Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Basra

Who Are The Indigenous People Of Europe?!

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

(salam)

I want to point something out to our international users.

Some of you may not realize this, but the idea of the Black Supremacy is uniquely US. Some people believe that these myths will give confidence and reinforce the idea of African Superiority. Many are tolerating this because they believe that afrocentrism is a way to counter the horrible and brutal past of the Slavery in the US.

Mainstream scholars do not accept many of the afrocentric ideas because they are not scientific. These ideas are just feel good myths without solid evidence or empirical data.

Islam is against all form of racism and prejudice.

Edited by Zareen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

I want to point something out to our international users.

Some of you may not realize this, but the idea of the Black Supremacy is uniquely US. Some people believe that these myths will give confidence and reinforce the idea of African Superiority. Many are tolerating this because they believe that afrocentrism is a way to counter the horrible and brutal past of the Slavery in the US.

Mainstream scholars do not accept many of the afrocentric ideas because they are not scientific. These ideas are just feel good myths without solid evidence or empirical data.

Islam is against all form of racism and prejudice.

There are different forms of what you term "Afrocentrism" there are some very reliable respected "Afrocentric" historians and real academics like Cheikh Anta Diop, Molefi Asante, Walter Rodney, Basil Davidson (who was a British academic and expert on Africa, who was white), etc. These scholars always qualify their statements and historical views and make reasonable historical analysis that is then debated by other historians. For example Cheikh Anta Diop wrote a very interesting academic work photoed below, that many academic societies all over the world (including in Europe, etc) praised as a very important piece of academic work even if they didn't agree with all its findings and conclusions:

The-African-Origin-of-Civilization-9781556520723.jpg

On Egypt it is very easy to determine for example that the first people to inhabit Egypt proper were the Nubians as even French historians of the past stated. The French academic and historian of the 18th century Jean-Francois Champollion http://en.wikipedia....iki/Champollion who traveled around the world and to Egypt stated back then even in his work entitled "Egypte Ancienne" that "The first tribes that inhabited Egypt, that is, the Nile Valley between the Syene cataract and the sea, came from Abyssinia to Sennar. In the Copts of Egypt, we do not find any of the characteristic features of the Ancient Egyptian population. The Copts are the result of crossbreeding with all the nations that successfully dominated Egypt. It is wrong to seek in them the principal features of the old race."

There are a small group of extreme, non-academic "Afrocentrists" that try to make claims to show that Africans (aka blacks) are somehow allegedly superior to whites (and other non-blacks); but these people are no more "scientists" then white supremacist quacks who try to claim the opposite (i.e. that whites are somehow allegedly "superior" to blacks and others).

Edited by Basra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so you are saying we shouldn't study our own history to empower ourselves???? Allah made us races, nations, and tribes, as is says in the Qu'ran (hence nationality) which means we are different whether we care to acknowledge or not. If you don't know your past you won't understand your present or future, all of these comes into play. And for one, black history is hidden and distorted, meaning black youth are blinded from who they are; so are you saying black youth shouldn't be introduced to the history of their ancestors, they should jus be taught that every one is the same and their past doesn't matter??? I am black and the only time i really found self love was through my history and how it connected me with the origins of math science, religion, the founding of civilization. It all connects with Islam because Allah wants us to be students of the world, and the world includes my peoples history and sheding light on the lies the caucasions (yes white people) have told. I love every nationality but that doesn't mean i have to accept the lies people put out there, and it doesn't mean I have to ignore the truth no matter how harsh it may be.

and what you say about white people coming to Islam, if you would rather tell a lie to convert someone than tell the truth, what does that say about you and the person you are trying to convert. White people will have to accept their history one day, no matter how much you want to keep it from them to please them. whether today or Judgement Day they will have to accept their history.

I love black history and you can get mad all you want if basra is exposing the truth. The Kaaba stone baby

1

I don't have the same understanding of Islam as u, and no im not in the nation, Im shia but still, why did Allah say he created us as differen races nations and tribes if Islam doesn't acknowledge race or the differences between peoples???

what the heck is that supposed to mean?

