Youngster's Black Power Poem Upsets School Officials

These concepts are socially constructed and have been given much weight. What are your thoughts?
whoknows
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 130
Joined: December 2nd, 2005, 7:06 am

Unread post by whoknows » April 5th, 2006, 4:31 am

^^^^^^^i'm not in college, i'm still in highschool.....

C-Raided
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 18
Joined: January 22nd, 2006, 11:05 pm

Unread post by C-Raided » April 8th, 2006, 2:46 am

I have one question for Se11. Where did white people come from? They couldn't have been the first people on the planet, because white people can only produce white people. What two white people that you know can produce a black or darker person? Black people on the other hand are capable of producing all shades and color's of black, brown, or red. So i say to you and other white people what is your history? The reason i ask this is because, the answer to this question will defeat the thinking of white supremacy. Because if white people were of the first people on the planet then they would be the planet's fore father's or the planet's original people. And that means they would denote some form of originality. But if Black people were here first, then that would mean that all of the earth's history like the pyramids(which are still a mystery to some), and the Nasca Lines(which are in south america) are made from the darker peoples of the planet. This would mean that this technology that baffles scientists and scholars came from darker people. And if that is true, then that means that this thought that white is more inteligent, more civilized, and more evolved is false. The answer to this question kills the thought of white superiority to blacks or darker people. Not to say that is what you are saying. But i ask you, what is the history of the white race? How did they come to be? By what means were they created?

se11
Heavy Weight
Heavy Weight
Posts: 2247
Joined: October 12th, 2004, 9:48 pm
Location: NYC

Unread post by se11 » April 8th, 2006, 8:01 am

Where did white people come from?



What two white people that you know can produce a black or darker person?


believe it or not, there are diversities in caucasian people. you have pale caucasian people(mostly from ireland/scotland and nordic area), you have medium looking white people mostly from spain and everywhere in europe and russia, and you have tanner looking white people particularly from portugal, some places in eastern europe. all of them are white but have different tones of skin.

The reason i ask this is because, the answer to this question will defeat the thinking of white supremacy.


what thinking of white supremecy? i dont consider my people better than anyone elses.

And if that is true, then that means that this thought that white is more inteligent, more civilized, and more evolved is false. The answer to this question kills the thought of white superiority to blacks or darker people.


how can people building pyramids or a lake make people more intelligent or smarter or advanced than another people overall. sure these people would be very advanced for the times they lived in. but you cant look at todays world and look to see which people are more evolved. because todays best new technologies are actually coming from asians. does that mean asians as an whole are better and more advanced than everybody else and they have superiority. nobody has any superiority because no matter how great you are, im sure there's some one of another race better than you.

But i ask you, what is the history of the white race? How did they come to be? By what means were they created?


i ask you the same thing.

you might say that black people were the first on the planet. but the truth is, we can never know who was here first. sure the first people came from africa. but the first human being was probably around 3 feet tall, very deformed from humans today and god only knows what color skin it had. people did not just show up one day, black 6'1 180 pounds with nappy hair. they evolved from another homosapian form and moved to other places. i believe earlier humans were much more vulnerable to adaptations, and that is why people look the way they do. african people like in africa, a hot jungle tropical enviornemnt close to the equator. much more sun hitting these peoples, darker skin, tanner things. european people, colder enviornement, not all year sun, lighter skin lighter hair, diffrerent hair.

se11
Heavy Weight
Heavy Weight
Posts: 2247
Joined: October 12th, 2004, 9:48 pm
Location: NYC

Unread post by se11 » April 8th, 2006, 8:01 am

What two white people that you know can produce a black or darker person?


believe it or not, there are diversities in caucasian people. you have pale caucasian people(mostly from ireland/scotland and nordic area), you have medium looking white people mostly from spain and everywhere in europe and russia, and you have tanner looking white people particularly from portugal, some places in eastern europe. all of them are white but have different tones of skin.

The reason i ask this is because, the answer to this question will defeat the thinking of white supremacy.


what thinking of white supremecy? i dont consider my people better than anyone elses.

