Inventions by Black folks
 

In response to @Rain Matrix 2017 's closed threads ...

Three light traffic signal, the first effective gas mask for fire fighters, closed circuit tv, walkers for the mobility challenged, the carbon filament that led to the lightbulb, VoIP, the blood bank, development of the IBM computer, and pacemakers, the development of the touch tone phone, fiber optic cables and caller ID, the mailbox, laser cataract surgery, the refrigerated truck, the Super Soaker, the dust pan, the ironing board, the potato chip, the modern rotary blade lawn mower, the gas heating furnace, peanut butter obviously, the drying machine, the automatic gearshift, automatic elevator doors, the folding chair, the golf tee, the ice cream scooper, development of the modern toilet.... must I go on?

All it takes is a Google search.

So, the next time you take a shit, or turn on the lights, use an elevator, check who called you, or dry your clothes or stop at a traffic light better preventing your death by car accident, or if you have any fond memories of watergun fights, or someone you know is saved by a fireman or pacemaker or has laser cataract surgery..... next time you use a dustpan or eat ice cream, peanut butter or potato chips or anything cold such as frozen food or beverages delivered by refrigerated trucks.... or I don't know... if you get old and need to use a walker to get around...

You can be more thankful and respect the contributions of our fellow brothers and sisters who may happen to have a much darker complexion than you and therefore some ignorant people have assumed, *incorrectly, must be lesser than a lighter skinned individual.

---------- Post added at 05:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:44 PM ----------

Oh and Niel Degrasse Tyson for being one of the most respected astrophysicist alive, and why not mention WEB Dubois, Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Mitchell for that whole Civil Rights Movement thing.

---------- Post added at 05:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:50 PM ----------

#GetSchooled #JewKnow

Actually God invented all those things and he's white.

End of discussion.

So lemme guess, every thread rain made with his (obviously skewed) debate will continue to be closed while freaks direct response to it will stay up. Whack shit. That second thread wasnt even inflammatory, and couldve lead to some real discussion.
Like freeks claim that iq isnt an accurate measure of skill or intelligence, I'd browse a source for that claim if it gets provided. Ghosted ass dead site & yall wanna block shit you dont agree with lol. Rains wrong af, but yall weak for liberal safe-spacing battle rap forums

Rains obviously trolling but it's true, this thread will stay up (or now be closed to prove a point) while Rain's will always be closed.

I laughed at the idea that NOBLE would destroy his opinions though. All NOBLE would post is "The reason for every negative you posted is from white privilege".

Anyways, while it's easy to consolidate a lot of accomplishments into a thread, the reason why racists bring this innovation point up is because it's just fact that white people have created a lot more. Why? Well it's hard as fuck to be a top level scientist and innovator when you're being kept as a slave. In countries where modern technology has developed most, it's not that long since black people were given the freedom and platforms to actually be able to create and invent. It's like dissing Nikki Minaj for not winning a Grammy in 1967.

Regardless, whenever I see crime rate facts, or innovation facts, I'm always wondering what the person actually believes. What are those statistics being used to represent? They imply the conclusion that skin pigment can have some sort of adverse effect on the likelihood to become involved in crime, or your pigmentation to have a biological reflection on intelligence. Very few people actually will admit to this belief, because frankly it's effortlessly proven to be untrue by essentially any scientist, but there's always an implication that this is the conclusion they are coming to at the end of people mentioning things like this.


The stupidest thing about race, always, is people's focus on how dark your arms are as opposed to what social class you are in. Black folks driving a benz in Beverly Hills whilst wearing a tuxedo and going the speed limit aren't getting pulled over more than white folks in hoodies driving a Toyota Starlet in Detroit. The reflection of a lack of black people in high positions, or the larger number of crime amongst black people, is a reflection on the social class which most of them belong to. Due to the "ghettoification" in America, many black people are born into low income families, obviously giving them more hurdles than if they were born to a more well of family in a better area. Now, I don't hand out excuses. If you're born in the ghetto and decide to sell drugs and get a record for it, I'm not giving you an excuse that you were born in a bad place. That's your fault for being stupid. But we're talking an overall scale.

I don't specifically see a need for affirmative action because I don't personally see a need for diversification. You shouldn't be inspired to become great by looking up to people strictly of the same skin colour as you. If I imagined being a fighter, I'm not thinking "Nah I don't wanna be Tyson or Anderson Silva, I wanna be Ricky Hatton or Michael Bisping" just because of their skin colour. You shouldn't require people to pander to your skin colour in creating television and media. Sure, to some degree you want media which reflects your experiences and creates that bond, but you shouldn't be thinking "Pffft, everyone says Godfather is supposed to be great but it's got no black folks so I'll watch New Jack City".

In summary, who the fuck cares what skin colour someone is? Next time someone tries to talk about skin colour to you, or you think about it as some important thing, just replace the word "skin" with "eye" and see if you still sound as sensical.

:gtfo: I made one thread about white privilege in which I argued that there is such a thing. I've never said anything even remotely close to suggesting it is the reason for every negative or that it explains everything. I was actually going to make a long ass post about IQ and race in the other thread, but then I thought why bother? Then I realized it was closed anyway.

