Biology behind the term someone is ‘Not Black Enough’

f977bdda850d02aa7cdd17577f5590ed8ac3ca82

Socially mixed people and black they are not considered the same which is a reflection on their biological features. This includes multi-generational multiracials, both multi-generational ‘light skin people’ aka mulattoes in the US and Somalis in the UK claim it is common for Afrikans to say that they are ‘not black enough’. This is based on what? The biological morphological traits of Afrikans which is brown to blue-black skin with Afro-textured hair. That shouldn’t be hard to figure out when I have seen first hand West Afrikans claim Somalis are not black but Afrikan Caribbeans are, despite the difference in continent and them both having chunks of their population which are admixed.

raven-symone-3

Raven-Symone, a light skin multiracial American. She is physically indistinguishable from a mulatto female showing consistent high levels of European genes and common alleles among the European contingent in her ancestry.

iman-scene-magazine-douglas-friedman-open

Iman  Abdulmajid, a Somali. She holds a hair texture consistent with heavy morphological admixture (partial or codominance in phenotype is the cause, this is something always ignored by pseudo-scientific followers), this is a common feature for people who live in the modern Northeast Afrikan Clinal Zone. A Clinal Zone is where 2 or more morphs (phenotypes) meet, Somalia and much of Northeast Afrika has seen a gradual mixture of morphs since the Kingdom of Punt.

somali_woman_hair2

Iman’s skin colour is not common however and is the result of bleaching. The image above is of a Somali woman who is the average complexion. The reason for Somalis hair texture yet dark skin is they contain admixture from before the current Caucasian ‘Arabs’ arrived in Arabia. There are still dark skin peoples who are aboriginal to the Arabian Desert living there, we just don’t see them on television.

mya-curly-black-hair-white-outfit

Mya is a first generation mulatto (Afrikan American and Italian), she looks virtually indiscernible compared to Raven-Symone who is multi-generational. This neatly demonstrates that the two have an affinity in terms of gene expression, irrespective of the fact that she has a white parent and Raven-Symone doesn’t have one. There is no doubt they are both mixed in phenotype.

black-girls-rock-jill-scott-2-e1427650775688

Jill Scott, an Afrikan American. She has both Afro-textured hair and is within the typical colour spectrum for Afrikans, hence she is black. If her genes are so different from Afrikans like the ‘we’re all mixed in the Americas’ crowd, then how do we explain the fact that Jill Scott’s gene expression is the same as Afrikans from the continent

The usage of admixture in arguments by negroes, their white masters and other non-blacks is worn-out and lacks scientific basis. Many peoples around the world are mixed with a minority of other groups genes. This is part of life people travel, people wage wars and raid other groups and the enslaved intermix, people get into relations with their neighbours whether black or white. This is actually explain by Clinal Zones, which many European scientists have ignored or attempted to invalidate by claiming’ we are all humans’ even though human clines originated in different places before meeting again. The usage of this false quote ignores morphological, genetic differences, with some morphs clustering closely with others who are distant geographically even with neighbouring peoples been drastically different. Morphs in all animals are the expression of genes which make up the living creature, this means the other bogus notion of ‘we are all the same under our skin’ has no scientific value. Common sense applied one could easily see that a Maasi albino, a Turkish albino, a Japanese albino and a Mayan albino would all look different with the same alleles for their skin, eye and hair colour. Even if the skin is carbon copies the gene expression is not so the overall phenotype is not the same under the skin.

high_brandi17sass-7f1d304e7d7f17fb5ae2f578a11193b3625bff93-s900-c85 thando-hopa-647x395

An Afrikan American woman and South Afrikan model Thando Hopa, the two seem indistinguishable ethnically due to albinism, even though Afrikan Americans have a different blood mixture due to slavery and the jumbling of Afrikan ethnicities into a new one. Compare this to the photomontage below of other peoples with albinism, they are easily descried as different.

Both gene expression and Clinal Zones are biologically based, not IMA media propaganda based. The propaganda of IMA scientists and historians, specially, shows that the current atheist trend amongst Europeans and those that follow their culture is actually religious and political in nature and not rooted in reality. If it was, the biological points I have made out would be common knowledge to those seeking the truth not the European agitprop.

skin_shade_map

111w-359

Note the ease with which to find a skin colour variation map. This is in stark polarity with finding a good map with the hair texture variation, which is the other pivotal feature in which is taken into account for race. The importance of hair texture is enormous, Afrikans have Afro-textured hair, which even in the Clinal Zone disappears by in large, this is actually enough to constitute subspecies (morphological difference based on geography which rarely ever mix due to this) but IMA’s have hidden this in plain sight. Eurocentrists claim that skull shape is the most relevant thing to race, this has partial importance but due to the fact that Afrikans have been on Earth for the longest Afrikans have all skull shapes within our collective. Something that has been noted in skulls tens of thousands of years old way before the alleles for pale skin existed.

