If Negros Had Been Left To Their Own Devices...

Your link speaks of Vinca signs, and also Jiahu symbols.
it's generally considered as proto-Writing, but I'm not so sure about that.

It makes more sense that Europe, and China founded writing, rather than Near-Easterners, or North-Africans.
I mean just look at the verbal performance of PISA scores, or IQ scores in Arab nations vs Europe, or China.

Apparently there is a lot of dispute over the vinca tablets in dating and authenticity.
Tărtăria tablets - Wikipedia

Egypt was also an extremely advanced and powerful civilization in its time.

I never said Vinca was, but may have been the first civilization.
Nor did I deny Ancient Egypt.
What do you have that supports that when we have the same thing in Africa thousands of years older than the vinca civilization?

So do we in Ukraine.


You dont have anything in the Ukraine except snow and guys that rape sheep from what I heard.

##############################

Just read up on you claim and that is only 4000 BCE. Egypt, Nubia and Sumer have writing that predates that.

And space ships and computers even before that.
 
Racist whites will hope against all hope that if Blacks were left to their own devices we would fail. The question I ask is if we are succeeding despite your very best efforts to stop us why would you think we would fail if you vanished from the planet?

Lets be serious for a moment.

1. Blacks existed before whites ever appeared on the planet.
2. They built civilizations that to this day whites cant figure out.
3. While europe was falling back into an illiterate quagmire, Blacks built more civilizations.
4. After whites declared "never again" and went on a homicidal and felonious crime spree across the planet, Blacks still survived and even helped whites build their civilizations.
5. After assisting in their own released from slavery here in the states, Blacks became politicians and successful businessmen.
6. Even when Jim Crow was established Blacks still became successful and built their own thriving towns and cities which whites promptly destroyed out of rage.

If we could do all that when we had no contact with whites and did all that when violently oppressed by whites how is there even a question?
334C7CC100000578-3545004-image-a-1_1461005759548.jpg

The question is, why are blacks drowning to get to the countries of the racist, raging whites when they could just stay in their apefreaka coontries.

And as a white man, I must say I can't for the life of me figure out how that super-advanced negro vessel works. All us dumb whites have is this crappy driftwood:
141003081459-uss-abraham-lincoln-file-horizontal-large-gallery.jpg


If only those negroes would make it to our white countries to teach us their ancient arts...

 
That wasnt in 4000 BCE. What in the hell are you talking about?

Well, you said the only thing in Ukraine was men who raped sheep.
So, I defended Ukrainian rocket scientists.
Ah. My bad.

In Africa there are civilizations well over 11k years old that show the study of astronomy.

Nabta Playa and the Ancient Astronomers of the Nubian Desert

Weren't they Mechtoid's though?
Who told you they were Mechtoid's? WTH is a Mechtoid?

Mechta - Afalou.
What makes you think they were Mechta Afalou?
 
Well, you said the only thing in Ukraine was men who raped sheep.
So, I defended Ukrainian rocket scientists.
Ah. My bad.

In Africa there are civilizations well over 11k years old that show the study of astronomy.

Nabta Playa and the Ancient Astronomers of the Nubian Desert

Weren't they Mechtoid's though?
Who told you they were Mechtoid's? WTH is a Mechtoid?

Mechta - Afalou.
What makes you think they were Mechta Afalou?

Because of Jebel Sahaba remains not too far from Nabta Playa are rather Mechtoid (Mechta-Afalou type)

Archaeology and Language II
 
Yeah, well a lot more of them are more upper middle class, or even upper class from their populations, than you people are.
That tends to happen when you arent subject to generations of racial oppression and having your fathers imprisoned and your mothers on welfare as a result. So again please explain what you are talking about?


We are some fifty years past the civil rights period dullard, your weak, pathetic line of excuses burnt out decades ago...blaming 'whitey' now says more about you than about 'whitey'...Blacks are their own worst enemy!
What does civil rights have to do with what I said? This is occurring as we speak.


Wow!!!! are you truly this clueless? A spate of opportunities were made available to Blacks as a result of critical Civil Rights legislation---including a number of disparate-impact rulings...Affirmative Action...Section-Eight housing...Welfare supplements...Food Stamps...Child-Care...Tuition Assistance...etc...etc. The vast majority of Blacks did nothing more than consume the 'freebies'...
Affrimative action has predominantly assisted white females, asians, hispanics, and lastly Blacks. All other races get the rest of that stuff and whites dominate the welfare recipients.