I wrote a rather lengthy reply then realized the thread was closed.

•IQs are good for gauging intelligence
•A high IQ doesn't guarantee success
•Having an extremely high IQ wouldnt be superior to survival skills in the Serengeti.
•IQ scores are limited to what's being tested
•Many believe IQ test are skewed
•An Ivy League student may be smart but would probably get schooled in the streets and end up robbed
•A misconception about black people is their IQs are low. Reality, due to their size of population there's a lot more smart black people than Asians
•I think IQ matters but someone with a high IQ can waste their talent while someone with a lower IQ achieve with theirs. I've met some real smart people of all races. As well as creative. IQ doesn't determine your drive and is limited in scope

I'll get on yo ass in real life bruh .. Stop the stupidity

---------- Post added at 01:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:57 PM ----------

First off, white people did not invent alot more . i love all people second my granddad is 100%German so i mix alot up because I i have both sides.

Racist ass dude its facts behind black inventions before we we're giving freedom. Yo some off your so called genius people stole outrageous amount of inventions from african people.

I mean go study for your self. Europeans were not even taking baths or shampooing there hairs before a black moor went there. Have you thought about all the lye your people told you? I dont give a fuck about non of lame ass bias ass dude on this site... Dont be talking shit about stuff you want even go look up yo self. You rather go off what you heard... Bitch ass dude

Lol, this guy thinks that Arabs = Sub-Saharan Africans

Moors weren't Arabs, although there were Arabs among them, if that makes any sense. They were Berbers and Amazigh who are mostly mixed today, but if you go back in history, yes, they resembled sub-Saharan Africans.

Everyone gets Moors mixed up. Too much disinformation.

Moors were multiple races. Predominantly Arabs which mixed with Berbers.

The reason Moors are thought of as being black is because many converts were and when Arabs lost their stronghold in Europe black Moor horsemen, some of the greatest warriors of the time (forget their name) went to reclaim the lands. Which they did. But these Moors were new converts and extreme in their beliefs. They looked down on the Arabs who ruled in Europe because they lived extravagantly. They were brutal and devout Muslims.

I've studied Islamic history, the crusades and the overall time period quite a bit. Also, my wife's north African (Kabyle) she's mixed with Berber and Arab. She's white and has cousins who are north African and look 100% European with blonde hair. Fine af too. Because they have Vandal ancestry. That part of Africa has tons of mixing going on and had for thousands of years.

---------- Post added at 01:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:18 AM ----------

You're on the right path but some inaccuracies. You gotta be careful what you watch on YouTube or hear from people. Europeans were backward in some areas fs. The French aristocracy in the 1700s were still fuckin disgusting. A lot of it stemmed from not understanding hygiene or sanitation. After the fall of Rome and the rise of the Catholic Church Europe went to shit in a lot of places.

Islam influenced the west and taught them a lot about hygiene, medicine and sanitation. But that's Islamic culture and science. Not a single black Moor. Besides, parts of Europe were conquered by moderate Muslims well before any Moors campaigned there. Islam inherited trade routes and ports which put it in the epicenter of learning and knowledge. It was also the hub of technology for its time. So they were in a perfect position to invent and create.

There's accounts of Islamic doctors visiting Europe that are hundreds of years old. Maybe a thousand. And it describes the brutal surgeries Europeans performed. But the truth is, there were white people who weren't European. There were white people who had great hygiene. And there were white civilizations that bathed and knew a great deal about sanitation a thousand years before Muhammad.

You said white privilege was a thing and denied that black privilege was a thing. Enough said.

I don't know what race invented spelling, but you better hope one of them travels to your area.

Anyways, if we're talking REAL historical and actual impact of invention, then it'd be hard to really have any stance on the matter. But what I'm talking about is technological advancements, and there's not really a discussion in that aspect. The only reason is because the side of the world which murdered and colonised the world had a vast white majority, kept other races as slaves, and had all the wealth and motivation to make those technological advancements.

I'm not implying anything, I'm giving the reasoning behind someone who might use "white invention vs black invention" as some sort of valid statistic to prove intelligence and ingenuity. You can't compare that level when one in the side of the world with wealth and motivation to invent, other races weren't being given the ability or platform to create anything.

It's a bit different now because of the Asian domination in technological advancements. I'm not sure if there would be more or less Asian people than white people in high ends of their respective fields but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a huge gulf in the way of Asians. Black people continue to grow towards high positions in every field and it's becoming more and more common.

You calling me racist though, it really shows why people like Rain's initial opinion exists. You so quickly prefer to jump to that angle rather than have a discussion. What did I even say that was racist? Where have I even projected a tone of racism in this thread? You can go out and wave a Black Lives Matter flag and follow some totally not racist youtuber who talks about how black people can't be racist and cultural appropriation is the worst thing ever.

You're just making up shit. I've never even discussed "black privilege" here, let alone denying it.

Nice to see you using WHITE font... hypocrite.

I think you've been to. And you bring up stupidity.LOL

Arabs had a far greater number of African slaves than the Europeans And the Arabs had hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of white slaves too. They also kept slaves until the 1900s. While Europeans outlawed slavery and became the dominate culture after doing so. So European's dominance was from more than just oppressing people.

