Ultimate White Power

You don't have a clue as to what your talking about Daniel. Do catch up with reality.

 

Why don't African Americans have this Protestant work ethnic much?

African Americans are overwhelmingly Protestant after all.

 

why do you believe you do?

they would have to be a different species if they evolved outside of Africa.

 

Because it's not being stressed as it once was. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic

 

So, why is the educated, wealthy, hard working core of the U.S.A more centered in Catholic Whites in cities between Boston, and Chicago where many Italians, Irish Catholics, and Polish settled?

Instead we find in places like the U.S.A South where there's much more White Protestants, they tend to be less educated, less wealthy, and not as hard working.

 

The Out of Asia theory is a scientific theory which contended that modern humans first arose in Asia. Most anthropologists until the mid 20th century preferred Asia over Africa, as the continent where the first hominids evolved.

Later due to the discovery of Peking man, it was considered by anthropologists up until the 1930s that Asia was most likely the cradle of the human species.[7] William Boyd Dawkins wrote that the tropical region of Asia was "the probable birthplace of the human race". The British anthropologist Alfred Cort Haddon wrote "There is reason to believe that mankind did not originate in Africa; but that all the main races in that continent reached it from Southern Asia".[8]

Apart from Eugene Dubois very few of the early human origin theorists actually visited Asia to see if their ideas were valid or not. This changed in the 1920s as a well-funded expedition was carried out in Asia called The Central Asiatic Expeditions. The expedition, led by Roy Chapman Andrews, visited parts of Central Asia including China and Mongolia to search for the origins of humankind.

Paleontologists who believed humans originated in Asia also include Johan Gunnar Andersson, Otto Zdansky and Walter W. Granger. All three of these scientists were known for visiting China and for their work and discoveries by excavating the sites at Zhoukoudian that yielded remains of so-called Peking man (Homo erectus pekinensis). Further funding for the excavations was carried out by Davidson Black a key proponent of the out of Asia theory. Because of the finds in Zhoukoudian, such as Peking Man, the focus of paleoanthropological research moved entirely to Asia, up until 1930.

The latest defenders of the out of Asia theory included Henry Fairfield Osborn, Davidson Black, and William King Gregory. Henry Fairfield Osborn was best known for his Dawn Man theory of human origins which he wrote would be found in Tibet and Mongolia. Osborn firmly believed that Asia had been the cradle of humankind.[13] Davidson Black writing a paper in 1925 titled Asia and the dispersal of primates wrote that the origins of man were to be found in Tibet, British India, the Yung-Ling and the Tarim Basin of China, his last paper published in 1934 before his death argued for human origins in an Eastern Asian context. William King Gregory also wrote that the Tarim Desert is the most likely place for human origins.

Von Koenigswald who found the first Gigantopithecus tooth in Hong Kong in 1935, continued to support the out of Asia theory.

The out of Asia theory later fell into decline, one of the reasons was because Franz Weidenreich merged the Asia hypothesis into the multiregional origin of modern humans, extending many other regions into his theory from the Old World with gene flow between various populations which influenced many anthropologists of the time.[16][17]

The last support for the out of Asia theory was due to the finds of fossils such as the Dryopithecus and Ramapithecus in Eurasia up until the early 1980s. One of the last advocates of the out of Asia theory was Jia Lanpo who argued that the cradle of humanity had been in Southwest China, up until his death in 2001. Scholar Sigrid Schmalzer in her book The People's Peking man claims the only modern advocates of the out of Asia theory have their beliefs firmly rooted in Chinese Nationalism....snip~

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Out_of_Asia_theory

She was a leftist and you know how lefties go left, and try and rewrite history. Kind of like the Democrats in the US today!

 

What if Humans really did develop in Asia, but abandoned Asia due to an Ice Age?

The fact that the oldest Human fossils of H Idaltu are found in Ethiopia which was connected to a Eurasian land-bridge at the time, makes it completely possible.

The fact that West Africa wasn't populated until 13,000 years ago with Iwo Eleru, makes things more confusing for the Out of Africa theory.

If Humans really came from Africa, why did they settle West Africa so late?

 

Ultimate White Power does not necessarily involve genociding others.

 

Because Weidenreich merged the Asia hypothesis into the multiregional origin of modern humans, extending many other regions into his theory from the Old World with gene flow between various populations which influenced many anthropologists of the time.

And because Schmalzer in her book The People's Peking man claims the only modern advocates of the out of Asia theory have their beliefs firmly rooted in Chinese Nationalism.

Which she hardly was even close to the truth and reality. Had nothing to do with Chinese Nationalism. Considering Tibet wasn't originally part of China.

 

Religions and cultures are highly correlated with races though. Some races eg Semites use their religion to cover their racial interest.

 

I'm using the term in its historical context, when Calvinism played a more important role in the religion. Now it's not that clear what Protestantism stands for. It has evolved from the time the Europeans powers were at their height.

If you read the link you'll have a better idea of its origins and its eventual decline, and will explain it far better. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic

 

So Detroit is adopting a northern European Protestant work ethic?

 

This discovery could confirm that the Asian man migrated to Africa.

The World's First Temple .....

Turkey's 12,000-year-old stone circles were the spiritual center of a nomadic people.

Excavations have revealed that Göbekli Tepe was constructed in two stages. The oldest structures belong to what archaeologists call the early Pre-Pottery Neolithic A period, which ended around 9000 B.C. Strangely enough, the later remains, which date to the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B period, or about 8000 B.C., are less elaborate. The earliest levels contain most of the T-shaped pillars and animal sculptures.