Gene Expression is also not measured by genetic distance as nappy headed, brown and black skinned individuals exist in the Indian and Pacific ocean islands. On top of that the Afrikan people (not ‘Sub-Saharan Afrikans’ another IMA falsity) contain over 80% of the world’s human genetic diversity. This also proves another lie by IMA’s to be false that genetic diversity is due to distance Afrika takes up 20.3% of the world’s land masses but an astonishingly overbalanced percentage of genes.

Afrikans morphological traits can survive admixture, which is a point I have NEVER heard raised by idiots who love to say how we are all mixed. Afrikans ithe Americas should easily expose this reality; many Afrikans in Cuba, in Grenada, in Belize , in the United States are known to have ancestry mixed with Europeans, Asian migrants known as American Indians and even East Asian indentured workers during and after slavery to a slight degree. This has however not caused unequivocal differences in phenotype which is not compatible with that of the Afrikans in the motherland. Many people in the motherland have a few ancestors who were non-Afrikan, this has not changed their morphs either. This fact clearly negates the excuse of those with multiracial phenotypes, as the admixture in other groups is minimal enough to not transmute into a different physical composition (phenotype). Nowhere near all Afrikans in the Western Hemisphere or in the motherland is mixed in ancestry.

carson20ben20-20photo20hr

Ben Carson is exemplary of genetic pollution from previous generations. He still retains the skin colour and hair texture but due to past events in his ancestry he has a straight European style nose, demonstrating admixture but absorption not admixture and metamorphosis. The higher proportion of brown skin blacks in the Americas is also due to genetic pollution, this is the effects from slavery on Afrikans not some Jesse Williams mulatto or multi-generational mulatto like Ice-T.

The mixing of genes, not massively altering the phenotype is a sign of natural selection taking place, which is one of the most well known laws of biology. ‘Gene replacement instead can be completely gradual. A classic example of gene replacement are Black Americans (not represented in the tree of Fig. 3 which includes on aboriginal people), who notoriously have a lighter skin color than Black Africans, their ancestors. This is especially true in the northern States. Genetic analysis shows that African Americans have on average 30% of their gene pool from European (White American) genes (28). This partial replacement took place over about 300 years of contact, and it is calculated that, if it was constant time, there must have been 3% of mixed unions per generation. Laws assured that the child of mixed parentage would be considered Black. Only individuals with a very low proportion of Black ancestry (or of skin color) would be able to “pass” as White. With the gene flow continuing at that same rate only 30% of that gene constitution would remain after 1000 years since the beginning and 9% after 2000 years. (1)’ Excerpt from Genetics and the Origin of Species: From Darwin to Molecular Biology, 60 years after Dobzhansky. The book was released in 1997 and was a form of an update on the work of Theodosius Dobzhansky a Ukrainian born American biologist (then Ukraine was Russian land) who formulated much of the modern evolutionary synthesis which is the regulated and organised names and terms for biology and is crucial to the current evolution theory belief system, which is based on his work not Darwin’s theories. Theodosius Dobzhansky wrote the Genetics and the Origin of Species in 1937. Gene Replacement is the important  to our morphology, if a group has a profoundly mixed history and in turn ancestry the genes of the minority populations would not be pushed out of the populations gene pool. This in turn has an impact on the Gene Expression of the given population, as is noted in population genetics. Population genetics looks into the frequency of alleles (versions of genes) in a geographical population, this explains clines of hues and physical features regulated by geographical proximity and population movement.

dobzhansky1                     3407f9gilcgz

We must do our research as ACBN’s. Looking in-depth at the biological mechanisms behind our phenotype. Terrible media driven arguments are a rife, almost uncontrollable and are signals that most people in the West claiming atheism and anti-religiousness are nothing more than coverts to this new Europeans political humanist  and not in scientific backed reality. The difference between Afrikans and other groups is not just socially rooted but genetically and ancestrally. If we do not establish a socio-political usage to our genetic based morphological difference our identity can easily be manipulated with detrimental reverberations.

Advertisements

34 comments

  1. amosnwilsonuniversity · July 4, 2016

    Reblogged this on Amos Magazine and commented:
    Great Work.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Mr Smooth · July 5, 2016

    Great post i like how you didn’t use that stupid word sub Sahara Africa to separate our northern territory from us. These mixed race people in Somalia and ethiopia treat our people who are original dwellers like their arab fathers.

