Objective truth or blind racism.

[ToughJ.Riggins]

I have never been one to say that different races don't have genetic differences. I just happen to believe in the out of Africa theory which is now strongly supported by DNA evidence. Sure it is very possible in the 80,000 years that Sub Sahara Africa was cut off from the people who migrated eventually to Europe that us whites evolved better critical thinking skills.

I happen to believe that there is a racial math and science gap, not that people of African decent can't understand math and science at all; they are just not quite as good at it. The whole idea that blacks can't function in society when they are raised in a proper home is ridiculous IMO. I happen to believe also that the problem with blacks is more along the lines of bad coping skills and impulsiveness. They don't function well when the going gets tough. I believe in small differences in the human race. To say that blacks are a different sub-species like many on this board claim is upsetting to my stomach.

Certainly every group has negative and positive traits though, if you look hard enough. I am certainly not a fan of rap culture and wouldn't date a black woman, but that doesn't mean I hate blacks as I tend to think some on this board do.

If I recall Reggie White "The Minister of Defense" said it best in a positive light. He described different good qualities that different groups had and still got in trouble with the PC media. Something like: Blacks are very spiritual and are loyal to their friends. Whites as a group are a very hard working people. Asians are a very respectful people...Italians are very family oriented...etc.etc. He got in trouble for speaking the truth, even though he spoke with love.

 

[Hockaday]

I think it's safe to say that if left on their own Africans weren't going to put a man on the moon any time soon.

 

[voice]

thanks Jaxvid, Don, Aussie , Bart and White shotgun for your logical rebuttals.

It is painful at times having (or trying ) to educate time and time again the plight of whites(or Western European Caucasoids)

One last time , Ethnic agression(non-white) will never cease until we are subjugated(genocide) or bred out to the extent where there is no meaningful resistance to genocide to concern the new non-white managerial elite.

This is not only a politically certainty, but a biological imperative dictated in nature. No two mammallian sub-species occuppy the same territorial niche in nature! They either interbreed creating a new identifiable sub-species, get absorbed in dominant sub-species, or are wiped out.

At the basic level, Nations are no more or no less than male territory. Once men cannot protect their offspring(wifes, daughters and sons) and genetically similar offspring, they are ripe for extinction(genocide).
So stop talking about getting to the point of a "level" playing field because this will not ever happen without one outcome occurring above.

Secondly, Sub-saharian africans are savages and this too is an observable and replicatable scientific fact, if we define a savage as someone who cannot create or maintain civilization. BTW, there are verifiable characteristics defining civilization and ******** cannot deliver this to their people.

Blacks have behavioural and intelligence characteristics that make this not possible and we can't wish it away. Lack of foresight, high serum testerone(impulsivity and lack of physical control), low intelligence create a savage environment within the "societies" they build causing them to chaotic, brutal and savage. Their breeding patterns and societal characteristics define the the low end of Phillippe Rushton's R-k Theory of Evolution. They rape and pillage our sons and daughters because this is their nature.http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/reb.html


Tuta Vannahan wrote "IQ and Wealth of Nations" identifying country IQ and whether or not countries can compete(civilization building again) and cutoff seems to be around 92-ie. ******** never, AmerInds maybe in the role they take as low wage serfs(they hit 92), Asians yes.

Geneticist Bruce Lahn has been crucified for his ground breaking work on intelligence. Guess what, the intelligence that spawned civilization doesn't exist in Sub-Saharan africa. Bruce Lahn has stopped his research stating some information is too controversial to know.
Please read "Race realism takes a step forward"
http://www.amren.com/ar/2005/12/#article3

As judged by other posters on this board, we don't take these positions out of "ignorant racism" but take our positions because we are educated on the scientific fact that creates the political outcomes we find ourselves in. We are evolutionary conservatives or at least I am.

This discussion and explanation will mean nothing to some because it takes a level of intellect to be able to understand how everything fits together and where we and our descendants are headed.

I appreciate the Caste football site because it brings together normal guys who had normal childhoods(in what WAS white civilization) and can't believe what has happened and what age we are entering.We aren't a bunch of stuffy academics who haven't participated in life ,but real people who have came to the conclusions through their own intellectual journey.

Sorry if that got a bit long and winded, but thanks all for your support and lets work to bring this caste system to its knees and stop worrying about PC BS.

