The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / On "Daren Acemoglu"
 All Comments / On "Daren Acemoglu"
    In Freakonomics in 2012, superstar economist Daron Acemoglu and his sidekick James A. Robinson used a Q & A with readers to promote their book Why Nations Fail and its all-purpose theory that "extractive institutions" rather than "inclusive institutions" were to blame for anything bad that ever happened anywhere in the history of the world....
  • […] They’ve been poor performers and strong performers throughout history (by and large). Indeed, in sub-Saharan Africa (emphasis […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jim
    No one ever utters the obvious answer. It isn't that complicated.

    Read the “Bell Curve”. Nuff said.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Boomstick
    "I doubt the Romans would have been able to defeat the Zulu in the Zulus own territory. "

    Ha ha, no. Assuming the Romans got to South African and weren't killed by various diseases, and they weren't vastly outnumbered, it would be a walkover. Roman armor, discipline, mediocre cavalry, engineering, and most importantly combined arms tactics would prevail, though there would doubtless be occasional losses due to ambushes and the like. Which the Romans, being made to sterner stuff than moderns, would shrug off.

    The Zulus were mostly fast moving light infantry with good discipline but lacking in sophistication.

    That “lack of sophistication” did not prevent them from winning battles against the British!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • There is alot of pretense, misinformation and ‘false flag’ psychological warfare being engaged in when talking about Africa and it seems to be working just fine. The facts are that these are downright lies. The Eurocentric white washing has done a good job on geography because Africa, the continent is well represeneted as being where the cradle of civilization.
    The impetus of the author’s question through analysis, will show that he believes as he was taught, that only the alleged moniker of ‘sub Saharan Africa’ is representative of the continent, when the lies are obvious! At least, to me based on objective criteria and amap showing otherwise.

    Ethiopia, Israel? Egypt, Morocco, Tanzania, Somalia…….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • […] that the fastest-growing economy of the 21st century will most likely be North Korea. North Korea, being an unusually economically-complex, yet, unusually poor country, is very much like Japan in the mid-19th century-just waiting for its opening to the West to […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Unit472
    OK, I accept the population density problem as related to disease issues but it seems to have had consequences beyond a lack of 'ruins' in Africa. One of the real problems in black societies is the lack of organization. Blacks are great athletes e.g. but not until whites created professional sports leagues could blacks showcase and make a living from their running and leaping abilities. That there are no major businesses founded and run by blacks anywhere in the world is an even starker evidence of this lack of organizational ability. While black apologists would ascribe this to 'racism', lack of capital, etc, the fact is many of the largest companies in the world came into existence since the Civil Rights Act passed in the US and such monsters of equity valuation and revenues as Amazon, Apple, Google and Facebook in the last 30 years. Even big retailing and restaurant chains come and go with startling speed but never with a black entrepreneur at the helm.

    Some might point to BET as a big black enterprise but this was a matter of getting a government license. Motown and other recored companies tend to be mere agencies where singers are kept under contract not real enterprises.

    OK, I accept the population density problem as related to disease issues but it seems to have had consequences beyond a lack of ‘ruins’ in Africa. One of the real problems in black societies is the lack of organization. Blacks are great athletes e.g. but not until whites created professional sports leagues could blacks showcase and make a living from their running and leaping abilities. That there are no major businesses founded and run by blacks anywhere in the world is an even starker evidence of this lack of organizational ability. While black apologists would ascribe this to ‘racism’, lack of capital, etc, the fact is many of the largest companies in the world came into existence since the Civil Rights Act passed in the US and such monsters of equity valuation and revenues as Amazon, Apple, Google and Facebook in the last 30 years. Even big retailing and restaurant chains come and go with startling speed but never with a black entrepreneur at the helm.

    Some might point to BET as a big black enterprise but this was a matter of getting a government license. Motown and other recored companies tend to be mere agencies where singers are kept under contract not real enterprises.

    There most certainly are successful black companies. There’s even a magazine called Black Enterprise that has been in print for years, dedicated to black entrepreneurship.

    http://www.blackenterprise.com/lists/be-100s-2014/

    I’m sure there are many black companies across Africa and Caribbean that you just may not be aware of since you don’t like there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • […] the borderline fascist, Steve Sailer, who I am loath to link to, makes an interesting point that contagious disease and environmental factors forces Africans to live rurally thereby depressing thei…and general […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Rifleman
    Well, you're going to have to qualify Africa as "sub Saharan Africa" because Egypt is clearly in Africa and was engaged in some civilization - writing, agriculture, monumental architecture, art, speculation for 2000+ years before Thales was born.

    And by American standards those Egyptians were black.

    But it's ecologically different from the rest of Africa.

    Fifty years ago, you would have asked “How come every country run by Asians is poor”?
     
    In 1964 I would have been noticing African style poverty in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong?

    Granted I'm not an MIT economist but.............no.

    The ancient Egyptians had straight hair. Some Egyptian mummies have been found with blondish or reddish hair. Egyptian mummies are not phenotypically sub-Saharan.

    Unlike sub-Saharan Africa, Japan and China have glorious pasts. And great futures.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Harry flashman says:
    Kush was a very late bloomer and was a source of slaves. When Kushites invaded Egypt they essentially copied Egyptians. Then dismantled the place. The Assyrians kicked out Taharqo.

    Laughable. Kush was around since 2000BC, and in fact, around 1550-1570 BC during the 17th dynasty, almost overran Egypt. And in fact they were a power in their own right- not only during and after the dynastic era, but pharaonic culture in part is closely related to and derives from Nubian precursors. As for slavery, Palestine and Mesopotamia also furnished numerous slaves in antiquity. And the Nubian pharaohs circa 800BC actually were RESTORATIONISTS of ancient Egyptian culture. After the Persians defeated the Egyptians to end the dynastic era, the Kushites built up the powerful Meriotic kingdoms to the south that were not mere copies of Egypt but independent cultural entities in their own right as credible scholars show. (K. Schillingford, 2004. A history of sub-Saharan Africa). As for copying, Europe itself is a massive copier and borrower – from things like writing, to key plant and animal domesticates, to even cultural products like Christianity, which did not come from Europe but from people called Jews in the sub-tropical the Middle East.

    quote:
    Far from Egypt being the supreme power of the Nile Valley, clearly Kush was at that time. “Had they stayed to occupy Egypt, the Kushites might have eliminated it. That’s how close Egypt came to extinction.”
    –Vivian Davies, Director, British Museum-Department of Ancient Egypt and Sudan. 2004 on the Kushite invasion- El-Kab, 17th Dynasty

    Scara Brae is in the tip of Scotland and is as old a settlement as you’d find.
    As for Skara Brae, it is rather unimpressive. It is a Neolithic village that produced very little of the “big” monumental pieces talked about by Sailer. You are trying to puff it up with dubious assertion, but it consists of a mere eight clustered houses. Readers can check out the “massive” houses of the little village below.

    http://www.orkneyjar.com/history/skarabrae/

    Flimflam. The South East of England was densely populated.
    We are not talking about density of population over a big region, but URBANIZATION density in that earlier time as discussed by Sailer. Cairo today still has more people than London, but in that earlier time, credible scholars show that Africa had city populations quite comparable with, or exceeding other cities in several contemporary European kingdoms.. Africa did not have massively dense urban populations everywhere, but neither did many parts of Europe. In fact some African cities exceed in population or compare favorably- Algiers in the 1600s had 150,000, Mekenes in Morocco 200,000. In West Africa, Kano had about 75,000 in the late 1500s, and Niani, capital of Mali had 60,000 inhabitants in 1324. (James Tarver 1996- The Demography of Africa- pg 93). Reader himself also notes (page 225) that complex urban societies arose in West Africa a millennia before Arab arrival.
    QUOTE: “West African history was ‘unshackled from the Arab stimulus paradigm in the 1970s.. wherein the transformation to a complex urban society began 1,000 years before the arrival of the Arabs.”

    ^^That’s Sailer’s own reference, Reader, speaking, page 225.

    Furthermore dispersed African urbanization patterns are nothing unusual. In fact Reader shows they are comparable to China’s urbanization pattern, in similarly situated eras. Quote:
    “Remarkably similar settlement processes appear to have characterized the urbanization process at sites of similar age in China, suggesting that this alternative to hierarchical social system and coercive centralized control strategy of classical definition may have occurred worldwide..”

    You really need to get a grasp of modern archaeology and history, and what Reader actually said as opposed to what someone CLAIMS he said.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Harry flashman says:
    Kush was a very late bloomer and was a source of slaves. When Kushites invaded Egypt they essentially copied Egyptians. Then dismantled the place. The Assyrians kicked out Taharqo.

    Dubious. Kush was around circa 2000BC, and in fact, by 1550-1570 BC almost overran Egypt. And in fact they were a power in their own right- not only during and after the dynastic era, but pharaonic culture in part is closely related to and derives from Nubian precursors. As for slavery, Palestine and Mesopotamia also furnished numerous slaves in antiquity. And the Nubian pharaohs circa 800BC actually were RESTORATIONISTS of ancient Egyptian culture. After the Persians defeated the Egyptians to end the dynastic era, the Kushites built up the powerful Mereotic kingdoms to the south that were not mere copies of Egypt but independent cultural entities in their own right as credible scholars show. As for copying, Europe itself is a massive copier and borrower – from things like writing, to key plant and animal domesticates, to even cultural products like Christianity, which did not come from Europe but from people called Jews in the sub-tropical the Middle East.

    KUSHITE INVASION OF ANCIENT EGYPT

    http://wysinger.homestead.com/article10.html

    DATA ON KUSH

    Scara Brae is in the tip of Scotland and is as old a settlement as you’d find.
    As for Skara Brae, it is rather unimpressive. It is a Neolithic village that produced very little of the “big” monumental pieces talked about by Sailer. You are trying to puff it up with dubious assertion, but it consists of a mere eight clustered houses. Readers can check out the massive houses of the little village below.

    http://www.orkneyjar.com/history/skarabrae/

    Flimflam. The South East of England was densely populated.
    We are not talking about density of population over a big region, but URBANIZATION density in that earlier time as discussed by Sailer. Cairo today still has more people than London, but in that earlier time, credible scholars show that Africa had city populations quite comparable with, or exceeding other cities in several contemporary European kingdoms.. Africa did not have massively dense urban populations everywhere, but neither did Europe. In fact African cities compare favorably- Algiers in the 1600s had 150,000, Mekenes in Morocco 200,000. In West Africa, Kano had about 75,000 in the late 1500s, and Niani, capital of Mali had 60,000 inhabitants in 1324. (James Tarver 1996- The Demography of Africa- pg 93). Reader himself also notes (page 225) that complex urban societies arose in West Africa a millennia before Arab arrival.

    QUOTE: “West African history was ‘unshackled from the Arab stimulus paradigm in the 1970s.. wherein the transformation to a complex urban society began 1,000 years before the arrival of the Arabs.”

    ^^That’s Sailer’s own reference, Reader, speaking, page 225.

    Furthermore dispersed African urbanization patterns are nothing unusual. In fact Reader shows they are comparable to China’s urbanization pattern, in similarly situated eras. Quote:
    “Remarkably similar settlement processes appear to have characterized the urbanization process at sites of similar age in China, suggesting that this alternative to hierarchical social system and coercive centralized control strategy of classical definition may have occurred worldwide..”

    You really need to get a grasp of modern archaeology and history, and what Reader actually said as opposed to what someone CLAIMS he said.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • London as late as the 1500s had a mere 50,000 inhabitants, smaller than contemporary Cairo on the African continent (Urban World History: An Economic and Geographical Perspective By Luc-Normand Tellier 2009)

    Flimflam. The South East of England was densely populated. It’s also an apples to oranges to comparison. Look at the Rhine Estuary. Heavily populated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • (b) Impressive stadium like ruins are scarce in ancient “hotbeds” of Caucasoid purity- northern Europe for example. They are scarce in the territory of virtuous Nordics or Germanics- appearing neither or barely in ancient Germany, Sweden, Holland, France etc etc. The British Isles are no different- where are the pyramids of Wales for example? Stonehenge in England is one of the few big northern European monumental constructs,”

    That’s not true at all. Ireland and other places have such monuments. Scara Brae is in the tip of Scotland and is as old a settlement as you’d find. These people were obviously expert woodworkers anyway. They built causeways and roads with lumber, stone.
    “but this is more than matched in the Nile Valley and the Kingdom of Kush in the Sudan- itself a “sub-Saharan” entity that produced its own ancient pyramids and burial complexes, despite a resource base that had a fraction of what was available to their Egyptian cousins on the much vaster, more populous territories of the northward Nile. Then there is the kingdom of Askum – sub-Saharan- which produced monoliths weighing 700 tons as Reader himself notes.”

    Kush was a very late bloomer and was a source of slaves. When Kushites invaded Egypt they essentially copied Egyptians. Then dismantled the place. The Assyrians kicked out Taharqo.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Sailer raises some interesting info as regards the debilitating tropical environment that hindered development on Africa, but does not develop these points and thus leaves several gaps. Lets recap a few:

    1) Acemoglu et al do not blame “extractive” versus “inclusive” institutions as an all purpose explanation for “anything bad that ever happened anywhere in the history of the world.” This is not what they say.

    2) Sailer’s comparison of the tropical Africa o the tropical Yucatan Mexico also misses the ball. Africa was not “far behind” other tropical places such as the Yucatan. In fact Africa produced some of the most sophisticated large scale civilization in human history- in the Nile Valley. And almost 20% of Egypt falls within the tropical belt. Its fundamental peopling was by tropical Africans (Zakrewski 2004, 2007; Yurco 1996, 1989, Keita 2005, 1992; Lovell 1999; et al) not the “Middle Easterners” or Europeans” or Asiatics (like Greeks, Romans, Assyrians, Persians, Hyskos, Arabs etc) who were only to come in significant numbers later. Here’s what conservative anthropologist Nancy Lovell, someone recommended by Mary Lefkowitz herself has to say about that:

    “There is now a sufficient body of evidence from modern studies of skeletal remains to indicate that the ancient Egyptians, especially southern Egyptians, exhibited physical characteristics that are within the range of variation for ancient and modern indigenous peoples of the Sahara and tropical Africa.. must be placed in the context of hypotheses informed by archaeological, linguistic, geographic and other data. In such contexts, the physical anthropological evidence indicates that early Nile Valley populations can be identified as part of an African lineage, but exhibiting local variation.”
    –Nancy C. Lovell, ” Egyptians, physical anthropology of,” in Encyclopedia of the Archaeology of Ancient Egypt, 1999). pp 328-332

    .

    3) Sailer’s “litmus test” of big ruins is undermined by the fact that:

    (a) the African peoples of the Nile Valley produced structures equal or greater. Egypt is obviously greater but And “Sub-Saharan” Africa includes the kingdom of Kush, which had its own writing system, iron industry and monumental construction. The southward movement of the Sahara obscures this fact, making numerous African cultures far to the north “sub-Saharan. Kushite civilization documented by credible scholars along these lines easily produces plenty of ruins and monuments.

    (b) Impressive stadium like ruins are scarce in ancient “hotbeds” of Caucasoid purity- northern Europe for example. They are scarce in the territory of virtuous Nordics or Germanics- appearing neither or barely in ancient Germany, Sweden, Holland, France etc etc. The British Isles are no different- where are the pyramids of Wales for example? Stonehenge in England is one of the few big northern European monumental constructs, but this is more than matched in the Nile Valley and the Kingdom of Kush in the Sudan- itself a “sub-Saharan” entity that produced its own ancient pyramids and burial complexes, despite a resource base that had a fraction of what was available to their Egyptian cousins on the much vaster, more populous territories of the northward Nile. Then there is the kingdom of Askum – sub-Saharan- which produced monoliths weighing 700 tons as Reader himself notes.

    .
    4) Sailer claims Reader’s argument is that the reason there are few ruins is because there was little wealth in sub-Saharan Africa before outside interventions . This is untrue. Reader makes no such claims. In fact Reader repeatedly shows Africa had plenty of sophisticated civilizations and wealth long before any outsiders showed up. Reader does manage to mention monumental construction in Africa’s Nile Valley which includes the Kingdom of Kush – itself a sub-Saharan entity with administrative links deep into the Sudan and trade links as far afield as Central Africa. QUOTE:

    “the wealth and power of Meroe at its height during the last few centuries BC is not at all surprising, particularly since the island of Meroe was also richly endowed with both iron ore and the hardwood timber needed for charcoal..

    Among the monumental ruins of a civilization lying today on the island of Meroe, huge mounds of slag testify to the scale of iron production that powered its rise and ultimately brought about its downfall…

    “Even iron-smelting technology, so powerful a formative element of the Meroe civilization, is older in West and central Africa and therefore cannot have been introduced from Meroe.. any residual feeling that Egypt or Nubia must have been responsible for developments in sub-Saharan Africa will have to be abandoned and Bantu-speaking people accepted as innovators in their own right.”
    –Reader (pages 191-199)

    Finally Reader mentions Askum- a “sub-Saharan” African civilization with plenty of big ruin- QUOTE:
    “The early Askumites built in stone. They erected massive carved monoliths over the graves of their leaders (one was 33 meters long and weighed over 700 tonnes, arguably the largest single piece of worked stone ever hewn.” (Reader, pg 208).

    In short, Reader is not saying what Sailer claims he said- quite the contrary.

    .
    5) Sailer correctly notes the environmental problems, but such problems also appear in Europe. White “role models” in parts of Europe lacking good soils or having environmental disadvantages, such as Ireland, or the Balkans did not accumulate much wealth either. Africa is nothing special in this regard. Such mundane things as geography, climate etc etc- points long observed by Thomas Sowell in his “Culture” trilogy some years before Reader, or his Ethic America (1981) almost 2 decades before Reader’s tome. .

    .
    6) “Tropical Africans” would include the Africans of Egypt and the Sudan, where there were indeed recognizable urban populations. But lack of urbanization is nothing special. As late as the 1700s Early Industrial Revolution era, China for all its advances only had about 3-4% of its population urbanized (W. Easterly 2014 The Tyranny of Experts. 146). As late as 1914, only 14-15% of Russia, a massive land, was urbanized. London as late as the 1500s had a mere 50,000 inhabitants, smaller than contemporary Cairo on the African continent (Urban World History: An Economic and Geographical Perspective By Luc-Normand Tellier 2009)

    .
    7) Sailer’s claims on Europe exercising “sexual restraint” for ‘darwinian advantages” are illogical and untrue. In fact high child mortality rates in historical Europe did encourage “thoughtless procreation,” with the simple logic that the more children on hand, the more chance some might survive that mortality. Just as Europeans found it advantageous to have plenty of children to ride out high child mortality, so also Africans found it advantageous to have plenty of children to ride out the impact of the debilitating wave of tropical diseases that cut down their children.

    .
    8) Sailer also fails to grasp that in Africa, high procreation rates are themselves a parental investment to ensure some survivability into the next generation. Until they die those children have to be fed or cared for. Furthermore as credible scholars have long shown, Africa has the lowest infanticide rate in the world, far below supposedly more virtuous European or Asiatic “role models” (QUOTE: “Africa has been reported to have a lower incidence of infanticide than all of the other continents.” –Milner, L.S. (2000). Hardness of Heart / Hardness of Life: the stain of infanticide. University Press. p. 160 ) Hardly a picture of missing “parental investment.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @LiveFreeOrDie
    Reader's theory may well be true, but think about this.

    Most nations, not just African ones, did *not* invent the Industrial Revolution. Some, however, were able to simply reverse engineer some of it and take advantage of it to build more advanced societies.

    In Africa (and perhaps other places), not only have they not been able to create civilization from the template that was handed to them by the 1st world (and I do not refer just to the colonizers), when it was built for them (like water treatment plants, etc.), they have not been able to maintain it.

    I used to be a pragmatist. Now, at 58, I am a fatalist about some things.

    agree

    Senegal seeks French, Chinese help as water crisis hits capital

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/27/us-senegal-water-idUSBRE98Q0MS20130927

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • syonredux [AKA "marlowe"] says:
    @Bliss

    Equality is a lie, and democracy is a farce.
     
    You would be happier as a serf in feudal Europe?

    Pretty much everything you are saying about africans was once said about your european ancestors...

    Ancient Egyptian hair:

    You can get a decent look at Ramses II hair here. The L’Oreal institite plucked out one of hairs to examine the roots, and found it to be naturallyauburn when he was younger (even grey hair retains pigment in the roots). It was hennaed in his old age to match the colour of his youth. He is descibed as having cynotrichous wavy Caucasian red hair.

    Queen Hatshetsut, again very fine wavy hair. The colour is probably due to henna on grey hair

    Sitkamos, with loosely curly hair, and again a good definition between skin and hair colour. Beside her is the hair of Thutmosis II, again curly/wavy.

    Hair on a skull (the rest is a bit grim). Straight as a ruler, and fairly light coloured.

    The vast majority of hair samples discovered at the site were cynotrichous (Caucasian) in type as opposed to heliotrichous (Negroid), a feature which is standard through dynastic times . . .

    http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/2008/07/21/mummies-and-mummy-hair-from-ancient-egypt/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Ethiopians have large amounts of West Eurasian/Caucasoid admixture:

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929712002716

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    Equality is a lie, and democracy is a farce.
     
    You would be happier as a serf in feudal Europe?

    Pretty much everything you are saying about africans was once said about your european ancestors...
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    They were comparing Indians to Egyptians, and noting that, of the peoples in the Mediterranean, the Northern Indians most nearly resembled the Egyptians.
     
    You sound like a broken record, like a brainwashed cultist. If you were a rational person the conclusion you would have drawn from that is: egyptians were unlike the peoples of the mediterranean.

    For northern indians are a mixed race ANI + ASI. ASI is native, ANI came from west of the Indus. The higher the ASI the closer to black skinned the Indian, with south indian tamils being as black as ethiopians. Pictures of masses of north indians, and the numerous color portraits from ancient egypt both show very dark-skinned people by west asian or mediterranean standards.

    All that means is that what north indians are to south indians, and what north europeans are to south europeans, or what north chinese are to south chinese is akin to what the ancient egyptians were to ethiopians. Capische, my boy?

    Look more dark brown to me, dear boy…..
     
    Do ethiopians, to whom the greeks compared you south indians, also look dark brown to you?

    Outliers can be quite interesting, dear boy
     
    Yes boy, they are interesting. But it is a truly irrational fool who tries to pass them off as representives of the norm, as you are doing.

    Says the man who thinks that John Michell was Negroid
     
    Where did I say he was negroid? I showed where he was described as black skinned. He could well have been an indian like Chandrasekhar who was seen as a black man in the american midwest in the 1950s . Unfortunately there is no extant portrait of the scientist Michell so we will never know whether he had african or indian ancestry, or was just a white brit who was bizarrely described as black complexioned, as in the examples you have dug up. Btw, can you give any examples from the early 19th century, Michell's era, where a white englishman was described as black-skinned?

    You sound like a broken record, like a brainwashed cultist.

    Coming from someone who thinks that the Amerind Olmec were Negroid…..

    If you were a rational person the conclusion you would have drawn from that is: egyptians were unlike the peoples of the mediterranean.

    Actually, the rational conclusion is that they are Caucasoid Mediterraneans.

    For northern indians are a mixed race ANI + ASI.

    With higher levels of ANI, dear boy…

    ASI is native, ANI came from west of the Indus.

    Yes, Caucasoid West Eurasians.

    The higher the ASI the closer to black skinned the Indian, with south indian tamils being as black as ethiopians.

    MMM, not quite, dear boy. To quote Snowden (you really should read him, dear boy) again:

    Ethiopians, known as the blackest peoples on earth, became the yardstick by which classical authors measured the color of others. In first century AD, Manilius described Ethiopians as the blackest; Indians, less sunburnt; Egyptians, mildly dark; with Moors the lightest in this color scheme.

    Pictures of masses of north indians, and the numerous color portraits from ancient egypt both show very dark-skinned people by west asian or mediterranean standards.

    Yet not as dark as Ethiopians, dear boy….

    All that means is that what north indians are to south indians, and what north europeans are to south europeans, or what north chinese are to south chinese is akin to what the ancient egyptians were to ethiopians.

    Actually, Egyptians are to Greeks what Greeks are to Finns, dear boy.

    Do ethiopians, to whom the greeks compared you south indians, also look dark brown to you?

    Very, very dark brown, I should say.

    But it is a truly irrational fool who tries to pass them off as representives of the norm, as you are doing.

    They establish the boundaries of the norm, dear boy. Hence, the fact that the outliers in Northern India/Pakistan are so much fairer than what may be found in Ethiopia is quite significant.

    Where did I say he was negroid? I showed where he was described as black skinned. He could well have been an indian like Chandrasekhar

    Both possibilities are extremely remote, dear boy. For one thing, Michell’s race would have been commented upon (cf, for example, the many references to Dumas and Pushkin’s Negroid ancestry).

    Unfortunately there is no extant portrait of the scientist Michell so we will never know whether he had african or indian ancestry,

    Again, dear boy, it would have been commented upon.The fact that it was not shows that he was Caucasoid.

    or was just a white brit who was bizarrely described as black complexioned,

    Not so bizarrely, as my many examples indicate.

    as in the examples you have dug up. Btw, can you give any examples from the early 19th century, Michell’s era, where a white englishman was described as black-skinned?

    Michell’s era was the 18th century, not the 19th. Michell’s dates: 25 December 1724 – 29 April 1793.

    And while I’m here, here’s another example of Europeans with black complexions:

    The inhabitants of this Isle are well proportioned, generally brown, and some of a black complexion

    A Tour in Ireland: With General Observations on the Present State of that Kingdom: Made in the Years 1776, 1777, and 1778, and Brought Down to the End of 1779, page 646

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    Equality is a lie, and democracy is a farce.
     
