₦airaland Forum

Horus:
I don't know if all of you noticed, but if you do some research on the internet you will see that the whites are not complaining about this US church ban on interracial marriage, but Blacks are complaining all over the internet about this ban. Do your own conclusion. Who is begging the oppressor to be allowed to get married with the oppressor?

Oohhh!. I know the answer to this one

"The opressed."

paniki:
It's not an assumption but a doubt based on my observation of the Afrikaans community and their conservativeness.

It's true that Dutch settlers landed in Cape Town around mid 1600s and the MEN proceeded to rap3 local black women for centuries since resulting in close to half of the current Cape Town population being coloured. But that doesn't change my doubt that a Afrikaner WOMAN would willingly have s3x with a black man in the 1950s just as I doubt that a Afrikaner WOMAN would willingly have s3x with a black man today in 2011. The interracial hanky panky that exists is usually amongst blacks and English whites who are more liberal. Afrikaners like to stick to themselves, they are ultra conservative to the point were they dislike even English whites

Sandra Laing was born in Piet Retief, a small Afrikaans town in Mpumalanga province very far away from Cape Town

It is obvious that post 1948, it would have been rare for a national party member to be hanky pankying with black people. However what is not rare is the pocket of colored communities that existed in the north western province all the way to namibia and the inherently high possibility that some "white" folk may have originated from these communities and passed or groups of "coloureds" migrated from griqua land or the cape to communities in the north.

Therefore making it extremely plausible that a snadra laing could existed allt he way in mpumalanga.

Shikena!

[quote author=tpia@ link=topic=816022.msg9694452#msg9694452 date=1323062470]oh yes, we're all one big happy family and differences between races are only a figment of our imagination since blacks are actually whites and whites are really blacks with caucasian genes.

asians are also blacks.


and not to forget- we all resemble monkeys except for white people of course who are the only race with no monkey forebears.

or is it they're at the top of the evolutionary ladder you said.[/quote]Right Right!

[quote author=tpia@ link=topic=816022.msg9694431#msg9694431 date=1323061646]^^is that the question i asked you? [/quote]When you graduate from the stage of refering to races in terms of negroid, mongoloid and caucosoid and enroll in your first evolutionary biology class then we can chat!

[quote author=tpia@ link=topic=816022.msg9694381#msg9694381 date=1323060530]didnt you once start a thread comparing every race besides whites, to monkeys?

i believe you posted pictures of monkeys and pointed out the similarities between them and specific races, excluding whites.

and when reminded of the origin of the name capuchin monkeys, you fought tooth and nail to prove that was a wrong analogy.[/quote]and as usual like a six year old you still lack the ability to comprehend the reference to the "monkeys" and "humans" in terms of climate, environment and adaptability.

Horus:
You do not get it at all. Every word have a meaning depending on how you use them so do not change my words like you. I never argue, I deal with fact only. Arguing is Ego. Dealing with fact only is knowledge.

Because when I told you that whites cannot produce anything than themselves you tald me that it was not true, and that is why I said that.

Right. You deal with facts. Sure you do,

Horus:
I didn't said melanin producing capability, I said they don't have enough melanin PERIOD. All human have melanin, even albinos otherwise the brain will not work, but they don't have enought of it.

Same question what is your point? Are we learning something new here?

You are just trying to wiggle out of your nonsensical sense making endeavor.

Tell me what point is it to say white people cannot produce black people but black people can produce white people without presenting the logic behind that.

Thats the most dafftest statment I have ever heard.

The counter to that statment would be it depends

paniki:
^^^^^

Yes they can't be 100% but I doubt that a Afrikaner woman would've been doing the hanky panky with a black man in the 1950s in fact I doubt that a Afrikaner woman would be doing the hanky panky with a black man in 2011. Besides they did blood test in the 60s which matched the father.

That assumption does not take in consideration the fact that colored people have been indentified as carrying the most diverse genotypes from all parts of the world centralized in one area.

For your info a lot of Afrikaaner did the hanky panky with a lot of Khoi people since the 1650's and many people over the generations were able to pass as  white in that society. The exchanges went well into the 50's shortlybefore most  of the colored's congregated in  district six as some of them could no longer pass for white when new laws were passed.

