I'm not a racist, but I am...

This forum is full of it, but it's all true. The facts are there. Maybe there is a little hyperbole, sure black people can become doctors, fly planes etc... I'm a reasonable human being, I was raised in a liberal environment. I have bullied before, but never been racist and I see bigotry as immature, however I can't escape the fact that they are indeed very unusual looking.

http://unicast.org/forums/forum.php?forum_id=1

"golly, niggers are hideous with their buck teeth, black skin and brillo heads. Egads."

Just do a google search for skull shapes of different races and albino black people... CAucasian and mongoloid skulls are about the same and both these races have obviously exceeded negrito races in culture and civilisation. Even the obscure native americans constructed early civilisations. Their hunter gatherers tribes only existed due to their isolation, deprived of the circumstnaces that allow for agrarian civilisation. Given another 1000 years after the SPanish arrived, and the Gulf of Mexico would be like the Mediteranean circa 1000 B.C..

Though I can't say the same for black civilisations, they were not isolated, theywere exposed to the Egyptians, who were arabic, im not one of these nuts who thinks they are white. I really am not a racist or even a far right conservative...

I can't contain what i think anymore and I shouldn't be afraid of expressing my thoughts. They do look so animal like, it is as if they are a relic from evolution before human civilisation. In fact that's what they are, the only tribal systems outside of sub-saharran africa left by around 1300 were in areas which didn't have much food. Yet in the rich jungles of africa they still lived in the stone age, never utilising the wide range of plants there.

I think the out of africa theory is correct and that blacks haven't evolved much whilst caucasians and mongoloids have had to deal with the ice age.

How should I approach these facts rationally? Liberals say I should just ignore them, conservatives say I should become a whtie supremacist nut. Surely there is another way? Surely there is a way to get society to accept these facts without sinking into depths of paranoia and stupidity.

Holy fuck! We've taken one step in the right direction! Now allow me to crush your arugment so we can progress ont othe more important task of devising a way to teach the rest of the population to the truth of eugenics.

"Me: BZZZZ WRONG. *provides long list of proven civilizations that have existed before "the history of races", shows where they were successful and what they contributed to human civilization as a whole...only to have it habitually ignored and unaddressed*"

The Songhai at their peak in the 15th century were practically still in the ancient age, herding goats, with no navy or intensive farming, despite the fact that they were equal in technical knowledge of the rest of the world.

Bear in mind the Almuhads, later to be known as the Moors, were the reputed invaders of this civilisation. The Moors were mediteranean arabs, not negroid.

The Kush and their descendants and trading posts in east Africa were far more advanced, but why civilisation there did not spread throughout Africa isn't a mystery. The Kush peoples of course were heavily influenced by the Egyptians (and genes) and possibly the only pre-colonial black civilisation to have kept up with the rest of the world. I would also like to mention that whatever gene stunts intelligence in the negro must have been selectively bred out of negro genes which trickled up the Nile into Egypt. Likewise the genetic traits for intelligence trickling down the Nile would have eventually spread through Africa giving the descendants and advantage over their "traditionally gened" brothers. However we are at a time when

The great city of Zimbabwe came into being in the 18th century, well after colonialism, suggesting that colonisation was a civilising influence, even if any native civilisation that arose was eventually comandeered by the colonists.

"HEY AND: Sub-Sarahan Africa was actually the first to make steel"
No. You need precise machine tools, knowledge of chemical analysis and a blast furnace to produce steel.

"Hey guys: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs_and_Steel, http://www.pbs.org/gunsgermssteel/

....Did I mention the first steps towards full-on Modern Colonization started in the 16th century?...etc etc etc = IGNORED, NOT DISCUSSED. "

I already know all of this and accept most of this. Yet I still notice that sub-saharran civilisation was astronomically less advanced than the rest of the world whilst evil european colonists consisted of vikings smashing sharp pieces of iron into monk's skulls across the north sea.