changes in the deserts of the Sahara and the Arabian Peninsula, when those regions recovered from their widest span and most extreme aridity during the Last Glacial Maximum period.

On the other hand, similar to mtDNA haplogroup (preHV)1, Y-chromosomal haplogroup J1-M267 can be identified as the sole branch that is highly abundant in the Near and Middle East and in northeastern and East Africa (Underhill et al. 2000; Semino et al. 2002, 2004; Luis et al. 2004). Higher STR diversity of this Y-chromosomal clade among Europeans and Ethiopians, as compared with populations from northeastern Africa and the Middle East, suggests that it may have reached Ethiopia (and Europe) early in the Holocene, whereas its frequent spread in North Africa and the Middle East may have been driven by the expansion of Arabs since the 7th century (Semino et al. 2004). "


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 26, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> That's right. What he's saying, which you are probably too stupid to understand, is that he classified them on the basis of the Y-chromosome, which would only gauge a male gene flow. But, then you need to calibrated for the mtDNA, which goes through the female line. This is why Sforza came to a ~40% caucasian admixture when he calculated both and not a 62% caucasian figure.
> 
> You clearly don't know wtf you are talking about, and I doubt emailing anyone will rectify the problem.



Sforza didn't study the mtDNA and Y chromosone of Ethiopians, he did an autosomal study you moron, that was published almost 12 years ago.


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 26, 2008)

Save the babble. Sforza, the greatest modern human population geneticist says that the Ethiopians are 40% caucasian. 

*THE END.*


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 26, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> Sforza didn't study the mtDNA and Y chromosone of Ethiopians, he did an autosomal study you moron, that was published almost 12 years ago.



I don't remember. But if you expect me to believe they were doing autosomal analysis in the early 80's, you must take me and anyone reading this for an idiot. 99.9% of the people reading this won't know how ridiculous that claim is given what sforza was trying to accomplish.

What study do you believe he used, btw? Full citation.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 28, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> Save the babble. Sforza, the greatest modern human population geneticist says that the Ethiopians are 40% caucasian.
> 
> *THE END.*




Sforza isn't the greatest modern human population geneticist, it was in an autosomal study that was published in his book where he said this, in which he also likewise said that Khoisan were also 51% West Eurasian and 49% African, that view is no longer accepted you moron.  And not all Ethiopians are heavily mixed, the Oromo as the Bass has pointed out again and again, have certainly less admixture than Amharas, but this mixture came very early in the Late Paleolithic era, which means Ethiopians have virtually no recent admixzure from Arabs.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 28, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> I don't remember. But if you expect me to believe they were doing autosomal analysis in the early 80's, you must take me and anyone reading this for an idiot. 99.9% of the people reading this won't know how ridiculous that claim is given what sforza was trying to accomplish.
> 
> What study do you believe he used, btw? Full citation.



How is 12 years ago the early 80s you moron? Have you read Sforza's book?


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 28, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> How is 12 years ago the early 80s you moron? Have you read Sforza's book?



Why the fuck did you say "Almost 12 years ago", then?

His book and first ethiopian study was in 1994, the one cited. How the fuck does 2008-1994 = "almost 12 years ago"?

I thought you were saying that the study he used in his 1994 was already 12 years old. It's the only thing that made sense. Even a monkey knows 2008-1994 is not "almost 12 years".

He did later study which I've read, Y-chromosome, which matched his early studies. So it doesn't matter in my mind if was looking at autosomes or not in 1994. I'm not tracking down his 50 pound lexicon to look.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 28, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> Why the fuck did you say "Almost 12 years ago", then?
> 
> His book and first ethiopian study was in 1994, the one cited. How the fuck does 2008-1994 = "almost 12 years ago"?
> 
> ...



There's a big difference between autosomes and Y-chromosones you idiot, Y-chromosones study the male line only and autosomes are gender neutral. There are clear differences between Ethiopian groups in relation to their Y-chromosones, that was already posted for you to se by yours truly. Cavalli-Sforza did no later study of Ethiopian Y-chromosones, post that study or the name of it.


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 28, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> There's a big difference between autosomes and Y-chromosones you idiot, Y-chromosones study the male line only and autosomes are gender neutral. There are clear differences between Ethiopian groups in relation to their Y-chromosones, that was already posted for you to se by yours truly. Cavalli-Sforza did no later study of Ethiopian Y-chromosones, post that study or the name of it.



Dumb fuck, I wasn't saying they were the same. The Y-chromosome and mtDNA studies done later *all agree on Sforza's first interpretation of the "racial" admixture of ethiopians*. Ethiopians are from 40-60% caucasian, depending on the group.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 28, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> Dumb fuck, I wasn't saying they were the same. The Y-chromosome and mtDNA studies done later *all agree on Sforza's first interpretation of the "racial" admixture of ethiopians*. Ethiopians are from 40-60% caucasian, depending on the group.