There is a terribly high probability for the occurence of a sandra laing within such a society

Please note her younger brother who itechnically doesnot look white but definitley passes as one

Horus:
Yes, they don't have enough melanin so caucasians cannot reproduce anything else but themselves. Can you demonstrate to me that a couple of blonds hairs and blue eyes caucasians can produce a dark skinned African with whooly hairs and bigs lips?

Oh so now its not "enough" melanin producing capability.

That statement is nonsensical. It has been proven that they have lower levels of the melanin producing gene compared to other tropical groups as a result of their adaptations to colder climates therefore it will be extremely difficult if not impossible for them to produce a gene that has been "bred" in the opposite direction.

The same goes for Black African people that live in Africa. It would pratically impossilbe for two Dinka natives to produce a child that lacks the hard coded melanin producing gene to produce very dark skin minus an "albino" defect which is a complete absence of the ability to pigment.

PS Africans like other human beings have varying levels of melanin producing capabilities which is why like every other grou on this planet also have varying degrees of pigmenttation.

What is your piont?.

You know what we should do is stage and insurrection. Destroy the evil empire called America. Set up our own magical Kingdom in Africa that offers Human rights and peace and security to our people.

Expatriate all our Diaspora brothers back to the continent, build an under water fence around the perimeter of Africa to ward off thieving vulturous pale skinned people.

Unite with all African state to build an inpenetrable airspace via our super duper out of this world Air force and last but not the least pump all our money into a space program that will find another planet where we will beam up to as soon a the other psycho pathic human populations completely obliterate themselves.

What say you BLACK PEOPLE!

Horus:
When did I said :unable to produce melanin?. Use quote and show me where I said that.

You really do't know what point you are trying to make so just quit debating with me or state your clear reason for the physical or biological defect of swapping genes with caucasians

Horus quote:
"Remember, caucasians cannot reproduce anything else but themselves.  They cannot reproduce genetic material they don’t have,; Melanin.  Therefore, they cannot reproduce us, but we can reproduce them and all others in humanity"

"White people are the albinos of a specific group of Africans and have inherited those people’s phenotypes"

Horus:
You are often trying to change my words to make it seem that I said what I didn't said and this is not honesty. Dont go in all kind of directions and stay focused and specific on the subject.

Horus said Inuits produce melanin even in cold climates.
Morpheus responded if what you are trying to say is that certain populations retain melanin in cold weather then you are correct.
Horus said polar bears skin color under their fur is black to bolster his point that animals still produce melanin even in extreme cold weather
Morpheus points out that Inuits are not as dark as Africans and proposes that this is so because of natural selection and varying levels of exposure to ultra violet exposure.

Horus's conclusion is that because of the above facts ergo White people are Albino's which are humans that are unable to produce melanin and so therefore they are some how weaker than Black people because they are albino progenitors of the latter

Morpheus says this is rubbish and White people produce melanin and also have peopl who xhbit the albinism defect as with other groups of people again in lesser levels than Africans because of natural selection patterns in colder region adaptations

Latsly Horus points out that pictures of cinese looking asians to show that black people produced Asians

Morpheus says varying degrees of humans inhabited Asia including dark skiinned people. Several groups bootle neck. Those that stay in tropica slimates often retain melanin producing genes those that migrate to colder climates loose thse qualities via DNA damage.

Evidence

The most recent scientific evidence indicates that all humans evolved in Africa,[23] then populated the rest of the world through successive radiations. It seems likely that the first modern humans had relatively large numbers of eumelanin-producing melanocytes. In accordance, they had darker skin as with the indigenous people of Africa today. As some of these original peoples migrated and settled in areas of Asia and Europe, the selective pressure for eumelanin production decreased in climates where radiation from the sun was less intense. Of the two common gene variants known to be associated with pale human skin, Mc1r[24] does not appear to have undergone positive selection, while SLC24A5[25] has.

