posted 08 March 2005 03:33 AM            

Your incapability of providing an answer. It's your call!

posted 08 March 2005 05:31 AM            

Also, don't forget to answer my question about the Gypsies!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Irrelevant! I asked you a simple question, that requires a straight forward answer. Any thing short of a *direct relevant* answer to the question is going to be taken as:

Your incapability of providing an answer. It's your call!

[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 08 March 2005).]

---

posted 08 March 2005 09:54 AM            

quote:

---

This is part of the Afrocentrists' Fallacy, there is no such thing as indigenous populations.

---

Of course there are you just don't want to admit it and here is why....

There is such a thing as indigenous peoples, even in America where you live, and yet you are NOT one of them. http://www.takingitglobal.org/themes/indigenous/

There is such a thing as indigenous Africans....but you are not one of them either.

You 'blame' Afrocentricism, but this is prepostrous and brain dead like most of your posts.

The notion of indigenous peoples is recognized both by the anthropological and historical community, and socio-politically by the United Nations General Assembly resolution 1514. It has nothing to do with Afrocentrism, and Europeans are NOT indigenous to Ancient Egypt.

No current or recent scholarship claims otherwise, and digging around for little bits of grey, red or yellow hair on cadavers has no bearing WHATSOEVER, on any of the above.

posted 08 March 2005 10:43 AM            

Where is "indigenous" here:

What do you call those Africans, who never left the land of their origin?

posted 08 March 2005 01:06 PM            

Here is the official reason, why this term is called AMBIGUOUS.....now trying reading again.

A - WHAT IS AN INDIGENOUS POPULATION ?
1) OFFICIAL DEFINITIONS
2) LEGAL, POLITICAL AND HISTORICAL CRITERIA
3) ECONOMIC CRITERIA

'Indigenous population' is an ambiguous term : it relies more on common sense than on any definition that would be accepted unanimously or that could be applied universally, i.e. in all the different political and geographical areas. In fact, it is a notion that varies and it does not have the same meaning everywhere.
As an example, here is the definition given by the Dictionnaire Robert : "indigenous (indigène) : born in the country in question".

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Abaza, it is official now. You are incapable of addressing an elementary school question posed, where lies no mention of the term "indigenous" that you keep driveling about!

Where is "indigenous" here:

What do you call those Africans, who never left the land of their origin?

A 9 year old can perhaps help you answer this question without a hesitation.

---

posted 08 March 2005 01:26 PM            

I will only take one step down to your level and explain what the word AMBIGUOUS means.

ambiguous

adj 1: open to two or more interpretations; or of uncertain nature or significance; or (often) intended to mislead; "an equivocal statement"; "the polling had a complex and equivocal (or ambiguous) message for potential female candidates"; "the officer's equivocal behavior increased the victim's uneasiness"; "popularity is an equivocal crown"; "an equivocal response to an embarrassing question" [syn: equivocal] [ant: unequivocal] 2: having more than one possible meaning; "ambiguous words"; "frustrated by ambiguous instructions, the parents were unable to assemble the toy" [ant: unambiguous] 3: having no intrinsic or objective meaning; not organized in conventional patterns; "an ambiguous situation with no frame of reference"; "ambiguous inkblots"

=============================================

Now, do you want to rephrase your ambiguous question??

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:
Abaza, it is official now. You are incapable of addressing an elementary school question posed, where lies no mention of the term "indigenous" that you keep driveling about!

---

posted 08 March 2005 02:15 PM            

Here is your own words to this Fallacy of yours.

quote:

---

Abaza, simple question for whatever's left of your brain cell to burn:
since you have difficulty in understanding what "indigenous" means in a scientific context:

What do you call those descendents of the "original" Africans, who *never* left the continent?

...remember, time isn't on our side.

[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 08 March 2005).]

---

=============================================

There are tens and sometimes hundreds of people who can claim to indigenuous to Russia, China, India, and several other places. Many of these people, do not belong to the same race or even share the same culture or language. Therefore, to think that the Second Largest Continent on earth has any form is unity is ABSURD and LUDICROUS!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Super car:

Abaza, it is official now. You are incapable of addressing an elementary school question posed, where lies no mention of the term "indigenous" that you keep driveling about!