    You would be happier as a serf in feudal Europe?

    Pretty much everything you are saying about africans was once said about your european ancestors...

    Democracy hasn’t worked in Africa. Name one black-run African country with a large population and covering a large stretch of territory that is democratic and prosperous.

    None. Not Kenya, not Tanzania, not Nigeria, not South Africa.

    All that you get in the Western media is process. Elections this, shared power that. Where are the results? Poverty, ignorance, superstition, disease etc.

    Where would you rather live? In Pyongyang or small-town Kenya? Riyadh or small-town South Africa? It’s a difficult choice, given how bad the condition of this continent is.

    And plus (for Africa in particular), the low-IQ masses are better off with their work laid out for them, and happier, instead of living at someone else’s expense, constantly anxious and angry, on the brink of despair and ready to kill someone.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @candid_observer
    One often sees explanations of the shortcomings of SubSaharan African populations based on climate/germs/parasites.

    But I don't see how this works. Presumably, the germs/parasites part of the explanation stems ultimately from the warm climate.

    But how does this explanation square with the apparent fact that all of the most advanced "models" of hominins came out of Africa, not elsewhere, where, presumably, the climate wasn't so warm? Homo erectus was a primitive hominin which made its way out of Africa, but which was surpassed by the Neandertals, which arose Africa, and also made its way out of Africa, but which was in turn surpassed by homo sapiens sapiens, which also arose in Africa. If climate was so decisive, why didn't the highest form of human being come from these other groups?

    I realize that the last ice age would have had an impact on the climate in SubSaharan Africa, but, still, why would SubSaharan Africa be a better place to bring about the most advanced human group, rather than these other areas?

    How is this supposed to work?

    i don’t think the neanderthals came out of africa. no neanderthal remains have been found there.also
    Neanderthal bodies were adapted to cold climates not found in subsaharan africa.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @gbloco
    The Mayan area is definitely not tropical -- 15-20 deg N, about the same as Khartoum to Abu Simbel. The remains in South America are in the highlands -- think Ethiopia/Sanaa. Interested to know why there are so few substantial ruins in North America.

    maybe population density and they were mostly hunter gatherers. the mississippian culture might have left more ruins but they ran out of time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Only Argue the Truth
    There have been African civilizations: Kush, Axum, Mali, Ghana and Songhay, with a few others as well.

    But here is the problem: the ruling family has to be extracted from a small intelligence elite. Most Africans have one crippling problem is that most of them cannot think in abstract terms. They can only perceive what exists in time and space, and what does not, they cannot perceive it.

    And one of the most important abstractions is to conceive of the future. Most Africans live for the day; from the morning, they might have the whole day planned, but ask about tomorrow, and the answer will be "When tomorrow comes." Thus, massive projects lasting years cannot be put in the hands of the average African.

    Africans are also on average have slower wit than Europeans or East Asians for example. In some cases, as I have seen personally, an African cannot understand a single word of simple instruction that a child of average intelligence might.

    (Also, if you want work out of an African, figure out what he can do first, then explain to him the whole process of it, beginning to end. If he falls short on his work, you have to punish him *physically*, or he won't be frightened of you and will brush you off. Believe me, nobody is more easily controlled than a frightened African.)

    Zimbabwe failed, because it fell into the hands of an African who could not understand how it was built and how it is maintained, and was a Marxist to boot. Cecil Rhodes should have held on to power, as you do not give in to demands of people who don't know how to rule like their rulers.

    Equality is a lie, and democracy is a farce. And there is no better example of that than Africa. Not all races are equal, and not all members of a race are equal.

    If you want civilization, let each ethnic group have its own country (there are literally hundreds), and then let them after countless wars sort it out. No more than a dozen will appear.

    The form of rule would be absolute monarchy, whose leaders are intelligent, courageous and honest (the trio together). They will seek to build an empire that will be honored by other countries. This has happened before, but the important part is: the intelligent, courageous and honest rule over the rest, justly and benevolently, but with no acquiescence whatsoever and with brutality when needed.

    Equality is a lie, and democracy is a farce.

    You would be happier as a serf in feudal Europe?

    Pretty much everything you are saying about africans was once said about your european ancestors…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Only Argue the Truth
    Democracy hasn't worked in Africa. Name one black-run African country with a large population and covering a large stretch of territory that is democratic and prosperous.

    None. Not Kenya, not Tanzania, not Nigeria, not South Africa.

    All that you get in the Western media is process. Elections this, shared power that. Where are the results? Poverty, ignorance, superstition, disease etc.

    Where would you rather live? In Pyongyang or small-town Kenya? Riyadh or small-town South Africa? It's a difficult choice, given how bad the condition of this continent is.

    And plus (for Africa in particular), the low-IQ masses are better off with their work laid out for them, and happier, instead of living at someone else's expense, constantly anxious and angry, on the brink of despair and ready to kill someone.

    , @syonredux
    Look mostly Caucasoid to me

    http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/2008/07/22/the-faces-of-ancient-egypt/
    , @syonredux
    Ancient Egyptian hair:

    You can get a decent look at Ramses II hair here. The L’Oreal institite plucked out one of hairs to examine the roots, and found it to be naturallyauburn when he was younger (even grey hair retains pigment in the roots). It was hennaed in his old age to match the colour of his youth. He is descibed as having cynotrichous wavy Caucasian red hair.
     

    Queen Hatshetsut, again very fine wavy hair. The colour is probably due to henna on grey hair
     

    Sitkamos, with loosely curly hair, and again a good definition between skin and hair colour. Beside her is the hair of Thutmosis II, again curly/wavy.
     

    Hair on a skull (the rest is a bit grim). Straight as a ruler, and fairly light coloured.
     

    The vast majority of hair samples discovered at the site were cynotrichous (Caucasian) in type as opposed to heliotrichous (Negroid), a feature which is standard through dynastic times . . .
     
    http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/2008/07/21/mummies-and-mummy-hair-from-ancient-egypt/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • “Why Did Civilization Lag in Africa?”

    no winter

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • There have been African civilizations: Kush, Axum, Mali, Ghana and Songhay, with a few others as well.

    But here is the problem: the ruling family has to be extracted from a small intelligence elite. Most Africans have one crippling problem is that most of them cannot think in abstract terms. They can only perceive what exists in time and space, and what does not, they cannot perceive it.

    And one of the most important abstractions is to conceive of the future. Most Africans live for the day; from the morning, they might have the whole day planned, but ask about tomorrow, and the answer will be “When tomorrow comes.” Thus, massive projects lasting years cannot be put in the hands of the average African.

    Africans are also on average have slower wit than Europeans or East Asians for example. In some cases, as I have seen personally, an African cannot understand a single word of simple instruction that a child of average intelligence might.

    (Also, if you want work out of an African, figure out what he can do first, then explain to him the whole process of it, beginning to end. If he falls short on his work, you have to punish him *physically*, or he won’t be frightened of you and will brush you off. Believe me, nobody is more easily controlled than a frightened African.)

    Zimbabwe failed, because it fell into the hands of an African who could not understand how it was built and how it is maintained, and was a Marxist to boot. Cecil Rhodes should have held on to power, as you do not give in to demands of people who don’t know how to rule like their rulers.

    Equality is a lie, and democracy is a farce. And there is no better example of that than Africa. Not all races are equal, and not all members of a race are equal.

    If you want civilization, let each ethnic group have its own country (there are literally hundreds), and then let them after countless wars sort it out. No more than a dozen will appear.

    The form of rule would be absolute monarchy, whose leaders are intelligent, courageous and honest (the trio together). They will seek to build an empire that will be honored by other countries. This has happened before, but the important part is: the intelligent, courageous and honest rule over the rest, justly and benevolently, but with no acquiescence whatsoever and with brutality when needed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Equality is a lie, and democracy is a farce.
     
    You would be happier as a serf in feudal Europe?

    Pretty much everything you are saying about africans was once said about your european ancestors...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Gypsy
    I can't possibly wade through all the comments here, so I hope this hasn't been already said.
    I read an interesting book one time, and since I'm now 60 my memory fails when I try to recall the name (in my defense, however, I read dozens and dozens of books annually.)
    Anyways, here was the theory on why Africans prospered less than residents of other continents: they did not have reliable pack animals. Most of the world, including North America after its invasion by the Spanish, had horses. They also had small, hardy donkeys. The Middle East had camels (though of course the Arabs were responsible for breeding the finest, purest horses on the planet as well). In India, there were elephants---ASIAN elephants, much more docile than their African counterparts.
    Contrast to Africa, which had...zebras; untameable. African elephants, also untameable. Could horses have thrived there? Well, perhaps, if Africa wasn't also home to large predatory beasts such as lions.
    In short, the people themselves had to become their own "beasts of burden", so to speak. It made sense to me, anyways.

    The book to which you refer is Jared Diamonds “Guns, Germs, and Steel”.

    His arguments about African animals being untamable are wrong. Most of those animals have recently been tamed by modern colonists, including the African elephant (tamed even back in the time of Carthage), Ostrich, and Zebra. Google each species on youtube, you can easily find tame cases.

    Wild animals in Europe were difficult to start with as well, before we started selective breeding. But, as the recent experiments with domesticating foxes in less than 50 years demonstrate, it can be done, even with animals which have resisted taming up until now. In the cases of fx. ostriches, mink and foxes, this is due to lack of applying selective breeding (lack of trying), rather than their being completely impossible to domesticate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @syonredux

    And that, silly boy, is why the greeks did not compare the egyptians to west asians. Yet you are stupid enough to insist that the ancient egyptians were mediterranean caucasoids.
     
    Other way around, dear boy. They were comparing Indians to Egyptians, and noting that, of the peoples in the Mediterranean, the Northern Indians most nearly resembled the Egyptians.

    Damn, you are hopelessly irrational.
     
    Says the man who thinks that John Michell was Negroid....By the way, dear boy, why the lack of response to all of my postings regarding Europeans who are described as having black complexions?

    If ASI was dark brown what explains the blackish skin tones of so many indians,
     
    Look more dark brown to me, dear boy.....

    such as your own people the tamils?
     
    Still operating under the assumption that I'm Tamil, eh? Well, if it makes you happy..

    How many times will this have to be repeated before it penetrates your thick skull? Are north indians closely related to south indians or not?
     
    Fairer skinned relatives, dear boy.Just as Finns are fairer skinned than the Greeks.

    Likewise the greeks saw the egyptians as related to the ethiopians. Not to themselves, or persians or other peoples of the near east.

    Dear boy, the Classical writers clearly distinguished the Ethiopians from the Egyptians:

    Strabo, Geography 15.1.13

    Black people resided not in the Nile valley but in a far land, by the fountain of the sun.

     

    And here's Snowden:

    Another frequent misconception in some discussions of the populations of the ancient world is the assumption that words or expressions describing people as dark--or black--skinned were always in classical usage the equivalents of "Ethiopians" i.e. Negroes, or, in twentieth century usage, blacks. Greeks and Romans, well acquainted with their contemporaries, differentiated between the various gradations of color in Mediterranean populations and made it clear that only some of the black- or dark-skinned peoples, those coming from the south of Egypt and the southern fringes of northwest Africa, were Ethiopians, i.e. Negroes. Ethiopians, known as the blackest peoples on earth, became the yardstick by which classical authors measured the color of others. In first century AD, Manilius described Ethiopians as the blackest; Indians, less sunburnt; Egyptians, mildly dark; with Moors the lightest in this color scheme. In other words, to all these peoples--Ethiopians, Indians, Egyptians, and Moors--who were darker than the Greeks and Romans, classical authors applied color-words but it should be emphasized that in general the ancients described only one of these--Ethiopians--as unmistakably Negroid. To summarize this point, there is no justification to equate Egyptians, Moors or any other north Africans, with Ethiopians, even when a color-word is applied to them, unless details are given as to other physical traits such as color, hair, nose, or lips, or unless there is additional evidence to support an equivalence with Ethiopian.

     


    You are trying to pass off outliers
     
    Outliers can be quite interesting, dear boy. For example, you won't find people like these among the native inhabitants of the Congo....

    from Kashmir whose population is not even 1% of north India as representative of the north indian phenotype? Pathetic.
     
    On the other hand, dear boy, they are Northern Indians....

    They were comparing Indians to Egyptians, and noting that, of the peoples in the Mediterranean, the Northern Indians most nearly resembled the Egyptians.

    You sound like a broken record, like a brainwashed cultist. If you were a rational person the conclusion you would have drawn from that is: egyptians were unlike the peoples of the mediterranean.

    For northern indians are a mixed race ANI + ASI. ASI is native, ANI came from west of the Indus. The higher the ASI the closer to black skinned the Indian, with south indian tamils being as black as ethiopians. Pictures of masses of north indians, and the numerous color portraits from ancient egypt both show very dark-skinned people by west asian or mediterranean standards.

    All that means is that what north indians are to south indians, and what north europeans are to south europeans, or what north chinese are to south chinese is akin to what the ancient egyptians were to ethiopians. Capische, my boy?

    Look more dark brown to me, dear boy…..

    Do ethiopians, to whom the greeks compared you south indians, also look dark brown to you?

    Outliers can be quite interesting, dear boy

    Yes boy, they are interesting. But it is a truly irrational fool who tries to pass them off as representives of the norm, as you are doing.

    Says the man who thinks that John Michell was Negroid

    Where did I say he was negroid? I showed where he was described as black skinned. He could well have been an indian like Chandrasekhar who was seen as a black man in the american midwest in the 1950s . Unfortunately there is no extant portrait of the scientist Michell so we will never know whether he had african or indian ancestry, or was just a white brit who was bizarrely described as black complexioned, as in the examples you have dug up. Btw, can you give any examples from the early 19th century, Michell’s era, where a white englishman was described as black-skinned?

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    You sound like a broken record, like a brainwashed cultist.
     
    Coming from someone who thinks that the Amerind Olmec were Negroid.....

    If you were a rational person the conclusion you would have drawn from that is: egyptians were unlike the peoples of the mediterranean.
     
    Actually, the rational conclusion is that they are Caucasoid Mediterraneans.

    For northern indians are a mixed race ANI + ASI.
     
    With higher levels of ANI, dear boy...

    ASI is native, ANI came from west of the Indus.
     
    Yes, Caucasoid West Eurasians.

    The higher the ASI the closer to black skinned the Indian, with south indian tamils being as black as ethiopians.
     
    MMM, not quite, dear boy. To quote Snowden (you really should read him, dear boy) again:

    Ethiopians, known as the blackest peoples on earth, became the yardstick by which classical authors measured the color of others. In first century AD, Manilius described Ethiopians as the blackest; Indians, less sunburnt; Egyptians, mildly dark; with Moors the lightest in this color scheme.
     

    Pictures of masses of north indians, and the numerous color portraits from ancient egypt both show very dark-skinned people by west asian or mediterranean standards.
     
    Yet not as dark as Ethiopians, dear boy....

    All that means is that what north indians are to south indians, and what north europeans are to south europeans, or what north chinese are to south chinese is akin to what the ancient egyptians were to ethiopians.
     
    Actually, Egyptians are to Greeks what Greeks are to Finns, dear boy.

    Do ethiopians, to whom the greeks compared you south indians, also look dark brown to you?
     
    Very, very dark brown, I should say.

    But it is a truly irrational fool who tries to pass them off as representives of the norm, as you are doing.
     
    They establish the boundaries of the norm, dear boy. Hence, the fact that the outliers in Northern India/Pakistan are so much fairer than what may be found in Ethiopia is quite significant.

    Where did I say he was negroid? I showed where he was described as black skinned. He could well have been an indian like Chandrasekhar
     
    Both possibilities are extremely remote, dear boy. For one thing, Michell's race would have been commented upon (cf, for example, the many references to Dumas and Pushkin's Negroid ancestry).

    Unfortunately there is no extant portrait of the scientist Michell so we will never know whether he had african or indian ancestry,
     
    Again, dear boy, it would have been commented upon.The fact that it was not shows that he was Caucasoid.

    or was just a white brit who was bizarrely described as black complexioned,
     
    Not so bizarrely, as my many examples indicate.

    as in the examples you have dug up. Btw, can you give any examples from the early 19th century, Michell’s era, where a white englishman was described as black-skinned?
     
    Michell's era was the 18th century, not the 19th. Michell's dates: 25 December 1724 – 29 April 1793.


    And while I'm here, here's another example of Europeans with black complexions:

    The inhabitants of this Isle are well proportioned, generally brown, and some of a black complexion

    A Tour in Ireland: With General Observations on the Present State of that Kingdom: Made in the Years 1776, 1777, and 1778, and Brought Down to the End of 1779, page 646
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I can’t possibly wade through all the comments here, so I hope this hasn’t been already said.
    I read an interesting book one time, and since I’m now 60 my memory fails when I try to recall the name (in my defense, however, I read dozens and dozens of books annually.)
    Anyways, here was the theory on why Africans prospered less than residents of other continents: they did not have reliable pack animals. Most of the world, including North America after its invasion by the Spanish, had horses. They also had small, hardy donkeys. The Middle East had camels (though of course the Arabs were responsible for breeding the finest, purest horses on the planet as well). In India, there were elephants—ASIAN elephants, much more docile than their African counterparts.
    Contrast to Africa, which had…zebras; untameable. African elephants, also untameable. Could horses have thrived there? Well, perhaps, if Africa wasn’t also home to large predatory beasts such as lions.
    In short, the people themselves had to become their own “beasts of burden”, so to speak. It made sense to me, anyways.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The book to which you refer is Jared Diamonds "Guns, Germs, and Steel".

    His arguments about African animals being untamable are wrong. Most of those animals have recently been tamed by modern colonists, including the African elephant (tamed even back in the time of Carthage), Ostrich, and Zebra. Google each species on youtube, you can easily find tame cases.

    Wild animals in Europe were difficult to start with as well, before we started selective breeding. But, as the recent experiments with domesticating foxes in less than 50 years demonstrate, it can be done, even with animals which have resisted taming up until now. In the cases of fx. ostriches, mink and foxes, this is due to lack of applying selective breeding (lack of trying), rather than their being completely impossible to domesticate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    That’s why they are Caucasoids, dear boy.
     
    And that, silly boy, is why the greeks did not compare the egyptians to west asians. Yet you are stupid enough to insist that the ancient egyptians were mediterranean caucasoids.

    More like dark brown….
     
    Damn, you are hopelessly irrational. If ASI was dark brown what explains the blackish skin tones of so many indians, such as your own people the tamils?

    And the Egyptians were compared to Northern Indians while the darker skinned Ethiopians were compared to the Southern Indians…..
     
    How many times will this have to be repeated before it penetrates your thick skull? Are north indians closely related to south indians or not? Likewise the greeks saw the egyptians as related to the ethiopians. Not to themselves, or persians or other peoples of the near east.

    Many of these people would look quite at home in the Med…
     
    You are trying to pass off outliers from Kashmir whose population is not even 1% of north India as representative of the north indian phenotype? Pathetic.

    These Pakistani children don’t look anything like Ethiopians:

    Pakistani children - Pakistani girls

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • And that, silly boy, is why the greeks did not compare the egyptians to west asians. Yet you are stupid enough to insist that the ancient egyptians were mediterranean caucasoids.

    Other way around, dear boy. They were comparing Indians to Egyptians, and noting that, of the peoples in the Mediterranean, the Northern Indians most nearly resembled the Egyptians.

    Damn, you are hopelessly irrational.

    Says the man who thinks that John Michell was Negroid….By the way, dear boy, why the lack of response to all of my postings regarding Europeans who are described as having black complexions?

    If ASI was dark brown what explains the blackish skin tones of so many indians,

    Look more dark brown to me, dear boy…..

    such as your own people the tamils?

    Still operating under the assumption that I’m Tamil, eh? Well, if it makes you happy..

    How many times will this have to be repeated before it penetrates your thick skull? Are north indians closely related to south indians or not?

    Fairer skinned relatives, dear boy.Just as Finns are fairer skinned than the Greeks.

    Likewise the greeks saw the egyptians as related to the ethiopians. Not to themselves, or persians or other peoples of the near east.

    Dear boy, the Classical writers clearly distinguished the Ethiopians from the Egyptians:

    Strabo, Geography 15.1.13

    Black people resided not in the Nile valley but in a far land, by the fountain of the sun.

    And here’s Snowden:

    Another frequent misconception in some discussions of the populations of the ancient world is the assumption that words or expressions describing people as dark–or black–skinned were always in classical usage the equivalents of “Ethiopians” i.e. Negroes, or, in twentieth century usage, blacks. Greeks and Romans, well acquainted with their contemporaries, differentiated between the various gradations of color in Mediterranean populations and made it clear that only some of the black- or dark-skinned peoples, those coming from the south of Egypt and the southern fringes of northwest Africa, were Ethiopians, i.e. Negroes. Ethiopians, known as the blackest peoples on earth, became the yardstick by which classical authors measured the color of others. In first century AD, Manilius described Ethiopians as the blackest; Indians, less sunburnt; Egyptians, mildly dark; with Moors the lightest in this color scheme. In other words, to all these peoples–Ethiopians, Indians, Egyptians, and Moors–who were darker than the Greeks and Romans, classical authors applied color-words but it should be emphasized that in general the ancients described only one of these–Ethiopians–as unmistakably Negroid. To summarize this point, there is no justification to equate Egyptians, Moors or any other north Africans, with Ethiopians, even when a color-word is applied to them, unless details are given as to other physical traits such as color, hair, nose, or lips, or unless there is additional evidence to support an equivalence with Ethiopian.

    You are trying to pass off outliers

    Outliers can be quite interesting, dear boy. For example, you won’t find people like these among the native inhabitants of the Congo….

    from Kashmir whose population is not even 1% of north India as representative of the north indian phenotype? Pathetic.

    On the other hand, dear boy, they are Northern Indians….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    They were comparing Indians to Egyptians, and noting that, of the peoples in the Mediterranean, the Northern Indians most nearly resembled the Egyptians.
     
    You sound like a broken record, like a brainwashed cultist. If you were a rational person the conclusion you would have drawn from that is: egyptians were unlike the peoples of the mediterranean.

    For northern indians are a mixed race ANI + ASI. ASI is native, ANI came from west of the Indus. The higher the ASI the closer to black skinned the Indian, with south indian tamils being as black as ethiopians. Pictures of masses of north indians, and the numerous color portraits from ancient egypt both show very dark-skinned people by west asian or mediterranean standards.

    All that means is that what north indians are to south indians, and what north europeans are to south europeans, or what north chinese are to south chinese is akin to what the ancient egyptians were to ethiopians. Capische, my boy?

    Look more dark brown to me, dear boy…..
     
    Do ethiopians, to whom the greeks compared you south indians, also look dark brown to you?

    Outliers can be quite interesting, dear boy
     
    Yes boy, they are interesting. But it is a truly irrational fool who tries to pass them off as representives of the norm, as you are doing.

    Says the man who thinks that John Michell was Negroid
     
    Where did I say he was negroid? I showed where he was described as black skinned. He could well have been an indian like Chandrasekhar who was seen as a black man in the american midwest in the 1950s . Unfortunately there is no extant portrait of the scientist Michell so we will never know whether he had african or indian ancestry, or was just a white brit who was bizarrely described as black complexioned, as in the examples you have dug up. Btw, can you give any examples from the early 19th century, Michell's era, where a white englishman was described as black-skinned?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @syonredux

    Mediterranean caucasoids are not heavily admixed with ASI
     
    That's why they are Caucasoids, dear boy.

    which is black skinned aboriginal.
     
    More like dark brown....

    So how the heck can they look like indians, north or south, who all have substantial ASI ancestry? Even the indians in the far northwest like Punjab, who are a very small fraction of north indians, are ~1/3 ASI.The majority of indians are majority ASI.
     
    Some data via Razib Khan:

    India has been underrepresented in genome-wide surveys of human variation. We analyse 25 diverse groups in India to provide strong evidence for two ancient populations, genetically divergent, that are ancestral to most Indians today. One, the ‘Ancestral North Indians’ (ANI), is genetically close to Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans, whereas the other, the ‘Ancestral South Indians’ (ASI), is as distinct from ANI and East Asians as they are from each other. By introducing methods that can estimate ancestry without accurate ancestral populations, we show that ANI ancestry ranges from 39-71% in most Indian groups, and is higher in traditionally upper caste and Indo-European speakers. Groups with only ASI ancestry may no longer exist in mainland India. However, the indigenous Andaman Islanders are unique in being ASI-related groups without ANI ancestry. Allele frequency differences between groups in India are larger than in Europe, reflecting strong founder effects whose signatures have been maintained for thousands of years owing to endogamy.

     

    http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2011/04/22/the_genetic_ori/

    Which explains why they are closer to black than to swarthy…
     
    Or, in many cases, closer to "swarthy" than to "black."

    The fact that the greeks compared the egyptians and ethiopians to distant indians instead of neighboring mediterranean caucasoids speaks volumes…
     
    And the Egyptians were compared to Northern Indians while the darker skinned Ethiopians were compared to the Southern Indians.....

    Here are some famous north indians, all upper caste aryans btw (who are a small minority of hindus):
     
    Ah, a good game of google image search, eh? I'm up for it. Let's see, the first thing that we have to bear in mind, dear boy, is that Northern India to the Greeks meant what is now Pakistan.So here we go:

    http://www.kashmir-tours.net/about_kashmir.htm

    Note the Kashmiri girl in the yellow head scarf. You could drop her into Poland and she would blend right in


    http://www.mommy-labs.com/creative-kids/art_craft_projects_kids/leaf-art-nature-therapy-kashmir-chinar-leaves/

    And you could lose several of these people in a crowd in Sardinia....


    http://www.pinterest.com/meownewyork/india-kashmir/

    Many of these people would look quite at home in the Med...


    http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/Asia/India/North/Jammu_and_Kashmir/Kargil/

    The two young ladies here could be dropped into Sicily....