To act in one's own interest is freedom

To be unable to act in one's interest is oppression

To act in other people's interest is slavery

I will always strive to be free-ALWAYS

Edited by: voice

 

[voice]

You know off the top of my head I can't think of one subsaharan invention, beyond simple crude inventions. But many American blacks have invented patented devices. Also "George Washington Carver made the peanut great!"

http://www33.brinkster.com/iiiii/inventions/#carver

 

[White Shogun]

I happen to believe also that the problem with blacks is more along the lines of bad coping skills and impulsiveness. They don't function well when the going gets tough. I believe in small differences in the human race.

Let's say I agree with you. That in and of itself is apparently sufficient enough to cause the huge gap in civilization you see between Africa and the rest of the world, so thanks for making the point.

You guys keep saying it isn't intelligence or whatever, and then offer up these suggestions that it's impulsive behavior, or an inability to get along together, or quit when the going gets tough, or don't understand math and science. Well, isn't that bad enough?? You make it seem like it's better to be thought of as intelligent but lacking all those other qualities, than to have those qualities and be dumb. Which ever it is, it's still bad, and they still suffer in comparison to other societies, in all categories and on all levels anyway. It's ironic in a way, because you're trying to defend blacks and Africa, but really you're just making them seem worse than any of the rest of us because you continually list all these other things that are wrong with them anyway!

 

[PitBull]

In any case, we should be free to choose with whom we associate, whom we
hire in our businesses, and not to lower standards for the inclusion of any
race. These are the main issues--civil, constitutional rights, and freedom of
choice.Edited by: PitBull

 

[ToughJ.Riggins]

I think it's safe to say that if left on their own Africans weren't going to put a man on the moon any time soon.

That reminds me, there was actually a Ugandan Space program. It was voted as one of the worst 100 ideas of the 20th century.

This is a land where most people have trouble finding sustenance, yet in the late 20th century the government launched a program to try and land on the moon.

Let's just say it failed.

 

[ToughJ.Riggins]

I happen to believe also that the problem with blacks is more along the lines of bad coping skills and impulsiveness. They don't function well when the going gets tough. I believe in small differences in the human race.

Let's say I agree with you. That in and of itself is apparently sufficient enough to cause the huge gap in civilization you see between Africa and the rest of the world, so thanks for making the point.

You guys keep saying it isn't intelligence or whatever, and then offer up these suggestions that it's impulsive behavior, or an inability to get along together, or quit when the going gets tough, or don't understand math and science. Well, isn't that bad enough?? You make it seem like it's better to be thought of as intelligent but lacking all those other qualities, than to have those qualities and be dumb. Which ever it is, it's still bad, and they still suffer in comparison to other societies, in all categories and on all levels anyway. It's ironic in a way, because you're trying to defend blacks and Africa, but really you're just making them seem worse than any of the rest of us because you continually list all these other things that are wrong with them anyway!

Ok WS, I see your point, but I would still much rather have my group labeled as impulsive or having a bad temperament than to be labeled as a savage unintelligent sub-species. That is what many on this board try to portray blacks as. Basically, I believe in much smaller differences than most on this board, especially those who think of blacks as a sub-species. Every group has certain bad characteristics which is where stereotypes come from. True some groups may have more positive than others. For instance I am Irish and very proud of my heritage, b/c I personally believe we are the best people on earth.

However, the Irish are also labeled as having quick tempers and are depicted as people who like to drink and party. There probably is some truth to this. The Irish also have a higher rate of Bipolar disorder than most other European groups. However IMO we have lots more positive characteristics like creativity (there are lots of good Irish writers), a good work ethic, and have the gift of the gab and we like to have fun.

Behavior can be created from an environment you grow up in. I agree that genetics create behavior also, I just happen to agree with Bill Cosby's analysis that blacks have gotten stuck on blaming whites and have created a bad subculture for themselves. This sub-culture is centered around rap values and quick gratification (sex, drugs and money). Essentially that is what I mean by impulsiveness. Instead of working hard to break the vicious cycle of absent fathers, overall bad role models, and poverty, most join the cycle and take the easy way out. An example is a fatherless black child grows up to have a child out of wedlock himself.