As with peoples having migrated northward, those with light skin migrating toward the equator acclimatize to the much stronger solar radiation. Most people's skin darkens when exposed to UV light, giving them more protection when it is needed. This is the physiological purpose of sun tanning. Dark-skinned people, who produce more skin-protecting eumelanin, have a greater protection against sunburn and the development of melanoma, a potentially deadly form of skin cancer, as well as other health problems related to exposure to strong solar radiation, including the photodegradation of certain vitamins such as riboflavins, carotenoids, tocopherol, and folate



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melanin

[quote author=tpia@ link=topic=816022.msg9689289#msg9689289 date=1322984909]@ the darwinists

of course darwin would put blacks next to monkeys on his evolutionary scale.

hope yall arent trying to prove otherwise? [/quote]I am not even gonna bother trying to prove anything to you cause it would be like engaging a six year old.

^^^^

[b]Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, as in colour, hair, shape of skull, proportions of the body, &c., yet if their whole structure be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races. The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans are as different from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Feugians on board the "Beagle," with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate.

He who will read Mr. Tylor's and Sir J. Lubbock's interesting works can hardly fail to be deeply impressed with the close similarity between the men of all races in tastes, dispositions and habits. This is shown by the pleasure which they all take in dancing, rude music, acting, painting, tattoing, and otherwise decorating themselves; in their mutual comprehension of gesture-language, by the same expression in their features, and by the same inarticulate cries, when excited by the same emotions. This similarity, or rather identity, is striking, when contrasted with the different expressions and cries made by distinct species of monkeys. There is good evidence that the art of shooting with bows and arrows has not been handed down from any common progenitor of mankind, yet as Westropp and Nilsson have remarked, the stone arrow-heads, brought from the most distant parts of the world, and manufactured at the most remote periods, are almost identical; and this fact can only be accounted for by the various races having similar inventive or mental powers. The same observation has been made by archeologists with respect to certain widely-prevalent ornaments, such as zig-zags, &c.; and with respect to various simple beliefs and customs, such as the burying of the dead under megalithic structures. I remember observing in South America, that there, as in so many other parts of the world, men have generally chosen the summits of lofty hills, to throw up piles of stones, either as a record of some remarkable event, or for burying their dead.

Now when naturalists observe a close agreement in numerous small details of habits, tastes, and dispositions between two or more domestic races, or between nearly-allied natural forms, they use this fact as an argument that they are descended from a common progenitor who was thus endowed; and consequently that all should be classed under the same species. The same argument may be applied with much force to the races of man.

As it is improbable that the numerous and unimportant points of resemblance between the several races of man in bodily structure and mental faculties (I do not here refer to similar customs) should all have been independently acquired, they must have been inherited from progenitors who had these same characters.
- The Descent of Man; Charles Darwin; 1871[/b]

^^^^
[b]Our naturalist would likewise be much disturbed as soon as he perceived that the distinctive characters of all the races were highly variable. This fact strikes every one on first beholding the negro slaves in Brazil, who have been imported from all parts of Africa. The same remark holds good with the Polynesians, and with many other races. It may be doubted whether any character can be named which is distinctive of a race and is constant. Savages, even within the limits of the same tribe, are not nearly so uniform in character, as has been often asserted. Hottentot women offer certain peculiarities, more strongly marked than those occurring in any other race, but these are known not to be of constant occurrence. In the several American tribes, colour and hairiness differ considerably; as does colour to a certain degree, and the shape of the features greatly, in the Negroes of Africa. The shape of the skull varies much in some races; and so it is with every other character. Now all naturalists have learnt by dearly bought experience, how rash it is to attempt to define species by the aid of inconstant characters.

But the most weighty of all the arguments against treating the races of man as distinct species, is that they graduate into each other, independently in many cases, as far as we can judge, of their having inter-crossed. Man has been studied more carefully than any other animal, and yet there is the greatest possible diversity amongst capable judges whether he should be classed as a single species or race, or as two (Virey), as three (Jacquinot), as four (Kant), five (Blumenbach), six (Buffon), seven (Hunter), eight (Agassiz), eleven (Pickering), fifteen (Bory St. Vincent), sixteen (Desmoulins), twenty-two (Morton), sixty (Crawfurd), or as sixty-three, according to Burke. This diversity of judgment does not prove that the races ought not to be ranked as species, but it shews that they graduate into each other, and that it is hardly possible to discover clear distinctive characters between them.
- Charles Darwin; The Descent of Man, 1871[/b]

cap28:
morpheus - there is nothing in any of those quotations which indicates that he felt blacks were EQUAL to whites - all he is demonstrarting is feelings of guilt and who wouldnt feel guilty at being the beneficiary of such terrible evil?