    That iman also got nose job to look like her arab gods http://www.celebrityplasticsurgery.tv/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/iman-before-after.jpg

    Liked by 1 person

    • Most of the original people called Arabs were black, before Arab was even an identity. If you do your research you would know the name Arab is not indigenous at all and was given by Persian and Greco-Roman invaders.

      There are still many Afrikans living in Arabia, it’s a hot desert no way could whites and off-whites be the ancient people depicted of Arabia who were often bareback in depictions. White ‘Arabs’ are invaders, but not all dark skin people in Arabia have the full Afrikan phenotype many resemble Indians from South India. They mixed mostly not the white Arabs.

      Liked by 2 people

    • I can’t use Sub-Sahara because all archaeological and genetic records prove Negroid Afrikan phenotype was prominent in North Afrika when it was rainforest little over 5500 years ago.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Mr Smooth · July 5, 2016

    You dont need archeology to prove we are native to every part of Africa especially north africa. Our people still reside there but are powerless.

    The term sub sahara is a sneaky word to deny our birth right to north Africa. That’s why I applaud for not falling for it.

    No the original arabs were not Black but the natives of the land which arabs occupy today. For example, original Latinos were not so called native Americans. Arabs and Latinos and other mixed groups don’t have any originality because they are products. They were not created by nature. That’swhy we can say original Blacks/Africans were brown to dark skin and wooly hair but we not say original mixed race people were

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes I mentioned the original people labelled Arab were black, either Afrikan or Dravidian in phenotype. Arab is an outsiders label, Arab just like Latino is a forged geno-culture created by Caucasian invasions, admixture and racism, both groups struggle to accept Afrikans as full members of their geno-culture which exposes their basis is anti-Afrikan, add the fact that they are not that these groups emergence coincided with Afrikans decline I numbers.

      Like

    • Europeans are also mixed Afrikans lived across the Mediterranean before whites arrived. It is extremely close to Afrika out of all region of Asia only Syria-Arabia is closer. Geneaology, although flawed has shown that Afrikans inflow of genes occurred significantly in the Mediterranean during the time when European first caught on to sophisticated society.

      Like

  4. Steve Toussaint · July 5, 2016

    I still don’t believe In these studies propagated by IMA’S about Black people in the America’s, Specifically The U.S.A. Are 60-70% African with the remaining gene pool being European as this is used to feed into the Anti Afrikan rhetoric spewed by multigenerational multiracial mulattos, first generation mulattos and self hating Afrikans. Not all of our ancestors were raped and just as our phenotype and Genotype can be directly breeded out after only a few generations of admixture, we can also bred back in the Afrikan gene pool. I appreciate the article though my brotha and please correct me if I’m wrong as I’m only 22 years old and have just stumbled upon this knowledge.

    Liked by 2 people

    • You are right 70% is way to low that is less than someone with a white grandparent. Purely foolish to believe, IMA’s will adjust all information for their propagandised purposes. If you read articles and books from the late 1800’s and early 1900’s many Afrikans were noted as unmixed after slavery in the US. I can tell you as someone whose family is from Jamaica, many Afrikan Americans can pass for Jamaicans and Jamaicans as a whole would be 90%+ Afrikan genetically. In fact on many DNA tests some Afrikan Americans come back late 90’s percentage which is effectively 100% as DNA tests can NEVER come back 100% of any population’s DNA.

      But DNA tests are not anywhere near 100% accurate.

      Liked by 2 people

    • I am younger than you. Age does not prevent someone from researching and nit-picking with Afrikan-centred lenses to determine the truth.

      Genes circulate throughout all populations as humans are now in clines instead of fully isolated subspecies, that does not removes subspecies though which is what IMA scientists and their media goons have promoted (propaganda). Phenotype can be bred into and out of, this is why you see many Balkans (including Greeks) and North Afrikan non-Afrikans with the male line E1b1b, which is also shared by Horn of Afrikans, Tuaregs and certain Nilo-Saharan populations. The Y-chromosomal gene for example may remain the same but the phenotypes differ drastically. The phenotype is closely related to the autosomal, overall genetic makeup from most of your recent ancestors, as the phenotype is the gene expression add environmental impacts eg. born in Summer or Winter, born in different part of the Earth a desert, a rainforest, a overcast sunless woodland ect. Also food ate impacts on genes and their mutations.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Kushite Prince · July 5, 2016

