Whites are not homo sapiens.
James Funkmeyer
Your all screwed up. First off, cannibalism was practiced by ALL races
and cultures at some point in their history. It persisted in Africa
longer than Europe by the way. For that matter whole peoples have been
eliminated from existence over the centuries. China isn't even all
chinese. There are numerous groups that if given the chance would
probably make Bosnia look tame. China was beaten many times, then just
absorbed the new comers and made them Chinese.
C wrote:
>
> In article <8638486...@dejanews.com>, westsid...@msn.com wrote:
>
> > When Linnaeus classified all the worlds animals into species in 1758 he
> > was unsure if Black Africans should be classified as Homo Sapiens, ie
> > humans.
>
> His classifications are irrelevant to the current reality. You really need
> to update your sources...it is damn near the 21st Century and you are still
> use long refuted 18th century sources.
>
> But let us look (read destroy) your friendly proposition...
>
> Homo=man Sapien=thinking. The first sign of thinking, writing, and science
> comes from the "Negroes" of the Nile Valley in East Africa. Africans have
> taught the Neanderthalis hybrid in Europe all of the methods of thinking.
> You weren't able to keep them so we had to come back in the "Dark Ages" to
> lift you out of savagery once again. You realized how important the African
> was to your livelihood so you created a situation where we would forever be
> by your side...until your death.
>
> >He mistakenly chose to so classify them. U.C. Cal. professor
> > Vincent Sarich points out that the morphological (ie physical) difference
> > between Blacks and Siberians is greater than the morphological difference
> > between Neandertals and Modern Europeans.
>
> Agreed! Agreed! Whites are neaderthals. They were unable to devise a
> signifcant Civilization without a parasitic relationship with humanity.
>
> Neaderthals didn't bury their dead, could conceive mathematics, and ate
> their own species. This is consistent with the unique history of the
> whites.
>
> >Yet these two later types are classified in different species. The races
> of >man are morphologically more differentiated than are the species in
> most other >genera.
>
> Agreed. The white stands alone in its gawking ugly appearance. No skin
> pigmentation. No lips. Poor muscular build. Highest amount of hair like
> lower primates. Sloping forehead, big jowels, and ridge brow like the lower
> strains of homo genus.
>
> > Possiblily of interbreeding does not define species. Tigers and Lions
> > can produce fertile offspring. Physical and behavioral differences
> > define species and on this basis Niggers are not homo sapiens, they are
> > not human.
>
> Most humans believe in communal values over individual, the sanctity of
> nature, and respect of ancestors. Africans, Asians, and Native Americans
> are identitical in these respects...the European Neanderthal stand alone in
> his awkard existence in being wholly individualistic, trying to control
> Nature, and worship of the young (a version of pedophilia) over the
> ancestors. The whites live like wild loners, devoid of social
> responsibility and context.
>
> >Our forefathers recognized this when they gave them names like
> > Negroes or Mulattoes (mules) or quadroons (1/4th black) or octoroons.
> > These are names for animals describing them by physical characteristics.
>
> By your own twisted "logic" your forefathers were freaks involved in
> beastiality. Did they try to breed with sheep and cows also?
>
> > Humans are called by their nationality or region of origin, ie Japanese
> > or Indians etc.
>
> As is the African American, Igbo, Zulu, Egyptian, Nubian, Ashanti...
> but not the white
>
> >Let us classify these large animals as non-humans or
> > sub-humans. Billy
>
> Agreed let us call the whites hell spawned devils...
>
> BTW, are you still beating your Korean war bride? Please don't beat her and
> then molest your offspring because this post has enraged you.
>
> --
> "The events which transpired five thousand years ago; Five years ago or
> five minutes ago, have determined what will happen five minutes from now;
> five years from now or five thousand years from now. All history is a
> current event"-John Henrik Clarke
>
> Celebrate African History.
White Star
C wrote:
>
> In article <8638486...@dejanews.com>, westsid...@msn.com wrote:
>
> > When Linnaeus classified all the worlds animals into species in 1758 he
> > was unsure if Black Africans should be classified as Homo Sapiens, ie
> > humans.
>
> His classifications are irrelevant to the current reality. You really need
> to update your sources...it is damn near the 21st Century and you are still
> use long refuted 18th century sources.
>
> But let us look (read destroy) your friendly proposition...
>
> Homo=man Sapien=thinking. The first sign of thinking, writing, and science
> comes from the "Negroes" of the Nile Valley in East Africa. Africans have
> taught the Neanderthalis hybrid in Europe all of the methods of thinking.
