DickSuckSmitty

[RWC]

I'm so sorry. Faggoty brown boys don't do it for me. I've let a few black bitches suck my dick before though. They're naturals. At least they're good at something.

 

[RWC]

In closing oily nigger boy, you are inferior to me.

I just googled "lynching" and had a good chuckle. Would you post a pic with a rope around your neck? That would be really funny.

 

[BitchSlapSmitty]

In closing oily nigger boy, you are inferior to me.

I just googled "lynching" and had a good chuckle. Would you post a pic with a rope around your neck? That would be really funny.

Hah, googled this, googled that, most guys just look at porn man.

What's your damage?

 

[eloisel]

You haven't "knocked" anything down, except maybe in your own mind. ..... You haven't effectly argued any point. I'll give credit when credit is due, but haven't earned it. And so-called history that was rewritten by whites to make blacks feel better about themselves like the history of a stack of blocks in the desert isn't a valid argument and doesn't prove anything.

Dear RWC, that is an emotional response and a conclusory statement you are providing to substantiate your claims which have no bases in fact.

And, yes, I knocked down three of your cartoonistic claims regarding African architecture, philosophers, and black queens and kings over Egypt. It wouldn't be that difficult to knock down the rest of your so called facts regarding literature, fashion, cuisine, art and invention.

One of the things you have the opportunity to learn is why the Egyptian kings didn't need slave labor for their monumental building projects. Many of the laborers in that time period were farmers. Farming, especially along the Nile, is a seasonal occupation. Those farmers had time to devote to building projects, for which they were paid, fed and housed. Those farmers also had a love and loyalty to their rulers because of the ruler's connection to the gods and because they hoped to be buried in the shadow of the king's pyramids - a good thing for their own belief in an afterlife. Not to say some laborers weren't slaves, but the majority were not. And, guess what? They had literature! You should read some of the stories in the Westcar Papyrus about ghosts and magicians. Not only could the wealthy read and write, so could the common laborer as is evidenced by the messages left by the work gangs in the rooms above the King's Chamber in the Great Pyramid.

You hate Africa yet you know so very little about it. I've just mentioned a few things about Egypt. Would you care to explore the rest of the continent? There are marvelous cities carved in the side of sheer rock. There is the cradle of civilization. There are the ancient dams that required some real ingenuity to construct. There are bridges. One of the interesting things about the country is how the people have managed to build on that continent for thousands of years and not polluted the place beyond livability or ruin every bit of majestic scenery with a man-made construct that will need to be imploded in a 100 years or less.

Speaking of imploding, I think perhaps you need a cleaning out of some of your prejudicial beliefs. They are keeping you ignorant. Here, put these to good use. Shove them in your ear or sit on them - whichever will affect the part you think with the most.

 

[BitchSlapSmitty]

I have that effect on people. Ex girlfriend and Milfs always run to me. It's weird.

 

[RWC]

It's funny that you mention Egyptian kings. Because the most well known one was King Tutankhamun, a Caucasoid North African.

All of these great claims are attributed to members of the dark-skinned branch of the white race, not black Africans.

 

[Gagh]

SPAM

 

[eloisel]

It's funny that you mention Egyptian kings. Because the most well known one was King Tutankhamun, a Caucasoid North African.

All of these great claims are attributed to members of the dark-skinned branch of the white race, not black Africans.

Tutankenaten!! Ha! Actually, Ramesses II is better known. Tut was a boy king buried in a borrowed tomb with borrowed tomb goods. Ramesses II has temples and statutes all over the place that still exist.

Before you get hung up on the Caucasoid stuff, you might want to check out the Out-of-Africa model. Regardless of what people wound up being 50-70 thousand years later, they started in Africa. Babe - you're just an African extremely diluted!

 

[MessengerX]

That's just theory, and I agree with Sarge in that last thread that saying we evolved from Africans is disrespectful.

 

[Sarek]

Shut the fuck up crappy dual.

 

[eloisel]

That's just theory, and I agree with Sarge in that last thread that saying we evolved from Africans is disrespectful.

That is interesting. Why do you think it is disrespectful?
And, to whom do you think it is disrespectful?

 

[Sarek]

How is it possible to be disrespectful to a crappy dual is a better question.

 

[starguard]

 

[RWC]

Tutankenaten!! Ha! Actually, Ramesses II is better known. Tut was a boy king buried in a borrowed tomb with borrowed tomb goods. Ramesses II has temples and statutes all over the place that still exist.

Ramses was also white. His remains are well preserved, red hair and all.

Before you get hung up on the Caucasoid stuff, you might want to check out the Out-of-Africa model. Regardless of what people wound up being 50-70 thousand years later, they started in Africa.

You seem to be a fan of illogical extremes, maybe you should just skip straight to the Out-of-Pangea model that has us ascending from primordial slime. And learn how to read a graph.

 

[Gagh]

Ramses was also white. His remains are well preserved, red hair and all.



You seem to be a fan of illogical extremes, maybe you should just skip straight to the Out-of-Pangea model that has us ascending from primordial slime. And learn how to read a graph.

 

[eloisel]

Ramses was also white. His remains are well preserved, red hair and all.

Which doesn't change the fact that he was African.

You seem to be a fan of illogical extremes, maybe you should just skip straight to the Out-of-Pangea model that has us ascending from primordial slime. And learn how to read a graph.