    And then there is Nikki Haley

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikki_Haley

    That’s why they are Caucasoids, dear boy.

    And that, silly boy, is why the greeks did not compare the egyptians to west asians. Yet you are stupid enough to insist that the ancient egyptians were mediterranean caucasoids.

    More like dark brown….

    Damn, you are hopelessly irrational. If ASI was dark brown what explains the blackish skin tones of so many indians, such as your own people the tamils?

    And the Egyptians were compared to Northern Indians while the darker skinned Ethiopians were compared to the Southern Indians…..

    How many times will this have to be repeated before it penetrates your thick skull? Are north indians closely related to south indians or not? Likewise the greeks saw the egyptians as related to the ethiopians. Not to themselves, or persians or other peoples of the near east.

    Many of these people would look quite at home in the Med…

    You are trying to pass off outliers from Kashmir whose population is not even 1% of north India as representative of the north indian phenotype? Pathetic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    These Pakistani children don't look anything like Ethiopians:

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/6900313884/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • syonredux [AKA "marlowe"] says:

    physical appearance of the Egyptians:

    Afrocentric misreadings of classical texts-The meaning of melas and melanochroes

    In their efforts to paint the ancient Egyptians “black,” Afrocentrists rely heavily on misreadings of ancient Greek and Roman literature – many of which stem from a severe misunderstanding of the historical use of color terms. In many ages and many cultures, descriptions of human complexion as “white,” “brown” or “black” would correspond in modern usage to “fair,” “tan” or “swarthy.” According to the anthropologist Peter Frost (*): This older, more relative sense has been noted in other culture areas. The Japanese once used the terms shiroi (white) and kuroi (black) to describe their skin and its gradations of color. The Ibos of Nigeria employed ocha (white) and ojii (black) in the same way, so that nwoko ocha (white man) simply meant an Ibo with a lighter complexion. In French Canada, the older generation still refers to a swarthy Canadien as noir. Vestiges of this older usage persist in family names. Mr. White, Mr. Brown, and Mr. Black were individuals within the normal color spectrum of English people.

    Ditto for Leblanc, Lebrun, and Lenoir among the French or Weiss and Schwartz among the Germans. In the same vein, the Greek words melas and leukos when applied to skin color were usually equivalent to “swarthy” and “fair” rather than the racial terms “black” or “white” as Afrocentrists would prefer (see definition of melas in the online LSJ lexicon). There are numerous examples of this usage in Greek literature – one unequivocal example describes an aged Odysseus magically regaining his youth (Homer Odyssey 16.172-176):

    “With this, Athena touched him [Odysseus] with her golden wand. A well-washed cloak and a tunic she first of all cast about his breast, and she increased his stature and his youthful bloom. Once more he grew dark of color [melanchroiês], and his cheeks filled out, and dark grew the beard about his chin.”

    In describing the skin tone of Odysseus, Homer used the word melanchroiês – a form of the same word that other

    Greeks sometimes chose to describe Egyptians, and one that is the source of much Afrocentric misunderstanding. If taken literally, the word would mean “black-skinned”; however, it is clear from the context that Homer means “of swarthy complexion” rather than racially “black,” and intends to describe Odysseus regaining his youthful color. Otherwise we would have to assume that during the process of rejuvenation Odysseus transformed into a black African! This despite the numerous ancient artistic portrayals of Odysseus as Greek-looking and certainly not “black” in any modern racial sense.

    Likewise, when the ancient writers described Egyptians as melas or melanchroes, they almost surely meant “dark-complected” rather than literally “black.” Any ambiguity in such descriptions can be resolved by noting that other classical writers such as Manilius specifically identified the Egyptians as medium in complexion rather than “black,” and that the Egyptians portrayed themselves as lighter and finer-featured than their African neighbors to the south.

    http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/descriptions-of-ancient-egyptians-by-others/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • syonredux [AKA "marlowe"] says:

    Hart doesn’t think very highly of Egypt, either:

    Section 7 – The importance of ancient Egypt is usually greatly overrated
    Most of us, when we studied world history in high school or college, were told that
    the ancient Egyptians made enormous contributions to world civilization. A careful
    consideration of the facts, however, reveals that their contributions were actually quite
    meager.
    For many centuries, European historians believed that ancient Egypt had been the
    first civilization on Earth. However, we now know that civilization originated in the

    Crescent of Southwest Asia. The ancient Egyptians were not the first people to
    build cities, nor were they the inventors of agriculture. Nor were they the first to use
    plows, employ irrigation, rotate crops, or domesticate animals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    they look rather like Mediterranean Caucasoids, only darker skinned.
     
    Anyone who thinks they look like med caucasoids has to be either seriously delusional or pathologically dishonest. In your case it is obviously the latter. A group of north indians will stand out like sore thumbs anywhere west of the Indus River.

    Mediterranean caucasoids are not heavily admixed with ASI which is black skinned aboriginal. So how the heck can they look like indians, north or south, who all have substantial ASI ancestry? Even the indians in the far northwest like Punjab, who are a very small fraction of north indians, are ~1/3 ASI. The majority of indians are majority ASI. Which explains why they are closer to black than to swarthy...

    The fact that the greeks compared the egyptians and ethiopians to distant indians instead of neighboring mediterranean caucasoids speaks volumes...


    Here are some famous north indians, all upper caste aryans btw (who are a small minority of hindus):

    Gandhi:

    https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSf7DcuJFfDhEpiYEUrRKg3rzLgi7UN6mwrl_VoJszbNpt-N1we


    Prabhupada, founder of Hare Krishna cult:


    http://theharekrishnamovement.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/srila-prabhupada-smiles-2.jpg


    Maharishi founder of Transcendental Meditation:

    http://www.awaken.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/050.jpg

    Mediterranean caucasoids are not heavily admixed with ASI

    That’s why they are Caucasoids, dear boy.

    which is black skinned aboriginal.

    More like dark brown….

    So how the heck can they look like indians, north or south, who all have substantial ASI ancestry? Even the indians in the far northwest like Punjab, who are a very small fraction of north indians, are ~1/3 ASI.The majority of indians are majority ASI.

    Some data via Razib Khan:

    India has been underrepresented in genome-wide surveys of human variation. We analyse 25 diverse groups in India to provide strong evidence for two ancient populations, genetically divergent, that are ancestral to most Indians today. One, the ‘Ancestral North Indians’ (ANI), is genetically close to Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans, whereas the other, the ‘Ancestral South Indians’ (ASI), is as distinct from ANI and East Asians as they are from each other. By introducing methods that can estimate ancestry without accurate ancestral populations, we show that ANI ancestry ranges from 39-71% in most Indian groups, and is higher in traditionally upper caste and Indo-European speakers. Groups with only ASI ancestry may no longer exist in mainland India. However, the indigenous Andaman Islanders are unique in being ASI-related groups without ANI ancestry. Allele frequency differences between groups in India are larger than in Europe, reflecting strong founder effects whose signatures have been maintained for thousands of years owing to endogamy.

    http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2011/04/22/the_genetic_ori/

    Which explains why they are closer to black than to swarthy…

    Or, in many cases, closer to “swarthy” than to “black.”

    The fact that the greeks compared the egyptians and ethiopians to distant indians instead of neighboring mediterranean caucasoids speaks volumes…

    And the Egyptians were compared to Northern Indians while the darker skinned Ethiopians were compared to the Southern Indians…..

    Here are some famous north indians, all upper caste aryans btw (who are a small minority of hindus):

    Ah, a good game of google image search, eh? I’m up for it. Let’s see, the first thing that we have to bear in mind, dear boy, is that Northern India to the Greeks meant what is now Pakistan.So here we go:

    http://www.kashmir-tours.net/about_kashmir.htm

    Note the Kashmiri girl in the yellow head scarf. You could drop her into Poland and she would blend right in

    http://www.mommy-labs.com/creative-kids/art_craft_projects_kids/leaf-art-nature-therapy-kashmir-chinar-leaves/

    And you could lose several of these people in a crowd in Sardinia….

    http://www.pinterest.com/meownewyork/india-kashmir/

    Many of these people would look quite at home in the Med…

    http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/Asia/India/North/Jammu_and_Kashmir/Kargil/

    The two young ladies here could be dropped into Sicily….

    And then there is Nikki Haley

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikki_Haley

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    That’s why they are Caucasoids, dear boy.
     
    And that, silly boy, is why the greeks did not compare the egyptians to west asians. Yet you are stupid enough to insist that the ancient egyptians were mediterranean caucasoids.

    More like dark brown….
     
    Damn, you are hopelessly irrational. If ASI was dark brown what explains the blackish skin tones of so many indians, such as your own people the tamils?

    And the Egyptians were compared to Northern Indians while the darker skinned Ethiopians were compared to the Southern Indians…..
     
    How many times will this have to be repeated before it penetrates your thick skull? Are north indians closely related to south indians or not? Likewise the greeks saw the egyptians as related to the ethiopians. Not to themselves, or persians or other peoples of the near east.

    Many of these people would look quite at home in the Med…
     
    You are trying to pass off outliers from Kashmir whose population is not even 1% of north India as representative of the north indian phenotype? Pathetic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    And here’s the Duke of Somerset to whom Swift is referring. This should give you some idea regarding what a “black complexion” could mean in an English context:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Seymour,_6th_Duke_of_Somerset
     
    Apparently you don't know that Jonathan Swift was a satirist of Irish origin otherwise why would you be taking him so seriously? The english, including that Duke, are very far from being black skinned. In fact they are the polar opposite. A person of mediterranean complexion would be called swarthy in the british isles. Only africans, indians etc could be called black, by serious people...

    Btw, did you know that when the british ruled Calcutta, a city in indo-aryan speaking north India, the part where europeans lived was called White Town while the part where the bengalis, of all castes, lived was called Black Town?

    http://indiaadventures.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/black-town-indian-kolkata/

    By early 19th century, Calcutta was divided into two distinct areas–the White Town where the British lived, and the Black Town where the Indians lived. The poverty and the living conditions in the Black Town shanties were appalling.

    Plenty pictures there showing what north indians look like. Anyone can see that they are very different from mediterranean caucasoids. The people that north indians are most closely related to are the south indians, which shows that the greeks saw egyptians, indians and ethiopians as quite different from themselves and other mediterranean caucasoids. Capische?

    Still more Europeans who are described as having black complexions:

    In the fourteenth year of my age, by a fellow scholar of swarth, black complexion, I had like to have my right eye beaten out as we were at play

    William Lilly’s history of his life and times from the year 1602 to 1681, page 20

    And here’s another person describing the Duke of Somerset as having a black complexion:

    He is of middle Stature, well shaped, a very Black Complexion, a lover of Music and Poetry

    Memoirs of the Secret Services of John Macky, Esq: During the Reigns of King William, Queen Anne, and King George I. : Including, Also, the True Secret History of the Rise, Promotions, &c. of the English and Scots Nobility, Officers, Civil, Military, Naval, and Other Persons of Distinction, from the Revolution : in Their Respective Characters at Large , page 17

    And here’s an account of an English religious non-conformist:

    His Majesty had further opportunity of discovering his zeal against heresy this year, upon two of his own subjects; one was Bartholomew Legate an Arian; he was a comely person, of a black complexion, and about forty years of age

    The History of the Puritans: Or, Protestant Non-Conformists, from the Reformation to the Death of Queen Elizabeth, with an Account of Their Principles, Their Attempts for a Further Reformation in the Church, Their Sufferings, and the Lives and Characters of Their Principal Divines, Volume 2
    page 89

    And here is a description of the inhabitants of the Western Isles of Scotland:

    The Inhabitants are generally well proportioned, and of a black Complexion; they speak only the Irish Tongue and use the Habit, Diet, and etc that is used in the Western Isles

    A Description of the Western Islands of Scotland: Containing a Full Account of Their Situation, Extent, Soils, Product, Harbours, Bays, Tides, Anchoring-places, and Fisheries. The Antient and Modern Government, Religion and Customs of the Inhabitants; Particularly of Their Druids, Heathen Temples, Monasteries, Churches, Chappels, Antiquities, Monuments, Forts, Caves, and Other Curiosities of Art and Nature: of Their Admirable and Expeditious Way of Curing Most Diseases by Simples of Their Own Product. A Particular Account of the Second Sight, Or Faculty of Foreseeing Things to Come, by Way of Vision, So Common Among Them. A Brief Hint of Methods to Improve Trade in that Country, Both by Sea and Land. With a New Map of the Whole, Describing the Harbours, Anchoring-places, and Dangerous Rocks, for the Benefit of Sailors. To which is Added, A Brief Description of the Isles of Orkney and Schetland

    page 248

    I suppose that you are going to argue that the inhabitants of the Western Isles of Scotland are Negroid?

    A description of Thomas, Earl of Ormonde:

    He was a very comely and graceful man, and of a black complexion, which gained him among the Irish the surname of Duffe

    A History of the Life of James Duke of Ormonde, Volume 1, page Lxiv

    MMM, here’s Ormonde:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Butler,_10th_Earl_of_Ormond

    Doesn’t look very Negroid, does he?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @syonredux

    Apparently you don’t know that Jonathan Swift was a satirist of Irish origin otherwise why would you be taking him so seriously?
     
    That's your response?You're not joking?

    The english, including that Duke, are very far from being black skinned. In fact they are the polar opposite
     
    Which explains why Swift could say that Somerset had a black complexion. Relative blackness, dear boy.When pale blondes abound, a swarthy brunet looks black in comparison.

    A person of mediterranean complexion would be called swarthy in the british isles. Only africans, indians etc could be called black, by serious people…
     
    Swift could be quite serious, dear boy.

    Plenty pictures there showing what north indians look like.
     
    Yes, and they look rather like Mediterranean Caucasoids, only darker skinned.

    Anyone can see that they are very different from mediterranean caucasoids.
     
    Not when compared to Negroids, dear boy.

    The people that north indians are most closely related to are the south indians, which shows that the greeks saw egyptians, indians and ethiopians as quite different from themselves and other mediterranean caucasoids.
     
    And yet the Greeks noted that the Egyptians looked like the lighter skinned, Caucasoid looking Northern Indians.

    they look rather like Mediterranean Caucasoids, only darker skinned.

    Anyone who thinks they look like med caucasoids has to be either seriously delusional or pathologically dishonest. In your case it is obviously the latter. A group of north indians will stand out like sore thumbs anywhere west of the Indus River.

    Mediterranean caucasoids are not heavily admixed with ASI which is black skinned aboriginal. So how the heck can they look like indians, north or south, who all have substantial ASI ancestry? Even the indians in the far northwest like Punjab, who are a very small fraction of north indians, are ~1/3 ASI. The majority of indians are majority ASI. Which explains why they are closer to black than to swarthy…

    The fact that the greeks compared the egyptians and ethiopians to distant indians instead of neighboring mediterranean caucasoids speaks volumes…

    Here are some famous north indians, all upper caste aryans btw (who are a small minority of hindus):

    Gandhi:

    https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSf7DcuJFfDhEpiYEUrRKg3rzLgi7UN6mwrl_VoJszbNpt-N1we

    Prabhupada, founder of Hare Krishna cult:

    Maharishi founder of Transcendental Meditation:

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Mediterranean caucasoids are not heavily admixed with ASI
     
    That's why they are Caucasoids, dear boy.

    which is black skinned aboriginal.
     
    More like dark brown....

    So how the heck can they look like indians, north or south, who all have substantial ASI ancestry? Even the indians in the far northwest like Punjab, who are a very small fraction of north indians, are ~1/3 ASI.The majority of indians are majority ASI.
     
    Some data via Razib Khan:

    India has been underrepresented in genome-wide surveys of human variation. We analyse 25 diverse groups in India to provide strong evidence for two ancient populations, genetically divergent, that are ancestral to most Indians today. One, the ‘Ancestral North Indians’ (ANI), is genetically close to Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans, whereas the other, the ‘Ancestral South Indians’ (ASI), is as distinct from ANI and East Asians as they are from each other. By introducing methods that can estimate ancestry without accurate ancestral populations, we show that ANI ancestry ranges from 39-71% in most Indian groups, and is higher in traditionally upper caste and Indo-European speakers. Groups with only ASI ancestry may no longer exist in mainland India. However, the indigenous Andaman Islanders are unique in being ASI-related groups without ANI ancestry. Allele frequency differences between groups in India are larger than in Europe, reflecting strong founder effects whose signatures have been maintained for thousands of years owing to endogamy.

     

    http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2011/04/22/the_genetic_ori/

    Which explains why they are closer to black than to swarthy…
     
    Or, in many cases, closer to "swarthy" than to "black."

    The fact that the greeks compared the egyptians and ethiopians to distant indians instead of neighboring mediterranean caucasoids speaks volumes…
     
    And the Egyptians were compared to Northern Indians while the darker skinned Ethiopians were compared to the Southern Indians.....

    Here are some famous north indians, all upper caste aryans btw (who are a small minority of hindus):
     
    Ah, a good game of google image search, eh? I'm up for it. Let's see, the first thing that we have to bear in mind, dear boy, is that Northern India to the Greeks meant what is now Pakistan.So here we go:

    http://www.kashmir-tours.net/about_kashmir.htm

    Note the Kashmiri girl in the yellow head scarf. You could drop her into Poland and she would blend right in


    http://www.mommy-labs.com/creative-kids/art_craft_projects_kids/leaf-art-nature-therapy-kashmir-chinar-leaves/

    And you could lose several of these people in a crowd in Sardinia....


    http://www.pinterest.com/meownewyork/india-kashmir/

    Many of these people would look quite at home in the Med...


    http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/Asia/India/North/Jammu_and_Kashmir/Kargil/

    The two young ladies here could be dropped into Sicily....


    And then there is Nikki Haley

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikki_Haley
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • […] Why Did Civilization Lag in Africa? – from steve sailer. […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    And here’s the Duke of Somerset to whom Swift is referring. This should give you some idea regarding what a “black complexion” could mean in an English context:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Seymour,_6th_Duke_of_Somerset
     
    Apparently you don't know that Jonathan Swift was a satirist of Irish origin otherwise why would you be taking him so seriously? The english, including that Duke, are very far from being black skinned. In fact they are the polar opposite. A person of mediterranean complexion would be called swarthy in the british isles. Only africans, indians etc could be called black, by serious people...

    Btw, did you know that when the british ruled Calcutta, a city in indo-aryan speaking north India, the part where europeans lived was called White Town while the part where the bengalis, of all castes, lived was called Black Town?

    http://indiaadventures.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/black-town-indian-kolkata/

    By early 19th century, Calcutta was divided into two distinct areas–the White Town where the British lived, and the Black Town where the Indians lived. The poverty and the living conditions in the Black Town shanties were appalling.

    Plenty pictures there showing what north indians look like. Anyone can see that they are very different from mediterranean caucasoids. The people that north indians are most closely related to are the south indians, which shows that the greeks saw egyptians, indians and ethiopians as quite different from themselves and other mediterranean caucasoids. Capische?

    And here’s another one, John Witaker’s description of John Spens:

    It was contrived by him, no doubt, in concurrence with one, who was commonly called Black
    John Spens, one of the Queen’s two Attornies General (Anderson, ii, 97), though a violent Protestant (Knox 338); who was probably engaged in the murder himself (Anderson i.48), who was certainly embarked in the rebellion afterwards (Keith, 452 and Goodall, ii. 370), and of whom, considering his black complexion and his anti-papistical spirit together, [...]

    Mary Queen Of Scots Vindicated: In Three Volumes, Volume 1, pages 302-303.

    I suppose that he must have been one of those Negroid Scotsmen that we hear so much about….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Apparently you don’t know that Jonathan Swift was a satirist of Irish origin otherwise why would you be taking him so seriously?

    That’s your response?You’re not joking?

    The english, including that Duke, are very far from being black skinned. In fact they are the polar opposite

    Which explains why Swift could say that Somerset had a black complexion. Relative blackness, dear boy.When pale blondes abound, a swarthy brunet looks black in comparison.

    A person of mediterranean complexion would be called swarthy in the british isles. Only africans, indians etc could be called black, by serious people…

    Swift could be quite serious, dear boy.

    Plenty pictures there showing what north indians look like.

    Yes, and they look rather like Mediterranean Caucasoids, only darker skinned.

    Anyone can see that they are very different from mediterranean caucasoids.

    Not when compared to Negroids, dear boy.

    The people that north indians are most closely related to are the south indians, which shows that the greeks saw egyptians, indians and ethiopians as quite different from themselves and other mediterranean caucasoids.

    And yet the Greeks noted that the Egyptians looked like the lighter skinned, Caucasoid looking Northern Indians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    they look rather like Mediterranean Caucasoids, only darker skinned.
     
    Anyone who thinks they look like med caucasoids has to be either seriously delusional or pathologically dishonest. In your case it is obviously the latter. A group of north indians will stand out like sore thumbs anywhere west of the Indus River.

    Mediterranean caucasoids are not heavily admixed with ASI which is black skinned aboriginal. So how the heck can they look like indians, north or south, who all have substantial ASI ancestry? Even the indians in the far northwest like Punjab, who are a very small fraction of north indians, are ~1/3 ASI. The majority of indians are majority ASI. Which explains why they are closer to black than to swarthy...

    The fact that the greeks compared the egyptians and ethiopians to distant indians instead of neighboring mediterranean caucasoids speaks volumes...


    Here are some famous north indians, all upper caste aryans btw (who are a small minority of hindus):

    Gandhi:

    https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSf7DcuJFfDhEpiYEUrRKg3rzLgi7UN6mwrl_VoJszbNpt-N1we


    Prabhupada, founder of Hare Krishna cult:


    http://theharekrishnamovement.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/srila-prabhupada-smiles-2.jpg


    Maharishi founder of Transcendental Meditation:

    http://www.awaken.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/050.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @syonredux

    Duke of Somerset:

    Is of a middle stature, well shaped, a very black complexion, a lover of music and poetry; of good judgment [not a grain;hardly common sense];but by reason of a great hesitation in his speech wants expression. He is about forty-two years old."

    http://books.google.com/books?id=88REAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22black%20complexion%22&pg=PA572#v=onepage&q=%22black%

     

    And here's the Duke of Somerset to whom Swift is referring. This should give you some idea regarding what a "black complexion" could mean in an English context:


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Seymour,_6th_Duke_of_Somerset


    I'm afraid that he does not look very Negroid, dear boy....

    And here’s the Duke of Somerset to whom Swift is referring. This should give you some idea regarding what a “black complexion” could mean in an English context:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Seymour,_6th_Duke_of_Somerset

    Apparently you don’t know that Jonathan Swift was a satirist of Irish origin otherwise why would you be taking him so seriously? The english, including that Duke, are very far from being black skinned. In fact they are the polar opposite. A person of mediterranean complexion would be called swarthy in the british isles. Only africans, indians etc could be called black, by serious people…

    Btw, did you know that when the british ruled Calcutta, a city in indo-aryan speaking north India, the part where europeans lived was called White Town while the part where the bengalis, of all castes, lived was called Black Town?

    http://indiaadventures.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/black-town-indian-kolkata/

    By early 19th century, Calcutta was divided into two distinct areas–the White Town where the British lived, and the Black Town where the Indians lived. The poverty and the living conditions in the Black Town shanties were appalling.

    Plenty pictures there showing what north indians look like. Anyone can see that they are very different from mediterranean caucasoids. The people that north indians are most closely related to are the south indians, which shows that the greeks saw egyptians, indians and ethiopians as quite different from themselves and other mediterranean caucasoids. Capische?

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux
    And here's another one, John Witaker's description of John Spens:

    It was contrived by him, no doubt, in concurrence with one, who was commonly called Black
    John Spens, one of the Queen's two Attornies General (Anderson, ii, 97), though a violent Protestant (Knox 338); who was probably engaged in the murder himself (Anderson i.48), who was certainly embarked in the rebellion afterwards (Keith, 452 and Goodall, ii. 370), and of whom, considering his black complexion and his anti-papistical spirit together, [...]
     
    Mary Queen Of Scots Vindicated: In Three Volumes, Volume 1, pages 302-303.

    I suppose that he must have been one of those Negroid Scotsmen that we hear so much about....
    , @syonredux
    Still more Europeans who are described as having black complexions:

    In the fourteenth year of my age, by a fellow scholar of swarth, black complexion, I had like to have my right eye beaten out as we were at play

    William Lilly's history of his life and times from the year 1602 to 1681, page 20
     
    And here's another person describing the Duke of Somerset as having a black complexion:

    He is of middle Stature, well shaped, a very Black Complexion, a lover of Music and Poetry

    Memoirs of the Secret Services of John Macky, Esq: During the Reigns of King William, Queen Anne, and King George I. : Including, Also, the True Secret History of the Rise, Promotions, &c. of the English and Scots Nobility, Officers, Civil, Military, Naval, and Other Persons of Distinction, from the Revolution : in Their Respective Characters at Large , page 17
     
    And here's an account of an English religious non-conformist:

    His Majesty had further opportunity of discovering his zeal against heresy this year, upon two of his own subjects; one was Bartholomew Legate an Arian; he was a comely person, of a black complexion, and about forty years of age


    The History of the Puritans: Or, Protestant Non-Conformists, from the Reformation to the Death of Queen Elizabeth, with an Account of Their Principles, Their Attempts for a Further Reformation in the Church, Their Sufferings, and the Lives and Characters of Their Principal Divines, Volume 2
    page 89
     
    And here is a description of the inhabitants of the Western Isles of Scotland:

    The Inhabitants are generally well proportioned, and of a black Complexion; they speak only the Irish Tongue and use the Habit, Diet, and etc that is used in the Western Isles


    A Description of the Western Islands of Scotland: Containing a Full Account of Their Situation, Extent, Soils, Product, Harbours, Bays, Tides, Anchoring-places, and Fisheries. The Antient and Modern Government, Religion and Customs of the Inhabitants; Particularly of Their Druids, Heathen Temples, Monasteries, Churches, Chappels, Antiquities, Monuments, Forts, Caves, and Other Curiosities of Art and Nature: of Their Admirable and Expeditious Way of Curing Most Diseases by Simples of Their Own Product. A Particular Account of the Second Sight, Or Faculty of Foreseeing Things to Come, by Way of Vision, So Common Among Them. A Brief Hint of Methods to Improve Trade in that Country, Both by Sea and Land. With a New Map of the Whole, Describing the Harbours, Anchoring-places, and Dangerous Rocks, for the Benefit of Sailors. To which is Added, A Brief Description of the Isles of Orkney and Schetland

    page 248
     
    I suppose that you are going to argue that the inhabitants of the Western Isles of Scotland are Negroid?