No, you are still wrong you damn jackass, Ethiopians are *NOT* 40-60% Caucasian, damn, how can anyone be so dense. Even the most mixed ones don't exceed having 47% West Eurasian mixture, but none of that mixture is recent admixture attributed to modern ethnic groups you idiot, I have read Passarino et al' study, and his study wasn't done using actual Y-chromosone markers, just a portion of the Y-chromosone itself. Do you know what YAP+ is? YAP+ is simply those Y-chromosones that fall up under haplogroups DE*, haplogroup D, and haplogroup E, those are the only Y-chromosones that carry the YAP+ mutation. DE* is exclusively African, D is Asian, and E is African, but not exclusively African since it left the African continent in the Late Paleolithic[Underhill et al, 2001]. Ethiopians just don't have haplogroup E, they have haplogroups A and B which are African and lack the YAP+ mutation. A and B haplogroups are the deep male lineages in the entire human male genome[Underhill et al 2001] Some Ethiopian groups like the Amhara have high frequencies of haplogroup J, where it appears at a frequency of 35%, the rest of their ancestry paternally is African.



Charts and figures will come in the next post.


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 28, 2008)

Actually, I want to see your PhD in: 

Genetics
Molecular genetics
Bioinformatics
Biocheistry

You seem to think you know more than a dozen highly credible scientists. What is your credibility? "You know a real eithiopian", right?


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 28, 2008)

Frequencies of haplogroup E in Ethiopian Oromo and Amhara









Haplogroup J in Ethiopian Oromo and Amhara






Source: http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/AJHG_2004_v74_p1023-1034.pdf


Look at the huge difference in frequencies between Oromos and Amharas in respect to haplogroups E and J, no way Ethiopians are 40%-60% "Caucasian". Almost forgot haplogroups A and B:








Source: http://hpgl.stanford.edu/publications/AJHG_2002_v70_p265-268.pdf

Groups I and II correspond to haplogroups A and B, Group III is obviously haplogroup E and Group VI is haplogroup J, note even the same differences you idiot.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 28, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> Actually, I want to see your PhD in:
> 
> Genetics
> Molecular genetics
> ...



I know more about genetics than you do, because you're making claims, yet if I posted studies with haplogroups and haplotypes you wouldn't be able to differentiate between which ones are African in origin and those that are Eurasian in origin.


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 28, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> I know more about genetics than you do, because you're making claims, yet if I posted studies with haplogroups and haplotypes you wouldn't be able to differentiate between which ones are African in origin and those that are Eurasian in origin.



You've posted a bunch of bullshit and red herrings, like your "ethiopian friend". 

Sell your afroshit to the low IQ trash who buys your garbage.


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 28, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> You've posted a bunch of bullshit and red herrings, like your "ethiopian friend".
> 
> Sell your afroshit to the low IQ trash who buys your garbage.



What the Bass posted was information too complex for your low IQ brain to decipher, but if you would have the sources it would have been made easier for you to understand.

The Bass' Ethiopian friend posts on this forum:


Human Biodiversity Forum


His name is Ezana.


----------



## nomdeplume (Jun 28, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> What the Bass posted was information too complex for your low IQ brain to decipher, but if you would have the sources it would have been made easier for you to understand.
> 
> The Bass' Ethiopian friend posts on this forum:
> 
> ...



Nice bullshit afrocentrist site. A bunch of afrocentric morons expounding on shit they don't even understand fully. I never claimed to know any more than the scientists I've read who have all pointed out the caucasian admixture of ethiopians. You on the other hand, think you do. After all, you have an ethiopian friend. How could anyone argue against such firepower.


----------



## Gunny (Jun 28, 2008)

wayne said:


> Racism is a dangerous philosophy for a warrior.  In WW II it was a common belief at the beginning of the war that the Japanese soldier was physically inferior.  He was small and half blind which made him a bad shot.  The survivors soon learned he could shoot good enough to kill you and was big enough to be dangerous.




LOL ... or when some dumb, arrogant jarhead is screwing with some little Okinawan and ends up tied up in all kinds of knots on the ground and the Okinawan apologizing for doing it.


----------



## Gunny (Jun 28, 2008)

52ndStreet said:


> Well get that "Judas Priest" "Suicide Solution" Album, and crank it up on your Ipod or surround sound system will ya?.



Does listening to Ice T make you want to go out and shoot a cop?  Get real dude.


----------



## Gunny (Jun 28, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> Don't waste my god damn time with your fantasies.The Oromo are about 60% caucasian. They are the most caucasian ethnic group from Ethiopia. As a whole, the ethiopians are about 40% caucasian.  See Poloni et al. 1997.
> 
> 
> Get this afro-shit the fuck out, before I put the beatdown on "your bass" like your dumb ass has never seen.




