From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Tue Mar 19 15:22:50 PST 1996
Article: 22309 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!xmission!nntp.micrognosis.com!news3.near.net!news.ner.bbnplanet.net!unix.amherst.edu!news.umass.edu!caen!usenet.cis.ufl.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!waikato!midland.co.nz!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,soc.culture.african,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: NOTICE  HOW THE ADVOCATES OF HATE AND LIES IGNORE MY POSTS WHEN THEY ARE FULL OF TRUTH AND EVIDENCE.
Date: 16 Mar 1996 22:18:34 GMT
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <4ifenq$m69@newsource.ihug.co.nz>
References: <4huni7$fv3@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i32a3$2jh@newsource.ihug.co.nz> <4i4djf$omv@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4ep0$r1r@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4n5m$1fkp <4ic8nv$1jk2@hearst.cac.psu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: alchemy.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:22309 soc.culture.african:35361 soc.culture.african.american:113181

In article <4ic8nv$1jk2@hearst.cac.psu.edu>, THE MIGHTY KUSHITE   says:
>
>bn946@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Les Griswold) wrote:
>>THE MIGHTY KUSHITE (rhd102@psu.edu) writes:
>>
>>White people ignore your posts because you're an ignoramus filled with
>>yourself, or you're trolling.

>Thats funny . They weren't being ignored before . 

An attempt to debate you was the original intention.  Debating of course
seems to beyond your scope.  It was also going to be a visible 
demonstration that Negroes still haven't advanced.  The latter part has
been proven beyond a shadow of doubt.  Thanks for playing.

>Its just that now , 
>they (the racists) have nothing to say when the TRUTH is at hand . 
>
Perhaps when you offer truth, then we'll have nothing to say, but until
that time occurs, we'll continue on.  I've noticed many a time when you've
failed to respond to a post of mine, but unlike you (an example of 
an immature individual), I haven't gone around parading my *victories* 
over you.

You have still failed to explain the bust of Menes.  You have failed to
explain why the Egyptians were meticulous over a corpse not becoming dark.
You have failed to explain why Negroes would wear black eyeshadow.  You
have failed to explain why Ancient Egypt if black, would idolise the
colour white in terms of purity.  You have yet to explain your outright
lying over the definition of the "land of black."  You have yet to explain
why the wife of Chephren is immortalised as being blonde and blue eyed.
You have failed to explain why Rameses II has soft, yellow silky hair. You
have failed to explain why the Egyptian reliefs display red men and creamy
yellow women.  You have failed to explain why Sesostris I would command
that all the Negroes should die (if on Egyptian soil) when he himself was
one.  You have also failed to reconcile the post (via Les Griswold) on the
civilisers of the (Green) Sahara (circa 5000-3000 B.C) being of 
Mediterranean type (hence your early Nubian civilisation).  The 
anthropologist particularly states they were non-Negro.

Quite frankly, you haven't offered any real evidence otherwise.  Your best
was Herodotus, yet you failed to understand the time period in which he
visited Egypt.  And if you press Herodotus as being indisputable, you may
(for the benefit of the readers) also tell us where he places the Cyclops
on the world map.

When and if you post truth, we will all be shocked.  At the moment, I 
would have more success arguing with a brick wall.  You have already 
decided who started Egypt, and no matter what evidence contradicts your
theories, it will never change your beliefs.  

At the moment, all you do is be derogatry.  Hardly the sign of someone 
winning an argument.  In fact it usually demonstrates that you are
losing, because it displays your immaturity.

Ourobouros.
 


From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Tue Mar 26 19:04:10 PST 1996
Article: 22370 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!sgigate.sgi.com!nntp-hub2.barrnet.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!waikato!midland.co.nz!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: FESTER THINKS THAT HER SHIT DOESN'T STINK.  EITHER THAT, OR SHE REALLY BELIEVES WHAT SHE'S SPEWING, AND THAT GETTING HER BUM-BUDDIES TO REFER
Date: 20 Mar 1996 06:43:46 GMT
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <4io9f2$c2n@newsource.ihug.co.nz>
References: <4huni7$fv3@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i32a3$2jh@newsource.ihug.co.nz> <4i4djf$omv@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4ep0$r1r@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4n5m$1fkp <4ik4pg$17t@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
NNTP-Posting-Host: alchemy.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1

In article <4ik4pg$17t@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura Finsten  says:
>
>bn946@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Les Griswold) wrote:
>>Laura Finsten (finsten@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca) drools:
>>> bn946@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Les Griswold) wrote:
>
[snipped all the boring statements from Miss Finsten]

Apparently in the previous blathering from someone who doesn't claim
ignorance in anthropology stated that "craniometry" was outdated.  If she
could bother herself, maybe she would like to read "Human Biodiversity,
Genes, Race and History" p. 160, table 9.1 by Jonathan Marks.  If she
does read it perhaps she'd like to explain why in 1995 anthropologists 
were still using "craniometry" in decyphering who belonged to which race 
(especially in criminal cases).

But Miss Finsten couldn't possibly be wrong could she?  Nor could her
contradiction to PC Maps be misguided could it?