And if that is true, then that means that this thought that white is more inteligent, more civilized, and more evolved is false. The answer to this question kills the thought of white superiority to blacks or darker people.


how can people building pyramids or a lake make people more intelligent or smarter or advanced than another people overall. sure these people would be very advanced for the times they lived in. but you cant look at todays world and look to see which people are more evolved. because todays best new technologies are actually coming from asians. does that mean asians as an whole are better and more advanced than everybody else and they have superiority. nobody has any superiority because no matter how great you are, im sure there's some one of another race better than you.

But i ask you, what is the history of the white race? How did they come to be? By what means were they created?


i ask you the same thing.

you might say that black people were the first on the planet. but the truth is, we can never know who was here first. sure the first people came from africa. but the first human being was probably around 3 feet tall, very deformed from humans today and god only knows what color skin it had. people did not just show up one day, black 6'1 180 pounds with nappy hair. they evolved from another homosapian form and moved to other places. i believe earlier humans were much more vulnerable to adaptations, and that is why people look the way they do. african people like in africa, a hot jungle tropical enviornemnt close to the equator. much more sun hitting these peoples, darker skin, tanner things. european people, colder enviornement, not all year sun, lighter skin lighter hair, diffrerent hair.

Old Shatterhand
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1318
Joined: March 5th, 2006, 4:18 pm
Contact:

Unread post by Old Shatterhand » April 8th, 2006, 10:06 am

The oldest representative fossils that have been found of modern humans have been found in Africa; however, there are 14 ways in which origin are looked at. The best hypothesis that I've seen is that the first modern humans most likely came from near the Middle East and spread rapidly.

C-Raided
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 18
Joined: January 22nd, 2006, 11:05 pm

Unread post by C-Raided » April 8th, 2006, 5:08 pm

I knew you didn't know the true history of white people! And the statement you made about pale white's and darker whites holds no merit. There are white people who have lived in South Africa and other hot climates for centuries and yet they are still white. There are black people who have lived in colder climate's such as Europe, Canada etc, for centuries and yet they are still black. Climate has nothing to do with the color of one's skin. The color of one's skin comes from genetics. And to disprove what you have said think of this, white people can't become darker than what they are because of what part they live on the earth, due to the fact that they can only tan because they will burn under the sun's rays. White people can be in the sun all day, but they will only get a tan or sun burned. Black people on the other hand can stay in the sun all day and not get burned due to the fact that they have melinan in their skin. Whereas white's do not have melinan. So i ask you again straight forwardly, what is the history of white people? And the notion that the first people evovled from some 3 foot human being doesn't answer the question of how white people came about. The answer is they had to come from black people. There is no way possible that black people came from white people. It's just not possible for white people to produce black people. And race in this aspect is important, because it is history. Haven't you noticed that white people have no record beyond six thousand years ago? Even in your history books at school the history only goes back 6,000 years, and before that they speculate on what happened. But black people and the darker people of the earth's history goes back further than that. Think what i have said logically, rather than respond emotionally to what i have said!

se11
Heavy Weight
Heavy Weight
Posts: 2247
Joined: October 12th, 2004, 9:48 pm
Location: NYC

Unread post by se11 » April 8th, 2006, 11:31 pm

. There is no way possible that black people came from white people. It's just not possible for white people to produce black people.


and vise versa. what the fuck are you trying to get at?

you cant prove anything, nobody ever can. we will never know the color of the first human or how any color came about. it is impossible to know.

Haven't you noticed that white people have no record beyond six thousand years ago? Even in your history books at school the history only goes back 6,000 years, and before that they speculate on what happened.


what history do "black people" have earlier than 6,000 years? honestly, what sort of records could anybody have kept 6,000 years ago.