Blacks are people like the rest of us. I just get sick and tired of constantly hearing the bashing of blacks and would prefer to focus on a pro-white agenda rather than anti-black. Blaming blacks for things like supporting affirmative action which hurts whites is one thing, but calling them a savage sub-species certainly doesn't bring about any positive results for this board or our goals of ending discrimination. There is a line between being UN-PC like all of us on this board are and being a hater.

Essentially, I tend to be an optimist and think that more blacks will eventually step up to the plate in this country and better themselves now that they have more role models. Especially with people like Condelezza Rice,who grew up a poor black girl in NYC, reaching such a high position. I definitely respect her and her views far more than Barack Obama. Another role model would be Clarence Thomas, who has spoken out about blacks taking responsibility to better themselves and to stop playing victim.

PS: Essentially, I would tell people on this board if you hate blacks so much instead of spewing hate speech, work your tail off and buy a home in Utah and then you won't have to worry about them anymore. There are barley any blacks in most of Utah (and most of the one's that are there probably have white values anyway). Be pro-active, that is much more optimistic.

Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins

 

[Bart]

Ok WS, I see your point, but I would still much rather have my group labeled as impulsive or having a bad temperament than to be labeled as a savage unintelligent sub-species.

Whatever. I just looked up the word, savage, and the definitions, as per our discussions of primitive civilizations is quite fitting. Either way, " A rose by any other name is still a rose."

 

[Kiwi]

It seems a lot of posters assume the problems with black society are the result of some genetic difference between the races. This is, in my opinion, a load of total rubbish. The big issue here is not genetic, it is cultural and technological. The state of Africa today results from a complex range of issues, you can't simply blame it on blacks being dumb. If you look at history, I believe that view is completely unfounded.

First of all, i'll put it out there that i am a Christian, and a young earth creationist at that. Because of this, there are certain fundamental principles that I sincerely believe in, which helps to bring me to my conclusions.

1. All humans are the descendants of Adam and Eve. We all come from the same ancestors, so I do not believe in the concept of "races". Races are a construct of our own society to group ethnically and more importantly, culturally distinct societies.

2. The theory of evolution is a lie. Contrary to what we are taught in schools, humans did not start out primordial sludge some 4 billion years ago. We were created perfect by God, but due to the Fall and sin we are degenerating as a species, not evolving.

Because of these beliefs, I find it repulsive that any "race" should try and assert its superiority based purely on better genes. The differences between Western civilisation and others can be explained culturally and by other factors.

Much is made of the difference between our advanced white civilisation and the primitive africans, aborigines etcetera. Allow me to make a comparison of two such societies: The German people around the time of Christ, and Maori society during the 18th and 19th centuries. These societies were not much different. Both were tribal, warlike and fiercely independent societies who had to interact with a more powerful and advanced technological empire. Upon coming into contact with such an Empire, both societies quickly adapted to and used the technology and tactics of the "superior" civilisation. The German leader Arminius used Roman battle tactics to smash Varus' column in the Teutoberg forest. Similarly, the Maori tribes of New Zealand used advanced battle tactics during the land wars of the mid 19th century, adapting their pa(hillforts) to defend against the British, by incorporating hidden trenches to fire their muskets from. They inevitably were eventually defeated, but tactically they were the equals of the British.

The point I am making with this comparison is that while societies can gain and improve technology, they can also lose it. The Germans and the Maori had no written form of language, so technology they may have had was lost. This was not because they were less intelligent than the Romans or the British, because they showed that they could quickly adapt and master such technology. More likely it was because they were geographically isolated from other civilisations, and as such had restricted contact. Being an agricultural subsistence society, there was probably not a lot of time to be studying how to build pyramids and creating professional armies and all that sort of thing. Our civilisation is more advanced because we have the benefit of thousands of years of accumulated written knowledge, not because we are inherently smarter than other races.

If that is the case, why is Africa so screwed up now? That is more difficult to explain, but once again I don't believe it is a genetic problem. A settlement like Great Zimbabwe showed that African society had the potential for increasing technological and political sophistication, but by its discovery by Europeans it had been abandoned. Why that happened is anyone's guess. Famine, war, disease or an alteration in trade routes could all have had an effect. The state of Africa today is as much a legacy of decolonisation as much as anything. If you grant independence to a nation which has a virtually non-existant educated political elite, an illiterate populace with ancient tribal vendettas, no history of democracy, and a lack of political and commercial infrastructure, guess what will happen? Africa needed colonialism to continue for at least another generation, simply to allow African nations to be able to function as stable democracies. In America, sure blacks are there own worst enemies, refusing to take any responsibility and blaming their failure on whitey, but is this attitude not a result of ridiculous affirmative action programmes and initiatives like Black History Month?


