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

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by boromir9111)
    Society.
    Really funny :') Absolutely brilliant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GodspeedGehenna)
    What's white on top and black on bottom?
    The milk that's been left in my fridge too long.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RollerBall)
    The milk that's been left in my fridge too long.
    Lol....I like this answer better
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    I'd say that too if I had my views and beliefs pissed all over that badly LOL. You were quite happy to debate before it was a challenge, now you revert to immaturity. Go cry into your Guardian you brainless retard :bawling:.
    *sigh* Well you're right about one thing I am tierd of debating with biggots. However you had to push me back into the mindless debate, so allow me to help you down from your high horse and put you back in your place!

    Race is determined on DNA (do you know what that is? yes, ok we can continue)
    The human race/Homo sapiens has 99.9% exact same dna. We homo sapiens are part of the hominidae family which includes gorillas, chimpanzees etc.... These animals that are in our family are a different race. It is the same when we compare other animal families such as the equidae species (horses). There are many sub species of horse, as they are in the hominidae species. One race of this family is the clydesdale horse. This race again like the homo sapien share a 99.9% dna structure. However within the clydesdale race not all the horses look exactly the same. There are some genetic differences. You get brown clydesdales, black ones, white/grey one, white ones with black patches etc. This is the same within our own species. You get white people, black people, brown. People with red hair, blonde, black, curly straight. Many genetic differences. However these differences are on a genetic scale, not in the race catagory. The differences in genetics are mearly an adaptaion to our surroundings. Many now agree that if you took a large group of scandinavians and put them in the middle of africa (and they only reproduce within that group). It would take less than 300 generations for these people to have huge changes in their genetic structure and start to look a lot more like and africans than a scandinavian.

    So I restate my point. There is no such thing as race within the human race catagory. Race in the context you use it is just a social construction used to justify your prejudice.

    I love the race doesn't exist card, it really serves to show how biased you are. If you found any cell or part of a human, science would easily be able to ascertain what race that person was; whether it was a skin cell, a bone, a toe, an organ, or even a hair. We are that different on a biological level.


    This is done through genetics not through dna(race).

    Drugs even interact differently between different races, and races even have different dispositions to diseases.
    Again this is due to a persons social surroundings/adaptaion to their surroundings. The reason why mainly black people get sickle cell disease and people from the mediterranean mainly get mediterranean disease and so on is because of where the disease started. For example sickle cell disease started in areas where there were huge problems with mosquitoes and malaria. Hence why black (africans) and to a lesser extent indians are more prone to the disease. This does not mean whites don't carry this disease or are immune to it. White people just don't get it on the same scale.

    The idea that these differences would have skipped out the brain is wishful thinking that isn't backed up by science or the world around us. Stop hiding behind the fact we overlap at the edges of civilisations. Chinese peasants with no education are smarter than black peasants with no education, and black peasants are stronger than Chinese peasants.
    What? That's just a random statement with nothing to back it.
    I realise this offends your liberal sensibilities but it is a fact. It is like arguing that a Bassett Hound is as clever as a collie, or that a pug can run as fast as a whippet! Like dogs, birds, monkeys, lemurs, whales, and any other species of animal with subspecies, humans were not created equal in every aspect of their abilities.
    Again you clearly understand nothing here. I have explained this already. The race is the sub catagory of the family. So collie is a race of the candidae family. Like humans are a race of the hominidae family. We share the same dna as do collies. A basset hound will be different the collie because it is another race within the candidae family. Just the same as a gorilla is different from a human. However I've already explained this!

    Now go cry.
    You my friend are nothing but a biggoted fool that knows nothing more than what you have read or been told by fellow ignoramuses. You have provided no logical or factual argument. You have only spouted the same crap that all you biggots spout. You're like mindless sheep. One person says "black bad, white good" you all say "black bad, white good" bah bah bah bah!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Law123mus)
    *sigh* Well you're right about one thing I am tierd of debating with biggots. However you had to push me back into the mindless debate, so allow me to help you down from your high horse and put you back in your place!