> You weren't able to keep them so we had to come back in the "Dark Ages" to
> lift you out of savagery once again. You realized how important the African
> was to your livelihood so you created a situation where we would forever be
> by your side...until your death.
>
East Africa were living very primitively When the Egyptians were
building Egypt and developing Science and mathmatics. Long after They
had Built Egypt, the Egyptians began taking the Nubians as slaves.
These primitives Knew nothing of science or mathmatics.
And I hope you try to say that the Egyptians were Negroids because I
have a few surprises for you.
The rest of your bullshit here is so obviously the work of a typical
simple minded nigger, it needs no amending. It speeks for itself.
> >He mistakenly chose to so classify them. U.C. Cal. professor
> > Vincent Sarich points out that the morphological (ie physical) difference
> > between Blacks and Siberians is greater than the morphological difference
> > between Neandertals and Modern Europeans.
>
Mistake is right. Negroids evolved in virtual isolation due to the
sub-Saharan barrier and couldn't have any gentic relation to Siberians.
And Siberians don't look anything like Negroids. As for Neanderthals,
Anthropologist beilieve they were a sub-species of genus Homo that were
displaced by modern Homo Sapians. Negroids and Caucasoids are all
Homosapians but Negroids evolved a more primitive brain than did
Caucasoids due to the enviroment in which they evolved. The evidence for
this is overwhelming.
--
Remove all that is impossible and therein lies the truth.
White Star
thunderr wrote:
>
> White Star wrote:
> >
> > C wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <8638486...@dejanews.com>, westsid...@msn.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > When Linnaeus classified all the worlds animals into species in 1758 he
> > > > was unsure if Black Africans should be classified as Homo Sapiens, ie
> > > > humans.
> > >
> > > His classifications are irrelevant to the current reality. You really need
> > > to update your sources...it is damn near the 21st Century and you are still
> > > use long refuted 18th century sources.
> > >
> > > But let us look (read destroy) your friendly proposition...
> > >
> > > Homo=man Sapien=thinking. The first sign of thinking, writing, and science
> > > comes from the "Negroes" of the Nile Valley in East Africa. Africans have
> > > taught the Neanderthalis hybrid in Europe all of the methods of thinking.
> > > You weren't able to keep them so we had to come back in the "Dark Ages" to
> > > lift you out of savagery once again. You realized how important the African
> > > was to your livelihood so you created a situation where we would forever be
> > > by your side...until your death.
> > >
> > Your confused or just blind ass stupid.
>
>
> The Nubians (Negroids) in
> > East Africa were living very primitively
>
>
> When the Egyptians were
> > building Egypt and developing Science and mathmatics.
>
>
Well for starters: Guns Germs and Steel by Jaraed Diamond. I don't
agree with
all of what he points out in his book but it has a lot of very
informative referances of the anciant world. He points out and
attempts to explain why The negroid and other races didn't progress
technologically like the Caucasian race did. Then there is Frank M.
Snowden, A NIGGER, who is supose to be an authority on race in
antiquity. He points out in his book, Blacks in Antiquity, that the
Egyptians were not Negroid. Go to the library and read just about any
book on ancient Egypt. Usually one will have a picture of the painting
on King Tutankhamen's chest of the massacare of the Nubians. there are
also pictures of Egyptian paintings of them taking nubian slaves. That
clearly points out that the Nubians were not Egyptians and that they
were nothing more than primitives.
Read!!! Thunderr read!!! You won't look so stupid if you just read.
> Long after They
> > had Built Egypt, the Egyptians began taking the Nubians as slaves.
>
> Same. Are you interpreting the wall paintings yourself or are you having
> a FIVE YEAR OLD DO IT!
>
No asshole I am reading the interpretation of educated scholars who
unlike yourself know what the fuck they are talking about.
> > These primitives Knew nothing of science or mathmatics.
>
> GOD!!!! YOU ARE SUCH A MORON!!!! YOU HAVEN'T THE SLIGHTEST CLUE YET YOU
> BABBLE LIKE YOU THINK YOU KNOW!!!!!!!
>
> > And I hope you try to say that the Egyptians were Negroids because I
> > have a few surprises for you.
>
> They WERE A MIX!!!!!!!!!! TALK TO EGYPTIONS DUMBASS!!!!!!!
>
> >NOT UNTIL CENTRIES AFTER THEY BUILT EGYPT DID THEY BEGIN TO TAKE NUBIAN
SLAVES AND EVENTUALY BREED WITH THEM. BUT THIS WAS NEAR THE END OF
THE EGYPTIAN IMPIRE ANYWAY!!!!!!!!!!
> > The rest of your bullshit here is so obviously the work of a typical
> > simple minded nigger, it needs no amending. It speeks for itself.
