Why do people hate blacks?

I keep seeing the word "nigger" posted everywhere and it appears a lot of people here hate black people. Why?

>>39
But I'm not claiming that there was civilization in Sub-Saharan Africa independent of external support. I'm critiquing  >>31 's post that states there never was a civilization there^[1], and not providing relevant references to research that support his claim. It is a fallacious argument to make such a statement without referring to substantial evidence to back up said statement^[2].

Also, rather cute you tried to turn that around on me^[3]. Nice try, slick.
_____________________
Footnotes:
[1] Under what evidence exactly?
[2] Just as if I said in this thread that there was civilization in Sub-Saharan Africa independent of external support, I have the obligation to provide relevant sources that support my claim, since to make such a claim, the burden of proof is on me. Since I had not made such a claim, I am not obligated to do so.
[3] I commend you on making the attempt, but let's not allow cutesy little things like that take the discussion off-topic. 

>>40
See
>>41

>>40
Those who claim the Negro in Africa independently invented the wheel, systems of writing, created cities with stone walls, and exhibited other traits linking them with humanity must prove their assertions.
I have not made such claims. You (assuming that you're the same guy who authored posts >>31 >>33 and >>37 in this thread) have made claims stating the opposite. Since you have stated such a claim, the burden of proof is on you in this case. I make this clear in the footnotes of my previous post, speaking of which, damn that extra [m] tag made them smaller than I had expected!

>>41
Fair enough, but this doesn't escape the fact evidence of lack of evidence was found by those searching for evidence of civilization. You see just as there are known knowns, unknown knowns and unknown unknowns, there are also known unknowns, this is the definition of the enigma that is the black man.

There has been legitimate and extensive research done on African civilizations, and there were African civilizations, primarily cattle cultures which organized during the 15th century into the Ashanti, Mali and Songhai, as well as ancient Ethiopia and eastern afro-arab trading posts. The civilizations however are distinctly lacking in many respects, especially recently with new light shone on the issue by Jared Diamond's work "guns, germs and steel" which illustrates that despite negro exposure to old world crops, cattle and technology they failed to adapt these practices and the species themselves to their environment and construct civilizations to a similar level of sophistication until late into the medieval era. Meanwhile the mesoamericans achieved superior levels of intensive farming, trade and urbanization without important innovations that the arabians brought to the dark continent 1000s of years before such as iron and wheeled carts.

>>40

Exactly

I assume like many or most do, that African capability to create civilization is limited.

It is like the roman's view of the solar system in its early days, it was wrong, but worked on the best logic, and although I am probably not wholly correct, until further knowledge is shown I correlate current evidence to = truth as far as we can see it.

That truth is that, African's personally created cultures are more primitive than Roman empires were over 2000 and even cultures from over 5000 years ago further east Mesopotamia, Babylon, the caucus regions pre-china etc. Also that culture given to them as in roads, wells, electricity, besides it being from an era where the technology was more cumbersome than it is for us now in the modern world, it has been misused and they have reverted from their technological gifts down nearer to base level pre-civilization.

0

>>44
I do not argue that Africa (particularly the Sub-Saharan region) hasn't been researched extensively, however what has been researched already may just be scratching the surface. Already we're seeing theories that ancient civilization may in face date older than we truly realize, including the areas in Sub-Saharan Africa. Dr. Robert M. Schoch has put forth a theory that the Great Sphinx could in fact be much older than previously thought^[1].
_____________________
References:
[1] http://www.robertschoch.com/sphinxcontent.html

As I've said in >>38
Archeological discoveries happen from time to time, and who knows? There may even been found a long lost underwater city off the coast of Namibia or Mozambique.

>>45
It is like the roman's view of the solar system in its early days, it was wrong, but worked on the best logic, and although I am probably not wholly correct, until further knowledge is shown I correlate current evidence to = truth as far as we can see it.
I agree, however, such should not be deemed "truth" until factual and reliable evidence is procured. Until then, it is a theory, not right nor wrong until substantial evidence deems it valid or false. is  We've moved past the days of heavy theocratic governance and people being burned alive for theorizing that the Earth was not the center of the universe.

