Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

White People's Inventions Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Also,how about some blacks have a low IQ because they're brought up in poor areas,or don't want to better themselves.

    Why is it then that the Black people I know have been brought up in a rich family,or have decided to strive and acheive for themselves are really clever?

    Why is it that White chavs amount to nothing,unless they come out of their chav lifestyle?

    Wealth and upbringing can place a huge impact in one's intelligence.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by narusku)
    OP read this and then go and then go and celebrate in the corner
    Some Inventions Made by Black People

    * air conditioning unit: Frederick M. Jones; July 12, 1949
    * almanac: Benjamin Banneker; Approx 1791
    * auto cut-off switch: Granville T. Woods; January 1,1839
    * auto fishing devise: G. Cook; May 30, 1899
    * automatic gear shift: Richard Spikes; February 28, 1932
    * baby buggy: W.H. Richardson; June 18, 1899
    * bicycle frame: L.R. Johnson; Octber 10, 1899
    * biscuit cutter: A.P. Ashbourne; November 30, 1875
    * blood plasma bag: Charles Drew; Approx. 1945
    * cellular phone: Henry T. Sampson; July 6, 1971
    * chamber commode: T. Elkins; January 3, 1897
    * clothes dryer: G. T. Sampson; June 6, 1862
    * curtain rod: S. R. Scratton; November 30, 1889
    * curtain rod support: William S. Grant; August 4, 1896
    * door knob: O. Dorsey; December 10, 1878
    * door stop: O. Dorsey; December 10, 1878
    * dust pan: Lawrence P. Ray; August 3, 1897
    * egg beater: Willie Johnson; February 5, 1884
    * electric lampbulb: Lewis Latimer; March 21, 1882
    * elevator: Alexander Miles; October 11, 1867
    * eye protector: P. Johnson; November 2, 1880
    * fire escape ladder: J. W. Winters; May 7, 1878
    * fire extinguisher: T. Marshall; October 26, 1872
    * folding bed: L. C. Bailey; July 18, 1899
    * folding chair: Brody & Surgwar; June 11, 1889
    * fountain pen: W. B. Purvis; January 7, 1890
    * furniture caster: O. A. Fisher; 1878
    * gas mask: Garrett Morgan; October 13, 1914
    * golf tee: T. Grant; December 12, 1899
    * guitar: Robert F. Flemming, Jr. March 3, 1886
    * hair brush: Lydia O. Newman; November 15,18--
    * hand stamp: Walter B. Purvis; February 27, 1883
    * horse shoe: J. Ricks; March 30, 1885
    * ice cream scooper: A. L. Cralle; February 2, 1897
    * improv. sugar making: Norbet Rillieux; December 10, 1846
    * insect-destroyer gun: A. C. Richard; February 28, 1899
    * ironing board: Sarah Boone; December 30, 1887
    * key chain: F. J. Loudin; January 9, 1894
    * lantern: Michael C. Harvey; August 19, 1884
    * lawn mower: L. A. Burr; May 19, 1889
    * lawn sprinkler: J. W. Smith; May 4, 1897
    * lemon squeezer: J. Thomas White; December 8, 1893
    * lock: W. A. Martin; July 23, 18--
    * lubricating cup: Ellijah McCoy; November 15, 1895
    * lunch pail: James Robinson; 1887
    * mail box: Paul L. Downing; October 27, 1891
    * mop: Thomas W. Stewart; June 11, 1893
    * motor: Frederick M. Jones; June 27, 1939
    * peanut butter: George Washington Carver; 1896
    * pencil sharpener: J. L. Love; November 23, 1897
    * record player arm: Joseph Hunger Dickenson January 8, 1819
    * refrigerator: J. Standard; June 14, 1891
    * riding saddles: W. D. Davis; October 6, 1895
    * rolling pin: John W. Reed; 1864
    * shampoo headrest: C. O. Bailiff; October 11, 1898
    * spark plug: Edmond Berger; February 2, 1839
    * stethoscope: Imhotep; Ancient Egypt
    * stove: T. A. Carrington; July 25, 1876
    * straightening comb: Madam C. J. Walker; Approx 1905
    * street sweeper: Charles B. Brooks; March 17, 1890
    * phone transmitter: Granville T. Woods; December 2, 1884
    * thermostat control: Frederick M. Jones; February 23, 1960
    * traffic light: Garrett Morgan; November 20, 1923
    * tricycle: M. A. Cherry; May 6, 1886
    * typewriter: Burridge & Marshman; April 7, 1885

