Good News From South Africa

[MilitantDogOwner]

Indeed, crab fat is the hardest to shift.

[macmannin]

Christ Jimbims,your on some tea breaks today,any jobs going at yopur place of work?

[jimbms]

Christ Jimbims,your on some tea breaks today,any jobs going at yopur place of work?

Not in today

[macmannin]

"Rubs chin whilst saying wella wella"

[Rog]

What does stature have to do with melanin and exposure to UV?

 

Stature in this case relates to the best body shape to disperse of heat. Tall and thin better than short and fat.

 

And those who live in northern are some of the tallest people in the world.

In fact, I think it is the Dutch who are the tallest.

 

Not just tall but also broad. A body shape best suited to the climatic conditions in the colder regions of the world.

 

Whereas there are pygmies in central Africa, where it is rather sunny.

 

And where food is very hard to come across and so a small body is an advantage all things having been considered.

 

What other discernible strengths or weakness are there in your comparisons of races or ethnic groups, other than the response to UV, which simply protects the skin from damage?

 

All sorts. People are NOT all equal irrespective of race. But neither is there any absolute superior race, no global Übermenschen. What IS true is that for given climates and given societies some races are superior to others IN THE PLACES THAT THEY BELONG.

 

 

If you go to Africa you will soon notice that people differ according to their environment. It is the environment in which they have lived for many generations that has favored different body styles and even ways of acting. Really, it’s not imagination nor racism, it’s fact. Look at the Zulus the Rwandans, the Tootsies, even the Pygmies, each differ according to best fit for their environment.

 

People have ways of acting based upon their environment, culture, and society - definitely.

 

And those successful way of acting become genetically imprinted over many generations because behavioral factors are inherited. There is nature and nurture but nature is a very powerful factor indeed and all the nurture in the world can’t change a person who is genetically predisposed iin a particular way. Homosexuality is a classic example.

 

 

In a changing world those who do not fit will die out. That’s life, it’s also what has put us where we are in our environment.

 

That's right. Those who cannot survive in our world will die. This does not mean it is natural selection.

 

Err, yes it does.

 

Natural selection is far more a specific thing than that. By extension, you would seem to be applying the idea of survival of the fittest to any aspects of life where people are more successful than others in extending their life. Unless you can explain in more detail how natural selection really operates in Africa.

 

In a changing world those who do not fit will die out.

 

 

Why? Natural selection shapes how a species or sub species changes in line with its environment, and how it changes its environment in the process which leads us on to the effects of mankind on the global climate but that’s another fish to fry.

 

I don't see natural selection in practice. I know about particular groups murdered because of the fabricated ehtnicity; I know about others in the world who seek to keep Africa relatively poor and needy through unfair trading practices and by dominating their nationa's economies, I know that certain people grab onto power and use it to kill others through the use of the military, and I see people being wiped out by disease and famine almost solely due to the problems caused by the previous examples. None of this is natural selection.

 

Err, yes it is. It’s once again a case of those who do not fit will die out

 

In any case, if you really did think that the impoverished circumstances of many Africans were the result of some 'natural selection'. Does that mean they should be allowed to die?

 

Yes.

[Khunbaan]

Hi Jim are you off today as well lol posting in other forums at 9.54, listen mate let it all out after 3. Say my name is jim and im unemployed.

[jimbms]

Hi Jim are you off today as well lol posting in other forums at 9.54, listen mate let it all out after 3. Say my name is jim and im unemployed.

You don't half talk crap but what can you expect from someone who has to stalk others and resort to personal attacks, get back onto the subject please. btw check the time it is lunch.

[Khunbaan]

jim i was talking about the post in general chat at 9.54, still in denial i see, never mind.

[jimbms]

jim i was talking about the post in general chat at 9.54, still in denial i see, never mind.

I never denyed it sunshine and what i do in my breaks has fuck all to do with you. So please stop stalking me and get a life.

[MilitantDogOwner]

jim i was talking about the post in general chat at 9.54, still in denial i see, never mind.

 

I'm still waiting to hear how the RAF lacks balls, and what superhuman, special army regiment you served in.

 

Back on topic...

 

Quick look at todays BBC news Africa...

 

Al-Qaeda take hostages in Mali.

Sudan peace in "serious crisis".

Guinea junta arrests 60 for 'trying to kill Camara'.

Africa drug trade fuelling terrorism and crime, says UN.

Nigeria police: Issuing corpses and denials.

Two Rwandan peacekeepers killed in new Darfur attack.

 

What is the point is sending billions to these countries when it won't make the slightest jot of difference?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Because, as I have said, the political and social circumstances of the people in Africa is partly shaped by the West - especially the drug trade.

 

And what do you think aid is supposed to achieve in these countries? Aid comes in lots of different forms and is intended for different things, but it isn't there to turn African nations into prosperous liberal democratic nations like ours, even in the long term. It isn't intended for that and cannot achieve that. The best that it can achieve it to slowly develop the economies and reduce the high levels of mortality.

