If You Get Offended Easily Dont Read This.........

The European has twisted and turned everything to fit his warped way of thinking. He has made himself the center of the world, indeed of the universe.

Have you ever heard the words Oriental and Occidental?

Orient means East and Occident means West. Now heres the twist. Europe, as put forth by the European, is the center of the world. Therefore, anything to its east is Oriental, while anything to its West is Occidental. This is what is meant by Eurocentric.

If Europe is not the center of the world then what is?

When a baby is born the most essential thing needed for survival is...Food...and where does this come from? The mother, therefore the Mother is central to the baby.

The cradle of civilization is Afrika. Afrika is the motherland. Therefore, Afrika is central to all of humanity. Now those whom we know today as Europeans are actually mutants who left the safe confines of the Motherland and evolved in Europe. Their food for survival was doctored by an unnatural mother. The side effects of their development outside of the natural womb has been albinism,aggression, and universal weakness predicated on their minority status in the world.

Unfortunatly its not as simple as just telling people whats going on.

I guess you have heard of the words Mankind and Human? We know that hue is Colour....human....hue-man... colour-man, man of colour. So that means humans are people of colour (thats brown,red,yellow et cetera.....) And melanin is the ingredient that produces skin colour. Europeans, mutants.

Mutants = something produced from...or an out-growth of ...anyway, these mutants dont have any melanin therefore they are colourless (White). As White is colourless its abnormal because the majority of the worlds people are hue-man. Which means they are ,as mutants , a kind of man, therefore mankind.

Look brothas.. alot of us are weak because mankind has cut off our nutrition from the Motherland. He has twisted the world so that Europe, the Mad Doctor, looks like the center. And we look abnormal.

:rasta: Oh its deeep:rasta:

Ya lost me on that one. I'm picturing a redneck Afrikan spitting beechnut and proclaiming 'and if whitey doesn't like it he can go back to Europe!'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hamlet

Ya lost me on that one. I'm picturing a redneck Afrikan spitting beechnut and proclaiming 'and if whitey doesn't like it he can go back to Europe!'

---

Rofl.... hahahahahahaha:p

Im cool with being a mutant instead of a human.

Its obvious that the white man AKA mutant rules this world (Atleast for now, I have a deep feeling that this will change) So maybe being a mutant is a good thing, I have had a mutant BB plant and it was mind blowingly potent, atleast 2x more potent that others, it just looked funny and I had to feed it differently.

Whi...Mutant Power!!


If you want to return to the motherland then pursue it with psychedelics, its out there in hyperspace.

Wow! :smokin:

If I thought your logic made any sense at all, I would admit myself to the local rehab center as quick as possible because I must be smoking crack.

Chainsaw1234 I agree with you. Your post ought to have been longer. I can see what you have tried to do, but do bare in mind how things have become as they are today. A sketchy account only reaches the minds of those who are all too familiar with the subjects in hand. Those who are unfamiliar will certainly find amuzement in your entertainment.

africa*

I am at a loss of words for what appears to be the worst attempt at word association. You started off well until you began on the whole mother aspect, from which it all just went to pieces and became mindless rabble. So many aspects of that statement are absurd, from a mother being essential to survival, which mothers are not, to Europeans not containing melanin, which all but albinos do (and albinos aren't mutants either). Yeah, that's deep, real deep.

Skin deep....

Some people think to much

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kiwiglowbug

Some people think to much

---

or not enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CultureCherryPopper

I am at a loss of words for what appears to be the worst attempt at word association. You started off well until you began on the whole mother aspect, from which it all just went to pieces and became mindless rabble. So many aspects of that statement are absurd, from a mother being essential to survival, which mothers are not, to Europeans not containing melanin, which all but albinos do (and albinos aren't mutants either). Yeah, that's deep, real deep.

Skin deep....

---

Or the part where he claims that the etymology of the word human comes from "hue" meaning color...that is BS too. :smokin:

In fact, so much of it was BS that I didn't want to waste my time dissecting it.