    Other things invented by Blacks People
    o Break Dancing
    o Chess
    o Jazz
    o Blues
    o Rap
    o Reggae, Ska
    o Rock and Roll
    o Super Water Blaster
    o Fiber Optics
    My bad guys, I didnt know these were wrong...darn you google
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ahnaf.c)
    Nope. White people 'invented' that to suggest Black people were more like animals.
    but if it's meant to be something derogatory. why are guys with big penises so proud? :confused: or jealous of others who push the national average up high?!
    It was something made up by white explorer something around those line :

    "they have penis like horses, they fornicate on the village place like if they were animals, even in the front of the children !"

    They didn't say it this way of course but you can find many books were such kind of statement were made. It was in no way to picture them in a good way. And probably totally made up.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Proud2BeEuropean)
    It is unkown where humans have orignated, new archeological evidence shows that the oldest human fossils have been found in Asia.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11618814

    http://www.deccanchronicle.com/inter...-west-asia-781
    No, you are wrong.

    It is largely agreed upon that people came out of Africa. The Human migration patterns from Africa has largely been corroborated using Genetic evidence.

    Your objection is akin to the Creationist claiming that they cannot find transition fossils and therefore concluding that it is unknown whether Humans descended from a common ancestor with Apes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    No, you are wrong.

    It is largely agreed upon that people came out of Africa. The Human migration patterns from Africa has largely been corroborated using Genetic evidence.

    Your objection is akin to the Creationist claiming that they cannot find transition fossils and therefore concluding that it is unknown whether Humans descended from a common ancestor with Apes.
    I am not a creationist. Let me see your genetic evidence ? How would you explain these remains then ?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The Slave Trade :ahee:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ypo)
    Do you have evidence for any of these ridiculous claims?

    Obviously there is none. A population with an average IQ of 70 is utterly incapable of inventing anything of use.

    But come now people, we should all sympathize and have pity for NigerianStudent. He's clearly on the far right side of the Nigerian Bell Curve and probably has a fairly acceptable level of functional intelligence. If he was born and lived in Nigeria he would probably become a proud, big shot chief or bureaucrat, what being able to write in full sentences and all.

    But he's not in Nigeria. He's in a whitey country, surrounded by all these smart whiteys and Asians, both groups with high levels of success and an actual written history.

    It must be terrible to feel so inferior. So please people, spare a thought for the plight of our Nigerian friend.
    If IQ testing is the best guide to intelligence then why don't your drive your argument to it’s logical conclusion ? Why have elections ? Why not just give it to the political leader with the highest IQ ? Why have job interviews or CV's ? Why not have birth licences or sterilization based on IQ ?

    THE ISSUE IS

    What point do those with these views want to make ?

    If IQ is only to be used to give whites and Asians an ego massage and make them think – your gang are smarter than most other gangs, then you can have it.

    CALL ME INTELLECTUALLY INFERIOR ALL DAY.

    I really don’t care.

    If you are person who wishes to believe this, that’s on you. If, on the other hand, these people wish to take their “evidence” to make the case that public policy should be altered or changed, THEN we have a problem.

    As for the The Bell Curve

    Where to begin ?

    It should be pointed out that their work was NEVER peer-reviewed, probably because of the obvious wholes it contains. As it turns out, even if you go by their numbers, IQ is weakly correlated with illegitimacy, crime and so on – the numbers match up badly. So badly, in fact, that when they draw the lines on their graphs to show the relationships, they leave out the dots, the scatter of data points the lines are based on. Further, correlation is not cause. After all, there is a much stronger correlation between your age and the national debt and yet neither causes the other and even Herrnstein and Murray admit that IQ is only 50% genetic. So only somewhat over half of these weak correlations-which-are-not-even-causes have anything to do with the inborn racial intelligence.