There are white people who have lived in South Africa and other hot climates for centuries and yet they are still white. There are black people who have lived in colder climate's such as Europe, Canada etc, for centuries and yet they are still black.


if you go back to 1500 AD people were still basically the same as they are today. maybe a little shorter and skinnier. but go back to the first humans and first evolved beings and they were MUCH DIFFERENT. they had the ability to develope use of fingers, toes, feet, arms, and hands. they all made these adaptations a very long time ago, so if humans were vulnurable enough to develope the use of hands, feet, teeth, legs, arms, ect. why couldn't their skin color change as well.

is it just a big coincidence that everybody that originated in an original place has a certian skin tone? everybody from europe/north asia is light skinned, everybody from south asia/africa is darker? even native americans here, all had a specific skin tone and they all had it. thats just a coincidence?

The answer is they had to come from black people. There is no way possible that black people came from white people. It's just not possible for white people to produce black people.


yeah, because black men and women have white kids all the time, right?

how do YOU think white people came? honestly, did we just appear one day? did 2 black people have a white baby? i mean seriously, how do you believe we came about.

jeremy
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 61
Joined: November 14th, 2005, 6:01 pm
Location: Compton

Unread post by jeremy » April 8th, 2006, 11:41 pm

Lol.I just wanted to put in my opinion.

C-Raided wrote: There are white people who have lived in South Africa and other hot climates for centuries and yet they are still white.


Have you ever heard of colonization?Europeans moved into those areas during those times.They moved in there for the lands' natural resoarses(spelling) i.e. gold,diamonds ect.The ones you see now are their descendants.

There are black people who have lived in colder climate's such as Europe, Canada etc, for centuries and yet they are still black. .[/quote]

Have you ever heard of migration?Some that lived in Africa moved into Europe.That's why you see black citizens in the U.K.Those that live in Cananda are descendants of African slaves from the U.S.Or maybe American blacks that decided to move to Canada because they were sick of the U.S..

Climate has nothing to do with the color of one's skin.[/quote]

Diet ,climate,and other things does has something to do one's physical appearance.This is what made everyone different from the time the first homo-sapiens were found in Africa.Homo-sapiens migrated from Africa into other parts of the world.The climate,diet, and other things changed their appearance.This didn't happened right away ,it took generations for this to happened.When homo-sapiens migrated to other parts of the world they adapted to their environment.DNA changes every generation.



So i ask you again straight forwardly, what is the history of white people? .[/quote]

Why do you have such an obsession with white people?Do you not like them or something?

The answer is they had to come from black people[/quote]

The first homo-sapiens looked like an ape not a modern black person.Saying other races came from black people like now is absurd.There was a PBS special that came out a while ago that explains how where humans came from.It showed that all humans originally came from the continent of Africa.Again, humans (including white people) originally came from ape-like animals.In the PBS special they had DNA evidence that the origance of man was in Africa and they were NOT black.They were called homo-sapiens NOT black!

Old Shatterhand
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1318
Joined: March 5th, 2006, 4:18 pm
Contact:

Unread post by Old Shatterhand » April 9th, 2006, 8:12 pm

PBS is heavily prejudiced in their presentation of anything having to do with science towards pantheistic evolution. There are far better scientific/scholarly models they just aren't as popular and as well known.

You've bought their lie that modern humans evolved from hominids. Keep studying...

jeremy
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 61
Joined: November 14th, 2005, 6:01 pm
Location: Compton

Unread post by jeremy » April 9th, 2006, 8:33 pm

Old Shatterhand wrote:PBS is heavily prejudiced in their presentation of anything having to do with science towards pantheistic evolution. There are far better scientific/scholarly models they just aren't as popular and as well known.

You've bought their lie that modern humans evolved from hominids. Keep studying...


You are telling me this because you are probably a Cristian.You believe in creationism which is what I myself do not belive in or ever will.But I respect your opinion though.

jeremy
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 61
Joined: November 14th, 2005, 6:01 pm
Location: Compton

Unread post by jeremy » April 9th, 2006, 8:34 pm

I meant Christian.LOLThere's no EDIT botton.