He MAINTAINS his beleif that the white race are superior to blacks throughout his life and his "theories" are later absorbed and even taught in various so called elite institutions in europe and america.

Right right.
Please do not misconstrue the "hijacking" of the concepts of survival of the fittest, natural selection and Equality of "races" with darwins theory of evolution.
Darwin acknowledges the advancement of western civilizations in comparison to so called "negro' races and this is clearly alluded to in the excerps. However what is never implied is the "inequality in the mental or physical abilities of one so called "race" over the "other" which is clearly alluded to in the excerps.

Darwins works were hijacked by 18th and 19th century social evolutionary scientists to propagate race science and eugenics.
In the origin of species the concept of Survival of the fittest is biological not social

^^^^

last one, I promise

[b]Fitz-Roy's temper was a most unfortunate one. It was usually worst in the early morning, and with his eagle eye he could generally detect something amiss about the ship, and was then unsparing in his blame. He was very kind to me, but was a man very difficult to live with on the intimate terms which necessarily followed from our messing by ourselves in the same cabin. We had several quarrels; for instance, early in the voyage at Bahia, in Brazil, he defended and praised slavery, which I abominated, and told me that he had just visited a great slave-owner, who had called up many of his slaves and asked them whether they were happy, and whether they wished to be free, and all answered "No." I then asked him, perhaps with a sneer, whether he thought that the answer of slaves in the presence of their master was worth anything? This made him excessively angry, and he said that as I doubted his word we could not live any longer together. I thought that I should have been compelled to leave the ship; but as soon as the news spread, which it did quickly, as the captain sent for the first lieutenant to assuage his anger by abusing me, I was deeply gratified by receiving an invitation from all the gun-room officers to mess with them. But after a few hours Fitz-Roy showed his usual magnanimity by sending an officer to me with an apology and a request that I would continue to live with him.
- Charles Darwin; The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, 1887[/b]

^^^

and even more and more

I was told before leaving England that after living in slave countries all my opinions would be altered; the only alteration I am aware of is forming a much higher estimate of the negro character. It is impossible to see a negro and not feel kindly towards him; such cheerful, open, honest expressions and such fine muscular bodies. I never saw any of the diminutive Portuguese, with their murderous countenances, without almost wishing for Brazil to follow the example of Haiti; and, considering the enormous healthy-looking black population, it will be wonderful if, at some future day, it does not take place.
- Letter from Darwin to J.S. Henslo, March 1834

^^^^

There's even more:

[b]My wife has just finished reading aloud your 'Life with a Black Regiment,' and you must allow me to thank you heartily for the very great pleasure which it has in many ways given us. I always thought well of the negroes, from the little which I have seen of them; and I have been delighted to have my vague impressions confirmed, and their character and mental powers so ably discussed. When you were here I did not know of the noble position which you had filled. I had formerly read about the black regiments, but failed to connect your name with your admirable undertaking. Although we enjoyed greatly your visit to Down, my wife and myself have over and over again regretted that we did not know about the black regiment, as we should have greatly liked to have heard a little about the South from your own lips.

Your descriptions have vividly recalled walks taken forty years ago in Brazil. We have your collected Essays, which were kindly sent us by Mr. Conway, but have not yet had time to read them. I occasionally glean a little news of you in the 'Index'; and within the last hour have read an interesting article of yours on the progress of Free Thought.
- Letter from Darwin to Thomas Higginson, February 27, 1873[/b]

@Cap 28

how about this excerp from the same book. What does that conclusion allude to. Hmmmm?

[b]The western nations of Europe, who now so immeasurably surpass their former savage progenitors, and stand at the summit of civilization, owe little or none of their superiority to direct inheritance from the old Greeks, though they owe much to the written works of that wonderful people.