    And it gets worse:

    All this is based on only one set of data with the numbers worked a certain way. But there are other sets of numbers, which they overlook – but would not if they had a strong case. And there are other ways to work the numbers. In fact, you can even show that it is impossible to measure intelligence by a single number.

    That is no small point:

    Their argument depends on expressing intelligence as a single number. You can’t do that. The authors admit as much but do not make it plain why anyone would say that, a point which would cast their whole book into doubt – and make it clear that there are other ways to read the numbers. By leaving this out you do not see how weak their case is. Their argument also depends on assuming that IQ is largely genetic therefore unchangeable. Not true. Just because something is genetic does not mean it is set in stone. Height seems to be even more genetic than intelligence yet it is heavily affected by what you eat growing up.

    It’s the last chapter, the book suggests that the authors have found the ultimate, progressive explanation of “everything” and any other research can halt now. But then, at the same time, they take a nostalgic look backwards to philosophies of long gone centuries where the unwashed masses of dumb sheep are at the mercy of an elite. An elite who alone have the power to choose when they are generous and when they are punitive. Although the authors are trying SO HARD to be subtle and preserve the appearance of being unbiased all the way through, the last chapter is where they show their true colours and the true purpose of the book.

    They tacitly assume an innate genetic component in both “race” and “IQ” (without ever addressing its lack of scientific proof!) but themselves fail to deliver a precise, universal definition of the groupings they write about. Instead they juggle with irrelevancies such as terminology. It tells a lot about the credibility of the authors, the whole work in fact. The fact of the matter is, H&M are masters of innuendo.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacobdatz)
    White and black neither are stuggling to find which is the better race
    We are all the same race
    Humans, homosapiens
    Why is there still such segregation for *insert deity's* sake
    Inventions are inventions either way
    Certain people in history have done bad things and been of one colour
    But people have also done good things whilst being the same colour
    We are all human
    Colour has nothing to do with invention
    Much the same as eye colour has nothing to do with it
    It is just random genetics which make up for nothing
    End of minirant
    we are all the same species (sapiens) but not the same race, that has a different meaning.

    A race is a sort of sub-species, a division within a species mainly due to geographical isolation, so we are different races, but not just white/black/brown... etc. there are different races among white people and black people.

    racism is not just between people of different skin colour, mainly it's just ****ging off other people's countries.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Proud2BeEuropean)
    Where did you get this figure from, could you cite your source please ?
    A robot is capable of making any of the things people like you who worship technology might consider evidence of racial superiority. Robots can fly planes, do incredible calculations and many other things. The point of this post wasn't really meant to be a tit-for-tat debate where everyone racks up score of what they think people in there race have done and the one that has the biggest score is the winner.

    Rather, I would argue that your entire basis for comparison is flawed. What constitutes cultural superiority and accomplishment is itself subjective. To suggest that we should gauge the legitimacy of a culture based upon its technological achievements is to elevate the importance of things over and above the importance of people. It would require that we extend the label, superior, to any culture with advanced technological prowess, even if that technology were put to use in such a way as to exterminate others, or ultimately in such a way that led to the extinction even of the culture that created it.

    I could empty bins. But I don’t. Three guys do: two black, one white, there contribution to the community in which I live is absolutely indispensable. That I could do their job is beside the point. I DON'T, and unless they do it, my block is screwed. But according to a lot of people their contribution is minor. Thus history is written by white people and thus white people have long sought to dismiss the contributions made by folks of color–not only those made to science, art and literature, but even the importance of the manual labour that African slaves did for 300 years. That others could have done the work in question hardly matters: the fact is, others DIDN'T; black slaves DID, and that makes all the difference.

