Conquer Club

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:And you forgot latino

Caucasian, south american or arabic, depending upon the individual's ancestory.

what about people from the domincan republic or puerto rico?

and honduras el salvador mexico gutemala panama etc..

0ojakeo0 wrote:

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:And you forgot latino

Caucasian, south american or arabic, depending upon the individual's ancestory.

what about people from the domincan republic or puerto rico?

Well, how about engaging your own pathetic cranial organ, and research the genomal-heritage of these islands yourself?

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:And you forgot latino

Caucasian, south american or arabic, depending upon the individual's ancestory.

Instead of Jew, you should have said Semetic. Semetic is a race, Jew is a religion. That is my opinion.

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:And you forgot latino

Caucasian, south american or arabic, depending upon the individual's ancestory.

what about people from the domincan republic or puerto rico?

Well, how about engaging your own pathetic cranial organ, and research the genomal-heritage of these islands yourself?

Im saying they arent of your fucking poll and last time i check the first people were found in africa making us all african. And i love how you put "black" but you put caucasian for white

0ojakeo0 wrote:Im saying they arent of your fucking poll and last time i check

Jake, if you cared to examine the options, you will quite clearly see that there is no option for "germanic" "siberian" "Kaffir" "bantu" "cantonese" "hispanic" "maori"..etc. etc. etc.

If you would also have cared to have read, you would have seen that these categories were not included, as there is a 12 option limit in these polls, and that I could not list every ethnical root.

Now, if you were to engage your brain and possibly research eacjh of these islands that you speak of, you could probably include them within the broad ethnic categories that I have listed.

Use your brain.

the first people were found in africa making us all african. And i love how you put "black" but you put caucasian for white

Riiiiight, so what would you have preffered me to use instead of "black"?

And yes, the latest homo-sapien remains were found in southern africa, where the first humans were thought to have lived, before migrating throughout the entire world, and evolving into genetically different human-beings, depending upon the climates that these humans lived in.

0ojakeo0 wrote:

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:And you forgot latino

Caucasian, south american or arabic, depending upon the individual's ancestory.

what about people from the domincan republic or puerto rico?

Well, how about engaging your own pathetic cranial organ, and research the genomal-heritage of these islands yourself?

Im saying they arent of your fucking poll and last time i check the first people were found in africa making us all african. And i love how you put "black" but you put caucasian for white

The Hopi Indians say that everybody is Hopi. Red Hopis, Yellow Hopis, Black Hopis, and White Hopis. And at one time, we all lived together peacefully. And then there was a Great Flood, and many people died, and the four colors of Hopis got separated. The Hopis in AMerica remembered this through ancient oral traditions, kept alive through their religion which they still practice to this day; but other Hopis in the world forgot that they were Hopi.

Black, White, Yellow, and Red...those are the races...not all the other fancy regional names you give. Just keep it simple! I answered NativeAmerican in your poll, because that is what I feel I am, but if you just asked if I was Black, White, Yellow, or Red human being...I would have answered White. So your poll is flawed. As people are not really telling you what race they are, but what region, country, racial-empathy, or religion they are.

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:Im saying they arent of your fucking poll and last time i check

Jake, if you cared to examine the options, you will quite clearly see that there is no option for "germanic" "siberian" "Kaffir" "bantu" "cantonese" "hispanic" "maori"..etc. etc. etc.

If you would also have cared to have read, you would have seen that these categories were not included, as there is a 12 option limit in these polls, and that I could not list every ethnical root.

Now, if you were to engage your brain and possibly research eacjh of these islands that you speak of, you could probably include them within the broad ethnic categories that I have listed.

Use your brain.

the first people were found in africa making us all african. And i love how you put "black" but you put caucasian for white

Riiiiight, so what would you have preffered me to use instead of "black"?

And yes, the latest homo-sapien remains were found in southern africa, where the first humans were thought to have lived, before migrating throughout the entire world, and evolving into genetically different human-beings, depending upon the climates that these humans lived in.

african maybe?



1. Hispanic isnt a race its a word made by the U.S goverment as most of the people called hispanic arent from spain. Just pointing that out.
2. i count 10 options and not including one is a religion not a race. And i dont think andyone was "native australian as i beleive the british used australia as a jail. (i think). So i think a better poll would have been. "african" "latin" caucasian, arabic, asian.

0ojakeo0 wrote:african maybe?

School-boy error.


So, maybe you are ignorant of the large arabic population in africa, to whome are just as african as any black african.

See, this is the reason why I avoided the terms "european" and "african" as both of these continents are inhabited by more than one of the broad ethnical groups.

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:african maybe?

School-boy error.


So, maybe you are ignorant of the large arabic population in africa, to whome are just as african as any black african.

See, this is the reason why I avoided the terms "european" and "african" as both of these continents are inhabited by more than one of the broad ethnical groups.

INHABITED. if they are in africa but are arabian there etnicity is still arabian

0ojakeo0 wrote:

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:african maybe?

School-boy error.


So, maybe you are ignorant of the large arabic population in africa, to whome are just as african as any black african.

See, this is the reason why I avoided the terms "european" and "african" as both of these continents are inhabited by more than one of the broad ethnical groups.

INHABITED. if they are in africa but are arabian there etnicity is still arabian

see, this is the reason why i generally do not debate mildly challenging subjects with children.

If you are truely ignorant of the fact that the arabian area stretches into northern and eastern africa, then I pity you. See, if you ever cared to research these things, instead of making sweeping, idiotic comments, then maybe you would be taken a little more seriously than you are.