BTW, Miss Finsten, in the University of Auckland, Massey and Otago, 
they've dropped the pretense that modern day anthropology is a science.
It's now in the domain of the liberal arts (using the University of 
Auckland's terminalogy).  Massey has taken it one step further by not
insulting those trained in yesteryear in physical anthropology and simply
called the course "social anthropology."  One of my friends who graduated
>from  Auckland about twenty years (major anthropology) received a B.Sc.  I
haven't bothered to check the other NZ Universities to confirm their 
classification of anthropology (whether science or art).

When and if you bother (Miss Finsten) to remark about Anthropology could
you please state actual facts rather than your misguided opinions.  It
would help matters immensely.  It would also help if you quite being
pedantic over certain names, as I'm sure "anthropological features" is 
understandable to those that wish to think as they converse.

As for Les Griswold being my spokesman, he is quite welcome to do so.  He
happens to be right, I have taken too much time pointlessly arguing with
certain individuals, namely mightless and fester.  Arguing with a brick
wall is a more profitable pastime...at least there is some possibility of
having a meaningful conversation as a brick wall could develop better
counter-arguments.

Ourobouros.








From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Tue Mar 26 19:04:29 PST 1996
Article: 22488 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!waikato!midland.co.nz!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,soc.culture.african,soc.culture.somalia,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: NOTICE  HOW THE ADVOCATES OF HATE AND LIES IGNORE MY POSTS WHEN THEY ARE FULL OF TRUTH AND EVIDENCE.
Date: 20 Mar 1996 07:16:31 GMT
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 94
Message-ID: <4iobcf$c2n@newsource.ihug.co.nz>
References: <4huni7$fv3@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i32a3$2jh@newsource.ihug.co.nz> <4i4djf$omv@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4ep0$r1r@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4n5m$1fkp 
NNTP-Posting-Host: alchemy.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:22488 soc.culture.african:35406 soc.culture.somalia:7328 soc.culture.african.american:113289

In article , s.judd@waikato.ac.nz (Stephen Judd) says:
>
>In article <4ilanp$55c@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, p_stone@alchemy.co.nz
>(Ourobouros) wrote:
>
>> Ah, when and if you post this, please be sure to remove the emotional
>> baggage.  Words like ludicrous and so forth hardly lend credibility to
>> your argument.
>
>If Laura calls your claims ludicrous -- maybe it's because they _are_
>ludicrous? Your former claim that "Blacks have fewer genes than Whites"
>(made in a post to this group in late January) is certainly ludicrous.
>
Chromosomes doesn't necessarily spell genes.  

>> BTW, I've only quoted what Cavalli-Sforza wrote, perhaps
>> you misunderstood this when you replied?
>
>Acutally, you didn't quote. You selectively paraphrased. IIRC, you claimed
>that he said "Blacks have fewer chomosomes than Whites". Lo and behold,
>when I checked the actual text, at the page you cited, what he had said
>was that more genes had been mapped for European populations, because more
>research had been done on them. A far cry from your outrageous claim. (We
>all have 23 chromosome pairs, no matter what "race" we belong to.)
>
Please state where I mentioned "Blacks have fewer chromosomes than Whites"
because I can assure you I didn't.

I'm fully aware of 23 chromosomes pairs, so why would I bother stating
otherwise?  

Believe or not, I have actually studied biology.  What you state is your
own misinterpretation.  Just because you don't like my viewpoint of the
world, doesn't mean you should put words in my mouth.  Afterall, doesn't
your idealogy of the world state that I'm supposed to be bigoted and not
you?

>You also omitted to mention the C-S also stresses that ALL genes appear in
>ALL groups, except a very few inbred isolate populations.
>
Because I don't agree with his racial classification.  A half breed 
Portuguese isn't White, yet it under a loose definition from him I would
have to accept such a classification ("Caucasian").  

Can you comprehend this?

As I stated earlier to you, I quoted from him because of PC Maps 
concerning the White race and how it was separated from the rest of the
"Caucasoids."  Something I'm extremely please about, because it backs up
my viewpoint of the world and not yours.

>Ironic, coming from a man who constantly accuses opponents of deliberately
>twisting the truth. Of course, I could be charitable and assume that
>you're out of your depth. Take your pick.
>
You could also not twist what I state, as I haven't yet stated that 
Negroes have fewer chromosomes pairs than Whites.  Can I accuse you of
delibrately twisting the truth now?

>You also omitted the following telling passages from your acknowledged
>authority (pp 19-20):
>
>"There is no scientific basis to the belief of genetically determined
>'superiority' of one population over the other. None of the genes that we
>consider has any accepted connection with behavioural traits, the
>determination of which is extremely difficult to study and presently based
>on soft evidence.
>
>"Superiority is a political and socioeconomic concept, tied to events of
>recent political, military and economic history and to cultural
>traditioons of countries or groups. This superiority is rapidly transient,
>as history shows, whereas the average genotype does not change rapidly."
>
I'm only interested in the data in his book, not his opinions.  If you
haven't fathomed this out by now you're pretty dense.  The same applies to
any other anthropological book I've quoted.  

Believe or not, you only quote what's relevant out of a book.  Perhaps you
fail to comprehend this point.

BTW, I have quoted out of anthropological texts (1970s) that stated that
individuals and races were inequal.  I'm more than willing to quote it
again.
  