    Had it not been for that unimpressive labour on the part of blacks, the Industrial Revolution in the UK would not have happened, dependent as it was on profits from industries that relied on slave labor. As for black folks’ supposed lack of achievement in terms of technology, science and the like.

    Where to begin ?

    I could spend several thousand words referring you to evidence on this subject, compiled by African and European scholars alike, which demonstrates both the racism and absurdity of YPO and other people arguments. But if your truly interested in this material you would be better served to seek out the information yourself, seeing as how it will be far more adequately presented therein than I could do here.

    You can begin with the works of

    1. Cheikh Anta Diop
    2. Molefi Asante
    3. Walter Rodney

    And for people whose racism leads them to dismiss black scholars on these subjects, you can always examine the voluminous writings of Basil Davidson: one of the most respected Africa scholars in modern history, who is decidedly both white and British.

    As I told you at the start 99.999% of white people or any race of people will ever invent anything of note, discover a cure for a deadly disease. Likewise, entire cultures (and not just black and brown ones) come up short in such an analysis. Iceland, for example, has lots of folks who would be considered white, and very few who wouldn’t be, yet they have hardly made a huge mark in the worlds of science, technology, or literature; so too for any number of Central European nations.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NigerianStudent)
    If IQ testing is the best guide to intelligence then why don't your drive your argument to it’s logical conclusion ? Why have elections ? Why not just give it to the political leader with the highest IQ ? Why have job interviews or CV's ? Why not have birth licences or sterilization based on IQ ?

    THE ISSUE IS

    What point do those with these views want to make ?

    If IQ is only to be used to give whites and Asians an ego massage and make them think – your gang are smarter than most other gangs, then you can have it.

    CALL ME INTELLECTUALLY INFERIOR ALL DAY.

    I really don’t care.

    If you are person who wishes to believe this, that’s on you. If, on the other hand, these people wish to take their “evidence” to make the case that public policy should be altered or changed, THEN we have a problem.

    As for the The Bell Curve

    Where to begin ?

    It should be pointed out that their work was NEVER peer-reviewed, probably because of the obvious wholes it contains. As it turns out, even if you go by their numbers, IQ is weakly correlated with illegitimacy, crime and so on – the numbers match up badly. So badly, in fact, that when they draw the lines on their graphs to show the relationships, they leave out the dots, the scatter of data points the lines are based on. Further, correlation is not cause. After all, there is a much stronger correlation between your age and the national debt and yet neither causes the other and even Herrnstein and Murray admit that IQ is only 50% genetic. So only somewhat over half of these weak correlations-which-are-not-even-causes have anything to do with the inborn racial intelligence.

    And it gets worse:

    All this is based on only one set of data with the numbers worked a certain way. But there are other sets of numbers, which they overlook – but would not if they had a strong case. And there are other ways to work the numbers. In fact, you can even show that it is impossible to measure intelligence by a single number.

    That is no small point:

    Their argument depends on expressing intelligence as a single number. You can’t do that. The authors admit as much but do not make it plain why anyone would say that, a point which would cast their whole book into doubt – and make it clear that there are other ways to read the numbers. By leaving this out you do not see how weak their case is. Their argument also depends on assuming that IQ is largely genetic therefore unchangeable. Not true. Just because something is genetic does not mean it is set in stone. Height seems to be even more genetic than intelligence yet it is heavily affected by what you eat growing up.

    It’s the last chapter, the book suggests that the authors have found the ultimate, progressive explanation of “everything” and any other research can halt now. But then, at the same time, they take a nostalgic look backwards to philosophies of long gone centuries where the unwashed masses of dumb sheep are at the mercy of an elite. An elite who alone have the power to choose when they are generous and when they are punitive. Although the authors are trying SO HARD to be subtle and preserve the appearance of being unbiased all the way through, the last chapter is where they show their true colours and the true purpose of the book.

    They tacitly assume an innate genetic component in both “race” and “IQ” (without ever addressing its lack of scientific proof!) but themselves fail to deliver a precise, universal definition of the groupings they write about. Instead they juggle with irrelevancies such as terminology. It tells a lot about the credibility of the authors, the whole work in fact. The fact of the matter is, H&M are masters of innuendo.
    You're contradicting yourself.

