Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Pioneer1

I'm Changing...........

Recommended Posts

I've been changing and reconsidering my political positions and the way I think about society period over the past few weeks, but several incidents that I've witnessed the past few days are really accelerating those reconsiderations and changes.

I've suspected it for a while, but I'm begining to believe more and more it's not White Racism that is the main reason so many AfroAmericans are in the condition they find themselves in today, but Black Ignorance/Stupidity.
Both seem to feed off eachother, but Black Ignorance/Stupidity seems to take precedence and may very well be a major reason White Racism was able to flourish so through out history in the first place.  I'm also beginning to believe that many cases of contemporary White Racism may very well be logical REACTIONS to the Black Ignorance/Stupidity being witnessed.

I'm not sure how to describe the direction I'm leaning because I'm definately not a Republican or Conservative.  Perhaps a Pragmatic Reformist would be a more accurate description of my position based on how I've been viewing society in general and AfroAmericans in specific lately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, I could see whether you might feel Black people are ignorant or stupid, but I think this is more a consequence of centuries of racism.

 

I hope none of the incidents you are not judging Black people on is not based upon the Cardi v.s. Nicki fight 😉

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's not the Cardi B fight.......lol.
Although that's just a minor SYMPTOM of a much greater problem.

It was just a week of observing a Black city with deteriorating neighborhoods full of so many AfroAmericans sitting around being idle or engaging in foolishness with grins on their faces....and then I go into a University district that sits on the very edges of several of those neighborhoods and it's almost an oasis of peace and stability filled with young East Asian, Indian, and Middle Eastern kids with a totally different attitude about life and where they fit in in society.

I used to believe that our condition was solely a consequence of centuries of racism, but even during the years I believed it on the surface...deep down while observing the behavior of our people I realized that the problems AfroAmericans had and have is MORE than just the racism they face.

-Looking back at how much Black boys and girls liked fighting eachother in school and between schools

-Looking at how so many grown AfroAmericans today despite having high rates of hypertension, diabetes, and other problems STILL induldge in junk food.....50 and 60 year olds sitting around eating hot cheetos and drinking grape soda pop.

-Looking at how so many grown AfroAmericans who should know better will insult another AfroAmerican they don't even know just because they aren't moving fast enough in line or some other trivial matter......things most people learn NOT to do at 13 or 14.

-The lazy and sloppy way so many of our people do jobs they don't like, as compared to so many others who will atleast pretend to do a good job until they leave and find something better.

 

 

Much of the condition our people find themselves can't be attributed soley to racism.  Something is wrong SPIRITUALY......or perhaps it's not spiritual but something else that isn't tangible enough to put my finger on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2018 at 7:27 PM, Pioneer1 said:

but I'm begining to believe more and more it's not White Racism that is the main reason . . .

@Pioneer1 WOW. Not the main reason!?

 

5 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Looking back at how much Black boys and girls liked fighting eachother in school and between schools

Do you really believe that they 'LIKE TO FIGHT' or what about looking at this from another point-of-view. You don't consider that they have been conditioned to feel that is what they are supposed to do? fight each other. 

 

 

5 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

I go into a University district that sits on the very edges of several of those neighborhoods and it's almost an oasis of peace and stability filled with young East Asian, Indian, and Middle Eastern kids with a totally different attitude about life and where they fit in in society.

But again, I have another point-of-view in that 'the grass may not be as green on the other side as you may believe it is.

 

5 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

-Looking at how so many grown AfroAmericans who should know better will insult another AfroAmerican they don't even know just because they aren't moving fast enough in line or some other trivial matter......things most people learn NOT to do at 13 or 14.

 

YES! I can relate to this! But @Pioneer1 again, I try to look at this objectively and from other perspectives. 

 

When I read and watch documentaries about other countries like the East Indians, Asians and etc. and I see the ones that chose to leave their country and come to live in American, I see other issues too. Many foreign people leave their country of origin and immigrate to Canada or Europe or America to have better opportunities.

 

And I try to look at 'the Big House' meaning, the government. This government has a foundation in 'conditioning' African Americans from the slaveyard and that is a repetitive process that has occurred in history before. We represent the outcome today, of what the government intended in order to remain on top. So, I try not to focus on the negative Blacks but I try to focus on those that are positive. 

 

You know you sound like Jesse Lee Peterson.

 

I become very frustrated too, but the problem begins with this government and their slave system of which lasted for hundreds of years. Unfortunately, many will never rise above this conditioning, but to give the supremacist movement 'a pass' would be a mistake. 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chev
 

 

Not the main reason!?


No.
Because if we were smarter as a people White racism wouldn't affect us NEARLY as much as it does.

If my Father owns his own law firm, should I really care that you won't offer me a part-time job as paralegal?

If AfroAmericans had their own hospitals with their own doctors....which we SHOULD have by now if we were smart enough to do so.....the disparities in the healthcare system wouldn't be nearly as big of an issue as it is today.




Do you really believe that they 'LIKE TO FIGHT' or what about looking at this from another point-of-view. You don't consider that they have been conditioned to feel that is what they are supposed to do?


I think they've been conditioned AND toxins in the environment (lead, mercury, ect.....) are having negative influences on their behavior.  But where I blame AfroAmericans is this has been a KNOWN fact for atleast 20 years yet how many of our people are actively trying to RE-CONDITIONING your youth and CLEAN UP the environment?
So again, it's back to Black stupidity.

Just like the drug problem.
Even after it was publicized that crack was purposely put into the Black community, many Black youth STILL sold it, used it, and even rapped about it!

Can you help a fool?

 

 

 

 

You know you sound like Jesse Lee Peterson.
 

:o......GIRL, HUSH YOUR MOUTH!!!, lol.

I said I'm changing into becoming more REALISTIC about the problems our people face.
Jesse Lee DENIES reality and claims that racism doesn't even exist and never existed.


 

 


I become very frustrated too, but the problem begins with this government and their slave system of which lasted for hundreds of years.


My question....a question I've been asking really since being a teenager....was HOW did African people get into such an inferior position TO BE ENSLAVED in the first place?
It's not like Africans were all about love and peace, because they obviously fought wars with eachother.....but they couldn't keep Europeans from colonizing and enslaving them.