    Race is determined on DNA (do you know what that is? yes, ok we can continue)
    The human race/Homo sapiens has 99.9% exact same dna. We homo sapiens are part of the hominidae family which includes gorillas, chimpanzees etc.... These animals that are in our family are a different race. It is the same when we compare other animal families such as the equidae species (horses). There are many sub species of horse, as they are in the hominidae species. One race of this family is the clydesdale horse. This race again like the homo sapien share a 99.9% dna structure. However within the clydesdale race not all the horses look exactly the same. There are some genetic differences. You get brown clydesdales, black ones, white/grey one, white ones with black patches etc. This is the same within our own species. You get white people, black people, brown. People with red hair, blonde, black, curly straight. Many genetic differences. However these differences are on a genetic scale, not in the race catagory. The differences in genetics are mearly an adaptaion to our surroundings. Many now agree that if you took a large group of scandinavians and put them in the middle of africa (and they only reproduce within that group). It would take less than 300 generations for these people to have huge changes in their genetic structure and start to look a lot more like and africans than a scandinavian.

    So I restate my point. There is no such thing as race within the human race catagory. Race in the context you use it is just a social construction used to justify your prejudice.



    This is done through genetics not through dna(race).


    Again this is due to a persons social surroundings/adaptaion to their surroundings. The reason why mainly black people get sickle cell disease and people from the mediterranean mainly get mediterranean disease and so on is because of where the disease started. For example sickle cell disease started in areas where there were huge problems with mosquitoes and malaria. Hence why black (africans) and to a lesser extent indians are more prone to the disease. This does not mean whites don't carry this disease or are immune to it. White people just don't get it on the same scale.



    What? That's just a random statement with nothing to back it.


    Again you clearly understand nothing here. I have explained this already. The race is the sub catagory of the family. So collie is a race of the candidae family. Like humans are a race of the hominidae family. We share the same dna as do collies. A basset hound will be different the collie because it is another race within the candidae family. Just the same as a gorilla is different from a human. However I've already explained this!



    You my friend are nothing but a biggoted fool that knows nothing more than what you have read or been told by fellow ignoramuses. You have provided no logical or factual argument. You have only spouted the same crap that all you biggots spout. You're like mindless sheep. One person says "black bad, white good" you all say "black bad, white good" bah bah bah bah!!
    That really does show what you know. Colour variation in the same breed of horses will not biologically change the horses in any way i.e. no extra variation than is normal will be noted. However if you compare an Arab horse with say a mustang (both of which evolved almost completely separately like humans) the DNA difference won't be vast but the biological difference will. If you found the bones of a brown Shetland pony and compared that to the bones of a white Shetland pony you would never be able to scientifically say what the difference is.

    It is strange you claim we are 99.9% identical between races, when in fact the figure is 99% identical:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/us/11dna.html

    This variation is really rather high when you consider there are thousands of pieces to DNA, and only as few as 1 or 2 could be responsible for high intelligence. Now, I know you liberal tards have a tendency to run off and quote articles to back up your point, but I referenced the above site purely for its stats rather than its interpretation before you start.

    Now of course we are only 2% different to apes:
    http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...ploring-the-g/

    If it only takes another 1% of difference in DNA to turn humans into apes, you've got to wonder how different we really are from race to race. Within that 1% difference there is already a wild difference in predisposition to strength, hormones, and physiology, so why o why not intelligence? Because it offends you? A defect in 1 gene can make someone retarded (I guess you'd know all about that), a defect in 1 gene can make someone a midget, so if whites and blacks are thousands of genes different, that leaves room for an awful lot of difference. Given that science doesn't say 'xyz genes are different, and those genes are responsible for xyz' all we can really do is look at the different outcomes of people the world over and hypothesise... Wherever you go blacks fail in intelligence driven pursuits: Africa, Haiti, Germany, UK, Canada. Wherever you go Chinese people succeed. Wherever you go blacks are stronger. It's strange these things just keep cropping up despite your insistence that we are all the same (which you cannot prove scientifically or else you would have). Unbiased IQ and strength tests on populations around the world have proven this.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ali.)
    I've never claimed my race to be superior, I personally think all races are equal. However, what I hate is when people pull out the race card at every opportunity, like you seem to be doing. Oh before you start, I have a dual nationality, I've been bullied for it several times, and I've never claimed 'racism' apart from when someone called me a terrorist and hit me. When someone's been rude to me, I've never automatically said "IS IT BECAUSE I'M NOT FULLY ENGLISH?! RACIST!"