Old Shatterhand
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1318
Joined: March 5th, 2006, 4:18 pm
Contact:

Unread post by Old Shatterhand » April 9th, 2006, 8:36 pm

jeremy wrote:
Old Shatterhand wrote:PBS is heavily prejudiced in their presentation of anything having to do with science towards pantheistic evolution. There are far better scientific/scholarly models they just aren't as popular and as well known.

You've bought their lie that modern humans evolved from hominids. Keep studying...


You are telling me this because you are probably a Cristian.You believe in creationism which is what I myself do not belive in or ever will.But I respect your opinion though.


Just the facts Jeremy... just the facts.

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » April 9th, 2006, 9:14 pm

PBS also had a special where a scientist used mitochondrial DNA and some other DNA (not sure of the names), and linked all human groups back to the San Bushmen - a black African tribe. They don't look like the Africans every body thinks of. They are brownish yellow, and have high cheekbones and slanted eyes, and many other features.

I don't believe some apes just evolved into the differnet races. Like this orangatang is gonna evolve into the white race, the gorillas are going to be black, the chimpanzees Asian, etc. I know I'm exagerrating, and scientist don't purport we come from these ape species, but the idea that some apes just evolved into different races of homo sapiens is absurd.

Old Shatterhand
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1318
Joined: March 5th, 2006, 4:18 pm
Contact:

Unread post by Old Shatterhand » April 9th, 2006, 9:19 pm

perongregory wrote:PBS also had a special where a scientist used mitochondrial DNA and some other DNA (not sure of the names), and linked all human groups back to the San Bushmen - a black African tribe. They don't look like the Africans every body thinks of. They are brownish yellow, and have high cheekbones and slanted eyes, and many other features.

--> There are 14 scientific tests performed and the results are used by the various scientific competing origin of humanity models.

I don't believe some apes just evolved into the differnet races. Like this orangatang is gonna evolve into the white race, the gorillas are going to be black, the chimpanzees Asian, etc. I know I'm exagerrating, and scientist don't purport we come from these ape species, but the idea that some apes just evolved into different races of homo sapiens is absurd.

--> That is the multi-regional model that my generation was taught. That model has failed but is still being taught on PBS.

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » April 9th, 2006, 9:21 pm

I guess PBS is just a visual forum for anything historical, social, or scientific.

UmanH-ay

Unread post by UmanH-ay » April 9th, 2006, 9:24 pm

They were called homo-sapiens NOT black!


im not disagreein with the rest of your posts but remember, we as humans today are in the form of "homo saipiens" and before us were the big and large "neanderthals" and the smaller "homo-erectus"

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » April 9th, 2006, 9:28 pm

Exactly, regardless of our individual races, the human species that rules the earth today are homo sapiens. Black, white, and Asian don't fit in the catergory of homo sapiens, like afaski said, homo erectus, homo habilis, etc. are in the same catergory with that term.

Old Shatterhand
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1318
Joined: March 5th, 2006, 4:18 pm
Contact:

Unread post by Old Shatterhand » April 9th, 2006, 10:07 pm

afakasi wrote:
They were called homo-sapiens NOT black!


im not disagreein with the rest of your posts but remember, we as humans today are in the form of "homo saipiens" and before us were the big and large "neanderthals" and the smaller "homo-erectus"


Neanderthals are classified as archaic Homo sapiens that lived (based on the fossil record) roughly between 150,000 and 30,000 years ago. They occupied Europe, the Middle East, and parts of Asia. In 1997 researchers from the Max Planck Institute and Pennsylvania State University reported the first genetic comparison of modem humans (classified by evolutionists as hop sapiens sapiens by the way) and Neanderthals. During this groundbreaking study (which has been described as "science at its very best"), two independent teams isolated, amplified (with the polymerase chain reaction), and sequenced mitochondrial-DNA (mtDNA) fragments from the right humerus of the first-discovered Neanderthal specimen. Next a team from the Max Planck Institute extended their human-to-Neanderthal genetic comparison by including a second segment of mitochondria1 DNA, called the hypervariable I1 (HVII) region.