Technology and advancements in tech were usually first seen in areas with lot of trading. That's why the Arabs were so advanced prior to the European Renaissance. They controlled the known trading routes. The silk road and all that. The Renaissance was possible due to what Europeans learned by interacting with Muslims. Yet, one civilization prospered while the other fell off. The latter one utilizing slavery till the end.

European advancements in banking, business and industry is what gave them the edge. Along with usery. It's haram in Islam to get or give loans with interest. This gave Europeans an advantage in war and economics. It allowed them to wage wars and do business without the money in hand. Something Muslims couldnt do. It was also a sin for Christians but Christians used Jews to do their banking to get out of it. That's a big reason why Jews are in banking now and were always targeted when blame needed to be placed. When really, it was the European aristocracy at fault for building up huge debts.

Regardless, white people were all over the world and not just in Europe. White people can be found all throughout Africa, the middle East, central Asia and even India. White people were not the creators of slavery and every race benefited from slavery.

I'll admit it's hard to distinguish Moors from Arabs because even the term "Arab" is often used to describe people who would be considered black in today's perspective. North Sudanese and Somalians, for example, are people who are sometimes included under "Arab." Somalia is even a member of the Arab League. But the average Somalian today would be considered black, and the average North Sudanese looks no different from an Ethiopian, who would also be considered black. Let's put it this way. Moors of today are like so-called "Latinos" in the sense that they are of mixed ancestry but may phenotypically resemble one of their ancestors more than the others depending on which region they're from. An Argentinian and a Dominican are both Latinos, but the average Dominican looks a lot more African while the average Argentinian looks a lot more European. There are Tuaregs (a Berber group) living all across North Africa and even some Sub-Saharan countries like Nigeria, Burkina Faso and The Gambia. A Tuareg from Burkina Faso looks a lot different than one from Libya. With that being said, I think it's worth noting that Africans who are very dark-skinned or who may be considered "black" aren't limited to sub-Saharan regions. There are many Sahelian people who are very dark-skinned. Fulanis, another Berber people, live in countries like Nigeria and Senegal, and they look no different than the average Somalian. Going back to the Moors who ruled Spain and much of southern Europe at a certain period, they were specifically from Mauretania, a state that spanned modern Morocco, Mauritania, Niger, and parts of Chad. Going back to that time period, people from that region would more so resemble what today we'd call black even though a lot of them look more Arab or mixed today. It's just like if you asked what did a Mexican look like 500 years ago. They'd look a lot more Native and Azteca than Spanish, because the Spanish admixture hadn't taken place with as much force as is present today. The Arab conquest of North Africa can be dated, so even though your wife who is Kabyle may look "white" , that doesn't necessarily mean her ancestors from 2,000 years ago, or 1,400 years ago, or 600 years looked the same. Many of the indigenous people who inhabited North Africa pre-Arab conquest did not look Arab. The final clue as to the identity of the Moors of Spain was their religion. Believe it or not, it wasn't Islam. The Moors practiced what is called Maraboutism, a syncretic religion based on Islam and traditional West African beliefs. It has a similar relationship to Islam as the Santeria or Lukumi practiced in Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Brazil has to Catholicism. The slave masters were forcing the African slaves they brought to Puerto Rico to convert to Catholicism, so the slaves found an ingenious way to practice their traditional religion under the guise of Christianity. The various African gods became the different Catholic saints. They were practicing voodoo while appearing to practice Christianity. The same thing happened during the Arab conquest of North Africa. They were often being forced to convert to Islam, so they hid traditional beliefs under Maraboutism. How do I know the Moors were Marabouts? They actually went as far as to name themselves after their religion! There were two dynasties of Moors in Spain and southern Europe, the Almoravids and the Almohads. Almoravid comes from Arabic مُرابِط‎ (al murabit), a term which the Marabout Moors used to denote their syncretic religion. They were burned at the stake during the Inquisitions along with Sephardi Jews for practicing "witchcraft." If the Moors of Spain were Arabs, why would Arabs be practicing a syncretic religion rather than the original Islam itself? Also, if you look at the depictions of Moors in Medieval art, it is almost always of a black person. Shakesperes Othello, for example, is almost always played by a black actor. Research some images of the Moor Head in Medieval and Renaissance art. Till today, the Spanish word "Moreno", which is derived from "moor" is used to describe blacks in endearing terms as opposed to "negro" which has a more negative connotation. I have never heard of Spanish speakers referring to Arabs as "Morenos."

I'd have to vehemently disagree Berbers were black. I've studied at Islamic centers and the conquest of North Africa and Europe is quite detailed and historically accurate. Not to mention there's depictions of ancient Berbers that Egyptians made thousands of years ago showing the 4 types of man. Berbers were white according to Ancient Egyptian accounts. Berbers were darkened by Arab expansion. Also Arabs are Semitic, like Sephardic Jews . Not African. Any Africans claiming to be Arab would be due to Arab expansionism. The Moors were also a Muslim Kingdom. And 100% Muslim. Moors were the second Muslims to conquer Europe. As Madrid and other cities in Europe were founded by Muslims well before Moors came. And Moors were a coalition of Muslims of all races that fell in the moorish empire. The reason, once again why Moors were veiewed as black is simple, because black Moors, recent converts to Islam reconquered parts of Europe when the moderate muslim empire collapsed. I've taken many college courses that dealt with the occupation of Spain. It's a gigantic misconception Moors were black. There were black Moors tho.

