Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts
Local Blogs
Miscellaneous


Go Back   Vanguard News Network Forum > News & Discussion > General Discussion
Register Multimedia Blogs Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

View Poll Results: Are blacks human?
Yes, but they are still inferior to whites. 7 13.73%
No, blacks are some other primate species. 44 86.27%
Voters: 51. You may not vote on this poll

 
Thread Display Modes Share
Old December 11th, 2010 #1
DeShawn S. Williams
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,471
DeShawn S. Williams
Default Survey: Are blacks human?

So people on here often say or at least imply that blacks are less than human. I'm curious just to get a sense of how many folks think that way. I know what modern science says. For me, it's hard to think of myself as anything BUT human, but I don't take offense at other views.

PEACE
 
Old December 11th, 2010 #2
Johnsonsmith
Member
 
Johnsonsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 459
Johnsonsmith
Default

a slightly less evolved human, yes
it's estimated humans share 94% of genes with apes
for blacks I imagine it's slightly higher, but high enough to account for low IQs, high infant mortality, criminality, etc
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #3
AussieWN
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,349
Default

No
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #4
P.E.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,783
P.E.
Default

Neigh, Mr. Cosby!

Now, sign your autograph here.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #5
Fred Streed
Pussy-Bünd fan club
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,557
Fred Streed
Default

Of course not. Thanks to the jew a few of them might have some human blood mixed in with their negro blood creating what my southern raised mother used to call high yellers, but even so no rational person would ever make the mistake of thinking they are human.

If you are a negro you should accept what you are and quit letting the jew and liberal idiots create discontent among you for not being human.

Embrace reality. It's wild stuff, muh nigga.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #6
Ted Denny Aylmer
Drinker of haterade
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 52
Ted Denny Aylmer
Default

Haven't some hard-core evolutionists proven that nogs are like 40,000 years behind Whites in the evolutionary curve?

That is enough for me to believe they are sub-human.

Then again my belief is that anyone not White is sub-human.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #7
Zenos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,514
Zenos
Default

Come on guys, answering no to a question like that makes us look like dumbasses. Blacks are human of a different race.

I think pure non-mixed blacks are less evolved, there's scientific evidence to support that, but not another species altogether.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #8
Fred Streed
Pussy-Bünd fan club
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,557
Fred Streed
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenos View Post
Come on guys, answering no to a question like that makes us look like dumbasses. Blacks are human of a different race.

I think pure non-mixed blacks are less evolved, there's scientific evidence to support that, but not another species altogether.
No. They should be classified as a different species.

Blacks are not "less evolved". They are perfectly adapted to their native environment. They EVOLVED INTO what they are. It is not simply a problem of them being "behind" us on some imaginary evolutionary scale. They might act like apes in a lot of ways but the truth is that even though Humans, negroes, and apes had a common ancestor somewhere in the past we have ALL evolved away from that common primate ancestor into what we are now.

The negro is adapted to a certain ecology and is an evolutionary success FOR THAT ENVIRONMENT. Of course intelligence didn't have as much reproductive advantage in his resource rich jungle environment as opportunism, an ability for slick jive talking, violence, and cunning thievery.

Negroes are not simply "less evolved". I doubt that our ancestors behaved anything like modern coons. The negro evolved into what he is today.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #9
Ted Denny Aylmer
Drinker of haterade
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 52
Ted Denny Aylmer
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Streed View Post
They might act like apes in a lot of ways but the truth is that even though Humans, negroes, and apes had a common ancestor somewhere in the past we have ALL evolved away from that common primate ancestor into what we are now.
Not if you believe in the multi-regional model of evolution.

Many Racialists (like Carleton Coon) have embraced this:

Quote:
Carleton Coon believed that each of the five races followed a separate evolutionary path for tens of thousands of years. He believed, "The earliest Homo sapiens known, as represented by several examples from Europe and Africa, was an ancestral long-headed white man of short stature and moderately great brain size." Further, he wrote, "The negro group probably evolved parallel to the white strain." (The Races of Europe, Chapter II) Coon hypothesized that modern humans, Homo sapiens, arose five separate times in five separate places from Homo erectus, "as each subspecies, living in its own territory, passed a critical threshold from a more brutal to a more sapient state".

In his 1962 book, The Origin of Races, Coon theorized that some races reached the Homo sapiens stage in evolution before others, resulting in the higher degree of civilization among some races.[11]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carleto...regional_model
Am confidant in stating that I have nothing in common with 'groidz!
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #10
guitardude27
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 37
guitardude27
Default

They're slightly less than human...but I'm slightly a zoophile, so...
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #11
Vijay Coomar
TNT NT-YT
 
Vijay Coomar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: VNN Chatroom
Posts: 2,756
Vijay Coomar
Default

NIggers in both looks and behaviour resemble the chimps more than humans. If you consider niggers human the problem is the chimps would have to be included too. Look at whoopi goldberg and tell me in all honesty whether she looks closer to a chimp or a human.
__________________
Join a gym. Get in shape. If women still hate you, well then that can't be changed, but as much as they hate you, they will still want to lay you. -Keifer
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #12
John in Woodbridge
Senior Member
 
John in Woodbridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,749
John in Woodbridge
Default

Short answer: Yes blacks are human.

Longer answer: Who or what is human is entirely subjective by whoever makes that determination.

