gadogado:

Why the harsh tone? you that began supporting my premise, talk about being a flip flopper!! guess you'd make an excellent politician. Let me put it this way, people that live in Africa from the tropic of capricorn all the way to the sahara share the same climate, 2-3 seasons in a year as opposed to full four seasons in Europe etc. If as they say people develop morphological adaptations to enable them cope with their environments then i'd hasten t say that blacks )especially bantus) with features like wide nostrils etc are the same race or family of people (since you dislike the word race)
second point is the linguistic similarity as well as cultural that exist among African groups, like I said, Africans/blacks are the same "race" with a high degree of internal diversity, to claim race doesn't exist is senseless. Even if the Ashanti and Yoruba never came into contact with each other, they would share many more physical, cultural and linguistic similarities to Yorubas than to the French or Italians. FACT.
The similarities are glaring, from Haiti to Zimbabwe to Nigeria to Senagal, you're all very similar and in the exact same situation (INABILITY TO BUILD A STABLE AND PROSPEROUS SOCIETY) These are the facts, any country in the world today that has black dominated government is a poverty stricken downward spiraling state regardless of the continent.

Again, be honest and reply my posts, or maybe it's even smart that you avoid me, just like you dodged your own debate of an African writing system when I crushed your baseless opinions with facts. The Yoruba are different from the Ashanti as they are to the French, why does the space in the differences matter in biology? Where does the similarity between 'races' start and stop? Wouldn't the idea of a similarity "in races" mean the belief in races as species? Again, why are there people indigenous to the Philippines and Malaysia that look like people from Gabon, yet their genetic lineages are as different to each other as they are to a European lineage?

Here again you carefully dodged majority 'black' nations like The Bahamas, Barbados, Equatorial Guinea and Botswana in your source-less and copied claims. Here they are again: Barbados, The Bahamas, Equatorial Guinea, Cape Verde. Face them and explain how they do not make your statements false.

gadogado:

Ok I suppose bronze casting is party scientific but it was done not for practical self help reasons but for religious voodoo worship to pillow his natural inclination to superstition.

This is as pathetic as your claim of Nsibidi being "lame writings." What was the purpose of the Roman Pantheons? What was the purpose of the Roman busts of Zeus and Hermes? What was the purpose of the Parthenon? To serve their gods, no? Superstition, no? And the last part of that sentence sounds funny and copied, no surprise.

gadogado:

(give me an african invention that actually made their condition better)

Ask the thousands of Europeans that died from things Africans weren't while exploring parts of Africa, they'll tell you.

gadogado:


I also see your point, however i think its necessary to make some demarcations and distinctions. The wheel is the mother of ll invention, technology started by developing the concept of the wheel. Now that thats out of the way, if the Inca or Maya didn't have a practical need for the wheel (assuming) then that explains the your supposed argument that they didn't actually use a wheel at any point in history (subject to verification) However, they were able to develop concepts that demonstrated an infusion of science into their thinking and methods, these concepts as well as the actual end result of the concepts (products) did prove to be of practical use for them and did supplement some of the hardships they faced. so here I've established two important points, a) infusion of science into their concepts (clear demonstration of intellectual ability) b) The need and desire to better their condition. These points more than make up for their abomination of not developing a wheel 
The African however has not demonstrated any infusion of science into anything he ever did and he also has not shown a desire and need to better his condition at any point in time (give me an african invention that actually made their condition better) Ok I suppose bronze casting is party scientific but it was done not for practical self help reasons but for religious voodoo worship to pillow his natural inclination to superstition.
I also disagree with you that Africa was entirely a thick green forest, some parts yes but not the whole continent. But when it comes to scientific invention, the whole continent is found wanting irrespective of environmental conditions. This contravenes your argument.

Since you don't like to research things for yourself, you know, like picking up books, I will give you one of the images you like to overlook, again:

Angolan Funeral 1786-87

[center][img]http://hitchcock.itc.virginia.edu/SlaveTrade/collection/medium/LCP-11.JPG[/img][/center]

No wheel before the 19th century? False.

gadogado:

But when it comes to scientific invention, the whole continent is found wanting irrespective of environmental conditions. This contravenes your argument.

Like Ancient Egypt?

@gadogado
First of all I do not think that Milton Friedman was making an attack on the intelligence of Africans as much as he was highlighting the technology that Africans can and do benefit from with exposure to the west. It is no more an attack than recognizing that the Japanese had not invented Guns prior to there exposure to the Portuguese. The Japanese benefited from this exposure to some level.


The wheel is not the mother of all inventions for the very reason that it is not always practical for everyone everywhere. Practicality is one of the reason people invent things like the wheel in the first place. That is why the vast majority of humans living in places that developed writing where not literate until after they had undergone some industrialization. For most people, life was just not conducive to setting aside resource to acquire literacy. For example, in the 12th century the most literacy could do for the average individual in the west was become a priest because the bible was pretty much the zenith of literature at the time. Not only did becoming literate require being somewhat connected to influential people, but the more lucrative task such as being scribes to nobility also required connections. In fact the majority of humans are still illiterate in any language today. Many people still cannot benefit from from being literate. Literacy and wheel making are not end in of themselves so the fact that they did not exist everywhere is not a statement of intelligence.

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 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 (The wheel hadn't been invented in parts of Africa by the 19th century) Take your theories of evolution elsewhere.

You need stop using this double standard. You expect Africans to develop everything independent of the rest of humanity, and yet you glorify Europeans and Arabs borrowing much of there advances from elsewhere as "making it there own". It is perfectly acceptable to use /adopt foreign technologies without necessarily improving on them. The Japanese did it with the Chinese calligraphy, the Greeks did with the Phoenician alphabet, and the Arabs did it with their numerical systems. However, many African societies were stable and relatively prosperous as well as relatively more enlightened than their neighbors without always relying on this process. In agriculture for example, many plants such as Yams and Cassava needed to be processed to extract the deadly chemicals such as arsenic. Not only was the process of cultivating these organism independently developed but also process for rendering them edible. Not only that but bronze casting and more importantly iron casting which existed throughout much of the continent was used for tools, farm implements, textiles, and of course weapons for centuries.