    A description of Thomas, Earl of Ormonde:

    He was a very comely and graceful man, and of a black complexion, which gained him among the Irish the surname of Duffe

    A History of the Life of James Duke of Ormonde, Volume 1, page Lxiv
     
    MMM, here's Ormonde:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Butler,_10th_Earl_of_Ormond

    Doesn't look very Negroid, does he?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • syonredux [AKA "marlowe"] says:

    Hart on Black Africa:

    Section 8 – Cultural and technological achievements in SSA prior to 1500
    In late pre-modern times, sub-Saharan Africa consisted of two very different
    portions, the exposed zone and the secluded zone. The exposed zone consisted of those
    regions which were in contact with the Moslem world or the European world. These
    included:
    • West Africa
    • Ethiopia and Somalia
    • Small, isolated parts of the Indian Ocean coast where Arab traders had set up
    trading posts or colonies
    • Those parts of the Atlantic coast where the Portuguese traders had set up small
    outposts.
    The secluded zone consisted of the rest of SSA — i.e., most of East Africa, and
    virtually all of central and southern Africa. This was a vast region, roughly twice the
    size of Europe.
    Parts of the exposed zone were reasonably prosperous, but it is hard to think of a
    single significant contribution to world civilization that was produced by the Negro
    tribes of that region. (Although there were a few written languages, the writing systems
    had been brought in from the outside by Moslem tribes or traders.)
    The entire secluded zone was a primitive and backward region. This was true not
    just in 1500, but even in the early 19th century when European explorers first penetrated
    it. Here are some aspects of that backwardness:
    1) Although there were some towns, there were no sizable cities.
    2) There were no wheeled vehicles, nor did they use the potter’s wheel. In fact,
    there were no mechanical contrivances with moving parts, such as scissors or hinges.
    3) They had not devised means of joining together pieces of wood.
    4) There were no coins or money.
    5) Although cattle were raised, they were not used as beasts of burden, and there
    were no draft animals.
    6) There was not a single written language in the entire region.
    7) As a result, there were no law codes, no philosophical works, and no literature.
    Nor was there any orally-composed epic poetry, such as the Iliad.
    8) There was no mathematics other than simple arithmetic.
    9) Only primitive methods of construction were known. There were no domes or
    arches. Little use was made of stone, and there were no temples or large monuments.
    Nor were there any schools, hospitals, libraries, or paved roads. The most noteworthy
    example of construction in the secluded zone are the ruins of Great Zimbabwe, which
    cover over 60 acres (about a tenth of a square mile). However, in comparison with what

    we find in other regions — such as Machu Picchu in South America, or the remarkable
    complex at Angkor Wat in Cambodia, or the large cities and religious buildings found
    in Mesoamerica — these are third rate, both in size and in quality. Indeed, the giant
    statues found on Easter Island (a tiny, isolated island in Polynesia) are more impressive
    than anything found in the entire secluded zone of SSA.
    10) The maritime skills of the inhabitants were very limited. They never reached
    the Cape Verde Islands, just a few hundred miles off the West African coast. More
    surprisingly, the Africans failed to reach Madagascar (an enormous island, about 1000
    miles long, that lies only 250 miles off the East African coast). Madagascar remained
    uninhabited until it was settled by people coming from Indonesia — more than 3000
    miles away, on the other side of the Indian Ocean — about 500 AD.
    In addition, the secluded zone was backward in social and political matters.
    Absolute rule, with no semblance of civil liberties or democracy, was the usual case.
    Cannibalism was rare, but was practiced by some tribes. Slavery was commonplace
    everywhere, and masters were free to put their slaves to death.
    The paucity of cultural, technological, and political achievements in the secluded
    zone of SSA is not surprising; rather, it is about what one would expect of a population
    with a mean IQ of around 70.

    http://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/hart_-_understanding_human_history-1.pdf

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    Actually, they looked quite a bit like that, dear boy.
     
    If they did, irrational hindu boy, the greeks would have compared the egyptians to the mediterranean caucasoids of the neighborhood, not to australoid mixed hindus from distant India.

    You mean ANI mixed with ASI, dear boy.
     
    Dear hindu boy, ASI = Black Australoid. Every hindu, of every caste, from north India or south India, is heavily mixed with black australoid. South indians being even more heavily mixed.

    My mother is Ashkenazi Jewish while my father is English-Scots.
     
    I am not buying it. Internet hindu trolls are notorious for concocting false identities on forums. It's funny how you even adopted an archaic 19th century british colonial manner of speaking, stupidly assuming that it will aid your charade. Brits don't talk like that anymore. Welcome to the 21st century, hindu boy...

    Do you really think that only South Asians date other South Asians?
     
    Dating isn't part of indian culture. Most likely the woman you are/were with belongs to your sub-caste, in an arranged marriage. And if, as you say, she is the same color as Chandrasekhar then she is probably seen as a black woman where you live, just as Chandrasekhar was seen as a black man in Chicago. I am pretty sure you are a south indian tamil brahmin.

    Finally, re:Michell, we were not talking of black hair. Show us where an englishman was described as having black skin...

    Duke of Somerset:

    Is of a middle stature, well shaped, a very black complexion, a lover of music and poetry; of good judgment [not a grain;hardly common sense];but by reason of a great hesitation in his speech wants expression. He is about forty-two years old.”

    http://books.google.com/books?id=88REAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22black%20complexion%22&pg=PA572#v=onepage&q=%22black%

    And here’s the Duke of Somerset to whom Swift is referring. This should give you some idea regarding what a “black complexion” could mean in an English context:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Seymour,_6th_Duke_of_Somerset

    I’m afraid that he does not look very Negroid, dear boy….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    And here’s the Duke of Somerset to whom Swift is referring. This should give you some idea regarding what a “black complexion” could mean in an English context:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Seymour,_6th_Duke_of_Somerset
     
    Apparently you don't know that Jonathan Swift was a satirist of Irish origin otherwise why would you be taking him so seriously? The english, including that Duke, are very far from being black skinned. In fact they are the polar opposite. A person of mediterranean complexion would be called swarthy in the british isles. Only africans, indians etc could be called black, by serious people...

    Btw, did you know that when the british ruled Calcutta, a city in indo-aryan speaking north India, the part where europeans lived was called White Town while the part where the bengalis, of all castes, lived was called Black Town?

    http://indiaadventures.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/black-town-indian-kolkata/

    By early 19th century, Calcutta was divided into two distinct areas–the White Town where the British lived, and the Black Town where the Indians lived. The poverty and the living conditions in the Black Town shanties were appalling.

    Plenty pictures there showing what north indians look like. Anyone can see that they are very different from mediterranean caucasoids. The people that north indians are most closely related to are the south indians, which shows that the greeks saw egyptians, indians and ethiopians as quite different from themselves and other mediterranean caucasoids. Capische?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    Actually, they looked quite a bit like that, dear boy.
     
    If they did, irrational hindu boy, the greeks would have compared the egyptians to the mediterranean caucasoids of the neighborhood, not to australoid mixed hindus from distant India.

    You mean ANI mixed with ASI, dear boy.
     
    Dear hindu boy, ASI = Black Australoid. Every hindu, of every caste, from north India or south India, is heavily mixed with black australoid. South indians being even more heavily mixed.

    My mother is Ashkenazi Jewish while my father is English-Scots.
     
    I am not buying it. Internet hindu trolls are notorious for concocting false identities on forums. It's funny how you even adopted an archaic 19th century british colonial manner of speaking, stupidly assuming that it will aid your charade. Brits don't talk like that anymore. Welcome to the 21st century, hindu boy...

    Do you really think that only South Asians date other South Asians?
     
    Dating isn't part of indian culture. Most likely the woman you are/were with belongs to your sub-caste, in an arranged marriage. And if, as you say, she is the same color as Chandrasekhar then she is probably seen as a black woman where you live, just as Chandrasekhar was seen as a black man in Chicago. I am pretty sure you are a south indian tamil brahmin.

    Finally, re:Michell, we were not talking of black hair. Show us where an englishman was described as having black skin...

    If they did, irrational hindu boy
    the greeks would have compared the egyptians to the mediterranean caucasoids of the neighborhood, not to australoid mixed hindus from distant India.

    But yet they chose to make the comparison with Northern Indians, the ones who are most Mediterranean Caucasoid in type, dear boy….

    Dear hindu boy, ASI = Black Australoid.

    Not quite , dear boy:

    Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent.

    Kindly note the bit about the ASI population not being “closely related to groups outside the subcontinent.”

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/08/indo-aryans-dravidians-and-waves-of-admixture-migration/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GeneExpressionBlog+%28Gene+Expression%29#.VCayDWddWHg

    Every hindu,

    MMM, you do know, of course, that nowadays “Hindu” tends to be used to refer to South Asians who practice Hinduism? E.g., it’s incorrect to call a South Asian who practices Islam Hindu.

    of every caste, from north India or south India, is heavily mixed with black australoid. South indians being even more heavily mixed.

    Well, barring the Tibeto-Burman populations, dear boy. And, on the other hand, the Northern population has higher rates of ANI admixture. Here’s some more info from Razib for your edification:

    I want to highlight one aspect which is not in the abstract: the closest population to the “Ancestral North Indians”, those who contributed the West Eurasian component to modern Indian ancestry, seem to be Georgians and other Caucasians. Since Reconstructing Indian Population History many have suspected this. I want to highlight in particular two genome bloggers, Dienekes and Zack Ajmal, who’ve prefigured that particular result. But wait, there’s more! The figure which I posted at the top illustrates that it looks like Indo-European speakers were subject to two waves of admixture, while Dravidian speakers were subject to one!

    The authors were cautious indeed in not engaging in excessive speculation. The term “Indo-Aryan” only shows up in the notes, not in the body of the main paper. But the historical and philological literature is references:

    The dates we report have significant implications for Indian history in the sense that they document a period of demographic and cultural change in which mixture between highly differentiated populations became pervasive before it eventually became uncommon. The period of around 1,900–4,200 years BP was a time of profound change in India, characterized by the deurbanization of the Indus civilization, increasing population density in the central and downstream portions of the Gangetic system, shifts in burial practices, and the likely first appearance of Indo-European languages and Vedic religion in the subcontinent. The shift from widespread mixture to strict endogamy that we document is mirrored in ancient Indian texts. [notes removed -Razib]

    What these results imply is that there was admixture between very distinct populations in the period between 0 and 2000 B.C. By distinct, I mean to imply that the last common ancestors of the “Ancestral North Indians” and “Ancestral South Indians” probably date to ~50,000 years ago. The population in the Reich data set with the lowest fraction of ANI are the Paniya (~20%). One of those with higher fractions of ANI (70%) are Kashmiri Pandits. It does not take an Orientalist with colonial motives to infer that the ancient Vedic passages which are straightforwardly interpreted in physical anthropological terms may actually refer to ethnic conflicts in concrete terms, and not symbolic ones.

    Finally, the authors note that uniparental lineages (mtDNA and Y) seem to imply that the last common ancestors of the ANI with other sampled West Eurasian groups dates to ~10,000 years before the present. This leads them to suggest that the ANI may not have come from afar necessarily. That is, the “Georgian” element is a signal of a population which perhaps diverged ~10,000 years ago, during the early period of agriculture in West Asia, and occupied the marginal fringes of South Asia, as in sites such as Mehrgarh in Balochistan. A plausible framework then is that expansion of institutional complexity resulted in an expansion of the agriculture complex ~3,000 B.C., and subsequent admixture with the indigenous hunter-gatherer substrate to the east and south during this period. One of the components that Zack Ajmal finds through ADMIXTURE analysis in South Asia, with higher fractions in higher castes even in non-Brahmins in South India, he terms “Baloch,” because it is modal in that population. This fraction is also high in the Dravidian speaking Brahui people, who coexist with the Baloch. It seems plausible to me that this widespread Baloch fraction is reflective of the initial ANI-ASI admixture event. In contrast, the Baloch and Brahui have very little of the “NE Euro” fraction, which is found at low frequencies in Indo-European speakers, and especially higher castes east and south of Punjab, as well as South Indian Brahmins. I believe that this component is correlated with the second, smaller wave of admixture, which brought the Indo-European speaking Indo-Aryans to much of the subcontinent. The Dasas described in the Vedas are not ASI, but hybrid populations. The collapse of the Indus Valley civilization was an explosive event for the rest of the subcontinent, as Moorjani et al. report that all indigenous Indian populations have ANI-ASI admixture (with the exceptions of Tibeto-Burman groups).

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/08/indo-aryans-dravidians-and-waves-of-admixture-migration/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GeneExpressionBlog+%28Gene+Expression%29#.VCayDWddWHg

    I am not buying it.

    Whatever makes you happy, dear boy.

    Dating isn’t part of indian culture.

    She was an American girl, dear boy. Her race was South Asian, not her culture.

    Most likely the woman you are/were with belongs to your sub-caste, in an arranged marriage.

    You are really developing an elaborate fantasy here…

    And if, as you say, she is the same color as Chandrasekhar then she is probably seen as a black woman where you live, just as Chandrasekhar was seen as a black man in Chicago.

    No, she was perceived as a South Asian. South Asians are far from uncommon in California, and people there know what they look like.

    I am pretty sure you are a south indian tamil brahmin.

    I’m strongly tempted to email her with this. I haven’t seen her in some time, and she would get a kick out of this.

    Finally, re:Michell, we were not talking of black hair. Show us where an englishman was described as having black skin…

    You really do think that Michell was Negroid, don’t you? Well, here’s Swift again:

    Duke of Somerset:

    Is of a middle stature, well shaped, a very black complexion, a lover of music and poetry; of good judgment [not a grain;hardly common sense];but by reason of a great hesitation in his speech wants expression. He is about forty-two years old.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=88REAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22black%20complexion%22&pg=PA572#v=onepage&q=%22black%

    Note that the Duke of Somerset is described as having a “very black complexion.” I suppose now that you will argue that the Duke was Negroid?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @syonredux

    Poor boy, can’t handle the truth. Let someone who does not belong to a congenitally dishonest caste tell you what the >4500 years old Great Sphinx of Giza looked like:
     
    Are you actually quoting Volney again?

    Mediterranean caucasoids look like greeks, levantines, persians etc. The ancient egyptians looked nothing like that.
     
    Actually, they looked quite a bit like that, dear boy.

    If they did the greeks wouldn’t have had to look at far away India with its dark skinned australoid
     
    You mean ANI mixed with ASI, dear boy.

    mixed population to find people that to them looked far more like the egyptians and ethiopians than the other people of the mediterranean and middle-eastern region.
     
    On the other hand, they compared the Egyptians to the lighter-skinned Northern Indians, dear boy, the ones who look more like Mediterranean Caucasoids....

    Only an indian
     
    Well, seeing as how I am not Indian, that's obviously incorrect...

    would claim that Chandrashekhar was “medium to light brown”.
     
    No. medium to light brown seems about right.Someone like, say, Yaphet Kotto, would be dark brown.

    I figured you had to be an internet hindu troll based on your stubborn dishonesty and the fact that you think it is so cool to talk like a 19th century british colonial in India. Am I right or what, dear boy?
     
    Spectacularly wrong, dear boy. My mother is Ashkenazi Jewish while my father is English-Scots. Do you really think that only South Asians date other South Asians?

    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again…
     
    Oh dear Lord, you actually do think that John Michell was Negroid? Is Beethoven going to be next?

    As for examples, there are so many:the black peasant in The Romance of the Rose, the Rígsþula, where the Scandinavian surfs are described as black, Black Irish as a term for dark-haired Irish, Russians routinely refer to Georgians as blacks, etc, etc.

    Actually, they looked quite a bit like that, dear boy.

    If they did, irrational hindu boy, the greeks would have compared the egyptians to the mediterranean caucasoids of the neighborhood, not to australoid mixed hindus from distant India.

    You mean ANI mixed with ASI, dear boy.

    Dear hindu boy, ASI = Black Australoid. Every hindu, of every caste, from north India or south India, is heavily mixed with black australoid. South indians being even more heavily mixed.

    My mother is Ashkenazi Jewish while my father is English-Scots.

    I am not buying it. Internet hindu trolls are notorious for concocting false identities on forums. It’s funny how you even adopted an archaic 19th century british colonial manner of speaking, stupidly assuming that it will aid your charade. Brits don’t talk like that anymore. Welcome to the 21st century, hindu boy…

    Do you really think that only South Asians date other South Asians?

    Dating isn’t part of indian culture. Most likely the woman you are/were with belongs to your sub-caste, in an arranged marriage. And if, as you say, she is the same color as Chandrasekhar then she is probably seen as a black woman where you live, just as Chandrasekhar was seen as a black man in Chicago. I am pretty sure you are a south indian tamil brahmin.

    Finally, re:Michell, we were not talking of black hair. Show us where an englishman was described as having black skin…

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    If they did, irrational hindu boy
    the greeks would have compared the egyptians to the mediterranean caucasoids of the neighborhood, not to australoid mixed hindus from distant India.
     
    But yet they chose to make the comparison with Northern Indians, the ones who are most Mediterranean Caucasoid in type, dear boy....

    Dear hindu boy, ASI = Black Australoid.
     
    Not quite , dear boy:

    Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent.
     
    Kindly note the bit about the ASI population not being "closely related to groups outside the subcontinent."

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/08/indo-aryans-dravidians-and-waves-of-admixture-migration/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GeneExpressionBlog+%28Gene+Expression%29#.VCayDWddWHg

    Every hindu,
     
    MMM, you do know, of course, that nowadays "Hindu" tends to be used to refer to South Asians who practice Hinduism? E.g., it's incorrect to call a South Asian who practices Islam Hindu.

    of every caste, from north India or south India, is heavily mixed with black australoid. South indians being even more heavily mixed.
     
    Well, barring the Tibeto-Burman populations, dear boy. And, on the other hand, the Northern population has higher rates of ANI admixture. Here's some more info from Razib for your edification:

    I want to highlight one aspect which is not in the abstract: the closest population to the “Ancestral North Indians”, those who contributed the West Eurasian component to modern Indian ancestry, seem to be Georgians and other Caucasians. Since Reconstructing Indian Population History many have suspected this. I want to highlight in particular two genome bloggers, Dienekes and Zack Ajmal, who’ve prefigured that particular result. But wait, there’s more! The figure which I posted at the top illustrates that it looks like Indo-European speakers were subject to two waves of admixture, while Dravidian speakers were subject to one!

    The authors were cautious indeed in not engaging in excessive speculation. The term “Indo-Aryan” only shows up in the notes, not in the body of the main paper. But the historical and philological literature is references:

    The dates we report have significant implications for Indian history in the sense that they document a period of demographic and cultural change in which mixture between highly differentiated populations became pervasive before it eventually became uncommon. The period of around 1,900–4,200 years BP was a time of profound change in India, characterized by the deurbanization of the Indus civilization, increasing population density in the central and downstream portions of the Gangetic system, shifts in burial practices, and the likely first appearance of Indo-European languages and Vedic religion in the subcontinent. The shift from widespread mixture to strict endogamy that we document is mirrored in ancient Indian texts. [notes removed -Razib]


    What these results imply is that there was admixture between very distinct populations in the period between 0 and 2000 B.C. By distinct, I mean to imply that the last common ancestors of the “Ancestral North Indians” and “Ancestral South Indians” probably date to ~50,000 years ago. The population in the Reich data set with the lowest fraction of ANI are the Paniya (~20%). One of those with higher fractions of ANI (70%) are Kashmiri Pandits. It does not take an Orientalist with colonial motives to infer that the ancient Vedic passages which are straightforwardly interpreted in physical anthropological terms may actually refer to ethnic conflicts in concrete terms, and not symbolic ones.

    Finally, the authors note that uniparental lineages (mtDNA and Y) seem to imply that the last common ancestors of the ANI with other sampled West Eurasian groups dates to ~10,000 years before the present. This leads them to suggest that the ANI may not have come from afar necessarily. That is, the “Georgian” element is a signal of a population which perhaps diverged ~10,000 years ago, during the early period of agriculture in West Asia, and occupied the marginal fringes of South Asia, as in sites such as Mehrgarh in Balochistan. A plausible framework then is that expansion of institutional complexity resulted in an expansion of the agriculture complex ~3,000 B.C., and subsequent admixture with the indigenous hunter-gatherer substrate to the east and south during this period. One of the components that Zack Ajmal finds through ADMIXTURE analysis in South Asia, with higher fractions in higher castes even in non-Brahmins in South India, he terms “Baloch,” because it is modal in that population. This fraction is also high in the Dravidian speaking Brahui people, who coexist with the Baloch. It seems plausible to me that this widespread Baloch fraction is reflective of the initial ANI-ASI admixture event. In contrast, the Baloch and Brahui have very little of the “NE Euro” fraction, which is found at low frequencies in Indo-European speakers, and especially higher castes east and south of Punjab, as well as South Indian Brahmins. I believe that this component is correlated with the second, smaller wave of admixture, which brought the Indo-European speaking Indo-Aryans to much of the subcontinent. The Dasas described in the Vedas are not ASI, but hybrid populations. The collapse of the Indus Valley civilization was an explosive event for the rest of the subcontinent, as Moorjani et al. report that all indigenous Indian populations have ANI-ASI admixture (with the exceptions of Tibeto-Burman groups).

     

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/08/indo-aryans-dravidians-and-waves-of-admixture-migration/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GeneExpressionBlog+%28Gene+Expression%29#.VCayDWddWHg

    I am not buying it.
     
    Whatever makes you happy, dear boy.

    Dating isn’t part of indian culture.
     
    She was an American girl, dear boy. Her race was South Asian, not her culture.

    Most likely the woman you are/were with belongs to your sub-caste, in an arranged marriage.
     
    You are really developing an elaborate fantasy here...

    And if, as you say, she is the same color as Chandrasekhar then she is probably seen as a black woman where you live, just as Chandrasekhar was seen as a black man in Chicago.
     
    No, she was perceived as a South Asian. South Asians are far from uncommon in California, and people there know what they look like.

    I am pretty sure you are a south indian tamil brahmin.
     
    I'm strongly tempted to email her with this. I haven't seen her in some time, and she would get a kick out of this.

    Finally, re:Michell, we were not talking of black hair. Show us where an englishman was described as having black skin…
     
    You really do think that Michell was Negroid, don't you? Well, here's Swift again:

    Duke of Somerset:

    Is of a middle stature, well shaped, a very black complexion, a lover of music and poetry; of good judgment [not a grain;hardly common sense];but by reason of a great hesitation in his speech wants expression. He is about forty-two years old.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=88REAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22black%20complexion%22&pg=PA572#v=onepage&q=%22black%
     
    Note that the Duke of Somerset is described as having a "very black complexion." I suppose now that you will argue that the Duke was Negroid?
    , @syonredux

    Duke of Somerset:

    Is of a middle stature, well shaped, a very black complexion, a lover of music and poetry; of good judgment [not a grain;hardly common sense];but by reason of a great hesitation in his speech wants expression. He is about forty-two years old."

    http://books.google.com/books?id=88REAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22black%20complexion%22&pg=PA572#v=onepage&q=%22black%

     

    And here's the Duke of Somerset to whom Swift is referring. This should give you some idea regarding what a "black complexion" could mean in an English context:


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Seymour,_6th_Duke_of_Somerset


    I'm afraid that he does not look very Negroid, dear boy....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    Looks like a sphinx to me…..
     
    Poor boy, can't handle the truth. Let someone who does not belong to a congenitally dishonest caste tell you what the >4500 years old Great Sphinx of Giza looked like:

    when I visited the Sphinx, its appearance gave me the key to the riddle. On seeing that head, typically Negro in all its features, I remembered the remarkable passage where Herodotus says: ' As for me, I judge the Colchians to be a colony of the Egyptians because, like them, they are black with woolly hair...

    Look like Mediterranean Caucasoids to me….
     
    Mediterranean caucasoids look like greeks, levantines, persians etc. The ancient egyptians looked nothing like that. If they did the greeks wouldn't have had to look at far away India with its dark skinned australoid mixed population to find people that to them looked far more like the egyptians and ethiopians than the other people of the mediterranean and middle-eastern region.

    The Egyptians didn’t think that they looked much like their Southern neighbors….
     
    The very fact that the greeks compared egyptians and ethiopians to north and south indians respectively clearly shows that they saw egyptians and ethiopians as related peoples. Just as north and south indians are obviously related.

    people with dark hair and olive complexions were frequently described as having “black complexions” in Northern Europe
     
    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again...

    More like medium to light brown, I would say. About the same shade as my first serious girlfriend in High School. Yes, she was South Asian.
     
    Only an indian would claim that Chandrashekhar was "medium to light brown". I figured you had to be an internet hindu troll based on your stubborn dishonesty and the fact that you think it is so cool to talk like a 19th century british colonial in India. Am I right or what, dear boy?