Man's ego and religion tells him that there has to be a clear demarcation between himself and the rest of the animal kingdom. In other words there can't be a sort of in-between species like blacks.
__________________
It’s time to stop being Americans. It’s time to start being White Men again. - Gregory Hood
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #13
Rottenfuhrer
Auslander raus!
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: behind enemy lines
Posts: 669
Rottenfuhrer
Default

Niggers are going to be returned to Africa or they will be piled in mass graves. The choice will be theirs when that time arrives. Discussing whether or not they are humans or not is completely irrelevant.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #14
SmokyMtn
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 8,503
Default

Erectus Walks Amongst Us

The evolution of modern humans

by

Richard D. Fuerle


http://erectuswalksamongst.us/

 
Old December 12th, 2010 #15
Jake Heke
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 69
Default

They are not fully human and not fully chimp.

Thus they are a failed primate species.

I voted not human.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #16
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,310
Mike Parker
Default

Blacks are human in the way that Roll Over Beethoven is classical music.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #17
Metal Warrior
Leaving a bruise
 
Metal Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Land o' Bears, PA
Posts: 1,652
Metal Warrior
Default

It depends on how taxonomic classifications are applied in the ever-changing world of PC biology.

In one article I read some time ago, a criminal forensics expert said that there were at least 21 significant physiological differences (bone lengths, muscle fibers, cranial structure, blood groupings, brain fissuring and volume, etc.) between Whites and sub-Saharans. In Darwin's time, Galapagos finches with the single difference of bill structure or toe length/placement were classified as different species, and Darwin based his categorization on consistency and heritability of characteristics. Using his method, we are different species, or at least, different subspecies.

Our evolutionary histories produced beings which function well in their respective environments. Africans filled the evolutionary niche of higher hominids in Africa, and Europeans (and northern Asians) in northern areas, with us superseding the competing local hominids (Neanderthals) over time.

The dividing line between species was set at cross-fertility, but this has also been amended by biologists blurring or erasing species categories. For instance, dogs and wolves have traditionally been in separate species (Canis familiaris and Canis lupus) because they are consistently, obviously, visually, objectively different to anyone. But some "scientists" now say they're on the same "continuum", because they easily cross-breed. And that "logic" has been applied to Europeans vs. Africans.

The "Africa as womb of humanity" theory has a snag for the PC crowd. If we agree that Africans were the prototypes, their "descendants" (Whites and Asians) evolved beyond them and left them behind. We got better at "being human", they stagnated.

Yet, if independent, environmentally-driven multiregional evolution from Homo erectus is in fact the case, they still come out lower. Blacks are then simply one of three or more end-products of that evolution, but the one most closely resembling the root species, which also indicates they are less evolved.
__________________
This message is hidden because Dan_O is on your ignore list.
This message is hidden because N.M. Valdez is on your ignore list.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #18
Fred Streed
Pussy-Bünd fan club
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,557
Fred Streed
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Denny Aylmer View Post
Not if you believe in the multi-regional model of evolution.

Many Racialists (like Carleton Coon) have embraced this:



Am confidant in stating that I have nothing in common with 'groidz!
The multi-regional model of evolution (which I do believe) does not deny that we evolved from a common ancestor. It simply denies that all modern "human" races have a common Homo sapiens ancestor. It says we "crossed over" from Homo erectus at different times and in roughly the same geographic areas we occupied at the beginning of recorded history.

There were already regional genetic differences in Homo erectus.

The jew and their brainwashed liberal idiot tools try to claim we all descend from a common ancestor from about 40,000 years ago (a fully modern human) and somehow just magically replaced the existing Homo erectus populations.

That is why I do not think we should even be classified as the same species as niggers.

And yes, sorry to have to break this to you but you do have something in common with niggers, a common ancestor somewhere way back. You also share a common ancestor with dogs, cats, and bananas if you go back far enough.

You are not one of those idiots who think we were brought here by little green men in flying saucers are you?

Rottefuhrer has the best answer. In the long run his approach is the one that matters and screw all the hair-splitting.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #19
Fred Streed
Pussy-Bünd fan club
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,557
Fred Streed
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Metal Warrior View Post


The "Africa as womb of humanity" theory has a snag for the PC crowd. If we agree that Africans were the prototypes, their "descendants" (Whites and Asians) evolved beyond them and left them behind. We got better at "being human", they stagnated.

Yet, if independent, environmentally-driven multiregional evolution from Homo erectus is in fact the case, they still come out lower. Blacks are then simply one of three or more end-products of that evolution, but the one most closely resembling the root species, which also indicates they are less evolved.
I mostly agree with what you are saying MW, and you make some important points.

The only thing I don't agree with is the African as prototype, if by African you mean something like the modern nigger.

The nigger is NOT stuck at some primitive stage of evolution or "behind" Whites. He EVOLVED into what he is. Our ancestors were not a type of nigger that we evolved away from. There were no niggers then. There were simply populations of Homo erectus, probably with at least some genetic diversity even in early erectus populations. As Homo erectus moved into Europe and Asia and spread out into isolated breeding populations in varying climates and ecosystems natural selection began to shape each population to their environment. Thus we have Europeans, various kinds of Gooks, and niggers of one sort or another.

There is less genetic distance between Whites and Asians than between Whites or Asians and niggers. But that doesn't mean that niggers have been evolutionary static. It just means our lines diverged earlier.

That is why the liberal belief that if we only give the nigger a little help they can "catch up" is so dangerous and so wrong. They will never catch up because there is no catching up to do. We are just simply two different things.

If you could go back in time to the common ancestor of Whites, Gooks, and niggers I doubt very much if that early ancestor had much in common with modern niggers. Early Homo erectus WASN'T some jive ass, shit talking, pimped out, basketball playing nigger. But some of them, over a million or so years, evolved into niggers while others evolved into us.
 
Old December 12th, 2010 #20
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,004
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

Different in kind, or different in degree?
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52 PM.
Page generated in 0.11752 seconds.

VNN on Twitter