Edited by: Kiwi

 

[PitBull]

Kiwi,

You are a dogmatist, and your arguments have nothing to do with reason
and objective reality--they are all faith-based, and by your own
admission, unable to be challenged by anyone who has a different point
of view.

Here's a little information for ya. We here in the States have had
hundreds of years of close experience with blacks, unlike you. I have
even tried to tutor and teach these people on a volunteer basis in the
past. I have gone to school with blacks, worked with blacks, talked to
blacks, live in a city that is 40% black, etc. Blacks are, by and large, pretty
stupid. Every single test of intelligence ever devised has shown it to be
true. It makes a lot of sense that groups of people isolated enough to
develop significant physical differences would also develop psychological
and mental differences too.

I'm sorry that you've shut off your mind from rational thought in order to
believe in the primacy of a book that is a a spiritual allegory. I realize
that many people's faith is so shaky that it can be ruined by even the
smallest challenge to their book-based worldview, and as pitiful as that
is, it is no reason for the rest of us to give you a pass. I went to a
Catholic school as a kid, and they always taught us that evolution and the
Bible were not mutually exclusive, that the Bible was both history and
allegory, but that it was spiritually true. I don't understand why this
concept is so fearsome to many, but I've learned not to be surprised by
other people's shortcomings.

The cure for your worldview of racial equivalence is to go live in a black
neighborhood or in a black country for a good long spell. Then the scales
of dogma will fall from your eyes when the truth of these differences is
revealed.Until you do, I have almost no respect for your opinion, other
than you are certainly allowed to have it. Blacks are not only their own
worst enemies, they are other races worst enemies as well. For now, live
quietly in your white neighborhood and continue to believe in your
fantasies. I'm sick of morally superior whites lecturing the rest of us who
know how dispicable multiculturalism and multiracialism are when they
are largley ignorant of them and isolated from the problems they cause
the rest of us.Edited by: PitBull

 

[White Shogun]

Interesting that Kiwi would choose to compare a 2000 year old German society to a 200 year old Maori one. Where did the Maori get those muskets to shoot from those really cool, innovative trenches?

If they were really smart, a castle or fortress would have come in really handy, to put behind those awesome trenches. They'd have really give those British guys a run for their money then, I tell ya!

What was Germany like in the 18th and 19th centuries? What kind of structures, roads, medicine, technology, art, music, theology, philosophy, weapons, et al, did the Germans have by the time the Maori thought it a good idea to build a trench? What is your explanation for the difference in civilizations?

Our civilisation is more advanced because we have the benefit of thousands of years of accumulated written knowledge, not because we are inherently smarter than other races.

Well, if one of the Africans or Maoris or whomever had been smart enough to devise an alphabet somewhere down the line, they, too, might have had the benefit of thousands of years of accumulated written knowledge, just like the other races.

I really can't understand how you guys can't see the illogic of what you're writing: It's not because they're dumb, they just never learned how to write! They're not dumb, they just don't play well together! They're not dumb, theyre just lazy! They're not dumb, they just never saw the need to build anything!

Well, WTF is the definition of dumb?

In this thread, the defenders of black culture have said that blacks are illiterate, lazy, hedonistic, excitable, impulsive, lack coping skills, and are weak in math and science, all in an attempt to refute the idea that they're not unintelligent compared to other races! You are defeating your own argument. THINK ABOUT IT!Edited by: White Shogun

 

[foreverfree]

If I recall Reggie White "The Minister of Defense" said it best in a positive light. He described different good qualities that different groups had and still got in trouble with the PC media. Something like: Blacks are very spiritual and are loyal to their friends. Whites as a group are a very hard working people. Asians are a very respectful people...Italians are very family oriented...etc.etc. He got in trouble for speaking the truth, even though he spoke with love.

I read where the comment in that speech that got him in trouble was when he called homosexuality a sin or something like that, trouble to the extent that CBS changed its mind on hiring him for "NFL Today", which it was already planning to do when he retired. Just burned White's contract. Speaking of #92, anyone notice that his widow has quite a lot, quite a lot, of white blood?