,

The more efficient causes of progress seem to consist of a good education during youth whilst the brain is impressible, and of a high standard of excellence, inculcated by the ablest and best men, embodied in the laws, customs and traditions of the nation, and enforced by public opinion. It should, however, be borne in mind, that the enforcement of public opinion depends on our appreciation of the approbation and disapprobation of others; and this appreciation is founded on our sympathy, which it can hardly be doubted was originally developed through natural selection as one of the most important elements of the social instincts.
- Charles Darwin; The Descent of Man, 1871

Important as the struggle for existence has been and even still is, yet as far as the highest part of man's nature is concerned there are other agencies more important. For the moral qualities are advanced, either directly or indirectly, much more through the effects of habit, the reasoning powers, instruction, religion, &c., than through natural selection;
- Charles Darwin; The Descent of Man, 1871

The moral faculties are generally and justly esteemed as of higher value than the intellectual powers. But we should bear in mind that the activity of the mind in vividly recalling past impressions is one of the fundamental though secondary bases of conscience. This affords the strongest argument for educating and stimulating in all possible ways the intellectual faculties of every human being.
- Charles Darwin; The Descent of Man, 1871[/b]

cap28:
At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes,  will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla. 2

Clever boy!. You use the same excerps conspicuously out of context that most propagandist use in reference to Darwins theories. Riddle me this though. Why would the same person that made those statements make these same statements as well

[b]I will not even allude to the many heart-sickening atrocities which I authentically heard of; -- nor would I have mentioned the above revolting details, had I not met with several people, so blinded by the constitutional gaiety of the negro as to speak of slavery as a tolerable evil. Such people have generally visited at the houses of the upper classes, where the domestic slaves are usually well treated, and they have not, like myself, lived amongst the lower classes. Such inquirers will ask slaves about their condition; they forget that the slave must indeed be dull, who does not calculate on the chance of his answer reaching his master's ears.

It is often attempted to palliate slavery by comparing the state of slaves with our poorer countrymen: if the misery of our poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin; but how this bears on slavery, I cannot see; as well might the use of the thumb-screw be defended in one land, by showing that men in another land suffered from some dreadful disease. Those who look tenderly at the slave owner, and with a cold heart at the slave, never seem to put themselves into the position of the latter; what a cheerless prospect, with not even a hope of change! picture to yourself the chance, ever hanging over you, of your wife and your little children -- those objects which nature urges even the slave to call his own -- being torn from you and sold like beasts to the first bidder! And these deeds are done and palliated by men, who profess to love their neighbours as themselves, who believe in God, and pray that his Will be done on earth! It makes one's blood boil, yet heart tremble, to think that we Englishmen and our American descendants, with their boastful cry of liberty, have been and are so guilty:
- The Voyage of the Beagle; Charles Darwin, 1839[/b]

Horus:
This theory of the environment and gene is theorynot a Fact. The polar bear analysis that was done by the Discovery Channel helps prove my point.  If you shave the hair off a polar bear, the skin beneath is black.  In nature the skin of the polar bear is black to absorb as much heat and light as possible to keep the arctic animal warm in its environment.  It is also true for the Eskimo (Inuit) who have a lot of melanin even in a very cold environment. (Do your own research to find out)

I don't know what that example above is trying to conclude as regards polar bears or Inuits or if you are aware of what you say when you say gene mutations is theory. if you are trying to say that people who live in colder climates are inherently able to  produce melanin then you are correct. Hoever there will be varying degrees of such production levels and certain population will always have higher levels than others. It is not a coincidence that populations that inhabit tropical regions retained more melanin producing abilities as a function of evolution compared to populations that inhabit colder regions. The evidence is in the fact that an inuit is not as dark as an African  because of varying levels of ultra violet ray exposure as a function of gene interactons with the enviroment ergo Mutations.


H

Horus:
ere again you deal with beliefs, not facts. All phenotypes exist within the black family. Asian people are only the semi-recessive descendants of their ancestors who were a black African tribe with slanted eyes. The man on left (Picture) is the original Chinese of China. The man on the right (Picture) is the Chinese of today. White people are the albinos of a specific group of Africans and have inherited those people’s phenotypes.  They try to imply that their phenotypes were originally theirs and that if you see people of African descent with these features, they inherited them from white people. Nothing is further from the truth.  Blacks are the genetic parents. And yes "caucasians" cannot produce anything other than themselves. A couple of caucasians with blond hairs and blue eyes cannot produce a dark skinned African with whooly hair and big lips. (Do your research). Don't deal with beliefs, deal with Facts only.