>> First off I'd like to find this grammaritical dictionary that states this.
>
>> bothered yourself over a supposed grammaritical error is that you thought
>
>"Grammaritical"? Possibly you mean "grammatical"?
>
Just like "traditioons" should be "traditions."  If you wish to have a
spelling bee go find someone else to play your silly game.

Ourobouros.


From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Tue Mar 26 19:04:33 PST 1996
Article: 22508 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!waikato!midland.co.nz!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,soc.culture.african,soc.culture.somalia,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: NOTICE  HOW THE ADVOCATES OF HATE AND LIES IGNORE MY POSTS WHEN THEY ARE FULL OF TRUTH AND EVIDENCE.
Date: 21 Mar 1996 08:45:44 GMT
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <4ir4vo$jn8@newsource.ihug.co.nz>
References: <4huni7$fv3@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i32a3$2jh@newsource.ihug.co.nz> <4i4djf$omv@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4ep0$r1r@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4n5m$1fkp <4in8m5$ckl@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
NNTP-Posting-Host: alchemy.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:22508 soc.culture.african:35418 soc.culture.somalia:7329 soc.culture.african.american:113306

[fester's most brilliant argument snipped]

As usual, when a liberal starts losing an argument they change topic.  
Instead of being able to argue over more relevant issues, she decides to 
argue over spelling.  The height of intellectual prowess from liberals.
You'd think they had more important issues to debate.

Yes, 'grammatical' is the correct word.  I used "is" from a logician or
mathematical point of view A and B => C.  In case you are ignorant, we
follow a left to right order in precedence, in other words (A and B) => C.
 
You can show the world how pedantic you can really be by continuing to
argue over trivial matters if you like.

Ourobouros.
  


From stefan@scott.net Tue Mar 26 19:04:42 PST 1996
Article: 22561 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!imci2!news.internetMCI.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!acara.snsnet.net!news.scott.net!usenet
From: evil Beavis 
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: ITS THOSE GODDAMN NIGGER EGYPTIANS AGAIN !!!
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 11:45:37 -0600
Organization: Scott Network Services, Inc.
Lines: 114
Message-ID: <315195C1.3AA4@scott.net>
References: <4huni7$fv3@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i32a3$2jh@newsource.ihug.co.nz>  <4iod0t$c2n@newsource.ihug.co.nz>
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup74.scott.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0GoldB2 (Win95; I)
To: Ourobouros 

Ourobouros wrote:
> 
> In article , hherndon@linex.com (Harold Herndon) says:
> >
> >Ourobouros (p_stone@alchemy.co.nz) wrote:
> >  That is total and utter bullshit. If you look at the mask of king Tut
> >he is clealrly black! The mask has all the features of an African black
> >man.
> 
> Where is Tut's fat lip?


All black people have "fat lips"??! Gee you don't know shit about Africa do you? Ever 
been to Namibia for instance?


> 
> >You must have never seen the sculptures of Egypt. Just take a look
> >at the lips on those sculptures and you will see that they were black.
> 
> Yes I have.  There is one on the mummy in Auckland's War Museum, it's
> even painted white...
> 
> >Tell me the name of the a statue in egypt of a european Pharoah. I have
> >an encyclopedia that proves your bullshit wrong.
> >
> You should buy another encyclopaedia, your one is junk.


What a convenient excuse.


> 
> >  I ask you this if tribal blacks are so primative and aren't civil, then
> >why is the murder rate among white Americans so much greater than most
> >tibes in Africa? Is it becaue whites in the us are savages and the tribal
> >Africana are civilized?
> 
> Perhaps you should visit Zambia. I have a Zambian friend (a nigger no
> less) who paints a very different picture.  He thinks it's madness that
> the Western World accepts niggers and other wogs into their countries,
> but he's pleased...


I hang out at a bar sometimes here in town which is owned by two Zambians from Lusaka. 
Well, they hardly share that view and do not feel it represents Zambians so maybe you 
should quit lying. BTW, does your "friend" (imaginary no doubt) know you call him a 
"nigger"??

> 
> BTW, I also know now friends that lived in Liberia (White, not niggers
> this time), they also paint how Negroes don't value their own lives.
> Murder was common place, like it was usual to find a murdered Negro on
> the road whenever they returned ot left their fortifications (Armed Guards
> the works).  Quite different from what you have tried to tell us.  BTW,
> even though they had to shoot the occasional nigger (to protect his family
> from the murdering and robbing primitives) most of the dead niggers were
> killed by other niggers.
> 


Gee, Liberia is almost exclusively black so I wonder why?? Most whites are killed by 
whites in European countries as well... You like that word "nigger" don't you - makes 
you feel strong and tough?? BTW, it is not used in Africa - a continent you "supposedly" 
know so much about. Try "kata" instead...