    Here's an example of what Chandra had to endure in pre-Civil Rights America:

    https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=97&start=40

    Chandra himself faced open racism. I have a first person account of a rather disturbing incident
    when Chandra joined the Univ. of Chicago. There was a faculty dinner.
    At the dinner Chandra as a a new faculty was invited and so was a mathematician G.O. Bliss who was a notorious racist. Hutchins was the president of Chicago and a visionary who had hired Chandra. At some point Bliss came up to Hutchins and said" President Hutchins you have forced me to shake hands with this black man Chandrasekhar you have hired and now I am going to the washroom to wash my hands".

    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again…

    Here’s another one, this time from Jonathan Swift:

    Duke of Somerset:

    Is of a middle stature, well shaped, a very black complexion, a lover of music and poetry; of good judgment [not a grain;hardly common sense];but by reason of a great hesitation in his speech wants expression. He is about forty-two years old.

    http://books.google.com/books?id=88REAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22black%20complexion%22&pg=PA572#v=onepage&q=%22black%20complexion%22&f=false

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    “from black to bark brown”; woof, woof, eh?
     
    Stop barking and start googling. That was no typo. The greyish brown skin stone which is common among indians looks similar to the color of tree bark.

    For example this brahmin ex-prime minister of India:

    http://www.timescontent.com/tss/photos/preview/28258/P%20V%20Narasimha%20Rao.jpg

    Stop barking and start googling. That was no typo. The greyish brown skin stone

    MMM, “skin stone” or “skin tone,” dear boy?

    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again…

    Here’s another example that slipped my mind earlier, the elaborate verbal play in Love’s Labour’s Lost. Biron is enamored of the dark-haired Rosaline, and the other characters find the passion misplaced:

    FERDINAND
    By heaven, thy love is black as ebony.
    BIRON
    Is ebony like her? O wood divine!
    A wife of such wood were felicity.
    O, who can give an oath? where is a book?
    That I may swear beauty doth beauty lack,
    If that she learn not of her eye to look:
    No face is fair that is not full so black.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    Looks like a sphinx to me…..
     
    Poor boy, can't handle the truth. Let someone who does not belong to a congenitally dishonest caste tell you what the >4500 years old Great Sphinx of Giza looked like:

    when I visited the Sphinx, its appearance gave me the key to the riddle. On seeing that head, typically Negro in all its features, I remembered the remarkable passage where Herodotus says: ' As for me, I judge the Colchians to be a colony of the Egyptians because, like them, they are black with woolly hair...

    Look like Mediterranean Caucasoids to me….
     
    Mediterranean caucasoids look like greeks, levantines, persians etc. The ancient egyptians looked nothing like that. If they did the greeks wouldn't have had to look at far away India with its dark skinned australoid mixed population to find people that to them looked far more like the egyptians and ethiopians than the other people of the mediterranean and middle-eastern region.

    The Egyptians didn’t think that they looked much like their Southern neighbors….
     
    The very fact that the greeks compared egyptians and ethiopians to north and south indians respectively clearly shows that they saw egyptians and ethiopians as related peoples. Just as north and south indians are obviously related.

    people with dark hair and olive complexions were frequently described as having “black complexions” in Northern Europe
     
    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again...

    More like medium to light brown, I would say. About the same shade as my first serious girlfriend in High School. Yes, she was South Asian.
     
    Only an indian would claim that Chandrashekhar was "medium to light brown". I figured you had to be an internet hindu troll based on your stubborn dishonesty and the fact that you think it is so cool to talk like a 19th century british colonial in India. Am I right or what, dear boy?

    Here's an example of what Chandra had to endure in pre-Civil Rights America:

    https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=97&start=40

    Chandra himself faced open racism. I have a first person account of a rather disturbing incident
    when Chandra joined the Univ. of Chicago. There was a faculty dinner.
    At the dinner Chandra as a a new faculty was invited and so was a mathematician G.O. Bliss who was a notorious racist. Hutchins was the president of Chicago and a visionary who had hired Chandra. At some point Bliss came up to Hutchins and said" President Hutchins you have forced me to shake hands with this black man Chandrasekhar you have hired and now I am going to the washroom to wash my hands".

    Poor boy, can’t handle the truth. Let someone who does not belong to a congenitally dishonest caste tell you what the >4500 years old Great Sphinx of Giza looked like:

    Are you actually quoting Volney again?

    Mediterranean caucasoids look like greeks, levantines, persians etc. The ancient egyptians looked nothing like that.

    Actually, they looked quite a bit like that, dear boy.

    If they did the greeks wouldn’t have had to look at far away India with its dark skinned australoid

    You mean ANI mixed with ASI, dear boy.

    mixed population to find people that to them looked far more like the egyptians and ethiopians than the other people of the mediterranean and middle-eastern region.

    On the other hand, they compared the Egyptians to the lighter-skinned Northern Indians, dear boy, the ones who look more like Mediterranean Caucasoids….

    Only an indian

    Well, seeing as how I am not Indian, that’s obviously incorrect…

    would claim that Chandrashekhar was “medium to light brown”.

    No. medium to light brown seems about right.Someone like, say, Yaphet Kotto, would be dark brown.

    I figured you had to be an internet hindu troll based on your stubborn dishonesty and the fact that you think it is so cool to talk like a 19th century british colonial in India. Am I right or what, dear boy?

    Spectacularly wrong, dear boy. My mother is Ashkenazi Jewish while my father is English-Scots. Do you really think that only South Asians date other South Asians?

    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again…

    Oh dear Lord, you actually do think that John Michell was Negroid? Is Beethoven going to be next?

    As for examples, there are so many:the black peasant in The Romance of the Rose, the Rígsþula, where the Scandinavian surfs are described as black, Black Irish as a term for dark-haired Irish, Russians routinely refer to Georgians as blacks, etc, etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Actually, they looked quite a bit like that, dear boy.
     
    If they did, irrational hindu boy, the greeks would have compared the egyptians to the mediterranean caucasoids of the neighborhood, not to australoid mixed hindus from distant India.

    You mean ANI mixed with ASI, dear boy.
     
    Dear hindu boy, ASI = Black Australoid. Every hindu, of every caste, from north India or south India, is heavily mixed with black australoid. South indians being even more heavily mixed.

    My mother is Ashkenazi Jewish while my father is English-Scots.
     
    I am not buying it. Internet hindu trolls are notorious for concocting false identities on forums. It's funny how you even adopted an archaic 19th century british colonial manner of speaking, stupidly assuming that it will aid your charade. Brits don't talk like that anymore. Welcome to the 21st century, hindu boy...

    Do you really think that only South Asians date other South Asians?
     
    Dating isn't part of indian culture. Most likely the woman you are/were with belongs to your sub-caste, in an arranged marriage. And if, as you say, she is the same color as Chandrasekhar then she is probably seen as a black woman where you live, just as Chandrasekhar was seen as a black man in Chicago. I am pretty sure you are a south indian tamil brahmin.

    Finally, re:Michell, we were not talking of black hair. Show us where an englishman was described as having black skin...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    “from black to bark brown”; woof, woof, eh?
     
    Stop barking and start googling. That was no typo. The greyish brown skin stone which is common among indians looks similar to the color of tree bark.

    For example this brahmin ex-prime minister of India:

    http://www.timescontent.com/tss/photos/preview/28258/P%20V%20Narasimha%20Rao.jpg

    Stop barking and start googling. That was no typo. The greyish brown skin stone which is common among indians looks similar to the color of tree bark.

    Whatever you say, dear boy. I wouldn’t want your feelings to be hurt.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Rivers change all the time.

    True, but the river valleys don’t change that much and the river stays there. The Nile has pretty much been in the same general place for maybe the last umpteen thousand years, even though it’s precise location wandered around enough for the Egyptians to need to become quite comfortable with basic geometry to redraw field boundaries after every flood.

    And humans can probably keep up with the rate of change of river locations, even the extreme flooding event. Individual cities may be lost, but new cities arise.

    The transportation aspect of rivers is likely also important, for much of history they would have been the transportation energy-efficiency winners. The longer the river, the more important it would be as a transportation system.

    So you get the Nile; Tigris and Euphrates; Indus and Ganges; and Yellow, Yangtze, and Perl, around each of which a long-lasting civilization formed (and corresponding ethnic groups).

    It’s interesting that the Islamic State today is tied pretty close to the Tigris and Euphrates.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Rivers change all the time.

    True, but the river valleys don’t change that much and the river stays there somewhere. The Nile has pretty much been in the same general place for maybe the last umpteen thousand years, even though it’s precise location wandered around enough for the Egyptians to need to become quite comfortable with basic geometry.

    And humans can probably keep up with the rate of change of river locations, even the extreme flooding event. Individual cities may be lost, but new cities arise.

    The transportation aspect of rivers is likely also important, for much of history they would have been the transportation energy-efficiency winners.

    So you get the Nile; Tigris and Euphrates; Indus and Ganges; and Yellow, Yangtze, and Perl, around each of which a long-lasting civilization formed (and corresponding ethnic group).

    It’s interesting that the Islamic State today is tied pretty close to the Tigris and Euphrates.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @random observer
    I am glad to see a couple of posters already tackled the Roman question. I quite agree. But you are understating it with your last point. Siegecraft? Didn't the Zulus maximum settlements amount to wooden kraals? Just burn 'em down.

    Though, being Romans, the Legions would surely have first built elaborate camps and circumvallations whose ditchwork and palisades [presuming there was any wood left in the country] would dwarf the besieged kraal itself.

    If the Romans managed to get to Zululand with anything like 40% [to be generous] of the Zulus' numbers and didn't die off at once [I don't think South Africa itself is much of a natural disease hotbed- it's pretty temperate for one thing] they'd have MUCH less trouble at Ulundi than they had at Alesia.

    Sorry, I see others have commented on the lost great cities of Zululand already. What a great concept, though, if the pulp writers hadn’t already sucked the marrow out of the “lost cities” meme already. Good meme, though.

    Still, in the context of the alleged primitivism of northern Europe, I did manage a shout out for the Gauls.

    It seems to me that the relative primitivism of the north compared to the mediterranean was largely true throughout pre-Roman antiquity [or all of antiquity for the extra-imperial areas], but it was mainly based on the [not insignificant] absence of much written language or many cities made of reasonably permanent materials [or wooden communities larger than towns]. It was real, but can be carried too far. The Celtic [ish] world eventually managed fairly productive and organized agriculture, towns, river commerce, clannish polities organized on a fairly large scale, and in a number of cases galley type ships at least comparable to those of the mediterranean world, albeit perhaps a century behind on size in some cases. And those cultures could support fairly territorially large political jurisdictions of settled populations, albeit still organized on tribal lines. And all of that in place when the Romans showed up. Of course, still lagging behind the Mediterranean world on all those measures, and having benefitted from contact with it, but still, not that far behind except in a few big areas. That’s why they could be Romanized to a degree so quickly. And, more typical of less developed peoples but still remarkable as a display of material culture, first rate metalworking.

    The Germans were farther behind, but under Roman influence they advanced pretty far between the death of Varus and the rise of Alaric. They could up sticks and move even in the latter era, but they knew about farming life and towns.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    I doubt the Romans would have been able to defeat the Zulu in the Zulus own territory.

    Zulus had leather shields and wore no armor. Three salvos of pilum would do a lot of damage. Romans had thick wood shields and metal armor that protected the head, chest and legs. Also, Roman siegecraft was the best in the world. The Zulu's walled cities and forts would would be quickly captured.

    I am glad to see a couple of posters already tackled the Roman question. I quite agree. But you are understating it with your last point. Siegecraft? Didn’t the Zulus maximum settlements amount to wooden kraals? Just burn ‘em down.

    Though, being Romans, the Legions would surely have first built elaborate camps and circumvallations whose ditchwork and palisades [presuming there was any wood left in the country] would dwarf the besieged kraal itself.

    If the Romans managed to get to Zululand with anything like 40% [to be generous] of the Zulus’ numbers and didn’t die off at once [I don't think South Africa itself is much of a natural disease hotbed- it's pretty temperate for one thing] they’d have MUCH less trouble at Ulundi than they had at Alesia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @random observer
    Sorry, I see others have commented on the lost great cities of Zululand already. What a great concept, though, if the pulp writers hadn't already sucked the marrow out of the "lost cities" meme already. Good meme, though.

    Still, in the context of the alleged primitivism of northern Europe, I did manage a shout out for the Gauls.

    It seems to me that the relative primitivism of the north compared to the mediterranean was largely true throughout pre-Roman antiquity [or all of antiquity for the extra-imperial areas], but it was mainly based on the [not insignificant] absence of much written language or many cities made of reasonably permanent materials [or wooden communities larger than towns]. It was real, but can be carried too far. The Celtic [ish] world eventually managed fairly productive and organized agriculture, towns, river commerce, clannish polities organized on a fairly large scale, and in a number of cases galley type ships at least comparable to those of the mediterranean world, albeit perhaps a century behind on size in some cases. And those cultures could support fairly territorially large political jurisdictions of settled populations, albeit still organized on tribal lines. And all of that in place when the Romans showed up. Of course, still lagging behind the Mediterranean world on all those measures, and having benefitted from contact with it, but still, not that far behind except in a few big areas. That's why they could be Romanized to a degree so quickly. And, more typical of less developed peoples but still remarkable as a display of material culture, first rate metalworking.

    The Germans were farther behind, but under Roman influence they advanced pretty far between the death of Varus and the rise of Alaric. They could up sticks and move even in the latter era, but they knew about farming life and towns.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @syonredux

    Does the Great Sphinx of Giza look caucasoid to you?
     
    Looks like a sphinx to me.....

    The numerous color paintings from Egypt show a people who were closer to black than to white,
     
    Look like Mediterranean Caucasoids to me....

    to their neighbors to the south (ethiopians etc) than to the north.
     
    The Egyptians didn't think that they looked much like their Southern neighbors....

    In fact the greeks did not compare the egyptians to themselves or to any of the middle-eastern peoples. Instead the closest in color to the egyptians and ethiopians they saw were the indians a people who range from black to bark brown for the overwhelming part.
     
    Well, yes, except that the Greeks noted that the Ethiopians looked like the Southern Indians whilst the Egyptians looked like the lighter skinned Northern Indians:

    Arrian (Indica 6.9)

    The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
     
    Strabo Geography 15.1.13

    As for the people of India, those in the south are like the Aethiopians in color, although they are like the rest in respect to countenance and hair (for on account of the humidity of the air their hair does not curl), whereas those in the north are like the Egyptians.
     

    It is Michell, not Mitchell:
     
    it's called a typo, dear boy, a sin to which you are occasionally prey ("from black to bark brown"; woof, woof, eh?)

    There is no surviving portrait of Michell; he is said to have been “a little short man, of black complexion, and fat.”[7]
     
    Oh dear Lord, please tell me that you don't think that that means that he was Negroid?Dear boy, people with dark hair and olive complexions were frequently described as having "black complexions" in Northern Europe. I know that Africentists wander down strange paths in their desperation to find some traces of intellectual achievement among Blacks, but surely even they would not be that ignorant.

    Btw, Chandrasekhar, of indian/hindu ancestry
    was also a black skinned
     
    More like medium to light brown, I would say. About the same shade as my first serious girlfriend in High School. Yes, she was South Asian.

    scientist who faced racial prejudice when he lived in pre-Civil Rights America.
     
    He also seems to have had some problems with the British:

    During this time, Chandrasekhar made acquaintance with British physicist Sir Arthur Eddington. In an infamous encounter in 1935, Eddington publicly ridiculed the concept of the Chandrasekhar limit. Although Eddington would later be proved wrong, this encounter caused Chandra to contemplate employment outside the UK. Later in life, on multiple occasions, Chandra expressed the view that Eddington's behavior was in part racially motivated.[6]
     

    Since you agree that indians are not caucasians
    what racial group in which racial classification system do you peg them as?
     
    South Asians, dear boy. The product of ANI (Ancestral North Indians) and ASI (Ancestral South Indians). From the redoubtable Razib Khan (an atheist like me, by the way):

    Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. The date of mixture is unknown but has implications for understanding Indian history. We report genome-wide data from 73 groups from the Indian subcontinent and analyze linkage disequilibrium to estimate ANI-ASI mixture dates ranging from about 1,900 to 4,200 years ago. In a subset of groups, 100% of the mixture is consistent with having occurred during this period. These results show that India experienced a demographic transformation several thousand years ago, from a region in which major population mixture was common to one in which mixture even between closely related groups became rare because of a shift to endogamy.
     
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/08/indo-aryans-dravidians-and-waves-of-admixture-migration/#.VCOEM5RdWHg

    “from black to bark brown”; woof, woof, eh?

    Stop barking and start googling. That was no typo. The greyish brown skin stone which is common among indians looks similar to the color of tree bark.

    For example this brahmin ex-prime minister of India:

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Stop barking and start googling. That was no typo. The greyish brown skin stone which is common among indians looks similar to the color of tree bark.
     
    Whatever you say, dear boy. I wouldn't want your feelings to be hurt.
    , @syonredux

    Stop barking and start googling. That was no typo. The greyish brown skin stone
     
    MMM, "skin stone" or "skin tone," dear boy?

    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again…
     
    Here's another example that slipped my mind earlier, the elaborate verbal play in Love's Labour's Lost. Biron is enamored of the dark-haired Rosaline, and the other characters find the passion misplaced:

    FERDINAND
    By heaven, thy love is black as ebony.
    BIRON
    Is ebony like her? O wood divine!
    A wife of such wood were felicity.
    O, who can give an oath? where is a book?
    That I may swear beauty doth beauty lack,
    If that she learn not of her eye to look:
    No face is fair that is not full so black.

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @syonredux

    Does the Great Sphinx of Giza look caucasoid to you?
     
    Looks like a sphinx to me.....

    The numerous color paintings from Egypt show a people who were closer to black than to white,
     
    Look like Mediterranean Caucasoids to me....

    to their neighbors to the south (ethiopians etc) than to the north.
     
    The Egyptians didn't think that they looked much like their Southern neighbors....

    In fact the greeks did not compare the egyptians to themselves or to any of the middle-eastern peoples. Instead the closest in color to the egyptians and ethiopians they saw were the indians a people who range from black to bark brown for the overwhelming part.
     
    Well, yes, except that the Greeks noted that the Ethiopians looked like the Southern Indians whilst the Egyptians looked like the lighter skinned Northern Indians:

    Arrian (Indica 6.9)

    The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
     
    Strabo Geography 15.1.13

    As for the people of India, those in the south are like the Aethiopians in color, although they are like the rest in respect to countenance and hair (for on account of the humidity of the air their hair does not curl), whereas those in the north are like the Egyptians.
     

    It is Michell, not Mitchell:
     
    it's called a typo, dear boy, a sin to which you are occasionally prey ("from black to bark brown"; woof, woof, eh?)

    There is no surviving portrait of Michell; he is said to have been “a little short man, of black complexion, and fat.”[7]
     
    Oh dear Lord, please tell me that you don't think that that means that he was Negroid?Dear boy, people with dark hair and olive complexions were frequently described as having "black complexions" in Northern Europe. I know that Africentists wander down strange paths in their desperation to find some traces of intellectual achievement among Blacks, but surely even they would not be that ignorant.

    Btw, Chandrasekhar, of indian/hindu ancestry
    was also a black skinned
     
    More like medium to light brown, I would say. About the same shade as my first serious girlfriend in High School. Yes, she was South Asian.

    scientist who faced racial prejudice when he lived in pre-Civil Rights America.
     
    He also seems to have had some problems with the British:

    During this time, Chandrasekhar made acquaintance with British physicist Sir Arthur Eddington. In an infamous encounter in 1935, Eddington publicly ridiculed the concept of the Chandrasekhar limit. Although Eddington would later be proved wrong, this encounter caused Chandra to contemplate employment outside the UK. Later in life, on multiple occasions, Chandra expressed the view that Eddington's behavior was in part racially motivated.[6]
     

    Since you agree that indians are not caucasians
    what racial group in which racial classification system do you peg them as?
     
    South Asians, dear boy. The product of ANI (Ancestral North Indians) and ASI (Ancestral South Indians). From the redoubtable Razib Khan (an atheist like me, by the way):

    Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. The date of mixture is unknown but has implications for understanding Indian history. We report genome-wide data from 73 groups from the Indian subcontinent and analyze linkage disequilibrium to estimate ANI-ASI mixture dates ranging from about 1,900 to 4,200 years ago. In a subset of groups, 100% of the mixture is consistent with having occurred during this period. These results show that India experienced a demographic transformation several thousand years ago, from a region in which major population mixture was common to one in which mixture even between closely related groups became rare because of a shift to endogamy.
     
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/08/indo-aryans-dravidians-and-waves-of-admixture-migration/#.VCOEM5RdWHg

    Looks like a sphinx to me…..

    Poor boy, can’t handle the truth. Let someone who does not belong to a congenitally dishonest caste tell you what the >4500 years old Great Sphinx of Giza looked like:

    when I visited the Sphinx, its appearance gave me the key to the riddle. On seeing that head, typically Negro in all its features, I remembered the remarkable passage where Herodotus says: ‘ As for me, I judge the Colchians to be a colony of the Egyptians because, like them, they are black with woolly hair…

    Look like Mediterranean Caucasoids to me….

    Mediterranean caucasoids look like greeks, levantines, persians etc. The ancient egyptians looked nothing like that. If they did the greeks wouldn’t have had to look at far away India with its dark skinned australoid mixed population to find people that to them looked far more like the egyptians and ethiopians than the other people of the mediterranean and middle-eastern region.

    The Egyptians didn’t think that they looked much like their Southern neighbors….

    The very fact that the greeks compared egyptians and ethiopians to north and south indians respectively clearly shows that they saw egyptians and ethiopians as related peoples. Just as north and south indians are obviously related.

    people with dark hair and olive complexions were frequently described as having “black complexions” in Northern Europe

    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again…

    More like medium to light brown, I would say. About the same shade as my first serious girlfriend in High School. Yes, she was South Asian.

    Only an indian would claim that Chandrashekhar was “medium to light brown”. I figured you had to be an internet hindu troll based on your stubborn dishonesty and the fact that you think it is so cool to talk like a 19th century british colonial in India. Am I right or what, dear boy?

    Here’s an example of what Chandra had to endure in pre-Civil Rights America:

    https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=97&start=40

    Chandra himself faced open racism. I have a first person account of a rather disturbing incident
    when Chandra joined the Univ. of Chicago. There was a faculty dinner.
    At the dinner Chandra as a a new faculty was invited and so was a mathematician G.O. Bliss who was a notorious racist. Hutchins was the president of Chicago and a visionary who had hired Chandra. At some point Bliss came up to Hutchins and said” President Hutchins you have forced me to shake hands with this black man Chandrasekhar you have hired and now I am going to the washroom to wash my hands”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Poor boy, can’t handle the truth. Let someone who does not belong to a congenitally dishonest caste tell you what the >4500 years old Great Sphinx of Giza looked like:
     
    Are you actually quoting Volney again?

    Mediterranean caucasoids look like greeks, levantines, persians etc. The ancient egyptians looked nothing like that.
     
    Actually, they looked quite a bit like that, dear boy.

    If they did the greeks wouldn’t have had to look at far away India with its dark skinned australoid
     
    You mean ANI mixed with ASI, dear boy.

    mixed population to find people that to them looked far more like the egyptians and ethiopians than the other people of the mediterranean and middle-eastern region.
     
    On the other hand, they compared the Egyptians to the lighter-skinned Northern Indians, dear boy, the ones who look more like Mediterranean Caucasoids....

    Only an indian
     
    Well, seeing as how I am not Indian, that's obviously incorrect...

    would claim that Chandrashekhar was “medium to light brown”.
     
    No. medium to light brown seems about right.Someone like, say, Yaphet Kotto, would be dark brown.

    I figured you had to be an internet hindu troll based on your stubborn dishonesty and the fact that you think it is so cool to talk like a 19th century british colonial in India. Am I right or what, dear boy?
     
    Spectacularly wrong, dear boy. My mother is Ashkenazi Jewish while my father is English-Scots. Do you really think that only South Asians date other South Asians?

    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again…
     
    Oh dear Lord, you actually do think that John Michell was Negroid? Is Beethoven going to be next?

    As for examples, there are so many:the black peasant in The Romance of the Rose, the Rígsþula, where the Scandinavian surfs are described as black, Black Irish as a term for dark-haired Irish, Russians routinely refer to Georgians as blacks, etc, etc.
    , @syonredux

    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again…
     
    Here's another one, this time from Jonathan Swift:

    Duke of Somerset:

    Is of a middle stature, well shaped, a very black complexion, a lover of music and poetry; of good judgment [not a grain;hardly common sense];but by reason of a great hesitation in his speech wants expression. He is about forty-two years old.
     
    http://books.google.com/books?id=88REAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22black%20complexion%22&pg=PA572#v=onepage&q=%22black%20complexion%22&f=false
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @anonymous
    It might not be entirely correct to dismiss early civilization in Northern Europe. For instance, _north_ of Britain, in the Orkney islands:

    "Ness of Brodgar is an archaeological site... in the Heart of Neolithic Orkney World Heritage Site... ...The site may have been occupied from as early as 3500 BC...

    ..."it’s of a scale that almost relates to the classical period in the Mediterranean with walled enclosure and walled precincts"...

    ...approximately contemporary with the mastabas of the archaic period of Egypt (first and second dynasties), the brick temples of Sumeria, and the first cities of the Harappa culture in India, and a century or two earlier than the Golden Age of China. Unusually fine for their early date, and with a remarkably rich survival of evidence, these sites stand as a visible symbol of the achievements of early peoples away from the traditional centres of civilisation..."


    And

    "Neolithic discovery: why Orkney is the centre of ancient Britain", Robin McKie, The Observer, October 2012:

    "Long before the Egyptians began the pyramids, Neolithic man built a vast temple complex at the top of what is now Scotland. ...