I don't know... it's sort of creative, in a Spike Lee meets the Cohen brothers script way.

sorry, but what youre talking about is evolution.

black men once ruled "afrika," the center of the world as you call it. proof is in the face of the sphinx, which is undoubtedly african american.

as they migrated around the world, people lost pigment but gained knowledge.

they changed the "center of the world" to what they thought WAS the center of the world. the atlantic was to the west and there was land to explore to the east. once the eastern lands began to be explored, america was discovered and the "center of the world" changed. however, due to the fact that language is slow to evolve once it has been set in place, the orient has not yet been given another name.

the word hue has absolutely nothing to do with the word human. The word human is from "humanus", the adjectival form of "homo". Homo refers to a genus in which humans are the only species. The other species in the genus Homo have all gone extinct, which yet again points towards the truth: evolution.

allow me to throw one more thing into the mix:

there are erosion marks on the sphinx that indicate the existance of incredibly high water levels, especially considering that the sphinx is in a very very large valley that empties into the mediterranean. there are cities perched high above mountaintops in peru that are OBVIOUSLY port cities...the evidence is so collectively large that there is no way to doubt it. could the story of moses and the ark be true? it certainly could be. perhaps there was a period of global warming on "pre-flood" earth. and if this period of global warming caused the ice caps to melt, then people obviously would have perished in a great flood. would it have been very hard for someone to realize the changing weather patterns and decide to build a boat? of course not. also... isnt it funny that macchu picchu was built an indescribable amount of years ago on a very high mountain peak? could it be that a giant flood couldnt reach that high?

personally, i choose to believe things that have been written down for thousands of years and have slight geographic proof. at least i can feel like i am dreaming in the correct direction.

cheers

uh, Noah and the ark...unless you're talking about the ark of the covenant. Indiana Jones: "didn't you guys go to Sunday School!".....lol

But the Noah story even being close to factual is a little far fetched. They believe they know the older Babylonian story it was based on which was pretty much something about high water in the river and a king floating down to the next fort with some of his livestock on board. (think Paul Bunyan and you get the picture about how such stories evolve). Flood anxiety though is a cultural phenomenon and there's always a lively yarn to be found to go along with it.

im simply saying that in the bible there is reference to a large flood.

there is also reference to a large flood in other holy books and records around the world.

there is a whole undersea city off the coast of asia that cannot be dated because it sustains incredible amounts of erosion. whatever the case, it is old.

there are port cities at 12,000 ft in peru, and there is water damage on the sphinx.

Perhaps (AND JUST OPEN YOUR MIND FOR THREE SECONDS PLEASE) humanity has been on earth for longer than we think.

the truth is that no one really knows whether or not there was an ark. the fact that some people choose not to believe it is a prime example of close-mindedness. why not believe it?

people who tell lies are quickly thwarted by someone who asks questions. if you ask a question to someone and they cannot answer it, they are either lying or talking about something that they do not know. how do you know that the person who tells you that the ark never existed is lying or not? the only way to know something is to find out for yourself, and the only way to begin finding out for yourself is accepting that you are ignorant except for the garbage that you have been fed your entire life.

i for one choose to believe things until they are proven wrong, just like math, the language of truth.

cheers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnionsOfLove

im simply saying that in the bible there is reference to a large flood.
there is also reference to a large flood in other holy books and records around the world.
there is a whole undersea city off the coast of asia that cannot be dated because it sustains incredible amounts of erosion. whatever the case, it is old.
there are port cities at 12,000 ft in peru, and there is water damage on the sphinx.
Perhaps (AND JUST OPEN YOUR MIND FOR THREE SECONDS PLEASE) humanity has been on earth for longer than we think.
the truth is that no one really knows whether or not there was an ark. the fact that some people choose not to believe it is a prime example of close-mindedness. why not believe it?
people who tell lies are quickly thwarted by someone who asks questions. if you ask a question to someone and they cannot answer it, they are either lying or talking about something that they do not know. how do you know that the person who tells you that the ark never existed is lying or not? the only way to know something is to find out for yourself, and the only way to begin finding out for yourself is accepting that you are ignorant except for the garbage that you have been fed your entire life.
i for one choose to believe things until they are proven wrong, just like math, the language of truth.
cheers

---

Nobody denies that arks existed, but there is no way that a pair of every species of beast and insect on earth were all on an ark. This would be physically impossible, even today, on modern vessels.