The results: Comparisons of Neanderthal DNA with human population groups yield genetic differences so radical that Neanderthals are now considered, by evolutionists, a dead evolutionary branch on their "tree of life" and I quote " Neanderthals did not make any genetic (and hence evolutionary) contribution to humanity, not even to Europeans as the multiregional model predicts."

On every level, compelling scientific evidence shows that Neanderthals were animals and did not contribute in any ways to modern humans.

Even though paleontologists have discovered a menagerie of hominids, they cannot seem to establish evolutionary connections among them and without these connections, human evolution cannot be declared a fact but remains a theory.

Homo sapiens idaltu (like H. erectus, Neanderthals, and other archaic Homo sapiens) were simply primates-animals that walked upright, possessed limited intelligence, and had some type of culture, but animals nonetheless. All the data support this interpretation.

In some all hominids have features that resemble humans. Human designers often combine two or more distinct designs in creating objects and devices. If people were created in God's image, wouldn't their Creator be expected to do the same? Evolutionists don't always interpret mosaic organisms as transitional intermediates. The duckbill platypus illustrates the point. This creature possesses a combination of mammalian and avian (birdlike) features.Yet evolutionists don't propose that mammals evolved from birds, with the duckbill platypus representing a transitional form between these two groups.

Old Shatterhand
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1318
Joined: March 5th, 2006, 4:18 pm
Contact:

Unread post by Old Shatterhand » April 9th, 2006, 10:08 pm

perongregory wrote:Exactly, regardless of our individual races, the human species that rules the earth today are homo sapiens. Black, white, and Asian don't fit in the catergory of homo sapiens, like afaski said, homo erectus, homo habilis, etc. are in the same catergory with that term.


Modern humans are classified as homo sapiens sapiens and you are correct that homo sapien hominids did not give rise to modern humans.

jeremy
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 61
Joined: November 14th, 2005, 6:01 pm
Location: Compton

Unread post by jeremy » April 9th, 2006, 10:14 pm

Lol.It's funny how these topics stray off the original topic.First it was about this little girl reciting a racist poem(that obviuosly was written by her parents) into a conversation of evolution.Lol

UmanH-ay

Unread post by UmanH-ay » April 9th, 2006, 10:19 pm

so old shattered, if you could break it down for me, are you saying that Neanderthals if you could say arent a "predescor" to us current being "homosapiens"?

Old Shatterhand
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1318
Joined: March 5th, 2006, 4:18 pm
Contact:

Unread post by Old Shatterhand » April 11th, 2006, 10:50 pm

afakasi wrote:so old shattered, if you could break it down for me, are you saying that Neanderthals if you could say arent a "predescor" to us current being "homosapiens"?


Correct. You just progressed a level. :)

MiChuhSuh

Unread post by MiChuhSuh » April 11th, 2006, 11:24 pm

afakasi wrote:so old shattered, if you could break it down for me, are you saying that Neanderthals if you could say arent a "predescor" to us current being "homosapiens"?


Yup, this is a common misconeption

They were another group which came at the same time annd co-existed with our ancestors, and in fact had contact with our ancestors in a few places, but they died out and we survived and progressed.

They had this special series on National Geographic about this, great stuff, witht eh lastest data. Would have knocked the 50's science teacher out his seat. They found "hobbits" in Java islands where the average adult size was aboutr 3-4 feet (and not midgets, but normal proportions)

UmanH-ay

Unread post by UmanH-ay » April 12th, 2006, 1:46 am

ok since this thread has gone off topic, im willing to know about neanderthals, if they arent a predescor to us humans, which forms were before? i know of one called homo-erectus

whoknows
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 130
Joined: December 2nd, 2005, 7:06 am

Unread post by whoknows » April 12th, 2006, 2:18 am

se11 wrote:
What two white people that you know can produce a black or darker person?


believe it or not, there are diversities in caucasian people. you have pale caucasian people(mostly from ireland/scotland and nordic area), you have medium looking white people mostly from spain and everywhere in europe and russia, and you have tanner looking white people particularly from portugal, some places in eastern europe. all of them are white but have different tones of skin.



