Mike

Merrimack, NH

#20052 Jan 2, 2014
AHAHAHAHAHA @ denigrating Michael Coe, perhaps the most widely respected scholars of Mayan history in all of academia while also citing the most insane, absurd Afrocentrist sources as though they're even slightly academically legitimate. Wahahaha. Afrocentrists - the best.

“BLACK Timberland Boots”

Level 1

Since: Aug 11

Pittsburgh,PA

#20053 Jan 2, 2014
IshJewBag Tov wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong again, boy.
Most so-called “white” people did not originate in the Caucasus, you nitwit. WHY do you Afronazi fools insist on believing 19th-century speculation and ignore all the science since then??
And then to you the 19th-century nonsense, along with a dose of Hebrew mythology is “reality” while all science is a Eurocentric fantasy???
You're truly daft, boy.
No, boy, the indigenous people of the Maghreb are Eurasian.
And most Jew Bags was not born with Zionazi balls in their mouth....except YOU!

Level 3

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#20054 Jan 2, 2014
caveman haven wrote:
<quoted text>And most Jew Bags was not born with Zionazi balls in their mouth....except YOU!
Are you in 8th grade, boy? Or that's when you dropped out?

You're obviously a cretin.

I suggest you shut your f`'ing mouth, boy. Play it safe, not sorry...

Since: Nov 13

Location hidden

#20055 Jan 2, 2014
KiloEcho wrote:
SaracenSam said
Again there is no proof my ancestors were black negr0es boy but keep dreaming WAASOS
KiloEcho replies
You are not a Berber nor an Arab. Arabs and Berbers do not hold your views
The word n@gro was coined by Iberians for their African slaves in the 16C.
The word n@gro was later popularized among Euro-slavers with the intensification of the African slave trade.
I have raised several points you have not yet addressed.
Are you at a loss for words?
Why Europeans CONSISTENTLY use the blackface makeup, the black head aka n@gro head in profile, and black color to better represent the Moors,?
If you are the descendants of the Noble Moors, tell us why? why?
Europeans under Moorish rule or attack passed down countless of traditions remembering the Moors as black skinned people.
If you are the descendant of the Noble Moors, tell us why? why?
http://black-face.com/blackface-history.htm
The blackfaced Moor was a figure found in dozens of London plays from at least 20 years before Othello and for decades afterward.
In court masques and other costume affairs of the period, blacking up as Moors was quite popular;
Queen Anne and a dozen of her ladies in waiting blackened their faces and arms, and apparently wore frizzy-haired wigs, at a masque the year after Othello premiered, causing one noble gentleman in attendance to shudder and remark,“[Y]ou cannot imagine a more ugly Sight.”
----------
You should stop embarrassing youself with the WAASOS
It is not funny
In addition, it has nothing to do with some of us here
I am not from West Africa. I am not the descendant of West African slaves
I am not a US citizen.
So you now think that I'm not a Moor but the Mulatto Dr Pepper is? Most North Africans share my view & I should know better, I am from there. Black face is no proof Moors were Negr0es, look at the evidence I posted direct from the Moors then, not 3rd parties.
African AE

Cape Town, South Africa

#20056 Jan 2, 2014
Anonymousinformer wrote:
<quoted text>
Fear not, I know EXACTLY who the real inhabitants of Israel truly really are, and I know the people who bear the seal of Solomon, the Hexagon (that in some circles were used for pagan rituals such as Moloch) are NOT the true representatives of the great holy land but are rather pretenders the facts are all there
Here it is written in the book itself (not making this up either you can research it)
"I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty,(but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue or Satan."
-Revalation 2:9
Israel is waking up and becoming more and more aware of just what it truly is.
Afronazi madness! THE REAL JEWS ARE IN ISRAEL WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT! Afronazis are West African in origin with F--K ALL Middle Eastern DNA! No one in the world sees Igbo or Afronazis as anything but a bunch of pretend dumbos wannabe Hebrews,Israelites Jews! West Africa is NOT mentioned in the bible at all!
African AE