    After all, there is a much stronger correlation between your age and the national debt and yet neither causes the other and even Herrnstein and Murray admit that IQ is only 50% genetic.
    They tacitly assume an innate genetic component in both “race” and “IQ”
    You have to decide if it is or is not influenced by genetic factor. There is genetic factor, they are not the only one factor but they exist and you won't fund a research stating the opposite.

    If IQ is only to be used to give whites and Asians an ego massage and make them think – your gang are smarter than most other gangs, then you can have it.
    You're the one carrying an inferiority complex, most people don't care about it. Don't attribute your personal obsession to other.

    I think you really have a problem. People don't talk about it all day long. Even if "white" people are proud of the achievement of their civilization how does it hurt you ? You know that national pride is a normal process that occurs and most of time is enforced in most country ? If you ask an British why he is proud of his country he will start to talk about great invention, the empire, the magna carta etc. ask the same question to a French he will tell you about human right, the enlightenment, philosophy and science etc. What is bad about it ? You probably have stuff your prude of in Nigeria, why other would not ?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LysFromParis)
    You're the one carrying an inferiority complex.
    Nope. This is just white male fantasy and please don't try to derail the argument by making it personal.

    (Original post by LysFromParis)

    Even if "white" people are proud of the achievement of their civilization how does it hurt you ? .I think you really have a problem. People don't talk about it all day long.
    But that's the whole point. White people don't have to talk about it, because it is everywhere. You don't need a "White History Month" because every hour of the day glories the achivements of white people. It's a lie but whites have the power to make the point of view STICK because they own most of the vast talking machine. The BBC, CNN, Newspapers, Wikipedia, Hollywood, Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge are run by whites and they fill the world with its voice. So we are taulght that

    1. Shakespeare is the greatest poet of all time
    2. Einstein is the most intelligent man of all time
    3. Isaac Newton is the greatest scientist of all time
    4. Mozart and Beethoven are the greatest musicians of all time
    5. Columbus is the greatest explorer of all time
    6. Da Vinci is the greatest painter of al time
    7. Dickens is the greatest author of all time
    8. Napoleon is the greatest warrior of all time


    We are taught that whites are the Fathers of Maths, the Fathers of literature, the fathers of all the disciplines in the world because whites own nearly all the main bits of the Vast Talking Machine. Not that English-speaking white men are always wrong or always agree among themselves. But when they do generally agree on something but are wrong about it, it is very hard to set it right.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NigerianStudent)
    Nope. This is just white male fantasy and please don't try to derail the argument by making it personal.



    But that's the whole point. White people don't have to talk about it, because it is everywhere. You don't need a "White History Month" because every hour of the day glories the achivements of white people. It's a lie but whites have the power to make the point of view STICK because they own most of the vast talking machine. The BBC, CNN, Newspapers, Wikipedia, Hollywood, Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge are run by whites and they fill the world with its voice. So we are taulght that

    1. Shakespeare is the greatest poet of all time
    2. Einstein is the most intelligent man of all time
    3. Isaac Newton is the greatest scientist of all time
    4. Mozart and Beethoven are the greatest musicians of all time
    5. Columbus is the greatest explorer of all time
    6. Da Vinci is the greatest painter of al time
    7. Dickens is the greatest author of all time
    8. Napoleon is the greatest warrior of all time


    We are taught that whites are the Fathers of Maths, the Fathers of literature, the fathers of all the disciplines in the world because whites own nearly all the main bits of the Vast Talking Machine. Not that English-speaking white men are always wrong or always agree among themselves. But when they do generally agree on something but are wrong about it, it is very hard to set it right.
    Are you aware you are actually living in a western country, watching western media ??? The list you made is a anglo-saxon view point, for example Shakespeare, Newton and Dickens will be probably replaced by French counterpart in France. The list will probably vary from a country to an other.