    Get over it, no one cares about race.
    The reason I put up this topic up this is because white people inventions and race and IQ goes to the VERY CORE, to the VERY HEART of white identity and let’s face it on this forum most people agree with white supremacist thought process to some extent. This doesn’t necessarily mean you are member of KKK but it does mean that you see the world through white eyes, not your fault really as the world does a marvellous job of teaching it to you. So as soon as you hit school the white supremacist though process clicks into top gear and you are taught that

    Shakespeare is the greatest poet of all time
    Einstein is the most intelligent man of all time
    Isaac Newton is the greatest scientist of all time
    Mozart and Beethoven are the greatest musicians of all time
    Columbus is the greatest explorer of all time
    Da Vinci is the greatest painter of al time
    Dickens is the greatest author of all time
    Napoleon is the greatest warrior of all time

    And on and on, not that I’m really interested in a tit-for-tat comparison of the accomplishments of whites and blacks, Europeans and Africans, in an attempt to tally up the ledger and proclaim one or the other the historical victor.

    As I fully realise that 99.999% of whites have did nothing for inventions or breakthroughs in science and 99.999% of black haven’t and 99.999% of Asians haven’t either. These numbers are simply conjectural of course, but it is to say that if we are going to judge groups people on there scientific breakthroughs then most people, including everyone in TSR would be deemed as worthless.

    What I’m saying is not even that controversial. Most of Western European scientific discoveries were copies of the original discoveries of Africans and Chinese. These discoveries and inventions were and are merely improvements on ancient discoveries made by Africans Blacks. Therefore, even if people of European origins have made improvements in ancient technologies and ancient inventions, such as rocketry, computer technology, aerodynamics and others, the basic mathematical formulas and ancient prototypes were invented by Africans and Chinese.

    SERIOUS White historians know these facts very well they also know that to tell the truth would reveal the dominate position of the Blackman in the bronze-age. SERIOUS white historians know they were barbarians when the foundation of world civilization was built by men of colour. Few western historians will tell the full story of man's racial history to do so would challenge the Aryan model of history so deeply ingrained in western culture. One fact I will emphasize again and again is that SERIOUS White historians are NOT ignorant of the truth about black history and in many cases they confirm it themselves
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lightburns)
    There's a big debate about this. But I have never seen evidence to show that the Egyptians were black.

    They did paint black people - Nubians, who they fought and enslaved. They painted themselves with middley-coloured skin.
    Have you read. 'The African Origin of Civilization : by Cheikh Anta Diop'

    http://www.amazon.com/African-Origin.../dp/1556520727

    Basically he finds undeniable evidence for the race of Egyptians

    1) Evidence from Physical Anthropology - The skeletons and skulls of the Ancient Egyptians clearly reflect they were Negroid people with features very similar to those of modern Black Nubians and other people of the Upper Nile and of East Africa.

    2) Melanin Dosage Test - Cheikh Anta Diop (who is a respected Egyptologist..by the way) invented a method for determining the level of melanin in the skin of human beings. When conducted on Egyptian mummies in the Museum of Man in Paris, this test indicated these remains were of Black people.

    3) Osteological Evidence - "Lepsius canon," which distinguishes the bodily proportions of various racial groups categories the "ideal Egyptian" as "short-armed and of Negroid or Negrito physical type."

    4) Evidence From Blood Types - Diop notes that even after hundreds of years of inter-mixture with foreign invaders, the blood type of modern Egyptians is the "same group B as the populations of western Africa on the Atlantic seaboard and not the A2 Group characteristic of the white race prior to any crossbreeding."

