It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Death of White Supremacy: 95 yrs ago TutanKhamun tomb was first opened by Archaeologists

page: 11
16
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous
OK there is much that is off with your replies , Mansa Musa was precisely the one who elevated higher learning throughout the Savannah and beyond, you must of heard of the university of Timbuktu and it's branches , although Mansa Musa gave it a boost, it was founded two centuries earlier, by a judge and funded by a very wealthy Mandinka lady, kinda like Oprah of her day,

It Boost of a student body of 25,000, among the courses given were astronomy, medicine , mathematics, chemistry, law ,finance, navigation, it's doctors devised finely tuned instruments to remove cataracts from the eyes, 70,000 manuscripts originated there, the book trade rivalled that of the gold trade, correspondence, were maintained with other Universities, in Moorish ruled Iberia, remember what I said about them starting in Senegal, North Africa ,East Africa, and Baghdad.

You seemed to want to do this biological determinative thing by stating Ethiopians carry Eurasian genes and that's why they are..what ?? great??, if so that's unfortunate, because like I said earlier the point is moot as all Africans carry Eurasian genes, and all Eurasians carry African genes.

I hope I am not misreading you on this but I have heard that argument before coming from some rather unpleasant people, they like to argue that anything of high value in blacks or Africans came from " Caucasian " genes, while so called African genes causes regression in whites.

To which I like to counter, The Ethiopians are great when it come to their dynamic past, because of their "Eurasian" genes, but are literally made the poster child for everything that's wrong with sub Saharan Africa IE "Black" when mass starvation, wars and potbellied kids with flies in their eyes are made the object of pity and contempt they are uncompromisingly BLK!!

As for practical benefit that changed the world from African science, I'll leave you with two,
Vaccination, used by a slave named Oneismus who convinced his owner to use it to stop a small pox epidemic, this knowledge which seemed counter intuitive, when the Dr Cotton Mathers, notice the blacks were not getting sick, because good OK Oneismus already treated them, this was back in the 1630ts this knowledge he carried over from Africa.
Caesarean Section, without killing Mom and Child, a group of European doctors observed this technique in Africa and carried this knowledge back with them.
Recommend the Book Blacks in Science Ancient and Modern.

As for the armies, my point was in your statement that Europeans showed up, Africans got conquered, am saying not so fast, not when they were evenly matched.

Look taking nothing away from Europe they did caught up (applause the renaissance) surpassed all on the planet, but no civilization with a cosmopolitan out look is an isolate, it's the very nature of high civilizations to thrive with diverse influences and reflect those influences , African civilizations are no exception, so why asked it of Africans when it does not exist anywhere else.

edit on 5-12-2017 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 08:06 PM
link   
I'm not trying to spread the stereotype.

But we can't refute it just by saying "nuh! nuh!" We need to zero in on the best evidence against it.

Pointing out the early discovery of vaccination, and the cesarean section, on the other hand, helps a lot.

What you have to work against is the race vs. intelligence controversy issues, where IQ testing found Sub Sahara Africa to be the bottom of the bucket. Of course this is widely criticized, partly because education levels have a profound effect on the outcomes and Sub Sahara Africa in recent history has mostly be subject to bad systems. Partly because nutrition plays a role.

But these kinds of criticisms mainly focus on calling results into question, rather than presenting any new evidence for the contrary. Evidence for the contrary would be very useful.

en.wikipedia.org...–1960

Finding something as momentus as a fully Sub Sahara African pharaoh would probalby help a lot.


edit on 5-12-2017 by bloodymarvelous because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Finding something as momentous as a Sub Saharan Pharaoh?? The very pharaonic system came from them, look up Ta- Seti and the finds at Qustol ,
Sorry to have you do the leg work but I'm having trouble posting links on my android.

As for the IQ thing, nurture have everything to do with it as opposed to nature, remember, Northern Europeans
Were supposed to be dumber than a block o bricks ,a view held by Mediterraneans both north and south as late as the middle ages, now ff to today , they are rated as among the happiest most educated nations and ppl on the planet , where everyone would like to migrate to if it weren't so damned cold.

Some African nations are coming out of their dark ages, I often used Rwanda as an example the dramatic turn around from abject poverty, war and genocide to becoming a middle income nation within a single generation, I m talking with in 20yrs , off course they are not alone, but they are the most dramatic example, then you have the Nigerians who outclassed all others in Britain in terms of higher education, they tie with East Asians in the U.S .

