Dude doesnt trust "European science" when it says we came from Africa, but when it says something about Australian Aboriginals they must do more research!
Black family in Georgia passed down a song through the centuries after slavery. Researchers linked song to Mende tribe in West Africa.
- Thread starter Ozymandeas
- Start date
The irony is that there is not such thing as “European science”. What is possible is, scientists who are European. Saying European science would indicate that there’s such thing as a “European molecules”.
When they encountered discoveries by Africans, they took advantage of them. They never stated we can’t use them, because it’s “African science”.
They contain centuries of African knowledge and scholarship on topics ranging from maths to astrological charts.
Overview | University of Cape Town
Stacks of manuscripts, TimbuktuThe Tombo
Last edited:
Dafunkdoc_Unlimited
Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
- Messages
- 44,630
- Reputation
- 8,094
- Daps
- 121,493
- Reppin
- The Wrong Side of the Tracks
Don't trust CAC science........except when it confirms my bias and lack of scientific understanding of gene-flow, genetic expression, and climate.
The only true dream the white man has is to denounce the existence and history of slavery! You know that far right wing white man that has you on his payroll…
Speaking of records!
“On April 16, 1862, the District of Columbia Compensated Emancipation Act became law. Originally sponsored by Senator Henry Wilson of Massachusetts, the act freed slaves in the District of Columbia and compensated owners up to $300 for each freeperson. In the months following the enactment of the law, commissioners approved more than 930 petitions, granting freedom to 2,989 former slaves.”
"An inscription on the Liberty Place monument in New Orleans, added in 1934, reads: "United States troops took over the state government and reinstated the usurpers but the national election of November 1876 recognized white supremacy in the South and gave us our state."
New Orleans considers removing Confederate monuments
City has estimated it will cost $144,000 to remove the monuments; and says anonymous donor will pay costwww.cbsnews.com
"William T. Thompson, the editor of the Savannah-based Daily Morning News, argued against the original Confederate flag, in an editorial on April 23, 1863, “on account of its resemblance to that of the abolition despotism against which we are fighting,” and in favor of the new flag, which he called “The White Man’s Flag.” His argument in favor of the new flag was that “As a people we are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause.” 1 Furthermore, the Confederacy that this flag represented was formed with the explicit purpose of maintaining slavery and white supremacy, as can be plainly seen from The Declaration of Causes of Seceding States."
Statement on Display of Confederate Flag - Evanston Public Library
The Evanston Public Library is committed to anti-racism and stands in solidarity with all who seek racial justice and equity. On Wednesday, July 29, a group of individuals openly displayed a Confederate Battle Flag at Lighthouse Beach in Evanston. Evanston resident LaShandra Smith-Rayfield...www.epl.org
Why are you arguing this with me who never once said slavery never happened
Still unwilling to go on record I see
Are there not aboriginals and Melenasians who look "black"? Were they not here in the Americas? Can any of you 100% confirm these black natives werent misidentified as africans during the slave trade? Lived among natives because they were natives,and not because they were runaways like the Europeans narrative?I dont believe you possibly can.
Your only option is to be willfully ignorant,and go on record to say there were absolutely no "black" natives in the Americas prior to slavery. @Burger King at least said "there was probably a few of em". Now its your turn to agree,or deny that there were any "black" natives in the americas.
I never said how many,that would be a fools errand due to you know, slavery and genocide. I simply said #WeWereAlreadyHere
No there weren't black people in America before colonization as far as all the current evidence says. You can take a DNA test to see if your ancestors are Australian aboriginals and MelanesiansAre there not aboriginals and Melenasians who look "black"? Were they not here in the Americas? Can any of you 100% confirm these black natives werent misidentified as africans during the slave trade? Lived among natives because they were natives,and not because they were runaways like the Europeans narrative?I dont believe you possibly can.
Your only option is to be willfully ignorant,and go on record to say there were absolutely no "black" natives in the Americas prior to slavery. @Burger King at least said "there was probably a few of em". Now its your turn to agree,or deny that there were any "black" natives in the americas.
I never said how many,that would be a fools errand due to you know, slavery and genocide. I simply said #WeWereAlreadyHere
Can’t be true. The slaves were already here. If they had said Seminole tribe it would be believable 
Dafunkdoc_Unlimited
Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
- Messages
- 44,630
- Reputation
- 8,094
- Daps
- 121,493
- Reppin
- The Wrong Side of the Tracks
There is no 'Black look' due to genetic diversity and environment, so that's a logical fallacy attempting to be an argument: if they look Black, they are Black, if they are Black, they look Black....
Continental Indians and Southeast Asians have darker skin than many present-day, 'unmixed' Africans. They aren't Black, either.
Continental Indians and Southeast Asians have darker skin than many present-day, 'unmixed' Africans. They aren't Black, either.
Can you 100% confirm they WERE?
Last edited:
I have no Idea what you think about that part of history. But your ABOS chief does claim it never happened.Why are you arguing this with me who never once said slavery never happened
What record are you talking about?Still unwilling to go on record I see
Babble box, Melanesians have a completely different gene pool from Black Americans. If these people make up the bulk of Black Americans ancestry, that would show up in your genetic makeup. It’s all very basic.
Secondly, osteological remains show what group these people related to. And now with genetic extractions it can be pinpointed even more accurately.
“The maternal genetic diversity of the individuals with African descent aligns with the routes of the trans-Atlantic slave trade but broadens our understanding of the ancestries of persons involved in it. Burial positioning, osteological pathology, and lack of maternal kinship among individuals of African descent provide tangible evidence for the emergence of racialized labor and society in Delaware during the late 17th century.”
Table S3. African Comparative Population Database
Table S4. Distribution of Comparative African Populations
Table S5. References for the Comparative Reference Populations from Africa …
Third, these people described themselves as Africans. That is how they referred to themselves. Anyone with basic understanding of history knows this.
One simple example is the First African Baptist Church. But many examples can be given.
First African Baptist Church, Savannah, Georgia (1773- ) •
First African Baptist Church, located in the historic district of Savannah, Georgia, is recognized as one of the nation’s oldest African American Baptist Churches. Although the church was not officially established until 1788, the original congregation of mostly enslaved individuals had been...
www.blackpast.org
I simply refuse to take a sip from your "kool aid". I’m not doing it. And that upsets you!
Slave cargo ships carried close to 300 to 400 people.
Dubois wrote in "The World and Africa" the survival rate was approximately was 15-20%.
W.E.B. DuBois who said 100 million Africans were taken during the Atlantic Slave trade from Africa. In 1969 Philip D. Curtin created the myth only 10 million Africans were enslaved.
In The Negro, DuBois, “IX THE TRADE IN MEN” page 86, wrote:
“The exact proportions of the slave trade can be estimated only approximately. From 1680 to 1688 we know that the English African Company alone sent 249 ships to Africa, shipped there 60,783 Negro slaves, and after losing 14,387 on the middle passage, delivered 46,396 in America.
It seems probable that 25,000 Negroes a year arrived in America between 1698 and 1707. After the Asiento of 1713 this number rose to 30,000 annually, and before the Revolutionary War it had reached at least 40,000 and perhaps 100,000 slaves a year.
The total number of slaves imported is not known. Dunbar estimates that nearly 900,000 came to America in the sixteenth century, 2,750,000 in the seventeenth, 7,000,000 in the eighteenth, and over 4,000,000 in the nineteenth, perhaps 15,000,000 in all. Certainly it seems that at least 10,000,000 Negroes were expatriated.
Probably every slave imported represented on the average five corpses in Africa or on the high seas. The American slave trade, therefore, meant the elimination of at least 60,000,000 Negroes from their fatherland. The Mohammedan slave trade meant the expatriation or forcible migration in Africa of nearly as many more. It would be conservative, then, to say that the slave trade cost Negro Africa 100,000,000 souls. And yet people ask to-day the cause of the stagnation of culture in that land since 1600!
Such a large number of slaves could be supplied only by organized slave raiding in every comer of Africa. The African continent gradually became revolutionized. Whole regions were depopulated, whole tribes disappeared; villages were built in caves and on bills or in forest fastnesses; the character of peoples like those of Benin developed their worst excesses of cruelty instead of the already flourishing arts of peace. The dark, irresistible grasp of fetish took firmer hold on men's minds.”.
The Negro: IX. The Trade in Men
The Negro, by W.E.B. Du Bois, [1915], full text etext at sacred-texts.com
www.sacred-texts.com
I simply said #WeWereAlreadyHere
This is the ultimate evidence, yep. lol
Last edited:
There is no 'Black look' due to genetic diversity and environment, so that's a logical fallacy attempting to be an argument: if they look Black, they are Black, if they are Black, they look Black....
Continental Indians and Southeast Asians have darker skin than many present-day, 'unmixed' Africans. They aren't Black, either.
Can you 100% confirm they WERE?
We have more awareness of phenotype diversity today. Yet a dark skinned dominican who looks like Young Dro would still be seen as black,because he looks black(just an example)
Yet you all believe the European who was far more ignorant and less considerate. Would have taken the time and care to distinguish "black looking" natives from Africans.
so if you believe there were natives in the Americas who looked anything close to black/"negro" . Not sure what proof you need,other than seeing how it works present day. If you look black,you are black until stated otherwise. Unfortunately,I doubt back then black natives were given the option to say "me no African"#TheProofIsInThePudding
Dafunkdoc_Unlimited
Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
- Messages
- 44,630
- Reputation
- 8,094
- Daps
- 121,493
- Reppin
- The Wrong Side of the Tracks
No, we don't.
You believe that Europeans COULDN'T tell the difference and your evidence is.....'They look Black to me, therefore, Europeans thought the same way.'....even though they didn't speak the same languages, didn't have the same societies, didn't have the same culture, and weren't even on the same continent....
By your 'logic' Continental Indians are Black.
You believe that Europeans COULDN'T tell the difference and your evidence is.....'They look Black to me, therefore, Europeans thought the same way.'....even though they didn't speak the same languages, didn't have the same societies, didn't have the same culture, and weren't even on the same continent....
By your 'logic' Continental Indians are Black.
He probably doesn’t know that Australian aboriginals and Melanesians carry Denisovan DNA.
“Melanesians and Aboriginal Australians carry about 3-5 % of Denisovan DNA. This is explained by interbreeding of eastern Eurasian Denisovans with the modern human ancestors of these populations as they migrated towards Australia and Papua New Guinea.”
When did modern humans get to Australia?
Archaeological evidence shows that modern humans had reached South-east Asia by 70,000 years ago and that they had spread to Australia by at least 50,000 years ago.
An Aboriginal Australian Genome Reveals Separate Human Dispersals into Asia - PMC
We present an Aboriginal Australian genomic sequence obtained from a 100-year-old lock of hair donated by an Aboriginal man from southern Western Australia in the early 20th century. We detect no evidence of European admixture and estimate ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
aww shyt he's going to say black Americans were Denisovans nowHe probably doesn’t know that Australian aboriginals and Melanesians carry Denisovan DNA.
“Melanesians and Aboriginal Australians carry about 3-5 % of Denisovan DNA. This is explained by interbreeding of eastern Eurasian Denisovans with the modern human ancestors of these populations as they migrated towards Australia and Papua New Guinea.”
When did modern humans get to Australia?
Archaeological evidence shows that modern humans had reached South-east Asia by 70,000 years ago and that they had spread to Australia by at least 50,000 years ago.australian.museum
An Aboriginal Australian Genome Reveals Separate Human Dispersals into Asia - PMC
We present an Aboriginal Australian genomic sequence obtained from a 100-year-old lock of hair donated by an Aboriginal man from southern Western Australia in the early 20th century. We detect no evidence of European admixture and estimate ...
Anything to avoid taking that DNA test and see a bunch of African countries in the results
No, we don't.
You believe that Europeans COULDN'T tell the difference and your evidence is.....'They look Black to me, therefore, Europeans thought the same way.'....even though they didn't speak the same languages, didn't have the same societies, didn't have the same culture, and weren't even on the same continent....
By your 'logic' Continental Indians are Black.
Im only talking about black natives who couldve been easily mistaken for Africans.
Could every native be mistaken for an African?no. You can tell me how much the European cared about the language and culture of the people if you'd like
But those two men on the left certainly wouldve been thrown in the "negro" category right along with the Africans. With no second thought about what language they were speaking and what culture they had. The European was kidnapping members of African Royal families to be slaves. But your telling me they gave a damn about the cultural differences of people they deemed "like beast" and savages
?
Dafunkdoc_Unlimited
Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
- Messages
- 44,630
- Reputation
- 8,094
- Daps
- 121,493
- Reppin
- The Wrong Side of the Tracks
They wouldn't be 'mistaken' to be African since they weren't in Africa, just like they didn't 'mistake' Continental Indians to be African.
They wouldn't be 'mistaken' to be African since they weren't in Africa, just like they didn't 'mistake' Continental Indians to be African.
Im talking about african slaves sent into the new world in the 1500s.
And your just being obtuse now. Once a "black" native were to get mixed in with African slaves. They wouldve been a negro and a slave,period.