> >    Peole always say someone else is doing the wrong thing but they fail
> >to look at thier own country. The truth is there are very few self
> >sufficient "white" countries. Name some for me won't you?
> >
> Get rid of Jews and all White countries would be self-sufficient.  You
> could actually review some European history if you don't believe me.
> >
> >  I bet you didn't know that ancient Israel and lot of Europe were built
> >by blacks too.
> 
> Where?
> 
> >When the Moor conqured much of Europe they gave their
> >architectual expertese to Europe.
> 
> So your saying that Gothic and Romanesque architecture is what the Moors
> gave us?
> 
> Have you studied the Crusader Castles in the Holy lands?
> 
> >If you don't believe the Moors were
> >black read the pay "Othello" by William Shakespear. Ironicly othello is a
> >game played on a green board with white and black peices.  I wonder what
> >came first the game or the play.
> >
> I've read and studied Othello, next question.
> 
> >I doubt Mr. Ourobouros will respond here because he knows I'm telling the
> >truth. I only expect a nasty e-mail message from such a gragantuan
> >intellect. ;)
> >
> I take it by now, your not surprised by being wrong?
> 
> BTW, as I keep telling mightless, just because you say so doesn't make it
> so.
> 
> As usual, you offer no proof of your allegations just empty words.
> 
> Ourobouros.



You are one lowly fuckhead Ourobouros. Go back to molesting your sheep...

eB


From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Tue Mar 26 19:05:07 PST 1996
Article: 22714 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!xmission!news.uoregon.edu!news.sol.net!news.inc.net!uwm.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!midland.co.nz!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,soc.culture.african,soc.culture.somalia,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: NOTICE  HOW THE ADVOCATES OF HATE AND LIES IGNORE MY POSTS WHEN THEY ARE FULL OF TRUTH AND EVIDENCE.
Date: 22 Mar 1996 12:54:50 GMT
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 140
Message-ID: <4iu7uq$r13@newsource.ihug.co.nz>
References: <4huni7$fv3@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i32a3$2jh@newsource.ihug.co.nz> <4i4djf$omv@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4ep0$r1r@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4n5m$1fkp 
NNTP-Posting-Host: alchemy.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:22714 soc.culture.african:35468 soc.culture.somalia:7332 soc.culture.african.american:113438

In article , s.judd@waikato.ac.nz (Stephen Judd) says:
>
>In article <4ir731$jn8@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, p_stone@alchemy.co.nz
>(Ourobouros) wrote:
>
Could you please quote where C-S states that fewer of the other races have
been mapped.

[snip]

>> Please feel free to bring forth the archives that state I said Blacks
>> have fewer chromosomes than Whites.
>

>I'll retract that: that was me getting excited. You have claimed that
>whites "have more genes" though, and that is functionally equivalent. And
>wrong too. My server has expired those articles. If you can point me at an
>archive, I'd be delighted to find them for you.
> 
According to McVay, his superduper software traces all hate posts and
responds to them (ie., I assume that he means archives since his software
most certainly doesn't respond in the normal sense).  Perhaps McVay will
be so kind as to tell you where my posts exist on his *accurate* site.

>> Did you know that in an earlier book Cavalli-Sforza stated that at least
>> 4 genes were responsible for skin colour?  Now, are those particular and
>> exact "genes" (by this I mean identical genes) going to show up in all 
>> races?
>
>In any given group of humans, some members will have those genes, yes.
>That's what he says. And if you could abandon your ridiculous idea that
>"racial" groups are genetically homogenous, you could understand it too.
>
So you are saying I'll see Nordic skin tones in say, native Taiwanese?
>> 
[PC Maps and C-S "saying" White race]

>> Once more you're putting words into my mouth.  I never stated that Cavalli-
>> Sforza said anything about a White race.
>
>I'll say it again even plainer. He identifies no White race. Anywhere. Or
>Black or Yellow or Buff-Pink. You claimed that his worlk does. It doesn't.
>I checked your references, and you got it wrong. Finis.
>
Please reread my response to your allegations.  From his data, I've 
noticed a separation from what we call Whites from other Caucasians.

Comprehende?
 
[snip]

>> For a start, you can
>> deduce from his data (and not his opinions) genetic differences between
>> the races, which means they aren't equal.
>
>Equal in what sense? In any field of human endeavour, there are people at
>the top with widely differing genetic makeup. Too, differences may be only
>superficial.
>
Or so you say.  The mere fact that Negroes haven't built *high* 
civilisation is a pretty thorough example.  By *high* I'm hopefully
negating some intelligent comment from a liberal about a mudshack being
civilisation.

>> Once we have inequality 
>> established, one race being superior to another is quite inevitable. Are
>> you going to state that there are no differences between the races Jew?
>
>No differences that make any difference to a reasonable person.
>
There is only one response to this, and that is unadulterated laughter.

As a digression Jew, do you think (in light of your comments) any 
compensation (e.g., job recruitment and education benefits) should be 
given to aborigines like the Maoris?

Just waiting for the hypocrisy to start.
 
>> >How is the statement "None of the genes that we consider has any accepted
>> >connection with behavioural traits" mere opinion?
>
>> Considering that a U.S trial a couple of years ago proved that this
>> particular murderer was a murderer because of his genes and so they let 
>> him off (presumably to breed those genes).  Did those genes have any
>> connection with his behavioural traits (ie., murdering)?
>
>Bollocks. I believe you're making this up, and I defy you to name the
>case. Go on. I'm waiting.
>
For fuck's sake, it was a major case on television.  If you care to tell
me where the U.S archives are, I'll be more than happy to bring the case
to light.  It'll be fun to ram another argument down your throat. 