---------- Post added at 11:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:46 AM ----------

"A marabout (Arabic: مُرابِط‎, translit. murābiṭ, lit. 'one who is attached/garrisoned') is a Muslim religious leader and teacher in West Africa, and (historically) in the Maghreb. The marabout is often a scholar of the Qur'an, or religious teacher.'

---------- Post added at 11:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:49 AM ----------

"Moor, in English usage, a Moroccan or, formerly, a member of the Muslim population of what is now Spain and Portugal. Of mixed Arab, Spanish, and Amazigh (Berber) origins, the Moors created the Arab Andalusian civilization and subsequently settled as refugees in North Africa between the 11th and 17th centuries."

---------- Post added at 11:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:51 AM ----------

"The term "Moors" refers primarily to the Muslim inhabitants of the Maghreb, the Iberian Peninsula, Sicily, and Malta during the Middle Ages. The Moors initially were the Berber autochthones of the Maghreb.[1] The name was later also applied to Arabs.[2][3]

Moors are not a distinct or self-defined people,[4] and the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica observed that "The term 'Moors' has no real ethnological value."[5] Medieval and early modern Europeans variously applied the name to Arabs, North African Berbers, and Muslim Europeans"

---------- Post added at 12:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:54 AM ----------

The Egyptian Book of Gates is around 3 or 4 thousand years old and depicts Berbers (Libyans) as white. Find an older more reliable source and I'll believe you Berbers were black.

Lyve science is on point with the cultural knowledge, dope conversation

Do you know what a paragraph is?

I’ve cut any type of racism out of my life. I can be called the N word, or any black related joke, it doesn’t bother me. And I have friends all different Colours and races

Race is too broad anyways. People who believe race is important think they have connections with people based on race. I'm white, I'm European, and American white supremacists can fuck right off claiming to be that shit too. I have no connection to them. "European" is too broad as well. Like how the fuck do I have a connection to France or Germany?

In other news, it's officially fucking Christmas cause the holidays are coming advert just played as I typed this.

Were you hurt by the wall of text?

Most lame thing about black ppl is when they hate on and blame white people for things like slavery when it was black ppl who sold the black slaves to white ppl.

https://humanityunited.org/wp-conten...go/hu-logo.png

http://www.gratitudeforgood.org/uplo...464850.jpg?366

http://spacecollective.org/userdata/...544/united.jpg

I didn't say Berbers were black. I compared them to Latinos and said they look more black or more Arab depending on which region they are from, and then I pointed out examples of Berber or Tuareg people who phenotypically would be considered black.
I am familiar with the wall painting you are probably referring to. The Book of Gates in the tomb of Seti I. However, all the versions showing Caucasian-looking figures are reconstructions. The actual original tomb painting itself is so damaged and with faded colors that the figures could be interpreted to have looked otherwise when they were originally painted. Also, they were depicting a Libyan, not necessarily a Berber. Then, as is the case now, not all Libyans looked the same. North Africa had been invaded by Mediterranean Europeans (Romans) and also Phoenicians, but the Berbers are indigenous to North Africa and didn't come from elsewhere. White people may have been present in ancient North Africa, but they are not indigenous to it and they are not Berbers. Even if the image was meant to depict a Berber from Libya, I've already said "A Tuareg from Burkina Faso looks a lot different than one from Libya." A Berber from Libya looking "white" is not indicative of how all Berbers from other regions look.

I don't really like or subscribe to the term "Semitic" for describing people, maybe because it's based on the Bible, which I consider largely a myth. It comes from the sons of Noah (Ham, Shem, and Japhet) who are supposed to be the progenitors of the Hamites (Africans near the Levant--Egyptians, Ethiopians, etc.), Semites, and (no one really knows who Japhet is supposed to be the father of but I've heard people say Caucasian and some say east Asians). It doesn't account for Australian Aborigines or Polynesians, for example. It's how ancient Middle Easterners tried to explain the world around them, and their world was very small because there was so much they were unaware of. Truthfully, most of the people I've met who are self-described Jews, I would consider white...and I don't consider Arabs to be white. So "Semitic" as a term inclusive of both those people (European Jews and Middle Eastern Arabs) is inadequate to me because I consider them distinct. As a caveat, maybe because I'm such a PC Liberal (lol), I respect people's right to identify however they choose to, so it doesn't really matter what I think of the term "Semitic..." or who is white or who is black. If someone identifies as such, I will respect that and address them as such. Race, at the end of the day, is really an arbitrary social convention. What would pass for white or black to me could be different from what would pass as such for you. I'm not interested in forcing labels on anyone and I'd rather let them speak for themselves. All the Tuareg people I've personally met identified as black, if they used such terms, but I'm pretty sure there are also Tuareg people who identify as white. Who am I to tell them any different?