John

 

[jaxvid]

First of all, i'll put it out there that i am a Christian, and a young earth creationist at that. Because of this, there are certain fundamental principles that I sincerely believe in, which helps to bring me to my conclusions.

1. All humans are the descendants of Adam and Eve. We all come from the same ancestors, so I do not believe in the concept of "races". Races are a construct of our own society to group ethnically and more importantly, culturally distinct societies.

2. The theory of evolution is a lie. Contrary to what we are taught in schools, humans did not start out primordial sludge some 4 billion years ago. We were created perfect by God, but due to the Fall and sin we are degenerating as a species, not evolving.

Because of these beliefs, I find it repulsive that any "race" should try and assert its superiority based purely on better genes. The differences between Western civilisation and others can be explained culturally and by other factors.

I thought Christians believed that God made seperate races, the tower of babel thing, and I also thought most conservative Christians believed that blacks were the descendants of Ham, and therefore cursed.

Even if you don't believe the Ham thing isn't there plenty of examples of "good" and "bad" peoples in the bible? Wouldn't that theoretically create a situation where certain peoples were less capable due to some past transgression against God?

I know for centuries Christians used the bible as evidence of the superiority of white societies, now apparently it's evidence of equality amongst all peoples. My, my, such different interpertations of the same book.

 

[Kiwi]

Somehow I don't think you guys understand what your own beliefs are. You call me dogmatic, but you believe in an a theory (evolution) which is utterly ridiculous and scientifically unexplainable. There has never been a single example of a mutation which adds information to the genome. But if evolution is to be believed, there have been hundreds of millions of them occurring. Until Mr Darwin came along, most rational, scientific intelligent Westerners believed in creation; guys like Isaac Newton, who as I recall was a half-decent scientist. As a student of history, I believe that the biblical account of creation is perfectly compatible with our human history, and for me personally I find that it makes a lot more sense than evolutionary history.

White Shogun, you seemed to have completely missed any of the points of my argument. My comparison of pre-Roman German society and pre-Western Maori society was supposed to show that without outside intervention, it is unlikely that German society, like maori society, was technologically very primitive and may well have stayed that wat. The Germans didn't have a written language either, but none of you would consider them dumb. The celtic peoples of Ancient Gaul and Britain had a written language, but they did not use it extensively because they preferred passing on knowledge through an oral tradition. If the Germans had never come in contact with Roman civilisation, they may never have developed a written language independently. It was only through invasion by Rome and in the 4th and 5th centuries, migration into the Roman Empire which forced Germany to modernise.

If you examine the story of the Tower of Babel and examine historical trends it is quite easy to see a relation between the two. The civilisation at Babel would have been very advanced, obviously as they built a rather large tower. When God confused their languages and they split off into different groups, they began to migrate in all different directions from Babel. Logically, as different groups migrate further from the centre of civilisation, they will lose contact with societies close to the centre. Furthermore, with smaller groups splintering off and settling in less hospitable places, it is inevitable that some information and knowledge will be lost, as simply surviving takes precedence over acquiring new technology or even retaining non-essential technology. In the case of the Maori people, they had been steadily migrating from Taiwan throughout Southeast Asia to the Pacific, then to New Zealand in the 13th century. With a relatively small group of settlers, would you expect them to start building castles? Building even one castle takes a huge amount of man-power and disposable resources.

Of course there are going to get different ethnic groups forming and due to natural selection and genetic bottlenecks and other reasons ethnically diverse populations will form. Of course there are going to be some genetic features of a population that will stand out. But if theres anything i've learned from this website especially from the discrimination against whites in sports, its that you shouldn't stereotype people based on a preconceived idea. I'm not trying to denigrate our own Western civilisation or elevate African technological achievements into something they are not, cause they are kinda lame. I'm just trying to say the difference in advancement between these societies is just based on racial genetic differences. The reality is far more complex than that. That's why I hate "races" trying to put themselves above other "races". We may be different, but in the end aren't we all part of the Human Race? (que gathering of all creeds and races gathering round a big fire singing 'kumbaya')

PS - In response to Jaxvid's comments, the "Curse on Ham" has been somewhat misunderstood. The curse is not directed on Ham himself, but his son Canaan. The descendants of Canaan were the people the Jews fought to win the Holy Land.

 

[PitBull]

Kiwi,

What experience do you have with blacks? What sort of experience do
you have with non-whites generally?