Wrong yet again moron...did you study ratios in school? Oh that's right they don't cover ratios in 3rd grade yet...in terms of population ratio Blacks dominate the welfare rolls...


Dispelling Myths: White Woman are not the primary beneficiaries of Affirmative Action
Posted on May 27, 2015 by Vijay Chokal-Ingam


Don’t believe everything that Jesse Jackson tells you.

There is a common myth that Affirmative Action benefits white women that has been perpetrated by many advocates of racial preferences including Jesse Jackson.

The logic goes that the standards of living, wages, and number of white women in positions of power has grown significantly since the advent of affirmative action in 1960’s, and therefore white women are the greatest beneficiaries of affirmative action. Many studies and articles have made this claim. These studies largely ignore the effects of other factors and trends, such as economic convergence, changing social norms, and antidiscrimination laws, on the economic status of white woman.

Without going into great detail, its safe to say that there has been a large increase in the number and enforcement of antidiscrimination laws in the United States since the 1960’s. At the same time, social norms have also changed, encouraging woman to enter the workforce and seek higher education in fields such as architecture and medicine that were once largely restricted to men. These factors are separate from affirmative action and their economic impact is enormous but difficult to measure.

At the University of Chicago, were learned about another economic phenomena called convergence that may also help to improve the economic status of white woman. In the absence of legal, social, and economic pressures, the economic well being of two similar groups of people will converge. The classic example of economic convergence is the United Kingdom and Ireland. For centuries, Ireland was an exploited colony of the United Kingdom, with much lower standards of living. Heard of the Irish Potato Famine? It was caused by British mismanagement of the Irish economy. This all changed with the end of colonialism in the early 20th century and the independence of Ireland. Irish standards of living rapidly increased until they actually surpassed those of the United Kingdom. Of course, the European Union would love to claim credit for the “Celtic Tiger” of Ireland’s economic success, but the probable cause is actually simple economic convergence.

So how are Ireland and the UK relevant for white women and affirmative action? For centuries, white women were oppressed and discouraged from pursing education and employment opportunities based on social norms and law. However, white woman and men both have the same parents and the same economic starting point. As social, legal, and economic pressures against woman in the workforce and in higher education disappear, woman and men experience rapid economic convergence.

This leads to all the studies that claim that the primary beneficiaries of affirmative action are white woman. These studies are correct is saying that the standards of living, education, and wages of woman have increased dramatically since the 1960’s. However, they suffer from attribution bias. The authors are unable to separate the impact of changing laws, social norms, economic convergence, and affirmative action on the economic status of white woman. Since many of the authors of these studies are left-leaning affirmative action supporters, they have a tendency to attribute ALL of the positive changes in the status of woman to affirmative action.

Let’s be clear. Ending affirmative action does not mean abolishing antidiscrimination laws, preserving outdated social norms, and reversing economic convergence. Affirmative action opponents simply say that race and gender should not be used as factors in assessing the qualifications of candidates. The long term impact of this change is difficult to measure.

It’s not really valid to attribute the enormous improvement in the economic well being of white woman over the last 5 decades purely to affirmative action.
 
That tends to happen when you arent subject to generations of racial oppression and having your fathers imprisoned and your mothers on welfare as a result. So again please explain what you are talking about?


We are some fifty years past the civil rights period dullard, your weak, pathetic line of excuses burnt out decades ago...blaming 'whitey' now says more about you than about 'whitey'...Blacks are their own worst enemy!
What does civil rights have to do with what I said? This is occurring as we speak.


Wow!!!! are you truly this clueless? A spate of opportunities were made available to Blacks as a result of critical Civil Rights legislation---including a number of disparate-impact rulings...Affirmative Action...Section-Eight housing...Welfare supplements...Food Stamps...Child-Care...Tuition Assistance...etc...etc. The vast majority of Blacks did nothing more than consume the 'freebies'...
Affrimative action has predominantly assisted white females, asians, hispanics, and lastly Blacks. All other races get the rest of that stuff and whites dominate the welfare recipients.