    “Afrikans morphological traits can survive admixture, which is a point I have NEVER heard raised by idiots who love to say how we are all mixed. Afrikans ithe Americas should easily expose this reality; many Afrikans in Cuba, in Grenada, in Belize , in the United States are known to have ancestry mixed with Europeans, Asian migrants known as American Indians and even East Asian indentured workers during and after slavery to a slight degree. This has however not caused unequivocal differences in phenotype which is not compatible with that of the Afrikans in the motherland. Many people in the motherland have a few ancestors who were non-Afrikan, this has not changed their morphs either. This fact clearly negates the excuse of those with multiracial phenotypes, as the admixture in other groups is minimal enough to not transmute into a different physical composition (phenotype). Nowhere near all Afrikans in the Western Hemisphere or in the motherland is mixed in ancestry.”
    Very well said brother! This can’t be stated enough. You really should consider writing a book. We need more of this type of information out there. We need something to counter the “white science” nonsense the media puts out. Our people need to study genetics,biology and anthropology much more. Thanks for this informative post.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. I believe you can find black people with the same straight nose you describe on dr carson. I believe he is authentic black with no admixture. he certainly talks authentic which is one of the things I love about him.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Most West and Central Afrikans do not have straight noses, his nose is also NOT an East Afrikan style straight nose meaning it is from a European ancestor. He is barely mixed, many black people in the Americas have minimal admixture, many do not, one can usually tell visually. Only place in West Afrika where straight noses are common with little or no admixture is in Senegambia and a long thin noses is not common, which is not the type of nose that Ben Carson has. Long broad noses are common and thin short noses are common.

      Like

  7. Fanta Graham · July 6, 2016

    posting 1 2 3

    Like

  8. authenticafricanvanguard · July 6, 2016

    brilliant post!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  9. authenticafricanvanguard · July 6, 2016

    also many africans don not understand The Term “White” Hispanic

    Liked by 1 person

    • Heck, many Afrikans don’t even understand term Black in relation to us and our identity how else do you think the one drop rule was allow to become prominent.

      If you don’t know who you are then how will you recognise anybody else, especially if they are using cloaked names. Without your own identity you don’t understand others in relationship to yourself and you can’t distinguish friend from foe.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. Bhekizitha · July 6, 2016

    “Gene Expression is also not measured by genetic distance as nappy headed, brown and black skinned individuals exist in the Indian and Pacific ocean islands.”

    Correct

    “On top of that the Afrikan people contain over 80% of the world’s human genetic diversity.

    I am unclear by what you mean when you speak of genetic diversity. Can you explain?

    Also, Amos Wilson said, “African people do not have enough scholars to write our history, and our history would fill a large library – we cannot wait to have experts in every field, we must Africanize information”

    With that in mind, since the study of genetics is ongoing and subject to an Ima political agenda, it is important we stay next to the jargon but reconfigure, correctly, the narrative.

    I would like to know your definition of a multiracial phenotype?

    And you contradicted yourself by claiming Ben Carson is not African / black because of his nose shape but at the same time you typed:

    “Afrikans have been on Earth for the longest Afrikans have all skull shapes within our collective.”

    Overall, I like where you are going.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I never contradicted myself. I pointed out that Dr. Ben Carson has an atypical nose for someone of West and Central Afrikan descent, the one region where it is common for long noses and thin noses is Senegambia and there is not usually long and thin, like that of certain Northern Europeans. This means it is likely a trait from a non-Afrikan ancestor, it is absorption, but Carson retains the key hair and skin colour keeping within a certain (Afrikan) morphology. Just like many Greeks have stubby noses and white ‘Arabs’ have broad noses, absorption mixtures of clines is not a new thing in any sense.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Multiracials have many phenotypes from dark to light, some with kinky hair and pale skin, some with dark skin and loose curly hair, most with loose curly hair and pale skin never does kinky hair and dark skin occur showing that non-Afrikans can not produce the Afrikan phenotype not even via throwback genes.

      They can be dark skin people (Dravidian types) mixed with Afrikans like in Arabia, the Horn of Afrika and the Sahel, cutting through language groups hence cutting through phylogenies of Afrikans, all the nonsense about those people are not mixed when you can find brown to dark skin mixed people in the Niger-Congo, Nilo-Saharan, and Afro-Asiatic language groups but only the latter do a significant percentage have this phenotype. This destroys the myth that it is because of the environment as it only occurs in Clinal Zones and in several phylogenies. This can also be seen amongst the Australian Abouriginies who have lank hair and dark skin who travelled through India as noted in genetic linguistics and certain Melanesians.

      Then there are the pale skin mixed people who are mixed with pale skin allele carrying peoples, they exist in Afrika as well as outside, notably in the Sahara, in Madagascar and in Southern Afrika. Ancient admixtures at that. These people have the stereotypical ‘light skin’ of mixed people due to partial dominance of dark skin alleles. Many do not even speak languages that originate within Afrika. They are also common outside of Afrika, far more than dark skin mixed people who are more ancient due to the fact that pale skin alleles and the people who carry them are recent additions to the human population.