We can talk about the 400 years of slavery and oppression but it's hard for you to make a slave out of and oppresss someone your intellectual equal......especially for that long of a time.

Can a cat make a slave out of a dog.....or a dog make a slave out of a bird?
They're all on a similar level and each would be unsuccessful trying to dominate the other.
But a human can easily make a slave out of ALL of them because we dominate intellectually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/19/2018 at 9:00 PM, Pioneer1 said:

GIRL, HUSH YOUR MOUTH!!!, lol.

 

LOL @Pioneer1 Okay. I will on that one! 

On 9/19/2018 at 9:00 PM, Pioneer1 said:

Jesse Lee DENIES reality and claims that racism doesn't even exist and never existed.

WHAT!? No Way! LOL. He is terrible! LOL. 

 

 

 

 

 

On 9/19/2018 at 9:00 PM, Pioneer1 said:

My question....a question I've been asking really since being a teenager....was HOW did African people get into such an inferior position TO BE ENSLAVED in the first place?

 

You know, I have read your post in this community and I think you have actually answered that question and don't realize it. I didn't comment though, but it was a response you made and in it, you explained how 'AfroAmericans have been tricked into believing they are free when in fact, they are still being enslaved in the mind'--- you said something to that affect. Another time you said something in another post in that 'some Black AfroAmericans are not really AfroAmericans and this is the reason why it is mistakenly believed that some Europeans have more Black traits then AfroAmericans and vice versa'!!!!

 

@Pioneer1 That is the key to understanding how Africans allowed the Slave Trade to begin and continue for hundreds and hundreds of years. We can't undertand what is going on today with what you term as many of us being 'stupid fools' and 'ignorant' and 'racism not being the main reason' if we don't see the reality of this issue going far back in time in the African world and in other ancient civilizations too, outside of the African continent. 

 

Many Africans, even in ancient times were not pure AFricans!!!! They carried the programming of their foreign ancestors and it was defined as AFrican cutlural beliefs when it was not. This is how the enslavement of Africans took root. 

 

What you are referencing but not fully grasping is COLORISM and WHITE SUPREMACY in BLACK FACE. Many AfroAmericans are condtioned to be violent one against another due to deep seeded and conditioning but it all goes back to this very issue. 

Edited by Chevdove
complete sentence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/19/2018 at 9:00 PM, Pioneer1 said:

Because if we were smarter as a people White racism wouldn't affect us NEARLY as much as it does.

 

LOL! @Pioneer1 Again, we are not as dumb as you feel, it is frustrating, but it is not finite in terms of all of us. The problem is that the enemy of White racism is within us. Because we, AFroAmericans are culturally distinct and due to SEPARATIST and being isolated for slavery and etc. our issues seem the worst, but this is because we are the representation of the Original human 'race'!-- [species]! Therefore, we were the target to obtain White Supremacy. Our participation is the supreme target and therefore the main reason White Supremacy continues. Without our suuport White racism would not exist. It's kind of like, 'a catch-22'. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chev

I understand clearly what you are saying.
But it ALL eventually goes back to intelligence....not of the individual but of the African race collectively.

If you say the problem was slavery and what happend to our people, why weren't we intelligent enough NOT to allow ourselves to be enslaved?

If you say the problem is that African people are being targeted, why aren't we intelligent enough MOVE from out of the sights of whoever is targeting us and flip the script and TARGET THEM instead?

If you say too many of our people are conditioned and brainwashed by the racism that exists within them, why aren't they smart enough to recognize this, overcome it, and eliminate it from their minds and community?

Again, it all goes back to being intelligent enough and smart enough to recognize your problem and solve it.


 


Because if lack of intelligence is the REAL problem....then even if you manage to eliminate White racism it will only be replaced with Chinese racism or Arab racism or racism from some other group who is smart enough to come in and take advantage of our people.

Remember that BEFORE the Europeans came into Africa....the Arabs were there enslaving Africans.
Now AFTER the Europeans....the Chinese are moving into part of Africa taking over much of the land today!

If it's not one group taking advantage of Africans, then it's another, and another, then another, ect.....

Pan-African people world wide need to figure out a way to increase their intelligence and smarts so that they will stop being victimized by other groups.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

why aren't we intelligent enough MOVE from out of the sights of whoever is targeting us ...

 

@Pioneer1 WHEW! Okay, this is a lot to break down . . . HERE I go . . . 

 

why weren't we intelligent enough NOT to allow ourselves to be enslaved?

Because of THREE MAIN REASONS: [1] We’ve been born into this world and conditioned from the womb; from birth, from the beginning. Modern mankind came into existence in a world that was already well inhabited. This earth is old and inhabited by extremely intelligent people and we are presently being dominated and controlled by ancient beings. We are doing the will of the opposer of the Black African presence because we are being born and conditioned to be ‘EATERNERS’; [2] FLATTERY--- IDOLATRY. Early Black kings were flattered, statues were made and given to them and then they bonded with eastern women and soon, . . . [3] FORCE. Black men began to oppress their own people because they felt that they were not respected enough by them. They changed their format from being ‘kings’ to decreeing that their own people worship them as gods. . . then they were overthrown. Now, we are being oppressed through other methods of force. We are under the control of THE GUNS . . . in more ways than one!

 

…why aren't we intelligent enough MOVE from out of the sights of whoever is targeting us …

We can’t MOVE easily from out of the sights of our own mothers!!! . . . LOL . . . Okay, seriously, to bring this into a better perspective and offer a better answer, I would like to highlight a recent topic that you spoke about in regards to the media highlighting that preacher’s behavior towards the Italian singer star, Ms. Arianne Grande. You did not have a problem with this, and the fact that she was NOT a Black African woman, invited into the Black Church, never came into your conversation. This then, is the very method that has been used for thousands of years to affect the African world. So, whether we blame our White mothers, fair skinned mothers, or dark skinned African mothers for instilling White Supremacy into us and into Africa and giving us White baby dolls to play with, or whether we blame the African kings for marrying White and/or fair skinned queens has nothing to do with ‘intelligence’. Our ancestors were not IGNORANT, but perhaps deceived so as not to recognize the methods in how White Supremacy and Colorism became instilled in their offspring. They embraced Black, White and fair skinned EASTERNERS into their African DNA and Africa came to be no different that THE EASTERN [ie NORTH EASTERN] mindset. We’ve been conditioned. BTW the redundant term ‘SIN’ in its many formats, such as ‘MT SINAI’, ‘SHINAR’, ‘CHINNEROTH’ …  means ‘THE EAST’. SINOLOGY means ‘the study of China and the east. They came from the East – GENESIS 11:2. . . . I think I need to start a brief thread on this issue about the eastern form of idolatry being supplanted into Africa.***

 

….flip the script and TARGET THEM instead? …
That has happened even way back thousands of years ago, but only in small percentages. But overcoming COLORISM and WHITE SUPREMACY cannot be done without a Higher Power because it is a global issue.