The above simply demosntrates that you really are not familar with what you are trying to imply. Ancient African groups that lived 100,000 years ago did not look like Contemporary African groups. As populations move and interact with their enviroments, they bottle neck and begin to form similar genotypical and phenotypical traits. Subsequent movements carry certain genotypes with them which form additional variations as they continue to interect with the environment. The traits that sustain and promote survival will be retained by the populations. There is a reason why an Arid dwelling African would exhibit predominat traits of longer limb proprotions and a slimmer build in comparison to a more robust rainforest farming African. There a reason why an arctic dwelling wolf woul exihibit white fur skin compared to a savannah dwelling Wolf which would retain fur that is adapeted to its enviroment.

This is not beleif my space man friend. Your melanin arguemnt is flawed as regards animals

cap28:
Their pseudo scientific justifications that the black man has no soul and needs to be saved from himself as espoused by Darwin and other racists has been exposed for what it is - a sick lie and an excuse for all of the heinous crimes that they have committed and continue to commit against african people .

Wow! I didn't know Darwin espoused that theory. Fascinating. Can you direct us to the source in his origins of the species?

cap28:
Horus is 100% spot on - africans are the only race of people who beg and plead to be allowed to mix their genes with other races - when will you dumb self loathing fools understand that all other races look upon africans with contempt - they dont want to be a part of you - only the rejects and failures amongst them want to be affiliated with blacks and even then they feel they are doing you a favour.

He may be spot on in promoting "african" pride in relation to how other so called "races" view the mixing of African genes with theirs however the  overwhelming fact still remains that populations of people all through history have swapped and continue to swap genes as a function of human survival and human evolution.

What constitutes "desirable' phenotypical traits or genes is constructed by 'social" engineering  influenced by the history between so called "white" people vs so called 'black" people.

cap28:
how many affluent whites do you see marrying and having children with black people - even the rich blacks opt for white rejects because most whites feel that they are above black people - blacks have no business mixing their genes with whites especially educated and affluent blacks - KEEP YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND WEALTH WITHIN YOUR OWN COMMUNITY JUST LIKE OTHER RACES DO - when was the last time an affluent chinese, arab or indian married a black person?? EVERY OTHER RACE PUTS THEIR OWN PEOPLE BEFORE OTHERS EXCEPT AFRICANS - CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME - LEARN TO PLACE YOUR OWN PEOPLE ON A PEDESTAL RATHER THAN OUTSIDERS WHO HATE YOU.

You buffons can continue to huff and puff about how we need to uphold the race' but the scientific fact still remains that as a part of natural selection and human evolution ,It is necessary to continue to  diversify genotypes with all the pools of gene sequencing that exists inthe world today regardless of what a few social evolutionist continue to propagate and humans will continue to do it regardles of social boundaries. It is inevitable because it is nature.

In other words you are free to run off to some island or some comunnity or church some where and engineer your kind by seperating yourself from the rest of humanity in the name of some idealistic agenda of upholding your "race"  but pleae by all means do not try to convince us  that this thought process constitues any sort of scientific or natural truth. It is no more than social engieering and should remian in that realm.

FACTS TRUMP SENTIMENTS ANY DAY!

Horus:
Until you breed out the recessive gene, this mean until you breed out the  gene from the African gene by stopping mixing with , and not by waiting for a natural selection.

I am beginning to believe you are truly from outer space.

1.Recessive genes does not equal "defective" genes.
2. You can breed in or breed out any particular gene that manifests itsef in undesirable traits  i.e Africans would breed in excess melanin producing ability. Europeans would breed it out because it is not condusive to environmental fitness.
2. Do you even know what natural selection entails thus the word "NATURAL?
3. Did you understand the importance of "geographic' location and clilmate relevant to mutations or desirable traits
4. "Africans having the most diverse gene sequencing" does not mean we have the ability to produce every other human "type". it just means our mutations are inherited from the earliest and therefore the oldest versions of original mutations. Subsequently they take longer to diverge during gradial shifts because they are the closet to the source code.  Gradial shifts are a movement from one spectrum of genotypical and phenotypical types to another . What people refer to as  "race"

let me break that down like I am explaining to a six year old.  You can move from any direction of a so called "racial" or ethnic spectrum to another with no physical or genetic boundaries. It is a nonsensical statment to say "caucasians" cannot produce anything other than themselves.   That would only be the case if they never bred with any thing other than themselves.  Africans are subject to the same rules and cannot produce anything other than themselves if they stay within their locals.
Ps do not post me pics of albinos or Light skin Africans from two black parents to prove other wise cause that would worsen your arguement. TRUST ME.