Furthermore, we are not our ancestors. Just because they were technology behind does not mean we have to be. Adopting technology from others to advance oneself is not some form of civilization "cheating". Africans, and anyone for that matter including Arabs, can benefit from analyzing Western development and adopting some of there methods/social norms. However, what seems to be happening today is that a one size fits all western government model is being adopted everywhere and for many places it is failing miserably. To some extent the west has culpability for promoting the system blindly(i.e with money,military interventions,weapons etc, )  without thinking about the ramifications. However, Africans should at this point know better and start developing systems/models that emerge from within the context of individuals living there within. But that is not happening, because for all the horrors of the last 300 years Africans have not change their fundamental mind set and have for the most part adopted the worst aspects of European and Arab cultures. We just have not learned much from history so now we are learning from experience. But this applies to much of North Africa, the Middle East, and central/south asia.

gadogado:

Go to malabo (the capital of EG) and compare their level of infrastructural development with Kuala Lampur or Singapore or Bangkok or Jakarta or even "i dare to say" Burma. The difference will be stark clear. When I talk about economic development im referring to "WHATS ON GROUND" not meaningless arithmetic (dividing national GDP by population to get per capita GDP) thats useless, it means nothing, go to EG and the slums you'll see will blow your mind!! Whats on ground?? how diverse and sophisticated are their markets and economy as a whole?? how about their infrastructure?? is it adequate? how about human services like education and health facilities?? what is the general standard of living for its citizens? It has about 700,000 population wise, compare that to countries with small populations like Bahrain and Oman then compare their standards.

ola olabiy:

he doesn't know that per capita income is an outdated means of calculating living standard.

Jokes! Equatorial Guinea is getting there, it's a little behind Indonesia and Malaysia, but here are the facts

Equatorial Guineas death rate is 9.26 deaths/1,000 population (July 2010 est.), Malaysia is 5.02 deaths/1,000 population (July 2010 est.) Indonesia is 6.25 deaths/1,000 population and Nigeria is 16.31 deaths/1,000 population (July 2010 est.)

Equatorial Guineas Life Expectancy is 61.98 years, Malaysia is 73.55 years, Indonesia is 73.55 years

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

I can't be bothered to bring up old stats, but this information is more shocking when you look at where this country was 10 years ago, countries don't develop in one year. African developing country? Here it is. "What's on ground" will come and is already coming.

My Fellow Nigerians


The time has come to demolish this nonsense 17th century concept of race or a "black race"

The whole concept is a total fraud based on attempts to demean different people collectively

Hang on for the ride

This is genetic sequencing that was done this year. 2010 genetic proof as opposed to 17th century ignorance

Sequencing Study Highlights Genetic Diversity in Southern Africa


An international research team reported in Nature today that it has characterized five human genomes from southern Africa, identifying millions of SNPs never before found in the human population.

The American, African, and Australian researchers sequenced the full genomes of two African individuals: a member of a hunter-gatherer population in the Kalahari desert known as the Bushmen, San, or Khoisan, and a Bantu individual from South Africa — Nobel peace prize winner Archbishop Desmond Tutu. After sequencing the exomes of three other Khoisan men, the team compared all five genomes, identifying more than 1.3 million previously undetected SNPs.

During their subsequent analyses, they not only found genetic differences between southern African populations and populations from other parts of Africa and the world but also within the Khoisan population — findings that may eventually inform everything from studies of human population history and adaptations to agriculture to personalized medicine strategies in southern Africa.

"On average, there are more genetic differences between any two Bushmen in our study than between a European and an Asian," co-lead author Stephan Schuster, a biochemistry and molecular biology researcher with Pennsylvania State University's Center for Comparative Genomics and Bioinformatics, said in a statement.

Southern Africa is believed to be the source of modern humans and, subsequently, is home to a great deal of human genetic diversity. But despite the decades-long effort to characterize the human genome and human population genetics, most studies have lacked representatives from this region, Schuster explained during a telephone briefing with reporters this morning.

In an effort to get a better sense of the genetic variation within humans, he and his team set out to characterize the genomes of individuals from the Khoisan population — thought to be the oldest modern human population. Schuster described the project at the American Society for Human Genetics meeting last fall, though this paper marks the first publication from the sequencing effort.

Archbishop Tutu, who has ancestry from Sotho-Tswana and Nguni language groups, which represent roughly 90 percent of southern Africans, also participated in the study. Tutu was a good candidate not only because of his ancestry but also because he is known to have survived polio, tuberculosis, and prostate cancer and because he is a voice for southern Africa and indigenous populations, senior author Vanessa Hayes, a cancer genetics researcher at the University of New South Wales, told reporters.

The four Khoisan men who participated in the study all came from different communities in Namibia's Kalahari Desert. Each was the most elder member of his community.

The team sequenced the genome of a Khoisan man named named !Gubi to 10.2 times coverage using paired-end sequencing with the Roche 454 GS FLX Titanium platform. !Gubi is believed to be around 86 years old and lives in the southern Kalahari on the Namibia-Botswana border. They also used a similar approach to sequence the genome of a second Khoisan man named G/aq'o, from a community in the northern Kalahari, to about two times coverage.

Meanwhile, the researchers sequenced Tutu's genome using the Applied Biosystems SOLiD 3.0 platform, generating sequence covering the genome about 12.3 times.

For the exome sequencing portion of the study, the team captured protein-coding sequences for each of the five individuals with the NimbleGen 2.1 M array and sequenced them by Roche 454 Titanium sequencing.

The genomic and exomic sequences were verified using a range of approaches, including genotyping and whole-genome and exome sequencing with the Illumina platform, which was used to sequence !Gubi's genome to 23.2 times coverage and Tutu's genome to 7.2 times coverage.