      The reason for mentioning genetic distance is it is well know that there is more genetic diversity in Afrikan villages than the much of Eurasia with many genes not been carried by people outside of Afrika. Despite this people will section of the Afrikans of the Indian and Pacific ocean as separate population because of their genetic distance (diversity, they ignore it is a type of diversity for the same phenotype) even though Afrikans have a huge genetic diversity between ourselves but these too group have the same phenotype. The reason for this is to claim that pale skin people originated most of the genes they carry which is false when you look the anthropological records and phylogeny compared to their genes with many dark skin, Negrito and straight haired Indian populations still unmixed carrying gene markers and genes that pale skin Eurasians carry.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. stevetoussaint · July 9, 2016

    Considering the confusion of multiracial multigenerational mulattos and first generation mulattos being asorbed into blackness in order to muddle the Afrikan indentity, how many Afrikan Americans are there in America?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Idk tbh. It is really impossible to know, there are tens of million to but make a sensible estimation would be difficult. If I was to guess over 50 million.

      We must remember governments around the world have been known to not bother to put certain areas or populations on their census’ and also to undercut the number of non-whites, or even just remove race and ethnicity of their census when there are too many non-whites. Afrikan Americans are at a severe disadvantage even compared to third world nations to know how many people of their ethnicity are in America. They do not control the census, they do not control (or have chosen not to) their identity, they are conflated with other black ethnicities on the US census. Not to mention the fact that in all countries the worst neighbourhood have the most problems with accurate information on the census and Afrikan Americans are disproportionately homeless or live in the worst neighbourhoods. From what I hear from my own family in America some places never receive census’.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. stevetoussaint · July 9, 2016

    Ahh that’s understandable. I’m Haitian American myself and one of my parents (mother) is technically still not a citizen so she doesn’t have to worry about the census. As far as Somalians, Ethiopians and Eritreans, I knew that they were admixed but couldn’t necessarily pinpoint or explain why. I’m in this group in fb called ancient Egypt and brothas and sistas in there basically try to destroy the myths of the ima narrated “true negro” by skull shape and pigmentation and explain that the east Africans aren’t admixed and that we have a monopoly on ALL phenotypic traits seeing as how we “birthed the world”. I agree to an extent but I wanna know your perspective.

    Liked by 1 person

    • We do not have a monopoly. I explained white people are cancerous cells, their aim is to damage and destroy all they can, the pale skin alleles are a sign of this, just like cancer cells visually look different under a microscope so do whites form our eyesight. They have been scientifically proven to be the within the normal human skin colour range as recent as 8000-9000 years ago, just like cancer they have physically degenerated and mutated. Just like cancer they are against nature and nature in of itself is trying to kill of ALL pale skin peoples, regardless of their alleles for pale skin, regardless of whether they are Japanese, Ashkenazi or Macedonian. All of them have negative birth rates, something unrecoverable if it is due to nature (human infertility).

      Gene Expression is something most ‘conscious’ negroes refuse to study, it clearly explains the differences in human phenotype, Clinal Zones, how the nuclear genetic makeup creates the phenotype. It is a complex scientifically PROVEN process, not theory and is overlooked by the mass media and overlooked by the school system. Genetic diversity shows that Afrikans in Afrika (Northern Cameroon) and outside of Afrikan (Melanesia) have genes that are common throughout Eurasia but a very similar phenotype to other Afrikans, showing that genes are only part of the colour and hair texture spectrum the other is the origin of white skinned people and their own SEPERATE degeneration form the rest of humanity before re-contact. We also know that through gene expression certain phenotypes can only be made by mixing two different ones, hence Clinal Zones. All that garbage about East Afrikans are unmixed Hamites, dark skin Caucasians ect. Lies, They are mixed, hence their phenotype, idiots who keep claiming Habeshas and other mixed people ignore the Oromo, who expanded from Kenya 400-500 years ago, have a very Horn of Afrikan phenotype but ORDINARY AFRO-TEXTURED HAIR. They also ignore the people of the Omo Valley (in Ethiopia) and the fact Nilotics, the darkest Afrikans on average, live side-by-side with mixed Horn of Afrikans. All dismissing the idea they are unmixed. They should be next to a gradation in phenotype change but are next to stark contrasts in reality.

      Even in historical evidence and archaeology it has been proven groups of people settled in East Afrika, as far south as Zanzibar from Arabia and Persia, why do Horn of Afrikans look so different. The Sabaeans and Himyarites expanded into East Afrika from Yemen, the Axumites expanded into South Arabia, vast trade through the Red Sea (still ongoing) has resulted in merchants and traders living in the Horn of Afrika from as far afield as China and Indonesia. Persians and Arabs also migrated to Zanzibar but were absorbed and you see the difference in phenotype, why, they are less mixed. These people have a very mixed past. Also remember the original peoples of Asia were dark skin so many peoples coming back were Afrikan or Dravidian in phenotype.

