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.

 

Are "white people", ie, Indo-Europeans, Semites, and Hamites aliens?

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 02:30 AM
link   
The reason I ask is because the people of Europe and the Middle East have things in common that the rest of the world does not, physically but more importantly culturally speaking.

I just want to make this clear: I am not a racist. However, I can't help but to notice not only the similarities between the different nations of "white people" and also commonalities held by all non-"white" nations. Not saying one is better than the other, I'm just saying you can't deny the difference between western/white and non-western/non-white cultures and the similarities inside both. Actually of anything (as a white person) I admire the beliefs and lifestyle of the indigenous/colored peoples of the world more than of my own people.

To cover quickly, because it is less important, the physical differences between white and non-white people. White people tend to have more defined noses, and of course have translucent, light-colored skin, that makes the veins visible and appear blue. They also have hair in lighter shades, while all other peoples of the world have black or dark brown hair. Same with eye color.

Far more important and drastic are the cultural differences. For one thing, all of the world's alphabets came from white cultures. Even the Indian and Southeast Asian alphabets were brought by Indo-European and Arab people. All of the writing systems that originated outside of the Middle East are pictographic.

White cultures also have an obsession with perfection and geometry, trying unrealistically to attain this perceived geometric perfection. This is why they build pyramids and wheels.

The Western idea of goodness is "righteousness" - what I mean by that, is that one is supposed to live by the book, there is often an equivalence between "justice" and "revenge", indeed the words can almost be synonyms in certain usages in the English language. The idea of "eye for an eye" is a totally Western idea; indigenous cultures didn't think in those terms, at least for the most part; they might get revenge in anger, but never did they consider it an ideal as far as I know. Non-western cultures tend to have a more practical approach to justice.

Western people tend to see the forest for the trees, while indigenous people see the "whole picture" more. Non-white cultures did not categorize things the way the ancient Greeks and modern scientists do (however I find the postmodern hatred of all labels and categories excessive and even oppressive).

Are these differences actually because an alien (but related) race of human beings were marooned on this planet? Could that explain why Western people are in a disharmony with nature and feel the need to modify it? And are they actually the descendants of Atlanteans?



+5 more 
posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:01 AM
link   
oh yeah, the difference between a russian and a spaniard is so much bigger than the difference between an inuit, zulu and chinese man.


and saying "im not a racist" and "i dont think one is superior to the other" doesnt change the fact that you are a racist, by definition, once you start categorizing people and saying ridiculous things like "native people tend to ___". sure, its not dangerous racism, but it is complete and utterly blatant racism to think along those lines.

not to mention "an eye for an eye" is about as western as hinduism. unless you consider babylon to be western?
"western" usually refers to european cultures, especially those modeled after the greeks and romans.

i'd also like to point out that the first written language was egyptian, and the first phonemic script was canaanite / phonecian. you can also argue that writing had been around in some capacity or another for thousands of years prior, all over the world (from china to peru). bear in mind EVERY complete form of written language does the same thing, you can't argue "well modern writing began in ___ which i am going to link with europeans" and discount heiroglyphics or early chinese script.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:19 AM
link   
The human journey is very interesting , every human alive today who does not come from Africa came from a single tribe who managed to leave the African continent. So the Chinese, Indians, Afghans, Westerners have all come from just one tribe who spread out throughout the world. 1 in 25 of us are descendants of Gehngis Kahn

[edit on 14-7-2009 by woodwardjnr]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:20 AM
link   
Nice post. To me, it seems like this post is a question of why white folks are different from other ethnic groups. A more defined nose what? The nose of Europeans and her ancestors are the results of living in a colder climate. Have you seen the skin color of Japanese women? It's white!