When the team compared the genomes and exomes to version 18 of the human reference genome and eight personal genomes sequenced, they found 1.3 million previously undetected SNPs, including 13,146 new SNPs that alter the amino acid sequence of 7,720 genes.

!Gubi's genome contained more SNPs than Tutu's, though both contained more SNPs overall — and more novel SNPs — than any other individual genome sequenced so far.

And from their population level analyses, the researchers detected as many or more genetic differences between the Khoisan and West African populations than between West African and European populations.

The team's preliminary peek at the functional role of genes affected by new SNPs in the Khoisan population suggests that these variants tend to fall in genes involved in immune response, reproduction, and sensory perception.

"We believed that because of their extremely long lineage, their genome would be very different," co-lead author Webb Miller, a researcher at Penn State's Center for Comparative Genomics and Bioinformatics, told reporters. And, he said, the findings so far support that hypothesis.

This type of genetic diversity within the human genome is believed to have helped humans thrive over thousands of years, Schuster said, though he emphasized that modern human genomes from all around the world still share far more similarities than differences. "We are genetically one healthy species," he said.

The team believes understanding human genetic diversity in southern Africa will likely be medically important, both for developing personalized medicine in this region and for identifying and understanding the roles of rare variants in human health and disease in general.

"Adding the described variants to current databases will facilitate the inclusion of southern Africans in medical researchers' efforts, particularly when family and medical histories can be correlated with genome-wide data," the researchers wrote.

The researchers have already started developing microarrays incorporating the newly identified southern African SNPs. For the next phase of the study, they plan to use these microarrays to genotype hundreds of individuals from southern Africa.


http://www.genomeweb.com/sequencing/sequencing-study-highlights-genetic-diversity-southern-africa

the highlights in the article include

"And from their population level analysis, the researchers detected as many or more genetic differences between the Khoisan and West African populations than between West African and European populations."



"On average, there are more genetic differences between any two Bushmen in our study than between a European and an Asian,"



This is genetic sequencing that was done this year ie 2010 genetic proof as opposed to 17th century ignorance

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 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 (The wheel hadn't been invented in parts of Africa by the 19th century) Take your theories of evolution elsewhere.

I was not attacking your person, I was attacking your illogical position and double standards.

I asked you earlier in this thread why it is alright for all of Europe to glory in the achievements of the Greeks (who by the way stole their knowledge from Egypt), but Africans cannot glory in Egypt or Ethiopia as African, you cleverly avoided the question.

I told you that for as long as Africa is ONE continuous landmass, there is no way any part of it could be excluded from the technological or philosophical achievements of another. I know there are things in Igbo and Yoruba culture that resemble ancient Egyptian things in great detail. The Europeans all copied from the Romans, who in turn copied from the Greeks and so on.

As for why African countries have not started dominating parts of technology in modern times, I would say that you should go and study why Biafra had to fight superpowers instead of only Nigeria. Why was Britain (and Soviet Union) so frightened of Biafra? Heck it was only a tiny country! Yet in under 3 short years, Biafra's scientific ambitions rattled powers that manipulate the fate of Africa. Who knows how Africa would have transformed if Biafra had survived. I'll leave that for now.

You would do well to go and find out how many technology patents owned by Africans (I didn't say African Americans). One of my friends who used to work for IBM owns 120 patents on semi-conductor designs alone.

I will say this again: STOP INSULTING BLACK PEOPLE!

The Negrito people of Asia have dark skin and kinky hair but the greatest genetic distance in all of humanity exists between them and Africans



[img]http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d9/Ati_woman_2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://abaca8./2010/01/01/&usg=__-vTsowHV7FFFFZWsU2cnXevFRY4=&h=800&w=536&sz=118&hl=en&start=61&tbnid=ZRuIy0mchmYjKM:&tbnh=143&tbnw=96&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpictures%2Bof%2Bnegritos%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26biw%3D1680%26bih%3D869%26tbs%3Disch:10%2C1152&um=1&itbs=1&ei=L9lpTJ2aE8TFnAfg7sDBBQ&biw=1680&bih=869[/img]

The term Negrito refers to several ethnic groups in isolated parts of Southeast Asia.[2]

Their current populations include 12 Andamanese tribes of the Andaman Islands, six Semang tribes of Malaysia, the Mani of Thailand, and the Aeta, Agta, Ayta, Pygmies, Ita, Baluga, Ati, Dumagat and at least 25 other tribes of the Philippines. Reports on the presence of British traders on Borneo (Sarawak), dating from the end of the 19th century, speak of negrito tribes on this island. There are reports that these traders presented "pygmies" to the emperor of China. Pygmies being another word for negrito. (Journal of the Malayan Branch Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. XXIX, part 1, 1956)

Negritos share some common physical features with African pygmy populations, including short stature, natural afro-hair texture, and dark skin; however, their origin and the route of their migration to Asia is still a matter of great speculation. They are the most genetically distant human population from Africans at most loci studied thus far (except for MC1R, which codes for dark skin).

They have also been shown to have separated early from Asians, suggesting that they are either surviving descendants of settlers from an early migration out of Africa, or that they are descendants of one of the founder populations of modern humans

The term "Negrito" is the Spanish diminutive of negro, i.e. "little black person", referring to their small stature, and was coined by early European explorers who assumed that the Negritos were recent arrivals from Africa.

Occasionally, some Negritos are referred to as pygmies, bundling them with peoples of similar physical stature in Central Africa, and likewise, the term Negrito was previously occasionally used to refer to African Pygmies.[4]

Sometimes the term "Negroid" will be used when referring to these groups, especially to their superficial physical features, such as their hair texture and skin color.

Being among the least-known of all living human groups, the origins of the Negrito people is a much debated topic. The Malay term for them is orang asli, or original people.

They are likely descendants of the indigenous populations of the Sunda landmass and New Guinea, predating the Mongoloid peoples who later entered Southeast Asia.[5]

Alternatively, some scientists claim they are merely a group of Australo-Melanesians who have undergone island dwarfing over thousands of years, reducing their food intake in order to cope with limited resources and adapt to a tropical rainforest environment. Anthropologist Jared Diamond in his bestselling book, Guns, Germs, and Steel suggests that the Negritos are possible ancestors of the Aboriginal Australians and Papuans of New Guinea. This assertion is echoed by Windshuttle and Gillin (2002).