      Like

    • I like your inquisitiveness, this is how you learn real from fake. You question until you hear what has been recorded and reported as the truth. Don’t just take urban myths and run with them.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. stevetoussaint · July 9, 2016

    I appreciate that my brotha. I have stumbled upon this knowledge due to the fact that the one rule is in reverse In Latin America and the carribean so mulattos and multiracial individuals are easily distinguished from authentic Afrikan people. Although most of us have unfortunately internalized the other side of the one drop rule in America and I argue my people up and down about this to the the point that they harp on my skintone and Afrikan features but it doesn’t deter me.

    Liked by 1 person

    • It is not the reverse, you know as a black Haitian that mulattoes are not considered black or white but mulatto. It is only the reverse in the ‘Middle East’: Egypt to UAE.

      Many Afrikan Americans will get what is coming to them though, steady upholding identity confusion and whites are handing a new-fangled identity to them since the 60’s. It will eventually fully break off using blacks as an incubator and be openly anti-black soon enough.

      Like

    • Keep teaching other what you know and learning what you don’t. Afrikan spirituality is about facts, reality, our phenotype is the result of our ancestry, these were time honoured beliefs. The phenotype was denoted as a sign of ancestry and remember ancestors are key to Afrikan spirituality as they guide us. Our phenotype is their gene expression, so we MAINTAIN their gene expression based on clan and blood circles which are linked to specific ancestors. In maintaining their gene expression we maintain them themselves so they can reincarnate their spirits into their descendants.

      Reincarnation is something easy to prove other than genetic/phenotype been rebirthed, behaviours are also carried into descendants. Greco-Roman faggotry was pushed in their time on North Afrika, it is been pushed today, they pushed Christianity on neighbours, they push Christianity onto the world, their Germanic ancestors couldn’t stop warring with each other, they still can’t look at the EU falling apart and the World Wars ect. They are doing what their ancestors did, they are their ancestors reincarnated.

      Liked by 1 person

  14. stevetoussaint · July 9, 2016

    Beautifully written my brotha. I currently deactivated my fb account so the only time I really get to educate my people on what I know is through conference calls and we basically build from there. I’m on the path to being an Afrikan centered biological nationalist and understand how important indentity is and I want more Afrikan Americans to understand who they are as a geno culture.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Deka's Daughter · August 17, 2016

    I think what you want to say is that each and everyone of us is born of a Black mother (Eve) and a white father (Adam) and all our beautiful mixtures and colours are variations of the earliest know coupling. Ps. There is also no ‘standard’ look for Somalians. I am Somali but everyone including the African cab driver and the Iranian Waiter thinks I’m Asian or Middle Eastern.

    Like

    • AfriKaNeedsToOwnItsResources · August 17, 2016

      Do you understand English?

      Standard is a synonym for usual or average. All groups of people have a average phenotype where if one has a phenotype outside of that range they would stick out like a sore thumb. How come Europeans have a phenotypical range which all people, even other races can define? How comes nobody questions whether East Asians can look like a Congolese people? But according to Eurocentrism people in Afrika have no standard phenotype all manner of invader and their descendants look just as native even when others say they look non-Afikan.

      Many people are mixed in phenotype among most ethnic groups in the Horn of Afrika you have very dark skin and kinky hair including in among Somalis, these people are also in the same so-called ethnic group as those with your average darker skin, curly haired people, heterogeneous genetically. I have much experience with Somalis and they themselves acknowledge that there are many recently mixed people in Somalia. I live in an area which is not too far away from some of the largest Somali communities in the United Kingdom.

      There are many tribes in Somali who claim direct descendants of ‘Arabs’ from after the time of Muhammad, similar to Sudan because that is very close Arabia as well as Islam spreading there when most Arabs didn’t even accept Islam. What about the Himyarites before Islam who crossed South Arabia into the Horn of Afrika and the Eastern coastline of Afrika. What about the Axumite Empire when they conquered Arabia and allowed for thousands of their Arab subjects to move into the Horn of Afrika as well as a similar Afrikan influx into Arabia. What about Mogadishu and been a place where many Persians migrated since ancient times, even the etymology of Mogadishu is Persian in origin. What about the invasions by the Portuguese into modern-day Ethiopia and Somalia. What about the Ottoman incursions into the Horn of Afrika, even adjoining parts of the Horn of Afrika and the Hejaz costline of Arabia into a single colony: called the Habesh and Hejaz. What about the influx of slaves from Eurasia, do you think that European and Central Asian female sex slaves and male slave soldiers went to Arabia and North Afrika and just stopped when the Horn of Afrika is even closer to Arabia than North Afrika, geographically and even culturally. Afrikans weren’t the only ones enslaved and going to Arabia it also happened vice versa, it was part of the trading system at the time. Somalis still boast about holding white ‘Arabs’ as slaves and their low levels of integration with Arabs due to their opposition. What about more recent admixed groups with white Arabian, Persian and Indian merchants, these ones mixed with white Eurasians in particular don’t even identify as Somali like the Benadiri people who coincidentally show how many other people have contacted Mogadishu over the centuries. All of these known, recorded historical movements of large populations into the Horn resulted in the phenotpyes and identities we see today. But to claim that the more recent paler skin admixtures such as the Benadiri or Bravanese type people, REGARDLESS of the language they speak, are somehow representative of Somali people, that is more than a joke.