[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 08 March 2005).]

---

posted 08 March 2005 02:21 PM            

I guess it is needless to say, that you don't have English in the bag quite yet.

posted 08 March 2005 02:22 PM            

quote:

---

Abaza, it is official now. You are incapable of addressing an elementary school question posed, where lies no mention of the term "indigenous" that you keep driveling about!

---

Abobo's incoherence surprises no one.

posted 08 March 2005 02:32 PM            

ludicrous

adj 1: broadly or extravagantly humorous; resembling farce; "the wild farcical exuberance of a clown"; "ludicrous green hair" [syn: farcical, ridiculous] 2: completely devoid of wisdom or good sense; "the absurd excuse that the dog ate his homework"; "that's a cockeyed idea"; "ask a nonsensical question and get a nonsensical answer"; "a contribution so small as to be laughable"; "it is ludicrous to call a cottage a mansion"; "a preposterous attempt to turn back the pages of history"; "her conceited assumption of universal interest in her rather dull children was ridiculous" [syn: absurd, cockeyed, derisory, idiotic, laughable, nonsensical, preposterous, ridiculous]

Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University

posted 08 March 2005 02:36 PM            

Just a couple of questions:

Would you say that the duck-billed platypus is indigenous to Australia?

Would you say that the plar bear is indigenous to the Artic regions?

Would you say that the camel is indigenous to the desert regions of Africa and Arabia?

posted 08 March 2005 02:44 PM            

This is a trick question!!

Clarence Walker encourages black Americans to discard Afrocentrism
July, 2001
Elisabeth Sherwin -- gizmo@ dcn.davis.ca.us
Enterprise staff writer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UC Davis History Professor Clarence E. Walker doesn't have any plans to visit Cal State Long Beach or Temple University in Philadelphia soon.

That's where two of the most vocal proponents of Afrocentrism (Ron Karenga and Molefi Asante, respectively) teach.

Walker doesn't think he'd get an especially warm reception on either campus because his most recent book, "We Can't Go Home Again: An Argument About Afrocentrism" (Oxford University Press, 2001), is devoted to knocking their theories about a black African cradle of civilization out of the ring.

According to Walker's book, Afrocentrism encourages black Americans to discard their recent history, with its inescapable white presence, and to embrace an empowering vision of their African (specifically Egyptian) ancestors as the source of Western civilization, a dubious claim to distant glory that fails to come to grips with complex modern problems.

Walker describes Afrocentrism as a form of totalitarian groupthink, devoid of historical accuracy.

"Afrocentrism is a mythology that is racist, reactionary, and essentially therapeutic," writes Walker. "It suggests that nothing important has happened in black history since the time of the pharaohs and thus trivializes the history of black Americans. Afrocentrism places an emphasis on Egypt that is, to put it bluntly, absurd.

"I've always been interested in critical history," said Walker in an interview at his on-campus office. He is finding his views at odds with those who don't want anything critical said about blacks.

Walker has been an American history professor at Davis for 16 years. He grew up in an integrated neighborhood in West Berkeley and graduated from Berkeley High School. He earned his Ph.D. from Cal in 1976.

He is especially interested in the history of race and racial ideas and will be teaching a class this winter on the novel as social history. He is impatient with people who don't think critically, and he doesn't care if those people are black or white.

"There is no evidence that the ancient Egyptians were black as we understand that term today," he said.

"Afrocentrism essentializes history, caricatures Africa and holds out the past to be recaptured," he said. "It's not smart and it's not practical."

However, over the past 10 years it has achieved some academic currency, which upsets Walker.

"Black people are not the same today as they were in the past," he says. "We are of African descent, but we are not African."

He says Afrocentrism caricatures Africa by suggesting that that vast continent has one uniform culture.

"And glorifying history doesn't give us a great purchase on the contemporary world," he said. "In the post-industrial American society, no one should worry about whether Cleopatra was black or white," he added.

Walker said his parents came from southern Texas. He was born in Houston in 1941. His family then moved to California. He has never been to Africa and he has no desire to go there.