go sit in the corner biatch....

don't you know that the dark skinned white people like the italians, spaniards, and some of the irish are black.

brothers like hannibal and his african army and the moors conquered rome, some parts of europe and ireland so these people have black blood in them. that's why hitler and the nazi's don't like them. when nazi's say pure arayan blood they talking about blood that ain't mixed with black and there isn't 2 many people that fall in that category.

people of color like asians, arabs, mexicans, indians and darkskinned europeans whether or not they want to admit it they black.

the nazi's know history why don't ya'll?

wake up and realize we the majority not the minority..

UmanH-ay

Unread post by UmanH-ay » April 12th, 2006, 2:30 am

ireland and england were never conquered by the moors

whoknows
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 130
Joined: December 2nd, 2005, 7:06 am

Unread post by whoknows » April 12th, 2006, 2:47 am

^^^^^the moors had spain but they set up shop in some parts of ireland, england and europe....

MiChuhSuh

Unread post by MiChuhSuh » April 12th, 2006, 11:09 am

whoknows wrote:
se11 wrote:
What two white people that you know can produce a black or darker person?


believe it or not, there are diversities in caucasian people. you have pale caucasian people(mostly from ireland/scotland and nordic area), you have medium looking white people mostly from spain and everywhere in europe and russia, and you have tanner looking white people particularly from portugal, some places in eastern europe. all of them are white but have different tones of skin.



go sit in the corner biatch....

don't you know that the dark skinned white people like the italians, spaniards, and some of the irish are black.

brothers like hannibal and his african army and the moors conquered rome, some parts of europe and ireland so these people have black blood in them. that's why hitler and the nazi's don't like them. when nazi's say pure arayan blood they talking about blood that ain't mixed with black and there isn't 2 many people that fall in that category.

people of color like asians, arabs, mexicans, indians and darkskinned europeans whether or not they want to admit it they black.

the nazi's know history why don't ya'll?

wake up and realize we the majority not the minority..


Moors were Arabs.

lol people of color are all black? Then why aren't light Europeans just "lightskinned" black. I mean Ice-T is black and he's light.

So since everyone's black, I guess that means you have no one left to blame and complain about huh?

Old Shatterhand
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1318
Joined: March 5th, 2006, 4:18 pm
Contact:

Unread post by Old Shatterhand » April 12th, 2006, 11:58 am

Oh and regarding the Ethopian Australopithecus, you will see it represented like this: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060412/sc_nm/science_humans_dc in the media.

The truth is that the Ethiopian finds, unearthed and described by a team headed by UC Berkeley paleoanthropologist Tim White, consisted primarily of three fossilized crania, two adult and one juvenile. Through the use of a radiometric technique (argon-argon dating), the research team dated the fossil specimens between 160,000 and 154,000 years in age. The team interpreted the anatomy of the three crania to consist of a mosaic of “archaic” and “modern” features. Because of the age and anatomical characteristics, the researchers assigned the Ethiopian specimens to an intermediate position between the “archaic” Homo rhodesiensis and Homo sapiens sapiens, and classified them as a new subspecies, Homo sapiens idaltu.

The paleoanthropologists were quite clear, however, that Homo sapiens idaltu was anatomically distinct from modern humans. Two recent studies by separate teams of paleoanthropologists affirm this conclusion. Both studies demonstrate that the “archaic” Homo sapiens that existed between about 500,000 and 100,000 years ago were morphologically (anatomically) distinct from modern humans, just like idaltu.

