Our logo is bigger now

Origins of Humanity: Africa?

108 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Sun, 2009-06-28 18:16

#1

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Origins of Humanity: Africa?

http://rabble.ca/babble/anti-racism-news-and-initiatives/how-react-appro...

thats the orig thread link k what I have to say

k so 1st of all we had a person going on about how mid eastern culture created stuff before europe BUT mid eastern culture is based off the culture of the orig inhabitants who it was stolen from which is africans. The orig jews were from ethiopia thats not even debated most of the white skinned jews you see today are from the kingdom of khazar which would be around modern day georgia str8 up.

Continuing u dont have to be white to be a white supremist bare other ppl are white supremists and it aint about being dark enuff to expierience racism lol what? Me personally since coming to KKKanada I got lighter im like a medium brown I used to be pure blacc plus about a south asian persepctive. South asia aint even the correct term ima have to say muthafucc the term that arabs and europeans collectively forced upon the ppl of East Ethiopia.

the afro-centric thing is not about africa only it called afro-centric because we are the 1st ppl and civilizations can be traceed to us. Take china for example it proven that east ethiopian and mandinka speakers as well as some pygmies went there and started shit the chinese called them the blacc headed ppl and they built pyradmids. Look at south east asians the pyramids in cambodia are the same as those of the aztecs as well as the fact that most south east asians just really look like africans with the epicantal fold which btw many africans have. (there were 2 major migrations of humans and the 1st one which basically resulted in all ppl except europeans is traced because those ppl carry the gene for the epicantal fold CDnE).

So continuing south east asians for example for the most part they are bhuddist for example and their culture is based off of east ethiopia or heavily influenced by it as well as their genetics. Denying the evidence of that is part of euro-centricism because not only does it seek to divide and conquer the colored ppl of the world it also seeks to discredit the true origins of their cultures another divide and conquer tactic.

Lets look at east ethiopia for example the 1st theory for the origin of sanskrit and pali 2 very old languages was that they started off as a way to speak to greek soldiers essentially saying that any "civilized" though started with the arrival of the 1sst white ppl there. When that was disproven they made a theory that was later discredited by the creator himself of a white skinned group of ppl called aryans invading and setting everything up. Now to this day new studies find shit that's older and older than before and the orig hyroglyphic text has not been translated yet. There more info on that after

But my point being that yall really went at afrohealer in that and many other threads and I dont know the full thing about it wasnt on this yet but looking at just that thread yall just proved the point the brotha was making.

Fri, 2009-06-26 23:04

#2

Erik Redburn

"the afro-centric thing is not about africa only it called afro-centric because we are the 1st ppl and civilizations can be traceed to us. Take china for example it proven that east ethiopian and mandinka speakers as well as some pygmies went there and started shit the chinese called them the blacc headed ppl and they built pyradmids. Look at south east asians the pyramids in cambodia are the same as those of the aztecs as well as the fact that most south east asians just really look like africans with the epicantal fold which btw many africans have. (there were 2 major migrations of humans and the 1st one which basically resulted in all ppl except europeans is traced because those ppl carry the gene for the epicantal fold CDnE)."

Um, no. Sorry, but Africans didn't invent everything. They did however contribute their fair share to world culture. Youre also mistaken about Eurpeans too, one of the first two migrations to Europe were from somewhere in Northern Africa. The whole world was populated by two not so different groups from Africa with a lot of mixing every step of the way. Thats about we know up to now and maybe all we'll ever know for sure*

*There may be some other pre-human ancestry (from earlier African migrations) mixed in along the way but that remains controversial.

Fri, 2009-06-26 23:27

#3

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

never said we invented everything but the fact of the matter is that the base foundation for every major culture esp the farther bacc you go is traced to an african presence there.

And yes I know about the migrations from north africa but im talking about the ones for the most part that ended up with eurpeans as they look today cuz white ppl have only been around for 10-15k years. And what do u mean all we'll ever know?

Dam I should post up the evidence of how advanced we really were. There are drawings on pyramids that resemble tanks, helicoptors etc on them. On top of that many places around the world have an affect where sand or rocc is fused into a glass like state which is caused by either comets or nuclear explosions. The fact that they remain radioactive till this day points to NWN (niggas wit nukes). cities in india have bodies that are still radioactive and the accounts of ancient stories of

1 weapon which contained the light of a 1000 suns, burned the faces of those even away from the explosion, poisened food and water, and how soldiers would take off their armor and jump into water to avoid it as well as saying it vaporized the bodies of those near the explosion and other stuff points to that. There are models of jet aircraft in pyramids in kemet as well as south amerikkka. and the way that you know it aint birds is because of the cross-sectional tail which no bird has but planes do.

ima pull the links out but erik I know my history mos def so dont even start cuz but u did so lets have a taste.

edit- http://www.africaspeaks.com/reasoning/index.php?topic=5106.0

edit- Another thing about the nuke they said that it sent a city underground off the coast of east ethiopia they just discovered those ruins go google it.

edit- Erik about the drawings thing sry ur gonna have to find it because there was an account on youtube of sum1 who had gone and filmed it themselves but many accounts of ppl who had they fist up got taken off of youtube still so sry it true tho still I dont need to lie about my history it stands for itself

Sat, 2009-06-27 00:32

#4

Erik Redburn

I'll get back after I read that piece through a bit further. Only a side point to what you were saying anyhow, don't let it derail you.

Sat, 2009-06-27 00:43

#5

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

yeye nothin personal u know

Sun, 2009-06-28 01:24

#6

Erik Redburn

Last note for tonight, I checked it out but it seems to about mysticism not history. Atlantis was just an old folk story, credited to semi-mythical bards like "Homer", but may have had some basis in fact as a distant memory of the destruction of the pre-Greek Minoan civilization by a nearby volcano. Nowadays its usually just referred to by believers in UFOs and such. African history from what little I've read is still very sketchy, partly due to a lack of old written records and partly due to our own Eurocentric bias, but theres better stuff out there if youre interested in the archeology of great classical civilizations like Zimbabwe, Mali, Axum or Benin etc.