The bible also tells us that a whale swallowed a man to save him from drowning, a snake talked, people came from "dust", and all sorts of other nonsense. To reject these claims is not "ignorant".

rejecting these claims without considering them first is completely ignorant.

you must ask:

is it not possible for a whale to swallow a man? if it were possible, the air in the whale's body would keep a man alive, would it not? so how could you say that it has never happened?

obviously a snake talking is a metaphor that isnt MEANT to be taken at face value. we both know what it was MEANT to be taken as.

the energy that holds together molecular bonds cannot be created or destroyed, only changed. when a person dies they decompose into the earth that they lived on their entire lives. the energy that once fueled that person changes form into soil nutrients and other random stuffs. plants suck nutrients out of soil and humans eat plants. how could it not be possible that humans come from dust? if you say it is impossible, you are doubting modern science.

to reject these claims is completely ignorant. rejection of anything without complete analyzation of possibilities arrives at a premature discovery of an incorrect truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnionsOfLove

rejecting these claims without considering them first is completely ignorant.

you must ask:

is it not possible for a whale to swallow a man? if it were possible, the air in the whale's body would keep a man alive, would it not? so how could you say that it has never happened?

If it ever happened, which is unlikely, it was purely an accident, and the whale did NOT do it to save the man.


obviously a snake talking is a metaphor that isnt MEANT to be taken at face value. we both know what it was MEANT to be taken as.

No, I don't assume anything. Nowhere in the bible does it say that that Genesis was a metaphor.

the energy that holds together molecular bonds cannot be created or destroyed, only changed. when a person dies they decompose into the earth that they lived on their entire lives. the energy that once fueled that person changes form into soil nutrients and other random stuffs. plants suck nutrients out of soil and humans eat plants. how could it not be possible that humans come from dust? if you say it is impossible, you are doubting modern science.

Modern science is quite different from the ravings of the ignorant, naked, half-starved, savages that were responsible for the myths of the Old Testament.

to reject these claims is completely ignorant. rejection of anything without complete analyzation of possibilities arrives at a premature discovery of an incorrect truth.

---

There are thousands of absurd things in life that people could claim have merit, and we must judge that some of them are so stupid as to be worthless. The superstitious claims of the bible fall into this category. They are not worth the time and effort that it would take to disprove them - because it's already been done.

Quote:

---

If it ever happened, which is unlikely, it was purely an accident, and the whale did NOT do it to save the man.

---

If it did happen, the man was saved. The whales intentions will always be unknown, but someone can interpret them as having been to save the man.

Quote:

---

No, I don't assume anything. Nowhere in the bible does it say that that Genesis was a metaphor.

---

can snakes talk? of course not. could it have been a metaphor that actually teaches people that their brain has the power to make them think that snakes talk? yes. i am a person who has the ability to reason and i do not differ physically from the person who wrote genesis. i have the ability to explain hard-to-grasp things using complex forms of imagery and metaphor, but i first have to accept that someone will not take me for an idiot. if you actually think that someone wrote "and the snake spoke..." because they were trying to say that "snakes can talk" then you are a very shallow thinker.

Quote:

---

Modern science is quite different from the ravings of the ignorant, naked, half-starved, savages that were responsible for the myths of the Old Testament.

---

yes indeed modern science is quite different, but i just told you a way that modern science can prove exactly what was written in the bible that you call false. please read it again and re-evaluate it. the "ignorant, naked, half-starved savages" that you speak of are the same ones that built the pyramids, invented wine, came up with the mathematical concept of zero, and wrote the bible. if you were to open your mind for a whole three seconds and IMAGINE that those people were ACTUALLY SMART and that they were trying to TELL YOU SOMETHING you would have something to GAIN from their writing, especially if you were one of them. the old testament was something that almost brought together every single person at one time in the earth's history. it almost made everyone think for a split second that perhaps its true and perhaps we are all the same. imagine the possibilities that would be realized if everyone on earth TODAY were to UNITE.

Quote:

---

There are thousands of absurd things in life that people could claim have merit, and we must judge that some of them are so stupid as to be worthless. The superstitious claims of the bible fall into this category. They are not worth the time and effort that it would take to disprove them - because it's already been done.

---

everything that someone experiences in life has merit because something can be learned from every situation in someone's life. the problem is that people are so ignorant that they choose ignorance.

unless something has been proven mathematically people still have the ability to imagine the possibilities.

cheers

As metaphor the old myths are great stuff for sure. If you put yourself in the times its not hard to see how they came about. You're a goat herder in charge of a group of goat herders. You're old and wise, and probably pretty smart since dumb didn't get you very far in those days. Now the young people are admiring your wisdom and asking you some really impossible questions about some really extraordinary things. Well, all you really know is goats, a flood you saw once, and that time you wandered into Ur with the really strange carvings. So what do you do? You get creative! ...and just like the birth of the Blues something totally original is born! All those archetypes and symbolisms kick in and we have stories to tell around the campfire for hundreds of years. They're important stories because they tell us about ourselves, our cultures and how we came along. Even about how our minds and imaginations work....wonderful stuff really if you want to peek below the surface.