The view of Africa's supposed inferiority intellectual and otherwise stemmed from, the massive trade in slave, off course they weren't the only one enslaved, but they suffered more acutely than others because of it, in the words of the late British historian Basil Davidson (the mutual respect and admiration shown in the past was replaced by racist ideas, a completely modern disease).
edit on 5-12-2017 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2017 @ 11:39 PM
link   
Dbl post.
edit on 5-12-2017 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2017 @ 04:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: bloodymarvelous



As for the IQ thing, nurture have everything to do with it as opposed to nature, remember, Northern Europeans
Were supposed to be dumber than a block o bricks ,a view held by Mediterraneans both north and south as late as the middle ages, now ff to today , they are rated as among the happiest most educated nations and ppl on the planet , where everyone would like to migrate to if it weren't so damned cold.


What they need is at least one great genius to come out of there.

Nobody doubts Jewish people are smart, because they have Albert Einstein.

In any statistical group, there are outliers, but most outliers are still within some range of the middle. For example men and women and physical strength: some women are stronger than some men, but the strongest women aren't as strong as the strongest men.

Neil De Grassi Tyson is a pretty good example, although he is half Puerto Rican, so not a perfect counter point.

But I think people like him are the ones who need to be getting more discussion.

Jimi Hendrix is good, and had two black parents. Musical genius and mathematical genius often go hand in hand, and he was definitely a musical genius.



Some African nations are coming out of their dark ages, I often used Rwanda as an example the dramatic turn around from abject poverty, war and genocide to becoming a middle income nation within a single generation, I m talking with in 20yrs , off course they are not alone, but they are the most dramatic example, then you have the Nigerians who outclassed all others in Britain in terms of higher education, they tie with East Asians in the U.S .


There are also some countries, like Botswana, that have been decent places to live for quite a while. They just don't make the evening news because nothing interesting ever happens there.




The view of Africa's supposed inferiority intellectual and otherwise stemmed from, the massive trade in slave, off course they weren't the only one enslaved, but they suffered more acutely than others because of it, in the words of the late British historian Basil Davidson (the mutual respect and admiration shown in the past was replaced by racist ideas, a completely modern disease).


I think it's also the reputation for barbarity, and the use of cruel torture that you see so often in parts of Africa. That utter and complete lack of empathy toward one another is what made the slave trade possible to begin with.

Most of the slaves were purchased by the Portuguese slave traders, not captured. And in the life histories of those who later wrote down their experiences there are many examples of the slave having been sold into slavery by their own family members.

When you see people who are themselves so devoid of compassion, it is hard to want to show them any.

Empathy, and refraining from the use of torture have always been seen as signs of an advanced society (which is notably ironic to say now, since the USA has dishonored itself by allowing exactly that to happen in Guantanimo Bay).



posted on Dec, 6 2017 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous


Neil De Grassi Tyson is a pretty good example, although he is half Puerto Rican, so not a perfect counter point. 

But I think people like him are the ones who need to be getting more discussion. 

Again you are playing around the edges of biological determinism, Puerto Rican is not a race and the African American community is very multi DNA mixed as is your average new world blacks from anywhere in the Americas, Anglo or Latin, matter of fact Latin based people are more culturally African than their Anglo based counter parts, the difference is language and national identification.

As for Jimi Hendrix the same holds true , his is an ethnic label ,meant to self identified with the social group called Black American or of late African American,, have nothing to do with his genetic make up.

Have you really looked into Euro/American social history?? cruelty and barbaric behavior first practice and refined on each other before being exported.

And no! Africans were unlikely to sell their own family members unless under extreme duress just like anyone else Europeans did just that.

But I'll tell you who did that, Euro/Americans, they kept not only their offspring, between enslaved and slave master as slaves, they often sold them off, this never happened in Africa or the East, the offsprings were recognized as family with all the rights and privileges that came with it.

A slave in Africa and the east was very mobile socially, one can go from cleaning bathrooms to emperor if he had skills and played his card right, the White slaves known as Mameluke in Egypt did just that, Zanj (east African) slaves did the same in Arabia and Iraq,
The difference is in the type of slavery practiced, Euro/Americans practiced the harshest type called chattel slavery.

