Why is black psuedoscience allowed to be preached in US colleges

Has the OP even bothered to prove the illusory premise that black pseudoscience is taught in schools?

 

Black people have not invented 'nothing' however the contribution of black people (by which in this case we mean the indigenous people of sub saharan africa) to invention is so small as to be negligable. None of Carver's inventions were actually put into production. What he did of some use is devise strategies for the planting of certain crops.

 

Nope. And most evidence that contradicts the OP'S position was outright dismissed. I wanted to give the benefit of the doubt that there may be productive discussion on the topic, but I have to say this is hardcore irrationalism.

 

I heard he invented the peanut.

 

That is true of most threads posted on this forum by members of the far right. They create a thread in the form of a leading question and assume that it is correct. But they offer no evidence to affirm the thread's thesis which proves the irrationality of their claims.


My favorite among those loony threads remains the classic "Why are progressive men afraid of conservative women?" That bit of utter lunacy remains an all time classic for its irrationality.

 

Who knew that fake science was racial in origin. You make it sound as tho we are inundated by black pseudo-science when given the amount of idiotic nonsense that is accepted by large swaths of white cultures it is the merest trickle.

But this isn't about pseudo-science its about racism and you couldn't be more transparent in that regard.

 

You heard wrong then. It is indigenous to the Americas and was domesticated by peruvians at least 4000 years ago possibly much longer,

 

Black psuedoscience often is racist..look at that (*)(*)(*)(*) about Sun people and Ice people spread at CUNY by afrocentrists. yes there is white pseudoscience too creationism is white invented ut at least it is being properly challenged and ridiculed. You accept this nonsense as fact. hell there is a guy here who insists that black people are indigenous to europe and only the Caucasus mountains originally contained white people.

 

Khazar and Hun lesbians run the colleges.

 

I don't accept pseudo-science as fact, and never have.

Nice of you to acknowledge that pseudo-science isn't racial in origin, merely in application.

 

That's so wrong and easily proven otherwise. It's not even a good try.

 

FYI:I already admitted to that and posted other contributions by same guy.
But good way to get your racist on.

 

Not inventions and not relevant to the rest of the world considering that virtually none of the so called inventions were ever used to any extensive degree.

 

Khazars haven't existed for hundreds of years

 

I know. Great isn't it?!

I'm just baiting my breath for the next stomping.

 

Are you calling for violence against Jews?

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/consp...al-ancient-egyptians-were-black-africans.html

I thought of this thread here when I crossed it. PF's own.

 

Referring back to the OP, I'm not sure there is a widespread trend in American academia to condone extreme "Afrocentric" historiography. When it comes to Egyptology at least, it's my perception that they either regurgitate the standard "Eurocentric" orthodoxy or skirt around the topic altogether to avoid offending either African or Arab activists. Of course, since anthropologists have moved away from the racialist paradigm associated with labels like "black" and "white", of course they'd hesitate to apply racially loaded terminology to ancient populations.

I do think the indigenous Egyptians were African, and thereby would have had darker skin than stereotyped Arab or Mediterranean peoples. But lately I've figured that calling them "Black" or otherwise creates more problems than it solves. Nobody is literally black or white in color anyway, and there are conflicting definitions of Black identity out there (e.g. does it mean dark skin in general, or specifically West African ancestry?). Not to mention it's a bit weird how "black" and "white" are still acceptable, but not other color-based labels like "yellow" or "red". So I think people who want to emphasize Egypt's native African heritage shouldn't bother trying to pigeonhole them into an obsolete racial taxonomy.

 

\

More Melanin is more prevalent in people from areas with higher amounts of UV radiation. It provides some protection against the skin being damaged. That is real science. Claims that melanin makes superior human beings is pseudoscience.

 

Based on the modern population of Egypt, the ancient Egyptians belonged primarily to the African haplogroup E1b1b, along with G, R1b, T and J1 in minor frequencies. As much as 30% of the Egyptian paternal lines could be descended from Arab invaders, notably from the Arabic peninsula (J1, 20%). The ancient Greeks were genetically related to the ancient Egyptians, sharing the same African haplogroup, and 25% of the modern Greeks belong to Haplogroup E1b1b as their African heritage has been diluted by Northern European admixture (Haplogroup I, 22.5% in North Greece).

 

I don't think it's pseudo science to point out things about Egyptology that we are nowhere near to any real certainty of as some people have thought. I do think it's pseudo science to come to conclusions from these matters of doubt and then to hold to these conclusions with as much rigor as any of the old dogmas of that paradigm were granted in their day. There is still a lot of very intriguing mystery in that area and I think we do it a disservice both when we deny it exists or treat it as solved without solid evidence

 

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