    "We have discovered a Neolithic temple complex that is without parallel in western Europe... ...the place is entirely manmade, although it covers more than six acres of land."

    ...arrived on Orkney about 6,000 years ago.

    ...In size and sophistication, the Ness of Brodgar is comparable with Stonehenge or the wonders of ancient Egypt. Yet the temple complex predates them all."




    So what happened? Who knows, but a leading candidate is weather change. Perhaps in early history the stability of large rivers in a relatively benevolent environment was necessary.

    Rivers change all the time. Here in Los Angeles, the L.A. river ran west from downtown to Marina Del Rey until 1825. Since then it runs south and dumps into the ocean about 20 miles away from the original point.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    It might not be entirely correct to dismiss early civilization in Northern Europe. For instance, _north_ of Britain, in the Orkney islands:

    “Ness of Brodgar is an archaeological site… in the Heart of Neolithic Orkney World Heritage Site… …The site may have been occupied from as early as 3500 BC…

    …”it’s of a scale that almost relates to the classical period in the Mediterranean with walled enclosure and walled precincts”…

    …approximately contemporary with the mastabas of the archaic period of Egypt (first and second dynasties), the brick temples of Sumeria, and the first cities of the Harappa culture in India, and a century or two earlier than the Golden Age of China. Unusually fine for their early date, and with a remarkably rich survival of evidence, these sites stand as a visible symbol of the achievements of early peoples away from the traditional centres of civilisation…”

    And

    “Neolithic discovery: why Orkney is the centre of ancient Britain”, Robin McKie, The Observer, October 2012:

    “Long before the Egyptians began the pyramids, Neolithic man built a vast temple complex at the top of what is now Scotland. …

    “We have discovered a Neolithic temple complex that is without parallel in western Europe… …the place is entirely manmade, although it covers more than six acres of land.”

    …arrived on Orkney about 6,000 years ago.

    …In size and sophistication, the Ness of Brodgar is comparable with Stonehenge or the wonders of ancient Egypt. Yet the temple complex predates them all.”

    So what happened? Who knows, but a leading candidate is weather change. Perhaps in early history the stability of large rivers in a relatively benevolent environment was necessary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Rivers change all the time. Here in Los Angeles, the L.A. river ran west from downtown to Marina Del Rey until 1825. Since then it runs south and dumps into the ocean about 20 miles away from the original point.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    He wasn’t John Mitchell, or Laplace, or Einstein, or Karl Schwarzchild, or Eddington, or Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, or , etc, etc.
     
    It is Michell, not Mitchell:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Michell

    There is no surviving portrait of Michell; he is said to have been "a little short man, of black complexion, and fat."[7]

    John Michell (25 December 1724 – 29 April 1793) was an English clergyman and natural philosopher who provided pioneering insights in a wide range of scientific fields, including astronomy, geology, optics, and gravitation. Considered "one of the greatest unsung scientists of all time",[1] he was the first person to propose the existence of black holes, the first to suggest that earthquakes travel in waves, the first to explain how to manufacture artificial magnets, and the first to apply statistics to the study of the cosmos, recognizing that double stars were a product of mutual gravitation. He also invented an apparatus to measure the mass of the Earth. He has been called both the father of seismology and the father of magnetometry.


    Btw, Chandrasekhar, of indian/hindu ancestry, was also a black skinned scientist who faced racial prejudice when he lived in pre-Civil Rights America. Since you agree that indians are not caucasians what racial group in which racial classification system do you peg them as?

    Does the Great Sphinx of Giza look caucasoid to you?

    Looks like a sphinx to me…..

    The numerous color paintings from Egypt show a people who were closer to black than to white,

    Look like Mediterranean Caucasoids to me….

    to their neighbors to the south (ethiopians etc) than to the north.

    The Egyptians didn’t think that they looked much like their Southern neighbors….

    In fact the greeks did not compare the egyptians to themselves or to any of the middle-eastern peoples. Instead the closest in color to the egyptians and ethiopians they saw were the indians a people who range from black to bark brown for the overwhelming part.

    Well, yes, except that the Greeks noted that the Ethiopians looked like the Southern Indians whilst the Egyptians looked like the lighter skinned Northern Indians:

    Arrian (Indica 6.9)

    The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.

    Strabo Geography 15.1.13

    As for the people of India, those in the south are like the Aethiopians in color, although they are like the rest in respect to countenance and hair (for on account of the humidity of the air their hair does not curl), whereas those in the north are like the Egyptians.

    It is Michell, not Mitchell:

    it’s called a typo, dear boy, a sin to which you are occasionally prey (“from black to bark brown”; woof, woof, eh?)

    There is no surviving portrait of Michell; he is said to have been “a little short man, of black complexion, and fat.”[7]

    Oh dear Lord, please tell me that you don’t think that that means that he was Negroid?Dear boy, people with dark hair and olive complexions were frequently described as having “black complexions” in Northern Europe. I know that Africentists wander down strange paths in their desperation to find some traces of intellectual achievement among Blacks, but surely even they would not be that ignorant.

    Btw, Chandrasekhar, of indian/hindu ancestry
    was also a black skinned

    More like medium to light brown, I would say. About the same shade as my first serious girlfriend in High School. Yes, she was South Asian.

    scientist who faced racial prejudice when he lived in pre-Civil Rights America.

    He also seems to have had some problems with the British:

    During this time, Chandrasekhar made acquaintance with British physicist Sir Arthur Eddington. In an infamous encounter in 1935, Eddington publicly ridiculed the concept of the Chandrasekhar limit. Although Eddington would later be proved wrong, this encounter caused Chandra to contemplate employment outside the UK. Later in life, on multiple occasions, Chandra expressed the view that Eddington’s behavior was in part racially motivated.[6]

    Since you agree that indians are not caucasians
    what racial group in which racial classification system do you peg them as?

    South Asians, dear boy. The product of ANI (Ancestral North Indians) and ASI (Ancestral South Indians). From the redoubtable Razib Khan (an atheist like me, by the way):

    Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. The date of mixture is unknown but has implications for understanding Indian history. We report genome-wide data from 73 groups from the Indian subcontinent and analyze linkage disequilibrium to estimate ANI-ASI mixture dates ranging from about 1,900 to 4,200 years ago. In a subset of groups, 100% of the mixture is consistent with having occurred during this period. These results show that India experienced a demographic transformation several thousand years ago, from a region in which major population mixture was common to one in which mixture even between closely related groups became rare because of a shift to endogamy.

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/08/indo-aryans-dravidians-and-waves-of-admixture-migration/#.VCOEM5RdWHg

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Looks like a sphinx to me…..
     
    Poor boy, can't handle the truth. Let someone who does not belong to a congenitally dishonest caste tell you what the >4500 years old Great Sphinx of Giza looked like:

    when I visited the Sphinx, its appearance gave me the key to the riddle. On seeing that head, typically Negro in all its features, I remembered the remarkable passage where Herodotus says: ' As for me, I judge the Colchians to be a colony of the Egyptians because, like them, they are black with woolly hair...

    Look like Mediterranean Caucasoids to me….
     
    Mediterranean caucasoids look like greeks, levantines, persians etc. The ancient egyptians looked nothing like that. If they did the greeks wouldn't have had to look at far away India with its dark skinned australoid mixed population to find people that to them looked far more like the egyptians and ethiopians than the other people of the mediterranean and middle-eastern region.

    The Egyptians didn’t think that they looked much like their Southern neighbors….
     
    The very fact that the greeks compared egyptians and ethiopians to north and south indians respectively clearly shows that they saw egyptians and ethiopians as related peoples. Just as north and south indians are obviously related.

    people with dark hair and olive complexions were frequently described as having “black complexions” in Northern Europe
     
    Since you claim it was frequent, give us a few examples. Or admit you are lying again...

    More like medium to light brown, I would say. About the same shade as my first serious girlfriend in High School. Yes, she was South Asian.
     
    Only an indian would claim that Chandrashekhar was "medium to light brown". I figured you had to be an internet hindu troll based on your stubborn dishonesty and the fact that you think it is so cool to talk like a 19th century british colonial in India. Am I right or what, dear boy?

    Here's an example of what Chandra had to endure in pre-Civil Rights America:

    https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=97&start=40

    Chandra himself faced open racism. I have a first person account of a rather disturbing incident
    when Chandra joined the Univ. of Chicago. There was a faculty dinner.
    At the dinner Chandra as a a new faculty was invited and so was a mathematician G.O. Bliss who was a notorious racist. Hutchins was the president of Chicago and a visionary who had hired Chandra. At some point Bliss came up to Hutchins and said" President Hutchins you have forced me to shake hands with this black man Chandrasekhar you have hired and now I am going to the washroom to wash my hands".
    , @Bliss

    “from black to bark brown”; woof, woof, eh?
     
    Stop barking and start googling. That was no typo. The greyish brown skin stone which is common among indians looks similar to the color of tree bark.

    For example this brahmin ex-prime minister of India:

    http://www.timescontent.com/tss/photos/preview/28258/P%20V%20Narasimha%20Rao.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:

    Africa baaaaaaaaaaaad!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • And, casting of stone would leave no fossils at all, unless they were deliberately added.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A few thoughts:

    No human being ever was perfectly adapted to their environment. Human environments are rapidly changing, and thus evolution constantly lags. You may be able to talk about sharks and cockroaches as perfectly adapted, but humans are not in the conversation.

    The megafauna of Australia and New Zealand were avian, but like the mammalian megafauna of other continents, their demise coincided with human migration.

    There is evidence that a substantial factor in mesoamerican dominance was predation of other tribes as far away as central North America. When all of those cultures collapsed under the strain, the dominant cultures did as well.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Simon in London
    "If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization. "

    Civilistion started in warm climes. But the ancestors of the civilisation builders all came from further north (with a possible question mark over Egypt).

    Civilistion started in warm climes. But the ancestors of the civilisation builders all came from further north (with a possible question mark over Egypt).

    That’s not history, that is wishful nordicist fantasy. The kind of baseless nonsense you find at Stormfront. Over there you also learn that the chinese civilization was founded by nordics from europe…

    Get real.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andy
    Those Egyptians were Caucasoids, sometimes with light hair.

    Not Europeans, but closer to them than blacks.

    Those Egyptians were Caucasoids, sometimes with light hair.

    Not Europeans, but closer to them than blacks.

    Does the Great Sphinx of Giza look caucasoid to you?

    The numerous color paintings from Egypt show a people who were closer to black than to white, to their neighbors to the south (ethiopians etc) than to the north. In fact the greeks did not compare the egyptians to themselves or to any of the middle-eastern peoples. Instead the closest in color to the egyptians and ethiopians they saw were the indians a people who range from black to bark brown for the overwhelming part.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @syonredux

    I’d also point out that “civilization”, as many “race realists” would define it, is a relatively recent phenomenon in most of Europe. Only in the last five or six hundred years did Northern Europeans make any major advances in science and technology.
     
    I don't know, dear fellow; looking at the historical record, it seems to me that Northern Europe had about caught up to the Med by 1,000 years ago (cf Michael Hart's UNDERSTANDING HUMAN HISTORY).

    Eastern Europe’s entry to that arena began as recently as 250 years go.
     
    Only if we exclude the Byzantine Empire, dear boy....

    And even so, much of this knowledge and expertise was put to poor use – two world wars that killed millions of whites, colonialism and imperialism that killed millions more brown people etc. etc.
     
    As opposed to Mao's China (40 million dead), Shaka Zulu (1.5 million dead), Genghis Khan (40 million dead), Hulagu's Invasion (800,000), Timur's Conquests (17 million), Pakistan's slaughter in Bangladesh (1.5 million), the reign of Qin Shi Huang Di (one million), etc?

    Like I told you idiots before, the intelligence distribution among blacks is bigger than that of non-blacks. Given an equal environment blacks will produce more outliers period, smart and stupid alike. Sorry that hurts your feelings. But the studies will back me up on this once they identify the intelligence genes.
     
    On the other hand, that is not going to do much good when you bear in mind the fact that the mean IQ of Blacks in America is 85....

    Even under current circumstances blacks have some notable (if infrequent) intellectual achievements. For example the first person to propose the concept of a black hole was a black man,
     
    First, eh? MMM, let's see. He wasn't John Mitchell, or Laplace, or Einstein, or Karl Schwarzchild, or Eddington, or Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, or , etc, etc.

    and the best poker player in the world is black.
     
    Stop the presses!

    When Africa catches up, it will claim the world’s best musicians, athletes, scientists and engineers.
     
    I wouldn't hold my breath waiting, dear boy.

    He wasn’t John Mitchell, or Laplace, or Einstein, or Karl Schwarzchild, or Eddington, or Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, or , etc, etc.

    It is Michell, not Mitchell:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Michell

    There is no surviving portrait of Michell; he is said to have been “a little short man, of black complexion, and fat.”[7]

    John Michell (25 December 1724 – 29 April 1793) was an English clergyman and natural philosopher who provided pioneering insights in a wide range of scientific fields, including astronomy, geology, optics, and gravitation. Considered “one of the greatest unsung scientists of all time”,[1] he was the first person to propose the existence of black holes, the first to suggest that earthquakes travel in waves, the first to explain how to manufacture artificial magnets, and the first to apply statistics to the study of the cosmos, recognizing that double stars were a product of mutual gravitation. He also invented an apparatus to measure the mass of the Earth. He has been called both the father of seismology and the father of magnetometry.

    Btw, Chandrasekhar, of indian/hindu ancestry, was also a black skinned scientist who faced racial prejudice when he lived in pre-Civil Rights America. Since you agree that indians are not caucasians what racial group in which racial classification system do you peg them as?

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Does the Great Sphinx of Giza look caucasoid to you?
     
    Looks like a sphinx to me.....

    The numerous color paintings from Egypt show a people who were closer to black than to white,
     
    Look like Mediterranean Caucasoids to me....

    to their neighbors to the south (ethiopians etc) than to the north.
     
    The Egyptians didn't think that they looked much like their Southern neighbors....

    In fact the greeks did not compare the egyptians to themselves or to any of the middle-eastern peoples. Instead the closest in color to the egyptians and ethiopians they saw were the indians a people who range from black to bark brown for the overwhelming part.
     
    Well, yes, except that the Greeks noted that the Ethiopians looked like the Southern Indians whilst the Egyptians looked like the lighter skinned Northern Indians:

    Arrian (Indica 6.9)

    The appearance of the inhabitants is also not very different in India and Ethiopia: the southern Indians are rather more like Ethiopians as they are black to look on, and their hair is black; only they are not so snub-nosed or woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians physically.
     
    Strabo Geography 15.1.13

    As for the people of India, those in the south are like the Aethiopians in color, although they are like the rest in respect to countenance and hair (for on account of the humidity of the air their hair does not curl), whereas those in the north are like the Egyptians.
     

    It is Michell, not Mitchell:
     
    it's called a typo, dear boy, a sin to which you are occasionally prey ("from black to bark brown"; woof, woof, eh?)

    There is no surviving portrait of Michell; he is said to have been “a little short man, of black complexion, and fat.”[7]
     
    Oh dear Lord, please tell me that you don't think that that means that he was Negroid?Dear boy, people with dark hair and olive complexions were frequently described as having "black complexions" in Northern Europe. I know that Africentists wander down strange paths in their desperation to find some traces of intellectual achievement among Blacks, but surely even they would not be that ignorant.

    Btw, Chandrasekhar, of indian/hindu ancestry
    was also a black skinned
     
    More like medium to light brown, I would say. About the same shade as my first serious girlfriend in High School. Yes, she was South Asian.

    scientist who faced racial prejudice when he lived in pre-Civil Rights America.
     
    He also seems to have had some problems with the British:

    During this time, Chandrasekhar made acquaintance with British physicist Sir Arthur Eddington. In an infamous encounter in 1935, Eddington publicly ridiculed the concept of the Chandrasekhar limit. Although Eddington would later be proved wrong, this encounter caused Chandra to contemplate employment outside the UK. Later in life, on multiple occasions, Chandra expressed the view that Eddington's behavior was in part racially motivated.[6]
     

    Since you agree that indians are not caucasians
    what racial group in which racial classification system do you peg them as?
     
    South Asians, dear boy. The product of ANI (Ancestral North Indians) and ASI (Ancestral South Indians). From the redoubtable Razib Khan (an atheist like me, by the way):

    Most Indian groups descend from a mixture of two genetically divergent populations: Ancestral North Indians (ANI) related to Central Asians, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Europeans; and Ancestral South Indians (ASI) not closely related to groups outside the subcontinent. The date of mixture is unknown but has implications for understanding Indian history. We report genome-wide data from 73 groups from the Indian subcontinent and analyze linkage disequilibrium to estimate ANI-ASI mixture dates ranging from about 1,900 to 4,200 years ago. In a subset of groups, 100% of the mixture is consistent with having occurred during this period. These results show that India experienced a demographic transformation several thousand years ago, from a region in which major population mixture was common to one in which mixture even between closely related groups became rare because of a shift to endogamy.
     
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/08/indo-aryans-dravidians-and-waves-of-admixture-migration/#.VCOEM5RdWHg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Slimer
    @Syon


    If only saying made it true, dear boy. Nubia was nothing more than a pallid reflection of Egypt
     
    Uhhh, you're just saying the same thing you said previously. I gave several reasons why Nubia, in fact, was not merely a "pallid reflection of Egypt." Your only retort is to repeat the same thing. You've got no argument, bro.

    That counts as originality, dear boy?MMM, the Finns most be one of the most original peoples on the planet then.
     
    Who said it was original? The point is that Nubia wasn't merely a "pallid reflection of Egypt."


    Only if by distinct you mean shoddy knock-offs, dear boy.
     
    No, I mean uniquely Nubian despite Egyptian influence.


    A book or two in the case of Nubia, dear boy; considerably more in the case of the vastly more interesting (and original) Egyptians.
     
    A book or two? Where, from the "HBD Library"? lolololol...

    I like how you completely ignored the last part of my post.
    Why did this vastly more interesting, black African-admixed population, i.e., the ancient Egyptians, build a thriving civilization before Europeans did?

    Uhhh, you’re just saying the same thing you said previously. I gave several reasons why Nubia, in fact, was not merely a “pallid reflection of Egypt.”

    No, you simply listed some things that struck you as being “original.” To the rest of the world, they are shoddy knock-offs.

    Your only retort is to repeat the same thing. You’ve got no argument, bro.

    Hardly, dear boy. I have judgement. And Nubia is, at best, a satellite of Egypt.

    Who said it was original? The point is that Nubia wasn’t merely a “pallid reflection of Egypt.”

    Dear boy, having your own language does not mean that you are not a “pallid reflection.” Rome had Latin, but it’s culture was derivative of Greece. Virgil imitates Homer, after all.

    No, I mean uniquely Nubian despite Egyptian influence.

    Only if “uniquely Nubian” means inferior, dear boy….

    A book or two? Where, from the “HBD Library”? lolololol…

    Sadly, no. I did most of my Nubian reading at UC Berkeley during my undergrad days.

    I like how you completely ignored the last part of my post.
    Why did this vastly more interesting, black African-admixed population,

    You mean the North African Caucasoids, dear boy?

    i.e., the ancient Egyptians, build a thriving civilization before Europeans did?

    You mean why did literate civilizations develop first in Egypt and Sumer before spreading to the rest of the Middle East, north Africa, and Europe? I really don’t know dear boy. Why has Italy lagged since AD 1700? Why has Scotland outperformed Wales? Why was Japan more culturally vital than China in the early 19th century?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @Slimer
    I'd also point out that "civilization", as many "race realists" would define it, is a relatively recent phenomenon in most of Europe. Only in the last five or six hundred years did Northern Europeans make any major advances in science and technology. Eastern Europe's entry to that arena began as recently as 250 years go. And even so, much of this knowledge and expertise was put to poor use - two world wars that killed millions of whites, colonialism and imperialism that killed millions more brown people etc. etc.

    Like I told you idiots before, the intelligence distribution among blacks is bigger than that of non-blacks. Given an equal environment blacks will produce more outliers period, smart and stupid alike. Sorry that hurts your feelings. But the studies will back me up on this once they identify the intelligence genes.

    Even under current circumstances blacks have some notable (if infrequent) intellectual achievements. For example the first person to propose the concept of a black hole was a black man, and the best poker player in the world is black. When Africa catches up, it will claim the world's best musicians, athletes, scientists and engineers.

    Again, the genetics studies will eventually prove me right. The emotionally clouded rantings of a few emasculated white men are irrelevant.

    Like I told you idiots before, the intelligence distribution among blacks is bigger than that of non-blacks. Given an equal environment blacks will produce more outliers period, smart and stupid alike. Sorry that hurts your feelings. But the studies will back me up on this once they identify the intelligence genes.

    Do you have some evidence (you know, links, numbers, etc) to back up that claim?

    As far as I am aware, IQ tests of blacks suggest an SD around 12, compared to around 15 for whites.

    Secondly, selection for lower IQ (elimination of alleles causing higher IQ because they also increase metabolic requirements) will reduce the variance of a population. Selection for any particular trait will reduce the variance …

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    Seem to have left out the Chinese, dear boy. Too fair for your tastes?
     
    You seem to be ignorant of the fact that Egypt, Sumer and Indus are the three oldest civilizations. What part of came later re: China couldn't you understand? If you really are a teacher I feel sorry for your students. Yes, the chinese are practically white compared to the ancient egyptians, sumerians and indians whose civilizations preceded theirs. So, what the heck is your point?

    I see that Slimer has already corrected your ignorance of history and forced you to acknowledge it. But, being shamelessly and incorrigibly dishonest you had to once again resort to a lie as an excuse for your stupidity:

    I am quite aware of the sequence. However, Bliss seemed rather more interested in originality (which civilizations are more or less autochthonous) than in chronological sequence.
     
    Clearly you don't even know what chronological sequence means. Anyone reading my post can see that I wrote earliest for the 3 oldest civilizations followed by came later for the chinese, greek and other civilizations. Any idiot can see that's a chronological sequence...

    Hard to believe that you are actually a teacher...

    You seem to be ignorant of the fact that Egypt, Sumer and Indus are the three oldest civilizations. What part of came later re: China couldn’t you understand?

    Later, yes, dear boy. On the other hand, China, like Egypt, Sumer, and the Harappan civilization. did develop independently…

    If you really are a teacher I feel sorry for your students.

    Well, I am an awfully harsh grader….

    Yes, the chinese are practically white compared to the ancient egyptians, sumerians and indians whose civilizations preceded theirs. So, what the heck is your point?

    MMMM, the four aboriginal, as it were, Old World civilizations….Egypt (North African Caucasoid), Sumer (Middle Eastern Caucasoid) , Harappan India (ASI South Asian), China (East Asian Mongoloid)…..Seems to be a positive dearth of Black Africans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Slimer
    I'd also point out that "civilization", as many "race realists" would define it, is a relatively recent phenomenon in most of Europe. Only in the last five or six hundred years did Northern Europeans make any major advances in science and technology. Eastern Europe's entry to that arena began as recently as 250 years go. And even so, much of this knowledge and expertise was put to poor use - two world wars that killed millions of whites, colonialism and imperialism that killed millions more brown people etc. etc.

    Like I told you idiots before, the intelligence distribution among blacks is bigger than that of non-blacks. Given an equal environment blacks will produce more outliers period, smart and stupid alike. Sorry that hurts your feelings. But the studies will back me up on this once they identify the intelligence genes.

    Even under current circumstances blacks have some notable (if infrequent) intellectual achievements. For example the first person to propose the concept of a black hole was a black man, and the best poker player in the world is black. When Africa catches up, it will claim the world's best musicians, athletes, scientists and engineers.

    Again, the genetics studies will eventually prove me right. The emotionally clouded rantings of a few emasculated white men are irrelevant.

    I’d also point out that “civilization”, as many “race realists” would define it, is a relatively recent phenomenon in most of Europe. Only in the last five or six hundred years did Northern Europeans make any major advances in science and technology.

    I don’t know, dear fellow; looking at the historical record, it seems to me that Northern Europe had about caught up to the Med by 1,000 years ago (cf Michael Hart’s UNDERSTANDING HUMAN HISTORY).

    Eastern Europe’s entry to that arena began as recently as 250 years go.

    Only if we exclude the Byzantine Empire, dear boy….

    And even so, much of this knowledge and expertise was put to poor use – two world wars that killed millions of whites, colonialism and imperialism that killed millions more brown people etc. etc.

    As opposed to Mao’s China (40 million dead), Shaka Zulu (1.5 million dead), Genghis Khan (40 million dead), Hulagu’s Invasion (800,000), Timur’s Conquests (17 million), Pakistan’s slaughter in Bangladesh (1.5 million), the reign of Qin Shi Huang Di (one million), etc?

    Like I told you idiots before, the intelligence distribution among blacks is bigger than that of non-blacks. Given an equal environment blacks will produce more outliers period, smart and stupid alike. Sorry that hurts your feelings. But the studies will back me up on this once they identify the intelligence genes.

    On the other hand, that is not going to do much good when you bear in mind the fact that the mean IQ of Blacks in America is 85….

    Even under current circumstances blacks have some notable (if infrequent) intellectual achievements. For example the first person to propose the concept of a black hole was a black man,

    First, eh? MMM, let’s see. He wasn’t John Mitchell, or Laplace, or Einstein, or Karl Schwarzchild, or Eddington, or Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, or , etc, etc.

    and the best poker player in the world is black.

    Stop the presses!

    When Africa catches up, it will claim the world’s best musicians, athletes, scientists and engineers.

    I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting, dear boy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    He wasn’t John Mitchell, or Laplace, or Einstein, or Karl Schwarzchild, or Eddington, or Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, or , etc, etc.
     