>
> You would benifit from having ANY mind , simple or not FART! What a
> FUCKHEAD!!!!!
> --
>
> “Hate is too great a burden to bear” Dr. Martin Luther King.
White Star
> identity. Oh shit, is this some racist hand book. Well why didn't you
> just say he was retarded?
>
Jesus Christ Blunderr! you call yourself a true liberal friend of the
Negro and you haven' read Guns, Germs and Steel? Jared Diamond is one of
the best known opposers to race based theories. His book is considered
ground breaking in the dismantling of theories stating that
technological advancements were attributed to race. Very interesting
book I must admit but only partially convinced me. But shame on you.
However it proves a point. You present a one sided argument without even
considering another point of view. I may be a racist but at least I
consider other possibilities. I am willing to sit down and read opposing
views. If they make sense I acknowledge it.
> Then there is Frank M.
> > Snowden, A NIGGER, who is supose to be an authority on race in
> > antiquity. He points out in his book, Blacks in Antiquity, that the
> > Egyptians were not Negroid. Go to the library and read just about any
> > book on ancient Egypt. Usually one will have a picture of the painting
> > on King Tutankhamen's chest of the massacare of the Nubians. there are
> > also pictures of Egyptian paintings of them taking nubian slaves. That
> > clearly points out that the Nubians were not Egyptians and that they
> > were nothing more than primitives.
> >
> > Read!!! Thunderr read!!! You won't look so stupid if you just read.
>
> Oh please! For someone reads as much as you do I am amazed at your lack
> of ability to comprehend. Perhaps your prejudice has made it impossible
> for you to see past your narrow concepts. Egypt at the time was
> multicultural in terms of populace. I have access to a Egyptian
> cultural experts who YOU would deem negroid because of how dark their
> complextions are. The joke is they would be lynched by racist buttwipes
> like yourself .
>
> > There is only one group of people who I consider Negroid and that is the true African Negroid. Which by the way are the only people for whom I have predjudices toward. And yes they were multi cultural but as I said that was toward the end of the Egyptian reign.
> > > Long after They
> > > > had Built Egypt, the Egyptians began taking the Nubians as slaves.
> > >
> > > Same. Are you interpreting the wall paintings yourself or are you having
> > > a FIVE YEAR OLD DO IT!
> > >
> > No asshole I am reading the interpretation of educated scholars who
> > unlike yourself know what the fuck they are talking about.
>
> Educated scholars barely have translated the text and haven't the
> slightest clue how or why the pyramids were built. Your dating of when
> Nubians were taken as slaves is as usual bullshit. They have proved that
> the racist whites were inferior to "nigger loving"whites though.
>
> >That's crap. There is a whole branch of science (Egyptology) devoted to Ancient Egypt. Ancient Egyptian culture, technology and architecture have been scrutinized more than any other Ancient civilization. They have made strides in understanding Ancient Egypt. And it wasn't my dating of when Nubians were taken as slaves, it was the Scholors, who have wrote volumes about Ancient Egypt, who dated the event.
> > > > These primitives Knew nothing of science or mathmatics.
> > >
> > > GOD!!!! YOU ARE SUCH A MORON!!!! YOU HAVEN'T THE SLIGHTEST CLUE YET YOU
> > > BABBLE LIKE YOU THINK YOU KNOW!!!!!!!
> > >
> > > > And I hope you try to say that the Egyptians were Negroids because I
> > > > have a few surprises for you.
> > >
> > > They WERE A MIX!!!!!!!!!! TALK TO EGYPTIONS DUMBASS!!!!!!!
> > >
--
thunderr
White Star wrote:
>
> thunderr wrote:
> >
> > White Star wrote:
> > >
> > > thunderr wrote:
> > > >
> > > > White Star wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > C wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In article <8638486...@dejanews.com>, westsid...@msn.com wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > When Linnaeus classified all the worlds animals into species in 1758 he
> > > > > > > was unsure if Black Africans should be classified as Homo Sapiens, ie
> > > > > > > humans.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > His classifications are irrelevant to the current reality. You really need
> > > > > > to update your sources...it is damn near the 21st Century and you are still
> > > > > > use long refuted 18th century sources.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But let us look (read destroy) your friendly proposition...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Homo=man Sapien=thinking. The first sign of thinking, writing, and science
> > > > > > comes from the "Negroes" of the Nile Valley in East Africa. Africans have
> > > > > > taught the Neanderthalis hybrid in Europe all of the methods of thinking.
> > > > > > You weren't able to keep them so we had to come back in the "Dark Ages" to
> > > > > > lift you out of savagery once again. You realized how important the African
> > > > > > was to your livelihood so you created a situation where we would forever be
> > > > > > by your side...until your death.