Wrong yet again moron...did you study ratios in school? Oh that's right they don't cover ratios in 3rd grade yet...in terms of population ratio Blacks dominate the welfare rolls...


Dispelling Myths: White Woman are not the primary beneficiaries of Affirmative Action
Posted on May 27, 2015 by Vijay Chokal-Ingam


Don’t believe everything that Jesse Jackson tells you.

There is a common myth that Affirmative Action benefits white women that has been perpetrated by many advocates of racial preferences including Jesse Jackson.

The logic goes that the standards of living, wages, and number of white women in positions of power has grown significantly since the advent of affirmative action in 1960’s, and therefore white women are the greatest beneficiaries of affirmative action. Many studies and articles have made this claim. These studies largely ignore the effects of other factors and trends, such as economic convergence, changing social norms, and antidiscrimination laws, on the economic status of white woman.

Without going into great detail, its safe to say that there has been a large increase in the number and enforcement of antidiscrimination laws in the United States since the 1960’s. At the same time, social norms have also changed, encouraging woman to enter the workforce and seek higher education in fields such as architecture and medicine that were once largely restricted to men. These factors are separate from affirmative action and their economic impact is enormous but difficult to measure.

At the University of Chicago, were learned about another economic phenomena called convergence that may also help to improve the economic status of white woman. In the absence of legal, social, and economic pressures, the economic well being of two similar groups of people will converge. The classic example of economic convergence is the United Kingdom and Ireland. For centuries, Ireland was an exploited colony of the United Kingdom, with much lower standards of living. Heard of the Irish Potato Famine? It was caused by British mismanagement of the Irish economy. This all changed with the end of colonialism in the early 20th century and the independence of Ireland. Irish standards of living rapidly increased until they actually surpassed those of the United Kingdom. Of course, the European Union would love to claim credit for the “Celtic Tiger” of Ireland’s economic success, but the probable cause is actually simple economic convergence.

So how are Ireland and the UK relevant for white women and affirmative action? For centuries, white women were oppressed and discouraged from pursing education and employment opportunities based on social norms and law. However, white woman and men both have the same parents and the same economic starting point. As social, legal, and economic pressures against woman in the workforce and in higher education disappear, woman and men experience rapid economic convergence.

This leads to all the studies that claim that the primary beneficiaries of affirmative action are white woman. These studies are correct is saying that the standards of living, education, and wages of woman have increased dramatically since the 1960’s. However, they suffer from attribution bias. The authors are unable to separate the impact of changing laws, social norms, economic convergence, and affirmative action on the economic status of white woman. Since many of the authors of these studies are left-leaning affirmative action supporters, they have a tendency to attribute ALL of the positive changes in the status of woman to affirmative action.

Let’s be clear. Ending affirmative action does not mean abolishing antidiscrimination laws, preserving outdated social norms, and reversing economic convergence. Affirmative action opponents simply say that race and gender should not be used as factors in assessing the qualifications of candidates. The long term impact of this change is difficult to measure.

It’s not really valid to attribute the enormous improvement in the economic well being of white woman over the last 5 decades purely to affirmative action.
This is from a white woman. Sorry but it debunks your link.

Affirmative Action Has Helped White Women More Than Anyone | TIME.com
 
Ah. My bad.

In Africa there are civilizations well over 11k years old that show the study of astronomy.

Nabta Playa and the Ancient Astronomers of the Nubian Desert

Weren't they Mechtoid's though?
Who told you they were Mechtoid's? WTH is a Mechtoid?

Mechta - Afalou.
What makes you think they were Mechta Afalou?

Because of Jebel Sahaba remains not too far from Nabta Playa are rather Mechtoid (Mechta-Afalou type)

Archaeology and Language II
Highly doubt it. How would an advanced hominid disappear from the planet that was smart enough to do astronomy?
 
Weren't they Mechtoid's though?
Who told you they were Mechtoid's? WTH is a Mechtoid?

Mechta - Afalou.
What makes you think they were Mechta Afalou?

Because of Jebel Sahaba remains not too far from Nabta Playa are rather Mechtoid (Mechta-Afalou type)

Archaeology and Language II
Highly doubt it. How would an advanced hominid disappear from the planet that was smart enough to do astronomy?