 

why aren't they smart enough to recognize this, overcome it, and eliminate it from their minds and community?

Because, again we were all born into this and conditioned from the beginning. It will never be completely eliminated as a whole. EASTER is here to stay for many Black Africans because of choice. Many of us make choices due to not realizing how deep seeded this issue really is and how far back it goes. The Odds are though, that there will be a few that can [and have] OVERCOME this kind of mindset. And it is a minority of Black Africans that have already done this, even thousands of years ago, and have proven that Black African people do have a high intellect. To be able to OVERCOME negative conditioning from birth and to become free from forms of SELF-HATRED and SELF-DESTRUCTION to be able to affect others and then form a positive culture has already been done.

 

Again, it all goes back to being intelligent enough and smart enough to recognize your problem and solve it.

No, not at all. It is not about being intelligent, rather, it is about ‘being delivered’ from a negative mindset that has been conditioned from birth. We have to be delivered. Saved. We need a higher being that can help us to see what happened before our birth and at the remote time when our ancestors were first introduced to this negative mindset. Since we cannot live long enough to have been there thousands of years ago, when these first Africans submitted to White Supremacy, then, we need to get to the origin of this issue in other methods. Script, and confirmation is one vital method, but there are other methods too.

 

Because if lack of intelligence is the REAL problem....then even if you manage to eliminate White racism it will only be replaced with Chinese racism or Arab racism or racism from some other group who is smart enough to come in and take advantage of our people.
It’s all the same though. Whether it’s Chinese or Arab racism, it all culminates to being White Supremacy and Colorism that they have in their societies too. So yes, it would continue to compound the African people with these additions in Africa, but that too, has been an issue in Africa for a long time. Nevertheless, Chinese people and Arab people are also intelligent just as African people have the potential to have high intellect . . . the kind of intellect that separates us from the animals. The highest of intellect started in the African civilization.

 

Remember that BEFORE the Europeans came into Africa....the Arabs were there enslaving Africans.
Now AFTER the Europeans....the Chinese are moving into part of Africa taking over much of the land today!

Not really. The Europeans penetrated African long before the Arab Movement. But I can identify with the Arab Slave Movement as I am a product of that movement! My Great grandmother was stolen from THE PORT OF SUDAN byway of Arab Slave Traders that operated under an infamous Black African slave trader, a Turk, name Bakir. He known as a notorious slave trader and operated for a ten year period and he, himself was enslaved as a boy at the age of ten. Yes, the Chinese have renewed their fervor in Africa, but they were trading with the Africans for thousands of years, based on my understanding. African people have been intermixed with these Arabs, Chinese, East Indians, Europeans and etc. for so long.

 

If it's not one group taking advantage of Africans, then it's another, and another, then another, ect.....

Pan-African people world wide need to figure out a way to increase their intelligence and smarts so that they will stop being victimized by other groups.

This has already begun, but we, over here in America will never get that memo from our government. When you have land and control, you have ‘the means’-- to control your own destiny. Africans don’t all agree, but based on my research, certain African leaders have already bonded together and have taken complete control of their destiny and it would be for this reason, that Obama was elected. The ‘Pan-African’ Movement and the ‘African Union’ Movements and etc. that we hear about, would not be what has really transpired! Nevertheless, we over here, are being targeted and exploited because of what has already happened in Africa. IMO, this African ‘taking back control of their people’ has been going on since the early 1990s, and it has been kept secret from us. That is why I believe the Minister Louis Farrakhan has been preaching hard on JESUS; he deal a lot with Pan-Africanism and he may know who is leading the major issues over there in SUBSAHARA and EAST AFRICA. Unlike overhear, those Africans in East Africa and the Iranians and certain other governments were bullied and are part of the Western leagues. They follow the Western format and they vote and elect leaders, but what we do not really understand is that, these governments would never vote over their religious leaders! They adhere to their religions of old. I strongly believe that the very reason for the break up of THE COLD WAR and perhaps the Arab fallout such as the Arab Spring has to do with the Sub-Sahara Africa and East Africa and how they dealt with trade relations.

 

For thousands of years the African men have been severely and violently oppressed and this hell has been carried into the continent of Africa via the Roman Empire and more. But a good example of what may be going on today would be to study what happened even before these times and what happened during the Assyrian Empire and the Neo-Babylonian Empire. The tall Black Africans that you spoke about in another thread, correlate to the ancient Sumerians of Cush Ham and they dominated Neo-Babylon. However, they had been completely suppressed during the Assyrian Empire times because their military force comprised the huge ‘line backer kind of Black African-typed men’ known by ancient names such as Canaanites and etc. and also, Dorian Greek [Spartans] and Thracians, and etc. But the Cushites and other Black African-typed men suppressed under the Assyrians were somehow able overthrow the Assyrian ‘BLACK MILITARY FORCE’ and they set up the Neo-Babylonian Empire. These Cushites [Chaldeans] also worked together with some Medes and Persians too, and they were able to overcome WHITE SYRIA. So this has been the kind of issues going on in the African continent for so long. But, I think there is a significant change that has to do with trade and we are not being informed about it. Something is going on in this world, and I really think it is because of a spark that occurred in Africa. But we will never benefit from it over hear. We have to deal with our own government from other platforms.

 

Edited by Chevdove
graphics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chev


I don't have time to address your entire post yet but I wanted to ask you about a couple statements that stood out for me:


This earth is old and inhabited by extremely intelligent people and we are presently being dominated and controlled by ancient beings.