>Furthermore, what C-S said was: none of the genes that he mapped were
>genes that determined behaviour. See the full passage in my previous post.
>
Thats' not what you quoted or at least your implication of his sayings.
 
>> And basically, how are genes not going to determine your personality?
>> Where did you get your personality? From the tooth fairy?
>
>You are assuming that the genes that play a part in determining
>personality are distributed along racial lines. There is no evidence that
>this is the case.
>
Or so you say.   For example, Asians always model their governments on 
authoritarian principles.  While Whites may have authoritarian governments
at times, they are usually overthrown in view of power-sharing, even Louis
XIV of France still needed consent.  

Why the difference Jew? Please don't plead ignorance either.

As I've stated before, the only reason anthropologists like C-S can
state that all races have the same genes with only a restriction on
quantity is because races are determined on geographical locations, not
on true differences.  As I was saying before, a half Negro/White 
Portuguese is still classified as Caucasian.  A half Negro/White Ethiopian
is classified as Negro.  Whats' the real difference?  One comes from
Greater Europe (North Africa into Mesopotamia), the other comes from
lesser Africa (removing North Africa).  How about your Chinese?  Your
northern Chinese are a mixture of Mongoloids and Caucasian, and so it
continues.  

Of course such logic escapes people like you and fester, otherwise I
wouldn't even need repeating the basic concepts over and over to 
ad infinitum.

Is such a concept beyond you?
  
>> Well considering you stated no anthropologist backed Thor Heyerdahl's
>> ideas, and I found one that did...your opinions aren't highly rated.
>
>Who?
>
Bengt Danielsson (sp?), a Swede. 

I can even dig out other ones, plus historians.  Though all I needed was
one to disprove you.

Ourobouros.


From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Tue Mar 26 19:05:18 PST 1996
Article: 22770 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!vertex.tor.hookup.net!hookup!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato!midland.co.nz!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,soc.culture.african,soc.culture.somalia,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: OUROBOROUS, YOU NEVER ANSWERED THIS POST EITHER.
Date: 22 Mar 1996 14:59:02 GMT
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 133
Message-ID: <4iuf7m$r13@newsource.ihug.co.nz>
References: <4huni7$fv3@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i32a3$2jh@newsource.ihug.co.nz> <4i4djf$omv@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4ep0$r1r@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4n5m$1fkp <4ip7ul$311@argentina.it.earthlink.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: alchemy.ihug.co.nz
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:22770 soc.culture.african:35491 soc.culture.somalia:7334 soc.culture.african.american:113474

In article <4ip7ul$311@argentina.it.earthlink.net>, Charles Curtis  says:
>
>THE MIGHTY KUSHITE  wrote:
>>THE MIGHTY KUSHITE   wrote:
>>>p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros) wrote:
>>>>If you could pose a suitable counterargument worth considering I may have
>>>>bothered answering your rude post.
>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah right ! The facts presented in my post were/are irrefutable and 
>>>indicative of truth . And this is the reason why you ignored it , and 
>>>still continue to ignore it . 
>>>
Please post the truth then.  Could you also look up the word ignore, it
would help you immensely.
>>>>
>>>>I've already posted quotations from various anthropologists on racial 
>>>>type, including one via Les on the civilisers of the (Green) Sahara.
>>>
>>>
>>>What ? You mean you have found some lit. written by some unknown , or 
>>>outdated eurocentric scholar , during your period of recouperation . The 
>>>Sahara cave paintings which realisticly depict people with black skin 
>>>and Gold jewelry suffice in telling us whoes domain the Sahara was before 
>>>admixture . But this is not enough so ,.........
>>>
So anybody that doesn't support your views is an unknown or outdated 
eurocentric scholar?

Quite convenient really. Do bad that it doesn't cut "ice."

>>>Raymond Furon , ex-president of the geological society in Paris France 
>>>tells us that at the end of the paleolithic ; five layers of fossilized 
>>>men were found in the region of Constantine ,Algeria. " Among them , many 
>>>Negros presenting affinities with the Nubians of Upper Egypt" .     
>>>
If it had been (at least) in the Mesolithic period you may had a point.
You don't so it's quite irrelevant.
  
>>>So we know for a *FACT* that the Sahara region/north Africa was once the 
>>>domain of black Africans .
>>>
Highly probable.  Just that when civilisation was there, they weren't.

[civilisation or civilization and mightless's attempt to change the issues]

>>>What have I avoided ? I have efficiently refuted every bit of the garbage 
>>>you have presented . The reference to the spelling was one sentence in a 
>>>post . So what are you talking about . 

I'm making sure you don't run away with a pointless argument.  BTW, why
did you bother to take notice with the spelling for?

>>> Dodging material ? Why have you not directly confronted my post ? Too 
>>>much truth for you to deal with . I refuse to let that article expire .  
>>>
Curious, since I responded to your post, you must have a reality problem.
To the buttheads that don't think alot, this is my second reply.

>>>Without getting into it , let me say this : White skinned people 
>>>,(with very low levels of melanin) are not indigenous to the extremely 
>>>hot and sun-beaten climate of north Africa . The Egyptians were . 
>>>
Perhaps that is why they built impressive houses for...

