Those who flame brazil84 and me demonstrate their lack of morality and civility. Their inability to counter our arguments demonstrates either intellectual deficiencies, or lack of truth. Even a genius cannot argue an obvious falsehood.
How is brazil84 lying? 
How is “Negro” a race if some “Negro” populations are genetically closer to “white” and “Asian” populations than to other “Negro” populations?
You’re just making things up- you have no genetic evidence. And it doesn’t even make sense. Why is intelligence/agreeableness more of an adaptive advantage in “civilization” over a hunter-gatherer societies? Smart/cooperative hunter-gatherers should be much more successful and have more offspring than dumb ones.
The reason there are so many taboos against discussing black inadequacies is because those inadequacies are obvious to a country that has made the decision to treat blacks like equals. This is why those who tell the truth arouse so much anger.
A person blaming the Great Depression on Jewish financial swindling would not arouse anger, only condescending smiles.
I am not making this up:
In 2005, offending rates [for murder] for blacks were more than 7 times higher than the rates for whites.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm
I think that is appalling, don’t you? Genetic evidence consists of the fact that blacks are characterized by stupidity and crime everywhere they live. They always have been.
Intelligence benefits hunters, or humans would not have evolved as they have. Most of distinctly human evolution happened during the paleolithic era. Nevertheless, paleolithic hunters are not required to learn mathematics, or languages that have more than perhaps a thousand words. They are not required to learn how to write. These skills require an additional degree of intelligence.
I use the word “Negro” rather than “black” in order to distinguish between the Bantu and their American descendants, and the Bushmen of southern Africa.
That’s a lovely Just So story. Pity it’s simplistic bullshit:
Despite the oceans of ink spilled on this question, no credible evidence exists that pathways to hypertension are different between blacks and other ethnic groups
Of course it can.
Just stop fucking right there. “Negroes” were in the Iron Age same time as everyone else, and independently. So don’t give us that Stone Age crap, Mr My-Neanderthal-Ancestors-Never-Mastered-Microliths-Never-Mind-Metals .
And he doesn’t disappoint!
NDD, when you say “black”, what “black” do you mean? All hundred or so different colored races, including the ones that are very close to european genealogy? Furthermore, I see absolutely no reason why social environment cannot lead to an 8x higher crime rate.
You need to watch this video.
What about the many sub-Saharan African populations that are neither Bantu nor “Bushmen”?
And yet most Africans speak far more languages than most Americans. There’s no evidence for this “civilization versus hunter-gatherer” hypothesis of yours. But there’s no evidence for the genetic propensity for the “races”, either.
There’s no need for the quotes, Bushmen is perfectly acceptable to them - in fact, the PC-term “San” nowadays embraced by everyone from governments to scientists is actually itself a Nama pejorative.
You are very good at illustrating your level of ignorance and great stupidity.
By all accounts a large percentage and even most of the American black populations were drawn from the West Africa region. The Bantu speakers do not live in the West Africa region, except a small part in the very extreme south end of Cameroun.
The populations that can be called Bantu and that descended from the expansion of the Bantus who contributed to the Americas would come only from the Kongos. They are only a part of the populations to go to the Americas.
It is sad that after so many people signaling this to you, you remain to ignorant and to stupid.
Again, it is American politics that concerns you in reality.
We can forget about the cretinism of this stone age claim, it not only has no historical sense to it, it has no sociological sense as well.
What is actually very amusing is the continued ignoring of the crime datas that completely contradict these primitive ideas.
That’s not exactly true. People who flame you and b84 do so because of your obvious racism and ignorance. Your refusal to accept facts that directly contradict your absurd claims make this less a debate and more PALATR (Point and look at the retard).
When people speak of “genetic relationships” between groups, whether’s it’s population groups of humans or different animal species, what we’re really talking about is the Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA). How closely two groups or species are related is how recently their MRCA existed. This goes for individuals too- siblings have a MRCA one generation back, first cousins have a MRCA two generations back, etc.
This is why it’s absurd to group sub-Saharan Africans (and the sub-Saharan African diaspora) as a “race”; many populations of sub-Saharan Africans have a MRCA with Europeans and Asians that is more recent then their MRCA with other sub-Saharan African populations. This chart, using mitochondrial DNA, shows the relative MRCA between multiple groups. For example (from the chart), the Bamileke of Cameroon (#19) have a more recent MRCA with Siberians (#30) then with the Kikuyu of Kenya (#11). So any race that includes the Bamileke and the Kikuyu must include Siberians, unless the racial “classification” is not based on genetic relationships or MRCA.
Putting the Kikuyu and Bamileke in the same “racial classification”, while putting Siberians in another, is like putting tigers and lizards in the same taxonomic classification (perhaps “quadrupeds”) while putting humans in another (“bipeds”), and snakes in yet another (perhaps “serpents”). It may make sense in a certain way, but that way has nothing to do with genetics or Most Recent Common Ancestor.
At least we’ve gotten way past any notion of NDD’s racism being “science-based”. His constant imagery of stone aged primitives in the jungle betray the real view he has of Black Africans. I’m sure he pictures himself like this in his dreams.
You are partially right, but yours is a minor point. The people brought to the New World were Negroes, rather than the racially distinct Pygmies and Bushmen.
A large number of these Negroes were Bantu, as you can see from this list of Negroes brought to Cuba:
Group Number of Africans landed in Cuba during slave trade
Bantu 400,000
Yoruba 275,000
Ibo/Ibibio/Ijaw 240,000
Ewe/Fon 200,000
Others 185,000
http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/spirituality-connect-your-center/9372-ethnic-influences-cuba-resulting-history-african-slave-trade-cuba.html
No, I am entirely right: encore, http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v464/n7290/fig_tab/nature08976_F3.html
The populations of the West Africa region are not synonymous with Bantu as a population.
Your invention of racial distinction has no sense at all.
You just proved my point. The Yoruba are closer, genetically, to Europeans and Asians then they are to the Ibo. Why should Yoruba and Ibo be in the same race?