But what fed the slave trade in Africa, empire building, the captured POWs were sold off for profits to a hungry market, the Americas needed labour.

selling ones enemy away made it more likely that they wouldn't come back at you, some nations like Dahomey and Ashanti did indeed made raids to their enemies lands for the sole purpose of gathering people for sale, but other than criminals within in their own societies, no! They didn't sell " their own " as there was no such thing as pan Africanism back then.


edit on 6-12-2017 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 12:39 PM
link   
In fairness, it is apparent that many of the chiefs and others who did sell slaves to the Portuguese had no idea how inhumanely they were going to be treated after the sale.

Some of the slave revolts were actually lead by slavers who had been given a taste of their own medicine.

www.huffingtonpost.com...


However another interesting issue pops up from the article.

The author mentions:
"Typically wars in West Africa were relatively short affairs that left a small number of causalities. The introduction of European weapons made these wars more drawn out and destructive affairs. Moreover, the only way Africans could acquire these firearms was through the trade of slaves. A king of Dahomey once requested that Europeans establish a firearms factory in his nation, but this request went ignored. Firearms became necessary for African nations to defend themselves both from African rivals as well as from European intrusion, but the only way to acquire these weapons was through the slave trade. This situation only benefited the competing European powers that were able to play Africans against each other."

In contrast, Japan's first encounter with European firearms went like this:

"The tanegashima seems to have been based on snap matchlocks that were produced in Portuguese Malacca, at the armory of Malacca (a colony of Portugal since 1511).[5] The name tanegashima came from the Japanese island (Tanegashima) where a Chinese junk with Portuguese adventurers on board was driven to anchor by a storm in 1543. The lord of the Japanese island, Tanegashima Tokitaka (1528–1579), purchased two matchlock muskets from the Portuguese and put a swordsmith to work copying the matchlock barrel and firing mechanism. The smith (Yaita) did not have much of a problem with most of the gun but "drilling the barrel helically so that the screw (bisen bolt) could be tightly inserted" was a major problem as this "technique did apparently not exist in Japan until this time." The Portuguese fixed their ship and left the island and only in the next year when a Portuguese blacksmith was brought back to Japan was the problem solved.[6] Within ten years of its introduction, over 300,000 tanegashima firearms were reported to have been manufactured."

en.wikipedia.org...(gun)


They copied the technology almost immediately upon seeing it. Never had to depend on Europeans to give them guns. (Although Japan still did end up engaging the trade of its own people as slaves also.)




originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: bloodymarvelous


Neil De Grassi Tyson is a pretty good example, although he is half Puerto Rican, so not a perfect counter point. 

But I think people like him are the ones who need to be getting more discussion. 

Again you are playing around the edges of biological determinism, Puerto Rican is not a race and the African American community is very multi DNA mixed as is your average new world blacks from anywhere in the Americas, Anglo or Latin, matter of fact Latin based people are more culturally African than their Anglo based counter parts, the difference is language and national identification.

As for Jimi Hendrix the same holds true , his is an ethnic label ,meant to self identified with the social group called Black American or of late African American,, have nothing to do with his genetic make up.





When you are refuting something, you have to play by its rules to some degree. The refutation of biological determinism would be to show that geniuses emerge from all ethnicities.

Simply claiming, by fiat "Ethnicity is a construct and so I shall not refer to it" feels really good. But refutes nothing.

That would be like when Gallileo wanted to prove that all objects fall at the same rate, regardless of their mass. He took two balls, one ten times heavier than the other, and dropped them from the Leaning Tower of Pisa.

In order to prove that it didn't matter how heavy the balls were, he took two balls of clearly different weights, dropped them from the same height at the same time, and everyone observed they fell at the same speed.

If you want to prove it doesn't matter what ethnic group a person comes from, and that genius should occur with equal frequency in all groups, you have to do more or less the same thing. If it truly doesn't matter, then no matter how you group the population groups, you will get the same result.


edit on 7-12-2017 by bloodymarvelous because: added bold to parts of the quotes.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 01:39 AM
link   
To be honest, I suspect that the stereotypes about people from Africa arose because white people of North America only met the humiliated, broken, shells of people who had already been enslaved.

There is also a certain Darwinian selection present in a system of slavery. The best and the brightest tend to live the shortest. The people who are dumb as a brick pose the least threat to the Master's sovereignty, and also tend to work the hardest without reward.



posted on Dec, 12 2017 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

There is also a certain Darwinian selection present in a system of slavery. The best and the brightest tend to live the shortest. The people who are dumb as a brick pose the least threat to the Master's sovereignty, and also tend to work the hardest without reward.