Cape Town, South Africa

#20057 Jan 2, 2014
motts wrote:
<quoted text>
I will not engage in your faecal language. I think you are mistaking me for 'Curious Me'.
He loves that kind of language and is a perfect role model for kids like you who bat for the girls team.
Youre a fat fairy with a low IQ and probably the idiot responsible for all the homo sites on the AA Forum!
African AE

Cape Town, South Africa

#20058 Jan 2, 2014
motts wrote:
<quoted text>
Caucasus mts = home of white people whether you like it or not fool. Any whites in North Africa are sons/daughters of imported slaves who are now mixed race..
Africa is the home of the BLACK MAN..ie BLACK PEOPLE ARE INDIGENOUS TO ALL OF AFRICA FOOL.
You are here to attempt to brainwash people into believing your EURONUT fantasies but unfortunately for you, there are no takers..
Nope THE MIDDLE EAST in where all Europeans originate, right from the neanderthal,Cromagnon.Eurasian Neolithic Farmers,Indo-Europeans!
Europeans ANCESTORS THE VERY INDIGENOUS MIDDLE EASTERN KURDS:
www.youtube.com/watch...
MTDNA showung Europeans/Middle Eastern people are the SAME people:
www.scs.illinois.edu/~mcdonald/worldmtdnamap....
Not only are the Middle Eastern people, European ancestor, but they are also the ANCESTORS OF PEOPLE OF THE MAGHREB!
Very early ancestor of the people of the Maghreb:
www.sciencephoto.com/media/481366/view
Modern Moors carrying their ancient ancestors DNA:
www.youtube.com/watch...
And by the way DUMBO, the CAUCASUS MOUNTAIN ARE DROWNED IN MIDDLE EASTERN DNA, Haplogroup J2/G
African AE

Cape Town, South Africa

#20059 Jan 2, 2014
I dont think Afronazis understand DNA at all! Please explain slowly to me how the pitch black Moors all suddenly turned white in 500 years! Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm???? How come they have virtually NO black African DNA considering their ancestors 500 years ago were pitch black????? LOL You nothing but a bunch of losers living in a dream make belief world!
www.scs.illinois.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogrou...

Spanish DNA shows they have 2% black African DNA. So all those black Moors must have been shooting blanks or were all gay fairies!

“DANGER!!”

Level 8

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#20060 Jan 2, 2014
CuloHecho wrote:
Are you more qualified than Dr Clarence Weiant?
Dr. Clarence Weiant
One of the oldest and most important archaeologists in America, Dr. Clarence Weiant, who was on the site in Mexico when the first stone heads (some with African features) were discovered, defends Van Sertima against attempts by the British archaeological establishment to discredit his earlier book,“They Came Before Columbus”.
HÉLL YÉS, I'm more qualified than "Dr. Clarence Weiant"!!

A pile of dog shít makes a better archaeologist than "Dr. Clarence Weiant".

Van Sertima's only defender was a man named Dr. Clarence Weiant who was more interested in archaeology through (((PARAPSYCHOLOGY))) than through conventional archaeological scientific methods, FÓÓL.

Van Sertima, despite having achieved full tenure was NEVER given a full professorship, and he was NOT a professor of Native American Studies, but of African Studies and whatever honors he may have gotten from Rutgers were only born of political motivation, as none of his papers were ever published in any properly accredited academic journals.

The things he published were through outside publishers, like Random House, or his own Journal of African Civilizations, which he exclusively edited and published for decades.

...continued on following post.*

“DANGER!!”