"The argument about origins misses the point," he said. "It's not your origins that are important but what you do with them. You have to take responsibility."

He understands that the Afrocentrist movement is designed in part to give blacks self-esteem and a sense of community.

Walker shrugs this off, too. "Fairy tales aren't going to get it."

"In terms of the education of black children, it hasn't done much," he said. "It may have given some kids a false sense of pride and that's not terribly useful."

Instead of promoting the mythology of Afrocentrism, Walker would like to see colleges and universities hire professors of African history who know what they're talking about.

At UCD, he'd like to see a professor of West African history who could teach classes on pre-colonial Africa and the slave trade.

"Students would learn that blacks in the United States didn't come out of a void; that there were complex societies in West Africa," he said.

"History is controversial," said Walker. "But how you read the past has all sorts of implications for the present." Walker suggests that there were many cradles of civilization including Egypt, the Nile Valley and China.

"I'm an old-fashioned intellectual critic," said Walker. "I don't like a lot of work being done in the field. No history should be presented as an exercise in celebration.

"What black people really need is a usable present, not a usable past," he added.

Walker said the publication of his book raised some eyebrows in black circles.

But he has not head from Molefi Asante.

"There's nothing to talk about with them," he said. "Just because you want to believe the world was created by black people doesn't make it so."

Walker can be reached at cewalker@ucdavis.edu.

To inquire about ordering any of the above mentioned books from an independent bookstore,
Bogey's Books at discounted prices [ Click Here ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Author Menu] [Date Menu] [Genre Menu] [Home Page] [Links] [Sponsors]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Davis Virtual Market | | Davis Community Network

posted 08 March 2005 02:57 PM            

the Chinese, Turks, Armenians,Veddoid of
Southern India, and the Malay of South East Asia are they not all native people of ASIA?

Now, if they are all native or indigenous people if you like, do they all belong to the same racial group and share the same culture and language?

Please try to answer my two simple questions...thanks!![b]

******* super car and others are encourged to participate as well!! ********

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
To Abaza

Just a couple of questions:

Would you say that the duck-billed platypus is [b]indigenous to Australia?

Would you say that the plar bear is indigenous to the Artic regions?

Would you say that the camel is indigenous to the desert regions of Africa and Arabia?

Would you say that the people of Africa whose genotypes and phenotypes derive from adaptations to the tropical and subtropical regions of Africa are indigenous to Africa

---

[This message has been edited by ABAZA (edited 08 March 2005).]

posted 08 March 2005 03:05 PM            

quote:

---

I see your questions

---

posted 08 March 2005 03:09 PM            

Thanks for your help anyway.....Good Luck!

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
[QUOTE]I see your questions

---

Have fun indulging this pinhead guys, I'm done with him. [/QUOTE]

posted 08 March 2005 03:14 PM            

Here's the answer: if the present form of the organism derives from long adaptation to a particular environment then the organism is indigenous to that environment or ecology.

So the Africa-adapted people of Africa and their phenotypical and genotypical homologues in the other areas are indigenous to Africa.

posted 08 March 2005 03:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

Have fun indulging this pinhead guys, I'm done with him.

---

posted 08 March 2005 03:54 PM            

1. INDIGENOUS PEOPLE
2. ORIGINAL PEOPLE / NATIVES
3. TROPICALLY ADAPTED

and let us not forget the new words:

4. AMBIGUOUS
5. ABSURD
6. LUDICROUS

LOL ----you guys just made my day!!

My Thanks to Rasol as well - for the amusement and entertainment.

=============================================

"ask a nonsensical question and get a nonsensical answer"; "a contribution so small as to be laughable";

=============================================

posted 08 March 2005 06:31 PM            

It seems I'm the one responsible for starting this flaming subject of 'indigenous,' since I was the one who first mentioned it. Sorry Guys!!

Then again, poor Abaza seems infuriated by this word and just can't accept it! Like I said, there is no rationality with this guy! He can't even accept a simple term like 'indigenous' and as usual he brings up "Afrocentrism" and even claims that it was Afrocentrists who concocted the term!! LMAO!!!