Or maybe the survivors, knew how to cope better for,
raw survival under extreme conditions , biding their time until the time was right.

BTW resistance in the U.S took on many forms, from out right rebellions to sabotage, and escaping.
In the Caribbean such maroon warfare and slave rebellion was more successful, but the Planter class could never rest easy on the mainland U.S, the black law codes bares this out.

Nor did dumb as brick ppl started off with bootstrap success or promise of success until it was aborted from the outside.
Pls klik the link below.

African American Towns And Businesses The Unknown Story:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Matter of fact given the extreme hardships endured by AAs in the U.S it is awe inspiring just how far they have come , yet still have always to go.

edit on 12-12-2017 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 04:25 AM
link   
The DNA is from the middle eastern area,not unlike elongated skulls,only thing being supressed here is who were they and what was their lineage,why do people have to try to muddy the water with some vague speculation of nubian conjecture,there is none,there were Nubians but he wasn't one of them,quit trying to make something out of nothing sounds so liberal



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Oldtimer2

Not for most members of the 18th dyn family to which Tut belonged to, this is the what the most common recent ancestors of TuT and family looked like, what he actually looked like that can be debated,

"Nubian" as a synonym for " Black " folks need to stop that,

See the area called Wawat that was part of the gold producing region, that gave what was to become Egypt it's Pharaonic identity, but they were not Nilo Saharans, like the Kush further south who conquered them.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

You said:


And no! Africans were unlikely to sell their own family members unless under extreme duress just like anyone else Europeans did just that.

But I'll tell you who did that, Euro/Americans, they kept not only their offspring, between enslaved and slave master as slaves, they often sold them off, this never happened in Africa


According to one man, among others slavery wasn't a color issue. And certainly not a "white" issue.


Slavery was not about race

When I address audiences on the history and legacy of slavery, I will often say that slavery and the slave trade were never about race. Having offered that hopefully surprising statement, I will explain that while the concept of race gradually became important in justifying and perpetuating slavery in the United States, race played essentially no part in establishing the transatlantic slave trade or in bringing millions of Africans to the Americas.

This argument has two parts: first, that Europeans (and Americans) did not engage in the slave trade out of any sense that it was particularly appropriate to enslave black people, and second, that Africans were full partners in the slave trade, without any sense on their part, either, that race was relevant to what they were doing.

Gates addresses the second part of this argument, summing up by saying that “white people and black people, on both sides of the Atlantic, [were] complicit alike in one of the greatest evils in the history of civilization.”



www.tracesofthetrade.org...

In fact, Gates, a black Man himself states:


The historical truth about Africa and the slave trade:

When we visited slave forts along the African coast in modern-day Ghana to film Traces of the Trade, we were walking in the footsteps of my ancestor, James DeWolf, and the other members of the DeWolf family who purchased more than 12,000 Africans in such slave forts.

As Gates asks, “How did slaves make it to these coastal forts?”

The reality is that nearly all who were sent across the Atlantic in chains were enslaved by Africans.


edit on 13-12-2017 by ADSE255 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:34 AM
link   
a reply to: ADSE255

I agree, slavery was not peculiar to Black ppl, the very word Slave, came from Slav, who were massively enslaved boarding the Caucasus the reason why slave is linked to Blackfolks because Africa served the major market for such in relatively recent times however it was massive enough to change the face of continents.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

I was addressing what you said about blacks never selling out on their own families. It happened, and they did.



posted on Dec, 13 2017 @ 05:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: ADSE255
a reply to: Spider879

I was addressing what you said about blacks never selling out on their own families. It happened, and they did.

I said they don't sell their own family members unless under duress , just like anyone else and that's true, Black selling other Blacks like white selling other whites is a given.
edit on 13-12-2017 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 12:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

There is also a certain Darwinian selection present in a system of slavery. The best and the brightest tend to live the shortest. The people who are dumb as a brick pose the least threat to the Master's sovereignty, and also tend to work the hardest without reward.


Or maybe the survivors, knew how to cope better for,
raw survival under extreme conditions , biding their time until the time was right.


This assumes that those who chose to survive made the more sensible choice.

A person with empathy, who finds them self living under horrible conditions, would probably not choose to bring children into it, if they had a choice. It's the ones without empathy, who are only aware of their own needs, that put out the biggest broods of offspring. That way they can have company in their misery.




Nor did dumb as brick ppl started off with bootstrap success or promise of success until it was aborted from the outside.
Pls klik the link below.