Are you suggesting that there are much older beings on this planet dominating African peoples who are NOT human?
Beings like fallen angels, nephilim, or giants?


Also you seem to play heavy emphasis on the words East and Eastern.
Do you believe East Asians are the orignal oppressors of Africans or that they are a special type of being in general.

What is your take on East Asians or the people of the East?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Are you suggesting that there are much older beings on this planet dominating African peoples who are NOT human?
Beings like fallen angels, nephilim, or giants?

 

@Pioneer1 I am not sure about the terms 'fallen angels' in terms of 'beings today walking around'. I am not sure about the term 'nephilim' and I just don't know where that term came from. It is not written like that anywhere in the Bible, so I am still wondering where that term came from. And, as far as 'Giants' this is the term that I focus on though. The presence of GIANTS means, based on my research, --- that they and in fact, all humans today are NOT PURE. 

 

Not only GIANTS, again, but all modern humans today are not pure, but we have 'foreign DNA' due to our ancestors from Africa that did interbreed with a foreign species. And, the Giant presence was more prevalent in ancient times for a very, very, specific reason; a very specific kind of SELECTIVE BREEDING. Because not all of the earlier humans practiced this distinct form of SELECTIVE BREEDING, they didn't have the presence of many Giants born in their specific cultures. 

 

In terms of African peoples being dominated by ALIENS; It is NOT a specific form of 'being' today that can be targeted as being different from humans today though, but we are all intermixed. However, this FOREIGN EARLIER SPECIES OF NEANDERTHALS did intermix with AFrican peoples and not just Europeans as the scientist try to streamline to happen. Neanderthals definitely represent that they had an earlier presence before the MODERN HUMANS of today and therefore, this term 'NEANDERTHAL' given to them is what I use. However the Bible term is different. Nevertheless, it is still the exact same outcome in that both the Bible and scientist are saying that there were earlier 'beings' on the earth, much earlier than modern mankind; HOMO SAPIENS. Therefore, the modern mankind have been introduced to ideas from the earlier past by these earlier BIENGS whatever their names really were. 

 

So today, we are still influenced by these non-African ideas, presented to us, AFricans that came from some earlier 'being(s)'. 

 

Today though, we all can see this in certain ways for ourselves----meaning---- the anthropological--- differences in how we MOSTLY look today as opposed to many depictions of the kind of people in ancient depictions amidst the ancient African civilizations.

 

We can see that Africans in the past as well as today did NOT have those incredibly large skulls and THE HUGE BROW RIDGE and, etc. as some of the ancient drawings showed. However, even today, we can see that many Europeans do still have this distinct BROW RIDGE, and the key is they have this feature on a large PERCENTAGE more than AFrian people do. Some African people do have this brow ridge but the percentage is very low. Some Africans, still today, have the massive skull, but again, on a much lower percentage than Europeans. And scientist admit that this feature is the same correlation to the NEANDERTHALS and other earlier homonids. Therefore and with the DNA analysis, this is one key factor that confirms all humans today have this in the DNA. But Afrian people did not retain as much of the DNA as Europeans. 

 

So eventhough, that kind of presence is NOT prominent today, there is complete evidence that the Bible is right in that the Africans did intermix with foreign presence (species) and that this foreign species also introduced strange ideas that have permeated through the African world; ideas that came from a much earlier existence that is not good for AFrican people. 

 

20 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Also you seem to play heavy emphasis on the words East and Eastern.
Do you believe East Asians are the orignal oppressors of Africans or that they are a special type of being in general.

 

 

@Pioneer1

 

Absolutely not. I do not believe that East Asians are the original oppressors of AFricans at all. And I do not believe that they are a special type of being at all. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

What is your take on East Asians or the people of the East?

 

What is your take on East Asians or the peopole of the East?

 

My take on the East Asians and 'the people of the East' is that this is a totally separate concept due to thousands upon thousands of years of history and migrations of peoples and the rise and fall of many different civilizations, and also, the many different cultures and civilizations in the east world. 

 

My statements regarding the early eastern ideas introduced into the Western civilizations is based on specific time periods, and therefore, without a good understanding of a timeline, it can be confusion, 'a Babylonish confusion' regarding this subject. So therefore, i will put a simple timeline now to better explain what I said earlier and to show how the EAst Asians have nothing to do with this earlier history.

 

------------------------------BEFORE 6000 BC--------------------6000 BC -------------4000 BC --------------3000 BC ----------2000 BC ---------- 1000 BC --------------------------------------

 

JOMON CIVILIZATION --- Before 6000 BC

AMRATION ---NAQADA---GERZEAN PERIODS --- Before 4000s BC

COPPER AGE --------------- 3000s BC

 

Okay so, I can't remember right off the other terms. I will come to me later. I have to think. LOL. But anyway, this is a start. The EAst Asian civilizations that I have learned about did not form until like way after 2000s BC. Ther earlier civilizations I just listed are the kind that played a factor in bringing in foreign ideas into the west..... when the earth was one mass. 

 

The Jomon civilization in what would be today, the FAR EAST, shows a certain type of pottery, rope pattern. Also around this same time, scientist and archeologist date other artifacts, NUMMEROUS ARTIFACTS, in the far east, and in Turkey Anatolia [ie. NOD EAST, or NORTH east] Many idols were unearthed of white god and goddess idols with the extreme long heads. They date this to be prior to 6000s BC up to and during this time period. So, this would agree with the Bible in that IDOLATRY stems from eastern ideas. I have them somewhere in my notes, but it was not easy for me to find this on the internet. I had to use the search engine and certain terms for this photos of artifacts that are in museums.

 

Then in North Africa in Egypt, these artifacts became prevalent at a much later time period. So it shows a movement and migration again, from the east. The red-black pottery also began to be manufactured at this later time period. Then at another later time period, the mass underground graves with distinct artifacts show up and so on and so forth during the 4000s bc.