The researchers also recovered stone artifacts in the same geological layers that held the fossilized crania. These “tools” lacked the sophistication of tools used by anatomically and behaviorally modern humans. Instead, these artifacts reflected the crude and primitive technology of Homo erectus and Neanderthals. Also, large mammal remains were discovered near the hominid fossils. Inspection of these mammal fossils indicated that they were hunted and butchered, presumably by idaltu. The researchers also reported that the idaltu crania evidenced modifications that suggested they were defleshed after death—behavior that reflects some level of intelligence, but not at a level exclusive to modern humans

Homo sapiens idaltu, like H. erectus, Neanderthals, and other “archaic” Homo sapiens, was simply a primate—an animal that walked upright, possessed limited intelligence, and had some type of “culture,” but an animal nonetheless. All the data support this interpretation. Homo sapiens idaltu stands as anatomically and behaviorally distinct from modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens), and dates older than Neanderthal.

The combination of “archaic” and “modern” characteristics possessed by idaltu poses no problems for old earth creation models. In some sense, all hominids have features that resemble modern humans. Homo sapiens idaltu is no exception. While White’s team interpreted the mosaic nature of these hominids to be an indicator of their transitional status, other explanations are equally plausible. With respect to old earth creation models for humanity’s origin, the discovery of Homo sapiens idaltu causes little, if any, excitement.

We're back to exactly where we started... misrepresentations being projected at the public by pantheist evolutionists who claim fact where only speculation exists.

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » April 12th, 2006, 12:37 pm

EVN - I'm just me... wrote:
whoknows wrote:
se11 wrote:
What two white people that you know can produce a black or darker person?


believe it or not, there are diversities in caucasian people. you have pale caucasian people(mostly from ireland/scotland and nordic area), you have medium looking white people mostly from spain and everywhere in europe and russia, and you have tanner looking white people particularly from portugal, some places in eastern europe. all of them are white but have different tones of skin.



go sit in the corner biatch....

don't you know that the dark skinned white people like the italians, spaniards, and some of the irish are black.

brothers like hannibal and his african army and the moors conquered rome, some parts of europe and ireland so these people have black blood in them. that's why hitler and the nazi's don't like them. when nazi's say pure arayan blood they talking about blood that ain't mixed with black and there isn't 2 many people that fall in that category.

people of color like asians, arabs, mexicans, indians and darkskinned europeans whether or not they want to admit it they black.

the nazi's know history why don't ya'll?

wake up and realize we the majority not the minority..


Moors were Arabs.

lol people of color are all black? Then why aren't light Europeans just "lightskinned" black. I mean Ice-T is black and he's light.

So since everyone's black, I guess that means you have no one left to blame and complain about huh?


Moors were not Arab. They're were Arab generals and Arab soldiers in the Moorish ranks but Moors were not Arab. I'm tired of this lying BS to belittle black people's history. I'm not gonna write a whole shit either, it's up to you to search and find the correct history. Anyways, I was in Europe and they had a Medieval exhibit in this Zurich Museum. They had this black doll on display titled "moor". It was a present to a swiss duke from some royalty in Spain. Shit was sick, I was like only if blacks had some money to see this history in actuality, instead of hearing every other mofo talk some, oh, they weren't black they were monkeys, they were aliens, they were Arabs, they were dark Europeans, they have black complexions and features but they weren't black. Mess that, it's up to you to find your history black peoples cause these other fools lie too much.

se11
Heavy Weight
Heavy Weight
Posts: 2247
Joined: October 12th, 2004, 9:48 pm
Location: NYC

Unread post by se11 » April 12th, 2006, 8:37 pm

don't you know that the dark skinned white people like the italians, spaniards, and some of the irish are black.


spanish people from spain arent black. and if you told any irish person they were black they would probably murder you on the spot. some SICILIANS may be black, but its not for sure or proven.

people of color like asians, arabs, mexicans, indians and darkskinned europeans whether or not they want to admit it they black.


so basically everyone is black to you.

way to go making up your own history lesson that you just pulled out of your ass.

black
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 713
Joined: November 16th, 2005, 6:49 am
Location: "It is the racist who creates the inferior." fanon.

Unread post by black » April 12th, 2006, 10:52 pm

whoknows wrote:
brothers like hannibal and his african army



they supposed to make a movie about hannibal with vin diesel...

Post Reply

Return to “Race and Ethnicity, Racial Relations & Racism”