    5) The Egyptians as They Saw Themselves - The Egyptians had only one term to designate themselves = kmt = the Negroes (literally). This is the strongest term existing in the Pharaonic tongue to indicate blackness; The term is a collective noun which thus described the whole people of Pharaonic Egypt as a black people.

    6) Testimony of Classical Greek and Roman Authors - Virtually all of the early Latin eyewitnesses (Pythogorus, Herodotus) described the Ancient Egyptians as Black skinned with wooly hair. It was ONLY after the conquest of Egypt by Alexander, under the Ptolemies, crossbreeding between white Greeks and black Egyptians flourished
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    If you want one African "invention" that is long term more significant than any other "invention" it is possibly mankind itself.

    Undernoted cut and paste from Wikipedia:



    "Anatomically modern humans evolved from archaic Homo sapiens in Africa in the Middle Paleolithic, about 200,000 years ago. By the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic 50,000 BP (Before Present), full behavioral modernity, including language, music and other cultural universals had developed.

    The out of Africa migration is estimated to have occurred about 70,000 years BP. Modern humans subsequently spread to all continents, replacing earlier hominids: they inhabited Eurasia and Oceania by 40,000 BP, and the Americas at least 14,500 years BP.[34] A popular theory is that they displaced Homo neanderthalensis and other species descended from Homo erectus[35] (which had inhabited Eurasia as early as 2 million years ago) through more successful reproduction and competition for resources.[36] The exact manner or extent of the coexistence and interaction of these species is unknown and remains a controversial subject.[citation needed]

    Evidence from archaeogenetics accumulating since the 1990s has lent strong support to the "out-of-Africa" scenario, and has marginalized the competing multiregional hypothesis, which proposed that modern humans evolved, at least in part, from independent hominid populations.[37]"

    I would say that if you embrace the above that is game, set and match, all other civilizations appear to spring from Africa.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DJKL)
    If you want one African "invention" that is long term more significant than any other "invention" it is possibly mankind itself.

    I would say that if you embrace the above that is game, set and match, all other civilizations appear to spring from Africa.
    Sure, although groups evolved local adaptations in response to their particular environments & cultures. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/science/26human.html

    For instance, agriculture and increasing population density lead to selection for behavioural traits that ultimately lead to the industrial revolution. UC Davis economist Greg Clark writes:

    In my recent book, A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World I argue two things. First that all societies remained in a state I label the “Malthusian economy” up until the onset of the Industrial Revolution around 1800. In that state crucially the economic laws governing all human societies before 1800 were those that govern all animal societies. Second that was thus subject to natural selection throughout the Malthusian era, even after the arrival of settled agrarian societies with the Neolithic Revolution.

    The Darwinian struggle that shaped human nature did not end with the Neolithic Revolution but continued right up until the Industrial Revolution. But the arrival of settled agriculture and stable property rights set natural selection on a very different course. It created an accelerated period of evolution, rewarding with reproductive success a new repertoire of human behaviors – patience, self-control, passivity, and hard work – which consequently spread widely.

    And we see in England, from at least 1250, that the kind of people who succeeded in the economic system – who accumulated assets, got skills, got literacy – increased their representation in each generation. Through the long agrarian passage leading up to the Industrial Revolution man was becoming biologically more adapted to the modern economic world. Modern people are thus in part a creation of the market economies that emerged with the Neolithic Revolution. Just as people shaped economies, the pre-industrial economy shaped people. This has left the people of long settled agrarian societies substantially different now from our hunter gatherer ancestors, in terms of culture, and likely also in terms of biology.
    http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2010/07...y-edition.html
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yet another delusional black. Although I'm not white I think I should set the record straight here.

    First off OP, it's clear to all you're are absolutely seething with jealousy. Seething at the fact that White civilisation actually managed to accomplish something, while your people in Africa still to this day eke out a Stone Age existence, all kept alive with billions and billions of dollars donated by the White man you so hate.