Well, U6 haplogroup might be Mechta-Afalou, if so then they didn't go extinct, but rather were absorbed by Natufian farmer types from the Near-East.
 
How does it make more sense when the first writing was in Egypt?


The first writing was Sanskrit
No. Lets see some proof. While youre at it get the other proof I asked for. I gave you enough time.


Gosh I'm still waiting for that solemn history lesson about how Africans taught Europeans how to build civilizations...?
Give it a break. I only taunt Ass till he's jumping up and down then I leave him alone.

It's a bit like taunting a dumb animal after that.

Well, I wouldn't say my purpose is to be mean to Black people here, it's more about educating White people about the wrongs of anti-Racism, and why we need to think things through on race.

We can't even define race in a meaningful way...
 
The primary reason for the lack of progress in Africa compared to Europe and Asia was due to the geography. We all began as Africans but like many other species we found life outside of our original home much easier.

However, because we evolved in Africa, it is the one place where the ecosystem evolved alongside us. For example the large African animals evolved ways of dealing with us by being either ultra-aggressive or ultra-wary. This meant that the African equivalent of the horse, the zebra, became virtually un-tamable, similarly the elephant and the wild dog. At the other end of the scale there was no shortage of bugs, worms, flies and other critters that were more than happy to use us as part of their life cycle. Thus Africa became a pretty tough place in which to survive. In fact, the 19th century Victorians call West Africa the “white man’s graveyard”.

When the ancestors of modern day Europeans, Asians and other peoples left Africa some 60,000 years ago, many found better places to live, milder climates, animals capable of domestication, and fewer things wanting to eat them either directly or from the inside out. A few found themselves in less hospitable places, such as Australia or parts of South America, but for the most the world outside of Africa was a better place.

Unlike Sub-Saharan Africa with Desert to the north and surrounded by 3 oceans, travel through Europe and Asia presented few geographic obstacles. In time, more sophisticated societies developed where they could interact, trade, and learn from their neighbors both near and far thus they advanced much faster than the Africans who remained isolated. The Romans got principals of government and art and culture from the Greeks, the Europeans copied gunpowder from the Chinese, mathematics from the Arabs. Those in Europe and Asia that were connected developed faster and faster and those that were isolated in Africa progressed slowly and became vulnerable to exploitation. It’s not that the Europeans and Asians were better than Africans, they were just able to progress faster because they were able to leave Africa.
And now that the negroes have left Africa, they lead the violent crime statistics. Explain that.
There is high correlation between poverty and crime throughout the world. Since the poverty rate among blacks is much higher that whites, one would expect higher crime rates.

But the main problem with that is blacks do not have a higher crime rate. And I'm not going to play the per capita game. .
You may be correct because we do not know the crime rate for blacks or whites. The FBI collects data on crimes reported, arrests, and convictions, not the actual crime rate. There is no way to know what the actually crime rate is. so there is no way to know what the crime rate for blacks and whites are. We often make the erroneous assumption that the arrest rate equals the crime rate.

We do know that if a black person and a white person each commit a crime, the black person is more likely to be arrested. This is due in part to the fact that black people are more heavily policed. Black people, more often than white people, live in very dense urban areas. Dense urban areas are more heavily policed than suburban or rural areas. When people live in close proximity to one another, police can monitor more people more often. In more heavily policed areas, people committing crimes are caught more frequently. This could help explain why, for example, black people and white people smoke marijuana at similar rates, yet black people are 3.7 times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession. The discrepancy could also be driven by overt racism, more frequent illegal searches of black people, or an increased willingness to let non-blacks off with a warning.
There will always be unknowns and you can always keep blaming those unknowns for black problems. It's kind of like a certain person on this forum who keeps going back to ancient Egyptian times and even before then, to a time from which no evidence survived, to point out supposed black achievements. I prefer to live in reality while rationally analyzing evidence that does exist and that evidence points overwhelmingly in one direction.
I don't see problems as being problems of Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, or any race or ethnicity because these are social problems that all us must deal with because in one or another they effect us all.
 
But the main problem with that is blacks do not have a higher crime rate. And I'm not going to play the per capita game. .
So what is the black crime rate?

.You've been shown that whites commit the most crimes and the numbers.
Those are numbers, not rates. Do you understand what a rate is? A "rate" is something like the "per capita game" you aren't going to play.