Sun, 2009-06-28 01:52

#7

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

the basis for a story of atlantis is much older n the greeks proly stole it from a # of sources including the sunken city off the coast of east ethiopia. There bare records, and oral records are more trustable then written ones cuz white ppl couldnt fucc with them. U need to read more and kemet go read about it itz the 1st one and the basis for all of em

Sun, 2009-06-28 02:25

#8

Erik Redburn

If you keep insisting that it all comes down to white people=liars, black people=truth, then theres really not much else I can say to you, except that archeology is based on testable science not folk stories that happened to be passed down through books. Its just incomplete and influenced by those who interpret the data of course. Some ancient folk stories are indeed rooted in actual events, as even "white" scientists have rediscovered, but some are simply impossible as anything more than moral parables, psychologically meaningful myths perhaps, or maybe just light dinnertime entertainment. Even the most faithful renditions however, are bound to change somewhat over enough centuries of telling, that goes beyond regional cultural differences.

Sun, 2009-06-28 02:28

#9

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

na I aint even supporting the notion of atlantis im just saying where the story proly came from was not the greeks. Mainly cuz hmm the city I talked about for example that event estimated to happen 6-8k years ago n there was NO civilization in europe at that time

Sun, 2009-06-28 02:54

Erik Redburn

Europe is both older and younger than that according to the stones, but if there was no Atlantis then it could have been made up anytime before the first records of its telling. It's really not worth arguing about anyhow.

Sun, 2009-06-28 03:28

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

it is worth arguing about cuz it something of ourz that bein stolen and discredited. It maybe a story but there bare other shit that aint. Ur attemps to make the argument not legit by focusing on the 1 part that is a story shows ur white supremacy, racism and eurocentric mindset. This is because not being able to come up wit a good argument u resort to copouts like it aint worth arguing over.

Genetic studies shown that white ppl only been around 8-12k years (go search dis cuz) what that tell you is for one thing the spihnx might be older then white ppl, we got bare shit thatz that old or older and that shows the source for the story was clearly us cuz guess what? YALL niggas didnt exist.

On top of that as for europe the oldest cave paintings etc have ppl depicted as africans and it aint symbolic cuz they show the animals as lighter then them. They covered up the paintings they found in france for proly this very reason. if my elders shit being stolen and was stolen from them therefore me it is worth argugin about had a longer post but browser crashed but get the most of it.

now lets let sizza n capleton speak for it rip it brothas they speak the truth take quotes from them n it just restatin my point

[Sizzla:]
Ah more time you done know say
Holy mount Zion that's where the foundation build
Well traditionally you know say
everything got to full before it spill
Selasie I... Oh Lord

Well make dem know
Babylon while you spread you spill
What we don't have every ghetto youth will
Can't take our own uno better be still
And lef' and go 'cause you gonna draw nil
Eh Ey, Yo
While you spread you spill
What we don't have every ghetto youth will
Can't take our own uno better be still
And lef' and go 'cause you gonna draw nil

[Capleton]
Judgement

[Chorus: Capleton]
Babylon a use dem brain
True dem waan d ghetto youth dem fi go down the drain
Babylon a use dem brain
The mark of d beast the whole ah dem a proclaim
Babylon a use dem brain
Them only fight against herb and dem a shipping cocaine
Babylon a use dem brain
Well dem you know say bad mind dem ah go burn in tha flame

[Capleton:]
Oh what ah agony and oh what a shame
To see my black brother goin all down the drain
Man made to suffer and woman to feel pain
Dey rape mi mommy mi sister I say oh what a shame
Brother and mi father afi chop sugar cane
Pon the plantation under stress and shame
Pon dem hand and dem foot I just see chackles and chains
now dem take it off and put it pon dem brain
Through them ah mi nation fi go down the drain
now the youths dem realize and shout the Hailie Hailie name
Man no pet lion dat mean we can't tame
One thing is our desire one thing is our aim
Me say wicked Babylon and dem ah go down the drain

[Sizzla:]
Babylon while you spread you spill
What we don't have every ghetto youth will
Can't take our own uno better be still
And lef' and go 'cause you gonna get nil
Oy Oy Judgement

Oh what ah crisis you would cry facing this
Could dem ah come with dem kit jus to take every bit
Don't tink me doh know you are the boss fi your kit
but our share you won't be living wit
I tell dem how could dem cadet go down practice
Now I see dem own face and dem own wanna vomit
Ey ey ey you've not been kind
I've put you up and now you leave us behind
Now something drop from your back
nothing ah touch it cuz ah mine
What's due onto us uno fi give we every time
Babylon...

[Chorus: Capleton]
Babylon a use dem brain
True dem waan d ghetto youth dem fi go down the drain
Babylon a use dem brain
The mark of d beast the whole ah dem a proclaim
Babylon a use dem brain
Them only fight against herb and dem a shipping cocaine
Babylon a use dem brain
Well dem you know say bad mind dem ah go burn in tha flame

Well this is one thing I cannot overstand
dem nah teach me nothin bout mi Asian plan
Inna the school and the college and the institution
the curriculum that I get is European
Ah teach me bout Marco Polo and Napolean
Nah teach me nuttin bout the river Nile bank
where civilization it began
You say thou shall not steal and should not kill no one
yet you steal treacherize and then you teach wrong
[Sizzla] yea yea slave and you murder all mi dad and mi mom
But wicked Babylonian and you will love to burn
Babylon ah....

[Sizzla:]
Tell them come down, fire bun all politician
Ah cauzin dispute makin us their plan
Oh your dishonesty and war is their illustration
Competin' this is more than competition
Could they? they fightin jus to enslave black man
And now them parties jus ah cause bear partition
And who is you no one takes any instruction...