African American Towns And Businesses The Unknown Story:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Matter of fact given the extreme hardships endured by AAs in the U.S it is awe inspiring just how far they have come , yet still have always to go.



I will admit that the situation I am forgetting about is the case of the slave who rules from behind the throne, so to speak.

A slave who gains so much of the master's trust that it's hard to tell they are a slave. In particular: house slaves. Some were considered essentially to be parts of the family. Probably slave masters would have depended on them sometimes even to do things like keeping the books for the plantation's financial affairs.

There is more than one way for a slave to survive.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 12:26 AM
link   

edit on 12/14/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 01:04 AM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous


A person with empathy, who finds them self living under horrible conditions, would probably not choose to bring children into it, if they had a choice. It's the ones without empathy, who are only aware of their own needs, that put out the biggest broods of offspring. That way they can have company in their misery. 

Many did abort their children, but others held on to only a hope and a prayer that they could be free or escape as there were multiple examples of freemen (a popular name among Black people ) walking around, all they had to do was make it past Maryland.
If you listen to the Negro spirituals, songs sang on plantations you would know where that inner strength came from, some were coded messages on escape routes

lyrics about the Exodus were a metaphor for freedom from slavery. Songs like “Steal Away (to Jesus)”, or “Swing Low, Sweet Chariot” raised unexpectedly in a dusty field, or sung softly in the dark of night, signaled that the coast was clear and the time to escape had come. The River Jordan became the Ohio River, or the Mississippi, or another body of water that had to be crossed on the journey to freedom. “Wade in the Water” contained explicit instructions to fugitive slaves on how to avoid capture and the route to take to successfully make their way to freedom. Leaving dry land and taking to the water was a common strategy to throw pursuing bloodhounds off one’s trail. “The Gospel Train”, and “Swing Low, Sweet Chariot” all contained veiled references to the Underground Railroad, and “Follow the Drinking Gourd” contained a coded map to the Underground Railroad. The title itself was an Africanized reference to the Big Dipper, which pointed the way to the North Star and freedom.


blackthen.com...



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 01:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: bloodymarvelous


A person with empathy, who finds them self living under horrible conditions, would probably not choose to bring children into it, if they had a choice. It's the ones without empathy, who are only aware of their own needs, that put out the biggest broods of offspring. That way they can have company in their misery. 

Many did abort their children, but others held on to only a hope and a prayer that they could be free or escape as there were multiple examples of freemen (a popular name among Black people ) walking around, all they had to do was make it past Maryland.


So, the ones foolish enough to think they would win the lottery.





If you listen to the Negro spirituals, songs sang on plantations you would know where that inner strength came from, some were coded messages on escape routes

lyrics about the Exodus were a metaphor for freedom from slavery. Songs like “Steal Away (to Jesus)”, or “Swing Low, Sweet Chariot” raised unexpectedly in a dusty field, or sung softly in the dark of night, signaled that the coast was clear and the time to escape had come. The River Jordan became the Ohio River, or the Mississippi, or another body of water that had to be crossed on the journey to freedom. “Wade in the Water” contained explicit instructions to fugitive slaves on how to avoid capture and the route to take to successfully make their way to freedom. Leaving dry land and taking to the water was a common strategy to throw pursuing bloodhounds off one’s trail. “The Gospel Train”, and “Swing Low, Sweet Chariot” all contained veiled references to the Underground Railroad, and “Follow the Drinking Gourd” contained a coded map to the Underground Railroad. The title itself was an Africanized reference to the Big Dipper, which pointed the way to the North Star and freedom.


blackthen.com...


Letting the people have hope is a powerful way to motivate a slave crew.

Modern "white" slavers often offer their captives the hope that they will be allowed to go free once they have earned enough money to pay the costs associated with their capture. Of course that is a lie. She's a potential witness to their whole operation. She'll never be allowed to leave while she's alive, unless the police raid the brothel.

If she's earning a lot of money her pimp will just charge her a lot of money for her room and board, or whatever he can think of. Not like she can object.



posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 01:57 AM
link   
My point is: I don't think they were really pulling one over on their masters.

More likely, the masters willingly put up with it because it posed no real threat to their position, and gave the slaves a will to go on living/working hard.

Keeping them captive is only half the goal. The other half is getting lots of work done using the fewest slaves possible to do it.
edit on 14-12-2017 by bloodymarvelous because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
16
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join