I don't think Matsu Petchu (sp?) was a sea port though. I kinda keep up with that sort of crap and I feel I would have heard something. Any time you're reading about the pyramids and inca ruins it's important to keep your New Age/UFO bullshit filter on. They love that stuff and have no problem inventing myths of their own :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnionsOfLove

If it did happen, the man was saved. The whales intentions will always be unknown, but someone can interpret them as having been to save the man.
can snakes talk? of course not. could it have been a metaphor that actually teaches people that their brain has the power to make them think that snakes talk? yes. i am a person who has the ability to reason and i do not differ physically from the person who wrote genesis. i have the ability to explain hard-to-grasp things using complex forms of imagery and metaphor, but i first have to accept that someone will not take me for an idiot. if you actually think that someone wrote "and the snake spoke..." because they were trying to say that "snakes can talk" then you are a very shallow thinker.
yes indeed modern science is quite different, but i just told you a way that modern science can prove exactly what was written in the bible that you call false. please read it again and re-evaluate it. the "ignorant, naked, half-starved savages" that you speak of are the same ones that built the pyramids, invented wine, came up with the mathematical concept of zero, and wrote the bible. if you were to open your mind for a whole three seconds and IMAGINE that those people were ACTUALLY SMART and that they were trying to TELL YOU SOMETHING you would have something to GAIN from their writing, especially if you were one of them. the old testament was something that almost brought together every single person at one time in the earth's history. it almost made everyone think for a split second that perhaps its true and perhaps we are all the same. imagine the possibilities that would be realized if everyone on earth TODAY were to UNITE.
everything that someone experiences in life has merit because something can be learned from every situation in someone's life. the problem is that people are so ignorant that they choose ignorance.
unless something has been proven mathematically people still have the ability to imagine the possibilities.
cheers

---

The bible is supposed to be the inspired word of god, and millions of people have been killed or oppressed due to it's teachings.

If there was a supreme being, why has he allowed his teachings to bring about murder, burnings, genocide, wars, oppressive laws, corruption, etc.?

Do you believe that the authors of this travesty were divinely inspired?

Since I know that the bible should not be used as a guide to life, does that make me "ignorant"?

What parts of the bible do you think could be helpful for humans to "UNITE"?

If the authors were "ACTUALLY SMART", wouldn't they just say straight-out what the truth is? If these authors were divinely inspired, would it matter whether they were "smart" or not, as they were just copying what god told them to write?

Isn't the real message of Adam and Eve, upon eating the fruit of knowledge, that their creator preferred them to be ignorant? Have not the churches and priests followed this path, with regards to thier followers?

In the libraries of the future, the bible will sit alongside books about witchcraft and voodoo.

Very interesting thread. You guys are really smart i like reading all this but im not the best at responding sorry if i come across weird. I believe what is fact but fiction makes me smarter. Peace
btw its 1pm and i just killed a fat morrocan spliff. really makes me sleepy that stuff

OnionsofLove, I cannot tell whether you are a Christian who defends the Bible, or someone who chooses to play devil's advocate. But never the less, you put a lot of stock into a book that: advocates rape, portrays mindless revenge against children by god, demands poor treatment of women, and founds the human race on incest. The bible is a record of history, and has a few good messages, but it's a document of antiquated facts and ideas, and for one to hold more than a little conviction in it without a grain of salt is really what is ignorant. To believe that man will not and cannot covet another man's wife is a foolish tenet on a supposed piece of stone, and has caused an unaccountable number of deaths over the ages. In a forum such as this, you would think that the want to spread love and happiness would abound, and that for anyone to fully defend the bible would be absurd. I am not advocating hedonism or mindless nymphomania, but surely we should question our beliefs in monogamy. Why is it so hard to accept that there are many wonderful people in the world to love, and to devote yourself to just one other is selfish and completely narrow-minded? I believe the message of the bible was lost in translation when mortal men attempted to transcribe the word of god, but is still worth looking for in its text. Just don't place all your faith in its words, but instead in love.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnionsOfLove

sorry, but what youre talking about is evolution.

black men once ruled "afrika," the center of the world as you call it. proof is in the face of the sphinx, which is undoubtedly african american.

---

i'm sorry, are you trying to say the face of the sphinx is african/american?

african yes, northern africa, as in egypt that's correct, considering it's the face of a pharaoh. america as we know it wasn't even know of when the sphinx was made so how on earth can it be american. not everything in this world is american you know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chainsaw1234

The European has twisted and turned everything to fit his warped way of thinking. He has made himself the center of the world, indeed of the universe.