[land of black, unification difficulties]

>>>I dont know what your talking about . 

Considering that you responded and defended one of your fellow Negroes,
you should be quite aware.

>>>But Narmer (Menes) is believed to 
>>>have been the first king to have united the two lands at the beginning of 
>>>the dynastic period . And his bust is just fine .
>>>
>>>http://www.best.com/~tdgilman/egypt/earliest.jpg
>>>
>>>Question : Is that bust of a white "medateranean" caucasion king ?
>>>
Question:  Why does Narmer have a 2nd dynasty bust as opposed to a 1st
century bust?

In other words, it isn't relevant.  Narmer was long dead by the second
dynasty.  I do not know why the bust has a flat nose, but it could be
referring to something else entirely (perhaps a favoured Negro servant or
perhaps they wanted to be derogatry over the memory of Narmer or some
other reason thats' lost).  You simply cannot base your argument over that
bust, as it's fundamental flaw is the incorrect cronology of the bust.

If Narmer is Menes, then the Numberer features in other civilisations and
histories as well.  The most famous of course being the Greek Meni whom
quote a few scholars consider the same man.  What race were the (ancient)
Greeks?

>>>>As for finding Negroes in Egypt thats easily explained: ever heard of
>>>>slaves?  Did you know that the Egyptians also got lazy and had Nubians for
>>>>their troops?
>>>
>>>Here you again . Nubia and nubians were greatly respected by thier 
>>>Egyptian kin to the north . For Nubia was for a time called TA-Seti (land 
>>>of the bow) because of the fame of Nubian archers . And slaves ? We can 
>>>talk about slaves . The Agean sea peoples called Tamu (Mu = white) by the 
>>>Africans tried repeatedly to invade the land of black (Kmt) but only 
>>>managed to become prisoners of war . These same prisoners of war , as 
>>>described by Ramses himself ; were later branded and used as slaves .   
>>>This is how whites contributed to African civilization .
>>>

Duh, didn't I write something about the army above?  In other words, 
you're writing even more useless points.  As for the remark about Slaves, 
that was trying to tell you reasons on why Negroes occasionally appear in 
Egypt.  I'm fully aware that other White cultures were turned into slaves, 
I've even mentioned some of them before.  But, you seem to feel the urge
that every skeleton of a Negro in Egypt is proof that they built Egypt,
when in fact it doesn't.  For one, why did they paint themselves red and
creamy yellow for?  Please stop avoiding this as you always do.

>>>Just pay close attention to the fact that he did not touch my post . He 
>>>knows that it is leathal . 
>>>
Could you please give examples on what you consider truth and facts.  I've
already responded to you in other threads, I even responded in this thread.  
To the unaware, mightless made two threads up on identical content.  
Perhaps he felt that I needed to respond to both threads identically in 
return?

BTW, one spelling bee deserves another, leathal should be lethal.  
According to most grammars, the end of a period follows immediately after
the last character, and not after a space.  Feel free to stop the spelling
bee.

Ourobouros.


From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Tue Mar 26 19:05:22 PST 1996
Article: 22789 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!xmission!news.uoregon.edu!news.u.washington.edu!uw-beaver!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!hookup!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!decwrl!waikato!midland.co.nz!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,soc.culture.african,soc.culture.somalia,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: NOTICE  HOW THE ADVOCATES OF HATE AND LIES IGNORE MY POSTS WHEN THEY ARE FULL OF TRUTH AND EVIDENCE.
Date: 21 Mar 1996 09:21:37 GMT
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 104
Message-ID: <4ir731$jn8@newsource.ihug.co.nz>
References: <4huni7$fv3@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i32a3$2jh@newsource.ihug.co.nz> <4i4djf$omv@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4ep0$r1r@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4n5m$1fkp 
NNTP-Posting-Host: alchemy.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:22789 soc.culture.african:35499 soc.culture.somalia:7335 soc.culture.african.american:113489

In article , s.judd@waikato.ac.nz (Stephen Judd) says:
>
>In article <4iobcf$c2n@newsource.ihug.co.nz>, p_stone@alchemy.co.nz
>(Ourobouros) wrote:
>
[ludicrous stuff from Judd snipped]

>> Chromosomes doesn't necessarily spell genes.  
>
>So you _do_ believe "blacks" have fewer genes than "whites"?
> 
Only in the context that Cavalli-Sforza uses it.  BTW, please correlate
number of genes to chromosomes.  For  a start Caucasiods (according to
the aforementioned author) have 88+-0.1 genes wheras the human species
(generally speaking) has 46 chromosomes (forgeting mutants like mongolism).

[wierdness about whether I said blacks had fewer chromosomes than whites]

>In a post to this group in late January or early February. I remember it
>well, and I remember replying to it to point out your error. You never
>replied.
>
Please feel free to bring forth the archives that state I said Blacks
have fewer chromosomes than Whites.

>> >You also omitted to mention the C-S also stresses that ALL genes appear in
>> >ALL groups, except a very few inbred isolate populations.
>> >
>> Because I don't agree with his racial classification.  A half breed 
>> Portuguese isn't White, yet it under a loose definition from him I would
>> have to accept such a classification ("Caucasian").  
>> 
>> Can you comprehend this?
>
>You've still got it wrong. Even in quite small groups (and this is the
>first time I've seen Portugese referred to as a race) _all_ genes are
>found - with greater or lesser frequency.
>
I didn't actually state the Portuguese were a race, are you trying once
more to put words into my mouth?