    It's obvious you're absolutely seething with inferiority. You know you're inferior. You know your people don't amount to a can of beans. And deep down you know why. You know why it is Whites, East Asians, Indians, hell even the Arabs, were able to create great civilizations while your people never even produced a written alphabet. Never invented the wheel. Never built a road. Hell, some Africans hadn't discovered fire when the Arabs arrived on the scene and pawned their collective Negroid asses.

    But you know OP, I don't agree with all these ignorant people here that say Black Africans never created anything. Blacks created lots of things! You have AIDs, the West Nile Virus, Hepatitis, Malaria…
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DJKL)
    If you want one African "invention" that is long term more significant than any other "invention" it is possibly mankind itself.

    Undernoted cut and paste from Wikipedia:



    "Anatomically modern humans evolved from archaic Homo sapiens in Africa in the Middle Paleolithic, about 200,000 years ago. By the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic 50,000 BP (Before Present), full behavioral modernity, including language, music and other cultural universals had developed.

    The out of Africa migration is estimated to have occurred about 70,000 years BP. Modern humans subsequently spread to all continents, replacing earlier hominids: they inhabited Eurasia and Oceania by 40,000 BP, and the Americas at least 14,500 years BP.[34] A popular theory is that they displaced Homo neanderthalensis and other species descended from Homo erectus[35] (which had inhabited Eurasia as early as 2 million years ago) through more successful reproduction and competition for resources.[36] The exact manner or extent of the coexistence and interaction of these species is unknown and remains a controversial subject.[citation needed]

    Evidence from archaeogenetics accumulating since the 1990s has lent strong support to the "out-of-Africa" scenario, and has marginalized the competing multiregional hypothesis, which proposed that modern humans evolved, at least in part, from independent hominid populations.[37]"

    I would say that if you embrace the above that is game, set and match, all other civilizations appear to spring from Africa.
    Yes, funny then that we're seeing more and more stories of significant ancestry of non-homo sapien hominids in non-African populations. For example, Neanderthals ancestry in Caucasians and Mongoloids. Funny also that many of the genes that survived from this ancient ancestry are associated with higher intelligence.

    Oh no, could it be...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Being a New Yorker, I'm used to seeing delusional Negroids overcome with inferiority screaming and hollering their superiority over other races, all the while doing so standing on street corners maintained by the White man's dollars, and collecting unemployment welfare benefits thanks to the White man's idiotic generosity to boot!

    In America you have two main groups. You have the Nation of Islam geniuses (of peanut-head rapist Malcolm X fame), and then you have the so called 'Black Hebrews'/'Black Israelites'. The latter are quite something - you can now find them in any large American city, standing on street corners directing racial epithets at Whites, East Asians, South Asians and other People of Mind (that's a term I like to use - kind of like People of Color, except referring instead to intelligence, not skin melanin content).

    Anyway, you'll find these 'Black Israelite' geniuses claiming all sorts of famous European historical figures were in fact Black - even, for example, the Vikings, King George III and Shakespeare - see here). Now if you think these are fringe groups with fringe ideas, think again. Just sit back and watch the amount of support these morons get from their fellow Blacks. It's really something you have to see to believe.

    But what I love most about Blacks' love of historical revisionism is their incessant claim that the White man came to Africa and 'stole the Black man's knowledge'.

    Yeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaah. Like Professor Einstein was just there in the Congo, swinging from trees or whatever and then the evil White man suddenly snuck upon him and stole Professor Einstein's "knowledge". Stole it right out of his head!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seven_Three)
    Lol no historian believes that Egyptians were the same racially as central, western or southern Africans. I'm not going to argue becuase you obviously don't know what you are tlakign about.

    Also black people ahve invented nothing. Oh wait, crack cocaine was invented in the Bahamas so that is one thing, although white people live there aswel so...
    I'm afraid even crude drug production is beyond the cognitive abilities of the Black man.

    I remember growing up, reading all these stories about Black gangs' drug warehouses blowing up and killing everyone inside. No surprise to read then that all the brilliant drug scientists were Black. But I must give Black drug gangs some credit. Their leaders did acknowledge their race's intellectual shortcomings.