A number of features would seem to suggest a common origin for the Negritos and African pygmies, especially in the Andamanese Islanders who have been isolated from incoming waves of Asiatic and Indo-Aryan peoples. No other living human population has experienced such long-lasting isolation from contact with other groups [6].

[b]These features include short stature, very dark skin, woolly hair, scant body hair and occasional steatopygia. The claim that Andamanese pygmoids more closely resemble Africans than Asians in their cranial morphology in a 1973 study added some weight to this theory before genetic studies pointed to a closer relationship with Asians.[6]

Other more recent studies have shown closer craniometric affinities to Egyptians and Europeans than to Sub Saharan populations such as that of African Pygmies. Walter Neves' study of the Lagoa Santa people had the incidental correlation of showing Andamanese as classifying closer to Egyptians and Europeans than any Sub Saharan population.[7][8]

Multiple studies also show that Negritos from Southeast Asia to New Guinea share a closer cranial affinity with Australo-Melanesians.[5][9] Further evidence for Asian ancestry is in craniometric markers such as sundadonty, shared by Asian and Negrito populations.

It has been suggested that the craniometric similarities to Asians could merely indicate a level of interbreeding between Negritos and later waves of people arriving from the Asian mainland. This hypothesis is not supported by genetic evidence that has shown the level of isolation populations such as the Andamanese have had.

However, some studies have suggested that each group should be considered separately, as the genetic evidence refutes the notion of a specific shared ancestry between the "Negrito" groups of the Andaman Islands, Malay Peninsula, and Philippines.[10]

While earlier studies, such as that of WW Howell, allied Andamanese craniometrically with Africans, they did not have recourse to genetic studies.[5] Later genetic and craniometric (mentioned earlier) studies have found more genetic affinities with Asians and Polynesians.[6]

A study on blood groups and proteins in the 1950s suggested that the Andamanese were more closely related to Oceanic peoples than Africans. Genetic studies on Philippine Negritos, based on polymorphic blood enzymes and antigens, showed they were similar to surrounding Asian populations[/b].[6]

Genetic testing places all the Onge and all but two of the Great Andamanese in the mtDNA Haplogroup M, found in East Africa, East Asia, and South Asia, suggesting that the Negritos are at least partly descended from a migration originating in eastern Africa as much as 60,000 years ago. This migration is hypothesized to have followed a coastal route through India and into Southeast Asia, which is sometimes referred to as the Great Coastal Migration.

Analysis of mtDNA coding sites indicated that these Andamanese fall into a subgroup of M not previously identified in human populations in Africa and Asia. These findings suggest an early split from the population of African migrants whose descendants would eventually populate the entire habitable world.[6] Haplogroup C and haplogroup D is believed to represent Y-DNA in the migration.[11]

Negritos have also possibly lived in Taiwan. The Saisiyat people performed the songs and rites of the festival called Ritual of the Little Black People (矮靈祭). In fact, the short, black men the festival celebrates are one of the most ancient types of modern humans on this planet and their kin still survive in Asia today. They are said to be diminutive Africoids and are variously called Pygmies, Negritos and Aeta. Chinese historians called them "black dwarfs" in the Three Kingdoms period (AD 220 to AD 280) and they were still to be found in China during the Qing dynasty (1644 to 1911). In Taiwan they were called the "Little Black People" and, apart from being diminutive, they were also said to be broad-nosed and dark-skinned with curly hair.[12]

After the Little Black People -- and well before waves of Han migrations after 1600 -- came the Aboriginal tribes, who are part of the Austronesian race. They are thought to have come from the Malay Archipelago 6,000 years ago at the earliest and around 1,000 years ago at the latest, though theories on Aborigine migration to Taiwan are still hotly debated. Gradually the Little Black People became scarcer, until a point about 100 years ago, when there was just a small group living near the Saisiyat tribe.[13]

The story goes that the Little Black People taught the Saisiyat to farm by providing seeds and they used to party together. But one day, the Little Black People sexually harassed some Aboriginal women. So, the Saisiyat took revenge and killed them off by cutting a bridge over which they were all crossing. Just two Little Black People survived. Before departing eastward, they taught the Saisiyat about their culture and passed down some of their songs, saying if they did not remember their people they would be cursed and their crops would fail.[14] There are other stories about them in other aboriginals.[15] Their sites still remains.[16]

more Negrito pictures

Summary of the article above

1 These people have kinky hair and dark skin

2 They have NOTHING in common with the average African genetically and are closer to Asians like Chinese, Japanese etc and even Europeans genetically


some direct quotes from the article above

"Other more recent studies have shown closer craniometric affinities to Egyptians and Europeans than to Sub Saharan populations such as that of African Pygmies. Walter Neves' study of the Lagoa Santa people had the incidental correlation of showing Andamanese as classifying closer to Egyptians and Europeans than any Sub Saharan population."

These features include short stature, very dark skin, woolly hair, scant body hair and occasional steatopygia. The claim that Andamanese pygmoids more closely resemble Africans than Asians in their cranial morphology in a 1973 study added some weight to this theory before genetic studies pointed to a closer relationship with Asians.

Later genetic and craniometric (mentioned earlier) studies have found more genetic affinities with Asians and Polynesians

Clear evidences in humanity backed up by solid scientific proof show clearly that

1. There has never been any such thing as a "black race" ever in all of humanity. It is not based on Genetics or shared history or culture or anything. It is the biggest fraud in the history of humankind and a figment of the imagination of prejudiced 17th and 18th century people

2. Just because a person has dark skin and kinky hair does not mean they are the same with people all over the African continent or that they are your brothers/sisters.

