asia for the asians, africa for the africans, white countries for everybody!.
everybody says there is this race problem.
everybody says this race problem will be solved when the third world pours into every white country and only into white countries.. the netherlands and belgium are just as crowded as japan or taiwan, but nobody says japan or taiwan will solve this race problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.. everybody says the final solution to this race problem is for every white country and only white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.. what if i said there was this race problem and this race problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into every black country and only into black countries?.
Diog - The advantage that certain races have in sprinting is definitely genetic.
The article identifies ONE single mutation of ONE single gene and then tries to disprove the genetic factor by showing it is also found in people not known for sprinting.
Anybody who thinks that genetic effects can be reduced to one mutation of one gene ought to be put to work writing horoscopes and kept well away from science.
The article is ideology masquerading as science.
asia for the asians, africa for the africans, white countries for everybody!.
everybody says there is this race problem.
everybody says this race problem will be solved when the third world pours into every white country and only into white countries.. the netherlands and belgium are just as crowded as japan or taiwan, but nobody says japan or taiwan will solve this race problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.. everybody says the final solution to this race problem is for every white country and only white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.. what if i said there was this race problem and this race problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into every black country and only into black countries?.
the very notion of "black" athletic superiority is deeply misguided.
Bollocks.
A 'gene for sprinting'. What utter nonsense. That article in the Times was obviously written by a journalist who normally writes the horoscope.
asia for the asians, africa for the africans, white countries for everybody!.
everybody says there is this race problem.
everybody says this race problem will be solved when the third world pours into every white country and only into white countries.. the netherlands and belgium are just as crowded as japan or taiwan, but nobody says japan or taiwan will solve this race problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.. everybody says the final solution to this race problem is for every white country and only white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.. what if i said there was this race problem and this race problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into every black country and only into black countries?.
FTS - you are equivocating. NOBODY is advocating Victorian attitudes of social Darwinism FFS.
Of course race describes something real. HOWEVER every attempt to define or classify races is imperfect and subject to numerous exceptions an anomalies.
We can squabble over pedantic definitions all night or we can admit that there are differences in groups of people who originate in different parts of our planet.
Where is the freckled ginger kid in this 100m final? Perhaps we are just not socialising ginger kids to believe they can run fast.
asia for the asians, africa for the africans, white countries for everybody!.
everybody says there is this race problem.
everybody says this race problem will be solved when the third world pours into every white country and only into white countries.. the netherlands and belgium are just as crowded as japan or taiwan, but nobody says japan or taiwan will solve this race problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.. everybody says the final solution to this race problem is for every white country and only white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.. what if i said there was this race problem and this race problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into every black country and only into black countries?.
There's a refuge crisis in parts of Europe, but definitely not any white genocide crisis - Spoletta
I agree that the phrase white genocide is a bit sensational. Having said that, there are parts of Europe where self-imposed ghettos are a threat to the indigenous population.
threads about this have been made before, but none have been made for a few years.
i was very much on the fence with this one, i never really cared.
but i became curious recently, having had a few interactions with street preachers.
Among the words attributed to Jesus — whether he said them or not — are some brilliant insights, some facile platitudes and some dangerous dogma.
threads about this have been made before, but none have been made for a few years.
i was very much on the fence with this one, i never really cared.
but i became curious recently, having had a few interactions with street preachers.
You can claim that other historical figures may not have existed all you like, but this thread is about our man JC.
I'm not questioning the historicity of anybody. I'm saying that all of your reasons to doubt the reality behind the Jesus of the gospels could equally be said about many other characters from history.
You said in your OP that your thoughts are 'Based on the limited research I've conducted over the past few days'. I agree it is an interesting topic but I think you should dig a lot deeper.
The best case for a historical Jesus is probably made by Bart Ehrman. The best and most recent case for a mythical Jesus is made by Richard Carrier.
threads about this have been made before, but none have been made for a few years.
i was very much on the fence with this one, i never really cared.
but i became curious recently, having had a few interactions with street preachers.
Not so much a question of his historicity but rather a question of the importance of his historicity.
Well that's a totally different subject.
You should read the case for the historicity of Jesus by Bart Ehrman.
threads about this have been made before, but none have been made for a few years.
i was very much on the fence with this one, i never really cared.
but i became curious recently, having had a few interactions with street preachers.
It is a red herring.
People have made extraordinary claims about all sorts of historical characters. We can dismiss those claims without asserting that the individuals did not exist.
threads about this have been made before, but none have been made for a few years.
i was very much on the fence with this one, i never really cared.
but i became curious recently, having had a few interactions with street preachers.
But you started off by claiming that the Jesus of the gospels is not based on a Jesus of history.
The fact that his followers came to believe he was son of god says nothing about his historicity.
threads about this have been made before, but none have been made for a few years.
i was very much on the fence with this one, i never really cared.
but i became curious recently, having had a few interactions with street preachers.
Many of Jesus's sayings are rendered hollow if he didn't exist
How so?