>>47

True we should demand proof, but I think after 100 years including finding pre-human hominid skulls in africa, the chances that we'll find a "lost civilization" in Africa is pretty small.  We've found no writings, no substantial ruins, not much of anything.  At some point the most logical answer is that said civilizations are not likely to exist.

>>48
If none are every to truly be found, then sure. However, there's always a possibility.

>>1
Proof?

>>50
http://www.4chan.org

>>49
This possibility is rapidly declining to the same levels as common superstitions and myths however, in fact it may even be lower at this point since even myths like Atlantis can be construed as elaborations of real world events like the eruption of Santorini and the demise of the Minoans.

>>52
Still a theory that isn't proven right nor wrong.

Did you hear the theory that the wheel and language was invented by my cock!... the evidence hasn't been found for it though I jizzed it into a deep crevice in Africa a veeeeery long time ago... so Until you find it you have to assume it could be true.

>>54
Don't be a wiseass, jerk.

I don't hate blacks, I hate niggers

>>56
^* African Americans

>>57

Niggers

>>58
schwoogies

>>58
^* African Americans
>>59
That's a new one! Also, ^* African Americans

>>60
I've got many more.

Also, schwartzers.

>>61
^* African Americans

>> 47

"I agree, however, such should not be deemed "truth" until factual and reliable evidence is procured. Until then, it is a theory, not right nor wrong until substantial evidence deems it valid or false."

Of course I wholly agree, even gravity is misunderstood in its science so it should be questionable as to how it maintains its pull, we could realize it is a push or that it makes the atmosphere sticky or any number of future understandings we may come to, the evidence for its effect is consistent, but it should not be in our minds that it will always be until we understand that it has to be consistent for some certain scientific reason.

But will you assume that there will be gravity tomorrow?

>>63
AFAIK, how gravity is generally understood has basically become law. Newton's law of universal gravitation, for example. Though, the law itself draws criticism from people who do mathematical calculations, and other such later problems with that were mooted with Einstein's general relativity, which at this point is not really just a theory anymore. Though to think that every single thing about gravity in our universe is understood is just folly.

I see where you're going with this, people are not going to deny the existence of gravity since evidence of it has been procured, studied, and examined. So there is truth that proves it exists.

However, we're talking about possible civilization in Sub-Saharan Africa independent of external support, and to my knowledge, the existence of such a civilization hasn't been proven false, so based just on that, to state that there never was such a civilization to be true, is committing a logical fallacy. Argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance) specifically, as I mentioned earlier in this thread in >>38.

>>64
There is no reason to assume there was a civilization in Africa.

>>65
indeed.  Therefore those who make such fantastical claims must bear the burden of proof.

If civilizations existed in Sub-Saharan Africa, show us the evidence.  Prove it.

Anyone can make unsupported claims.  If you want to be taken seriously, PROVE IT.  Saying "but but but but you can't disprove it with 100% certainty" is the sort of faggotry that flying saucer kooks, theologians, and conspiracy theorists engage in, and the reason why no one takes them seriously.

Prove it.  PROVE IT.  PROVE YOUR CLAIMS OR SHUT THE FUCK UP AND CONCEDE THAT YOU'RE WRONG.

>>62
jungle bunnies

>>65-66
Therefore those who make such fantastical claims must bear the burden of proof.
That's all fine and dandy, however I have not claimed there was civilization in Sub-Saharan Africa independent of external support at all in this thread. Had I done so, then I would be obligated to show the burden of proof on my behalf.

>>31 Claimed there never was, and in >>32 I simply ask him for substantial proof to back up his claim. Since he (and others) had not done so, this is not "proof" that there never was civilization, doing so is committing a logical fallacy which I've stated so earlier in >>64 and >>38 in this thread.

>>67
^* African Americans

>>65
>>66
There were various civilizations in Sudan/Ethiopia. The most impressive surviving proof of these civilizations today are hundreds of pyramids, designed & built by niggers, for nigger kings and queens.

>>70
^* African American

Nigger is not just for blackies anymore!