Rate: a certain quantity or amount of one thing considered in relation to a unit of another thing and used as a standard or measure.

As for why rates are important, here's an example:

Ford builds 100 cars.
Toyota builds 100,000 cars.

100 of the Fords fail.
200 of the Toyotas fail.

The numbers (100 vs 200 failures) only show that Toyota had more failures, but the rate (100% failure vs 0.2% failure) is the only piece of information from this example that will let you determine the quality of the vehicle (reliability-wise).

Yep so if there are 1000 crimes, which is a thing and 700 whites commit rimes, then whites commit 70 percent of the crimes.
 
Racist whites will hope against all hope that if Blacks were left to their own devices we would fail. The question I ask is if we are succeeding despite your very best efforts to stop us why would you think we would fail if you vanished from the planet?

Lets be serious for a moment.

1. Blacks existed before whites ever appeared on the planet.
2. They built civilizations that to this day whites cant figure out.
3. While europe was falling back into an illiterate quagmire, Blacks built more civilizations.
4. After whites declared "never again" and went on a homicidal and felonious crime spree across the planet, Blacks still survived and even helped whites build their civilizations.
5. After assisting in their own released from slavery here in the states, Blacks became politicians and successful businessmen.
6. Even when Jim Crow was established Blacks still became successful and built their own thriving towns and cities which whites promptly destroyed out of rage.

If we could do all that when we had no contact with whites and did all that when violently oppressed by whites how is there even a question?
334C7CC100000578-3545004-image-a-1_1461005759548.jpg

The question is, why are blacks drowning to get to the countries of the racist, raging whites when they could just stay in their apefreaka coontries.

And as a white man, I must say I can't for the life of me figure out how that super-advanced negro vessel works. All us dumb whites have is this crappy driftwood:
141003081459-uss-abraham-lincoln-file-horizontal-large-gallery.jpg


If only those negroes would make it to our white countries to teach us their ancient arts...

Ignorance of western foreign policy is apparent here by this stupid ass white man. Again you might want not to make ship accidents racial. The US has 2 naval ship accidents here recently.
 
And now that the negroes have left Africa, they lead the violent crime statistics. Explain that.
There is high correlation between poverty and crime throughout the world. Since the poverty rate among blacks is much higher that whites, one would expect higher crime rates.

But the main problem with that is blacks do not have a higher crime rate. And I'm not going to play the per capita game. .
You may be correct because we do not know the crime rate for blacks or whites. The FBI collects data on crimes reported, arrests, and convictions, not the actual crime rate. There is no way to know what the actually crime rate is. so there is no way to know what the crime rate for blacks and whites are. We often make the erroneous assumption that the arrest rate equals the crime rate.

We do know that if a black person and a white person each commit a crime, the black person is more likely to be arrested. This is due in part to the fact that black people are more heavily policed. Black people, more often than white people, live in very dense urban areas. Dense urban areas are more heavily policed than suburban or rural areas. When people live in close proximity to one another, police can monitor more people more often. In more heavily policed areas, people committing crimes are caught more frequently. This could help explain why, for example, black people and white people smoke marijuana at similar rates, yet black people are 3.7 times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession. The discrepancy could also be driven by overt racism, more frequent illegal searches of black people, or an increased willingness to let non-blacks off with a warning.
There will always be unknowns and you can always keep blaming those unknowns for black problems. It's kind of like a certain person on this forum who keeps going back to ancient Egyptian times and even before then, to a time from which no evidence survived, to point out supposed black achievements. I prefer to live in reality while rationally analyzing evidence that does exist and that evidence points overwhelmingly in one direction.
I don't see problems as being problems of Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, or any race or ethnicity because these are social problems that all us must deal with because in one or another they effect us all.

I understand your position but when you are black and get blamed for violence and see innocent blacks being killed by people who believe this nonsense while they justify murders then you understand that it is of the utmost importance to shut that kind of belief up.
 
And now that the negroes have left Africa, they lead the violent crime statistics. Explain that.
There is high correlation between poverty and crime throughout the world. Since the poverty rate among blacks is much higher that whites, one would expect higher crime rates.