An Hausa man for example is as genetically different if not more different from a Zulu than he is from a French man

3. Two people who are genetically very distant and have nothing in common can look very similar while two people who are closer genetically could look different from each other

you clearly dont know much about anthropology, what haplogroup are they in as far as Mt DNA and also Y DNA genetic markers

gadogado:

you clearly dont know much about anthropology, what haplogroup are they in as far as Mt DNA and also Y DNA genetic markers

Aahh! The sound of a deflated Arab!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L1_(mtDNA)

Take a look, pls, lets talk science not pointless pictures, these people came out of africa 20,000 years ago!! FACT

Beaf:

Aahh! The sound of a deflated Arab!

correction: Afro-arab

^
It was just a harmless jibe.

L1b is most frequent in West Africa and among Igbo Nigerians, Mauritanian, El Hierro, Grand Canari, Algeria and Egypt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L1_(mtDNA)#cite_note-3

Interesting!
No wonder my people trace their history to Egypt. . . Scientific proof!

So my fellow Nigerians


Whenever an ignorant  wants to start talking about the "black race", he is an uninformed  who is intent on demeaning people.



The different African societies are as different from each other as they are from non-African societies. They have never been similar on any level at all. People always talk about a "black race" when they want to ask extremely silly questions like "What did they achieve" and all sorts of similar nonsense.


Germans and English were complete babarians and savages for most of human history. They were low class slaves who never contributed anything to humanity until just recently. They never had any lost glory to reclaim. East Africans were far more civilized than them for thousands of years  Many parts of Eastern Europe have not contributed anything meaningful to humanity either and also many parts of Asia


Any fraud that comes on this site to ask what a mythical "black race" bla bla bla should be smacked down immediately!

gadogado:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_L1_(mtDNA)

Take a look, pls, lets talk science not pointless pictures, these people came out of africa 20,000 years ago!! FACT

Dude your fraud has been completely exposed!

Finish exposing your nyash now by yourself

What the heck are you talking about haplogroups?

If you knew anything about haplogroups, you would not be shaming yourself by bringing it to support your fraudulent idea of a "black race"


I just provided concrete scientific proof from 2010 of the fraud that the idea of race is and the funny idea of a "black race" that is genetically deficient



Oya take the platform and show us how haplogroup=race (It would be fun watching this clown try to turn the haplogroup L1= "black race" joke he is parading about . Bring out the pop corn guys. This liar thought he was dealing with uneducated people living in the 18th century )  What a joke

He is about to commit harikiri

Also come and list what haplogroup the Negeritos are from and how they are genetically related to Africans more than say Chinese people

You obviously dont know anything about genetics and humanity otherwise you wold not have dared to suggest the nonsense you were parroting in this thread


How dare you parrot lies to our face?




Guy you just march shit!

^^^
you seem bitter, you see you're diverging, attempting to change the topic of discussion to genetics and black race this and that. The fact that black Africans are closely genetically related is indisputable, Ok in the interest of appeasing you, lets dump the term "black race" seeing that it bothers you so much. I'll agree for the sake of argument that there is no such thing. Instead, I'll simply say "dark skinned people from the African continent" are the least intelligent people in the world. Now what??
Wonder why you're fighting so hard against the existence of race I guarantee you'd be championing a "black race" if it were at the top of the world's power hierarchy as opposed to the very bottom as is the present case. Either way, don't be too emotional, that is an African feature thats hurts Africans. Try being logical, we're here or at least I am to learn and debate constructively not engage in over heated emotion-laden arguments, thats a little immature in my opinion. We can always agree to disagree.
My question is simple, is "black" lack of intellectual capacity responsible for their current predicament i.e- lack of development, if it isn't, then what is responsible. Im not asking whether you're genetically closer to a Frenchman than your neighboring Igala or Idoma.

Ahh for once an intellectual debate on NL. I must commend all the participants here for avoiding the popular evil of running threads aground with pointless insults (even though some insults surfaced). Keep up the good work folks

gadogado:

^^^   
you seem bitter, you see you're diverging, attempting to change the topic of discussion to genetics and black race this and that. The fact that black Africans are closely genetically related is indisputable, Ok in the interest of appeasing you, lets dump the term "black race" seeing that it bothers you so much. I'll agree for the sake of argument that there is no such thing. Instead, I'll simply say "dark skinned people from the African continent" are the least intelligent people in the world. Now what??
Wonder why you're fighting so hard against the existence of race I guarantee you'd be championing a "black race" if it were at the top of the world's power hierarchy as opposed to the very bottom as is the present case. Either way, don't be too emotional, that is an African feature thats hurts Africans. Try being logical, we're here or at least I am to learn and debate constructively not engage in over heated emotion-laden arguments, thats a little immature in my opinion. We can always agree to disagree.
My question is simple, is "black" lack of intellectual capacity responsible for their current predicament i.e- lack of development, if it isn't, then what is responsible. Im not asking whether you're genetically closer to a Frenchman than your neighboring Igala or Idoma.

You haven't been able to defend any of your points, you dodge most of them when someone shows them to be untrue, so what exactly is mature about this 'debate'? Forget it, you've convinced no one and your thread, for the most part, is useless.

Hmmm. A lot of unsupported claims (especially from this gadogado fellow). I'll be back to address these arguments completely some days from now, as I'm currently too busy to devote much time to nairaland.

But for now, I'll dole out a few statements that should get a few people thinking.

1. At one point all other Europeans were illiterate and considered "barbarians" in comparison with the Greeks and Romans.

But the Romans, who considered the Celts (English, Irish, "Spanish," "Portuguese," etc) and especially the "Germans" (Visigoths, Ostrogoths, French, Dutch, most of Western Europe) as barbarians, got their entire culture from Greece. Which means nothing- except that the things that made Greece great were mostly her writings. They did have Alexander the Great, and a formidable and advanced military, but many groups, some of them not at all so advanced in terms of "civilization," such as the Huns (Attila) or Mongols (Genghis Khan) or 7th century Arabs (Khalid ibn al-Walid), also had great conquerors, as did some African kingdoms, so there is nothing unique about military competence. In fact, Africans had military competence also (see Warfare in Atlantic Africa 1500-1800 by John Thornton).