If there were black Moors, it isn't a "gigantic" misconception that the Moors were black.



There's only so much one can learn from Wikipedia entries. I have personally studied under Marabout and Sufi sheikhs. I've studied with sheikhs from the Tajani, Qadiri and Naqshabandi orders. The Sufis, like the Marabouts, are often considered heretics in the eyes or orthodox Muslims.

"The Book of Gates" - Your answer makes me think you just googled it real quick. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're well versed in Egyptian Mythology/ History. However, claiming the depictions were too faded to tell the race is absurd. Egyptians made Africans look much different than Libyans.

"That was Libyans not Berbers" - I think you're confused with ancient Libyans and the modem state of Libya. Ancient Libyans are the ancestors of the Berber people. The inscription is much older than the Greek or Roman empires so they didn't affect the look of Libyans. Ancient Libya was from Morocco to Algeria btw.

"The Latin name*Libya*(from GreekΛιβύη,*Libyē) referred to the region west of the*Nile*generally corresponding to the modern*Maghreb. Its people were ancestors of the modern*Berbers.[1]Berbers occupied the area for thousands of years before the beginning of human records in ancient Egypt.Climate changes*affected the locations of the settlements."

"I pointed out they look black" - Berbers are not black nor were their ancestors. But there are black Africans that mixed with Berbers and adopted the Berber culture. That was around 700ad to 1100ad and the majority of Berbers are Berber / Arab with a little European and African mix.

Im glad you're such an expert and told me my wife's heritage didn't matter. Even though, she's Berber and has been to Libya, Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria several times. Of course, you know her ancestry better than her.

"I don't subscribe to the term Semitic" - Ok so you don't subscribe to science? Now im thinking you're trolling me. Or maybe you believe Hebrews were black just like you do Moors? Maybe you watch to much YouTube. Im sure you believe black Egyptians built the pyramids?

Semitic "adjective

1.

relating to or denoting a family of languages that includes Hebrew, Arabic, and Aramaic and certain ancient languages such as Phoenician and Akkadian, constituting the main subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic family.

2.

relating to the peoples who speak the Semitic languages, especially Hebrew and Arabic."

"Genetic studies indicate that modern Jews (Ashkenazi, Sephardic and Mizrahi specifically), Levantine Arabs,*Assyrians,Samaritans,*Maronites,*Druze,Mand aeans, and*Mhallami, all have an ancient indigenous common Near Eastern heritage which can be genetically mapped back to the ancient Fertile Crescent, but often also display genetic profiles distinct from one another, indicating the different histories of these peoples.[14]"

"I dont consider Arabs to be white" - It doesn't matter, Arabs are white by US standards.

"For 71 years, the United States has classified Americans of Middle Eastern and North African ancestry as “white”"

"Only so much one can learn from Wikipedia" - Well maybe you should start there cuz I've shown you to be wrong many times. If you think I learned from Wikipedia you're sadly mistaken.

"I've studied under Sufi Sheiks" - Are you saying you dance and sing well? Sufis are just the esoteric branch of Islam. And religion isn't race. Anyone can be a Sufi. I dont know what it has to do with Berbers tho. Point?

---------- Post added at 10:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:52 AM ----------

In my estimation black revisionist are as bad as white ones. Either blacks built everything and were Moors, Egyptians, Berbers, Hebrews and g0d or the great white race were Pharaohs, Aryans and the creators of mathematics and Noble behavior. Yeah... and if you think people are what ever race they identify with then you must believe Aryans are the great white race. Well, as long as white people believe they're such.

---------- Post added at 10:07 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:05 AM ----------

I'm a Scythian warrior btw

---------- Post added at 10:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:07 AM ----------

Black revisionism, with support from it's liberal enforcers, is what made memes like "Hitler did nothing wrong" so effective and popular. Trolling begets trolling. No one ever gaf about Hitler, rather the reactions from saying it.

---------- Post added at 10:42 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:31 AM ----------

I actually did Google because I couldn't remember the name of the picture and where it was from. But I was already familiar with it and I was at one point well versed in Egyptian mythology and history. Saying Egyptians made Africans look much different is simply stupid. The Egyptians were Africans themselves and so we're the Libyans. Everyone depicted on that wall were Africans. Or do you want to argue that Egypt and Libya are not in Africa? I think what you meant is they made Sudanese or people to their south look different with darker paint.

I actually thought you might have been confused, but I'm glad we're both aware that ancient Libya spans a greater geographical area than the modern country named Libya. That's why I added that, then as is the case now, not all Libyans looked the same, and neither was Libya filled with only Berbers, and there had been Phoenician settlers in North Africa even before the Romans and Greeks. So a depiction of a "Libyan" doesn't necessarily equate a depiction of a Berber. A "Libyan" at that time could have been anybody from the settlers to the indigenous people of various shades.