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Like you aren't a little brain damage victim.
> > > >
> > > > The Nubians (Negroids) in
> > > > > East Africa were living very primitively
> > > >
> > > > Bullshit.
> > > >
> > > > When the Egyptians were
> > > > > building Egypt and developing Science and mathmatics.
> > > >
> > > > Proof! What books do you sight as reference?!?!?!
> > > >
> > > Well for starters: Guns Germs and Steel by Jaraed Diamond. I don't
> > > agree with
> > > all of what he points out in his book but it has a lot of very
> > > informative referances of the anciant world. He points out and
> > > attempts to explain why The negroid and other races didn't progress
> > > technologically like the Caucasian race did.
> >
> > "Guns Germs and Steel"? Doesn't sound like a book researching cultural
> > identity. Oh shit, is this some racist hand book. Well why didn't you
> > just say he was retarded?
> >
> Jesus Christ Blunderr! you call yourself a true liberal friend of the
> Negro and you haven' read Guns, Germs and Steel?
So you"re saying anyone who disagrees with prejudice has read it right?
NAWWWWWWWW, I don't think so.
Jared Diamond is one of
> the best known opposers to race based theories. His book is considered
> ground breaking in the dismantling of theories stating that
> technological advancements were attributed to race. Very interesting
> book I must admit but only partially convinced me. But shame on you.
> However it proves a point. You present a one sided argument without even
> considering another point of view.
Excuse me but one reading one book isn't required for having an opinion.
I don't need a book to tell me their are blacks achieving in science ,
mathmatics and high tech. The whole idea you are pushing is based on
blacks being unable to handle working these fields. The facts prove you
wrong.
I may be a racist but at least I
> consider other possibilities. I am willing to sit down and read opposing
> views. If they make sense I acknowledge it.
Just as hearing doesn't require you listen, reading doesn't mean you
were objective.
Nope. It's true.
There is a whole branch of science (Egyptology) devoted to Ancient
Egypt. Ancient Egyptian culture, technology and architecture have been
scrutinized more than any other Ancient civilization. They have made
strides in understanding Ancient Egypt.
I like the word "strides". It's so hopeful with no real qualification of
any acheivement.
And it wasn't my dating of when Nubians were taken as slaves, it was
the Scholors, who have wrote volumes about Ancient Egypt, who dated the
event.
From trying to translate the symbolics which were not even factual but
myth creations for the royals in power. Wall paintings and an ever
evolving set of charactors that may or may not mean the same thing
depending on the author at the time. Who cares how many volumes the
researchers write. That has no bearing on how factual their translations
were.
> > > > > These primitives Knew nothing of science or mathmatics.
> > > >
> > > > GOD!!!! YOU ARE SUCH A MORON!!!! YOU HAVEN'T THE SLIGHTEST CLUE YET YOU
> > > > BABBLE LIKE YOU THINK YOU KNOW!!!!!!!
> > > >
> > > > > And I hope you try to say that the Egyptians were Negroids because I
> > > > > have a few surprises for you.
> > > >
> > > > They WERE A MIX!!!!!!!!!! TALK TO EGYPTIONS DUMBASS!!!!!!!
> > > >
>
> --
> Remove all that is impossible and therein lies the truth.
The real point is that hybrids of blacks are everywhere and though the
denial may be in the wind the physical evidence points to blacks. I am
working with Egyptian art work from the tombs right now and though I
have no scientific training I can say that the characterisics are most
black with slight variations. A better genetic test is the only way to
prove there is no relation. Till then I disagee.
White Star
something.
> Nope. It's not.
>
gypt. Ancient Egyptian culture, technology and architecture have been
> scrutinized more than any other Ancient civilization. They have made
> strides in understanding Ancient Egypt.
>
> I like the word "strides". It's so hopeful with no real qualification of
> any acheivement.
>
> And it wasn't my dating of when Nubians were taken as slaves, it was
> the Scholors, who have wrote volumes about Ancient Egypt, who dated the
> event.
>
> From trying to translate the symbolics which were not even factual but
> myth creations for the royals in power. Wall paintings and an ever
> evolving set of charactors that may or may not mean the same thing
> depending on the author at the time. Who cares how many volumes the
> researchers write. That has no bearing on how factual their translations
> were.
>
They weren't all mythical. Many dipicted historical accounts. And
researchers are not going to publish data as historical events if they
aren't reasonably sure of the accuracy. And no data is being offered
that revises the histories.
Well their translations are sure the hell a lot more credible than
yours.