But Greece derived their first number system from their alphabet. They derived their alphabet from the Phoenicians! Prior to that, they were ancient illiterates. And the Phoenician writing system developed in Egypt! (from the Proto-Sinaitic alphabet)

Obviously the enormous leap in mathematical philosophy that Greeks took in making geometry abstract is to be respected, but the truth is that even Greek historians admit themselves that the idea OF geometry (literally meaning "land measurement" was derived from Egyptian land surveyors (though they were possibly preceded in this by Sumerians).

Without the idea of geometry (which is what most of Greek mathematics, with a few notable exceptions, was concerned with) and without a number system developed from an alphabet that was brought to them, and therefore without writing, what would the intellectual achievements of the Greeks, and later their cultural inheritors, previously "barbaric" Western Europeans, have been?

My point here is that you're giving people credit they don't deserve.

There are only a few independent origins of writing. They are:

1. Sumer
2. Egypt
3. Mesoamerica
4. China
5. Easter Island (possibly)
6. Indus Valley
7. Crete (possibly independent, hasn't actually been confirmed)

As you can see, only one of these groups (Crete) were European. So stating that the Europeans had more "brain power early on" from writing is not that plausible.

Sub-saharan Africa was greatly isolated from the fertile crescent (Mesopotamia, the birthplace of most of all world civilization) by water and desert, so Africans didn't have the benefit of just adapting other peoples' writing easily and then developing literature and mathematics early on. When writing did finally reach sub-Saharan Africa (Arabic) it came with a very conservative, religion based culture. The idea that Africans couldn't conceive of writing is silly, since the Adinkra, Akan, and Nsbidi symbols essentially did communicate ideas with pictures, indicating logographic writing styles. However, in the absence of huge trade between cities and city-states speaking the same language, the development of these into full logographic writing systems would be unnecessary and unlikely.

2. There were no horses in sub-Saharan Africa until horses were introduced from the North. Zebras cannot be domesticated. Nor can giraffes. Elephants can only be tamed, not domesticated (bred and modified by humans). So the idea that sub-Saharan Africans would even need to use a wheel is silly, there are only a few things for which a wheel might be advantageous. Possibly a lot of servants pulling a large object would have benefited from wheels, as in that picture of that Angolan society. Horses, which were rare, would very smartly have been reserved for cavalry soldiers (Sokoto, Oyo, Borno, etc.) and occasionally hoarded by royalty if extremely rare (Benin). The cow/ox, camel, donkey and all other domesticated animals relevant to wheels all were found in North Africa, and found their way into sub-Saharan Africa sparingly (trade with North Africans, then trickle down trade from black Muslim states to non-Muslim states).

The wheel is not the mother of invention, pal. Give that a rest, its only one the simplest and yet most useful inventions in certain environments. I don't see what use it would be in a horseless/oxen-less savanna or a bumpy and uneven forest/jungle devoid of animals to pull objects mounted on wheels.

3. Sub-Saharan Africa was massively underpopulated compared with the rest of the centers of civilization (Sumeria/Mesopotamia, China, India, Mexico and South America). The main reason for this is that only some parts of West Africa and Ethiopia had a few useful crops (as opposed to the many in Europe and Asia) that were actually native to Africa, and not introduced from elsewhere, that would have allowed for food surpluses, and consequently large, sedentary communities, and gradually higher technology. Most other crops from North Africa that would have helped in sustaining large populations could not survive the shift in climate and rainfall that occurs as one goes from North Africa to sub-Saharan Africa.

In fact the statement that "people that live in Africa from the tropic of capricorn all the way to the sahara share the same climate," is the exact opposite of the reality, as climate zones vary vertically in Africa and there are at least three major different climes from the Tropic of Capricorn to the Sahara, but the useful crops and wildlife were in North Africa.

As for a "race" concept, it's not much more illogical than the ethnicity concept so I won't bother to argue against it but New Guineans, pure Australian aborigines, Malaysian Negritos, Phillipine Negritos, Solomon Islands, and various other groups with "wide nostrils" are clearly significantly different in appearance from both a pure dark skinned Yoruba and an extremely light skinned Igbo, and indeed from most other Niger-Congo ("Bantu" or non-"Bantu" language speakers. Unless you really think that these people are of the same race as the "typical" pure black African:

http://backintyme.com/forum/store/Kids3.jpg

http://backintyme.com/forum/store/Kids2.jpg

http://backintyme.com/forum/store/Kids1.jpg

http://www.isteve.com/images/Solomon_Island_Blonde.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/da/Vanuatu_blonde.jpg/180px-Vanuatu_blonde.jpg

http://www.gnxp.com/blog/uploaded_images/blondeblack-725114.jpg

http://adamspicturelibrary.com/images/SBN/0-0-CHI-HDST-SBN-013d_c.JPG

http://gal.darkervision.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/aborigines_5.jpg

http://www.businessfacilities.com/blog/uploaded_images/aborigines_5-700849.jpg


Clearly you need to increase your understanding of the continuous (rather than discrete) nature of the human phenotype spectrum.


4. As for stable prosperous societies/enlightened kingdoms, the idea of "enlightened" is relative, as the Islamic hordes that swept across Asia and parts of Europe were very certain of their "enlightenment" compared to the "infidels" they fought, as were the jihadists in Northern Nigeria, but I can assure you that no Celtic, Slavic, or Germanic (the majority of Europeans) kingdom was really "enlightened" prior to contact with Greece or Rome or its descendants (and by consequence inheritance of all the foundations laid by Sumeria and Egypt), so what does that make these people prior to their "enlightenment"? The dregs of the white "race"? Of course not.

