“Africa”

Level 7

Since: Jan 12

Oakland

#3419 Nov 30, 2012
Redefined wrote:
<quoted text>
If you wasn't concerned than you wouldn't be asking the same question over & over again & yes most of what Barros has written in this thread is dated and accurate which is why he's no longer responding.
No, illiterate, I am not concerned about the asinine rhetoric you fools are always posting as a buffer to deflect from answering that questions I ask whenever I approach anyone for specific questioning.

I am also see you are trying to slide away from your other argument. First you say that what he said about Black history was inaccurate, not you are shifting to what has said in general.

Well I don't care and didn't ask about what he has said in general or "most" of what he has written.

I am specifically referring to what sentiments were made about BLACK history, and it is clear that you have nothing to offer in regards to naming what was said that was inaccurate, because you were just talking out of the side of your ass.
Barros Serrano

Reserve, NM

#3420 Nov 30, 2012
Redefined wrote:
<quoted text>
This is why I stated most of what he has written is inaccurate or dated. Many of his comments have been refuted by several bloggers here because his information is NOT correct & it has been a lot of bad information. Even Bozino has corrected him & he was initially agreeing with the whole thread.
You're a liar. Nothiing I've posted has been refuted.

In fact as I recall the only person who has successfully corrected anything I've stated is Bakari, regarding the development of the Neolithic in W-Central Africa. And he did it with real EVIDENCE, not Afronazi bullshit.

You can right now refute nothing I've said. Nor can you refute the scientific EVIDENCE I and others have posted backing it up.

You respond to pics drawn by Iberians showing non-black Moors with 17th-century paintings of black Moors! LOL!!! That refutes NOTHING!

And like I said, SOME MOORS WERE BLACK!!!

See how ridiculous you Afronazis are?

And Bozinho corrected nothing, you fool.
Barros Serrano

Reserve, NM

#3422 Nov 30, 2012
Redefined wrote:
Plant eating dinosaurs in Antarctica....
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/...
At that time Antarctica was not at the south pole. You are familiar with Gondwanaland? Antarctica separated from Africa in the early Mesozoic.

In any case, what is the relevance of this?

Knowing you, you'll say something like, "Well, this proves civilization in Antarctica and black people could have been riding those dinosaurs!" That's your style.
Barros Serrano

Reserve, NM

#3423 Nov 30, 2012
Bakari Neferu wrote:
<quoted text>
No, illiterate, I am not concerned about the asinine rhetoric you fools are always posting as a buffer to deflect from answering that questions I ask whenever I approach anyone for specific questioning.
I am also see you are trying to slide away from your other argument. First you say that what he said about Black history was inaccurate, not you are shifting to what has said in general.
Well I don't care and didn't ask about what he has said in general or "most" of what he has written.
I am specifically referring to what sentiments were made about BLACK history, and it is clear that you have nothing to offer in regards to naming what was said that was inaccurate, because you were just talking out of the side of your ass.
And now he's going on about Antarctica! LOL!!!

This should be amusing... black Moorish Hebrew Olmec Chinese Viking penguins and such...
Barros Serrano

Reserve, NM

#3424 Nov 30, 2012
Garamantes... I keep thinking about them.

They were pulling water up out of the subsurface water lying under the Sahara, and created a large prosperous city and extensive agricultural works.

they were BLACK!

But nobody is interested in this? Archaeologists are just now resuming work on this civilization, now that Gadoofy is gone (who didn't care about it and wouldn't fund or even allow much archaeology to be done there).

Me, I'm very eager to learn more about this.

Ok, but what am I thinking! No, let's prove that CHARLEMAGNE WAS BLACK!!!

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#3425 Nov 30, 2012
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
Liar. I and others have repeatedly posted the data, but you lying Afronazis then pretend you didn't see it. I am tired of going through this endless routine.
We posted, for example MULTIPLE proofs of 30,000 yr old Eurasians in the Maghreb. Human remains and DNA, all Eurasian. But... of course you didn't see that, right?
Liar.
The problem with you is, lots of ideology but no science, no logic.
What do you mean "we"??? I haven't seen any sources posted by you what so ever or anything other poster...

Me and Bigsmoke posted sources backing up our claims, but the same can not he said for you! I already debunked your worthless claim a long time ago! I already said the original Berber population was pushed further from the coastal North Africa by WAVES of different non African groups. Which you ignored of course.

I'll give you two WARNINGS Barros Serranos..Ignore them and I'll bombard you with factual SOURCES..Just give right now while you're at.

That's warning #1!

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#3426 Nov 30, 2012
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm tired of hearing about “tropical body plan” which still doesn't tell us who someone was.
However, YES, Upper Egypt's affinities were with NUBIA... genetically, morphologically and culturally. The archaeological evidence confirms this.
Tropical body plan is people who live in tropical climate which Europeans and Western Asians DO NOT.

Which is why people are saying AE had a similar body plan to Nubians and other Africans more so than Europeans or western Asians. Its that simple..

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#3427 Nov 30, 2012
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
10,000 bc???
Europe has been inhabited by sapiens since 45,000 years ago.
Read!!!! I said WESTEN EUROPE...