 

3000s BC, then it became easy to date civilization due to TRADE, the massive trade of copper which showed up as far as the ancient Americas. However, the technique and concentration of copper artifacts was thick in the Mediterranean region and again, this is another method used to date civilizations that came after the 10,000s BC --6000s BC, and after the 4000s BC. There are distinct and different kinds of COPPER SMELTING, specific and can date certain city civilizations and this is when the Black KEMET civilization becomes obvious that it was started by them. There are different kinds of KEMET or BLACK king civilizations too. All of what I am saying now, is both exact and confirmed by secular historians and the Bible recordings. All of this information ties into how it is obvious that IDOLATRY and POTTERY and STONE IDOLS and then CRUDE IRON IDOLS and etc. was technology that first came from the east. By the time that the CALCOLITHIC PERIOD [ie. COPPER AGE] exploded into the world of production and trade byway of the KEMET kings, Idolatry had become common in the western world of the Mediterranean. The Eastern people were known more so in ancient script as being simple ASIATICS and not East Asian or Central Asians or West Asian [ie. Present day Iran, Armenia and etc.]. These terms came much later in time.

 

The BLACK kings, were not smelting iron and copper metal to make idols, but to make plates, and tools, and wheels, and etc. but they were introduced to idol making from the Asiatics and by the time of the copper age, though, idol making was an ancient occupation that dates back thousands of years prior to the Copper Age. There is so much more information I could give, but for now, I will stop here, but later, maybe I might share a very common term regarding METAL SMITHING, that might also help to understand the early Kemet people that became apart of the Asiatic world.

 

Edited by Chevdove
graphics, add to content

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chev

 

Actually the term "giants" is not found in the actual Hebrew Bible.
That word "giant" is a mistranslation in the King James Bible.

If you read Genisis Chapter 6 verse 4 in a Hebrew translation Bible you will read:

"The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown"


Nephilim in Hebrew literally means "those who came down".
Or some may say "fallen ones".

This is talking about the original Black men went down and mixed with the "daughters of Adam" or the Caucasian women.

Adam is not the first human being but represents the first "White" or Caucasian man.


 

 

 

 

We can see that Africans in the past as well as today did NOT have those incredibly large skulls and THE HUGE BROW RIDGE and, etc. as some of the ancient drawings showed. However, even today, we can see that many Europeans do still have this distinct BROW RIDGE, and the key is they have this feature on a large PERCENTAGE more than AFrian people do. Some African people do have this brow ridge but the percentage is very low. Some Africans, still today, have the massive skull, but again, on a much lower percentage than Europeans. And scientist admit that this feature is the same correlation to the NEANDERTHALS and other earlier homonids. Therefore and with the DNA analysis, this is one key factor that confirms all humans today have this in the DNA. But Afrian people did not retain as much of the DNA as Europeans.


What about the Australian Aboriginees who are not European and are dark skinned but have short foreheads and heavy brow ridges?

Do you think they have a very high percentage of neanderthal ancestry, or none at all?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

What about the Australian Aboriginees who are not European and are dark skinned but have short foreheads and heavy brow ridges?

Do you think they have a very high percentage of neanderthal ancestry, or none at all?

 

Sounds like you believe austrialian aborigines are not human perhaps even subhuman. Have you ever seen one in real life? Can you post an image of one these people with a "short foreheads" and "heavy brow ridges" and include a link back to the site you got it from. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

????

I'm not sure how you came to THAT conclusion based on the few words that I said, but you did remind me of what I was planning on doing anyway which was post pictures of a few examples.


Here are some pictures of Australian Aboriginees......

 

Image result for australian aboriginal

 

Related image

 

Image result for australian aboriginal men




Notice how they have straight hair (often blonde), small foreheads in comparison to their faces, and relatively heavy eyebrow ridges.

My question is could THEY have been mixed with Neanderthal?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to have difficulty understanding the difference being asking a question and drawing a conclusion.

 

None of these people have short fore heads and heavy brow ridges is nothing out of the ordinary. I also doubt they "often" have blond hair. Besides where did you find these photos?

 

Here is a more representative photo along with a link that speaking to the genetic lineage if these people. 

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-26/dna-of-extinct-human-species-pacific-islanders-analysis-suggests/7968950?pfmredir=sm

7872720-3x2-340x227.jpg

 

I gather you have never seen an aborigine in person.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy


The link you provided talks about PACIFIC ISLANDERS and MELANESIANS in general.

I'm talking about AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINALS in specific.

-two different subjects.


Also, we don't know WHAT ethnicity those girls are in that picture you provided.
There are literally thousands of island in the Pacific.
Do you know exactly who they are or where they come from?

I can tell you that ALL of the pictures I provided were of Australian Aboriginees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Delano neither has @Pioneer1; indeed he has not confirmed that he has met any aborigines.

 

Pioneer your statement suggests you did not read the article, or perhaps you did not comprehend it 😉

 

pioneer have you based your world view of these people based upon these photos from a site you will not name?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

the actual Hebrew Bible.

 

@Pioneer1 The Hebrew Bible that you are quoting is dated after the Persian Empire times. It is a translation after the Black Babylonians were overthrown around the 500s BC, but their script was not completed until AD 500s, almost a thousand years after the Persian Empire times. 

So then, I now understand where that word 'Nephilim' comes from based on what you are saying.

 

The Septugint was translated out of the Original Hebrews into the KIONE Greek language in 200 BC. 

the King James Version was based on the MASORETIC TEXT that was sparked by the violence that erupted byway of the KARAITE Jews over the Samartians who were from the Helenistice movement. 

Today, even the White Jews don't refute that the Hebrew Text "Tanakh" and etc. that your refer to has over 500 contradictions from the ancient Aramaic script and PHonecian and KIONE text the original Septuagint was based upon.

 

The Islamic men and the KARAITE JEWS swept through North Africa all the way to Northwest Africa and up into Byzantine during the AD 400s over this very issue of the White Syrians and Hellenes and Sarmatian Jews that wrote their own version of the Pentatuch. 

 

16 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

This is talking about the original Black men went down and mixed with the "daughters of Adam" or the Caucasian women.

Adam is not the first human being but represents the first "White" or Caucasian man.

 

You speak 'as a matter of fact', but if you give references, then maybe I can debate better. In reference to 'Adam' and his son Cain; this would be a contradiction due to the Y-DNA GENOME research that shows all MALES today stem from the AFRICAN MAN. How then could Adam be white?