---

How relevant!

Your logic is tenuous at best.

oh yeah wow.. i meant african like plain african.

dont know how that one passed me by.

"Your logic is tenuous at best."

hehe...not sure which post this statement applies to but I'm guessing all of them?.....lol :)

lol @ Hamlet, had me wondering too

That was meant to be directed at Chainsaw.

Ummm...in case you haven't noticed, Africa is not populated by one homogeneous race of "black people". The sub-Saharan Africans are extremely genetically diverse; try comparing a Khoi, a Pygmy and a West African Bantu sometime, and telling me they're all the same race. It's like looking at a Chinese person, a Swede and an Eskimo and saying they belong to the same Americo-Eurasian race.

Am I making this up?

No it isn't Oneironaut. Modern inhabitants of many parts of Afrika over the past 20,000 years have been subjected to unfavourable genetic diversity through genetic mutation caused by inter-racial sexual relations which have produce mongrels. Lightening of skin has also occured through circumnavigation and settlement in different regions of the planet, but Africoid features are very much still apparent and the lightening of Pigment has not been such that Black people have become caucasian.

The original bloodline of those Africans who where telepathic and connected to the Earth in most instances has been corrupted by invaders. There is no simily or comparison that can include both Black and White people where discussing the race of origin. Chinese, Swede and Eskimo are near the end of the line of mutants. In fact the original Chinese, an exterminated population aging more than 100,000 years, consisted of a race of what they call 'Little Black People'. Chinese historians admit themselves that they are not the original inhabitants of the land they occupy. The Chinese historians will also admit that practices of Martial Arts, knowledge of Chi, and Fighting techniques gained by studying animal movements was developed by Jet Black people a long long time before they became recognised by the world as being skilled in handling weapons and hand to hand combat. The next of kin of 'The Little Black People' are still alive today and are said to be diminutive Africoids and are variously called Pygmies, Negritos and Aeta. They are found in the Philippines, northern Malaysia, Thailand, Sumatra in Indonesia and other places.

"A people without the knowledge of their past history, origin and culture is like a tree without its roots", said our "most valuable Black Man" of the early 20th century, Marcus Garvey. If we (Afrikans) don't wake up to face the artificial complexities of this fabricated world, to become ourselves, we will thenceforth remain a people just copying other people's identities, cultures and "knowledge" and will remain at war with and within ourselves.

Oneironaut, when comparing Khoi, Pygmy and Bantu what am I looking for? Evidence that Broad Noses and Big Thick Lips in combination have been on the planet 73 Trillion years longer than white people? Thas all there is to find.

What is a plain Afrikan OnionsOfLove? You dig a hole when all you needed to have said was the Sphinx's Africoid features were destroyed by Napolean. And how can you put "loosing pigment by travelling" and "gaining knowledge" in the same sentence as if "loosing BlaKness is somehow relative to gaining knowledge"? The technology of today is a spit in a bucket (new term for me) compared to the technology of 50,000 years ago. Thing is these days our technology is purely based, or more poised, on destroying life. America has never been discovered; at least not in any timeframe relative to the existence of mongrels derrived from Martians and Reptilians from outer space.

Hamlet Do you not think so-called extra terrestrials or entities from other planets and dimensions could exists?

Chainsaw1234 Europeans didn't have a choice about leaving Africa. They were sent to the Causasus Mountains, according to legend, because their melaninless state promted a spiritual de-unification between individual and Earth and produced a beast like person who had no concept of connectedness to the universe which was dangerous as you can see with modern politics and who holds the trigger. They were there for around 2000 years before an Afrikan left the Mother Continent with a book to civilise the cave man. When white people learned from the book, they further evolved into beasts. Soon enough they learned how to build vessels to move around and commence the world wide bloodbath which has been slowly escalating for around 6000 years. Afrikan Libraries that contained REAL knowledge were Torched by invading Europeans because they couldn't understand the content. But today when we visit the Great British Museum in the capital of England we find lots of prehistoric African arftifacts that assist in putting the picture together. There are also artifacts deemed unsuitable for public viewing that remain under lock and key. The Illuminati do their best to ensure that the facts DO Not Escape because they have built their war machine on teachings that came out of Afrika; though Afrikans were never a war-like being even though Zulu are famous for being Great Warriors GEEEE

Time for a breather, so much diarrhea there ain't enough space for me to let it all out

I get it spirit knows more than any geneticist , anthropologist and archeologist and has evidence that the rest of the scientific community doesnt have....You should start sharing that stuff bud. Or , whatever it is you've been smoking, pass it here!