So when you pray to the Kaaba, you're not praying to the house constructed by Ibrahim and Ismail, but to a symbol of Black human supremacy? LOL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what the heck is that supposed to mean?

So when you pray to the Kaaba, you're not praying to the house constructed by Ibrahim and Ismail, but to a symbol of Black human supremacy? LOL!

We don't understand.....only she understands because she is more evolved since she absorbs more light than us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are different forms of what you term "Afrocentrism" there are some very reliable respected "Afrocentric" historians and real academics like Cheikh Anta Diop, Molefi Asante, Walter Rodney, Basil Davidson (who was a British academic and expert on Africa, who was white), etc. These scholars always qualify their statements and historical views and make reasonable historical analysis that is then debated by other historians. For example Cheikh Anta Diop wrote a very interesting academic work photoed below, that many academic societies all over the world (including in Europe, etc) praised as a very important piece of academic work even if they didn't agree with all its findings and conclusions:

The-African-Origin-of-Civilization-9781556520723.jpg

On Egypt it is very easy to determine for example that the first people to inhabit Egypt proper were the Nubians as even French historians of the past stated. The French academic and historian of the 18th century Jean-Francois Champollion http://en.wikipedia....iki/Champollion who traveled around the world and to Egypt stated back then even in his work entitled "Egypte Ancienne" that "The first tribes that inhabited Egypt, that is, the Nile Valley between the Syene cataract and the sea, came from Abyssinia to Sennar. In the Copts of Egypt, we do not find any of the characteristic features of the Ancient Egyptian population. The Copts are the result of crossbreeding with all the nations that successfully dominated Egypt. It is wrong to seek in them the principal features of the old race."

There are a small group of extreme, non-academic "Afrocentrists" that try to make claims to show that Africans (aka blacks) are somehow allegedly superior to whites (and other non-blacks); but these people are no more "scientists" then white supremacist quacks who try to claim the opposite (i.e. that whites are somehow allegedly "superior" to blacks and others).

This is pretty much junk too.

Cheikh Anta Diop is responsible for developing the black supremacy/Afrocentric viewpoint. His ideas are mostly rejected for being false.

Edited by Zareen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awww Basra's banned? I actually found his posts relatively informative...although for the most part it was the same old regurgitated outcries of western imperialism taking over on an intellectual level - even if the topic had absolutely nothing to do with such a sentiment :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to argue man was originally black, and that whiteness evolved later, then couldn't one argue that "whiteness" represents a higher stage of the evolutionary process (since things don't generally "devolve" as such), and thus in some sense superior? Note, I don't believe this, just mentioning it to show what this type of thinking can lead to.

Well, it is true that whites evolved from blacks. Atleast im about certain this is proven. It doesnt mean whites are "higher", because evolution doesnt go in any direction. A polar bear is no better than a grizzley bear just because a polar bear evolved white fur. A grizzley would outlive a polar bear in the woods and vise versa.

So where did the white people come from?

They evolved into existence, just like red haired people evolved into existence. Think about it. Thats like asking how did birds come into existence, well, they came from reptiles.

Some people claim that all human descend from Africans. Other claims we descend from apes.

Humans descended from both african humans and apes. humans by definition are apes even today, africans are considered apes as well. And so, this is why people claim we have evolved from both, because we have.

If you look into taxonomic classification, what you have are species which would be africans and neanderthals and erectus and things like this, and all of those species would be under genuses and families and orders of apes and mammals and animals.

If anyone doesnt understand what i mean, just ask, i can go get some pictures and i can actually explain this rather than giving a 2 second response.

That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard....the fact that you said that proves you have an inferiority complex so you come up with ridiculous ideas like this.....or you see yourself as superior because of the color of your skin. You think that someone is more evolved because they absorb more sunlight....how ridiculous......I read all of this before and it was written by black supremacists. Anyone who feels that they are superior because of their race automatically loses all credibility.

I am a typical American with many mixed races, so im not being racist when i say that some humans have evolved in ways that make them superior in certain environments.