Sun, 2009-06-28 05:05

Erik Redburn

Enough already, I tried to leave you an easy out, but youre obviously pulling this stuff out of your hat as you go along and now youre accusing me of being a racist because I'm...white? Or because I dared disagree with you? Sorry, but I'm not the one insisting that everything good came from one group of people and everything bad from another, and I'd actually be rather insulted if anyone assumed I knew all about "white people" just because I was born with a pinkish hue. If you want to debate this further please provide some peer reviewed material on the subject first, with footnotes if possible, as thats something I am at least familiar with dealing with.

Sun, 2009-06-28 08:34

Maysie

Maysie's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi, a few comments about this thread.

The title doesn't match what you want to talk about. I'm going to need to change it as it's misleading at this point. If you have a suggestion let me know.

Talking about racism, and the connection to history is a challenging thing to do here. Song lyrics/poetry, as much as they may speak to you as saying the "truth" as you understand it (and I mostly agree with you, by the way) are not arguments towards proving your point. Maybe you just want to say your piece, in that case, go ahead.

It's fairly well accepted (although not completely) that Africa the continent, and Ethiopia the country is the place of the origins of both cro-magnon and the first homo sapiens. If that's what we're talking about. Since I'm not an anthropologist, I can't provide the material that Erik is asking for.

Sun, 2009-06-28 10:34

Ze

On a tangent, I'm not sure "white people" have been around for all that long. I think "white people" invented themselves and the whole idea of "whiteness" in the 19th C as part of the colonialist enterprise - the invention of the ida of "whiteness" is part and parcel of the invention of European racism, which went hand-in-hand with colonialism. Ben FRanklin called the Swedes "dark-skinned" as part of an effort to exclude them. "Whiteness" shifted its boundaries to suit the needs of white elites seeking to exclude others. No one in (say) New Guinea had any idea of so-called racial difference until white people came along and told them they were black and therefore inferior.

None of this detracts from the current systemic racism of our societies, I'm merely talking about the early constructions of race and "whiteness."

Sun, 2009-06-28 10:57

Unionist

Rexdale_Punjabi wrote:

But my point being that yall really went at afrohealer in that and many other threads and I dont know the full thing about it wasnt on this yet but looking at just that thread yall just proved the point the brotha was making.

Could have something to do with his condescending and superior attitude and non-stop namecalling. R_P, I rate you and him as opposites in my book. Please keep posting and enlightening us here!

Just some historical recollections from the 2008 thread you continued from:

[url=http://rabble.ca/comment/903399/Re-how-react-appropriately-when-accused-...

Quote:

I hope you don't mind if I point out that IMO your looking down and ridiculing of the non-white, non-black immigrants like me may be rooted in a colonialist mindset that thinks the world revolves around blacks and whites, and that every one else in the world who does not have an Afrocentric view, must have adopted a Eurocentric one. This is wrong.

Try to put aside the racist-colonialist glasses to see the world from the viewpoint of other cultures.

[url=http://rabble.ca/comment/903405/Re-how-react-appropriately-when-accused-...

Quote:

AfroHealer you continue to alienate instead of provide solidarity. You speak only of those who are dark skinned enough to understand. You speak as if all cultures and all people who are FN (including me) have not experienced anything close to your oppression. Then you jump on Unionist, who lost people to the Holocaust, and call him also a white supremest, completely ignoring his oppression and the way Jewish people feel and have been treated.

You can stick here with your racism, because that is what I call it. YOUR racism. You seem to think no one but dark skinned people can experience it. You dismiss my comments regarding Jewish and mixed race people, and then dare to call us as well, white supremacists.

We are not dark enough for this discussion according to you. Therefor the lot of us are racists. Bullshit AfroHealer. Not everything has to be seen through your eyes to make it valid. You want solidarity and peace, give us, the Jews and the mixed race people here, a voice. Do not dismiss us as if we have not suffered, or our families haven't. You do not own the market on oppression and frankly I am getting fed up with your one way street.

[url=http://rabble.ca/comment/903406/Re-how-react-appropriately-when-accused-...

Quote:

I belong to a visible minority. Not a racial minority. Another minority. As a result, I have been treated with cruelty and contempt for as long as I can remember. My life has been destroyed in ways I don't care to describe here. It was only recently that I managed to find a bit of self respect and start "fighting", not just for myself but for others.

Anyway, I want to add my voice to stargazers and for solidarity.

If my struggle against oppression is turned against other oppressed people - my potential and necessary allies - then I am lost.

Sun, 2009-06-28 10:59

remind

remind's picture

Point of clarification, this comment of R-P's "Genetic studies shown that white ppl only been around 8-12k years" is incorrect, at best.

Sun, 2009-06-28 11:31

Ze

Is it longer or shorter, then?

Sun, 2009-06-28 11:43

remind

remind's picture

LOL, actually both.

Sun, 2009-06-28 12:34

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

remind wrote:

LOL, actually both.

I hate when my bookmarks get deleted... itz around there tho some stuff says 10-14 other 6-10 I just averaged it but really most of the changes occured mainly cuz they got cut off from the rest of the population during the ice age and had to change fast to die out cuz of the cold basically but it may have been more gradual but even then yall aint old g

Sun, 2009-06-28 12:48

Unionist

R_P, I'm trying to understand what difference it makes which civilization or which colour of humanity is older than another?

Sun, 2009-06-28 13:09

remind

remind's picture

More BS R_P, do you have any idea when the last ice age started, and when glaciation as we know it, started to end?

And as evolutional theories go, which your position is, albino genetical mutations never were cut off, they went, or were driven, out of Africa prior to, or at the least during, the last ice age, which was a lot longer ago than your maximum guesstimate.

Also, my DNA is at least 120,000 years old, while yours, as a man, might be perhaps 6,000-60,000.