    I have it, from a fairly high official within the NYPD no less, that now not one Black drug gang in the greater NYC area employs Blacks to produce their drugs. All the drug technicians are Whites or Asians, mostly poor Chinese immigrants I am told.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saroona abdi)
    MATE R YU KIDDIN ME!!! black ppl are the first race who made the first civilization; the Ancient egyptian civilization. ancient egyptian were black africans 4 yur information luv.
    I dare you to go to Egypt and say that to the real, modern-day Egyptians. Just don't expect it to make it to your flight back. In Egypt, Blacks are treated like dirt. Like in other Arab countries, you're referred to as abd (literally slave). Your whole purpose in life there it just to entertain other people. To sing and dance and shake your ass a little for the amusement of the masses.

    How you can make such a claim in the age of DNA is beyond me. Are you not aware that modern day Egyptians are pretty much genetically identical to the ancient Egyptians? In fact Coptic Christian Egyptians are genetically identical, having not received a significant amount of Arabian genes from the invading Muslim conquerors.

    And guess what? There is not one recorded Black ethnic group in Sub-Saharan Africa with any genetic evidence for significant Egyptian ancestry. In fact, the genetic distance between the ancient Egyptians and modern-day Negroid sub-Saharan Africans is greater than that between Europeans and Chinese. I wonder what you would say if the British started claiming that it was them that built the Great Wall!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Either way, what was it the ancient Egyptians ever invented anyway? They sure built a fine civilization for the time. Very large, elaborate buildings, some of which have survived to this very day. And they managed some great feats of engineering, no doubt. But what is it they really contributed to the rest of humanity? I would posit, probably much less than other contemporaneous groups, even others in the Middle East region (for example their contemporaries the Phoenicians (invented the alphabet) the Israelites (basically invented monotheism) or various groups in and around Iraq who arguably contributed the most.)

    As for the Chinese, that truly is a mystery. While it's true that Chinese, like other East Asians, have significantly higher IQs than other major groups, they have contributed fairly little to world civilization. In fact if the Chinese as a people disappeared a thousand years ago there would be little impact on humanity up until perhaps the last few years.

    About the only think they actually contributed to the world was fireworks, paper and Chinese food! The whole compass thing is garbage. China was an isolated civilization thousands of miles from Europe. How do you people think the Europeans managed to navigate all the way to China without a compass? As for a written language and the printing press, it's absolutely true the Chinese independently discovered them. But they certainly didn't share it with the rest of the world!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Being an equal mixture of black and white, I have had this argument with myself on numerous occasions.

    The white side always wins. But the black side is so much cooler.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ypo)
    Either way, what was it the ancient Egyptians ever invented anyway? They sure built a fine civilization for the time. Very large, elaborate buildings, some of which have survived to this very day. And they managed some great feats of engineering, no doubt. But what is it they really contributed to the rest of humanity? I would posit, probably much less than other contemporaneous groups, even others in the Middle East region (for example their contemporaries the Phoenicians (invented the alphabet) the Israelites (basically invented monotheism) or various groups in and around Iraq who arguably contributed the most.)
    Wasn't the concept of monotheism already in Zoroastrianism?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Wasn't the concept of monotheism already in Zoroastrianism?
    Quite possibly. One way or the other monotheism originated and spread out from parts of the non-Egyptian Middle East.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Anyway, back to the topic. I wonder, is NigerianStudent willing to back up his claims and post a long list of list of all the Black inventions, especially those requiring actual intellectual abilities (so for example the doorstop or peanut butter don't count, not that any Black invented those anyway...)? I love tearing those lists apart.

    Just a preliminary note to anyone who does happen upon any such list when it's inevitably posted - almost all the claims of Black inventions are absolute lies. You can see this by the lack of factual evidence accompanying the claims. In fact, you can see a comprehensive debunking of many of these claims here.

    And yet, we still have all these myths of brilliant Black inventions and genius Black scientists shoved down our throats all throughout "Black History Month", another disgusting politically-correct Americanism the UK has adopted. Black History Month, what a joke. Personally I think Black History Second would be more than adequate...
 
 
 
  • 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
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
  • 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.