    If you go to China I'm sure they will give you a different list also.

    Don't blame us because you immigrated in a western country and watch western media it's silly.

    I resume your point :
    - I leave in a foreign country where they don't spend their time glorifying foreign achievement. Woo that's so unexpected...

    You have wonderful literature in Asia, with great story. It's just not main stream in Europe, but well known over there. If you only look at the west and complain they're mainly talking about stuff related to them, do you really think they are the one to blame ?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Its fair to say that White people do aknowledge other race's inventions,advancements. Most recognise that the 0 was an Indian invention,and that the English number system is very much the same as the Arabic system.

    Advancement and wealth of nations are intweened together
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LysFromParis)
    Are you aware you are actually living in a western country, watching western media ??? The list you made is a anglo-saxon view point, for example Shakespeare, Newton and Dickens will be probably replaced by French counterpart in France. The list will probably vary from a country to an other.

    If you go to China I'm sure they will give you a different list also.

    Don't blame us because you immigrated in a western country and watch western media it's silly.

    I resume your point :
    - I leave in a foreign country where they don't spend their time glorifying foreign achievement. Woo that's so unexpected...

    You have wonderful literature in Asia, with great story. It's just not main stream in Europe, but well known over there. If you only look at the west and complain they're mainly talking about stuff related to them, do you really think they are the one to blame ?
    The names on the list are world wide names who everyone knows, the names are not limited to the west, they are world wide names. White people have a louder stereo than anyone else, so they can tell the world to think their way and see the world through their eyes. What white English speaking male say is often taken as THE truth. It is extremely difficult, to the point of impossible, to question it, let alone offer another view of the issue, if you don't believe me, tell someone you don't know who Shakepeare or Einstein is and then watch the look on the face.

    My point is that many people in the English-speaking world learn most of what they know about the world at large from English-speaking white men, from 2.2% of that world, a 2.2% that has a limited racist view on things. And then in comments on TSR and in books I see this same mistake repeated over and over again – people assuming that Anglo white men have a full and true picture of what is going on. So THAT is my “agenda”. I am not trying to make white men look bad or something. This is not about blame. Instead it is a warning against being overly dependent on any one part of the world for your knowledge of the world as a whole but according to you, the state of the world we live in is the "natural order of things" rather than an artifical social construct based on fear and hate.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NigerianStudent)
    The names on the list are world wide names who everyone knows, the names are not limited to the west, they are world wide names. White people have a louder stereo than anyone else, so they can tell the world to think their way and see the world through their eyes. What white English speaking male say is often taken as THE truth. It is extremely difficult, to the point of impossible, to question it, let alone offer another view of the issue, if you don't believe me, tell someone you don't know who Shakepeare or Einstein is and then watch the look on the face.

    My point is that many people in the English-speaking world learn most of what they know about the world at large from English-speaking white men, from 2.2% of that world, a 2.2% that has a limited racist view on things. And then in comments on TSR and in books I see this same mistake repeated over and over again – people assuming that Anglo white men have a full and true picture of what is going on. So THAT is my “agenda”. I am not trying to make white men look bad or something. This is not about blame. Instead it is a warning against being overly dependent on any one part of the world for your knowledge of the world as a whole but according to you, the state of the world we live in is the "natural order of things" rather than an artifical social construct based on fear and hate.
    I'm French I know Einstein and Shakespeare. But I can give you a different list reflecting my country point of view :

    Best drama writer : Moliere/Racine
    Best Philosopher : Voltaire/Descartes
    Best novel writer : Hugo/Zola
    Best poet : Baudelaire
    Best leader : Napoléon
    Best inventor : Pasteur/Curie

    You see different from your list. Hardly anyone would deny they are great and there is obviously cultural relativism in play. They contributed to humanity as much as those you cited and in my point some even more but I'm biased and it can't be otherwise.

    Basically you're blaming people to have cultural bias and to emphasis what they see as important. You can't ask European average man to care about Nigerian art or novel, they don't care and I will tend to say it's pretty normal.