*sigh*

I would post counterpoints to your theory but honestly i'm a little tired and i don't feeling like scampering through my text books and google to refute your points.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by cenpuppie]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:25 AM
link   
yeah regarding more defined nose... you ever met a quechua (inca)? an indian person? (the subcontinent) the only real distinguishing characteristic of white people is very low amounts of pigmentation. that's where the skin comes from. thats where non-brown eyes come from. that's where lighter hair colors come from. all of the above are VERY far from being genetic variety - you'd be surprised to learn the part of the world with the most genetic variety (by far) is east africa.

oh and "non-white" science did not categorize things the way "whites" did? science only survived the dark ages thanks to the arabs preserving and progressing it (guess where the concept of zero comes from), and china was *vastly* more advanced than europe was for the tremendous majority of human history.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by JScytale]


+26 more 
posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale
oh yeah, the difference between a russian and a spaniard is so much bigger than the difference between an inuit, zulu and chinese man.


and saying "im not a racist" and "i dont think one is superior to the other" doesnt change the fact that you are a racist, by definition, once you start categorizing people and saying ridiculous things like "native people tend to ___". sure, its not dangerous racism, but it is complete and utterly blatant racism to think along those lines.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by JScytale]


thats ridiculous...he was just thinking out loud and saying what he thinks...and what he said wasnt racist in the least.

anyway...whats wrong about saying dark coloured people make better sportsmen or women?...there are many different races of dogs..horses..everything...they all have things they are better at..more suited to..thats the whole point...thats why races exist in the first place...thats what races are!!!!..

how did we ever get to the point that even mentioning this fact is a reason to be attacked and be called names?

you sir are being discriminatory in attacking the OP for absolutely no reason.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:34 AM
link   
reply to post by alienesque
 


www.britannica.com...

Racism:
any action, practice, or belief that reflects the racial worldview—the ideology that humans are divided into separate and exclusive biological entities called "races," that there is a causal link between inherited physical traits and traits of personality, intellect, morality, and other cultural behavioral features, and that some races are innately superior to others.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:42 AM
link   
I'll answer these in a kind of random order, if you don't mind.


Are these differences actually because an alien (but related) race of human beings were marooned on this planet?


If we white people truly are an alien race from another planet, how would we be so similar to the other races on the planet (so much so that we would be able to interbreed)? Is this not a virtual impossibility? Why would we have no knowledge of this? Why would this alien race simply forget about it, or make no record of the events? Why aren't there at least myths that indicate something of this nature? Where's the archaological evidence? Why are we virtually biologically identical to the other races if we have such differing origins?


Could that explain why Western people are in a disharmony with nature and feel the need to modify it?


Let me start by telling you that your assertion here is simply wrong. Have you ever been to or seen Japan or China or Korea? I don't think you'll find better examples of people living in disharmony with nature. During the Olympic Games the Chinese government spent thousands of dollars paying people to photoshop photos of their skyline because of the smog that plagues the city. But then you'll probably put that down to us and our outside influence on them or something. However it can plainly be seen that they are no more instinctually bound to the land than we are.

Anyway, what your statement really demonstrates is a lack of understanding of the history of white/middle-eastern people. Our ancestors began just as everybody else's, in a tribal environments more or less in harmony with nature. The difference is, the geological position of settlements like those found in Greece and in Egypt provided unique opportunities for the trade of technology and goods, which led to a rapid increase in the sophistication of said technology. The abundance of resources in these parts of the world also aided this expansion, and trade began to become more common. The seas of the Mediterranean were also essential, it was like a kind of ancient highway, while travel on land remained slow and tiring.

An African tribesman walking the savanna, who is limited in contact to his family and the members of perhaps a few others, is hardly going to discover pythagorean theory. While an abundance of resources might provide the opportunity, and a lively market for the trade of technologies might provide the incentive for a Greek philosopher, he has no need for it and has more pressing concerns.

It has nothing to do with aliens, it has to do with the region of the Earth that we inhabited, just in the same that we have fair skin and bright eyes and hair because they proved advantageous for life in the environment that surrounded us.


And are they actually the descendants of Atlanteans?


What the hell?

continuing...


[edit on 14-7-2009 by sorennn]

[edit on 14-7-2009 by sorennn]

[edit on 14-7-2009 by sorennn]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:46 AM
link   
*sigh*

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
Far more important and drastic are the cultural differences. For one thing, all of the world's alphabets came from white cultures. Even the Indian and Southeast Asian alphabets were brought by Indo-European and Arab people. All of the writing systems that originated outside of the Middle East are pictographic.

Well, I have never heard Semitic peoples grouped in with "whites," but assuming that they are, this is true: alphabets all come from Phoenician.


White cultures also have an obsession with perfection and geometry, trying unrealistically to attain this perceived geometric perfection. This is why they build pyramids and wheels.