 

So far, there is nothing that proves that the WHITE MAN reproduced MALES ORIGINALLY without the presence of the African origin.

 

 

Daughters of 'men' therefore, you are defining as daughters of 'Adam' the African man. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

What about the Australian Aboriginees who are not European and are dark skinned but have short foreheads and heavy brow ridges?

Do you think they have a very high percentage of neanderthal ancestry, or none at all?

 

LOL! You are saying in a authoritative statement, that they are not European, but that is so NOT true. The Europeans "came from the east". 

Also, I presented articles in the previous threads about the research that does linke a small percentage of DNA of the DENISOVANS to the Melanesians and yes, Australian Aborigines. I spoke about the MRCA-- MOST RECENT COMMON ANCESTOR of the Neanderthals and their linke to the Denisovans. I said that the DENISOVANS were EXTINCT.

The Melanesian people and the other distinct people that show this small percentage are not African but scientist say they have more Semitic origins that do Europeans though. We are all GLOBALLY INTERMIXED and we all on this earth show varying degrees of ancient pre-modern DNA presence. The Australians show that trait because of their specific GENE ARRANGEMENT and their early intermixture from which the Europeans and other Asiatic-type people today come from.

 

Nevertheless, the Y-DNA means that the AFRICAN ORIGINS is the obvious proof that even the Melanesians and Aboriginal Australians have this AFRICAN ORIGIN---Just as the scientist admit that even the 'White'--European man also come from this same African Origin. Therefore, just as Europeans, the Melanesians and the Aboriginal Australians are NOT-pre-modern homonids. They are HOMO-SAPIENS--modern humans. 

 

So no, the Melanesians and Aboriginal Australians cannot be Neanderthal for more reasons than one. Neanderthals are distinctly 'white' [IE DON'T HAVE MELANIN in their skin as the modern mankind]. The Denisovans and other earlier hominids are all very dark skinned and they are classified based on other anthropological basis too and etc. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Delano said:

It's insulting to say they look like Neanderthals. 

 

@Delano These beautiful people over their were and are severely oppressed and I watched a documentary showing how,they went through the same racism during the 1960s that we did over here. They were outlawed from being able to go into ice cream shops and etc.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like people who think. Having to choose between head and hrart people ill take heart people. 

Pioneer abirigubaksin Australia call themselves black. And they are the oldest continuos culture on the planet. Pioneer for someone pro black and about unity your comments about other black people., 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i remember way back in the 70s, an Australian tennis player named Evonne Goolagon (sp), - a grand slam winner who was curly haired and tawny colored and said to be a descendant of Aborigines. There was  a lot of talk when she broke away from her coach and manager who she claimed wanted to exercise complete control over her and her earnings.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I remember Evonne, she was one of the best players of her day. I did not know until now that she was an Aboriginal Australian.  You so rarely encounter these people -- outside Australia.  Then the Europeans did murder every single indigenous Tasmanian to the point not one lives today.

 

 Evonne_Goolagon.jpg

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how this became a focus on Australian Aboriginees with blonde hair.

I just asked Chev a simple question about them based on her earlier statements and all of a sudden whether or not Aboriginees are "human", tennis players, and how much I love Black unity becomes the main topics......lol.

You all can discuss that among yourselves....I'm focused on what I'm focused on.



 

 


Chev

You speak 'as a matter of fact', but if you give references, then maybe I can debate better. In reference to 'Adam' and his son Cain; this would be a contradiction due to the Y-DNA GENOME research that shows all MALES today stem from the AFRICAN MAN. How then could Adam be white?


Yes
The very WORD "Adam" means to turn red (or blush) in Hebrew!

"
This is the Hebrew word for "man". It could be ultimately derived from Hebrew אדם ('adam) meaning "to be red", referring to the ruddy colour of human skin, or from Akkadian adamu meaning "to make".

https://www.behindthename.com/name/adam

Black and Brown people generally don't turn red and blush, only those who are of a white or light complexion do.

Both Adam and EDOM which also means red comes from the same Hebrew root word "dam" which means blood.


The children of Adam are the children of Caucasians.

African history goes back thousands if not millions of years, but Adam was written about less than 6000 years ago according to nearly all the scholars.

This is because Adam was not an African.
Our people were BEFORE Adam or known as "pre-adamites".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Yes
The very WORD "Adam" means to turn red (or blush) in Hebrew!

@Pioneer1*sigh . . . Thank you for the reference, but the Genome project was published in 2012. So, what your reference is saying is that the DNA showing all Y-DNA linked to the African man is incorrect and what is being seen in the chromosomes for all mankind is 'a trick of the eye'?

Why now, whould White scientist lie about that? Why would they lie about originating from a Black AFrican origin?

 

And your statements about Black men earlier than the 'PRe-Adamah', where is your reference on this in correlation to 'the African Y-DNA? 

 

13 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Black and Brown people generally don't turn red and blush, only those who are of a white or light complexion do.

 

I DO!!! I told you that I was REDDISH when I was born and I had RED HAIR. My cousins, a lot of them were also born with REDDISH TONE and RED HAIR. My AUNT was born with RED HAIR. MY SECOND COUSIN has A VERY RED AFRO and he maintained this RED SKIN. My male cousin, is nick named RED because he still has a REDDISH tone. And we are all BLACK/BROWN, Dark skinned, BROWN-REDDISH SKINNED. This in on both, my paternal side and my maternal side. There are so many AFrican-typed people that are REDDISH.

 

As far as ADAM and the link that you provided from 'HEBREW' language, that is so INCOMPLETE just based on well . . . ME!!! LOL!

I am brown skinned and 'I fail the paper bag test.' I am not fair skinned at all. 

 

My research shows that ADAM or ADAMAH is not only defined as being RED, but it includes so much more.  Sometimes, his name is also spelled ADHAM and in the Bible it is stated that all men were called ADAMAH. Prior to The African man, again, there is NO SCIENTIFIC PROOF of any Y-DNA other than THE AFRICAN MAN, no matter if there is other proof of the presence of the Neanderthals or the previous HOMONIDS. Today, there is NO Y-DNA present other than THE AFRICAN MAN. 