    Is the Magna Carta more important than the Human Right of 1789 ? Ask an English and a French you'll have tow different responses probably both true in their own context.

    You want our media to bore us with the new amazing Congo writer no one care about ? Maybe is great in is country but here it's of barely no interest. If he does something great maybe his name will spread over here.

    You can also find non-white world reknown:
    Gengis Khan
    Gandhi
    Asoka
    Zheng He
    Kong Zi (confusius)
    Lao Zi
    Sun Tzu
    Alexandre Dumas
    Leopold Sédar Senghor
    Martin Luther King
    etc.

    http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/lists/all/index.html

    look here many non-white people. You're looking for bad intention when there is none.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LysFromParis)
    look here many non-white people. You're looking for bad intention when there is none.
    Seriously, don't waste anymore time.

    He will continue to argue and talk rubbish.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Proud2BeEuropean)
    I am not a creationist. Let me see your genetic evidence ? How would you explain these remains then ?
    I didn't say you were a creationist.

    The first link does not attempt to challenge the concept that Modern Humans emerged from Africa.

    Your second link was only discovered very recently. It would inappropriate to draw a conclusion from such a small article.

    The genetic evidence....Single origin hypothesis

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_..._modern_humans

    Go to the Genetic Reconstruction part.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    I didn't say you were a creationist.

    The first link does not attempt to challenge the concept that Modern Humans emerged from Africa.

    Your second link was only discovered very recently. It would inappropriate to draw a conclusion from such a small article.

    The genetic evidence....Single origin hypothesis

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_..._modern_humans

    Go to the Genetic Reconstruction part.
    I am not a genetisist and niether are you. So I am not going to pretend to understand the single origin hypothesis.

    Maybe the new human remains that are older than any found in Africa were planted there by aliens.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steezy)
    OP, the black panther movement has dwindled. In the UK racism against black has also dwindled. The world is starting to forget, I suggest you do the same.
    You have no control over your sub-conscious.

    There will always be racism, you can't get rid of it in a mere generation, hell not even 10 generations.

    There are people with egg on their face who say racism is wrong, but when they were our age and older/younger, they would so easily show violence to blacks and other races and plenty of verbal abuse too.

    They thought that's the way it would always be, always had been? Hadn't it? This is really america though, the UK was a bit more tolerant, IE. blacks didn't have to give whitey their bus seats.

    Now they're in their 60's-80's, trying to pretend they're old and wise and not that they got their entire attitudes wrong for decades. Or they're still completely far-right racist.


    For troops that would be stationed here in WWII they were shown promo films stating that they might have to ''sit at a table with a Negro'', and may have to treat them like ''normal'' human beings....

    People from that whole generation are still around and try to deny it, some are in government, and they want you to believe they are right because they are older.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LysFromParis)
    I'm French I know Einstein and Shakespeare. But I can give you a different list reflecting my country point of view :

    Best drama writer : Moliere/Racine
    Best Philosopher : Voltaire/Descartes
    Best novel writer : Hugo/Zola
    Best poet : Baudelaire
    Best leader : Napoléon
    Best inventor : Pasteur/Curie
    They are all white and that's all that matters at the end of the day. Whites do not agree on everything, but what most do agree on they repeat so many times – through film, television, schoolbooks, universities, the news, the Wikipedia, etc – that it no longer seems like a mere point of view but a mere fact.

    How can you judge who is the best poet ?

    Thus you hear their own point of view so much and barely hear that of others, that you do not even see your point of view as just that, a point of view. You do not see how limited it is. You do not see how it is shaped by your race.

    (Original post by LysFromParis)
    You want our media to bore us with the new amazing Congo writer no one care about ?
    This is white racist thinking in it's essence, that's black peoples history is not universal enough and would bore people but whites is universal enough. This essentially signifies the way in which eurocentric thinking has supplanted your rational thought. Your argument assumes that white peoples perspectives and history are sufficiently broad to stand in as the generic "human" experience, while persons of color have experiences which are only theirs, and from which whites can learn nothing.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.