Did you know that in an earlier book Cavalli-Sforza stated that at least
4 genes were responsible for skin colour?  Now, are those particular and
exact "genes" (by this I mean identical genes) going to show up in all 
races?


>> As I stated earlier to you, I quoted from him because of PC Maps 
>> concerning the White race and how it was separated from the rest of the
>> "Caucasoids."  Something I'm extremely please about, because it backs up
>> my viewpoint of the world and not yours.
>
>I can't find any group in his book called "White". Let me look in the
>index again (fx: pages turning...) How about that? No entry for White.
>Lots of entries for the three biggies: Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid; lots
>of entries for samller, meaningful subdivisions based on gene frequncies,
>which do not correspond with traditional "races"; no "White" or "Black".
>No Jews either, I might add, except to note that Jews are too diverse to
>be worth studying (ie not a "race").
>
Once more you're putting words into my mouth.  I never stated that Cavalli-
Sforza said anything about a White race.

Perhaps you should actually pay more attention to what is said, rather 
than what you think is said.  For example, your bogus assertion that I said
that Blacks have fewer chromosomes than Whites.

[snip]
 
>
>Why is the quote above mere opinion? If a physicist says "There is no such
>thing as a perpetual motion machine", is that mere opinion? Surely a noted
>scholar's view of his own field is worth considering?
>
Because he is genuflecting to liberal propaganda.  For a start, you can
deduce from his data (and not his opinions) genetic differences between
the races, which means they aren't equal.  Once we have inequality 
established, one race being superior to another is quite inevitable. Are
you going to state that there are no differences between the races Jew?

>How is the statement "None of the genes that we consider has any accepted
>connection with behavioural traits" mere opinion?
>
Considering that a U.S trial a couple of years ago proved that this
particular murderer was a murderer because of his genes and so they let 
him off (presumably to breed those genes).  Did those genes have any
connection with his behavioural traits (ie., murdering)?

And basically, how are genes not going to determine your personality?
Where did you get your personality? From the tooth fairy?

>> Believe or not, you only quote what's relevant out of a book.  Perhaps you
>> fail to comprehend this point.
>
>According to me, you completely failed to quote what was relevant, and
>botched what you did quote.
> 
Well considering you stated no anthropologist backed Thor Heyerdahl's
ideas, and I found one that did...your opinions aren't highly rated.

To me, I quoted what was relevant.  To you, I didn't.  Simply put: your
opinions don't rate. 

Ourobouros.


From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Tue Mar 26 19:05:26 PST 1996
Article: 22818 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!op.net!news.tcst.com!news.spectrum.titan.com!buffnet2.buffnet.net!realtime.net!news.mindspring.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news1.digital.com!decwrl!waikato!midland.co.nz!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power
Subject: Re: ITS THOSE GODDAMN NIGGER EGYPTIANS AGAIN !!!
Date: 20 Mar 1996 07:26:56 GMT
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <4ioc00$c2n@newsource.ihug.co.nz>
References: <4huni7$fv3@hearst.cac.psu.edu>    <4iih9r$8j6@alterdial.UU.NET>
NNTP-Posting-Host: alchemy.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1

In article <4iih9r$8j6@alterdial.UU.NET>, dckom@future.atcom.net (David Christian) says:
>
>soren.groth@mailbox.swipnet.se (Soren Groth) wrote:
[snip]
>>>Point is, chum, this ain't the 14th century no more.  Get a new calendar
>>>while you get a clue.
>
>Good Googlie mogglie! lesthe putz admits Africa was on an even
>technical plane with Europe? Will wonders never cease!
>Can't turn your back on the boy for a month or three with out he goes
>and contridictes himself all over the place.
>
Perhaps I quote is necessary (14th century):
"In the summer of 1338 [14th Century] the cargo of a galley which set sail
>from  Venice for the East included a mechanical clock [a complex
technological device], symbolic beginning of the export of machinery
reflecting the incipient technological supremacy [yes I'm afraid it states
that 'evil' word 'supremacy'] of the West [who?]"

Before the Industrial Revolution: European Society and Economy 1000-1700
2nd Ed. by C.M Cipolla, London, 1980. 

Would you like to go back even further on how Europe was more advanced
than (Blackest) Africa?

Wonders never cease, liberals wrong yet again, racists right once more.

Could we please have a challenge based on facts rather than propaganda for
a change?

Ourobouros.