In Africa, the Axumite Empire was very prosperous and "enlightened", but declined through trade isolation, and climate change affecting crop yield.
The kingdom of Makuria was very prosperous and "enlightened", but declined through Islamic Egyptian aggression.
The Benin Empire was very prosperous, but declined through trade isolation (from the slave trade) and later through outside aggression (British).
The Mali Empire was very prosperous and "enlightened", but fell apart through dynastic struggles, like many empires outside of Africa.
The Ghana Empire was very prosperous but was weakened by increase in nearby Almoravid  power and declined.
The Songhai Empire was very prosperous but was defeated by Moroccan invaders with guns.


I don't see what a lack of "intellectual ability" had to do with the decline and conquest of these states, but maybe that's because unlike some people I don't have an agenda to push.


5. As for the statement that "bronze casting is party scientific but it was done not for practical self help reasons but for religious voodoo worship to pillow his natural inclination to superstition." that only indicates one's idiocy and ignorance.

There are few bronze works, whether Ife, Igbo-Ukwu, or Benin that depict ANY kind of "voodoo" theme. The artwork depicts religious themes, actually, not unlike Celtic and other European pagan religions. However, for an example of European "voodoo" consider the Wicker man ritual of Celtic druids that involved human sacrifice to please the gods (see The Gallic War by Julius Caesar, or any of the commentaries of Cicero, Pliny the Elder, or Tacitus on the Celts)). Almost all of the art is about military activity, court life, royalty, the deification of royalty, religious beliefs, or pedestrian things like carvings of animals. The things represented in the bronzes are the same things represented in statues and sculptures in many past cultures, kingdoms around the world.
6. As for "practical self help"

The Haya people of Tanzania were manufacturing steel in high temperature furnaces before anybody else
(http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,912179,00.html).

Then there's the fortifications of walls, ramparts, and moats near Ijebu and Benin in Nigeria

(http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16322035.100-the-african-queen.html?page=2)

(http://cohesion.rice.edu/CentersAndInst/SAFA/emplibrary/49_ch09.pdf)

and Wesler,Kit W.(1998). Historical archaeology in Nigeria. Africa World Press pp.143,144



Then there's an example of Benin classification of plants:

BOTANY- A European Forest Botanist who worked in Benin in the 1930s admitted in his studies that the Benin were better botanist than the Europeans in the classification of rain forest trees. He stated that


The more one has to do the correlation of vernacular [Edo] names with
their scientific equivalents, the more one come to realize that they are not
merely a haphazard jumble. There seems to be a considerable amount of
almost scientific system and a wealth of description in many of the names.
While dealing with the Guarea species-Obobo’s, it is perhaps worth
noting that systematic botanists were a long time making up their minds as
to the correct classification of Guarea Cedrata and for at time it was
transferred to the genus Trichilia. The Bini was never in doubt about the
matter and made it clear that he considered it to be a Guarea

Thus the classification of the Guarea which have for long baffled the Europeans was rightly resolved using the Benin indigenous classification. See R. H. Hide “The Bini as a Botanist” Nigerian Field, Vol. XI, 1943 p.32.


Then the use of plants:

PLANT SCIENCE- The Edo domesticated many species of plants in their environment for their own use and mankind. There is specie of cotton domesticated by the Edo people known as lshan cotton and one of the best for weaving Khaki or jeans. The colonial government went about encouraging the cultivation of this specie in Nigeria before the cotton trade in Southern Nigeria collapsed. A colonial official who visited Esan area in 1902 reported the quality of the cloth made from this cotton specie to be “of strong durable texture” National Archives, Ibadan File CSO 1/13 Vol 20, Windham Fosberry Report on visit to Ishan Country, 1902


TEXTILE TECHNOLOGY – Earlier in the 18th Century French trader Landolphe reported of Benin that “a few houses are to be seen without a cotton spinning machine or a frame for making admirable cotton or straw rugs” Ling H. Roth, Great Benin: Its Custom, Art, and Horrors, 1968, P 141 while in the 1860s the British Consul Burton complained that Benin people were not disturbed by English trade embargo because they are “…independent of Manchester” textile mills. Ibid 142

Then crafting armor and weapons with metal:

METAL TECHNOLOGY- Their mastery of the Brass is very well known. Archaeologist and historians are still baffled and yet to establish the source of copper which were used for their brass work. The cire perdue technique of casting is also known to have been indigenously developed. Similar achievements also exist in Iron technology. Scientific investigations show that the techniques of iron smelting employed the same principles with modern or western iron smelting techniques. The Edo mastery of the iron is best exemplified by the Ineme (a small group in Etsako and Akoko Edo areas whose expertise is legendary. For the Benin call them Uleme ne gbe egue and there is a Benin proverb that describe the best Iron smelter and smith in Benin would be an apprentice among the Ineme. Their expertise was sought not only by Benin but also by the Igala, Igbira and Northern Yoruba for production of weapons. See Aigbokhaoede. Asimilafele,
Inemhe- Our heritage, 1991


Then soil conservation:

AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE- They knew their environment and soil and the best techniques that were suitable for maximum yield. They selected their soil and the best soil was known as Eken ne Uloka – loose soil that allowed percolation of water and easy decay of vegetable matter to fertilize the soil. They checked the topography too and ensured that it did not destroy the environment- proverbs abound about this e.g. "No gua Iya I mien eken no yawo ehe" – one who plants the side of the valley is unable to cover it with soil” In this way gulley erosion was avoided. Frederick Lugard, Governor General of Nigeria 1912-1918 commended the agricultural techniques of Benin people for helping to preserve the forest .Frederick Lugard Political Memoranda: Revision of Instructions to Political Officers on subjects Political and Administrative, 1913-1918, P.432 The farming technique’s conservationist value was further commended by the Forest officer P. A. Allison in
his article “Historical inferences to be drawn from the effect of human settlement on the vegetation of Africa” Journal of African history, Vol. III, No 2, 1962, p.243 .

And possibly some writing:

WRITING- The Benin kingdom might have also developed some logographic symbols, although not a full writing system. There were speculations with some Olokun symbols in the past.  

Hau, Kathleen (1973). Pre-Islamic writing in West, Africa. Bulletin del'IFAN, 35(Series b, 1): 1-45.

