The world's last isolated humans

Ghost Utmost

The Soul of the Internet
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
20,402
Reputation
8,799
Daps
74,327
Reppin
the Aether
Well despite your arrogant tone, there's plenty of things to question. But your questions sadly show how much you verify truth by cac standards. Its not about a fancy title or getting a stamp of approval from cac institutions. Well it shouldnt be if youre so called black.

Anyways you could always question how dark skinned people were ruling in the Americas, Asia, Africa, Europe etc... before any sight of a cac, mongloid, or so called Arab. Despite this truth and FACT, they try tonrelegate everyone, especially everyone thays dark skinned to Africa. And on another note, there are some scientists that say that only black people are 100℅ human while the rest have neanderthal DNA...

Then there's the fact that while there was a great focus on Africa by outsiders, more so was put to America. The biggest genocide/slavery happened here and I don't believe that's by coincidence. The Americas hold more resources than any other place as well..

There were ancient dread locked mummies found in South America. There's interesting things about the city of Cuzco (means Naval) in Peru as well. These are some reasons I don't buy the out of Africa theory. It seems like a way to divert the attention of people, especially black people in the Americas, from America to elsewhere. Just my 2 cents

Did Human all originate from one place?

Like, instead of Africa, humans originated in South America..

Or

Did Humans spontaneously arise all over the globe simultaneously? And still be the same species and be able to breed globally. With all the other groups of humans that arose on the other side of the planet

??

(Cause.. if they did begin in one place then Africa is the likely place. Black people in South America doesn't disprove that humans started in Africa. However old the mummy is, just imagine he or his peops traveled from Africa.. before that.

If you think all humans worldwide just came into existence separately.. they didnt.)
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,496
Reputation
-2,229
Daps
17,841
Did Human all originate from one place?

Like, instead of Africa, humans originated in South America..

Or

Did Humans spontaneously arise all over the globe simultaneously? And still be the same species and be able to breed globally. With all the other groups of humans that arose on the other side of the planet

??

(Cause.. if they did begin in one place then Africa is the likely place. Black people in South America doesn't disprove that humans started in Africa. However old the mummy is, just imagine he or his peops traveled from Africa.. before that.

If you think all humans worldwide just came into existence separately.. they didnt.)

If you want to call everyone that has color "African" because in distant distant times they once came from there, then why stop at black people? Why aren't we calling cacs and Asians Africans too because that's where they came from long long ago (supposedly)?

There were black people in Europe before cacs, and they should be respected as such. There were also black people in Asia before the asians we see today, and again they should be respected as such. They shouldnt be lumped into a "African" box unless we're referring to pangea and that one continent being named africa. Ultimately, the over fixation of Africa for black people makes it easier for them to get away with stolen land, specifically in the Americas.
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,496
Reputation
-2,229
Daps
17,841
I dont get your argument. I agree that Black people reached the Americans before the Europeans. Its also well documented that Africans were in contact with the Chinese/Asians way before Africa was discovered by them CACs.

Are you saying Black people are not African, vice versa?

See a big problem with us is that we don't know history beyond what cacs tell us about it today. In this day with the internet it shouldn't be too hard to look up how there were black people ruling in places like Russia, Germany, Poland etc... during the middle ages. They're African?

The people that were here in America, that were at times clearly depicted as black or outright called negro, they're African? Yet the cac, who says he descends from Africans, gets to be European? The so called Asian gets to be Asian? While blacks found existing in all these places BEFORE these groups always get relegated to being African. I mean if you still can't see that its about land/resources then I don't know what else to tell you
 

Ghost Utmost

The Soul of the Internet
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
20,402
Reputation
8,799
Daps
74,327
Reppin
the Aether
If you want to call everyone that has color "African" because in distant distant times they once came from there, then why stop at black people? Why aren't we calling cacs and Asians Africans too because that's where they came from long long ago (supposedly)?

There were black people in Europe before cacs, and they should be respected as such. There were also black people in Asia before the asians we see today, and again they should be respected as such. They shouldnt be lumped into a "African" box unless we're referring to pangea and that one continent being named africa. Ultimately, the over fixation of Africa for black people makes it easier for them to get away with stolen land, specifically in the Americas.

I'll boil the question down to just a few words

Did all humans originate in one place, then spread out across the globe?
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,496
Reputation
-2,229
Daps
17,841
I'll boil the question down to just a few words

Did all humans originate in one place, then spread out across the globe?

Here I'll try again. If we call people African because their distant distant distant relatives came from Africa, then why dont we call cacs African? Or Chinese? Japanese? Russians?