There's a big difference between mutations to a genome and additions to
a genome. Since the amount of time that evolution has been a theory
(little more than one hundred years) and the scale of time that it takes to
make such large evolutionary changes are not remotely similar, such
direct changes would be hard to detect. Fortunately, there are millions of
fossil records that completely support evolution.

Let's compare the scientific data that supports evolution (millions and
millions of fossilized records, and genetic evidence now) to all the
scientific support for creationism (zero, only mentioned in mythical
books, accounts of which largely disagree). I don't think scientifically,
you have an argument. Just a belief. Fine, but don't be too upset that the
rest of us don't agree.

Dude, races are different! Not just features and colors, but other (mental
and psychological) differences as well. I'm shocked that you can't see
through the propaganda to turn your country (and every other white
country on the planet) into a third-world jobs park where we lose our
sovereignty, rights, and country while we smile and think what morally
superior people we are whilst invaded and conquered. Wake up. The
propaganda is also being diffused through the churches too. Its
coordinated and planned. Don't fall for it.Edited by: PitBull

 

[Kiwi]

I'll admit I don't know many black people. There's a small (black) Zimbabwean community near where I live and one of the guys from there is a really good friend of mine. But as you might suspect I have not been really been in contact with a really big African community. Maybe that makes me a an idealist without any idea of what African society is like as a whole. But hey, I can't make sense of a situation I haven't experienced, I can only react to my own situation in life.

I, like you guys am completely aware of how white civilisation seems to be getting swamped by other cultures. Technically, I think NZ is already a third world country

. But I think as much as anything this is a result of a moral breakdown in our own society, which we have brought upon ourselves. Through colonialisation and subsequently massive immigration it seems that we have opened up Pandora's Box.

PitBull, I know to you that creationism may seem like a crazy wild-eyed religious fanatic can't-bare-to-stare-reality-in-the-face-idea but it is not a belief I have come to without a lot of thought. It is completely futile to believe in a religion which is based on myth and not scientific fact. I mean what's the point? I have a decent knowledge of biology and evolutionary theory, just the basics, and I would be pretty confident in saying I have a better understanding of history than most people. I would challenge you to have a look at how many so-called 'missing links' there are. From what I have researched, there are absolutely zero. I guess it all depends on your point of view. We all have views based on the way we view the world and that affects how we perceive events and situations that occur. I'd just like you to respect that my belief in this theory is not blind faith, but many hours of research, thought and observation. I wouldn't believe in something if I didn't think it was real. Edited by: Kiwi

 

[White Shogun]

Kiwi,
Actually, I am well aware of the holes in evolution and do not subscribe to that theory at all. However, I am a champion of reason, after all, it is God-given, and the evidence to me appears abundant that black cultures and peoples have not been able to create the civilizations that whites and other races have created. Looking objectively at history, I don't see how anyone can see otherwise.

 

[Colonel_Reb]

Kiwi,
Actually, I am well aware of the holes in evolution and do not subscribe to that theory at all. However, I am a champion of reason, after all, it is God-given, and the evidence to me appears abundant that black cultures and peoples have not been able to create the civilizations that whites and other races have created. Looking objectively at history, I don't see how anyone can see otherwise.

Ditto that for me.

 

[Don Wassall]

Ialso don't believe in evolution, at least Darwin's hole-filled theory of it, but also don'tsubscribe tothe "Earth is 6,000 years old"religious belief. I think the answers to the mysteries of existence and the universe are far beyond the powers of humanbeings to comprehend, but if we can somehow get off the path to extinction mankind (particularly the white race) is on now and move forward spiritually and morally, the definitive answerswill become known to us eventually.

 

[PitBull]

I'm not worried about holes in evolutionary theory, I'm worried about
people who think everything there is to know about the world is
contained in one book that is chock full of allegory.

I'm also worried about people who disregard the life experiences of
millions of white people who have interacted with blacks over centuries,
and choose instead to believe in some pie-in-the-sky idealism that is
created to disenfranchise whites from their own countries, rights, and
property.

It ain't no moral breakdown--its a planned and coordinated effort on the
part of white-haters to weaken and destroy white countries. It has
absolutely nothing to do with morality at all. We could be completely
moral and they would be doing the same thing. Beware of black friends.
He's probalby just using you to meet white women. Don't think that there
isn't some ulterior motive. That's all I have to say on the issue.