Before the discovery of Göbekli Tepe, archaeologists believed that societies in the early Neolithic were organized into small bands of hunter-gatherers and that the first complex religious practices were developed by groups that had already mastered agriculture. Scholars thought that the earliest monumental architecture was possible only after agriculture provided Neolithic people with food surpluses, freeing them from a constant focus on day-to-day survival. A site of unbelievable artistry and intricate detail, Göbekli Tepe has turned this theory on its head.

Schmidt believes the people who created these massive and enigmatic structures came from great distances. It seems certain that once pilgrims reached Göbekli Tepe, they made animal sacrifices. Schmidt and his team have found the bones of wild animals, including gazelles, red deer, boars, goats, sheep, and oxen, plus a dozen different bird species, such as vultures and ducks, scattered around the site. Most of these animals are depicted in the sculptures and reliefs at the site......snip~

http://archive.archaeology.org/0811/abstracts/turkey.html

 

This PCA plot shows that the 45,000 year old Ust Ishim man from Siberia had DNA spot on with India.

https://s28.postimg.org/myzy4isj1/PCA12.png

How come?

According to the Out of Africa theory, Ust Ishim is supposed to have come from Africa recently before that.

I mean shouldn't have Ust Ishim been much like Africans by DNA, rather than those in India if true?

 

Yep.....

 

The Sumerians weren't Semites originally, and what if they didn't come from the West but East.



Sumer (/ˈsuːmər/)[note 1] was the first urban civilization in the historical region of southern Mesopotamia, modern-day southern Iraq, during the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze ages, and arguably the first civilization in the world with Ancient Egypt.[1] Living along the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates (Mesopotamia is Greek for the land between two rivers), Sumerian farmers were able to grow an abundance of grain and other crops, the surplus of which enabled them to settle in one place.

Modern historians have suggested that Sumer was first permanently settled between c. 5500 and 4000 BC by a West Asian people who spoke the Sumerian language (pointing to the names of cities, rivers, basic occupations, etc., as evidence), an agglutinative language isolate.

These conjectured, prehistoric people are now called "proto-Euphrateans" or "Ubaidians",[7] and are theorized to have evolved from the Samarra culture of northern Mesopotamia (Assyria).[8][9][10][11] The Ubaidians (though never mentioned by the Sumerians themselves) are assumed by modern-day scholars to have been the first civilizing force in Sumer, draining the marshes for agriculture, developing trade, and establishing industries, including weaving, leatherwork, metalwork, masonry, and pottery.

However, some scholars contest the idea of a Proto-Euphratean language or one substrate language. It has been suggested by them and others, that the Sumerian language was originally that of the hunter and fisher peoples, who lived in the marshland and the Eastern Arabia littoral region, and were part of the Arabian bifacial culture.[12] Reliable historical records begin much later; there are none in Sumer of any kind that have been dated before Enmebaragesi (c. 26th century BC). Juris Zarins believes the Sumerians were settled along the coast of Eastern Arabia, today's Persian Gulf region, before it flooded at the end of the Ice Age.

The influence of Sumerian on Akkadian (and vice versa) is evident in all areas, from lexical borrowing on a massive scale, to syntactic, morphological, and phonological convergence.[14] This has prompted scholars to refer to Sumerian and Akkadian in the 3rd millennium BC as a Sprachbund.[14] Sumer was conquered by the Semitic-speaking kings of the Akkadian Empire around 2270 BC (short chronology), but Sumerian continued as a sacred language.

Native Sumerian rule re-emerged for about a century in the Neo-Sumerian Empire or Third Dynasty of Ur (Sumerian Renaissance) approximately 2100-2000 BC, but the Akkadian language also remained in use. The Sumerian city of Eridu, on the coast of the Persian Gulf, is considered to have been the world's first city, where three separate cultures may have fused — that of peasant Ubaidian farmers, living in mud-brick huts and practicing irrigation; that of mobile nomadic Semitic pastoralists living in black tents and following herds of sheep and goats; and that of fisher folk, living in reed huts in the marshlands, who may have been the ancestors of the Sumerians.....snip~

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer

Pre Pottery to, huh?

 

Better governance at lower cost, should be, ultimate white power.

 

We already have better governance. This is Ultimate White Power.

Go preach "better governance" to the untermenschen.

 

The ancient Slavs who carried R1a were responsible for the spread of the charioteers and they even reached ancient Greece. The average frequency of the Slavic haplogroup R1a is 11.5% nationally in Greece today. It was the Greco-Macedonians and Tharacians who introduced R1a to Greece from 4,000 to 3,500 years ago. There are archaeological links between the Pontic-Caspian steppe, which is known as the R1a heartland, and ancient Greece as well, suggesting that the charioteers originally arrived from the Pontic-Caspian steppe.

 

Informative

But can you call them Slavs? Surely they are common to Slavs and Nords?

 

I have no idea. What's your take?

 

My take is: no. The Nordic work ethic stems from the genetic nature of Nords. Without even considering IQ and creativity differences.

 

Nordic people were hunter-gatherers directly descended from Cro-Magnons before the arrival of Indo-Europeans who carried R1a and R1b from the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Recent studies of genomic variation in prehistoric human remains have demonstrated that two mass migration events shaped the European race, the Neolithic spread of agriculture from Anatolia starting ~9,000 years ago and migration from the Pontic-Caspian steppe ~5,000 years ago.

 

the untermenschen like to whine about paying, manly Taxes.

 

So...your first image shows an artistic portrayal of warfare between two African nations? How is this evidence of European racial superiority?

It's true that the ancient Egyptians obtained the chariot from the Middle Eastern Hyksos, and that the chariot as an invention probably developed on the Central Eurasian steppes like your second image shows. But what does this have to do with European racial superiority? You might as well claim that gunpowder being invented in China shows Asian racial superiority.