You seem to think of race as an absolute. For the sake of argument, let's assume what you say is true and Berbers are not black but are mixed with black, Arab, and European. Are they all homogeneously mixed, or are some a little more mixed with black or a little more mixed with Arab than others? At which point are they so mixed that one can say they "look black" or "look Arab?" If you're saying any degree of mixture means they are not black, then you might as well say African Americans aren't black even though their DNA is like 80% African on average. Lol. Go tell a Fulani from Nigeria or a Tuareg from Mali they are not black.

Untuck your dick from between your asscheeks and realize I didn't say your wife's heritage didn't matter. What I said was MY OPINION of what I think her race is or what I think of terms like "Semitic" ultimately doesn't matter, but what DOES matter is how people choose to identify themselves. If your wife thinks she is white, then I respect that and will address her as a white person.


Semitic is not a scientific term, concept, or theory so how does saying I don't subscribe to the term Semitic mean I don't subscribe to science? Yes, science can be used to map the genetics of people we call "Semites" and show a correlation of haplogroups, but that doesn't make the term "Semitic " scientific. The term Semitic is derived from the Bible (Shem, one of the sons of Noah) and I specifically mentioned that as one of the reasons I find it inaccurate. So the term Semitic is Biblical, not scientific. I know the word exists and what it means or what it's supposed to mean. That doesn't mean I'm precluded from thinking more accurate term for describing people within the same set can be found. Even though we disagree, you were cool until this post when you started sounding cheeky, putting words in my mouth and coming with strawman arguments. I think you probably watch YouTube more than me and have came across people arguing that everyone from the Moors to Egyptians were black and are lumping me into the same category so to some extent, you're arguing against them, not me. Have I said anything about Egyptians in this thread? I may or may not believe black Egyptians built the pyramids, but let's not get ahead of ourselves and stick to arguing against only what has been stated thus far.


Like I said before, race is an arbitrary social convention, and while I may have opinions about people's race, I ultimately respect their right to identify however they choose. If an Arab person told me they are white, I'll accept that. I'm pretty sure there are some who identify as white just as I'm sure there are some who don't. If you're will to tell an Arab who denies being white that they are in fact white because of US standards, be my guest.




Are you aware that not all Sufis sing and dance or belong to the so-called whirling dervishes? I mentioned the specific orders the sheikhs I studied under were from. Research Maraboutism, which I said earlier was a syncretic religion practiced by the Moors in Spain, then come back and tell me what it has to do with Berbers and Sufism.

---------- Post added at 01:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:20 PM ----------

It's Sad @NOBLE, trying to win an argument by semantics or exceptions.

Or finding where I misspoke to win an argument, of zero importance.. eeeww you got me!

Black, white and Semitic are common ways of describing common ancestry yet you took issue with me using the word Semitic, why? Semantics. You have no substantive argument so you argue about definitions. When clearly there's a social standard already set in place. Second, if you want to use obscure definitions you should make sure we both agree on the definitions so there's no confusion.

Regardless, of anything you say Berbers are a distinct racial group. I don't 'subscribe' to the racial classifications myself but for the sake of argument i simplified things. I'm not a faggot.

---------- Post added at 01:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:51 PM ----------

If you don't believe me Sufis dance ask this guy pal

That chick who has white fleash who is black is hot, i think i love her.

As 4 the sufis, the sufis are alright, the mystic ones are fine, mystics, shamans, saints are all cool, average religious folk kinda silly with it imo.. Jesus was not Christian, buddha was not Buddhist nah mean.

I don't think I'm "winning" this argument at all, and neither am I trying to...because we're arguing opinions and not fact. Race isn't a scientific fact. Sure, there are science-related fields like forensics that can determine the race of an unknown perpetrator based on evidence left behind like hair follicles or the genetic profiles of their DNA. However, those findings are based on probabilities and use inductive reasoning. They don't have enough deductive force to be considered science because it is possible for something to be true statistically but factually wrong. Even when they do paternity DNA tests, they can only say someone is the father with 99 point something percent accuracy, not 100% because it's based on probability and statistics. It's the same thing with the question of what race a particular hair follicle or DNA sample belongs to. I remember watching a series where Henry Louis Gates (an African American scholar) was interviewing some black celebrities and helping them find which tribe in Africa their DNA mostly matches. When he did himself, he found out he was actually more European genetically than African. Lol! So if he commits a crime and left some DNA evidence, forensics could conceivably think they are looking for a Caucasian individual rather than someone who is visually black. Research the "problem of induction" and you may understand why race cannot be scientific. Race is more of an opinion than anything else.
What makes this argument even more absurd, and why I don't think either of us can win the portion about race, is the fact that we are debating the race of a people neither one of us are claiming to belong to. You are not a Berber and neither am I. That's why I said I'd defer to a Berber speaking for themselves as to whether they consider themselves black, white, Arab, or none of the above. I think the way someone defines themselves takes precedence over the way they are defined by others. Your wife, for example, may be a Berber and claim to be white. I have also met Berbers who claim to be black..so even when they speak for themselves, they may not all agree. Like I said...arbitrary opinion. But on an individual level, I respect someone's right to define themselves. If you tell me your name is Muhammad Ali, I'm not going to insist on calling you Cassius Clay, no matter what your birth certificate says, because I'm not an asshole like that. It isn't my opinion or your birth certificate that ultimately defines your identity. It is you who define it, and I respect that.
The portion about history is more concrete and winnable as a debate item. But the thing about history is...we mostly get the side of the winners and it can be told from many angles. For example, the perspective with which I was taught about the War of 1812 growing up in the US is rather different from the perspective that I learned was taught here since moving to Canada. This brings me to what you were saying about black and white revisionists. Yes, there are historical revisionists, both black and white or otherwise, who twist history to suit their own agenda or to make themselves feel better or their ancestors look better in the past than they actually might have looked. However, history being revised isn't always a bad thing. Sometimes it's actually history being corrected. Like I said, history is mostly told from the perspective of the winners. "Until lions have their own historians, tales of the hunt will always glorify the hunter"....or so the saying goes. Particularly for people who have been marginalized or have been the losers of historical events, you can't always take for granted that what we were all taught is 100% factual. An alternative version of history can be wrong, but it isn't wrong simply because it is alternative, if you get what I'm trying to say.
Either way, it's been an interesting chit-chat. Keep elevating!