And in my other post I said Europe was first discovered and settled by sapiens somewhere around 35.000 B.C which I backed up by a LINK.

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#3428 Nov 30, 2012
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, your theory is correct and backed by evidence. There were Eurasians in Lower Egypt especially, and yes they mixed with black Africans.
When I see on the news people from that region, I can't help but notice that MOST of the Egyptians I see look like they're at least part “black”. Haven't y'all notice that? Afronazis keep claiming that the black people were replaced by Greeks and Persians and Arabs, but I don't think so. They're still there!
Is it not true that if you go to the town of Aswan, most of the people are black? That's what I've read.
True.

My younger sister use to live in Egypt around the Aswan area and she said some of the people from Upper Egypt did identify as African. But I believe most are Nubians.

Most Egyptians are mixed, you have Persians, Greeks,Turk,Arab..But some still(especially in upper Egypt) have a tropical body plan similar to other Africans.

“Africa”

Level 7

Since: Jan 12

Oakland

#3429 Nov 30, 2012
Barros Serrano wrote:
Garamantes... I keep thinking about them.
They were pulling water up out of the subsurface water lying under the Sahara, and created a large prosperous city and extensive agricultural works.
they were BLACK!
But nobody is interested in this? Archaeologists are just now resuming work on this civilization, now that Gadoofy is gone (who didn't care about it and wouldn't fund or even allow much archaeology to be done there).
Me, I'm very eager to learn more about this.
Ok, but what am I thinking! No, let's prove that CHARLEMAGNE WAS BLACK!!!
When I first heard about the Garamantes, I just thought they were some northern tribe in the desert because what I read had only made passing remarks toward them, but then I began reading about them and found that these people were essentially the most advanced native civilization in the Sahara and just as advanced in civilization as Sudanese and Ethiopians were. I mean not only did they have writing, mastery over agriculture and managed to summon a continuous supply of water in the middle of a desert for a period of centuries, but apparently they had far flung international networks and were the ones responsible for forging the trans Saharan trade routes.

I mean these guys were NICE!! LOL...

Interestingly, they have been linked with the Sao people of Central Africa, and probably helped, directly or indirectly, had influenced the natives of the Kanem/Bornu region.

“Try harder :)”

Level 8

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

#3430 Nov 30, 2012
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong, boy. You utterly failed to refute anything I said. I and others provided the clear proof that the Maghreb has been predominantly Eurasian for 30,000 years.
You cannot refute that data! You can't ignore all that evidence just because you WANT to.
I want one of you Afronazi lying jackasses to address the art done by ancient Egyptians showing the Berbers as light-skinned Eurasian types. I want you to explain why the Numidians shown on Phoenician and Roman-era coins all look like Eurasians. I want you to explain all that Eurasian DNA in the Maghreb for 30,000 years. I want you to explain Medieval Iberian portrayals labelled “Moors” and showing non-black Eurasian types.
You lying lowlife haven't dealt with any of this.
And then there are the Guanches... LOL!!!
You have nothing, you racist pig.
More useless repetitive rambling...I ready refuted your claims a long @$$ time ago!

Didn't I fcking say waves of Eurasians pushed the original Berbers further from coastal North Africa??

Like the Phoenicians,Vandals,Romans and finally the ARAB conquest of North Africa! I already said this to you with a source backing me up, which of course YOU ignored.

This is your second and final warning,boy.

“100%”

Level 8

Since: Jan 10

United States

#3431 Nov 30, 2012
Bakari Neferu wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, quite right. I wasn't going to get any answers from you to begin with because you are too incompetent to cede any.
So you are saying that you admit that you were just talking out the side of your ass.
No if you wanted an answer you would have done what I told you to do.

“100%”

Level 8

Since: Jan 10

United States

#3432 Nov 30, 2012
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
Moron: You repeatedly demonstrate that you do NOT understand the science or history relevant to these discussions.
My info is not dated. I in fact have brought into this discussion new information as it is reported.
And I was in another place for 2 days busy with something else so excuuuuuuuuuuuse me if I can't spend 24-7 in Topix.
I find you to be one of the biggest prevaricators in here. You will grab onto a "fact", and then spin and twist it in more ways than I thought possible.
I also suspect you need a psychiatrist.
You haven't brought NOTHING.

“100%”

Level 8

Since: Jan 10

United States

#3433 Nov 30, 2012
Bakari Neferu wrote:
<quoted text>
No, illiterate, I am not concerned about the asinine rhetoric you fools are always posting as a buffer to deflect from answering that questions I ask whenever I approach anyone for specific questioning.
I am also see you are trying to slide away from your other argument. First you say that what he said about Black history was inaccurate, not you are shifting to what has said in general.
Well I don't care and didn't ask about what he has said in general or "most" of what he has written.
I am specifically referring to what sentiments were made about BLACK history, and it is clear that you have nothing to offer in regards to naming what was said that was inaccurate, because you were just talking out of the side of your ass.
It is inaccurate & will remain inaccurate until he backs up his statements.