If you want to "beat down" on someone you will kindly take it to the flame zone.  Whether or not you agree with someone, eveyone is entitled to their opinion and you will not stifle it. 

There is a subforum specifically designated for you to prove your e-prowess and e-balls in.  Use it please.

Thanks

Gunny


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jun 28, 2008)

nomdeplume said:


> Nice bullshit afrocentrist site. A bunch of afrocentric morons expounding on shit they don't even understand fully. I never claimed to know any more than the scientists I've read who have all pointed out the caucasian admixture of ethiopians. You on the other hand, think you do. After all, you have an ethiopian friend. How could anyone argue against such firepower.




Full of Afrocentrists? Are you just plain stupid or what? That board is owned by some white German dude with a dictator mentality you moron. Evidence was present by the Bass that your small brain couldn't even comprehend, piss off poindexter with your ad-hominem personal attacks.


----------



## Gunny (Jun 28, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> You know what? Bring it on and as a matter of fact I can get an Ethiopian here to confirm what I say you idiot, Oromo aren't 60% "Caucasian", no group in Ethiopia is 60% Caucasian you dummy, how many studies have you actually read?



Please read my preceding response to nomdeplume.  Verbally beat each other to death in the designated forum and leave this one to those that wish to discuss the topic.

Thanks


----------



## Bass v 2.0 (Jul 3, 2008)

wayne said:


> Just because someone is Ethiopian does not mean that have any more knowledge than anyone else. For example, many people believe that men have always worn pants or that people have always been world travelers.
> 
> It would seem that anywhere Caucasians, whites and Arabs, colonized they would have left some genetic imprint. Some people will always mix that is just they do and have always done.



The problem, Arabs, whites and so called Caucasians didn't colonize Ethiopia, it seems that no one has even read the history of Ethiopia and my Ethiopian friend is well versed in the genetic studies which confirm this. So called "Caucasians" have been colonized and have been mixed with by others, I don't know why people seem to think that so called "Caucasians" are the only ones who went around the leaving genes when evidence points to the fact theat they themselves have received various genetic inputs. 


Point blank, Ethiopians are not heavily mixed with Arabs and or "Caucasians".


----------



## Shogun (Jul 3, 2008)

GunnyL said:


> Does listening to Ice T make you want to go out and shoot a cop?  Get real dude.



no, but I HAVE that album.. on TAPE

you should have asked if listening to NWA makes a person rob a liquor store.

[youtube]gLhvDDeJem4[/youtube]


----------



## nomdeplume (Jul 3, 2008)

Charlie Bass said:


> The problem, Arabs, whites and so called Caucasians didn't colonize Ethiopia, it seems that no one has even read the history of Ethiopia ".



What a fucking moron. You ever heard of King Solomon? There has been a ton of genetic exchange between southern arabs and ethiopians. You probably want to split hairs over the word "colonized", but you are merely whipping a strawman.



Charlie Bass said:


> Point blank, Ethiopians are not heavily mixed with Arabs and or "Caucasians".



I guess it depends on your definition of "heavy". 40%-60% is pretty heavy in my book. Natural born mulatos.

It just pisses you off that the ethiopians are mix, a big thorn in the side of afrocentrist morons.


----------



## Unkotare (May 9, 2020)

52ndStreet said:


> I read an article about Barack Obamma, and how he felt , and many other mixed race people, that it is a benefit to be a Mulatto, or of mixed race.
> But I must say, contrary to popular belief, many Blacks that I know, are not
> for integration,or interracial marriage.
> 
> I think the media has this misconception that interracial marriage, is on the rise.It is not on the rise.


Oh yes, it is.


----------



## Unkotare (May 10, 2020)

52ndStreet said:


> The Bible says" Do not mix your seeds". I would never have any mixed race
> Children.They get called all kinds of names,like Zebra,or mongrel,Get my
> point.Who would want to subject their child to a lifetime of abuse and name calling. I think the thats whats makes us all unique, the beauty of diffrent and unique races,not this mixed up melting pot stew,that some people are trying to promote.It just doesn't look right. The Black Panthers does not sleep with the Lions or Chetahs in the Jungle.Animals don't intermix,I feel humans should not mix around also.


What a pathetic coward.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (May 10, 2020)

Unkotare said:


> 52ndStreet said:
> 
> 
> > The Bible says" Do not mix your seeds". I would never have any mixed race
> ...


The Bible? He says the bible says something and then IGNORES the fact that  Noah's son had a black wife. Remind me who did God instruct to safe the human race?


----------



## IM2 (May 10, 2020)

Blacks were against interracial relationships because we could get killed for being in them. Number 2 until 1967 it was against federal law.


----------

