Post by kemetic on Apr 21, 2020 10:48:55 GMT -5
Again folks may indeed walk away thinking he's talking about Africans, fact is, he never said anything about them being Africans and in the context he's using Black , it's about talking a piss out of white supremacist.
I value this potentially widespread misinformation in the black community over trying to annoy white supremacist… because there already too much misinformation.
I've been through a lot of text and one major work, that of S.N Kramer and I'm pretty sure they weren't talking about beards , headwear etc but Black heads,plus some genetic studies a yr or so back, about extremely dark skinned folks in the area around the Zargos mts early farmers...Africans no! Australasian looking folks similar to native Australasians yes.
Those alabaster or ivory inlaid blue eyed figures are not Sumerian but of the state of Mari in Syria.But they did interact with Sumer
So the question asked ,Sumerian Black yes!..Africans no!
However were there Africans who migrated in to the area post OOA time, How so?? we have linguistic , genetic and material evidence for that..but but that means the Sumer..$@#! [b,] No!
And finally let's not ignore those biblical begats man, those were not created by so -called Afrocentrics.[/quote]
There hasn’t been any aDNA studies done on the Sumerians so we have to wait and see on that point. Black headed is not evidence that these people were black skinned, and if they were dark skin, that still doesn’t tell us anything about appearances since dark skin in modern context is anything darker than a typical Northern European. You can be talking about someone dark like modern middle easterners or dark as a southern sudanese. Either way, if your not arguing for a direct connection between black Africans and Sumerians, what does Sumerians have to do with black African history? There were plenty of civilizations made by dark skin people world wide. Are we taking pride in them all or only those closes to Africa?
Also, the blue eye sculptures are definitely associated with the Sumerian artist.
Just to set the record str8 for anti FBA racists.
Joel Augustus Rogers was Jamaican.
Ivan Van Sertima was Guyanese.
Cheikh Anta Diop was Senegalese.
Yosef ben Jochannan was Puerto Rican.
G Kofi Osei was Ghanaian.
Alexander von Wuthenau was a white German European.
Stop the hate a/t divide and conquer methodology against FBAs, its fruitless.
The avg BLACK person whether of ultimate African, Asian, or Oceanian descent has no interest in history anthropology genomics etc.
The avg Foundational Black American knows nothing about any claims to be indigenous to North America.
A simple street survey or even a survey of enrolled students proves the above.
But never you mind any of that. It's souch fun Tilting Windmills. SMH
Joel Augustus Rogers was Jamaican.
Ivan Van Sertima was Guyanese.
Cheikh Anta Diop was Senegalese.
Yosef ben Jochannan was Puerto Rican.
G Kofi Osei was Ghanaian.
Alexander von Wuthenau was a white German European.
Stop the hate a/t divide and conquer methodology against FBAs, its fruitless.
The avg BLACK person whether of ultimate African, Asian, or Oceanian descent has no interest in history anthropology genomics etc.
The avg Foundational Black American knows nothing about any claims to be indigenous to North America.
A simple street survey or even a survey of enrolled students proves the above.
But never you mind any of that. It's souch fun Tilting Windmills. SMH
I don’t know how aware the average black american is aware of the new “we were always here” theory. I follow plenty of black social media platforms and I’ve seen enough people parroting that claim whereever I go to view it as not some simple minority. I would be surprised if a lot of black people who use the internet heavily have not seen that claim at least several times during this time. Though it really doesn’t matter how well known it is in our community. I specifically pointed out new young black scholars who ARE interested in black history, who have to wade through mounds and mounds of Afrocentric bullcrap, similarly to how I had to when these scholars had me thinking that someone psychical description is enough evidence to claim a historical person as black. I had to unlearn a lot of the things that were taught to me because they were just plain inaccurate and wholly outdated. I also learn to second guess every claim and dig deeper. Some young black scholars will able to wade through the bullcrap and get into real information, but I’m afraid the majority are swamped into believing these unforunate falsehoods. I myself have preach the same misinformation once not too long ago. Now I’m pissed and need Afrocentrics( and I consider myself one proudly) to step up to the inaccurate info dump of so many black scholars today and start embracing true black African history. We obviously failed somewhere in afrocentric studies when we have many of our people happy to embrace being native to the americas while pooping on the African continent.
BTW your very own people, white Europeans, invented the nappy hair & broad nose definition of blk ppls.
Try ranting and railing at the source.
Try ranting and railing at the source.