> > > > > > These primitives Knew nothing of science or mathmatics.
> > > > >
> > > > > GOD!!!! YOU ARE SUCH A MORON!!!! YOU HAVEN'T THE SLIGHTEST CLUE YET YOU
> > > > > BABBLE LIKE YOU THINK YOU KNOW!!!!!!!
> > > > >
> > > > > > And I hope you try to say that the Egyptians were Negroids because I
> > > > > > have a few surprises for you.
> > > > >
> > > > > They WERE A MIX!!!!!!!!!! TALK TO EGYPTIONS DUMBASS!!!!!!!
> > > > >
> >
> > --
> > Remove all that is impossible and therein lies the truth.
>
> The real point is that hybrids of blacks are everywhere and though the
> denial may be in the wind the physical evidence points to blacks. I am
> working with Egyptian art work from the tombs right now and though I
> have no scientific training I can say that the characterisics are most
> black with slight variations. A better genetic test is the only way to
> prove there is no relation. Till then I disagee.
>
I have viewed many Egyptian works of art myself and the more anceint
sculptures and paintings of Egyptians look a lot like Mongolians not
Negroid. A few of the most recent do have Negroid traits which stands to
reason because The Egyptians were known to mix with the Nubian slaves.
But this was long after Egypt was built. If they are planning genetic
testing I would be very intersted in the results. If the Egyptians were
a Homogenious mix of Negroid and Caucasian or Mongolian then clearly I
will have to re-examine some of my convictions about niggers. Especially
if they were pure Negroid. But when I look at the soap stone sculpture
of Queen Navertiti, not sure about the spelling, I don't see Negroid or
even a Homogenious mix. I see pure Caucasian and it is sriking.
> --
>
> “Hate is too great a burden to bear” Dr. Martin Luther King.
--
thunderr
White Star wrote:
>Thunderr wrote:
> >
> > The real point is that hybrids of blacks are everywhere and though the
> > denial may be in the wind the physical evidence points to blacks. I am
> > working with Egyptian art work from the tombs right now and though I
> > have no scientific training I can say that the characterisics are most
> > black with slight variations. A better genetic test is the only way to
> > prove there is no relation. Till then I disagee.
> >
> I have viewed many Egyptian works of art myself and the more anceint
> sculptures and paintings of Egyptians look a lot like Mongolians not
> Negroid. A few of the most recent do have Negroid traits which stands to
> reason because The Egyptians were known to mix with the Nubian slaves.
> But this was long after Egypt was built. If they are planning genetic
> testing I would be very intersted in the results. If the Egyptians were
> a Homogenious mix of Negroid and Caucasian or Mongolian then clearly I
> will have to re-examine some of my convictions about niggers. Especially
> if they were pure Negroid. But when I look at the soap stone sculpture
> of Queen Navertiti, not sure about the spelling, I don't see Negroid or
> even a Homogenious mix. I see pure Caucasian and it is sriking.
>
One thing to note is that royals were sheltered almost totally from the
sun so depictions of them were given more extreme variations in shade.
It was a symbol of status to be pale shade of brown. Also artists
renderings were symbolic rather than realistic so idealized features
were common.
White Star
thunderr wrote:
>
> White Star wrote:
>
>
> > >
> > > The real point is that hybrids of blacks are everywhere and though the
> > > denial may be in the wind the physical evidence points to blacks. I am
> > > working with Egyptian art work from the tombs right now and though I
> > > have no scientific training I can say that the characterisics are most
> > > black with slight variations. A better genetic test is the only way to
> > > prove there is no relation. Till then I disagee.
> > >
> > I have viewed many Egyptian works of art myself and the more anceint
> > sculptures and paintings of Egyptians look a lot like Mongolians not
> > Negroid. A few of the most recent do have Negroid traits which stands to
> > reason because The Egyptians were known to mix with the Nubian slaves.
> > But this was long after Egypt was built. If they are planning genetic
> > testing I would be very intersted in the results. If the Egyptians were
> > a Homogenious mix of Negroid and Caucasian or Mongolian then clearly I
> > will have to re-examine some of my convictions about niggers. Especially
> > if they were pure Negroid. But when I look at the soap stone sculpture
> > of Queen Navertiti, not sure about the spelling, I don't see Negroid or
> > even a Homogenious mix. I see pure Caucasian and it is sriking.
> >
> sun so depictions of them were given more extreme variations in shade.
> It was a symbol of status to be pale shade of brown. Also artists
> renderings were symbolic rather than realistic so idealized features
> were common.
If this is true then nothing they painted or sculpted can be reliable as
models of what they truely looked like or who they were. I will have to
do some more research on Egyptian art.