    It is Michell, not Mitchell:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Michell

    There is no surviving portrait of Michell; he is said to have been "a little short man, of black complexion, and fat."[7]

    John Michell (25 December 1724 – 29 April 1793) was an English clergyman and natural philosopher who provided pioneering insights in a wide range of scientific fields, including astronomy, geology, optics, and gravitation. Considered "one of the greatest unsung scientists of all time",[1] he was the first person to propose the existence of black holes, the first to suggest that earthquakes travel in waves, the first to explain how to manufacture artificial magnets, and the first to apply statistics to the study of the cosmos, recognizing that double stars were a product of mutual gravitation. He also invented an apparatus to measure the mass of the Earth. He has been called both the father of seismology and the father of magnetometry.


    Btw, Chandrasekhar, of indian/hindu ancestry, was also a black skinned scientist who faced racial prejudice when he lived in pre-Civil Rights America. Since you agree that indians are not caucasians what racial group in which racial classification system do you peg them as?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Slimer
    I'd also point out that "civilization", as many "race realists" would define it, is a relatively recent phenomenon in most of Europe. Only in the last five or six hundred years did Northern Europeans make any major advances in science and technology. Eastern Europe's entry to that arena began as recently as 250 years go. And even so, much of this knowledge and expertise was put to poor use - two world wars that killed millions of whites, colonialism and imperialism that killed millions more brown people etc. etc.

    Like I told you idiots before, the intelligence distribution among blacks is bigger than that of non-blacks. Given an equal environment blacks will produce more outliers period, smart and stupid alike. Sorry that hurts your feelings. But the studies will back me up on this once they identify the intelligence genes.

    Even under current circumstances blacks have some notable (if infrequent) intellectual achievements. For example the first person to propose the concept of a black hole was a black man, and the best poker player in the world is black. When Africa catches up, it will claim the world's best musicians, athletes, scientists and engineers.

    Again, the genetics studies will eventually prove me right. The emotionally clouded rantings of a few emasculated white men are irrelevant.

    Only in the last five or six hundred years did Northern Europeans make any major advances in science and technology.

    Ok, fair enough. You can have credit for ancient-Egyptian level technology, and we get the post 1400 advances.

    Now, can you explain why they didn’t use their 4,000 year head start to colonize Mars by now?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • More mummy DNA testing:

    Egyptian mummies yield genetic secrets

    one of the mummified individuals may belong to an ancestral group, or haplogroup, called I2, believed to have originated in Western Asia.

    Modern map of I2a distribution.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Rifleman
    Well, you're going to have to qualify Africa as "sub Saharan Africa" because Egypt is clearly in Africa and was engaged in some civilization - writing, agriculture, monumental architecture, art, speculation for 2000+ years before Thales was born.

    And by American standards those Egyptians were black.

    But it's ecologically different from the rest of Africa.

    Fifty years ago, you would have asked “How come every country run by Asians is poor”?
     
    In 1964 I would have been noticing African style poverty in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong?

    Granted I'm not an MIT economist but.............no.

    Those Egyptians were Caucasoids, sometimes with light hair.

    Not Europeans, but closer to them than blacks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Those Egyptians were Caucasoids, sometimes with light hair.

    Not Europeans, but closer to them than blacks.
     
    Does the Great Sphinx of Giza look caucasoid to you?

    The numerous color paintings from Egypt show a people who were closer to black than to white, to their neighbors to the south (ethiopians etc) than to the north. In fact the greeks did not compare the egyptians to themselves or to any of the middle-eastern peoples. Instead the closest in color to the egyptians and ethiopians they saw were the indians a people who range from black to bark brown for the overwhelming part.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’d also point out that “civilization”, as many “race realists” would define it, is a relatively recent phenomenon in most of Europe. Only in the last five or six hundred years did Northern Europeans make any major advances in science and technology. Eastern Europe’s entry to that arena began as recently as 250 years go. And even so, much of this knowledge and expertise was put to poor use – two world wars that killed millions of whites, colonialism and imperialism that killed millions more brown people etc. etc.

    Like I told you idiots before, the intelligence distribution among blacks is bigger than that of non-blacks. Given an equal environment blacks will produce more outliers period, smart and stupid alike. Sorry that hurts your feelings. But the studies will back me up on this once they identify the intelligence genes.

    Even under current circumstances blacks have some notable (if infrequent) intellectual achievements. For example the first person to propose the concept of a black hole was a black man, and the best poker player in the world is black. When Africa catches up, it will claim the world’s best musicians, athletes, scientists and engineers.

    Again, the genetics studies will eventually prove me right. The emotionally clouded rantings of a few emasculated white men are irrelevant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Only in the last five or six hundred years did Northern Europeans make any major advances in science and technology.

    Ok, fair enough. You can have credit for ancient-Egyptian level technology, and we get the post 1400 advances.

    Now, can you explain why they didn't use their 4,000 year head start to colonize Mars by now?
    , @syonredux

    I’d also point out that “civilization”, as many “race realists” would define it, is a relatively recent phenomenon in most of Europe. Only in the last five or six hundred years did Northern Europeans make any major advances in science and technology.
     
    I don't know, dear fellow; looking at the historical record, it seems to me that Northern Europe had about caught up to the Med by 1,000 years ago (cf Michael Hart's UNDERSTANDING HUMAN HISTORY).

    Eastern Europe’s entry to that arena began as recently as 250 years go.
     
    Only if we exclude the Byzantine Empire, dear boy....

    And even so, much of this knowledge and expertise was put to poor use – two world wars that killed millions of whites, colonialism and imperialism that killed millions more brown people etc. etc.
     
    As opposed to Mao's China (40 million dead), Shaka Zulu (1.5 million dead), Genghis Khan (40 million dead), Hulagu's Invasion (800,000), Timur's Conquests (17 million), Pakistan's slaughter in Bangladesh (1.5 million), the reign of Qin Shi Huang Di (one million), etc?

    Like I told you idiots before, the intelligence distribution among blacks is bigger than that of non-blacks. Given an equal environment blacks will produce more outliers period, smart and stupid alike. Sorry that hurts your feelings. But the studies will back me up on this once they identify the intelligence genes.
     
    On the other hand, that is not going to do much good when you bear in mind the fact that the mean IQ of Blacks in America is 85....

    Even under current circumstances blacks have some notable (if infrequent) intellectual achievements. For example the first person to propose the concept of a black hole was a black man,
     
    First, eh? MMM, let's see. He wasn't John Mitchell, or Laplace, or Einstein, or Karl Schwarzchild, or Eddington, or Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, or , etc, etc.

    and the best poker player in the world is black.
     
    Stop the presses!

    When Africa catches up, it will claim the world’s best musicians, athletes, scientists and engineers.
     
    I wouldn't hold my breath waiting, dear boy.
    , @The most deplorable one

    Like I told you idiots before, the intelligence distribution among blacks is bigger than that of non-blacks. Given an equal environment blacks will produce more outliers period, smart and stupid alike. Sorry that hurts your feelings. But the studies will back me up on this once they identify the intelligence genes.
     
    Do you have some evidence (you know, links, numbers, etc) to back up that claim?

    As far as I am aware, IQ tests of blacks suggest an SD around 12, compared to around 15 for whites.

    Secondly, selection for lower IQ (elimination of alleles causing higher IQ because they also increase metabolic requirements) will reduce the variance of a population. Selection for any particular trait will reduce the variance ...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @syonredux

    If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization.
     
    Seem to have left out the Chinese, dear boy. Too fair for your tastes? As for the Egyptians, Sumerians, and Harappans, none of them were Black Africans, and the Egyptians and Sumerians were Caucasoids/West Eurasians.

    You would also know that the greeks, romans, chinese, persians etc who came later all saw the people living in high northern latitudes as primitive barbarians. Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?
     
    On the other hand, the Greeks and the Chinese were not terribly impressed by their southern neighbors....

    The reality is that people living in the far north were never able to create civilizations on their own.
     
    On the other hand, they have managed to improve on what they inherited: Newton, Kant, Hume, Watt, Hubble, Edison, Rembrandt, etc.

    Northern europeans and northern asians were still primitive savages thousands of years after africans built this:

    http://pyramidsofgiza.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/great-sphinx.jpg
     
    And, of course, the Egyptians were North African Caucasoids...

    By the way take a look at these over 3000 years old giant head statues of the Olmec rulers, they look very much like african-american football players rather than northeast asians. Amuse us with a northern racial explanation for this:
     
    MMMM, you seem to have "African-American football players" on the brain, dear boy. This is at least the second time that you have used that comparison. I do hope that you are not planning on invoking the whole "Omecs were Black Africans" idea. Even rabid Africentrists seem to have given that one up.

    Seem to have left out the Chinese, dear boy. Too fair for your tastes?

    You seem to be ignorant of the fact that Egypt, Sumer and Indus are the three oldest civilizations. What part of came later re: China couldn’t you understand? If you really are a teacher I feel sorry for your students. Yes, the chinese are practically white compared to the ancient egyptians, sumerians and indians whose civilizations preceded theirs. So, what the heck is your point?

    I see that Slimer has already corrected your ignorance of history and forced you to acknowledge it. But, being shamelessly and incorrigibly dishonest you had to once again resort to a lie as an excuse for your stupidity:

    I am quite aware of the sequence. However, Bliss seemed rather more interested in originality (which civilizations are more or less autochthonous) than in chronological sequence.

    Clearly you don’t even know what chronological sequence means. Anyone reading my post can see that I wrote earliest for the 3 oldest civilizations followed by came later for the chinese, greek and other civilizations. Any idiot can see that’s a chronological sequence…

    Hard to believe that you are actually a teacher…

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    You seem to be ignorant of the fact that Egypt, Sumer and Indus are the three oldest civilizations. What part of came later re: China couldn’t you understand?
     
    Later, yes, dear boy. On the other hand, China, like Egypt, Sumer, and the Harappan civilization. did develop independently...

    If you really are a teacher I feel sorry for your students.
     
    Well, I am an awfully harsh grader....

    Yes, the chinese are practically white compared to the ancient egyptians, sumerians and indians whose civilizations preceded theirs. So, what the heck is your point?
     
    MMMM, the four aboriginal, as it were, Old World civilizations....Egypt (North African Caucasoid), Sumer (Middle Eastern Caucasoid) , Harappan India (ASI South Asian), China (East Asian Mongoloid).....Seems to be a positive dearth of Black Africans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Forgot to add. Some have said that we don’t know how the pyramids were created. Not true. Joseph Davidovits has come up with a material called geopolymers. They’re the equivalent of plastic polymers but they’re made of minerals. They look just like stone blocks when they’re hardened. If you look at the outside blocks of the pyramids they fit together perfectly. Inside the pyramid they are rough except for the hallways and galleries. So only the outside and covering were cast in geopolymer. Its also been speculated that the whole upper section was cast in order to make it easier as the geopolymer material can be carried in baskets then put into molds. Fair warning Egyptologists don’t like this explanation but to me it’s the only explanation that makes sense. It also explains the delicate vases and sculpture made of Dorite an immensely hard stone. They were cast just like clay. This would also account for the perfect edges on the various caskets, tool marks(they are actually wood mold marks). Where people claim that advanced machining has taken place is actually holes drilled while the casting stone was not completely hardened. One very strong piece of evidence that the stones were cast is the fossils in the stones. In pyramid blocks the fossils are all mixed up in terms of orientation. In a normal block the fossils are laying flat like they landed when they died on the sea floor.

    http://www.geopolymer.org/archaeology/pyramids/are-pyramids-made-out-of-concrete-1

    There’s a video on the above link that shows him making limestone blocks.

    There’s intense interest and research in geopolymers. It’s not there yet but they will have a huge influence on building and material science some day. The cement made this way takes a LOT less energy, last as long as the pyramids and being a polymer can be tuned chemically in an almost infinitely number of ways just like plastic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “Rome was never invincible. What set the Romans apart from their opponents was the ability to recover much more quickly from defeats.”

    One of Rome’s not-so-secret biggest military weapons was roads. Some of which still are in use. Doesn’t a cadence of 1000 “left!” define the distance a legion marched in a “mile”? Which could also tell you how far along you were on the road…

    There’s a theory somewhere that roads and ox carts enabled civilization to spread much faster then transport provided by more “appropriate technology” such as camels (that didn’t need roads). Were there roads in sub-Saharan Africa? Or did people just carry everything wherever on their heads?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Syon

    If only saying made it true, dear boy. Nubia was nothing more than a pallid reflection of Egypt

    Uhhh, you’re just saying the same thing you said previously. I gave several reasons why Nubia, in fact, was not merely a “pallid reflection of Egypt.” Your only retort is to repeat the same thing. You’ve got no argument, bro.

    That counts as originality, dear boy?MMM, the Finns most be one of the most original peoples on the planet then.

    Who said it was original? The point is that Nubia wasn’t merely a “pallid reflection of Egypt.”

    Only if by distinct you mean shoddy knock-offs, dear boy.

    No, I mean uniquely Nubian despite Egyptian influence.

    A book or two in the case of Nubia, dear boy; considerably more in the case of the vastly more interesting (and original) Egyptians.

    A book or two? Where, from the “HBD Library”? lolololol…

    I like how you completely ignored the last part of my post.
    Why did this vastly more interesting, black African-admixed population, i.e., the ancient Egyptians, build a thriving civilization before Europeans did?

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Uhhh, you’re just saying the same thing you said previously. I gave several reasons why Nubia, in fact, was not merely a “pallid reflection of Egypt.”
     
    No, you simply listed some things that struck you as being "original." To the rest of the world, they are shoddy knock-offs.

    Your only retort is to repeat the same thing. You’ve got no argument, bro.
     
    Hardly, dear boy. I have judgement. And Nubia is, at best, a satellite of Egypt.

    Who said it was original? The point is that Nubia wasn’t merely a “pallid reflection of Egypt.”
     
    Dear boy, having your own language does not mean that you are not a "pallid reflection." Rome had Latin, but it's culture was derivative of Greece. Virgil imitates Homer, after all.

    No, I mean uniquely Nubian despite Egyptian influence.
     
    Only if "uniquely Nubian" means inferior, dear boy....

    A book or two? Where, from the “HBD Library”? lolololol…
     
    Sadly, no. I did most of my Nubian reading at UC Berkeley during my undergrad days.

    I like how you completely ignored the last part of my post.
    Why did this vastly more interesting, black African-admixed population,
     
    You mean the North African Caucasoids, dear boy?

    i.e., the ancient Egyptians, build a thriving civilization before Europeans did?
     
    You mean why did literate civilizations develop first in Egypt and Sumer before spreading to the rest of the Middle East, north Africa, and Europe? I really don't know dear boy. Why has Italy lagged since AD 1700? Why has Scotland outperformed Wales? Why was Japan more culturally vital than China in the early 19th century?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Slimer
    Pyric Sense wrote:

    "They are still a mystery as to their origins and builders; however, sub-Saharan Africans, who scarcely built two-story houses much less ingenious pyramids, are not contenders. Whatever gifts they may possess, the gifts necessary to create the Great Pyramid have never manifested among them"

    Riiiight... that's why Nubia built more pyramids than Egypt did.

    Syon Wrote: "Kush was a pale (ahem) imitation of Egypt. As with Ethiopia, it only looks impressive when compared to the rest of Black Africa. The Meso-American civilizations (Olmecs, Mayans, etc) had less of a head start and still accomplished more."

    While heavily influenced by Egypt, Nubia/Kush was not merely an imitation - it had a distinct language, distinct architecture, distinct sundials/astronomical instruments and overall distinct system of governance. You clearly haven't read much about either of these civilizations.

    And like Jefferson pointed out, Egyptians, if not black, most certainly have black African ancestry. Why did this black African-admixed population produce civilization at a time when most of Europe (Greece being the only exception) was populated by savages?

    While heavily influenced by Egypt, Nubia/Kush was not merely an imitation

    If only saying made it true, dear boy. Nubia was nothing more than a pallid reflection of Egypt.

    it had a distinct language,

    That counts as originality, dear boy?MMM, the Finns most be one of the most original peoples on the planet then.

    distinct architecture, distinct sundials/astronomical instruments and overall distinct system of governance.

    Only if by distinct you mean shoddy knock-offs, dear boy.

    You clearly haven’t read much about either of these civilizations.

    A book or two in the case of Nubia, dear boy; considerably more in the case of the vastly more interesting (and original) Egyptians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Art Deco
    Seem to have left out the Chinese, dear boy. Too fair for your tastes? As for the Egyptians, Sumerians, and Harappans, none of them were Black Africans, and the Egyptians and Sumerians were Caucasoids/West Eurasians.

    Sumer preceded Hwang Ho civilization by 2000 years, Egypt did so by 1,000 years or more, and the Indus Valley cities did so by 500 years.

    Egyptian Copts are the heirs to the ancient Egyptians. Supposedly, their most proximate kin would be the latter-day population of Ceylon.

    The Indus Valley is thought to have been predominantly populated with people related to today's Dravidian population in southern India, with a proto-Australoid minority you find today only in the Antipodes.

    Sumer preceded Hwang Ho civilization by 2000 years, Egypt did so by 1,000 years or more, and the Indus Valley cities did so by 500 years.

    Yes, dear boy, I am quite aware of the sequence. However, Bliss seemed rather more interested in originality (which civilizations are more or less autochthonous) than in chronological sequence. Hence, his omission of China (which is usually regarded as having arisen independently) is rather interesting. One assumes that Bliss found their pallor disquieting.

    Egyptian Copts are the heirs to the ancient Egyptians.

    Yes, dear boy. They are Caucasoid West Eurasians.

    Supposedly, their most proximate kin would be the latter-day population of Ceylon.

    Do you have any gene studies that support that assertion?

    The Indus Valley is thought to have been predominantly populated with people related to today’s Dravidian population in southern India, with a proto-Australoid minority you find today only in the Antipodes.

    Yes, dear boy. The Harappans would, presumably, have pretty much entirely ASI in character. That’s why I did not describe them as Caucasoids.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Pyric Sense wrote:

    “They are still a mystery as to their origins and builders; however, sub-Saharan Africans, who scarcely built two-story houses much less ingenious pyramids, are not contenders. Whatever gifts they may possess, the gifts necessary to create the Great Pyramid have never manifested among them”

    Riiiight… that’s why Nubia built more pyramids than Egypt did.

    Syon Wrote: “Kush was a pale (ahem) imitation of Egypt. As with Ethiopia, it only looks impressive when compared to the rest of Black Africa. The Meso-American civilizations (Olmecs, Mayans, etc) had less of a head start and still accomplished more.”

    While heavily influenced by Egypt, Nubia/Kush was not merely an imitation – it had a distinct language, distinct architecture, distinct sundials/astronomical instruments and overall distinct system of governance. You clearly haven’t read much about either of these civilizations.

    And like Jefferson pointed out, Egyptians, if not black, most certainly have black African ancestry. Why did this black African-admixed population produce civilization at a time when most of Europe (Greece being the only exception) was populated by savages?

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    While heavily influenced by Egypt, Nubia/Kush was not merely an imitation
     


    If only saying made it true, dear boy. Nubia was nothing more than a pallid reflection of Egypt.

    it had a distinct language,
     
    That counts as originality, dear boy?MMM, the Finns most be one of the most original peoples on the planet then.

    distinct architecture, distinct sundials/astronomical instruments and overall distinct system of governance.
     
    Only if by distinct you mean shoddy knock-offs, dear boy.

    You clearly haven’t read much about either of these civilizations.
     
    A book or two in the case of Nubia, dear boy; considerably more in the case of the vastly more interesting (and original) Egyptians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @syonredux

    If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization.
     
    Seem to have left out the Chinese, dear boy. Too fair for your tastes? As for the Egyptians, Sumerians, and Harappans, none of them were Black Africans, and the Egyptians and Sumerians were Caucasoids/West Eurasians.

    You would also know that the greeks, romans, chinese, persians etc who came later all saw the people living in high northern latitudes as primitive barbarians. Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?
     
    On the other hand, the Greeks and the Chinese were not terribly impressed by their southern neighbors....

    The reality is that people living in the far north were never able to create civilizations on their own.
     
    On the other hand, they have managed to improve on what they inherited: Newton, Kant, Hume, Watt, Hubble, Edison, Rembrandt, etc.

    Northern europeans and northern asians were still primitive savages thousands of years after africans built this:

    http://pyramidsofgiza.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/great-sphinx.jpg
     
    And, of course, the Egyptians were North African Caucasoids...

    By the way take a look at these over 3000 years old giant head statues of the Olmec rulers, they look very much like african-american football players rather than northeast asians. Amuse us with a northern racial explanation for this:
     
    MMMM, you seem to have "African-American football players" on the brain, dear boy. This is at least the second time that you have used that comparison. I do hope that you are not planning on invoking the whole "Omecs were Black Africans" idea. Even rabid Africentrists seem to have given that one up.

    Seem to have left out the Chinese, dear boy. Too fair for your tastes? As for the Egyptians, Sumerians, and Harappans, none of them were Black Africans, and the Egyptians and Sumerians were Caucasoids/West Eurasians.

    Sumer preceded Hwang Ho civilization by 2000 years, Egypt did so by 1,000 years or more, and the Indus Valley cities did so by 500 years.

    Egyptian Copts are the heirs to the ancient Egyptians. Supposedly, their most proximate kin would be the latter-day population of Ceylon.

    The Indus Valley is thought to have been predominantly populated with people related to today’s Dravidian population in southern India, with a proto-Australoid minority you find today only in the Antipodes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Sumer preceded Hwang Ho civilization by 2000 years, Egypt did so by 1,000 years or more, and the Indus Valley cities did so by 500 years.
     
    Yes, dear boy, I am quite aware of the sequence. However, Bliss seemed rather more interested in originality (which civilizations are more or less autochthonous) than in chronological sequence. Hence, his omission of China (which is usually regarded as having arisen independently) is rather interesting. One assumes that Bliss found their pallor disquieting.

    Egyptian Copts are the heirs to the ancient Egyptians.
     
    Yes, dear boy. They are Caucasoid West Eurasians.

    Supposedly, their most proximate kin would be the latter-day population of Ceylon.
     
    Do you have any gene studies that support that assertion?

    The Indus Valley is thought to have been predominantly populated with people related to today’s Dravidian population in southern India, with a proto-Australoid minority you find today only in the Antipodes.
     
    Yes, dear boy. The Harappans would, presumably, have pretty much entirely ASI in character. That's why I did not describe them as Caucasoids.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Lot

    Amhara (at least high-status Amhara) do bear some physical resemblance to old-stock Caribbean ‘mulatto elites’
     
    I recently learned that a store clerk I had always assumed was Dominican is really Ethiopian. I'd describe the look as facial features and hair about equal parts white and black, but skin color 60-80% black. In this case, she was lighter than Obama.

    >>I’d describe the look as facial features and hair about equal parts white and black, but skin color 60-80% black.<<

    To me their facial features look more like 60-80% Caucasian, but skin tone 60%-80% African, as you say.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    It does seem that *all* the populations that did establish civilisation had been to high northern latitudes, and been exposed to Ice Age conditions.
     
    If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization. You would also know that the greeks, romans, chinese, persians etc who came later all saw the people living in high northern latitudes as primitive barbarians. Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?

    The reality is that people living in the far north were never able to create civilizations on their own. Northern europeans and northern asians were still primitive savages thousands of years after africans built this:

    http://pyramidsofgiza.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/great-sphinx.jpg

    The Amerindian city-builders seem to have been mostly descended from NE-Asians
     
    The mother civilization of the Americas was the Olmec civilization of central america. The subsequent aztecs, incas, mayas were also located far closer to the equator than the north pole. Again making a mockery of your ignorant claims of northern latitude superiority.

    By the way take a look at these over 3000 years old giant head statues of the Olmec rulers, they look very much like african-american football players rather than northeast asians. Amuse us with a northern racial explanation for this:

    http://www.softseattravel.com/sitebuilder/images/Xalapa_Museum009-578x401.jpg

    http://images.travelpod.com/users/linzstoker/peru_05.1123816020.lindsey_and_olmec_head_xalapa_museum.jpg

    “If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization. ”

    Civilistion started in warm climes. But the ancestors of the civilisation builders all came from further north (with a possible question mark over Egypt).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Civilistion started in warm climes. But the ancestors of the civilisation builders all came from further north (with a possible question mark over Egypt).
     
    That's not history, that is wishful nordicist fantasy. The kind of baseless nonsense you find at Stormfront. Over there you also learn that the chinese civilization was founded by nordics from europe...

    Get real.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:

    “WHY DID IT TAKE THE GERMANIC TRIBES SO LONG TO CATCH-UP CIVILIZATION-WISE WITH THE HELLENIC TRIBES?”

    Further away from cradle of civilization. Too many trees prevented communication. Mountain ranges.

    In southern Europe and Near East, fewer trees meant more travel. And sea routes linked the first civilized centers together in trade.
    Athens in unthinkable without sea trade.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:

    “Sub-Saharan African rivers are unnavigable..”

    SS-Africa is so huge and diverse I’m not sure generalizations like this make much sense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @dcite
    "More impressive than piling rocks up into pyramids are the rifled blow guns of the Amazon Indians and the technology of the Eskimos." Piling rocks? Huh? Might as well say the Brooklyn Bridge is as impressive as a sand castle. The Great Pyramid (the one that really puzzles the experts) is constructed with such precision, that this precision could not be duplicated today, and it is based on geometric principles and angles. I am not a mathematician, but I have read their treatises on it, and to this day they cannot figure out how it was done, and I don't mean the piling part, which just might have been accomplished with brute labor; but not the design, and probably not the placement. An extraordinary level of abstract thinking was required to even conceive of the Great Pyramid much less build it. It had no objects in it, nor any artifacts of human scale, so it was probably not used as a burial chamber as were the much later, smaller pyramids. Have black Africans ever struck anyone as having a propensity for abstract, mathematical, conceptualized thinking?
    Pyramids in fact have been found in many parts of the world, not just South America and Egypt. Some of the biggest are in the Balkan area. Others have been found in China, Ireland, central North America.
    They are still a mystery as to their origins and builders; however, sub-Saharan Africans, who scarcely built two-story houses much less ingenious pyramids, are not contenders. Whatever gifts they may possess, the gifts necessary to create the Great Pyramid have never manifested among them.