Level 8

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#20061 Jan 2, 2014
*CONTINUATION from last post:

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

“Van Sertima's work has been strongly criticized by opposing academics, who describe his claims to be ill-founded and false. Van Sertima's Journal of African Civilizations was not considered for inclusion in Journals of the Century.[10] In 1997 academics in a Journal of Current Anthropology article criticized in detail many elements of They Came Before Columbus (1976).[5] Except for a brief mention, the book had not previously been reviewed in an academic journal. The researchers wrote a systematic rebuttal of Van Sertima's claims, stating that Van Sertima's "proposal was without foundation" in claiming African diffusion as responsible for prehistoric Olmec culture (in present-day Mexico). They noted that no "genuine African artifact had been found in a controlled archaeological excavation in the New World." They noted that Olmec stone heads were carved hundreds of years prior to the claimed contact and only superficially appear to be African; the Nubians whom Van Sertima had claimed as their originators do not resemble these "portraits".[5] They further noted that in the 1980s, Van Sertima had changed his timeline of African influence, suggesting that Africans made their way to the New World in the 10th century B.C., to account for more recent independent scholarship in the dating of Olmec culture.[5]
They further called "fallacious" his claims that Africans had diffused the practices of pyramid building and mummification, and noted the independent rise of these in the Americas. Additionally, they wrote that Van Sertima was "diminishe[ing] the real achievements of Native American culture" by his claims of African origin for them.[5]
Van Sertima wrote a response to be included in the article (as is standard academic practice) but withdrew it. The journal required that reprints must include the entire article and would have had to include the original authors' response (written but not published) to his response.[5] Instead, Van Sertima replied to his critics in his journal volume published as Early America Revisited (1998).[11]
In a New York Times 1977 review of Van Sertima's 1976 They Came Before Columbus, the archaeologist Glyn Daniel labeled Van Sertima's work as "ignorant rubbish", and concluded that the works of Van Sertima, and Barry Fell, whom he was also reviewing, "give us badly argued theories based on fantasies".
•••••••
In 1981 Dean R. Snow, a professor of anthropology, wrote that Van Sertima "uses the now familiar technique of stringing together bits of carefully selected evidence, each surgically removed from the context that would give it a rational explanation". Snow continued, "The findings of professional archaeologists and physical anthropologists are misrepresented so that they seem to support the [Van Sertima] hypothesis".”

His only defender was a man named Dr. Clarence Weiant who was more interested in archaeology through parapsychology than through conventional archaeological scientific methods.

Level 3

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#20062 Jan 2, 2014
Curious Me wrote:
*CONTINUATION from last post:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_van_Sertima
“Van Sertima's work has been strongly criticized by opposing academics, who describe his claims to be ill-founded and false. Van Sertima's Journal of African Civilizations was not considered for inclusion in Journals of the Century.[10] In 1997 academics in a Journal of Current Anthropology article criticized in detail many elements of They Came Before Columbus (1976).[5] Except for a brief mention, the book had not previously been reviewed in an academic journal. The researchers wrote a systematic rebuttal of Van Sertima's claims, stating that Van Sertima's "proposal was without foundation" in claiming African diffusion as responsible for prehistoric Olmec culture (in present-day Mexico). They noted that no "genuine African artifact had been found in a controlled archaeological excavation in the New World." They noted that Olmec stone heads were carved hundreds of years prior to the claimed contact and only superficially appear to be African; the Nubians whom Van Sertima had claimed as their originators do not resemble these "portraits".[5] They further noted that in the 1980s, Van Sertima had changed his timeline of African influence, suggesting that Africans made their way to the New World in the 10th century B.C., to account for more recent independent scholarship in the dating of Olmec culture.[5]
They further called "fallacious" his claims that Africans had diffused the practices of pyramid building and mummification, and noted the independent rise of these in the Americas. Additionally, they wrote that Van Sertima was "diminishe[ing] the real achievements of Native American culture" by his claims of African origin for them.[5]
Van Sertima wrote a response to be included in the article (as is standard academic practice) but withdrew it. The journal required that reprints must include the entire article and would have had to include the original authors' response (written but not published) to his response.[5] Instead, Van Sertima replied to his critics in his journal volume published as Early America Revisited (1998).[11]
In a New York Times 1977 review of Van Sertima's 1976 They Came Before Columbus, the archaeologist Glyn Daniel labeled Van Sertima's work as "ignorant rubbish", and concluded that the works of Van Sertima, and Barry Fell, whom he was also reviewing, "give us badly argued theories based on fantasies".
•••••••
In 1981 Dean R. Snow, a professor of anthropology, wrote that Van Sertima "uses the now familiar technique of stringing together bits of carefully selected evidence, each surgically removed from the context that would give it a rational explanation". Snow continued, "The findings of professional archaeologists and physical anthropologists are misrepresented so that they seem to support the [Van Sertima] hypothesis".”
His only defender was a man named Dr. Clarence Weiant who was more interested in archaeology through parapsychology than through conventional archaeological scientific methods.
Wow, those 2 academic giants remind me for some reason of Dr. José Pimienta-Buey, David Imhotep, Runuoko Rashidi and the inimitable Clyde Winters.