LOL! Yes, seeking geometric perfection lead to the building of the pyramids and the wheel. Pretty sure religion and transport had no role there...


The Western idea of goodness is "righteousness" - what I mean by that, is that one is supposed to live by the book, there is often an equivalence between "justice" and "revenge", indeed the words can almost be synonyms in certain usages in the English language. The idea of "eye for an eye" is a totally Western idea; indigenous cultures didn't think in those terms, at least for the most part; they might get revenge in anger, but never did they consider it an ideal as far as I know. Non-western cultures tend to have a more practical approach to justice.

Here we have to make a distinction between Semitic and "white" (i.e., Northern European), since indigenous ideas about "righteousness" in, say, Scandinavia were very different (or, more probably, simply didn't exist).


Western people tend to see the forest for the trees, while indigenous people see the "whole picture" more. Non-white cultures did not categorize things the way the ancient Greeks and modern scientists do (however I find the postmodern hatred of all labels and categories excessive and even oppressive).

Um, but we don't categorize things the same way as the Greeks. What about that?? Also, just FYI, to same something about how westerns and non-westerns see the world, as a blanket statement, is racist.


Are these differences actually because an alien (but related) race of human beings were marooned on this planet? Could that explain why Western people are in a disharmony with nature and feel the need to modify it? And are they actually the descendants of Atlanteans?

Um, no.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by sorennn
Why are we virtually biologically identical to the other races if we have such differing origins?

correction: biologically identical, not nearly
. The genetic difference between you and your neighbor is astronomically larger than the genetic difference between the average white person and say, the average chinese person.



Let me start by telling you that your assertion here is simply wrong. Have you ever been to or seen Japan or China or Korea? I don't think you'll find better examples of people living in disharmony with nature. During the Olympic Games the Chinese government spent thousands of dollars paying people to photoshop photos of their skyline because of the smog that plagues the city. But then you'll probably put that down to us and our outside influence on them or something, however it can plainly be seen that they are no more instinctually bound to the land than we are.

this is very true. the way people "treat nature" has everything to do with the size of their population and cultural tendencies and nothing to do with their ancestry. the OP should read up on china's history.



Anyway, what your statement really demonstrates is a lack of understanding of the history of white/middle-eastern people. Our ancestors began just as everybody else's, in a tribal environments more or less in harmony with nature. The difference is, the geological position of settlements like those found in Greece and in Egypt provided unique opportunities for the trade of technology and goods, which led to a rapid increase in the sophistication of said technology. The abundance of resources in these parts of the world also aided this expansion, and trade began to become more common. The seas of the Mediterranean were also essential, it was like a kind of ancient highway, while travel on land remained slow and tiring.

An African tribesman walking the savanna, who is limited in contact to his family and the members of perhaps a few others, is hardly going to discover pythagorean theory. While an abundance of resources might provide the opportunity, and a lively market for the trade of technologies might provide the incentive for a Greek philosopher, he has no need for it and has more pressing concerns.






And are they actually the descendants of Atlanteans?


What the hell?


I laughed too.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale
oh yeah, the difference between a russian and a spaniard is so much bigger than the difference between an inuit, zulu and chinese man.



first of all, russians and spaniards both have indo-european ancestry, thus they would both be in the "white" category.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
first of all, russians and spaniards both have indo-european ancestry, thus they would both be in the "white" category.


I point you to this quote.


However, I can't help but to notice not only the similarities between the different nations of "white people" and also commonalities held by all non-"white" nations.


He just divided the world in two.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko

Originally posted by JScytale
oh yeah, the difference between a russian and a spaniard is so much bigger than the difference between an inuit, zulu and chinese man.



first of all, russians and spaniards both have indo-european ancestry, thus they would both be in the "white" category.

Um, and, second of all ...?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale
oh yeah, the difference between a russian and a spaniard is so much bigger than the difference between an inuit, zulu and chinese man.


and saying "im not a racist" and "i dont think one is superior to the other" doesnt change the fact that you are a racist, by definition, once you start categorizing people and saying ridiculous things like "native people tend to ___". sure, its not dangerous racism, but it is complete and utterly blatant racism to think along those lines.