I loved the part about knowing humans used to be telepathic towards the earth...for some reason captain planet theme music went through my head at that moment....

what spirit posted is what ive been trying to explain this entire post... the world is not as it seems and humans are not acting like humans should probably be acting, referring especially to the amount of time people spend doing nothing with their lives. or the amount of hate that travels around in circles in our western society. or any of the innumerable things that are obviously amounting to nothing in everyone's life.

when i said losing pigment and gaining knowledge i did not mean to imply that i was correlating the two. what i meant is that when people leave their place of origin they gain knowledge of other places and animals and climates. the knowledge they gained about the places they went is what allowed early people the chance to stay somewhere long enough to become genetically accustomed to it.

i dont think ill be posting here in the future as it seems everyone is a skeptic. perhaps that is the problem of the world today - everyone's ego is so large that they automatically assume that new knowledge is false knowledge. people are artificially happy with the current state of affairs in their mind and they are not willing to rewire their thoughts according to new beliefs and understandings. the truth is contained collectively within the minds of the people of the world, and the only way to find it is to accept that you dont know anything and start opening your mind.

referring specifically to the governments around the world: why do people still allow themselves to be ruled? ultimately the intentions of the ruler (or democratic government) are completely unknown. Why are we in the middle east? it might as well be because we are chasing the infamous space alien murderer named magnos III. no one knows, and the government does whatever it wants. when will people break the chains?

cheers

before someone tries to break my post apart again, i was not referring to the middle east for any reason other than to make an example of it. i do not care why we are there because the truth is that NO ONE KNOWS FOR SURE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnionsOfLove

.
i dont think ill be posting here in the future as it seems everyone is a skeptic. perhaps that is the problem of the world today - everyone's ego is so large that they automatically assume that new knowledge is false knowledge.

---

Or maybe it's that people have grown content with not thinking for themselves.

Everyone is a skeptic, which is a brilliant thing in itself. Could you imagine a world where everyone accepted everything at face value? Now that would be some sort of hell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weirdo79

I get it spirit knows more than any geneticist , anthropologist and archeologist and has evidence that the rest of the scientific community doesnt have....You should start sharing that stuff bud. Or , whatever it is you've been smoking, pass it here!

I loved the part about knowing humans used to be telepathic towards the earth...for some reason captain planet theme music went through my head at that moment....

---

If attempting to win people's hearts and have them totally discard my statement by suggesting that I think I am more knowledgable than the world of Geneticist, Anthropologists and Archeologist, as well as having a Captain Planet's theme tune going through your head, is the only reaction you get, then those Geneticists, Anthropologists and Archeologists that you know of and communicate/associate with haven't allowed you to learn anything that can be presented as an opinion that can oppose what I said on the subject. You are simply trying to discredit my opinion/assassinate my character without even offering a reasonable opinion of your own on the subject. All I see you do around the boards is create a cloud of confusion as to whether or not what a person says is right or wrong by throwing a spanner in, you don't even offer an alternative; just your half-witted personal account of someone's legitimacy to offer their perspective on a subject. Keep in mind that lots of people who came up with particular theories have cause great changes to our daily lives; the theories they presented in those times hit the ears of others pretty much the way in which you responded. Today I am a jerk-off, tomorrow I could be right about yesterday. The end!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnionsOfLove

..I dont think ill be posting here in the future as it seems everyone is a skeptic. perhaps that is the problem of the world today - everyone's ego is so large that they automatically assume that new knowledge is false knowledge...

---

You should continue to make contributions everywhere IMO. People do have the right to think what they want to think. People have the right to protest against people's thought and opinions. This not only helps to better oneself but in the course of information exchange as conclusions can be drawn that were not necessarily to the objective of the original subject. I criticised your point on 'Plain Afrikans' but also decided to throw you a rope too only because I am quite familiar with some aspects of Afrikan presence in the world that date back long ago (some people call it history). Giving up is a sign of weakness, especially if you believe you are right and your only problem is with people who think you are wrong. People who seldom take heed of information run on the spot, while people who build with information progress and gain direction.

all these big words,im suprised you can still know this and talk like this and smoke weed

not to racist but this has to be said
I agree Africa is the womb of mankind and look what happens when you shit where you eat.....