Sun, 2009-06-28 13:11

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Erik Redburn wrote:

Enough already, I tried to leave you an easy out, but youre obviously pulling this stuff out of your hat as you go along and now youre accusing me of being a racist because I'm...white? Or because I dared disagree with you? Sorry, but I'm not the one insisting that everything good came from one group of people and everything bad from another, and I'd actually be rather insulted if anyone assumed I knew all about "white people" just because I was born with a pinkish hue. If you want to debate this further please provide some peer reviewed material on the subject first, with footnotes if possible, as thats something I am at least familiar with dealing with.

so what do u want it on? n u still dont get it bro we reclaiming what's ours and been stolen from us to make us think we inferior and were nothing but slaves. It was never urz to take or claim it was and always will be ours. n U have the privilege of choosing when to care about race which is evient by ur "jus because I was born with a pinkish hue".

Maysie wrote:

Song lyrics/poetry, as much as they may speak to you as saying the "truth" as you understand it (and I mostly agree with you, by the way) are not arguments towards proving your point. Maybe you just want to say your piece, in that case, go ahead.

na ill argue circles round these niggas why? Cuz im the one spittin the truth I just added a song at the end cuz yo u know helps them understand the baccground n overall picture a bit more and im tryna make ppl understand it aint me or 1 next person saying it when a community saying the same thing u should listen.

Unionist wrote:

R_P, I'm trying to understand what difference it makes which civilization or which colour of humanity is older than another?

cuz for almost 1500 years now arabs and then europeans have been tryna make themselves seem superior, older, and make us look inferior all the while copying our shit and saying it theirs. It makes a big dif cuz we the 1st and we told we just slaves. Blacc History Month? Na it jus AmeriKKKan slave month think about how much they teach u so ppl think aii so white allowed us to sit next to them OMG so much progress but if they knew where we come from, what we were, they would have a very different mentality.

Sun, 2009-06-28 13:13

Slumberjack

Personally, I'd be inclined to believe that trying to analyize and unravel the past 150 years or so would be more than enough to chew on.

Sun, 2009-06-28 13:20

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

remind wrote:

More BS R_P, do you have any idea when the last ice age started, and when glaciation as we know it, started to end?

And as evolutional theories go, which your position is, albino genetical mutations never were cut off, they went, or were driven, out of Africa prior to, or at the least during, the last ice age, which was a lot longer ago than your maximum guesstimate.

Also, my DNA is at least 120,000 years old, while yours, as a man, might be perhaps 6,000-60,000.

Yes I do glaciation started to end around 10k years ago. And na albinoz are light skinned africans they aint white ppl there's a difference. and 6k years? im not even gonna say anything. ye we drove albinoz the fucc out and into the caucaus mountains that's documentated in various oral traditions including my tribes I already knew that. Im saying the changes dont have to go hand in hand with the ice age. The ice age part may have just killed off most of the darker skinned ppl but left variour lighter skinned versions who then changed after.

N na boom the african women's dna is 120k years old as a man mine would be equally as old ur talking about genetic lineages which then yea mine would be around 60k years. But remember what ur not yo. Ur genetically recessive that's why only a white couple can have white kids (not albino like I said that's different). But look at africa. U got all dif kinds looking kids coming from 1 couple cuz the gene pool is larger, more diversity, as well as the fact that where the rest come from? So dont get it twisted.

We can chill but u aint me n I aint u. (n this aint no gender thing dont even spin it like that g).

Sun, 2009-06-28 13:22

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Slumberjack wrote:

Personally, I'd be inclined to believe that trying to analyize and unravel the past 150 years or so would be more than enough to chew on.

but ur tryna give ppl a general overview so they generally know what they are u can focus on the details after. Itz like tryna argue how much water u want out of a well but u aint started digging yet.

Sun, 2009-06-28 13:42

remind

remind's picture

"ye we drove albinoz the fucc out and into the caucaus mountains that's documentated in various oral traditions including my tribes I already knew that."

So, you are stating, or agreeing, that it was your ancestors who started the first acts of discrimination towards "others"?

Actually, in respect to DNA, I was feeding you a line R_P you to see what you actually knew about mtDNA , MRCA and inherited Y chromozones R_P.

And pray tell me, according to your version of the out of Africa theory what are the differences between Albinos aka "light skinned Africans" and "white people"?

Sun, 2009-06-28 14:07

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

remind wrote:

"ye we drove albinoz the fucc out and into the caucaus mountains that's documentated in various oral traditions including my tribes I already knew that."

So, you are stating, or agreeing, that it was your ancestors who started the first acts of discrimination towards "others"?

Actually, in respect to DNA, I was feeding you a line R_P you to see what you actually knew about mtDNA , MRCA and inherited Y chromozones R_P.

And pray tell me, according to your version of the out of Africa theory what are the differences between Albinos aka "light skinned Africans" and "white people"?

na I aint statin it was discrimination there a history behind but it aint for u to know that story it a tribal history.

edit - Just to clear that up part of it was a war part of it was jus leavin cuz they couldnt survive there anyway. Remember there are tribes some were forced some werent.

There nuff differences from dif lineages, MtDNA and y haplogroups? On top of hair, features, body shape, etc? Albinoz are made for a tropical climate they just turn out really light.

Sun, 2009-06-28 14:20

remind

remind's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi wrote:

remind wrote:

"ye we drove albinoz the fucc out and into the caucaus mountains that's documentated in various oral traditions including my tribes I already knew that."

So, you are stating, or agreeing, that it was your ancestors who started the first acts of discrimination towards "others"?

Actually, in respect to DNA, I was feeding you a line R_P you to see what you actually knew about mtDNA , MRCA and inherited Y chromozones R_P.

And pray tell me, according to your version of the out of Africa theory what are the differences between Albinos aka "light skinned Africans" and "white people"?

na I aint statin it was discrimination there a history behind but it aint for u to know that story it a tribal history.

edit - Just to clear that up part of it was a war part of it was jus leavin cuz they couldnt survive there anyway. Remember there are tribes some were forced some werent.

There nuff differences from dif lineages, MtDNA and y haplogroups? On top of hair, features, body shape, etc? Albinoz are made for a tropical climate they just turn out really light.