The black man is God, so Everything Comes from us.. Including white folks

How did this get posted here?

lol @ writing "getSchooled" after posting a bunch of bullshit

remember when i said ... black "inventors" took things that already existed , and just put a tweak on it?

"traffic lights

The first known traffic signal appeared in London in 1868 near the Houses of Parliament. Designed by JP Knight, it featured two semaphore arms and two gas lamps. The earliest electric traffic lights include Lester Wire's two-color version set up in Salt Lake City circa 1912, James Hoge's system (US patent #1,251,666) installed in Cleveland by the American Traffic Signal Company in 1914, and William Potts' 4-way red-yellow-green lights introduced in Detroit beginning in 1920. New York City traffic towers began flashing three-color signals also in 1920.

Garret Morgan's cross-shaped, crank-operated semaphore was not among the first half-hundred patented traffic signals, nor was it "automatic" as is sometimes claimed, nor did it play any part in the evolution of the modern traffic light."

"Filament for light bulb:

English chemist/physicist Joseph Swan experimented with a carbon-filament incandescent light all the way back in 1860, and by 1878 had developed a better design which he patented in Britain. On the other side of the Atlantic, Thomas Edison developed a successful carbon-filament bulb, receiving a patent for it (#223898) in January 1880, before Lewis Latimer did any work in electric lighting. From 1880 onward, countless patents were issued for innovations in filament design and manufacture (Edison had over 50 of them). Neither of Latimer's two filament-related patents in 1881 and 1882 were among them, nor did they make the light bulb last longer, nor is there reason to believe they were adopted outside Hiram Maxim's company where Latimer worked at the time. (He was not hired by Edison's company until 1884, primarily as a draftsman and an expert witness in patent litigations).

Latimer also did not come up with the first screw socket for the light bulb or the first book on electric lighting."


Lawn Mower:

English engineer Edwin Budding invented the first reel-type lawn mower (with blades arranged in a cylindrical pattern) and had it patented in 1830. In 1868 the United States issued patent #73807 to Amariah M. Hills of Connecticut, who went on to establish the Archimedean Lawn Mower Co. in 1871. By 1888, the US Patent Office had granted 138 patents for lawn mowers (Butterworth, Growth of Industrial Art). Doubtlessly there were even more by the time Burr got his patent in 1899.

Some website authors want Burr to have invented the first "rotary blade" mower, with a centrally mounted spinning blade. But his patent #624749 shows yet another twist on the old reel mower, differing in only a few details with Budding's original."

"Automatic Transmission/Gearshift:

The first automatic-transmission automobile to enter the market was designed by the Sturtevant brothers of Massachusetts in 1904. US Patent #766551 was the first of several patents on their gearshift mechanism. Automatic transmission technology continued to develop, spawning hundreds of patents and numerous experimental units; but because of cost, reliability issues and an initial lack of demand, several decades passed before vehicles with automatic transmission became common on the roads."


"Elevator:

Steam-powered hoisting devices were used in England by 1800. Elisha Graves Otis' 1853 "safety elevator" prevented the car from falling if the cable broke, and thus paved the way for the first commercial passenger elevator, installed in New York City's Haughwout Department Story in 1857. The first electric elevator appeared in Mannheim, Germany in 1880, built by the German firm of Siemens and Halske. A self-closing shaft door was invented by J.W. Meaker in 1874 ("Improvement in Self-closing Hatchways," US Patent No. 147,853)."


"Peanut Butter:

Peanuts, which are native to the New World tropics, were mashed into paste by Aztecs hundreds of years ago. Evidence of modern peanut butter comes from US patent #306727 issued to Marcellus Gilmore Edson of Montreal, Quebec in 1884, for a process of milling roasted peanuts between heated surfaces until the peanuts reached "a fluid or semi-fluid state." As the product cooled, it set into what Edson described as "a consistency like that of butter, lard, or ointment." In 1890, George A. Bayle Jr., owner of a food business in St. Louis, manufactured peanut butter and sold it out of barrels. J.H. Kellogg, of cereal fame, secured US patent #580787 in 1897 for his "Process of Preparing Nutmeal," which produced a "pasty adhesive substance" that Kellogg called "nut-butter." "

"Dustpan:

While the ultimate origin of the dustpan is lost in the mists (dusts?) of time, at least we know that US patent #20811 for "Dust-pan" was granted to T.E. McNeill in 1858. That was the first of about 164 US dustpan patents predating Lloyd Ray's."