[MilitantDogOwner]

Because, as I have said, the political and social circumstances of the people in Africa is partly shaped by the West - especially the drug trade.

 

And what do you think aid is supposed to achieve in these countries? Aid comes in lots of different forms and is intended for different things, but it isn't there to turn African nations into prosperous liberal democratic nations like ours, even in the long term. It isn't intended for that and cannot achieve that. The best that it can achieve it to slowly develop the economies and reduce the high levels of mortality.

 

Where there is a will there is a way...and that will is the wrong end of a AK47.

[manxy]

Because, as I have said, the political and social circumstances of the people in Africa is partly shaped by the West - especially the drug trade.

 

And what do you think aid is supposed to achieve in these countries? Aid comes in lots of different forms and is intended for different things, but it isn't there to turn African nations into prosperous liberal democratic nations like ours, even in the long term. It isn't intended for that and cannot achieve that. The best that it can achieve it to slowly develop the economies and reduce the high levels of mortality.

I've always had problems with this one LDV and realise that I'm very hypocritical over Africa and by closing my eyes, ears and thinking about other things, I get by in my own fairly secure world on my 'pink fluffy cloud' in the IOM.

 

In days gone by, I read 'somewhere' that certain parts of Africa had a high mortality rate with lots of families having some 8 or more children, where half of them died through disease, famine or neglect. It appeared that their birth control methods were inept as they took no protection and the chances of contamination and disease was high.

 

Charities and Aid was given to them in the millions and one hoped that birth control and disease could be stopped, but all that seemed to happen, was that the population grew bigger and therefore created an even bigger problem than before. The medicines and assistance helped to reduce the suffering and the charity workers have excelled in helping stop many hundreds of thousands from dying, but all that seems to be happening now, is the increasing numbers, which means that there isn't sufficient food and water to prevent people from going hungry or thirsty and a problem has been created with the best intentions at heart.

 

In a type of comparison, China at one stage had and still have a population problem and they therefore put restrictions on how many children the people could have and is known as the One-Child Policy. If Africa could reduce their numbers as like the Chinese are doing, then IMO, there would be less need to provide food, water and medicines and certain parts of the country could stabilize.

 

Unfortunately, it seems that 'Our' very interference has generated an expectation of sorts, where humanitarian aid has caused a dilemma, that in providing basic needs and saving lives, has consequently caused a bigger problem by increasing the population which means that further Aid is needed on top of what they're getting now.

 

So I'm torn between two thoughts, one part that says that Aid has to be stopped eventually which would mean many thousands and thousands of people dying through natural process and that's where I close my eyes etc and the other part of me asks what would I do in their position and the truthful answer is that I'd do whatever it takes for my families survival and would dread to be in their place.

It's a cruel world at times and I realise that I'm very hypocritical! Sad really

[jimbms]

I get by in my own fairly secure world on my 'pink fluffy cloud' in the IOM.

 

Why is it every time I think of a reply to some of your replies I have to stop when I realise a slap my be the result.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Not just tall but also broad. A body shape best suited to the climatic conditions in the colder regions of the world

And what of those living in Indochina where it is very hot and where I would presume food to have been in abundance - they are generally rather short.

 

I understand a certain common sense to what you stating, however, I have not come across any evidence to back-up your statements and can see some contradictory examples.

 

Whereas there are pygmies in central Africa, where it is rather sunny.

 

And where food is very hard to come across and so a small body is an advantage all things having been considered.

 

All sorts. People are NOT all equal irrespective of race. But neither is there any absolute superior race, no global Übermenschen. What IS true is that for given climates and given societies some races are superior to others IN THE PLACES THAT THEY BELONG.

There may some variation in respect of height, broadness of body, skin colour, sickle cell immunity but other than that I don't see what else actually discerns one group from another.

 

And those successful way of acting become genetically imprinted over many generations because behavioral factors are inherited. There is nature and nurture but nature is a very powerful factor indeed and all the nurture in the world can’t change a person who is genetically predisposed iin a particular way. Homosexuality is a classic example

 

It depends on what behavioural factors you are referring to here - you ought to be far more specific. Besides, you might assume that particular behavioural traits are inherited, however, they could be learned and reproduced in that society.

Homosexuality is not a classic example, you are making a big assumption there.

 

 

In a changing world those who do not fit will die out.

Yet such a statement is not natural selection in itself. Does the woman who is hit by a car serve as an example of natural selectio? Does the young boy who is stabbed by someone offer an example of natural selection?

 

If we are to use natural selection properly and see it as those who are most likely to survive due to heritable traits then what can we see in Africa? You seem to imply by your sweeping use of the term that any deaths serve as examples of natural selection - I disagree.

 

In our society for example it is those who are the poorest who as a group have a higher mortality than those few who are very well off. However, given the economic and political make-up of society the result of wealth inequality and power structures is not down to heritable traits. And the same can be said in regions or even most of Africa in the modern quasi-capitalist world.