 

You do understand that this name ADHAM is the origin of the name HAM [ie. CHAM]; and HAM IS A NAME THAT DEFINES AFRICANS?

 

13 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

The children of Adam are the children of Caucasians.

 

So, I get you, in that you believe that A WHITE MAN  is the origin of White people, and you are correcting scientist today, White scientist who say that they come from the AFrican man. WOW.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


giving him.....360 degrees of knowledge, just like Erykah Badu.


Brushwaves

Nicca, Nas and Dr. Michael Eric Dyson did a lecture and were on stage together so what are you talking about?
Infact, Dr. Dyson asked him if he would TEACH A CLASS with him at the university!

By the way Nas is from the Queensbridge projects.
I'm not sure if he was born there though.

 

 

 




Chev

Don't confuse ADAM with ADAMAH.

ADAMAH means "red soil" but ADAM means "to make red".

Both words have the root word "dam" in them because it signifies RED as in BLOOD.
But there are two different Hebrew words.

And as far as my references, all you have to do is look up the word ADAM in Hebrew and it will clearly show you that it means "to be red" or "to make red".

As far as non-Whites being able to turn red and blush.......

OFCOURSE we can now!
Most of us are mixed with Caucasian ancestry and come in all kinds of different colors.
I'm what most considered light skinned and I can get red when angry (I don't blush as much as I did when I was younger because I rarely if ever get embarassed now).

I'm talking about the original dark races that were UNMIXED with Caucasian ancestry and retained there original dark color.

Adam means "reddish man" or "blushing man".....take it or leave it but that's the TRUTH.

And no, don't believe White people came FROM White people but FROM Black people.
Just not African Black people.
I believe they came from East Indian Black people or the Dravidians now mostly found in Southern India.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Adam means "reddish man" or "blushing man".....take it or leave it but that's the TRUTH.

 

LOL @Pioneer1 I understand that is what you want to believe, in that BLACK AFRICAN PEOPLE DON'T BLUSH!

 

They don't have RED BLOOD going through their veins.  Interesting.

8 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Just not African Black people.
I believe they came from East Indian Black people or the Dravidians now mostly found in Southern India.

 

Well, I have presented the scientific recent information in that even the White Scientist report that ALL Y-DNA have this BASAL A MARK in all of their chromosomes and this is global. And this BASAL Mark branches off and the distinction in sub-groups all over the world who have lost the ability to show the dominant African traits are reflected in their Chromosomes . . . even the Black and dark skinned people of East India and elsewhere. Nevertheless, they all have this mark that is dominant in Africa, but you want to believe that East Indians do not have this same mark, that even White Europeans have that lead back to AN AFRICAN MALE ORIGIN . . . and you attribute their straight hair to being a different kind of BLACK PRESENCE. I understand you. 

 

Oh well... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1 I am adding some picture references. But firstly, I requested that you provide references and you did, so I should thank you! 

Now then, I want to say too, that in this reference, it did use the word 'RUDDY' to correlate to Adam, and it used the word 'ADAMAH. However, I also want to add that, trying to confirm truth, is difficult for anyone today, especially when today's scholars deliberately fluctuate from their own records too! This source link actually contradicts what they said. I have found too, that they try to alter the definition of the word RUDDY and extract that it actually means BROWNISH-RED and not just reddish! And again, the Hebrew source that you refer to, is not the Original Hebrew language but stems from the publication around AD 500s. This publication sparked the violence that came from the Islamic men and the Karaite Jews. My research goes much farther back to the civilizations of KEMET that are dated at the time the Bible dates ADAM. Adam does not even mean RUDDY, but again, BLACK or, BLACK-RED, if you do include that aspect. So I do agree with you in how 'red' can be included in on the definition of Adam, but it is not as you are saying in terms of being 'fair skinned'.

 

Therefore, here are some picture references to show you that, the KEMET people identified with this 'RED BLOOD' that they too possessed in relation to them also being of 'the BLACK EARTH', which would be the definition of the name 'KEMET'. The early KEMET CIVILIZATIONS DID define themselves as being BLACK-RED in more than one aspect and it was a prevalent theme in their ancient artwork and more:

 

ANCIENT CRETE MINOA

 

8308048275_ffb05cdea2_b.jpg

 

 

005.throneRoom-07.reconst.jpg

 

 

1200px-Knossos_-_North_Portico_02.jpg

 

In college, I was required to take ART HISTORY and this is what is taught, in that the ancient Minoan columns were red-black all over their city-civilizations

 

So even though the link you provided shows the word RUDDY, this would not even be true. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

44ebaf2a00b026be90c7220f04a3d358.jpg

 

@Pioneer1 Following, is the link you provided:

 

the Hebrew word for "man". It could be ultimately derived from

Hebrew אדם ('adam) meaning "to be red", referring to the ruddy colour of human skin,

or from Akkadian adamu meaning "to make".

https://www.behindthename.com/name/adam

 

But in this same link, it continues...

 

According to Genesis in the Old Testament Adam was created from

the earth by God (there is a word play on Hebrew אֲדָמָה ('adamah) "earth").

https://www.behindthename.com/name/adam

 

Your link is showing that 'Hebrew language' that is not from the older civilizations! Nevertheless, it still is presenting some truth, but they are just not defining it in completeion and with regards to the very land of KEMET in that it means BLACK EARTH!

 

Here is a published book:

 

content?id=lcblBQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontco

 

Exploring Religion in Ancient Egypt presents an overviewof the beliefs, sacred rituals, and

eligious practices of thepeople of Kemet – literally, “the Black Land”– whose Nile Valley

population stretched from Aswan to theMediterranean coast beginning from circa 3100 B.C.

https://books.google.com/books/about/Exploring_Religion_in_Ancient_Egypt.html?id=lcblBQAAQBAJ

 

Modern scholars of the western civilization have defined terms to extract the Black presence but the earliest of cilizations are set in these KEMET lands. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chev

Lol, honey WHY are you throwing all of this information at me???
All these pictures of little red-head Black children???

This concept is very simple.....Adam means "ruddy" or "blushing" or "to show blood".
The Hebrew definition IS what it IS and needs no spin or explanation.

Caucasians aren't actually "white" they are ruddy and reddish and Adam symbolizes the Caucasian race.