“100%”

Level 8

Since: Jan 10

United States

#3434 Nov 30, 2012
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
You're a liar. Nothiing I've posted has been refuted.
In fact as I recall the only person who has successfully corrected anything I've stated is Bakari, regarding the development of the Neolithic in W-Central Africa. And he did it with real EVIDENCE, not Afronazi bullshit.
You can right now refute nothing I've said. Nor can you refute the scientific EVIDENCE I and others have posted backing it up.
You respond to pics drawn by Iberians showing non-black Moors with 17th-century paintings of black Moors! LOL!!! That refutes NOTHING!
And like I said, SOME MOORS WERE BLACK!!!
See how ridiculous you Afronazis are?
And Bozinho corrected nothing, you fool.
Your OPINIONS are NOT FACTS.

“Africa”

Level 7

Since: Jan 12

Oakland

#3435 Nov 30, 2012
Redefined wrote:
<quoted text>
No if you wanted an answer you would have done what I told you to do.
No, if you HAD the answer, you would have simply given it to me in one sentence, instead of writing ten posts of non-stop rhetoric. All this time you spent dodging my question with useless posts, and you could have simply settled and ended this matter with one single post...if you actually had the answer to the question that is. But you don't.

This is how I know you are talking out the side of your ass.
Barros Serrano

Reserve, NM

#3436 Nov 30, 2012
big mike M wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you mean "we"??? I haven't seen any sources posted by you what so ever or anything other poster...
Me and Bigsmoke posted sources backing up our claims, but the same can not he said for you! I already debunked your worthless claim a long time ago! I already said the original Berber population was pushed further from the coastal North Africa by WAVES of different non African groups. Which you ignored of course.
I'll give you two WARNINGS Barros Serranos..Ignore them and I'll bombard you with factual SOURCES..Just give right now while you're at.
That's warning #1!
We means me, Curious, Jeff and Garrig. All of us EDUCATED (unlike most of you) and knowledgeable about this stuff.

We posted it numerous times. EVERY time the Afronazis responded with hysteria, socks, name-calling, denial, but NEVER did they deal with the evidence presented.

So stop BS'ing me. There's been a whole lot of evidence confirming that the Maghreb has been predominantly Eurasian for 30,000 years. If you idiots can't comprehend the studies when they're here, then to hell with you.

You are playing games, as usual, which you must, because you cannot win your case(s).

You never showed us that there were originally African groups in the Maghreb to be pushed away!!! Whereas we have ample evidence that 30,000 years ago Eurasians entered and found the place uninhabited.

30,000 years of predominantly Eurasian DNA and human remains, and you liars pretend it isn't there. But we PROVED it is there.

Deny that and either you didn't read any of the threads, or you're a LIAR!

Warnings! LOL!!! Boy, you have nothing! You idiots have already posted crap you think makes your case, and it never does. You either misconstrue evidence that in fact makes OUR case, or you talk about irrelevancies. That is especially Redefined's forté...

So cram your warning up your uneducated lying ass, boy.

“100%”

Level 8

Since: Jan 10

United States

#3437 Nov 30, 2012
Barros Serrano wrote:
<quoted text>
You're talking out yer ass again, fool.
Before 6000 years ago? We already know of civiization in SE Europe from 7000 years ago.
I saw nothing in your post about any civilization. Glaciers melted... ok... so what?
You say SE Europe has the oldest writing but this has already been debunked but you remember you claim your opinions haven't been refuted.
http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/educator/modules/gu...
Barros Serrano

Reserve, NM

#3439 Nov 30, 2012
Redefined wrote:
<quoted text>
You haven't brought NOTHING.
You're a liar.

“100%”

Level 8

Since: Jan 10

United States

#3440 Nov 30, 2012
Bakari Neferu wrote:
<quoted text>
No, if you HAD the answer, you would have simply given it to me in one sentence, instead of writing ten posts of non-stop rhetoric. All this time you spent dodging my question with useless posts, and you could have simply settled and ended this matter with one single post...if you actually had the answer to the question that is. But you don't.
This is how I know you are talking out the side of your ass.
I've already stated most of what Barros have written has been refuted because it has either been inaccurate or DATED. You choose to IGNORE everyone refuting many of his statements which PROVES my point. And if you choose to ignore this, than you obviously don't want an answer. You just wanna have something to argue about.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

African-American Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
progressive white people: where are you? (Jul '08) 4 min Masud_S_Hoghughi__ 2,719
latina wondering what its like to date black men (May '14) 27 min CIGAR FACE 228
Europe Sees Ferguson as Blight on U.S. Rights R... 30 min neveratfault 360
Let's name the losers who posted here on christ... 33 min CIGAR FACE 24
Are whites taller than us. 37 min Capree 80
[Click Here] A white woman's message to the bla... 37 min Miguel the man 3
Per Capita Blacks commit 440% more crime thanWh... (May '12) 52 min Nbam 267
the moors were black africans not arabs!!! (Jun '08) 1 hr KiloEcho 29,069
why is the most popular male porn star white? 2 hr Obsidian2xxx 202
Hebrew Israelite (Feb '11) 2 hr JOHNS ON TOP OF IT 98,952
More from around the web