ola olabiy:

the question is:
when was the time sub-saharan africans were ahead of any other race?
good you knw that north africans were better at a stage. and asians too.
but, what about blacks? when? or is this due to some inherent factors?

paddy_lo:

what a retardted question to ask . .

who birthed the other races,exactly. . .?

Who became human,who evolved the brain to think and master his sorroundings?

Its like asking,when was the time your great grand father was ever ahead of u. .

dude if your great grandfather was not there u would never exist today. .

Same thing the first humans were Africans,and stayed in africa for 2/3rds of our time on earth as homo sapiens

developing culture,language,burying our dead,hunting agriculture and so on ,

In this period everyone on earth was black,and resided in Africa

the other creatures that were in europe and asia were too dumb to survive the so called neanderthals(they died off)

Pls know your history. . . .b4 asking incredulously ignorant questions

you are as daft as they come. ode sue sue.
who is talking about evolution theories here?
i say, when was the time we blacks lorded it over others?

you are as lousy as your font

chyz:

This link should answer your question. It is information that was and still is subdued by white supremacist.Black Africans had there own time as well as the others such as earopeans,asians, north africans(arabs), and the middle east. Check this link out and feel proud of your people.Never be fooled again by these white manipulators.


http://www.blackhistoryjohnmoore.bravehost.com/moors.html

gadogado:

@sage Im not in anyway against the "black race" im at least 60% black. So that assertion is senseless. All im asking is what does the evidence suggest about the relative mental development of Africans.
Also, if you believe that theres no such thing as race, then you're living in lala land. Africans present a monolithic group if you compare to other groups. In other words, Africans have more in common with each other than they do with European or Asian groups. You're saying technically theres no such thing as race, but i think there is race but each race has a varying degree of intra racial variance and relative diversity. Saying race doesn't exist is wishful thinking. There are too many similarities in physical, cultural, linguistic aspects that Africans share with each other. So you can't outrightly ignore that. Africans are a monolithic group with a high degree of internal diversity, this diversity does not negate the fact that Africans are one race.

gadogado:

@sage Im not in anyway against the "black race" im at least 60% black. So that assertion is senseless. All im asking is what does the evidence suggest about the relative mental development of Africans.
Also, if you believe that theres no such thing as race, then you're living in lala land. Africans present a monolithic group if you compare to other groups. In other words, Africans have more in common with each other than they do with European or Asian groups. You're saying technically theres no such thing as race, but i think there is race but each race has a varying degree of intra racial variance and relative diversity. Saying race doesn't exist is wishful thinking. There are too many similarities in physical, cultural, linguistic aspects that Africans share with each other. So you can't outrightly ignore that. Africans are a monolithic group with a high degree of internal diversity, this diversity does not negate the fact that Africans are one race.

EzeUche22:

I am actually starting to regret what my Aro ancestors did with the selling of slaves to the whites. What an inhuman trade!

The ramifications can be felt today throughout the black world. Our lost brothers and sisters who were stripped away from their beloved continent!

Kobojunkie:

Please answer the question that you pretended to respond to.

asha 80:

I thought you saw it as a thing of pride and something to boast about?

The thing with it is that even the White Berber North African societies also struggled with the concept of written language despite being very close to the medditerenian while "sub-saharan parts like Ethiopia had a fully developed system

Your diffusion theory I reckon is 100% correct

ola olabiy:

i say, when was the time we blacks lorded it over others?

EzeUche22:

Now I have nothing but regret. . .  

tpiah:


more like when was the time blacks[b] didnt [/b] lord it over others?

tpiah:

^^if you dont understand my post, waka pass.

thanks.

sage:

Slavery was a bad thing but even Europeans sold each other into slavery in North Africa.

Slavery is hardly unique to the African continent so lets stop this American rubbish of "Africans sold their brothers"

Africans did not sell their brothers. They sold strangers just like other people in the world did.

sage:

Dude you are talking rubbish of the highest order. Complete unrivalled nonsense. It is a mere wish to think that a "black race" exists. No wonder you came here with a phony 17th century argument

EzeUche22:

What do you mean that we sold strangers? My people sold fellow Igbos and neighboring Ibibios. We knew who they were. They were weaker Igbo clans to the north, but they will still our people. We did sell our brothers and sisters and we sold them to strangers.

Onlytruth:

Oh I understand your position very well. The people you are debating just don't get it. 

I was thinking exactly the same thing just before you said it.

When characters like gadogado come here to yarn dust, I wonder whether they have actually sat down to look carefully at how this world has evolved through time.

It all began in Africa, and I can best my last dollar that it will end in Africa.

And while we are at it, Africans always influenced the history of this world, one way or another.  I won't say more than that.

gadogado:

we're talking about the AFRICAN's INABILITY TO BUILD A STABLE AND PROSPEROUS SOCIETY/ENLIGHTENED CIVILIZATION on his own (without Arabs and Europeans) and whether this is caused by a lack of intellectual capacity as implied by Friedman.

ChinenyeN:

As far as history is concerned, sage is telling the truth. You sold strangers, not your 'fellow Igbos and neighboring Ibibios'. Yes, you may have known who they were, but back then, they weren't your "fellows". They weren't your people.

EzeUche22:

You have to understand that you are looking through a tribal lens. The most primitive of societies. Ethnic groups form under people who speak the same language. Not clan loyalty. They were fellow Igbos as in ethnic group, but not of the same clan.

gadogado:

Why don't you focus on the argument being made and intellectually argue a point as opposed to attacking my personality and "people like me" we're not arguing about THEORIES or evolution which are controversial to say the least. we're talking about the[b] AFRICAN's INABILITY TO BUILD A STABLE AND PROSPEROUS SOCIETY/ENLIGHTENED CIVILIZATION on his own (without Arabs and Europeans) and whether this is caused by a lack of intellectual capacity[/b] as implied by Friedman (The wheel hadn't been invented in parts of Africa by the 19th century) Take your theories of evolution elsewhere.

ChinenyeN:

The wheel (or lack thereof) is not a measure of intellectual capacity or enlightenment. Societies in the western hemisphere (the Inca & Maya for example) reached high levels of societal sophistication, yet there is no evidence that the use of the wheel existed among them. I understand where you're getting at though. The idea of a wheel seems rather simple. So simple, in fact, that one would think that any society would have had to have developed it once it reached some level of sophistication, but such is not the case. In short, the wheel is actually not an obvious invention, and similarly to writing, it is thought to have independently developed in only Mesopotamia (and possibly China, depending).

One other thing to look at is geography (the same thing that affected cultural diffusion of ideas). Africa, including the Sahara (at least, in the past) was thickly forested, as opposed to Europe and Asia, which are characteristically plains and arid/desert-like, respectively (oversimplified, I know, but still largely true). The wheel would have been too impractical for Africa, in comparison to Europe and Asia, where the wheel is a rather practical invention.   

Lastly, no standards exist for technological/societal advancement. There are no guidelines of how and at what point societies should evolve and progress.

So, although societies can be judged by their overall advancement, it really speaks little for their intellectual capacity.
This here is more inline with the argument of how (and whether or not) slavery and colonization left Africa worse off.