Your comments unfortunately give your american countrymen the label of ignorant pigs.

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:african maybe?

School-boy error.


So, maybe you are ignorant of the large arabic population in africa, to whome are just as african as any black african.

See, this is the reason why I avoided the terms "european" and "african" as both of these continents are inhabited by more than one of the broad ethnical groups.

INHABITED. if they are in africa but are arabian there etnicity is still arabian

see, this is the reason why i generally do not debate mildly challenging subjects with children.

If you are truely ignorant of the fact that the arabian area stretches into northern and eastern africa, then I pity you. See, if you ever cared to research these things, instead of making sweeping, idiotic comments, then maybe you would be taken a little more seriously than you are.

Your comments unfortunately give your american countrymen the label of ignorant pigs.

like this poll isnt ignorant

0ojakeo0 wrote:like this poll isnt ignorant

Hahahaha! classic.


^^ Me laughing at you.

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:like this poll isnt ignorant

Hahahaha! classic.


^^ Me laughing at you.

norse you have native australian and JEW! you obviously dislike jews so you cant give them the fact they have a race too. THAT is ignorant

0ojakeo0 wrote:

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:like this poll isnt ignorant

Hahahaha! classic.


^^ Me laughing at you.

norse you have native australian and JEW! you obviously dislike jews so you cant give them the fact they have a race too. THAT is ignorant

Jake, that is utter crap.

Syzygy wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:like this poll isnt ignorant

Hahahaha! classic.


^^ Me laughing at you.

norse you have native australian and JEW! you obviously dislike jews so you cant give them the fact they have a race too. THAT is ignorant

Jake, that is utter crap.

ethnicity is basically asking where your ancestors are from correct? "hey where are your ancestors from? "Jew"

0ojakeo0 wrote:norse you have native australian and JEW! you obviously dislike jews so you cant give them the fact they have a race too. THAT is ignorant

Jake, what in freya's sweet, sweet name are you blethering about?

For a start, I listed Natvive australasian, not australian.

And I have listed Jew's as an ethnical group, thus giving them their "race", as you put it.

Look, I know it must be painful being made to look a little silly, but there is no reason to come out with proposterous comments like that.

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:norse you have native australian and JEW! you obviously dislike jews so you cant give them the fact they have a race too. THAT is ignorant

Jake, what in freya's sweet, sweet name are you blethering about?

For a start, I listed Natvive australasian, not australian.

And I have listed Jew's as an ethnical group, thus giving them their "race", as you put it.

Look, I know it must be painful being made to look a little silly, but there is no reason to come out with proposterous comments like that.

why dont you have roman catholic up htere? or christianity?

Those are religions, not ethnicity!

0ojakeo0 wrote:ethnicity is basically asking where your ancestors are from correct? "hey where are your ancestors from? "Jew"

No, this isnt correct.

How would you classify romany-gypsies then? Or any nomadic group?

And if you knew anything about judaism, and the hebrew origins, you would know that judaism, for the most part, stems from a break-away group of sub-continent asians, that inhabited the middle eastern area around 3000 BC.

Now, if you were to genetically analyse 70-80% of all jews today, you could link them to these break away tribes.

Of course, there were the khazar jews as well, who are ethnically caucasian and religously jewish, so obviously in this case, their ethnicity is caucasian.

I took what DaGip said earlier, about "semitic" being a better term, but anyone with 3 brain-cells would have known what I meant anyway.

Norse wrote:

0ojakeo0 wrote:ethnicity is basically asking where your ancestors are from correct? "hey where are your ancestors from? "Jew"

No, this isnt correct.

How would you classify romany-gypsies then? Or any nomadic group?

And if you knew anything about judaism, and the hebrew origins, you would know that judaism, for the most part, stems from a break-away group of sub-continent asians, that inhabited the middle eastern area around 1000 BC.

Now, if you were to genetically analyse 70-80% of all jews today, you could link them to these break away tribes.

Of course, there were the khazar jews as well, who are ethnically caucasian and religously jewish, so obviously in this case, their ethnicity is caucasian.

I took what DaGip said earlier, about "semitic" being a better term, but anyone with 3 brain-cells would have known what I meant anyway.

so they are from asia? i thot u had that on the list

0ojakeo0 wrote:so they are from asia? i thot u had that on the list

Nope, because in the thousands of years of evoloution since has rendered their genetic properties different to trhat of the sub-continent asians,. to a point were they are, effectively, their own race.

It's the same as your "teh humanz iz da africanz" arguement.

Who here supposes that they're not a mix of at least two or more of the poll options?

And I don't mean... way back... but within the past 1000 years or so since these definitions have had ANY anthropological meaning whatsoever.

Even just one filament of my lineage, that of my ancestors who undoubtedly considered themselves pure Spaniards, includes those categories which Norse calls Caucasian, Black, Arabic, Jewish, and Native North America.

Just wondering... Do you actually know any Jews?

btownmeggy wrote:Who here supposes that they're not a mix of at least two or more of the poll options?

And I don't mean... way back... but within the past 1000 years or so since these definitions have had ANY anthropological meaning whatsoever.

Even just one filament of my lineage, that of my ancestors who undoubtedly considered themselves pure Spaniards, includes those categories which Norse calls Caucasian, Black, Arabic, Jewish, and Native North America.

Actually I can't see that I am in any meaningful way whatsoever... I've gone back to about 1400 and before that both branches of the family were pretty much working in the same village in agriculture, as they would have been most likely for hundreds of years. Before that? I'd warrant a guess at Saxon due to the part of the country.