Funny you have 2 different statement in your posting (see bold). Which is it?

And here you are yelling about people needing to know, so you can "reclaim" your history, but then you say "it ain't for you to know".

Sun, 2009-06-28 14:22

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

remind wrote:

Rexdale_Punjabi wrote:

remind wrote:

"ye we drove albinoz the fucc out and into the caucaus mountains that's documentated in various oral traditions including my tribes I already knew that."

So, you are stating, or agreeing, that it was your ancestors who started the first acts of discrimination towards "others"?

Actually, in respect to DNA, I was feeding you a line R_P you to see what you actually knew about mtDNA , MRCA and inherited Y chromozones R_P.

And pray tell me, according to your version of the out of Africa theory what are the differences between Albinos aka "light skinned Africans" and "white people"?

na I aint statin it was discrimination there a history behind but it aint for u to know that story it a tribal history.

edit - Just to clear that up part of it was a war part of it was jus leavin cuz they couldnt survive there anyway. Remember there are tribes some were forced some werent.

There nuff differences from dif lineages, MtDNA and y haplogroups? On top of hair, features, body shape, etc? Albinoz are made for a tropical climate they just turn out really light.

Funny you have 2 different statement in your posting (see bold). Which is it?

And here you are yelling about people needing to know, so you can "reclaim" your history, but then you say "it ain't for you to know".

I meant the body type not pigmentation. For example the longer legs shorter upper body, etc. The main reason tey cant survive is the lacc of pigmentation otherwise they body type etc is the same

edit- n ye reclaim it but see there shit that if they dont already know it aint no reason to reveal it cuz it a tribal history one tribe dont tell another one that let alone ppl from other countries

Sun, 2009-06-28 14:43

remind

remind's picture

LMAO!

Sun, 2009-06-28 16:27

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

fucc so funny

Sun, 2009-06-28 17:54

remind

remind's picture

Yep, you are!

Sun, 2009-06-28 18:14

Maysie

Maysie's picture

I changed the thread title. If we can get back on topic that would be simply marvelous.

Oh, and given what the topic actually is, this doesn't belong in the anti racism forum. Moving to humanities and science.

Sun, 2009-06-28 20:21

Erik Redburn

Thank you Maysie, and thank you for being so fair about this.

Sun, 2009-06-28 21:41

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

u dont realize the difference between an oral history and stories the dude takin in the oral history is just memorizing it he doesnt actually understand it. If u wanted to lets say look at lineage he wouldnt be able to tell u exact he would just say aii this house n go bacc however long u wanna know something else? he has to restart.

But also since the beginning europe has been the most wartorn and savage continent and what europeans were doing to each other they just spread it to the rest of the world. Since proly any outside contact with the world they have had to do racist shit because a mixture always results in the other race so even from a tribal or w.e POV the kid would belong to the other tribe. On top of that most european shit period is taken from others. Plato admitted that almost all they knew came from their southern egyptian neighbours and admired them greatly. Go search it cuz.

N u dont realize a lot of human nature is socially engineered which means that ppl will act collectively for a group same way as tribes for example. and what do u consider european ppl? if u told ppl that africans living there were european theyd laugh european has come to mean white ppl.

Sun, 2009-06-28 21:43

Erik Redburn

Back to the subject, I objected to that one bit of drift, rather cautiously at first I thought, because the fact that, yes we all originated in Africa way way back, and of course, European people have indeed used racist lies to justify stealing others land and enslaving them for centuries now, does not lead logically to arguing that everything Europeans have done throughout history is related to that, individually and collectively, and even less so can any of the victims of colonialism, pretty much everyone outside of Europe for the past five hundred years, lay claim to everything were taught to admire. Not that impressive buildings and technology are the only measure of a civilizations worth IMV, accepting that too can be seen as post-colonialist.

What I am objecting most here is what appears to be a mirror image reverse of the same kind of colinial exclusivity, up to and including the belief that "races" are a physical reality manifested in our acts, thoughts or "nature", which is what this extreme excluisivity verges on. That is not something I've heard from any theory of race in the last generation, outside the far right. The dangers are too obvious, well beyond what it does to reasoned discussion of the subject between those who identify with one group or another, by choice or by historical accident.

I hope nothing I've said is seen as denying the collective responsibnility (not guilt) of those who are lucky enough to be able to move through our society without dealing with the ugly racism that obviously still exists (among some far more than others, sorry) and whose ancestors were able to get rich on this fertile soil (to some degree or other) largely because they didn't have to pay the indigenous caretakers for it. I hope this makes sense. I'm in abit of rush again.

Sun, 2009-06-28 21:44

Unionist

Erik Redburn wrote:

No thanks to you though Unionist, did you mean insults like calling others "condescending" or the annoying fact that I defend myself against others broadsides? Sorry about that, my working class roots showing again. Going back to 2008 were any of Your selected "recollections" in direct reply to anything *I* wrote? That's the nub of the issue here.

I haven't got a clue what you're talking about. I was talking about Afrohealer. How did you get into this discussion? The comments I quoted from sanizadeh, Stargazer, and RosaL were all directed to Afrohealer.

Erik Redburn wrote:

Since you want to resurrect the past again though, it wasn't about race, Afrohealer was called out for making sexist remarks and insisting he knew better than even those he called sisters, including a few who happend to be non-white themselves and therefore I assume personally aware of either kind of prejudice.

I have no clue what you're talking about. I was disturbed at his suggestion that as a Jew, I should talk to Nazis and try to persuade them to change their ways. I was also rather astonished at his support for Idi Amin, in a discussion about Amin's vicious racist expulsion of all South Asians from Uganda. I thought "condescending" was about the least of adjectives used in his direction.

Sun, 2009-06-28 21:48

Erik Redburn

Apologies again for misreading Unionist here.

Sun, 2009-06-28 21:50

Erik Redburn

Ah, my apologies then Unionist, I was badly mistaken there and overeacted. I've gotten into so many scraps here that maybe I'm getting abit paranoid. I will delete.

Sun, 2009-06-28 22:03

Bookish Agrarian

I'm sorry, but your belief that Europe is the seat of warring and other evils is not supported by a single, solitary bit of historicial reality. I live just a few miles from a site where a huge battle took place according to both oral and acheological evidence. This battle took place pre-contact according to carbon dating.

Egypt - arguably the most advanced civilization to grow out of Africa was beset with wars, racism and all kinds of nasty crap. Same goes for many other of the African civilizations.

What I find stunningly racist is your complete denial of the contributions of 'civilization' made by Asians. While Europeans, and frankly much of the rest of the world including most of Africa, were still running around in animal pelts the Chineese were inventing writing, high art and all the other markers of civillization.

Then of course there is the Indian subcontinent with continual high civilization dating back into an antiquity that pre-dates all the rest.

Sure be proud of African's place in the anals of the human race (all of us), but lets not do it at the cost of being both silly and repeating the sins of the Victorian Parlour.

I have spent my life fascinated by archeology and our ancient civilizations. The 'theories' you promote are simple mirror images of the most ethnocentric tripe from the Victorian era. It would not be tolerated in any other poster and it is beyond me why you continue to be given the benefit of the doubt.

Sun, 2009-06-28 22:22

Erik Redburn

Couple hard facts -as hard as they ever get in the humaities. European 'civilization' only goes back 3-4000 years to the Minoans, who the Greeks or Hellenes as they called themselves borrowed from in part, then the Etruscans and Romans. Though its come to light recently that their pre-Thracian (Bulgaria now) neighbopurs had elements of civilization themselves, like fine gold casting of the horses they admired, as well as others in Iberia etc. "Civilization" in this context only meaning a society living in more urban environment, which by necessity has more complex organization. They sprung up everywhere after the spreading agricultural revolution made it possible to settle down permanently, as is already well known.

European 'people' on the other hand go back twenty-five-thirty five-forty thousand years to the hight of the last ice-age, though they wouldn't have seen themselves as "European people" either, less so than all the different cultures and tribes now. The physical featueres like blondeism may have come later, but colouyration is the least of it and recent discoveries in genetics indicvate that the slight physical differences betwen "races" and sub-races etc are often the least telling in reghards to heredity. Heredity I should add that only reflects physical adaptations to local climates over time and things like genetic drift and "founders effect". The assumption that skin colour or hair type etc reflect character or intelligence is where the racism sneaks in but is wholey unsupported by both modern science And sociology.

The idea of Eurperan uniqueness, meaning superiority in their books of course, only dates back coincidently to the beginning of colinialism and the slave trade as an industry, based on skin colour mostly. Slavery existed in smaller forms before, not so small forms among slave economis like Rome, but I don't consider them quite the same as mostly involved prisoners of war, criminals, temporary debt slaves etc and often had some right, including being able to marry or buy themselves out of slavery. In the "new world" that was rarely the case. An ancient evil still, but extent and intent do count for something I think.

From what I've read this is basically the level of knowledge we have now, and thats all I'm repeating. I'm hardly an expert myself, I don't know if there really can be "experts" when so much of our past is lost, but I do know something on the subject, having followed the subject for years. Always with a handy salt shaker nearby...

Onemore point that may have been misunderstood. I agree that oral histories can sometimes tell us something written histories don't -why traditional Rabbis consider both when ruling on precedence for example- but they too are subject to revision and accumulation of extraneous mythology ontop of actual verifiable events and personalities. Sometimes the mythology are more telling than the bare bones details, as Joseph Campbell argued.

Sun, 2009-06-28 22:25

Bookish Agrarian

Well said

Sun, 2009-06-28 22:51

Erik Redburn

Thanks, same to you. Erik has read a few books too, before getting caught up in the online wars. Erik just talks about himself in the third person at times, maybe I should sell runners instead. ;) Pax.

Sun, 2009-06-28 22:56

remind

remind's picture

Thank you Erik, I agree. It was the late 1700's that the idea of "race" was introduced.

In respect to history and warfare, and of interest to me are the recent Swedish findings regarding Gotland and who were the actual Vikings there and it seems from their findings that they were actually of Mongolian descent, at least in Gotland.

Sun, 2009-06-28 22:57

Erik Redburn

Rexdale_Punjabi wrote:

u dont realize the difference between an oral history and stories the dude takin in the oral history is just memorizing it he doesnt actually understand it. If u wanted to lets say look at lineage he wouldnt be able to tell u exact he would just say aii this house n go bacc however long u wanna know something else? he has to restart.

But also since the beginning europe has been the most wartorn and savage continent and what europeans were doing to each other they just spread it to the rest of the world. Since proly any outside contact with the world they have had to do racist shit because a mixture always results in the other race so even from a tribal or w.e POV the kid would belong to the other tribe. On top of that most european shit period is taken from others. Plato admitted that almost all they knew came from their southern egyptian neighbours and admired them greatly. Go search it cuz.

N u dont realize a lot of human nature is socially engineered which means that ppl will act collectively for a group same way as tribes for example. and what do u consider european ppl? if u told ppl that africans living there were european theyd laugh european has come to mean white ppl.

I disagree with nearly everything you say here, what I can understand, but i'm not going to argue this anymore beyond sayiing that warfare between nations was endemic worldwide (with a few localized exceptions) long before the age of European colonization, mostly reflecting scarcity of resources per population after the agricultural revolution perhaps, and being blonde, blue-eyed and pale to be European was also an old racist myth about being "pure Aryan" or rather "Nordic", the wrongly assumed homeland of "Indo-European" speakers -not the only Europeans if you ever ask any Hungarian, Basque or Jew. What happened after Christofero Columbo bumped up against these Turtle iislands went far far beyond warfare between nations to conscious and systematic genocide, that is still going on some places. It wasn't Inate to "my" culture but rather reflected the ignorance of the age and a moral failure that even back then was recognised by some colonials.

What youre arguing here, whether youre fully aware of it or not, also goes far beyond any theories of race I've seen, including others who speak of a more afro-centric view to counter all the Eurocentric views traditionally taught. My view is now quite simple, there's only one race, the human race. I thank those who have argued that for generations now. As a member of that same human race though, I still feel prrsonally responsible to support everyone and anyone who is still struggling for their fair share and a real measure of equality. That doesn't however extend so far as having to submit to every view expressed among those of somewhat different ancestry, as if everyone is of one view or another.

Sun, 2009-06-28 23:03

Erik Redburn

That's a new one to me, guess I'm still arguing too much. Wonder how that came about, marraige to the local Saami or Inuit? They mention any alternative hypothesis yet?

Mon, 2009-06-29 00:10

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

I'm sorry, but your belief that Europe is the seat of warring and other evils is not supported by a single, solitary bit of historicial reality. I live just a few miles from a site where a huge battle took place according to both oral and acheological evidence. This battle took place pre-contact according to carbon dating.

Egypt - arguably the most advanced civilization to grow out of Africa was beset with wars, racism and all kinds of nasty crap. Same goes for many other of the African civilizations.

What I find stunningly racist is your complete denial of the contributions of 'civilization' made by Asians. While Europeans, and frankly much of the rest of the world including most of Africa, were still running around in animal pelts the Chineese were inventing writing, high art and all the other markers of civillization.

Then of course there is the Indian subcontinent with continual high civilization dating back into an antiquity that pre-dates all the rest.

Sure be proud of African's place in the anals of the human race (all of us), but lets not do it at the cost of being both silly and repeating the sins of the Victorian Parlour.

I have spent my life fascinated by archeology and our ancient civilizations. The 'theories' you promote are simple mirror images of the most ethnocentric tripe from the Victorian era. It would not be tolerated in any other poster and it is beyond me why you continue to be given the benefit of the doubt.

kemet is wayyy older then china and the indian subcontient is part of africa. I didnt even mean that there was no war other places just that europe it was more concentrated. 1st of all go look at chinese history they attritbute a lot of the stuff in the beginning to the blacc headed ppl from the west which was us. U dont realize that ancient india for example had a lot of things similar to ancient kush and for most of its history has been called east ethiopia that should tell u enuff.

Europe had more tribal warfare and other shit that's proven by the fact that up till the formation of the EU there were many little or big wars going on between countries and the farther bacc u go the more it happens. My point in that was that more warlike places tend to be more patriarichal. On top of that ur saying how it racist about the asian tip. Ok lets see with that. Ancient china is younger then ancient india. kush, or kemet. South east asian ways itz already known they were heavily influenced by ancient india and one way u still see that is the prevalence of bhuddism.

The fact that you know so little and saying how we were runnin around in animal pelts while chinese were making shit? They admit that we taught them yall were running around in animal peltz cuz not us. Ethnocentric shit? na itz cuz you fail to realize 1/2 the points I been making which is evidenced by the fact that u thought that ancient china was older.

Benefit of the doubt? I told u look it up cuz my bookmarks got deleted but why would I lie? To make myself feel better in front of a bunch of white ppl? LOL Im tryna show u shit that been stolen and hidden that you deny lets look at south amerikkka for example. New digs even suggest that the 1st ppl there were african/austrial aborigine. The 1st civilization were the olmecz for example. Go read the book fro example they came before columbus. You dont realize that one huge reason for keeping a lot of history hidden is to divide and conquer ppl and keep them from making claims. Did you know for example that a lot of louisana is owned by it was either the yamasee or wichita tribe. And a yamasee-wichita women owns most of georgia cuz she inherited it from her grandfather who was a chief bacc in the dayz.

n the proper name is not egypt thats a greek name it kemet. As for age they discovered the sphinx predates the sahara in the region cuz it has weathering on it from heavy monsoon like rainfall. on top of that since itz known that shit in india started from the horn of africa (civilization I mean) and bare stuff like the river ganges being named after him. And the fact that many of the oldest cities and the vedass are 6-7k years old then it pushes the date for other shit bacc and they still discovering new stuff that even older. Also the other problem is a lot of stuff for the oldest civilization would have disappeared and possibly been replaced one theory for that is this fact.

http://forum.grasscity.com/general/63637-nuclear-weapons-ancient-world.html

http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377/13920_stones.html

http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=144283

Mon, 2009-06-29 00:28

Webgear

remind wrote:

Thank you Erik, I agree. It was the late 1700's that the idea of "race" was introduced.

In respect to history and warfare, and of interest to me are the recent Swedish findings regarding Gotland and who were the actual Vikings there and it seems from their findings that they were actually of Mongolian descent, at least in Gotland.

Can you provide a link? I have been studying Vikings for the last few months.

Mon, 2009-06-29 00:55

Bookish Agrarian

Rexdale_Punjabi wrote:

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

I'm sorry, but your belief that Europe is the seat of warring and other evils is not supported by a single, solitary bit of historicial reality. I live just a few miles from a site where a huge battle took place according to both oral and acheological evidence. This battle took place pre-contact according to carbon dating.

Egypt - arguably the most advanced civilization to grow out of Africa was beset with wars, racism and all kinds of nasty crap. Same goes for many other of the African civilizations.

What I find stunningly racist is your complete denial of the contributions of 'civilization' made by Asians. While Europeans, and frankly much of the rest of the world including most of Africa, were still running around in animal pelts the Chineese were inventing writing, high art and all the other markers of civillization.

Then of course there is the Indian subcontinent with continual high civilization dating back into an antiquity that pre-dates all the rest.

Sure be proud of African's place in the anals of the human race (all of us), but lets not do it at the cost of being both silly and repeating the sins of the Victorian Parlour.

I have spent my life fascinated by archeology and our ancient civilizations. The 'theories' you promote are simple mirror images of the most ethnocentric tripe from the Victorian era. It would not be tolerated in any other poster and it is beyond me why you continue to be given the benefit of the doubt.

kemet is wayyy older then china and the indian subcontient is part of africa. I didnt even mean that there was no war other places just that europe it was more concentrated. 1st of all go look at chinese history they attritbute a lot of the stuff in the beginning to the blacc headed ppl from the west which was us. U dont realize that ancient india for example had a lot of things similar to ancient kush and for most of its history has been called east ethiopia that should tell u enuff.

Europe had more tribal warfare and other shit that's proven by the fact that up till the formation of the EU there were many little or big wars going on between countries and the farther bacc u go the more it happens. My point in that was that more warlike places tend to be more patriarichal. On top of that ur saying how it racist about the asian tip. Ok lets see with that. Ancient china is younger then ancient india. kush, or kemet. South east asian ways itz already known they were heavily influenced by ancient india and one way u still see that is the prevalence of bhuddism.

The fact that you know so little and saying how we were runnin around in animal pelts while chinese were making shit? They admit that we taught them yall were running around in animal peltz cuz not us. Ethnocentric shit? na itz cuz you fail to realize 1/2 the points I been making which is evidenced by the fact that u thought that ancient china was older.

Benefit of the doubt? I told u look it up cuz my bookmarks got deleted but why would I lie? To make myself feel better in front of a bunch of white ppl? LOL Im tryna show u shit that been stolen and hidden that you deny lets look at south amerikkka for example. New digs even suggest that the 1st ppl there were african/austrial aborigine. The 1st civilization were the olmecz for example. Go read the book fro example they came before columbus. You dont realize that one huge reason for keeping a lot of history hidden is to divide and conquer ppl and keep them from making claims. Did you know for example that a lot of louisana is owned by it was either the yamasee or wichita tribe. And a yamasee-wichita women owns most of georgia cuz she inherited it from her grandfather who was a chief bacc in the dayz.

n the proper name is not egypt thats a greek name it kemet. As for age they discovered the sphinx predates the sahara in the region cuz it has weathering on it from heavy monsoon like rainfall. on top of that since itz known that shit in india started from the horn of africa (civilization I mean) and bare stuff like the river ganges being named after him. And the fact that many of the oldest cities and the vedass are 6-7k years old then it pushes the date for other shit bacc and they still discovering new stuff that even older. Also the other problem is a lot of stuff for the oldest civilization would have disappeared and possibly been replaced one theory for that is this fact.

http://forum.grasscity.com/general/63637-nuclear-weapons-ancient-world.html

http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377/13920_stones.html

http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=144283

You might want to look at a map - India is not a part of Africa. Oh maybe at one time- but that was a long, long time ago - Pangeans Unite!

As well, unfortunetly warfare has been a part of the human condition in all corners of the world. Europe was no more, or no less prone to strife and struggle, or partiarchy for that matter than anywhere else historically. You might be able to make that argument post the industrial revolution, but that is not what you are blow harding about.

As for your racist assertions about Asia you might want to do some reading. Early hominids remains dating to 2.4 million years ago have been found in China with anatomically modern humans having been in China at least 67,000 years ago. China is old in terms of human settlement. There is even some theories that suggest that two distinct lines of humans met and intermingled at one point one branch of the family from China the other from Africa. I don't subscribe to it, but it is a scholarly premise, not like your Graham Hancock view of the world.

The Xia Dynasty in China - depending on which time frame you use in both China and Egypt - are roughly concurrent in time frames. These things are very difficult to gauge but most experts would argue that Chinese and Egyptian civilizations rose independently at roughly the same time. Unless you are Graham Hancock or course and subscribe to the whacky notion, not supported by most Egytologists that the Sphinx somehow pre-dates what we understand as the Egyptian civilization.

In Europe and the rest of Africa most of the people were still pelt wearers. That's not racist assumption. This thread is specifically about what we define as 'civilization' which means structured settlements, agriculture, high art and a bunch of other stuff. That does not mean those other peoples had no value, merely that they do not conform to the civilization construct you began.

Your posting in this topic continues to be based in a racist construct that ignores the reality of many other parts of the world. I maintian if it was coming from almost any other poster actions would be taken.

Mon, 2009-06-29 01:07

Papal Bull

I will elaborate on this tomorrow, but R_P's hypothesis is all based off of late 19th century and early 20th century fiction, mixed in with the movement of nationalist mysticism between cultures in the mid-20th century, finally mated with the hilarious Coast to Coast radio crowd. Africa + India = Lemuria hypothesis. Just so much.

Oral history my arse. It is a bizarre neomystic view of the usual suspects of far out history.

Mon, 2009-06-29 02:23

Rexdale_Punjabi Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

Rexdale_Punjabi's picture

ill elaborate more too but Bookish Agrarian No it is. You got to realize how much of the continents today are there because of politriccs. Why does europe exist? Is it not a continuation of the eurasian plate? Why is it considered seperate from asia? Politriccs.

I dont mean physically attached I mean in other ways. And yes europe has been more patriarichal. bare other places like kemet held the queen as higher then the king for example.

If u dont know what I mean when I say india is part of africa just dont start it something white ppl know nothing about. Fucc the maps yall wrote. n I know china is old in terms of human settlement u can go look at a migration map and see that humans went there after crossing thru india. Mostly southern china tho cuz the earliest humans stayed near coasts and eventually got to australia by island hopping.

Who the fucc is graham hancocc? n Papal bull if all ur gonna do is talk shit plz STFU.

On top of that no it widely agred and known that ancient egypt is older. And Bookish did you ever think they were making it look younger? There are many cases of making shit look younger or just inventing shit to fit with w.e white have felt like it should. An example is randomly stating the vedas were 200 years apart each starting from bhudda so that an invasion would fit with the bible.

go look at how old the sphinx is. also go look at how old bare shit is in bare places in africa as well.

Pages

Topic locked