It will refer to apparent healthy individuals:

who are creatively lazy.
who exploit a free giveaway.
who watch TV for >4 hours a day
who play video games > 4 hours a day.
who sleep > 10 hours a day.
who eat junk food for >60% diet.
who accumulate their junk food trash everwhere except in the trash.
who combine trips to reduce labor rather than save time.
who are alergic to sweat, labor, muscle stress.
who creatively discover, share, and celebrate, blind benefits such as welfare, foodstamps, unemployment, medical insurance, prescriptions, etc.
who rant and rave to create more freebies.
who riot and cry when sources dry up.
who hold up their religion as an shield against responsibility.
who claim entitlement without investment.
who snicker at the truly disabled who are not <italics>smart</italics> enough to suck the system dry.

Remind you of anyone?
They come in all colors! and they live in all walks!
They suck the system for peanuts and for pounds!
They have held senatorial seats, they have slept on park benches. They have conned their way into the hearts of the sympathetic, and kicked out other defenseless residents.

>>64

We are really talking about whether or not there was one, not whether we could possibly find one.

They have two different answers (1. Unlikely 2. complete uncertainty) and Argumentum ad ignorantiam is not applicable to the first argument.

"to state that there never was such a civilization to be true, is committing a logical fallacy"

I said the evidence for it being there is not there, but it cannot be possibly ruled out ever, like the existence of god in god's mystical god world where we can never inspect.

>>73
We are really talking about whether or not there was one, not whether we could possibly find one.
Oh. Well, I'm not sure when the topic took a turn towards that route. I was just arguing the fallacy of >>31 's claim, nothing more, nothing less.
I said the evidence for it being there is not there, but it cannot be possibly ruled out ever, like the existence of god in god's mystical god world where we can never inspect.
Fair enough, I can agree with that. True, even discovered areas are still debated, like the reference I cited in >>47

>>74

How's the unicorn search going?

>>75
Don't be a wiseass.

>>76
It's called "reductio ad absurdam" and it is a perfectly valid argument.

>>77
No. You're being a wiseass^[1]. Animals that were described with similar features to the mythical unicorn have been postulated, discovered, and examined, however the image of what a unicorn is, is of man's imagination.

But, we're not talking about unicorns, I'm talking about the fallacious claim >>31 made in this thread that there never was a civilization without proof to back his claim.^[2] He made a claim about it, I never did, and that's the only thing I've been arguing about from the start.^[3]

>>73 stated
We are really talking about whether or not there was one, not whether we could possibly find one.
To which I would suggest the creation of a new thread to argue on that point, as it seems this argument and its objective has shifted inadvertently somewhere in this thread.^[4]
And that's all I'm going to say on that.^[5]
_____________________
Footnotes:
[1] I apologize for the snide comment, but you're really being absurd.
[2] Sorry, "indirect proof", or lack of, is not the burden of proof.
[3] Had I also made a claim in this thread, I too, would be obligated to provide burden of proof.
[4] Though if it's to be continued in this thread, that's fine. A new thread would be a bit more orderly and actually have a topic. I'd be more than happy to debate it as well, even though this wasn't the objective of my original argument. This thread has spun into something completely different it seems.
[5] I'd hate to be rude, but it is become a bit tiring to explain what my argument is for the past seven times and having only one person in this thread that understood it, and probably IHBT. In that case hats off to you, good sirs.

>>77

Why don't you "reductio my cornahoe"?

>>79

Hows 'bout we cornjulio you?  The adults are talking.

>>78

Since it's impossible to prove a negative, how about you put your money where your mouth is and show us a sub-saharan civilization.  We've been looking for over 100 years, yet nothing.  I mean I suppose you could say that there is one that left no physical evidence, or is buried 60 miles under the earth, but at some point, the odds of finding a lost civilization anywhere we haven't found one yet get so tiny that it's not worth basing an argument on.  There might be a teapot on Jupiter too, but I don't think we can use that speculation to conclude that the aliens on Mars drink Earl Grey rather than Green Tea.  You speculate that there must be a civilization in SSA, and are using that to speculate on the equality of blacks and white.  Yet we have no such civilization outside of N Africa -- most of which were egyptian or phonetian or perhaps Islamic later on.  That isn't how this game is played.

Put up or shut up.

PS 80GET