Why do they get identified by the lands they were found in but blacks no matter where they are found are relegated to Africa? Your question is irrelevant since other people whose relatives come from Africa (cacs) aren't called Africans like you try to call every so called black person
 

Ghost Utmost

The Soul of the Internet
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
20,402
Reputation
8,799
Daps
74,327
Reppin
the Aether
Here I'll try again. If we call people African because their distant distant distant relatives came from Africa, then why dont we call cacs African? Or Chinese? Japanese? Russians?

Why do they get identified by the lands they were found in but blacks no matter where they are found are relegated to Africa? Your question is irrelevant since other people whose relatives come from Africa (cacs) aren't called Africans like you try to call every so called black person

So: yes.

Okay good.

So there's a couple of possibilities but let's zero in on the one you're most fond of.

People left Africa and then they made it to South America. With dreads. But then they changed because of ???? until they were black, but not African. Not anymore African than Europeans.

All these groups of black but not African people. So far removed that they are no closer to Aficans than Europeans:

Why are you caping for them as one group? Worried about their stolen lands. Making sure we recognize that they were THERE!

But they not related to you. Or Africa. Or African Americans. They are no closer than Europeans.

So what's the hubbub? Focus on your own people's issues.
Oochie Wallie :hula:One Mic
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,496
Reputation
-2,229
Daps
17,841
So: yes.

Okay good.

So there's a couple of possibilities but let's zero in on the one you're most fond of.

People left Africa and then they made it to South America. With dreads. But then they changed because of ???? until they were black, but not African. Not anymore African than Europeans.

All these groups of black but not African people. So far removed that they are no closer to Aficans than Europeans:

Why are you caping for them as one group? Worried about their stolen lands. Making sure we recognize that they were THERE!

But they not related to you. Or Africa. Or African Americans. They are no closer than Europeans.

So what's the hubbub? Focus on your own people's issues.
Oochie Wallie :hula:One Mic

Bruh you don't even sound like you know what you're talking about so there's no way I can know :hubie:

You still haven't addressed why indigenous black people found in Europe Asia or america are all African but cacs get called Europeans and the Chinese get called Asian even though blacks are documented as being in both areas before these groups..

The people who were found in america were black and was referred to as such. Same as those in Europe. Its on you to give your explanation as to why the black people there and here are African while cacs get called European or Chinese/Japanese get called Asian... If you can't explain then keep it a buck and say that instead of shamelessly trying to waltz around it...
 

King Ming

All Star
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
5,293
Reputation
407
Daps
8,387
Reppin
Azania
See a big problem with us is that we don't know history beyond what cacs tell us about it today. In this day with the internet it shouldn't be too hard to look up how there were black people ruling in places like Russia, Germany, Poland etc... during the middle ages. They're African?

The people that were here in America, that were at times clearly depicted as black or outright called negro, they're African? Yet the cac, who says he descends from Africans, gets to be European? The so called Asian gets to be Asian? While blacks found existing in all these places BEFORE these groups always get relegated to being African. I mean if you still can't see that its about land/resources then I don't know what else to tell you

i get your point...

But i feel Black people need to start embracing their Africanness or else we will continue to be abused by all these other races

All Black people are African!
 

Ghost Utmost

The Soul of the Internet
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
20,402
Reputation
8,799
Daps
74,327
Reppin
the Aether
Bruh you don't even sound like you know what you're talking about so there's no way I can know :hubie:

You still haven't addressed why indigenous black people found in Europe Asia or america are all African but cacs get called Europeans and the Chinese get called Asian even though blacks are documented as being in both areas before these groups..

The people who were found in america were black and was referred to as such. Same as those in Europe. Its on you to give your explanation as to why the black people there and here are African while cacs get called European or Chinese/Japanese get called Asian... If you can't explain then keep it a buck and say that instead of shamelessly trying to waltz around it...

If the Black people in America before everybody else

Weren't African

And are so far removed as to be no closer to Africans than Europeans are

Then why is it important to lift them up as something special. They aren't your people any more than the 'Indians' are. Since they aren't African.

And if the ones in the Americas aren't related to the ones in Asia then why lump them together and speak on these unrelated groups of black people as if they are one group.

I haven't said that they are or are not, yet. I am just wondering about your cosmology.

Here's what I think: basically the skin color of people is determined by the climate and most acutely the distance from the equator. Such that the people living closest to the equator are darkest and it gradually gets lighter as you move away from the equator.

So there aren't 5 skin colors. There's a gradient from dark dark brown to very pale "white".

So if there was a group of Black people here - the Americas - before the 'Indians' they would have to be Africans that came to the Americas on a boat or sumn. Cause if they would have gone through the process that the 'Indians' went through - slowly walk to the Americas over the course of 100,000 years - then they would have changed the same way the 'Indians' did.