But the main problem with that is blacks do not have a higher crime rate. And I'm not going to play the per capita game. .
You may be correct because we do not know the crime rate for blacks or whites. The FBI collects data on crimes reported, arrests, and convictions, not the actual crime rate. There is no way to know what the actually crime rate is. so there is no way to know what the crime rate for blacks and whites are. We often make the erroneous assumption that the arrest rate equals the crime rate.

We do know that if a black person and a white person each commit a crime, the black person is more likely to be arrested. This is due in part to the fact that black people are more heavily policed. Black people, more often than white people, live in very dense urban areas. Dense urban areas are more heavily policed than suburban or rural areas. When people live in close proximity to one another, police can monitor more people more often. In more heavily policed areas, people committing crimes are caught more frequently. This could help explain why, for example, black people and white people smoke marijuana at similar rates, yet black people are 3.7 times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession. The discrepancy could also be driven by overt racism, more frequent illegal searches of black people, or an increased willingness to let non-blacks off with a warning.
There will always be unknowns and you can always keep blaming those unknowns for black problems. It's kind of like a certain person on this forum who keeps going back to ancient Egyptian times and even before then, to a time from which no evidence survived, to point out supposed black achievements. I prefer to live in reality while rationally analyzing evidence that does exist and that evidence points overwhelmingly in one direction.
I don't see problems as being problems of Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, or any race or ethnicity because these are social problems that all us must deal with because in one or another they effect us all.
Blacks cause problems for whites, you are correct.
 
I used to think race was a superficial matter, and the mindset behind race was a placebo effect. I am beginning to wonder if there isn't something deeper in our DNA that effects our behavior. When I see family members with the same genetics have the same preferences act in the same ways, think the same way, or with twins and these strange coincidences behaviorally. Race, DNA may be more than skin deep. What if certain forms of behavior, say being more prone to violence, even racism itself where a behavioral trait that is genetic? In the list of things we may have inherited genetically, predilections to certain behaviors, it wouldn't surprise me.
 
Racist whites will hope against all hope that if Blacks were left to their own devices we would fail. The question I ask is if we are succeeding despite your very best efforts to stop us why would you think we would fail if you vanished from the planet?

Lets be serious for a moment.

1. Blacks existed before whites ever appeared on the planet.
2. They built civilizations that to this day whites cant figure out.
3. While europe was falling back into an illiterate quagmire, Blacks built more civilizations.
4. After whites declared "never again" and went on a homicidal and felonious crime spree across the planet, Blacks still survived and even helped whites build their civilizations.
5. After assisting in their own released from slavery here in the states, Blacks became politicians and successful businessmen.
6. Even when Jim Crow was established Blacks still became successful and built their own thriving towns and cities which whites promptly destroyed out of rage.

If we could do all that when we had no contact with whites and did all that when violently oppressed by whites how is there even a question?
334C7CC100000578-3545004-image-a-1_1461005759548.jpg

The question is, why are blacks drowning to get to the countries of the racist, raging whites when they could just stay in their apefreaka coontries.

And as a white man, I must say I can't for the life of me figure out how that super-advanced negro vessel works. All us dumb whites have is this crappy driftwood:
141003081459-uss-abraham-lincoln-file-horizontal-large-gallery.jpg


If only those negroes would make it to our white countries to teach us their ancient arts...

Ignorance of western foreign policy is apparent here by this stupid ass white man. Again you might want not to make ship accidents racial. The US has 2 naval ship accidents here recently.
And the negro misses the point yet again (hint: it's not about ship accidents, but about who is trying to get where and at what cost).


Yep so if there are 1000 crimes, which is a thing and 700 whites commit rimes, then whites commit 70 percent of the crimes.

And if those 700 whites are from a group of 100,000,000 whites, while the other 300 crimes are committed by 300 blacks from the same country, which happens to only contain 300 blacks, which person would you cross the street to avoid: A random white dude who has a 0.0007% chance of being a criminal or a random black dude who has a 100% chance of being a criminal?
 
There is high correlation between poverty and crime throughout the world. Since the poverty rate among blacks is much higher that whites, one would expect higher crime rates.