This would, again, be an emotional response from you. I am inclined to believe the Out-of-Africa model is a possibility. I base that belief on real research and facts gathered by people such as:

Chris Stringer, a British anthropologist and a researcher in the area of hominins in the Natural History Museum's Department of Paleontology;

Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, an Italian population geneticist, a professor at Stanford University since 1970 (now emeritus), and one of the most important geneticists of the 20th century;

Stephen Oppenheimer, a well-known expert in the field of synthesizing DNA studies with archaeological, anthropological, linguistic and other field studies and a member of Green College, Oxford University;

Donald Carl Johanson, an American paleoanthropologist known for his discovery of the skeleton of Lucy when he was curator of the Cleveland Museum of Natural History, and he established the Institute of Human Origins, in Berkeley, California in 1981 then moved it to Arizona State University in 1998; and

Spencer Wells, a geneticist and anthropologist, an Explorer-in-Residence at the National Geographic Society leading The Genographic Project, has a B.S. in Biology from the University of Texas at Austin, a Ph.D. in Biology from Harvard University, a Postdoctoral fellow from Stanford University, and a Research fellow from Oxford University.

What do you have to back up your theories besides emotional responses and self-serving conclusory statements? What are the credentials of the people that "compiled" the data for your graphs?

 

[RWC]

Which doesn't change the fact that he was African.

Conversely being in Africa doesn't change the fact that he was also a Caucasoid, no doubt a minority on the Dark Continent.

This would, again, be an emotional response from you. I am inclined to believe the Out-of-Africa model is a possibility. I base that belief on real research and facts gathered by people such as...

Incorrect, sweetie. Some of my responses have been visceral but never emotional. I am posting on the internet. You seem to have a problem telling the difference.

What do you have to back up your theories besides emotional responses and self-serving conclusory statements? What are the credentials of the people that "compiled" the data for your graphs?

Not so fast. You've compiled a fine list but have neglected to state what exactly you've cited from each of these individuals.

And as far as "self-serving conclusionary statements" go, it's what proceeds a premise in a debate. If one has a premise without a conclusion there would be no argument, just an inventory list without a point.

 

[eloisel]

Conversely being in Africa doesn't change the fact that he was also a Caucasoid, no doubt a minority on the Dark Continent.

Provide your evidence for your certainty that "caucasoids" were a minority in Africa over 3,000 years ago.

Incorrect, sweetie. Some of my responses have been visceral but never emotional. I am posting on the internet. You seem to have a problem telling the difference.

Yet another interesting element of your argument style, admitting your statements are based on neither reason nor observation.

Not so fast. You've compiled a fine list but have neglected to state what exactly you've cited from each of these individuals.

Perhaps you should check your internet connection. You seem to have a problem receiving my entire post.

And as far as "self-serving conclusionary statements" go, it's what proceeds a premise in a debate. If one has a premise without a conclusion there would be no argument, just an inventory list without a point.

It appears you have confused the word conclusory with "conclusionary." I will assume you meant conclusive as conclusionary is not a word. Perhaps you should look up the definition of conclusory. When your argument is not supported by the facts, then it is conclusory - not conclusive.

 

[RWC]

Provide your evidence for your certainty that "caucasoids" were a minority in Africa over 3,000 years ago.

It's a moot point, but if you want to believe that Caucasoids were a majority in Africa at any time in history, feel free.

Yet another interesting element of your argument style, admitting your statements are based on neither reason nor observation.

And you've shown your inability to recognize qualifiers and quantifiers. That said, my statement "You seem to be a fan of illogical extremes, maybe you should just skip straight to the Out-of-Pangea model that has us ascending from primordial slime" was a direct response to your "Out of Africa model" that you hold in such high esteem, and it was a logical and fair comparison.

Perhaps you should check your internet connection. You seem to have a problem receiving my entire post.

You seem to have a problem understanding questions. Again: You've compiled a list but have neglected to state what exactly you've cited from each of these individuals.

It appears you have confused the word conclusory with "conclusionary." I will assume you meant conclusive as conclusionary is not a word. Perhaps you should look up the definition of conclusory. When your argument is not supported by the facts, then it is conclusory - not conclusive.

I misread one word, but you have based your entire argument on Greeks in Egypt as evidence of Africa being the "cradle of civilization".

Your major premise here is that I "hate Africa" (your words), and that I should recognize that Africa is "the cradle of civilization". Your minor premise (taken jointly are known as syllogism) is that Egypt was a once great culture, and as evidence you point out that Europeans moved to a northern port city and taught other Europeans there. Plotinus? Greek. Ammonius Saccas? Greek. Alexander of Aphrodisias? Greek. They were all Greeks who traveled the distance equivalent from San Fransisco to San Diego and this is your "proof" that the entire continent of Africa was once a cultured and civilized society. All you've proven is that Greeks lived on both sides of a trade route and taught philosophy on both sides of the Mediterranean and little else.

Your arguments say nothing about black Africans, African Americans even Africa itself. You are familiar with the AIDS ravaged continent where Arabs still enslave blacks and female circumcision is prevalent, aren't you? Or how about the U.S. inner-cities that are crime-ridden toilets thanks to blacks? Because I'm still unconvinced that a stack of blocks in the desert proves anything other than slavery existed in Africa thousands of years ago as it does now. Remember, saying that blacks designed those pyramids just because they were slaves is the functional equivalent of calling a Mexican roofer an architect, and we both know that just isn't the case.

 

[Gagh]

^Cunt.