"Clothes Dryer:

The "clothes-drier" described in Sampson's patent was actually a rack for holding clothes near a stove, and was intended as an "improvement" on similar contraptions:

My invention relates to improvements in clothes-driers. The object of my invention is to suspend clothing in close relation to a stove by means of frames so constructed that they can be readily placed in proper position and put aside when not required for use.

US patent #476416, 1892

Nineteen years earlier, there were already over 300 US patents for such "clothes-driers"
(Subject-Matter Index of Patent 1790 to 1873).

A Frenchman named Pochon in 1799 built the first known tumble dryer -- a crank driven, rotating metal drum pierced with ventilation holes and held over heat. Electric tumble dryers appeared in the first half of the 20th century."


"Heating Furnace:

In the hypocaust heating systems built by the ancient Romans, hot air from a furnace circulated under the floor and up through the channels inside the walls, thereby distributing heat evenly around the building. One of the most famous heating systems in recent centuries was the iron furnace stove known as the "Franklin stove," named after its purported originator Benjamin Franklin around 1745 AD. The US had issued over 4,000 patents for heating stoves and furnaces by 1888 (Benjamin Butterworth, Growth of Industrial Art, 1888)."




Nice try tho

---------- Post added at 04:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:08 PM ----------

ill get @ the other "inventions" later,

---------- Post added at 04:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:08 PM ----------

Probably get banned again for saying the truth but w.e ... lol funny af


Einstein was a plagiarist too btw ... hes not black but its interesting. idc about race , just the facts ... not the made-up fantasy world stachio wants to live in .... :high: ...

@Rain Matrix 2017 banned again? I thought a while back they went away with "policing" racism here?

Also ..

The blood bank was invented by charles drew
the pacemaker was invented by John Hopps
laser eye surgery was invented by Theodore Maiman


Getting bored of giving this nigga a history lesson ima stop for a bit ... ill continue later

---------- Post added at 04:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:23 PM ----------

i dunno im just posting the real inventors ... turns out they werent black people after all

:confused:

Umm so most inventions are updates. A stainless steel knife is an update of a stone knife. Doesn't take away from the patented invention. You didn't teach me anything I didn't already know or suspect was the case. You just proved your own vanity in needing to defend your racism. Also, you clearly didn't read... I didn't say laser eye surgery... I said laser cataract surgery. Plus you must be delusional if you believes those "updates" don't contribute to your modern day lifestyle, which was my point. Read between the lines.

---------- Post added at 05:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:41 PM ----------

Plus, I've got your dumbass doing fact checking research to defend your biggotry... now that's funny asf. As if you are really proving that these contributions are not meaningful. Lolollol....

---------- Post added at 05:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:42 PM ----------

The first homo sapiens were black, so do you discount all their inventions that were later updated? Smh....

So I tied a string around a piece of cardboard. I just invented shoes

---------- Post added at 06:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:57 PM ----------

Fact is , if THAT type of shit is your A-material ... Stealing white people's ideas ... If that's the best u got? The argument is over

Lol @ the folding chair ... Nigga was running out of shit by the end . Niggas is too lazy to pagarise let alone invent anything


Go invent me a sandwich nigga

---------- Post added at 06:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:00 PM ----------

The whole race standing behind the folding chair Rofl wow


Be proud ... Probably wasn't even invented by u guys but I'll let u have that one

What about the guy who invented hickies by putting a twist on the moustache burn he got on his neck? Saw a pic one time...Pretty sure he was white.....no matter how many times he says nigga.

Go back to poppin benzos with a few drinks and invent yourself an overdose

While it's clearly from racist descent and means nothing....Rain Matrix just fucking owned Stachio.

So when facts fail u rely on insults and suicide jokes

Okay you win if it means that much to u idgaf. I'm just a nigga that enjoys the truth, would be nice if dragons and unicorns existed but telling me to die isnt gonna make them real lol


Ignorance is bliss but knowledge is power

its a battle rap website...what do you expect? Guess youre more the unicorn type tho.

Is that a slavery joke? shiet was leeeeet ownage

---------- Post added at 01:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:13 AM ----------

1) Most know about the invention list. I'm sure he only had to Google the details. Honestly, it seems like you got trolled bad af when you have to reduce a peoples worth to a fuckin invention list. Black people don't get value from a list , they get it because they're human.

2) New evidence shows humans may have evolved out of Europe, not Africa. So what now? And original man, black or white, didn't have many inventions. Mainly just ones for hunting and shelter. Besides, you have no clue what color people were then. Most of our original inventions came from Mesopotamia and Egypt anyways and they weren't black or white.

---------- Post added at 01:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:27 AM ----------

The trolling is strong with you, faggot who talks about unicorns in 2017.