So that's what I think. If there were African looking people wherever, they didn't evolve to be African looking if they started out in Mongolia. They would have had to come to Mongolia from Africa rapidly cause if they would have slowly walked there over 100,000 year period them the same changes that occurred in Mongolians would have happened to them - since this is exactly what the Mongolians are. Everything starts from Africa and moves outward from there. Once 100% of people were black Africans.

*so just skip along to this part*

Explain why you're so enthusiastic about the Black people of Mongolia if they are not African and are of no relation to you.
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,496
Reputation
-2,229
Daps
17,841
i get your point...

But i feel Black people need to start embracing their Africanness or else we will continue to be abused by all these other races

All Black people are African!

No you sadly don't get it but you go run to Africa and see how they know you're not one of them. I'll wait for cacs to fukk their kingdom up so I can get what used to be mine and my ancestors... It shouldnt be too long
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,496
Reputation
-2,229
Daps
17,841
If the Black people in America before everybody else

Weren't African

And are so far removed as to be no closer to Africans than Europeans are

Then why is it important to lift them up as something special. They aren't your people any more than the 'Indians' are. Since they aren't African.

And if the ones in the Americas aren't related to the ones in Asia then why lump them together and speak on these unrelated groups of black people as if they are one group.

I haven't said that they are or are not, yet. I am just wondering about your cosmology.

Here's what I think: basically the skin color of people is determined by the climate and most acutely the distance from the equator. Such that the people living closest to the equator are darkest and it gradually gets lighter as you move away from the equator.

So there aren't 5 skin colors. There's a gradient from dark dark brown to very pale "white".

So if there was a group of Black people here - the Americas - before the 'Indians' they would have to be Africans that came to the Americas on a boat or sumn. Cause if they would have gone through the process that the 'Indians' went through - slowly walk to the Americas over the course of 100,000 years - then they would have changed the same way the 'Indians' did.

So that's what I think. If there were African looking people wherever, they didn't evolve to be African looking if they started out in Mongolia. They would have had to come to Mongolia from Africa rapidly cause if they would have slowly walked there over 100,000 year period them the same changes that occurred in Mongolians would have happened to them - since this is exactly what the Mongolians are. Everything starts from Africa and moves outward from there. Once 100% of people were black Africans.

*so just skip along to this part*

Explain why you're so enthusiastic about the Black people of Mongolia if they are not African and are of no relation to you.

How can different skin colors be because of temperature when in every continent the first recorded people there were black/dark skinned? When there were black people ruling in Europe where cacs should have been for centuries before cacs popped up around the 1400-1500s? :dwillhuh:

That's what you're refusing to address and the convo can't really go any further till you address it. Black people did not come out of Africa to Europe then become white. They did not come out of Africa to Asia then become Chinese. That's pseudoscience. And even with that it STILL doesn't address how blacks always get referred to as African and African only, but cacs and other groups get to be called European or whatever land they're on despite arriving on the continent AFTER black people.

So to answer your question I'm enthusiastic about the truth and the truth is that black people were the first people on every land. So if we're going to call ANYONE American, European, Asian, etc... it's the first people on that land and not the most recent people we see there.
 

Ghost Utmost

The Soul of the Internet
Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
20,402
Reputation
8,799
Daps
74,327
Reppin
the Aether
How can different skin colors be because of temperature when in every continent the first recorded people there were black/dark skinned? When there were black people ruling in Europe where cacs should have been for centuries before cacs popped up around the 1400-1500s? :dwillhuh:

That's what you're refusing to address and the convo can't really go any further till you address it. Black people did not come out of Africa to Europe then become white. They did not come out of Africa to Asia then become Chinese. That's pseudoscience. And even with that it STILL doesn't address how blacks always get referred to as African and African only, but cacs and other groups get to be called European or whatever land they're on despite arriving on the continent AFTER black people.

So to answer your question I'm enthusiastic about the truth and the truth is that black people were the first people on every land. So if we're going to call ANYONE American, European, Asian, etc... it's the first people on that land and not the most recent people we see there.

I'll address your claim that the entire Earth was all black people - but not Africans - then Europeans, Asians, Arabs, and Native Americans arrived suddenly, displaced all the Black - not Africans - and pretended that they had been there all along.

Where did the white Europeans come from fully formed to overrun the true Black Europeans. The white ones had to develop 8n some kind of way, then get their numbers up, then invade Europe, right?

I say Europeans developed right where they were over some amount of time until they eventually look like they do now.

Here's what you're not really picturing exactly right. It wasn't that on year 1 niqqas left Africa and by year 10 they had colonized the planet then it took another 100,000 years for them to slowly become white.

No.

As the people spread out from Africa they transformed along the way. They didn't move very fast at all. They weren't traveling toward any destination, they just had to set up camp far enough from the other camps that they wouldn't beef. Look up how wolves arrange their territories for a general idea of how one human group had to be x number of miles from the next or else they would be taking food off the other's plate.

So every couple generations you have a group that goes that much further north. Like 10 miles or sumn. Just far enough to get out the way.

If randomly a lighter person is born and that lighter person is more successful

(cause let's say they have arrived at a place where dark black skin actually blocks enough sun that lighter skin is healthier for that climate. People need sun like plants, which is the entire mechanism that drives lighter and darker skin)

then there are more lighter kids and the population becomes lighter just cause that level of melanin is suited for that spot on the map.

Water seeks it's own level and so does natural selection.

So I don't think - and neither does logic - that Black people were the population of Europe until 1400, then Europeans appeared out of NOWHERE and removed them all.

And strange how the new people that appeared in 1400 to replace the black people across the globe - funny how those people actually follow the rule about distance from the equator. Norwegians and Italians are both called "white" but the Italian is clearly darker skinned. And clearly closer to the equator.

Africans vary in skin tone based on their proximity to the equator.

Asians. I dated this Cambodian chick who was my color (kinda like Barry O color?). I didn't even know Asians were that color before that. But you have your white Asians and your dark ones. And everything IN BETWEEN.
 

Crayola Coyote

Superstar
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
27,158
Reputation
2,460
Daps
62,198
Well despite your arrogant tone, there's plenty of things to question. But your questions sadly show how much you verify truth by cac standards. Its not about a fancy title or getting a stamp of approval from cac institutions. Well it shouldnt be if youre so called black.

Anyways you could always question how dark skinned people were ruling in the Americas, Asia, Africa, Europe etc... before any sight of a cac, mongloid, or so called Arab. Despite this truth and FACT, they try tonrelegate everyone, especially everyone thays dark skinned to Africa. And on another note, there are some scientists that say that only black people are 100℅ human while the rest have neanderthal DNA...

Then there's the fact that while there was a great focus on Africa by outsiders, more so was put to America. The biggest genocide/slavery happened here and I don't believe that's by coincidence. The Americas hold more resources than any other place as well..

There were ancient dread locked mummies found in South America. There's interesting things about the city of Cuzco (means Naval) in Peru as well. These are some reasons I don't buy the out of Africa theory. It seems like a way to divert the attention of people, especially black people in the Americas, from America to elsewhere. Just my 2 cents

THIS. Also the main culprit are saying they not African. We don't care what those high I. q. People say
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,496
Reputation
-2,229
Daps
17,841
I'll address your claim that the entire Earth was all black people - but not Africans - then Europeans, Asians, Arabs, and Native Americans arrived suddenly, displaced all the Black - not Africans - and pretended that they had been there all along.

Where did the white Europeans come from fully formed to overrun the true Black Europeans. The white ones had to develop 8n some kind of way, then get their numbers up, then invade Europe, right?

I say Europeans developed right where they were over some amount of time until they eventually look like they do now.

Here's what you're not really picturing exactly right. It wasn't that on year 1 niqqas left Africa and by year 10 they had colonized the planet then it took another 100,000 years for them to slowly become white.

No.

As the people spread out from Africa they transformed along the way. They didn't move very fast at all. They weren't traveling toward any destination, they just had to set up camp far enough from the other camps that they wouldn't beef. Look up how wolves arrange their territories for a general idea of how one human group had to be x number of miles from the next or else they would be taking food off the other's plate.

So every couple generations you have a group that goes that much further north. Like 10 miles or sumn. Just far enough to get out the way.

If randomly a lighter person is born and that lighter person is more successful

(cause let's say they have arrived at a place where dark black skin actually blocks enough sun that lighter skin is healthier for that climate. People need sun like plants, which is the entire mechanism that drives lighter and darker skin)

then there are more lighter kids and the population becomes lighter just cause that level of melanin is suited for that spot on the map.

Water seeks it's own level and so does natural selection.

So I don't think - and neither does logic - that Black people were the population of Europe until 1400, then Europeans appeared out of NOWHERE and removed them all.

And strange how the new people that appeared in 1400 to replace the black people across the globe - funny how those people actually follow the rule about distance from the equator. Norwegians and Italians are both called "white" but the Italian is clearly darker skinned. And clearly closer to the equator.

Africans vary in skin tone based on their proximity to the equator.

Asians. I dated this Cambodian chick who was my color (kinda like Barry O color?). I didn't even know Asians were that color before that. But you have your white Asians and your dark ones. And everything IN BETWEEN.

All that skin color and temperature talk is pseudoscience breh. Let me know when you research the black brehs that ran Europe before cacs. That's something tangible and historical. Your talk about someone being away from the equator making you white is pseudoscience and a guess at why different races exist.

You ask where did cacs come from and that's what you should be looking into because their interpretation of history is to hide all the black civilizations globally (not just Africa) that contributed to the worlds advancement
 
Top