    The gift that didn’t manifest is the gift of staple cereals. Khamut, wheat and barley were very difficult to grow below the Nile River Valley. Agriculture generally didn’t spread by long route trade but by short hops. Staple cereals rounded the Mediterranean sea pretty well, worked west into central Asia and did nicely in Europe but they couldn’t cross the sand barrier of Northern Africa.

    So, sub-Saharan Africa was stuck with beans and yams as their main agricultural crop. Beans are good, but you get very little per acre vs. wheat and barley. Yams provide some starch, but they rot so quickly that you can’t store your surplus in case of a famine.

    Mayans and Aztecs had Indian corn, the Chinese and Indians had brown rice and millet, the Egyptians, Babylonians and Greeks had wheat, khamut and barley. These crops store well and a small percentage of the people can make enough to feed an entire city

    So in Sub Saharan Africa, with every drought came political upheaval. More people had to work in farming full time. This left less time for people to create civilizations where a god-emperor conquered and controlled a massive river-valley and coast, much less figure out ways to build big piles of stone that benefited entirely one mummy.

    Of the stories of efficient cereals accelerating civilization the story of con is the most recent. It was domesticated the most recently, compared to the old-world crops. It fueled the growth of the late Olmec, Inca, Maya and Aztec civilizations, all of which left some nice stone ruins. Corn was slowly crossing the mini sand barrier (north Mexico, Arizona, south Texas) into North America as a core crop where it allowed the Anasazi to make their awesome cliff palaces. Sure, they’re not as grand as the pyramids but they were so much more practical and showed an ingenuity that would have been great if it were allowed to develop. Would be interesting to see what sort of architecture the Anisazi would have developed if white people didn’t come over to get their smallpox and whooping cough on everything.

    So that’s the deal. Civilizations start as hunters. If they find a farmable crops they mostly become farmers. If they find really efficient crops only some become farmers and others are free to work on technology, architecture, philosophy, warfare and government.

    The Sub Saharan Africans were stuck with low efficiency crops due to their rainy/dry season schedule and the sand barrier.

    Native Australians were even worse off since the had almost zero crops to choose from. Today Australia grows plenty of crops and fruits, but of their top 30 agricultural productions ALL of them came from Europe, South America or East Asia, so the best civilization could do in Australia was the fishing villages on the southern coast.

    So difficult weather, inefficient plants, bothersome animals = no time to advance technology/society. Inviting weather, efficient plants, domestication ready animals = plenty of spare time to advance society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jefferson
    Here is an Egyptian girl who is clearly the product of racial miscegenation. She does not even look White enough to pass for an Israeli, let alone White enough to pass for a European.
    http://www.worldofstock.com/slides/PCH13289.jpg

    And there are millions of Egyptians who look like her.

    Egyptians have more Sub Saharan African admixture than Israelis and Europeans, so that pretty much disqualifies them from being Caucasoids.

    Why? It seems to me that a man who is, say, 95% Caucasoid and 5 % Negroid is Caucasoid. For that matter, there are Egyptians with no Black ancestry.

    Caucasoid = the absence of any Sub Saharan blood. Once you have any Sub Saharan blood you turn into a racial mutt.

    This is quite silly.

    Egyptians are racial mutts, this is 100 percent fact.

    I would avoid the phrase “100 percent fact.” It sounds rather juvenile.

    Egyptians are not the epitome of Caucasoid racial purity.

    Was anyone claiming that they were?

    Here is an Egyptian girl who is clearly the product of racial miscegenation. She does not even look White enough to pass for an Israeli, let alone White enough to pass for a European.

    Of course, millions of Israelis are Europeans….

    And there are millions of Egyptians who look like her.

    On the other hand, there are also Egyptians who look like this:

    Omar Sharif:

    http://en.unifrance.org/directories/person/123097/omar-sharif

    No one seemed to mind when he played a Russian in Dr Zhivago and a German in NIGHT OF THE GENERALS.

    Faten Hamama:

    http://www.7asriyan.com/7asriyan/MoreNews.aspx?newsid=277387

    Mona Zaki:

    http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2001/562/profile.htm

    Essam Sharaf:

    http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/12595/Egypt/Politics-/Egypt-PM-speaks-of-Egypt%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%98bright%E2%80%99-future-at-firs.aspx

    Egypt is a very diverse place.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    It does seem that *all* the populations that did establish civilisation had been to high northern latitudes, and been exposed to Ice Age conditions.
     
    If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization. You would also know that the greeks, romans, chinese, persians etc who came later all saw the people living in high northern latitudes as primitive barbarians. Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?

    The reality is that people living in the far north were never able to create civilizations on their own. Northern europeans and northern asians were still primitive savages thousands of years after africans built this:

    http://pyramidsofgiza.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/great-sphinx.jpg

    The Amerindian city-builders seem to have been mostly descended from NE-Asians
     
    The mother civilization of the Americas was the Olmec civilization of central america. The subsequent aztecs, incas, mayas were also located far closer to the equator than the north pole. Again making a mockery of your ignorant claims of northern latitude superiority.

    By the way take a look at these over 3000 years old giant head statues of the Olmec rulers, they look very much like african-american football players rather than northeast asians. Amuse us with a northern racial explanation for this:

    http://www.softseattravel.com/sitebuilder/images/Xalapa_Museum009-578x401.jpg

    http://images.travelpod.com/users/linzstoker/peru_05.1123816020.lindsey_and_olmec_head_xalapa_museum.jpg

    If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization.

    Seem to have left out the Chinese, dear boy. Too fair for your tastes? As for the Egyptians, Sumerians, and Harappans, none of them were Black Africans, and the Egyptians and Sumerians were Caucasoids/West Eurasians.

    You would also know that the greeks, romans, chinese, persians etc who came later all saw the people living in high northern latitudes as primitive barbarians. Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?

    On the other hand, the Greeks and the Chinese were not terribly impressed by their southern neighbors….

    The reality is that people living in the far north were never able to create civilizations on their own.

    On the other hand, they have managed to improve on what they inherited: Newton, Kant, Hume, Watt, Hubble, Edison, Rembrandt, etc.

    Northern europeans and northern asians were still primitive savages thousands of years after africans built this:

    http://pyramidsofgiza.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/great-sphinx.jpg

    And, of course, the Egyptians were North African Caucasoids…

    By the way take a look at these over 3000 years old giant head statues of the Olmec rulers, they look very much like african-american football players rather than northeast asians. Amuse us with a northern racial explanation for this:

    MMMM, you seem to have “African-American football players” on the brain, dear boy. This is at least the second time that you have used that comparison. I do hope that you are not planning on invoking the whole “Omecs were Black Africans” idea. Even rabid Africentrists seem to have given that one up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Seem to have left out the Chinese, dear boy. Too fair for your tastes? As for the Egyptians, Sumerians, and Harappans, none of them were Black Africans, and the Egyptians and Sumerians were Caucasoids/West Eurasians.

    Sumer preceded Hwang Ho civilization by 2000 years, Egypt did so by 1,000 years or more, and the Indus Valley cities did so by 500 years.

    Egyptian Copts are the heirs to the ancient Egyptians. Supposedly, their most proximate kin would be the latter-day population of Ceylon.

    The Indus Valley is thought to have been predominantly populated with people related to today's Dravidian population in southern India, with a proto-Australoid minority you find today only in the Antipodes.

    , @Bliss

    Seem to have left out the Chinese, dear boy. Too fair for your tastes?
     
    You seem to be ignorant of the fact that Egypt, Sumer and Indus are the three oldest civilizations. What part of came later re: China couldn't you understand? If you really are a teacher I feel sorry for your students. Yes, the chinese are practically white compared to the ancient egyptians, sumerians and indians whose civilizations preceded theirs. So, what the heck is your point?

    I see that Slimer has already corrected your ignorance of history and forced you to acknowledge it. But, being shamelessly and incorrigibly dishonest you had to once again resort to a lie as an excuse for your stupidity:

    I am quite aware of the sequence. However, Bliss seemed rather more interested in originality (which civilizations are more or less autochthonous) than in chronological sequence.
     
    Clearly you don't even know what chronological sequence means. Anyone reading my post can see that I wrote earliest for the 3 oldest civilizations followed by came later for the chinese, greek and other civilizations. Any idiot can see that's a chronological sequence...

    Hard to believe that you are actually a teacher...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    WHY DID IT TAKE THE GERMANIC TRIBES SO LONG TO CATCH-UP CIVILIZATION-WISE WITH THE HELLENIC TRIBES?

    They weren't behind technologically.

    They had iron tools and iron weapons and armor, agriculture, animal husbandry, horseback riding, wagons, alcohol fermentation, textile weaving etc. They even were able to defeat a Roman legion(under ideal circumstances).

    the dejbjerg wagon from dejbjerg bog, 50 BCE

    They even were able to defeat a Roman legion(under ideal circumstances).

    The Romans suffered many defeats at the hand of the Germanics. Some of the most massive defeats were during the Cambrian war. At the battle of Arausio alone, Roman losses are estimated to be between 80,000 and 120,000 men.

    Rome was never invincible. What set the Romans apart from their opponents was the ability to recover much more quickly from defeats.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Numinous

    Reader didn’t really want to draw out the modern implications in the manner of J.P. Rushton, but it’s pretty obvious reading his book that there are connections between prehistoric Africa and inner city black America.
     
    Steve, this is where you sort of lose me. When recent history of slavery and marginalization can explain (at least to some extent) the dysfunction of inner-city black America, why must we jump back many millenia to discover the supposed roots of those causes in tropical insects and pachyderms?

    I think the implication is clear enough. Natural selection favoured certain behavioral traits in Africa and nothing has happened in America to change the old evolutionary outcome. At least some of the whites who provided about one sixth of contemporary African-American genes were perhaps more like tropical Africans in certain behavioural characteristics than the average European male. Not that the truth or falsity of that makes much difference.

    BTW as I intend to note elsewhere the poor light soils point doesn’t carry much weight with me. Unless you cut down all your tropical forest life for tropical people, especially those in the equatorial tropics where there are no hurricanes, is so easy that muscling up so as to be able to impregnate the maximum number of females is most likely to be favoured by natural selection. From seas and rivers the fishing is easy and fruits and roots, if not crops, mean that the women can provide food unaided. Sri Lankans aren’t promiscuous muscular types like West Africans but don’t need much of a work ethic to survive in the south west within 6 degrees of the equator on the Indian ocean.

    As for thin soils, none are as thin as those on which pre-Columbian people thrived along the Amazon. The secret was, as cattle rancher’s are now learning, to let the jungle regrow regularly while cutting a new area for agriculture.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Numinous

    Reader didn’t really want to draw out the modern implications in the manner of J.P. Rushton, but it’s pretty obvious reading his book that there are connections between prehistoric Africa and inner city black America.
     
    Steve, this is where you sort of lose me. When recent history of slavery and marginalization can explain (at least to some extent) the dysfunction of inner-city black America, why must we jump back many millenia to discover the supposed roots of those causes in tropical insects and pachyderms?

    I think the implication is clear enough. Natural selection favoured certain behavioral traits in Africa and nothing has happened in America to change the old evolutionary outcome. At least some of the whites who provided about one sixth of contemporary African-American genes were perhaps more like tropical Africans in certain behavioural characteristics than the average European male. Not that the truth or falsity of that makes much difference.

    BTW as I intend to note elsewhere the poor light soils point doesn’t carry much weight with me. Unless you cut down all your tropical forest life for tropical people, especially those in the equatorial tropics where there are no hurricanes, is so easy that muscling up so as to be able to impregnate the maximum number of females is most likely to be favoured by natural selection. From seas and rivers the fishing is easy and fruits and roots, if not crops, mean that the women can provide food unaided. Sri Lankans aren’t promiscuous muscular types like West Africans but don’t need much of a work ethic to survive in the south west within 6 degrees of the equator on the Indian ocean.

    As for thin soils, none are as thin as those on which pre-Columbian people thrived along the Amazon. The secret was, as cattle rancher’s are now learning, to let the jungle regrow regularly while cutting a new area for agriculture.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I often wonder if implausibility isn’t considered a virtue these days.

    70% how you look
    20% how you sound
    10% what you say

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Rifleman
    Well, you're going to have to qualify Africa as "sub Saharan Africa" because Egypt is clearly in Africa and was engaged in some civilization - writing, agriculture, monumental architecture, art, speculation for 2000+ years before Thales was born.

    And by American standards those Egyptians were black.

    But it's ecologically different from the rest of Africa.

    Fifty years ago, you would have asked “How come every country run by Asians is poor”?
     
    In 1964 I would have been noticing African style poverty in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong?

    Granted I'm not an MIT economist but.............no.

    The ancient Egyptians were not black. They had straight hair. Some were blonde and red-haired. The ancient mummies demonstrate this conclusively.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “No, they did not. The Roman Empire included a fair amount of modern Germany east of the Rhine for over 200 years.”

    Okay, good point. How about “the Germans pushed the Romans back to the Rhine”?

    Likewise, I think the Romans occupied perhaps the majority of low-land Scotland for about 50 years. It’s likely the logistics/weather (poor local agriculture) pushed out the Romans: “The total size of the Roman garrison in Scotland during the Flavian period of occupation is thought to be some 25,000 troops, requiring 16–19,000 tons of grain per annum.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Malaria was a big problem for much of the US until evil white people started spraying DDT and taking other measures, draining swamps, standing water, etc that can harbor mosquitoes. Now the death toll of malaria is so low in the US, that it’s a statistical blip here- usually its someone who traveled to some tropical region and caught it there.

    Much of Africa’s current problems with malaria are due to do-goodism from liberals. They’ve pushed for all sorts of aid to the region, with the consequent increases in population density necessary for malaria epidemics. They also went all ‘green’ on Africa and largely delayed and blocked the use of pesticides there which were instrumental in driving down malaria in the US. They do things like give free sleeping nets to the Africans to block mosquitoes, and the Africans use them for fishing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Amhara (at least high-status Amhara) do bear some physical resemblance to old-stock Caribbean ‘mulatto elites’

    I recently learned that a store clerk I had always assumed was Dominican is really Ethiopian. I’d describe the look as facial features and hair about equal parts white and black, but skin color 60-80% black. In this case, she was lighter than Obama.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Simon in London
    >>I’d describe the look as facial features and hair about equal parts white and black, but skin color 60-80% black.<<

    To me their facial features look more like 60-80% Caucasian, but skin tone 60%-80% African, as you say.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Bliss

    It does seem that *all* the populations that did establish civilisation had been to high northern latitudes, and been exposed to Ice Age conditions.
     
    If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization. You would also know that the greeks, romans, chinese, persians etc who came later all saw the people living in high northern latitudes as primitive barbarians. Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?

    The reality is that people living in the far north were never able to create civilizations on their own. Northern europeans and northern asians were still primitive savages thousands of years after africans built this:

    http://pyramidsofgiza.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/great-sphinx.jpg

    The Amerindian city-builders seem to have been mostly descended from NE-Asians
     
    The mother civilization of the Americas was the Olmec civilization of central america. The subsequent aztecs, incas, mayas were also located far closer to the equator than the north pole. Again making a mockery of your ignorant claims of northern latitude superiority.

    By the way take a look at these over 3000 years old giant head statues of the Olmec rulers, they look very much like african-american football players rather than northeast asians. Amuse us with a northern racial explanation for this:

    http://www.softseattravel.com/sitebuilder/images/Xalapa_Museum009-578x401.jpg

    http://images.travelpod.com/users/linzstoker/peru_05.1123816020.lindsey_and_olmec_head_xalapa_museum.jpg

    Meh, Meso-America never invented metal-smelting, so had to do everything with stone tools. Everything would take three times as long to do with stone tools. That statue of a slave had to be carved with stone tools. Barbarians had iron, so they got to use hammer and chisel to carve stuff.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bliss

    It does seem that *all* the populations that did establish civilisation had been to high northern latitudes, and been exposed to Ice Age conditions.
     
    If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization. You would also know that the greeks, romans, chinese, persians etc who came later all saw the people living in high northern latitudes as primitive barbarians. Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?

    The reality is that people living in the far north were never able to create civilizations on their own. Northern europeans and northern asians were still primitive savages thousands of years after africans built this:

    http://pyramidsofgiza.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/great-sphinx.jpg

    The Amerindian city-builders seem to have been mostly descended from NE-Asians
     
    The mother civilization of the Americas was the Olmec civilization of central america. The subsequent aztecs, incas, mayas were also located far closer to the equator than the north pole. Again making a mockery of your ignorant claims of northern latitude superiority.

    By the way take a look at these over 3000 years old giant head statues of the Olmec rulers, they look very much like african-american football players rather than northeast asians. Amuse us with a northern racial explanation for this:

    http://www.softseattravel.com/sitebuilder/images/Xalapa_Museum009-578x401.jpg

    http://images.travelpod.com/users/linzstoker/peru_05.1123816020.lindsey_and_olmec_head_xalapa_museum.jpg

    Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?

    Because the big-headed, neotynic Mongols were equipped with technologically advanced military technology, the recurved composite bow.

    Also, why didn’t they need to build a wall on their Southern border?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Lot
    The Roman fleet that failed to defeat the Gaulish fleet was built by a small army, hundreds of miles from home, surrounded by hostile tribes. The result would have been different had it been the Mare Nostrum fleet, built by specialized Roman labor in friendly territory.

    De Bello Gallico is an amazing piece of history, and provides us with the single best description of the ancient Gauls and Germans, and mostly a flattering one, with frequent references to their size, strength, stoicism, and bravery, as well as frequent references to their victories over Roman armies in earlier generations.

    But Caesar was also an ambitious politicians who had every incentive to overstate the military prowess of the ancient Celts and Germans, whom he ultimately defeated despite being outnumbered more than 10 to 1.

    There's really no question that the Romans were massively more advanced than the ancient Gauls. One group was writing poetic satires and legal treatises, the other was illiterate.

    There’s really no question that the Romans were massively more advanced than the ancient Gauls. One group was writing poetic satires and legal treatises, the other was illiterate.

    My point isn’t that they were more advanced than the Romans. The point is they weren’t a millennia behind and at the same level as 1800s Zulus. They had ships with sails and iron-chain attached anchors, and were larger than a galley and traded with Britain. You would expect barbarians to ride in dugout canoes down the river to hunt some heads. The city of Alesia was so well fortified it required 70,000 Romans to besiege it for two months to capture (by starvation, not storm). They wouldn’t have had as much trouble in 1700-years-in-the-future Zululand.

    In any case, ancient Rome is at latitude 42 N, attached to western Europe, and twice as close to Paris than Cairo, so maybe we need a Moynihan`s Law Of Proximity to Barbarians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Priss Factor [AKA "pizza with hot pepper"] says:
    @Eric Rasmusen
    Civilization started in the Middle East. The big question is why it didn't spread south to Africa, except for Ethiopia. Disease seems like a good explanation--- it wasn't worth bringing technical innovations over mountains or desert if you had a high chance of dying of disease.

    “Civilization started in the Middle East. The big question is why it didn’t spread south to Africa, except for Ethiopia. Disease seems like a good explanation— it wasn’t worth bringing technical innovations over mountains or desert if you had a high chance of dying of disease.”

    I think the question of “did African diseases, geography, climate, and etc prevent the rise of civilization in Africa?” is tolerable even to lots of Libs.

    And we might agree with that too.

    The more troubling question is, did African conditions only socially and culturally prevent blacks from building civilization… or did those conditions also alter the black DNA in such a way that blacks are less likely to build civilizations even in hospitable conditions?

    If the latter is true, then it’s not just a black problem IN Africa but a black problem ALL OVER the world: Europe, US, Brazil, Haiti, Jamaica, and etc.

    In making black genetics more immune to malaria, did African conditions also make black genetics more immune to rules of civilization?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @skepticaldonkey
    Commenter "pizza" above is not Whiskey...it is STEVE SAILER!!

    And he's mostly right except that blacks are not "wolfish" or "noble savages." One reason they were enslaved by everyone is not just because they were technologically backward but because they are docile and slavish. They make good slaves. That's why they had to be imported to the Americas, because the natives (especially in North America) were in fact noble savages and wouldn't tolerate slavery. Unlike other peoples, blacks prosper under slavery.

    “Commenter “pizza” above is not Whiskey…it is STEVE SAILER!!”

    I’m starting to wonder if “Art Deco” is Whiskey minus the “white women hate hate hate the beta male” thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Simon in London
    It does seem that *all* the populations that did establish civilisation had been to high northern latitudes, and been exposed to Ice Age conditions. Populations such as Australoids & sub-Saharan Africans who never experienced the Ice Age never created civilisations. I therefore suspect that this must be the critical factor.

    Not predators - no significant big predators in Australia for tens of thousands of years.
    Not crop-eating megafauna - Australia never even got as far as agriculture. None in the Papua New Guinea highlands.
    Not disease causing lack of population density - Papua New Guinea highlands very densely populated.

    The above three may all have contributed to lack of civilisations, but clearly lack of these three is not sufficient for civilisation.

    From what I can tell, the civilisation-building population groups all come primarily from the group that turned left out of Africa. Instead of proceeding east along the coast towards India, they went north. The Europeans/Caucasoids and NE-Asians/Mongoloids seem to have split first, with the distinct NE-Asian population emerging around 22,000 years ago (quite recent - several tens of thousands of years after this population entered Eurasia). The Amerindian city-builders seem to have been mostly descended from NE-Asians, with a split around 15,000 years ago. Later of course some of these Ice-folk went back south again into already-inhabited territory and eventually built cities in places like India (Caucasoids) and SE Asia (Mongoloids).

    It does seem that *all* the populations that did establish civilisation had been to high northern latitudes, and been exposed to Ice Age conditions.

    If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization. You would also know that the greeks, romans, chinese, persians etc who came later all saw the people living in high northern latitudes as primitive barbarians. Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?

    The reality is that people living in the far north were never able to create civilizations on their own. Northern europeans and northern asians were still primitive savages thousands of years after africans built this:

    The Amerindian city-builders seem to have been mostly descended from NE-Asians

    The mother civilization of the Americas was the Olmec civilization of central america. The subsequent aztecs, incas, mayas were also located far closer to the equator than the north pole. Again making a mockery of your ignorant claims of northern latitude superiority.

    By the way take a look at these over 3000 years old giant head statues of the Olmec rulers, they look very much like african-american football players rather than northeast asians. Amuse us with a northern racial explanation for this:

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?

    Because the big-headed, neotynic Mongols were equipped with technologically advanced military technology, the recurved composite bow.

    Also, why didn't they need to build a wall on their Southern border?
    , @Anonymous
    Meh, Meso-America never invented metal-smelting, so had to do everything with stone tools. Everything would take three times as long to do with stone tools. That statue of a slave had to be carved with stone tools. Barbarians had iron, so they got to use hammer and chisel to carve stuff.
    , @syonredux

    If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization.
     
    Seem to have left out the Chinese, dear boy. Too fair for your tastes? As for the Egyptians, Sumerians, and Harappans, none of them were Black Africans, and the Egyptians and Sumerians were Caucasoids/West Eurasians.

    You would also know that the greeks, romans, chinese, persians etc who came later all saw the people living in high northern latitudes as primitive barbarians. Why do you think the Han chinese build the Great Wall of China on their northern boundary?
     
    On the other hand, the Greeks and the Chinese were not terribly impressed by their southern neighbors....

    The reality is that people living in the far north were never able to create civilizations on their own.
     
    On the other hand, they have managed to improve on what they inherited: Newton, Kant, Hume, Watt, Hubble, Edison, Rembrandt, etc.

    Northern europeans and northern asians were still primitive savages thousands of years after africans built this:

    http://pyramidsofgiza.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/great-sphinx.jpg
     
    And, of course, the Egyptians were North African Caucasoids...

    By the way take a look at these over 3000 years old giant head statues of the Olmec rulers, they look very much like african-american football players rather than northeast asians. Amuse us with a northern racial explanation for this:
     
    MMMM, you seem to have "African-American football players" on the brain, dear boy. This is at least the second time that you have used that comparison. I do hope that you are not planning on invoking the whole "Omecs were Black Africans" idea. Even rabid Africentrists seem to have given that one up.
    , @Simon in London
    "If you knew history you would know that all the earliest civilizations were created by dark skinned people in hot climates: Egypt, Sumeria, Indus Valley Civilization. "

    Civilistion started in warm climes. But the ancestors of the civilisation builders all came from further north (with a possible question mark over Egypt).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Hapalong Cassidy
    “WHY DID IT TAKE THE GERMANIC TRIBES SO LONG TO CATCH-UP CIVILIZATION-WISE WITH THE HELLENIC TRIBES?”

    I have my own novel theory about that. The Northern Europeans took longer to become civilized because it took them longer to develop resistance to alcoholism. The Southern Europeans and Middle Easterners had been practicing agriculture longer (due to a climate more favorable for developing it), and were thus introduced to the fermentation process much sooner. When the Northern Europeans ultimately came into contact with these populations, alcohol wreaked havoc upon them much in the same way it did to the North American Indians.

    ““WHY DID IT TAKE THE GERMANIC TRIBES SO LONG TO CATCH-UP CIVILIZATION-WISE WITH THE HELLENIC TRIBES?””

    My guess: until the mouldboard plough they were reliant on sheep & cattle herding, not conducive to civilisation. Once they were able to farm wheat in heavy northern European soil they civilised quickly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.