 

[Kiwi]

Beware of black friends.
He's probalby just using you to meet white women. Don't think that there
isn't some ulterior motive. That's all I have to say on the issue.

Thanks for the advice man. It's quite amazing you have such great knowledge about my friends, despite the fact they live in a country thousands of miles away and you haven't even met them!

 

[ToughJ.Riggins]

I also don't believe in evolution, at least Darwin's hole-filled theory of it, but also don't subscribe to the "Earth is 6,000 years old" religious belief. I think the answers to the mysteries of existence and the universe are far beyond the powers of human beings to comprehend, but if we can somehow get off the path to extinction mankind (particularly the white race) is on now and move forward spiritually and morally, the definitive answers will become known to us eventually.

I certainly don't believe in evolution as college Academia sees it. They actually want us to believe Margolis's theory that the mono-cellular "protists" which means "first animals" came about from a large membrane absorbing bacteria which then became the organelles. Basically these protist's mitochondrias which allow cellular respiration were former heterotrophic bacteria. All organelles came from different bacteria according to this ludicrous theory.

According to Julie Margoilis's theory, which only came about in the 1980's, we are expected to believe that 3.5 billion years ago bacteria came into existence. Then 1.5 billion years ago, the first auto-trophic plant cells developed from a membrane engulfing a chloroplast bacteria and soon after protists by a similar process aforementioned. Now, 1.5 billion years later all the (by some counts) over 1 billion different species that exist were created. I think this is rubbish.

First off there is a wide range in length of different species genomes (the human gene code is billions of nucleotides long for instance and a mosquitoes much shorter). Also note that different species have very different amounts of chromosomes. Secondly many respected scientists now refute that we supposedly shared a common relative with something like a housefly's ancestors 1.5 to 1.4 billion years ago. I am a subscriber to the intelligent design theory and believe God flooded the earth with different species.

Sure some evolving does occur through natural and sexual selection. However, there is no way that enough mutations occurred for Natural Selection to take it's affect and for us to have shared a common relative with insects 1.5 billion years ago. It is simply impossible from online articles I have read refuting it.

Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins

 

[ToughJ.Riggins]

I personally believe that modern Cro-Magnum man was created in God's image around 200,000 years ago. We are created in his image b/c we have a soul and conscience. I don't know how this happened and don't think necessarily that we all came out of one Adam and one Eve (that may have been symbolic for our sinning ancestors). I also believe that the Garden of Eden actually existed in an area around Ethiopia Africa. Then b/c of man disobeying God and listening to the Adversary instead, Eden was taken away. We then had to face the cruelty of nature which is what the Devil wanted.

This is why I believe in the Out of Africa theory, it does not refute the Bible and is supported by DNA evidence. The theory teaches the similarity of the "human race." It teaches that we have all shared a common female relative and later a male relative somewhere around 80,000 years ago soon before we left Africa.

The human race started in Africa and b/c we disobeyed God we had to come face to face with disease and shortages of food which brought war. Essentially human beings were torn apart and went to populate all areas of the globe. Some people based on environmental factors and sheer population created the first civilizations a mere 3,500 years ago. The Jews were Gods chosen people b/c they kept the true religion which the bible comes from. This is why the Jews are hated and one of the big reasons the Middle East where monotheism comes from is so unstable. "All human beings" lived primitively before 3500 years ago. There is no black sub-species, they are part of the human family.

Lastly Sub-Sahara Africa as it exists today will only get more and more unstable. This is because of 10s of millions of AIDS cases. Swaziland for instance has an entire third of the populous infected with AIDs. This is a horrible tragedy. People of these countries may become the next big terrorist threats IMO, b/c unstable countries with poverty breed terrorism. The U.S and other countries should be working more with these governments to fight the AIDs crisis.Edited by: ToughJ.Riggins

 

[jaxvid]

God looks like Cro-Magnon man????? He should slap you for saying that. Stay away from storms with lighting.

And you are wrong about Eden being in Africa, it was in Ireland. I know, I've been to both places.

You say the human race started in Africa and had to leave because we disobeyed God, well I think that staying IN Africa would be the real punishment.

You're right about the US needing to help fight AIDS in Africa, I suggest starting with donating your yearly salary to some poor African. Let me know how that works out. I've noticed that giving lots of money to Africans always solves their problems.