In Genesis 5:2 it plainly tells you that Adam isn't just one person but symbolizes a GROUP of people:
"
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created."

Adam and Eve were not actual individuals but a myth that symbolized the GENESIS of the Caucasian race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/7/2018 at 8:28 PM, Pioneer1 said:

This concept is very simple.....Adam means "ruddy" or "blushing" or "to show blood".

 

@Pioneer1 I've been busy...

 

Aside from your believing in historical dated accounts as being myths, I won't comment for now. But no,

 

RUDDY does not mean 'BLOOD RED', it means BROWNISH-RED. As I have stated, this definition has been altered, but it is science based. So, I will 

return with some references. 

 

As I have said, the same melanin that is in humans and in hair is the exact same in all plants and animals. There are only two. EUMELANIN (which is BLACK) and,

PHAEOMELANIN [sp?] which is RED. These two types are found in human and animal skin, hair, and eye cells is from the same!-- and the variations that gives rise to 

other colors stem from these two! Therefore, the terms RUDDY is scienced-based and your sources have altered that term so as to extract the Black-AFRICAN presence in their translated scrips.

 

Pioneer why are you asking 'why am I throwing all of this information at you' ?

 

I am supposing that you don't want me to debate. So, I will refrain. But would still provides some references about the color 'RUDDY' based on my research in how

this term as been altered.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chev

Lol.....
Are you trying to change the definition of "ruddy"?

Maybe RUSTY may mean "brownish-red" but not ruddy.

And again, the word A-DAM has the word "dam" at it's root which clearly means BLOOD.

It was the word Hebrews used for the color RED which is at the root of the word "Edom" or "Edomite".

If the term "ruddy" has been altered, who altered it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Image result for idumea

 

 

Just like the ancients called their land "Kemet" meaning BLACK land.....the ancients also called the land just north of Egypt where the Semitic tribes lived "Idumea" or "Edom" which meant RED land.

Land of the "red" or "ruddy" people.

Caucasians who live in the Middle East don't stay white and pale like those in Europe, it's too hot.....they turn reddish.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

And again, the word A-DAM has the word "dam" at it's root which clearly means BLOOD.

 

@Pioneer1 'dam' does not mean BLOOD. And you say clearly, please show me this in context, because I've never seen this anywhere.

 

2 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

If the term "ruddy" has been altered, who altered it?

 

@Pioneer1 I provided references that are scienced based.

 

The map you show are of EDOM, not JACOB. The reference about 'Edom' [ie Esau] is specific in that he was both RED and HAIRY. The word RUDDY was not at all used! His twin brother Jacob was not described at all to be neither red or ruddy. 

 

The term RUDDY was used to describe David who existed hundreds of years after Esau. 

 

 

45 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

Caucasians who live in the Middle East don't stay white and pale like those in Europe, it's too hot.....they turn reddish.

 

This is crazy. There are many White people and Europeans who live in the Middle East today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chev

 

 

 

'dam' does not mean BLOOD. And you say clearly, please show me this in context, because I've never seen this anywhere.


I'm sorry to break the news to you sis but yes, "dam" DOES mean blood:

 

 


 

Quote

 

 

 

dam(blood). Blood, an essence of human life, in its Hebrew form is built into the name Adam

 

 

http://hebrew.jerusalemprayerteam.org/blood/

 


 

Quote

Dam = Blood in Hebrew (Strong's Concordance)

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/1818.htm
 

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

Word: דם (Masc) Transliteration: dam Trans: BLOOD Definition: The red fluid that circulates through the body

 

 

http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/lexicon_dalet.html

 

 

 


And for further reference that Adam means "red"...................

 

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

Adam (אדם) literally means "red", and there is an etymological connection between adam and adamah, adamah designating "red clay" or "red ground" in a non-theological context.\l "

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adamah

  

 

Quote

 

 

 

This man was called Adam: which in the Hebrew tongue signifies one that is red;

 

 

"Flavius Josephus of the Antiquities of the Jews Book I"

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/ant-1.html

 


So you can't say you've never seen it anymore, and no matter where you go you'll find that the Hebrew word "dam" means blood and "adam" means red or one that is red.

I told you Adam was the first Caucasian (white man) and the Bible is the book of Caucasian origins.

You can learn the easy way or the hard way but you WILL learn.

 

 

 

 

 

This is crazy. There are many White people and Europeans who live in the Middle East today.


I didn't say their weren't.
I said that when Caucasians in the Middle East are exposed to that much sun light and heat they turn RED.
Which is why the ancients described them as RED people instead of "White", but they are the same people.

Adam and Eve is a myth that symbolizes the first White people who were driven out of the "garden" or Black civilization.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

told you Adam was the first Caucasian (white man) and the Bible is the book of Caucasian origins.

 

@Pioneer1 Geez, your source is only from the same source! No where else. This is not in any other context. The word 'dam' is not in anything relating to scientific classification. 

38 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

 

This is the JERUSALEM PRAYER TEAM.org FOR THE WORD 'ADAM'.

 

 

38 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

Dam = Blood in Hebrew (Strong's Concordance)

 the Hebrew (strong's concordance)

 

This is all based on that source and you are excluding your other reference in the word 'RUDDY'. 

 

This again, is being extracted, the 'RED' that your sources are based on is that they are extracting from even the word RUDDY!!!

I accept your references but again, your source is extracting the scientific complete definition of RED in association to KEMET.

 

[1] So let me just ask you this: You don't believe that Black people have 'red blood'?

[2] That Kemet ancient script excluded the definition of 'BLOOD' being scientifically defined?

[3] do you not realize too, that the very term 'BLOOD' also, in and of itself defines A RED-BLACK COLOR!? LOL

 

@Pioneer1 BLOOD is not 'red' BUT IT IS A BLACK-RED COLOR! lol

 

Scientifically, your sources have extracted the full definition of the name of Adam in his association to being an original Black African-typed man.

 

 

38 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

Adam and Eve is a myth that symbolizes the first White people who were driven out of the "garden" or Black civilization.

 

IF you believe thins, then why in the world would you use their book to define and believe in the word 'Adam'!? This makes no sense at all. You are contradicting yourself.

Edited by Chevdove
paragraph

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...