Olodostein:
You keep mentioning Nigeria concerning this same sex marriage nonsense.  It is not in our culture; PERIOD!!!  Homosexuality is alien to us. The fact that it is legal in South Africa does not mean that other African countries will adopt it.   The Boers have influenced your culture to the extent that you don't know who you are or your true identity.

You attack your fellow African brothers and kill them in cold blood. Xenophobes! And you come to a Nigerian forum to preach to us about Human right and Tolerance??  Before you speak of Hypocrisy. Look yourself in the mirror first.

What do you know about fundamentals? You are a lost sheep.  Get lost again.

Eh don't mind Paniki. He/she is trying to come to grips as to the reason why Nigeria keeps competing with South Africa when in his/her mind. We are not as "progressive" as SA and finds it gratifying to point out the countries flaws IN COMPARISON.

Horus:
Absolutely not factual and not based on any scientific evidences.

You are some weird dude.

Scientific fact: Africa has the most diverse gene sequencing and mutations compared to other populations of the world.
Scientific fact:  hybridization is advantageous by increasing genetic variability, there is a larger range of variable and adaptive genotypes to work from,  ergo a hybrid "race" has superior long-range prospects in terms of disease prevention and immunities

Example  If a population is optimally adapted to the environment they evoloved in, say black people's melanin producing ability under exposure to intense ultra violet rays in tropical regions, then introducing a gene pool least adapted to this environment say from european skin adaptations. This would lower average individual fitness if the population remained in the original geographic area, until natural selection restores the balance via weeding out the defect.

This goes both ways s well, example: A population in west Africa carrying a high incidence of the sickle gene A possilbe mutation to malaria exposure would find it advantageous to create hybrid populations with nonsickling peoples. The "hybrids" with a lower incidence of the sickling disease would exhibit increased fitness, relative to the original population outside of the intial population environment.

In general populations have been swapping genetic information for millenia with natural selection deciding which ones are more favorable to changin environments and intimate prefernce

Horus:
In this new there will be more and more deadly ultraviolet radiations coming from the sun, there will be increased solar activty for several centuries and you will need to have enough melanin to survive because melanin act as a natural sun screen. Africans who mix their gene with  will be at risk when they get melanoma (skin cancer) when exposed to direct sun light . No other creatures in nature that are considered the same species mix. Meaning lions, though they are of the feline species do not mix with tigers. They do not mix with leopards. They do not mix with cheetahs. They do not mix with panthers. You as African should not be mixing your seed with other races because if we continue to do that we will mongrelize the races and miscegenize the races and the children will suffer as a result because they will not be accepted by Africans nor by the Caucasians and any other group of people for that matter.

Based on the above information thats some of the most stupidest stuff i have ever heard.

BlackLibya:
so are u saying i should live my life as a white person?

If your MALE Ydna ancestor is european derived then you are tied to that lineage biologically.

You can make up what ever you wish is relevant for you to "fit in". People cross racial lines all the time because there are no true boundaries.

BlackLibya:
On my father's side? It wouldnt be. On my mother's side, it should be.

But since AA's tend to trace their lineage matrilineally, it doesnt matter.

Your mother's father cannot pass that marker to you because she does not carry it from him. Only your father can transfer that marker.

even if you trace your lineage from your mother's side it does not negate the unchangeable tie to your father's blood line.

DNA cannot lie!

BlackLibya:
The DNA test will not tell me where my family comes from, it can only tell me what general area I my parents ancestors may come from.

After your great-great-great grandparent the test is irrelevant.

The DNA will pinpoint using Y-DNA markers that are unchanged from male to male lineage, what Ethnic group you originate from in the continent. Thats pretty close enough for you to say what part of Africa your "male" ancestor originates from ergo your lineage.

in other words you can only have one great great great grand father

Unless you are scared that your Y-DNA marker is from europe?