Total FRAUDS!
motts

Bridgetown, Barbados

#20063 Jan 3, 2014
Dr. Clarence Weiant is the RESPECTED AND ACCEPTED expert by BLACK people on this BLACK forum when dealing with the subject of the Olmecs.

AA and other Black people here do not care what the Mongrel-Troll brigade who offer nothing but pseudo-archaeology from fraudulent eurocentric so-called archaeologists who have LIED their way into history.

Coe is a liar and a fraud.

Those Olmec heads are BLACK AFRICANS…PROVEN AND CONFIRMED..

Now, back to the Moors..

The Moors were Black

Blacks are indigenous to North Africa.

WHATCHAGONNADO ISH TOFF?
African AE

Cape Town, South Africa

#20064 Jan 3, 2014
motts wrote:
Dr. Clarence Weiant is the RESPECTED AND ACCEPTED expert by BLACK people on this BLACK forum when dealing with the subject of the Olmecs.
AA and other Black people here do not care what the Mongrel-Troll brigade who offer nothing but pseudo-archaeology from fraudulent eurocentric so-called archaeologists who have LIED their way into history.
Coe is a liar and a fraud.
Those Olmec heads are BLACK AFRICANS…PROVEN AND CONFIRMED..
Now, back to the Moors..
The Moors were Black
Blacks are indigenous to North Africa.
WHATCHAGONNADO ISH TOFF?
Yip these are INDIGENOUS NORTH AFRICANS AND THE MAJORITY in Morocco:
www.youtube.com/watch...
Dr. Clarence Weiant lived when Noah was alive! He has long been pushing up daisies!
There has been DNA taken from the Olmec skeletons with the result coming out later this year! I doubt they are Africans. More likely Australoids!
motts

Bridgetown, Barbados

#20065 Jan 3, 2014
One of the oldest and most important archaeologists in America, Dr. Clarence Weiant, who was on the site in Mexico when the first stone heads (some with African features) were discovered, defends Van Sertima against attempts by the British archaeological establishment to discredit his earlier book,“They Came Before Columbus”.
“Van Sertima's work,” Dr. Weiant writes,“is a summary of six or seven years of meticulous research based upon archaeology, egyptology, African history, oceanography, astronomy, botany, rare Arabic and Chinese manuscripts, the letters and journals of early American explorers, and the observations of physical anthropologists...As one who has been immersed in Mexican archaeology for some forty years, and who participated in the excavation of the first giant heads, I must confess, I am thoroughly convinced of the soundness of Van Sertima’s conclusions.”

—Dr. Clarence Weiant
Letter to the New York Times, May 1, 1977

CASE CLOSED

trollslayer

Chicago Heights, IL

#20066 Jan 3, 2014
SaracenSam wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't call me a MoFo boy, we are not in the ghetto, I am not discussing original man. We are discussing the Moors, who were not West African Negr0es like yourself.
You come here trolling these forum you will be treated ANYWAY I CHOOSE. Original Moor were Original Africans. Your trollish manipulation of African history will not be tolerated here. Any white or bi-racial moors are the result white slaves being brought into Africa by the Original Moors. No I am not West African, you village IDIOT.
trollslayer