But the main problem with that is blacks do not have a higher crime rate. And I'm not going to play the per capita game. .
You may be correct because we do not know the crime rate for blacks or whites. The FBI collects data on crimes reported, arrests, and convictions, not the actual crime rate. There is no way to know what the actually crime rate is. so there is no way to know what the crime rate for blacks and whites are. We often make the erroneous assumption that the arrest rate equals the crime rate.

We do know that if a black person and a white person each commit a crime, the black person is more likely to be arrested. This is due in part to the fact that black people are more heavily policed. Black people, more often than white people, live in very dense urban areas. Dense urban areas are more heavily policed than suburban or rural areas. When people live in close proximity to one another, police can monitor more people more often. In more heavily policed areas, people committing crimes are caught more frequently. This could help explain why, for example, black people and white people smoke marijuana at similar rates, yet black people are 3.7 times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession. The discrepancy could also be driven by overt racism, more frequent illegal searches of black people, or an increased willingness to let non-blacks off with a warning.
There will always be unknowns and you can always keep blaming those unknowns for black problems. It's kind of like a certain person on this forum who keeps going back to ancient Egyptian times and even before then, to a time from which no evidence survived, to point out supposed black achievements. I prefer to live in reality while rationally analyzing evidence that does exist and that evidence points overwhelmingly in one direction.
I don't see problems as being problems of Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, or any race or ethnicity because these are social problems that all us must deal with because in one or another they effect us all.

I understand your position but when you are black and get blamed for violence and see innocent blacks being killed by people who believe this nonsense while they justify murders then you understand that it is of the utmost importance to shut that kind of belief up.
Are you talking about Eric Garner?
 
The first writing was Sanskrit
No. Lets see some proof. While youre at it get the other proof I asked for. I gave you enough time.


Gosh I'm still waiting for that solemn history lesson about how Africans taught Europeans how to build civilizations...?
Give it a break. I only taunt Ass till he's jumping up and down then I leave him alone.

It's a bit like taunting a dumb animal after that.

Well, I wouldn't say my purpose is to be mean to Black people here, it's more about educating White people about the wrongs of anti-Racism, and why we need to think things through on race.

We can't even define race in a meaningful way...

The Coyote sub-species come from Plains Coyotes who just spread out mostly since the 1940's. the most famous example the Eastern Coyote which came to the Eastern seaboard since the 1940's, and is considered a sub-species from Plains Coyotes, mixed with Wolf, and Dog.

Now, how is that anymore meaningful distinction, than Humans which some have been generally split for at least 40,000 years (Europeans vs Asians)
In fact Eurasians, and Africans could be split for 100,000 years.
Some Africans like Bushman might be split from other Africans even more than 100,000.
 
I used to think race was a superficial matter, and the mindset behind race was a placebo effect. I am beginning to wonder if there isn't something deeper in our DNA that effects our behavior. When I see family members with the same genetics have the same preferences act in the same ways, think the same way, or with twins and these strange coincidences behaviorally. Race, DNA may be more than skin deep. What if certain forms of behavior, say being more prone to violence, even racism itself where a behavioral trait that is genetic? In the list of things we may have inherited genetically, predilections to certain behaviors, it wouldn't surprise me.
Wow. That actually sounded lucid.
 
No. Lets see some proof. While youre at it get the other proof I asked for. I gave you enough time.


Gosh I'm still waiting for that solemn history lesson about how Africans taught Europeans how to build civilizations...?
Give it a break. I only taunt Ass till he's jumping up and down then I leave him alone.

It's a bit like taunting a dumb animal after that.

Well, I wouldn't say my purpose is to be mean to Black people here, it's more about educating White people about the wrongs of anti-Racism, and why we need to think things through on race.

We can't even define race in a meaningful way...

The Coyote sub-species come from Plains Coyotes who just spread out mostly since the 1940's. the most famous example the Eastern Coyote which came to the Eastern seaboard since the 1940's, and is considered a sub-species from Plains Coyotes, mixed with Wolf, and Dog.

Now, how is that anymore meaningful distinction, than Humans which some have been generally split for at least 40,000 years (Europeans vs Asians)
In fact Eurasians, and Africans could be split for 100,000 years.
Some Africans like Bushman might be split from other Africans even more than 100,000.
What you dont seem to get is those are just labels made up by the people that were last to civilization. Would you trust someone that just graduated kindergarten with setting up a classification system over someone thats teaching classes in college?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top