[edit on 14-7-2009 by JScytale]


so there is no differences in the values and ideals different cultures promote? i don't think it really has anything to do with genetics because white people, even if they ARE alien, do have basically the same DNA as non-white people, because for one thing, there were also indigenous white people (and still are, such as the Basques), that the Indo-Europeans mixed with. Same with the Semites who mixed with the Canaanites, etc.

And of course not all white people think one way, and all non-white people the other. I'm talking about the overall cultures.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale


not to mention "an eye for an eye" is about as western as hinduism. unless you consider babylon to be western?
"western" usually refers to european cultures, especially those modeled after the greeks and romans.

i'd also like to point out that the first written language was egyptian, and the first phonemic script was canaanite / phonecian. you can also argue that writing had been around in some capacity or another for thousands of years prior, all over the world (from china to peru). bear in mind EVERY complete form of written language does the same thing, you can't argue "well modern writing began in ___ which i am going to link with europeans" and discount heiroglyphics or early chinese script.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by JScytale]


anyone who knows their history knows that European civilization began in the Middle East. As I said, Semitic and Hamitic, which would mean most Middle Eastern and North African people, are considered "white" in this regard, at least they are more like Westerners than like the native people of the world.

Hinduism actually does have a Western component too; the caste system's highest levels are the rich white skinned Indo-Europeans who invaded India and brought the Vedas.

Chinese script is an evolution of pictographs. It is very beautiful and very complex, yes, but it is not anything like an alphabet. Phoenicians, like I said, are Semitic and thus Western. I never said Western people invented writing, I said they alone used alphabets until recently.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by cenpuppie
Nice post. To me, it seems like this post is a question of why white folks are different from other ethnic groups. A more defined nose what? The nose of Europeans and her ancestors are the results of living in a colder climate. Have you seen the skin color of Japanese women? It's white!

*sigh*


[edit on 14-7-2009 by cenpuppie]


But white people (grouped with Middle Eastern people) ARE a totally different group of cultures (not people) than every other culture in the world.

Middle Eastern people have far sharper nose shapes than European people, so it is not about the climate. As for Asians, yes their skin is fairly pale, but it is still darker than the skin of Europeans; the women put powder on their skin to make it appear snow white.

Also, white people sunburn - what adaptive quality does that have? Can you tell me it's NORMAL to get cancer just by being out in the sun? No, maybe it's because white people come from a different star system with a darker (or more distant) sun?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
anyone who knows their history knows that European civilization began in the Middle East. As I said, Semitic and Hamitic, which would mean most Middle Eastern and North African people, are considered "white" in this regard, at least they are more like Westerners than like the native people of the world.

No, civilization began in the middle east. What people call European civilization began in Greece. Almost every single European culture today (and US Culture) is firmly rooted in Greek culture.



Chinese script is an evolution of pictographs. It is very beautiful and very complex, yes, but it is not anything like an alphabet. Phoenicians, like I said, are Semitic and thus Western. I never said Western people invented writing, I said they alone used alphabets until recently.

pictographs, when specific and varied enough (such as the examples of Egyptian hieroglyphics or Chinese script) serve the same purpose as an alphabet with the same capability. The only negative is they take a lot longer to learn, and take more time to write.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
Also, white people sunburn - what adaptive quality does that have? Can you tell me it's NORMAL to get cancer just by being out in the sun? No, maybe it's because white people come from a different star system with a darker (or more distant) sun?


Sunburning is a side effect of losing skin pigmentation, which was an adaptive change. There isn't much sunlight in northern latitudes, and some sunlight must penetrate the skin to produce vitamin D. Thats awful hard in the winter in northern europe when you have dark skin blocking most of it.

anthro.palomar.edu...

[edit on 14-7-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
Also, white people sunburn - what adaptive quality does that have? Can you tell me it's NORMAL to get cancer just by being out in the sun? No, maybe it's because white people come from a different star system with a darker (or more distant) sun?

*sigh*

No, Northern Europeans have lighter skin because it allows the body to produce Vitamin-D more efficiently in less sunny climates.

Sunburns aren't adaptive at all. But, by the time humans migrated to Northern Europe, they were able to make clothes (elsewise, they would have died from the cold), and they would have spent more time outside, making them tanner year-round. Sun burns are thus a product of modern society, where we spend relatively little time in the sun, and then go full boar, travel south, and lay in the sun for 12 hours a day.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:23 AM
link   
reply to post by suomichris
 


jinx



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join