      Adam and Eve is a fictitious story. Adam doesn’t mean white at all in Arabic or Hebrew or Aramaic or Amharic. Skin colour is regulated by alleles it is a proven fact all known alleles for pale skin came from a certain region in Central Asia, all genetic evidence points to this, even white Europeans have had to admit they are fairly new in this world. For people in East Afrika, the sites of the oldest human remains, to have frequent pale skin populations is a crystal clear indicator of what has to place. Deny reality all you want every single migration I mentioned has took place, is documented and can be searched on Google. You are the product of heavy infiltration into East Afrikan blood circles and gene pools, there is a reason many Horners boast about their different phenotype from kinky hair, brown to blue black skin Afrikans or as you lot love to call us ‘Bantus’, just like Europeans, and just like them you set aside slavery for blacks too.

      Liked by 1 person

  16. Deka's Daughter · August 18, 2016

    You seem very defensive. Chill out!
    I like your article and I am not denying that migration and admixture took place .
    I will however point out a few facts you seem oblivious to.
    Fact 1). During the time of the Prophet (SAW) newly converted Arab Muslims were driven out of Arabia by the Pagan Arabs and the majority of them found refuge and settled in what is now modern day Somali. This was due to the close proximity of Somalia to the Red Sea and Arabian Gulf. Anyway, because of this migration, many Somalians are of noble Arab decent. No Somalians were forced/made to convert to Islam, it has always been the faith of their forefathers (driven out of Arabia).
    Fact 2) The Portuguese did not invade Ethiopia. (Somalia/Sudan/East Africa maybe) but not Ethiopia. Ethiopia is the only African country that has never been invaded or colonised.
    Fact 3) To suggest that the Benadir are a ‘more recent addition’ to the Horners and don’t identify as Somali is a joke. LMAO. it’s like saying the Xhosa don’t identify as South Africans and only the Zulu can! The Benadir are a Somali clan like all other clans in Somalia. They are NOT a new addition. Unless you have lived in Somalia, you cannot make generic assumptions on its people based on a couple of back yard comments from your London neighbourhood. By the way, we don’t have tribes like the rest of Africa we just have clans.
    Fact 4) Arabs are not ‘white’ as you assert. Only Europeans/Caucasians can claim to be ‘white’.
    Fact 5) We don’t call you ‘Bantus’. There are also Bantus (who are thought to have migrated from neighbouring African countries) in Somalia. History books divided, categorised and labelled us all according to our colour, features, hair texture etc. It’s the Historians that called you ‘Bantus’ which is not a dirty word at all. It’s an African word meaning ‘The people’.
    Fact 6) Adam and Eve is not a fictitious story if you believe in God. If however you are Darwinian and believe we came from being a tiny amoeba in the sea, then became a reptile, monkey, ape and a myriad of species before we finally magically morphed into humans, then that’s your choice and I respect that.

    Like

    • AfriKaNeedsToOwnItsResources · August 18, 2016

      I am not defensive, you claim Somalis have no standard phenotype to justify why you have an atypical phenotype for a Somali. You are a descendant of these migrations but struggle to see how you aren’t admitting it.

      When did I say Islam was forced on Somalis? You aren’t even reading what I wrote. ‘There are many tribes in Somali who claim direct descendants of ‘Arabs’ from after the time of Muhammad, similar to Sudan because that is very close Arabia as well as Islam spreading there when most Arabs didn’t even accept Islam.’ BEFORE Arabs, they chose to convert, they chose to mix.

      Stop spreading misinformation on my blog, invading and conquering are two different things. You can unsuccessfully invade a place but you CAN’T unsuccessfully conquer a place, as conquest mean not only to attack but to control and dominate. You also lied about Ethiopia, Ethiopia was conquered in the 1930’s by Mussolini’s Italy with the Hoare-Laval Pact, 2/3 of Ethiopia was assigned to Italy by the British and French under League of Nations supervision. ‘Britain and France refused to intervene. In December 1935, news leaked out about the Hoare-Laval Pact – a secret plan made by the foreign secretary of Britain and the prime minister of France to give Abyssinia to Italy.
      In the end, the League did almost nothing. By May 1936, Italy had conquered Abyssinia.’