Chicago Heights, IL

#20067 Jan 3, 2014
motts wrote:
One of the oldest and most important archaeologists in America, Dr. Clarence Weiant, who was on the site in Mexico when the first stone heads (some with African features) were discovered, defends Van Sertima against attempts by the British archaeological establishment to discredit his earlier book,“They Came Before Columbus”.
“Van Sertima's work,” Dr. Weiant writes,“is a summary of six or seven years of meticulous research based upon archaeology, egyptology, African history, oceanography, astronomy, botany, rare Arabic and Chinese manuscripts, the letters and journals of early American explorers, and the observations of physical anthropologists...As one who has been immersed in Mexican archaeology for some forty years, and who participated in the excavation of the first giant heads, I must confess, I am thoroughly convinced of the soundness of Van Sertima’s conclusions.”
—Dr. Clarence Weiant
Letter to the New York Times, May 1, 1977
CASE CLOSED
Matthew Stirling and many have confirmed the identity of Omecs. The Olmecs themselves have confirmed their ID by leaving us their sculptures
http://anthropology.si.edu/olmec/english/arch...
trollslayer

Chicago Heights, IL

#20068 Jan 3, 2014
so if Van Sertima isn't recognized by whites, then he isn't a legitimate scholar..LOL. The trolls need to do better.

Level 3

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#20069 Jan 3, 2014
motts wrote:
Dr. Clarence Weiant is the RESPECTED AND ACCEPTED expert by BLACK people on this BLACK forum when dealing with the subject of the Olmecs.
AA and other Black people here do not care what the Mongrel-Troll brigade who offer nothing but pseudo-archaeology from fraudulent eurocentric so-called archaeologists who have LIED their way into history.
Coe is a liar and a fraud.
Those Olmec heads are BLACK AFRICANS…PROVEN AND CONFIRMED..
Now, back to the Moors..
The Moors were Black
Blacks are indigenous to North Africa.
WHATCHAGONNADO ISH TOFF?
LOL!!! Afronazis on Topix accept Weiant, so never mind that he was a complete fruitcake!

Coe is the leading expert on Mesoamerica. He is respected everywhere... except by Afronazis, of course.

So whom shall I believe... ALL the REAL archaeologists working on Mesoamerica... or a pack of Afronazi nutballs on Topix... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

Gee I don't know. And what should I believe regarding the Maghreb... all the real scientific evidence, or a pack of Afronazi nutballs on Topix... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

Level 3

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#20070 Jan 3, 2014
trollslayer wrote:
<quoted text>
You come here trolling these forum you will be treated ANYWAY I CHOOSE. Original Moor were Original Africans. Your trollish manipulation of African history will not be tolerated here. Any white or bi-racial moors are the result white slaves being brought into Africa by the Original Moors. No I am not West African, you village IDIOT.
Wrong, Afronazi nutball boy. The original Moors were non-black Berbers from the Maghreb, as is proven by a mountain of evidence, contained in scientific literature you are apparently incapable of reading due to all the long words and complex sentences.

Get an education, boy.

Level 3

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#20071 Jan 3, 2014
trollslayer wrote:
so if Van Sertima isn't recognized by whites, then he isn't a legitimate scholar..LOL. The trolls need to do better.
Van Sertima isn't recognized by legitimate scholars.

He never proved anything, never was peer reviewed...

He was a charlatan and a fraud. He was a liar who made money conning gullible Afronazi cultists like you, boy.

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
African-American women are the world's most bea... (May '09) 4 min BMskinnyfemlegs 591
All women prefer white men 5 min Aphex 4,664
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 9 min RoxLo 1,233,337
Why do White people smell so different? (Aug '08) 18 min Whats up doc 436
Hebrew Israelite (Feb '11) 25 min Ben YISRAEL 120,743
Do white people hate Asian or black people more? 25 min FordsBitch 78
How has Africa from the begining of time influe... (May '13) 26 min trollslayer 3,976
why do white people hate other races so much 1 hr NotSoDivineMsM 427
Van Sertima debunked! Afronazis Drowning in Tears! 1 hr Don Barros Serrano 394
Blacks Are Biologically Superior To Whites (Sep '12) 1 hr BMskinnyfemlegs 298
More from around the web