Hau, Kathleen (1967). The ancient writing of Southern Nigeria. Bulletin del'IFAN, 29(Series b, 1-2): 150-190.

Hau, Kathleen(1964). A royal title on a palace tusk from Benin (Southern Nigeria). Bulletin del'IFAN, 26(Series b, 1-2): 21-39.

Hau, Kathleen (1961). Oberi Okaime script, texts, and counting system. Bulletin del'IFAN, 23(1-2): 291-308.

Hau, Kathleen (1959). Evidence of the use of pre-Portuguese written characters by the Bini? Bulletin del'IFAN, 21: 109-154.

@gadogado and others of like mind

if na stormfront send you, you should report back to them with the news that unfortunately, your plan failed, and you'll refund 50% of their money.

keep 50% for effort.

someones been reading 'germs, guns and steel' and apparently is a die hard adherent of liberal "excuses" for black African failure to independently develop at significant levels. I don't have the time to attack each of your points but know that these are things I've already read (long ago), believed and later on dispelled.

@tpiah
Im not on here for a race war, just an unemotional discussion, Im trying to make you accept the harsh reality of your condition.

^^the harsh reality of[b] your [/b] condition, bro, not mine.

i get the feeling you're projecting on blacks ie the situation of your own people (whoever they are) depresses you, so you think talking down to others is the solution.

it's not.

gadogado:

someones been reading 'germs, guns and steel' and apparently is a die hard adherent of liberal "excuses" for black African failure to independently develop at significant levels. I don't have the time to attack each of your points but know that these are things I've already read (long ago), believed and later on dispelled.

@tpiah
Im not on here for a race war, just an unemotional discussion, Im trying to make you accept the harsh reality of your condition.

you may be right. we know we(blacks) don't YET have the technological advancement of whites.
but your shuwa arab people may have to face up to the reality of your inferiority to whites. may be you need to read about how egypt on one hand and algeria/morocco/tunisia were shared by british and french people.


i also don't know any meaningful invention pioneered by arabs.

yeye boy

ola olabiy:

i also don't know any meaningful invention pioneered by arabs.

Take that back oh!

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

this surely reveals your real intention to me.
of what significance is the whole of arabia apart from some useless pyramid? what positive impact did our interaction with you arabs have on our advancement. camel-riding skills?
turbaning skills? or extreme and uncouth polygamy?
where was your enlightenement when your land was being pillaged and shared by whites?
i also mean when your forefathers were forcefully fed french/english language?
and GBAM!, when isreal was coming into being?
ode buruku.

ezeagu:

Take that back oh!

why?
i was ready to engage in any intellectual discourse. it is true we are not at the same level of technological advancement as whites (at least, westerners). and we don't have their level of innovative inventions YET. but arabs?
a people whose women (most of) have still never heard of the internet nor how to use it.

gadogado:

someones been reading 'germs, guns and steel' and apparently is a die hard adherent of liberal "excuses" for black African failure to independently develop at significant levels. I don't have the time to attack each of your points but know that these are things I've already read (long ago), believed and later on dispelled.

@tpiah
Im not on here for a race war, just an unemotional discussion, Im trying to make you accept the harsh reality of your condition.

Nice try buddy, I read "Guns, Germs, and Steel" years ago and was put off by Diamond's Eurocentrism, his condescending, patronizing excuses for various groups, and his bizarre attempt to ignore the fact that technologically advanced Chinese and Indian imperialists didn't go to genocidal extremes in meting out evil that European imperialists did (i.e. his book subliminally justifies these acts as inevitable and unavoidable). He could have just have admitted that certain groups (not ALL Europeans, and certainly not ONLY Europeans) were particularly averse to peaceful interaction with other groups of people who were very different from them.

I also read Will Durant's The Story of Civilization many years before that and unlike certain people read Henri Frankfort (author of The Birth of Civlization in the Near East, among other things, and not at all somebody with a "liberal" agenda) and many other authors and already knew that most of Diamond's "liberal excuses" are not even of his creation, but that earlier writers, in trying to determine how it is that "civilization" comes about, anticipated most of the real requirements for the development of "civilization" without giving a second thought to Africans, Native Americans, or aborigines or any agenda "excusing" them, but rather said much of what Diamond said (minus some of the science and his attempts to insinuate that brutal European imperialism was nearly unavoidable or merely a natural social process), in the context of the development of Sumer, Egypt, Maya, etc.

With regard to certain people's differing ideas on the development of civilization, the difference between me and certain people is that I've actually bothered to read about African societies before reading stuff like Guns, Germs, and Steel, because I have an interest in knowledge for its inherent worth, rather than agendas (whether "liberal" or "traditional" that use knowledge only to make claims. I had read enough real history books, by objective scholars, European (some of them "racists" by current standards), American, and African to know that African societies from Axum, to Sokoto, to the Congo, had experienced famines for reasons relating to their over-dependence on a few useful foods they had and could grow without outside trade without needing to read a bestseller to know this.

If certain people are the realists that they claim they are perhaps they might familiarize themselves with the work of people like Gregory Maddox and realize that the African environment was not incapable of being tamed (the "primitive" Africa idea- that the very nature of the environment would always have resulted in insurmountable challenges to the possibility of Africans developing on the same level as some Asians and some Europeans without outside "help" but that Africa was not "merrie Africa" (i.e. no famine, hunger, disease, etc.) as people often assume and the environmental challenges to higher development in SOME (not all) places in sub-Saharan Africa were very real. The truth is in the midway between these extremes but certain people assume that I could actually believe the former, merely because I acknowledge some of the truth in the fact that there were some unusual challenges faced by sub-Saharan Africans and some unusual deprivations and isolation.

So go ahead and dispel Guns, Germs, and Steel, as I don't accept many of Diamond's premises, conclusions, and assertions, especially with regards to Africa. I only commented on this thread because certain people and not most of the other posters in this thread, have a view of black Africans' "condition" that is at odds with reality.

Certain people haven't been reading much of anything but have large opinions on topics they possess only small amounts of objective, non-polemical information on.