From p_stone@alchemy.co.nz Fri Mar 29 17:06:09 PST 1996
Article: 23122 of alt.politics.white-power
Path: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca!news.island.net!news.bctel.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!xmission!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.orst.edu!engr.orst.edu!rutgers!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.msfc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!waikato!midland.co.nz!newsource.ihug.co.nz!usenet
From: p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.white-power,soc.culture.african,soc.culture.somalia,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: NOTICE  HOW THE ADVOCATES OF HATE AND LIES IGNORE MY POSTS WHEN THEY ARE FULL OF TRUTH AND EVIDENCE.
Date: 26 Mar 1996 07:23:57 GMT
Organization: Order of Alchemists
Lines: 120
Message-ID: <4j862d$m85@newsource.ihug.co.nz>
References: <4huni7$fv3@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i32a3$2jh@newsource.ihug.co.nz> <4i4djf$omv@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4ep0$r1r@hearst.cac.psu.edu> <4i4n5m$1fkp <4j4sd0$s6h@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>
NNTP-Posting-Host: alchemy.ihug.co.nz
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.1
Xref: nizkor.almanac.bc.ca alt.politics.white-power:23122 soc.culture.african:35595 soc.culture.somalia:7343 soc.culture.african.american:113720

In article <4j4sd0$s6h@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura Finsten  says:
>
>p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros) wrote:
>>In article <4iudmj$n7s@informer1.cis.McMaster.CA>, Laura Finsten  says:
>
>>>p_stone@alchemy.co.nz (Ourobouros) wrote:

[argument over Laura's pettiness on grammar edited]

>Ourobouros, if I had *changed* the focus of the argument, I would have
>discontinued arguing about the genetics and other human biology issues
>and devoted all my comments to dissecting your writing skills.  

Perhaps the only reason you did so was my chiding.  For example, the 
thread "Lessons on Race Issues..." changed completely from when my server
crashed to when it was working again.  Who was responsible for the change?
Nobody but you.

>As you
>should be able to see, I have responded to everyone of your posts in
>response to mine concerning your lack of knowledge in the realm of
>human biology, and I have responded to several of your attacks on
>Stephen Judd, as well.  I have not *changed* the focus of the argument,
>I broadened it.  

If you have indeed responded to the Judd's & Ourobouros's posts then they
have failed to appear on my server, please repost them.

Please only repost them if they are factual.  Your opinions aren't 
appreciated nor are they welcome.

>And I regret it, because it is a waste of bandwidth,
>although for *you* to criticise anyone else's writing skills is just
>so outrageous...
>
Considering that I have (to date) only criticised two people on that
topic, and one of them being you, your comments are a little premature.
If you cared to notice, I only mocked you on your grammar when you
attacked mine.  The same applies to mightless.

What amazed me more, once your pathetic apology.  You stated that you
regretted the spelling bee, but continued on with your supposed lesson.
More hypocrisy really.

>[edit, including Ecyclopedia Britannica definitions of allele and of
>gene frequency in the context of the Hardy-Weinberg law]
>
>>Hope that helps.  Learn anything?
>
>No.  I already knew all that.  Did you?
>
You surprised me.  

>>Just to help us frame the continuation of the "relevant issues",
>>why don't you define a couple of ideas to me:  how can we tell if a
>>neanderthal skull is a neanderthal skull without craniometry?  And the
>>explanation of how a Black/White Portuguese and a Black/White Ethiopian 
>>ARE different in race (Caucasoid and Negroid)?
>
>Craniometry generally, or the cephalic index in particular?  I have not
>said anywhere that craniometry is not used by physical anthropologists.

And I have not said cephalic index either, but you seem to have made that
assumption.  

>How would one be able to say much at all about variation in skeletal
>populations without it?  My criticism was directed specifically at the 
>*cranial or cephalic index* which most human skeletal biologists has
>little or no value.  And so to a certain extent, this is a pointless 
>exercise.
>
Or so you say.  As I stated elsewhere, cranial measurements of modern
races are still in use [Jonathan Marks].  Or at least they were in 1995,
which you stated was outdated (interesting definition).

The last time I looked (no references sorry), there were differences in
bone structure between the Negro and the (Nordic) Caucasian.  Especially
the lower body positions.

>A number of features can be observed without any need for measurement:
>Neanderthal skulls tend to be flattened (rather than rounded) on top, 
>and have very pronounced supraorbital (brow) ridges with frontal sinuses 
>(large air spaces).  In some specimens, the nasal bones jut out nearly 
>horizontally.  Taurodont molars is another distinctive, nonmetric cranial/
>facial characteristic (although it is not unknown in some modern human
>populations).  Most distinctive cranial features are best assessed metrically, 
>and include the breadth and length of the nasal cavity, the absolute size 
>of the anterior teeth and their size relative to the premolars and molars.
>
"Most distinctive cranial features are best assessed metrically..."

Hypocrisy at it's finest.  Could you please give us a dictionary meaning
of "metrically."

[difference in Neanderthals edited]

Perhaps one could state there were different races of Neanderthal?

BTW, aren't there differences in skulls from different races besides the
cephalic index?

I have mentioned facial angle as one...
You could also include jaw shape, skull thickness and other 
classifications.  But then, wouldn't that go against your beloved 
propaganda?


One last thing, you failed to answer the last question from my
previous post.  To jog your memory, it has to do with the difference of
racial classification of a half-breed Portuguese and a half-breed 
Ethiopian.  It is relevant that you answer this question.  That way we
can ascertain whether the standard classifications are fictional or not. 
If they are fictional, then it helps to explain why geneticists cannot 
satisfy themselves on racial differences on a genetic level.  

Ourobouros.

P.S I do hope that you wield a degree in anthropology.  It makes it so
much easier.  

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor