Guns, Germs, and Steel

[ExpensiveThrillz]

http://www.ahshistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/GUNS-GERMS-AND-STEEL.pdf

PDF of the book just in case it wasn't posted in 5 pages

 

[Blackking]

yeah just like the egyptians built pyramids 8000 years and then they didnt, because they had lost the technology and got conquered by other people

so if the west africans had ships 8000 years or before 1500AD that wouldnt prove anything, because civilizations rise and they also fall and by 1500AD and before europeans came all of the great civilizations of west africa had fallen and by that time they were behind the europeans in technology, they did not have ships, they did not have guns and they did not have a written language and that is why it was so easy for a few europeans to conquer and enslave and conquer and divide

now we can do 2 things about the defeat

we can make a clear eyed analysis of why we lost and then try to correct things or we can wallow in some history about 8000 year old ships and 8000 year old pyramids and c00ning somalians that will make you feel better at night

-Nobody is wallowing in history.... u said they didn't have ships, I proved u lost already.
-You then said some other BS, I showed how that didn't make sense.
-You say that they lost technology - I simply asked what r u basing this on... And you avoided it. I would rather you lay it out, I'm open for any knowledge or I wouldn't even ask these questions on here.
-I HAVE NO CLUE y you randomly just dissed Somalians, lol.

 

[theworldismine13]

-Nobody is wallowing in history.... u said they didn't have ships, I proved u lost already.
-You then said some other BS, I showed how that didn't make sense.
-You say that they lost technology - I simply asked what r u basing this on... And you avoided it. I would rather you lay it out, I'm open for any knowledge or I wouldn't even ask these questions on here.
-I HAVE NO CLUE y you randomly just dissed Somalians, lol.

there is no historical record of west african having ships in 1500AD and the historical records clearly shows that west africans were technologically behind europeans which common sense and logic tells you was the reason why a few europeans were able to dominate the area

even the whole divide and conquer theory makes no sense without europeans having better technology

and its more like you made a maday call to one your boys who apparently is somalian and he randomly brought up somalians in this thread, Somalians have nothing to do with the point i was making, but i did learn they have been c00ning it up with arabs for 1000 years

 

[Blackking]

there is no historical record of west african having ships in 1500AD and the historical records clearly shows that west africans were technologically behind europeans which common sense and logic tells you was the reason why a few europeans were able to dominate the area

even the whole divide and conquer theory makes no sense without europeans having better technology

and its more like you made a maday call to one your boys who apparently is somalian and he randomly brought up somalians in this thread, Somalians have nothing to do with the point i was making, but i did learn they have been c00ning it up with arabs for 1000 years

They [Somalians] weren't the only ones that traded ideas and cultures with Middle Eastern natives. I don't know if we can consider that c00ning.

You're saying Sudanese have always c00ned as well????

You think that most of Northern Africa are/were c00ns?

Please, enlighten me... as you seem to be an expert in the area of coornerybafooneryology.

divide and conquer was aided by guns, I never argued against that..

 

[theworldismine13]

They [Somalians] weren't the only ones that traded ideas and cultures with Middle Eastern natives. I don't know if we can consider that c00ning.

You're saying Sudanese have always c00ned as well

You think that most of Northern Africa are/were c00ns?

Please, enlighten me... as you seem to be an expert in the area of coornerybafooneryology.

.

for the record i dont like using the word c00n, ****** or nikka but for the sake of this post

yeah the somalians apparently got down with the arabs during the arab slave trade so they were c00ning

sudanese are still enslaving black people to this day right now so they are still c00ning for sure, like ive said, the sudanese are an arabic version of dominicans



im not sure what you mean by north africans, north africans arent black for the most part

and all the west africans that sold us into slavery were also c00ning

did i miss anybody?

 

[Blackking]

for the record i dont like using the word c00n, ****** or nikka but for the sake of this post

yeah the somalians apparently got down with the arabs during the arab slave trade so they were c00ning
sudanese are still enslaving black people to this day right now so they are still c00ning for sure, like ive said, the sudanese are an arabic version of dominicans



im not sure what you mean by north africans, north africans arent black for the most part

and all the west africans that sold us into slavery were also c00ning

did i miss anybody?

Nope u missed no one

.. can't watch the video now, but will check it out later.

Some pretty bold statements made here tho



"sudanese are an arabic version of dominicans" -- Is a classic line.

 

[theworldismine13]

divide and conquer was aided by guns, I never argued against that.

and guns are a higher form of technology than anything the west african had

 

[Blackking]

and guns are a higher form of technology than anything the west african had

I'm not going to even debate you. You can't be wrong and everything you say is 100% truth and fact. Some would say the following however....


Some people believe that at least by 1000ad asians were using gun powder to fire projectiles. How many weapons can u break down then assemble?? You do know that the 'tech' isn't so advanced with standard 'guns'.... When Muslims conquered europe they had lil cannons n shyt....
cac combined that ^with Chinese technology and created their own weapons.. as the chines also had cannons and smaller fire arms. Of course China is mentioned because of the trade of ideas and tech between them and some of the areas that were colonized.

However, the guns in the 1400's were NOT High Technology as compared to everything else in the world. For some reason, you actually believe that the knowledge that it takes to create a gun is > advanced astrology, mathematics, engineering, leaps in advanced architectural design, Navigation of the sea.

Black and brown Muslims were using hand cannons to murk each other in the 1200's similar to the way they use car bombs and AK's now.

Europe went NOT when creating shyt.

Meaning, They used already developed technology for their manipulative and greedy goals... (I know that u dismiss and deny this fact, SIGH / YAWN) but If you have plastic, wires, and a few chemicals - AND your goal was to save a life or to end a life ---- What u made out of that would be completely different. You know nothing of technology, you career isn't really innovative, so I guess you don't understand the link between innovation and motivation.
Morocco is most certainly on the Western side Africa if I'm not mistaken.... and they most certainly were using 'hand cannon's' while Europeans were still living like with limited technology.
Not only Moroccans (and other northern and western kingdoms who were advanced) - traded EVERYTHING with surrounding lands.... It's not like groups of people in West africa didn't know about this technology. It's just that North Africa was the land that- not only had the resources for large armies...... it was the area that got into the conflicts with people across seas and surrounding lands in Africa.... so they developed better warfare tactics.

There are historians that DO Explain why 'they ' didn't develop modern armies and didn't have a primary focus on gun development..... but it wasn't simply because they couldn't do the shyt or they were "simpleminded Africans who couldn't make da weeeapon right" .


Think about it like this............. You didn't even believe Ancient Africa had ships. Could there also be some other things you aren't knowledgeable on as well???

 

[GetInTheTruck]

I read parts of it a while ago. If you are on that "Africans created everything thousands of years before the white man" tip it will make you a little uncomfortable.

part of it does come off a little caccish, but there are some points that hold weight. I have it somewhere, this thread is making me want to finish it.

 

[theworldismine13]

I'm not going to even debate you. You can't be wrong and everything you say is 100% truth and fact. Some would say the following however....


Some people believe that at least by 1000ad asians were using gun powder to fire projectiles. How many weapons can u break down then assemble?? You do know that the 'tech' isn't so advanced with standard 'guns'.... When Muslims conquered europe they had lil cannons n shyt....
cac combined that ^with Chinese technology and created their own weapons.. as the chines also had cannons and smaller fire arms. Of course China is mentioned because of the trade of ideas and tech between them and some of the areas that were colonized.

However, the guns in the 1400's were NOT High Technology as compared to everything else in the world. For some reason, you actually believe that the knowledge that it takes to create a gun is > advanced astrology, mathematics, engineering, leaps in advanced architectural design, Navigation of the sea.

Black and brown Muslims were using hand cannons to murk each other in the 1200's similar to the way they use car bombs and AK's now.

Europe went NOT when creating shyt.

Meaning, They used already developed technology for their manipulative and greedy goals... (I know that u dismiss and deny this fact, SIGH / YAWN) but If you have plastic, wires, and a few chemicals - AND your goal was to save a life or to end a life ---- What u made out of that would be completely different. You know nothing of technology, you career isn't really innovative, so I guess you don't understand the link between innovation and motivation.
Morocco is most certainly on the Western side Africa if I'm not mistaken.... and they most certainly were using 'hand cannon's' while Europeans were still living like with limited technology.
Not only Moroccans (and other northern and western kingdoms who were advanced) - traded EVERYTHING with surrounding lands.... It's not like groups of people in West africa didn't know about this technology. It's just that North Africa was the land that- not only had the resources for large armies...... it was the area that got into the conflicts with people across seas and surrounding lands in Africa.... so they developed better warfare tactics.

There are historians that DO Explain why 'they ' didn't develop modern armies and didn't have a primary focus on gun development..... but it wasn't simply because they couldn't do the shyt or they were "simpleminded Africans who couldn't make da weeeapon right" .


Think about it like this............. You didn't even believe Ancient Africa had ships. Could there also be some other things you aren't knowledgeable on as well???

none of what you are saying has anything to do with the yoruba and igbo and other tribes of west africa in the 1500's

if the chinese invented gunpowder it doesnt change the fact that the europeans had gunpowder and the yoruba and igbo did not

 

[Blackking]

none of what you are saying has anything to do with the yoruba and igbo and other tribes of west africa in the 1500's

It has everything to do with it. But I'll just go with whatever u say.... I just wanted to mention some things that other people are aware of.

 

[theworldismine13]

It has everything to do with it. But I'll just go with whatever u say.... I just wanted to mention some things that other people are aware of.

it has nothing to do with it, the yoruba and igbo were not in in morrocoo and they did not sail to europe and they did not send giraffes to china

maybe you feel some kind of connection to the moors because you are a muslim from sudan, but african americans did not descend from the moors, we descend for the most part from yoruba and igbo and other west african tribes

 

[Blackking]

it has nothing to do with it, the yoruba and igbo were not in in morrocoo and they did not sail to europe and they did not send giraffes to china

maybe you feel some kind of connection to the moors because you are a muslim from sudan, but african americans did not descend from the moors, we descend for the most part from yoruba and igbo and other west african tribes

I really only feel a connection w nikkas in detroit. But at large w black americans.

But from my understanding the overall theme of the book (and thread) is why European, Eurasian people were able to conquer.... the people of multiple continents and the majority of Africa.

You're arguments couldn't have possible been pushed back in the manner in which foreheads are pushed back - and narrowed down to mentioning the two 'tribes' u consider 'we' all come from.... because that would just be beyond belief.

You don't find it weird that you narrow all transatlantic slaves to two groups (you consider two tribes) when reality narrows it down to people in West Central South and even eastern Africa?

Now I've already stated that I know that you're all knowing... but did you know the Sudanese slaves also ended up in the Americas.. Mostly they ended up in Asia... but ALSO did u also know that many central Africans had their slaves sent to the coast then transported?



From What you are stating -all black Americans should have automatic citizenship to Nigeria or maybe Niger n benin and a couple places - because (if u didn't know, lol) the people u mention come from that land.

But Why do u not mention Sierra Leone, Mali, Camerron, ivory c, benegal etc - the tribes in those places and other peoples that were kidnapped? Like Oprah(who u love so much,lol) ,, liberian Kepelle tribe...


You're making some bold claims when very few AA can trace their real roots even with DNA

 

[theworldismine13]

I really only feel a connection w nikkas in detroit. But at large w black americans.

But from my understanding the overall theme of the book (and thread) is why European, Eurasian people were able to conquer.... the people of multiple continents and the majority of Africa.

You're arguments couldn't have possible been pushed back in the manner in which foreheads are pushed back - and narrowed down to mentioning the two 'tribes' u consider 'we' all come from.... because that would just be beyond belief.

You don't find it weird that you narrow all transatlantic slaves to two groups (you consider two tribes) when reality narrows it down to people in West Central South and even eastern Africa?

Now I've already stated that I know that you're all knowing... but did you know the Sudanese slaves also ended up in the Americas.. Mostly they ended up in Asia... but ALSO did u also know that many central Africans had their slaves sent to the coast then transported?



From What you are stating -all black Americans should have automatic citizenship to Nigeria or maybe Niger n benin and a couple places - because (if u didn't know, lol) the people u mention come from that land.

But Why do u not mention Sierra Leone, Mali, Camerron, ivory c, benegal etc - the tribes in those places and other peoples that were kidnapped? Like Oprah(who u love so much,lol) ,, liberian Kepelle tribe...


You're making some bold claims when very few AA can trace their real roots even with DNA

but i already answered why i narrowed it down, the other poster asked that

and the answer i gave is, those are tribes that participated or were victims of the slave trade

and i said the yoruba, igbo and other tribes in west africa, so i was including the rest but the yoruba and igbo was just to be specific, but you can name any tribe in west africa and its the same thing, they did not have ships, they did not have guns and they were behind technologically

and also your boy came out of nowhere taking about somalia, as if somehow somalians are relevant to the situation in west africa in 1500, your other boy was talking about the pyramids from 8000 years ago and you keep talking about moors and other cornball c00ns

so mentioning yoruba and igbo clarifies what we are talking about, we are talking about the beginning off the slave trade when the portuguese, spanish and english sailed to the west coast of africa, the notion that the people living in the west coast of africa were NOT behind technologically behind is retarded, they obviously were behind

were the central africans taken to the coast bussing their guns? obviously not, so they were in the same situation the yoruba and igbo were in

the moors, somalians, sudanese, ancient egyptians and ancient west african kingdoms arent going to change the basic fact that west africans were behind and where overwhelmed with ships and guns

ive already taken my DNA and it says im yoruba and when most people that take their DNA they are yoruba, igbo or some other west african tribe

of course there are exceptions but the vast majority of african americans can trace their african roots to the tribes along the west african coast that encountered europeans in the 1500s or to other tribes in the interior that were captured

and if you want to analyze how we became slaves we have to analyze that particular situation, and if we want to win we have to understand why we lost, that is the only point of me making my blunt assessment

 

[Blackking]

but i already answered why i narrowed it down, the other poster asked that

and the answer i gave is, those are tribes that participated or were victims of the slave trade

and i said the yoruba, igbo and other tribes in west africa, so i was including the rest but the yoruba and igbo was just to be specific, but you can name any tribe in west africa and its the same thing, they did not have ships, they did not have guns and they were behind technologically

and also your boy came out of nowhere taking about somalia, as if somehow somalians are relevant to the situation in west africa in 1500, your other boy was talking about the pyramids from 8000 years ago and you keep talking about moors and other cornball c00ns

so mentioning yoruba and igbo clarifies what we are talking about, we are talking about the beginning off the slave trade when the portuguese, spanish and english sailed to the west coast of africa, the notion that the people living in the west coast of africa were NOT behind technologically behind is retarded, they obviously were behind

were the central africans taken to the coast bussing their guns? obviously not, so they were in the same situation the yoruba and igbo were in

the moors, somalians, sudanese, ancient egyptians and ancient west african kingdoms arent going to change the basic fact that west africans were behind and where overwhelmed with ships and guns

ive already taken my DNA and it says im yoruba and when most people that take their DNA they are yoruba, igbo or some other west african tribe

of course there are exceptions but the vast majority of african americans can trace their african roots to the tribes along the west african coast that encountered europeans in the 1500s or to other tribes in the interior that were captured

and if you want to analyze how we became slaves we have to analyze that particular situation, and if we want to win we have to understand why we lost, that is the only point of me making my blunt assessment

,

ok