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/ir1/manchuriarev3.shtml

      Ethiopia was never conquered during the scramble for Afrika, just like Liberia, which was made ‘independent’ prior to the scramble by the white American. Ethiopia was an Italian colony for a short period of time and remains a neo-colony with it seceding land to Italy to form Eritrea another fake Afrikan nation.

      The Benadiri don’t claim to be Somali. You don’t even know about your own country I guess. The Benadiri are heavily mixed, they boast about their mixed heritage, their name and the name of Mogadishu is of Persian descent, they are known as the people of Mogadishu. They are not recent, their phenotype is as they are mixed of all manner of merchants descent from Persia, Arabia, India even Indonesia. EVERYBODY from Somalia says they are mixed. Even Ibn Battuta says in his day they spoke a variety of Eurasian tongues and were not similar to other people in Somalia. You obviously do not understand gene expression if you think pale, hairy people can be related to dark, hairless people without admixture from another gene pool.

      https://www.somalinet.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=255932

      Tell all those Somalians they don’t know about their own country and their own ethnicity. Somalis are renown for been able to recite their ancestor name for name for several hundred years, the Benadiri know they are mixed. The Benadiri are not a clan, they don’t claim to come from a single common ancestor or a tiny collective of ancestors. This is what constitutes Afrikan clan systems, everywhere. I should know as in Jamaica there are still people who have’t lost their culture from West and Central Afrika.

      Explain the use of Bantu on somalinet? Bantu is the modern colloquial term used by Somalians for Negroid people, it is even used for the Senegalese and Malians who are not Bantu at all. Bantu is also used as a replacement for slave and epithet still commonly used by Somalis in relation to Negroid people once again, I should know as in the UK where cultural and ethnic clashes are common Somalis have a habit of calling Afrikans and Caribbeans slave or nigger, in a racial sense and many refuse to be called black due to Somali culture looking down on Negroid phenotype people. Bantus did not immigrate to Somalia you liar, they were kept as slaves. Many have even tried to repatriate to Southeast Afrikan nations which they refer to as their homeland. There is still widespread racism against Somali Bantus. Nobody said we view the word negative, it is multiracials in the Horn of Afrika who use it in an attempt to be offensive.

      Once again lies. When did I say Arabs are white, I normally put Arab in apostrophes because it is not a race at all. I mentioned EVEN IN THE POST ‘The reason for Somalis hair texture yet dark skin is they contain admixture from before the current Caucasian ‘Arabs’ arrived in Arabia. There are still dark skin peoples who are aboriginal to the Arabian Desert living there, we just don’t see them on television.’ I know first hand Arabs aren’t white and if you’ve read my other posts and comments you would see that I have pointed out that the average Arab is a Caucasian with some recent Afrikan mixture, many are Afrikan people and the original people of Arabia were Afrikan or Dravidian in phenotype. One of my good friends is a person who is half-Yemeni, black Arab Yemeni. I said many of the pale skin mixed people in the Horn such as the Habeshas and Bravanese are the the result of mixture from recent pale skin invaders to Arabia and Anatolia. The older mixture with the Mahra people or Hejaz Arabs still have curly hair but don’t have paler skin, this is called using common sense. Pale skin can never be native to a desert, this defies logic and it also defies the Evolution theory yet most clowns in the West who claim to follow Evolution want me to believe tan-white skin people are native to a desert across the sea from Afrika. The impact of Eurocentrism and it’s contradictory theories.

      Adam and Eve is fake, find their bones? LMAO. You can’t because they aren’t real. Explain how their name, as the FIRST HUMANS, is Adam and Eve when Semitic is the newest language group to the Afro-Asiatic language group? Explain how their names are Semitic? And I don’t even have to get onto the fact you are suggesting I approve Evolution another unproven theory of human origin is the only other alternative to Abrahamic religion. All I know is the oldest human remain is from Afrika, the oldest genetic markers are from Afrika, the oldest, most diverse gene pools are in Afrika, that is more than enough evidence of where humans come from. Goddesses and Gods existed before Abrahamic religions came about, before someone written down stuff on paper and claimed it predates other religions explain to me what were the other ethnicities worshipping? Even the Arabs who made Islam were not Muslim prior to Muhammad, yet a book about Muhammad spreading of a NEW religion explains the history of not only Arabs but all of humanity? Common sense must be ignored in order to believe in what you say.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s