For example, some humans have evolved immunity to HIV. other humans have evolved enhanced bone density, other humans have evolved white skin for the sake of sun absorbtion.

It doesnt mean that any one group is "better" than another, it just means were different. But in specific environments certain humans are going to thrive more than others.

Its like, comparing a human to a lion. Were both animals, both evolved over time. A human isnt necessarily "better" than a lion. A lion is far stronger than us and would easily physically beat us in a fight any day. But likewise a lion would never outsmart a human. So neither is necessarily better than the other, just different in different environments. Which is what the theory of evolution is all about.

Edited by iSilurian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans descended from both african humans and apes. humans by definition are apes even today, africans are considered apes as well. And so, this is why people claim we have evolved from both, because we have.

If you look into taxonomic classification, what you have are species which would be africans and neanderthals and erectus and things like this, and all of those species would be under genuses and families and orders of apes and mammals and animals.

If anyone doesnt understand what i mean, just ask, i can go get some pictures and i can actually explain this rather than giving a 2 second response.

I have looked into the homo erectus/sapiens and other human species classification in depth. I am not that interested in the origin of the species or study of the ancient humanoid/man. Whoever they were or how they lived, they already perished millions of years ago.

However, I do like to know more about the Neanderthals because it seems that they were the most recent human ancestor. Is there even a possibility of them inbreeding with the homo sapiens?

This is what I wish to know

Genetic evidence suggests interbreeding took place with Homo sapiens (anatomically modern humans) between roughly 80,000 and 50,000 years ago in the Middle East, resulting in 1–4% of the genome of people from Eurasia having been contributed by Neanderthals
Edited by Zareen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

macro evolution is a mere theory and most likely is a myth as the scientific world has failed to produce one mutation in a laboratory let alone the billions or trillions needed to make complex changes

even if its possible if you do the maths of it you wil find that the age of earth is too young for all these processes to have taken place

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have looked into the homo erectus/sapiens and other human species classification in depth. I am not that interested in the origin of the species or study of the ancient humanoid/man. Whoever they were or how they lived, they already perished millions of years ago.

However, I do like to know more about the Neanderthals because it seems that they were the most recent human ancestor. Is there even a possibility of them inbreeding with the homo sapiens?

This is what I wish to know

Yes. I had made a post about this in another topic just yesterday (or maybe 2 days ago?). The DNA found in neanderthal remains has been found to match the DNA of western modern european populations, while not matching DNA of modern african populations. With that, it is said that neanderthals interbred with homo sapiens once they had come across each other in northern

European regions.

http://news.national...rbred-dna-gene/

If you look at life, overall, even beyond just hominids. Hominids that are talked about in regards to being our recent ancestors go back about 4 million years or so (australopithecus and all them). However, if you take them, and take their piece of the puzzle and combine it with other pieces, you will find a large puzzle that goes back a good ~600 million years. And so, when you say "perished millions of years ago", its relative. In the grand scheme of things it was only yesterday that they were here. 4 mya out of 600 mya.

but ok. sorry if ive been aggressive at all with my posts.

macro evolution is a mere theory and most likely is a myth as the scientific world has failed to produce one mutation in a laboratory let alone the billions or trillions needed to make complex changes

even if its possible if you do the maths of it you wil find that the age of earth is too young for all these processes to have taken place

failed to produce one mutation? whats that supposed to mean? mutations are observed all the time. Also, the earth is over 4 and a half billion years old, which is more than enough time for organisms to acquire changes in their gene pool.

Edited by iSilurian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care....his posts gave me dyslexia so I had him on ignore.

Good you escaped a lot of trash.

I ignored him for far too long. I and others had to egg him enough to bring out the worse in him. He fell for it. Got banned.

Edited by Marbles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good you escaped a lot of trash.

I ignored him for far too long. I and others had to egg him enough to bring out the worse in him. He fell for it. Got banned.

Good you escaped a lot of trash.

I ignored him for far too long. I and others had to egg him enough to bring out the worse in him. He fell for it. Got banned.

:o so sneeeaaaky, props :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...