I never knew that......

nawghtyhare said:
 
ColdCity said:
 
nawghtyhare said:
 
ColdCity said:
id def take down elaine...no dambs given
Click to expand...
and walk around with her proudly on my arm
we would be straight up holding hands, arm intertwined, and swinging as we walk down the street

u think wale would hook a ***** up ???
@ILoveHipHop43
nerd.gif
Click to expand...
would smang wale need to hook it up
Click to expand...
u need some punctuation in there bruh
laugh.gif
Click to expand...
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
 
or does he?
 
Last edited:
yvespo3 said:
Julia Louis-Dreyfus has a net worth of $3 billion. How is it possible that Julia has nearly twice as much money as Larry David and Jerry Seinfeld combined? It's not from acting, it's not from endorsements, and it's not from investing in real estate. Nope, a little known fact is that Julia is lucky to be the eldest daughter of billionaire Gerard Louis-Dreyfus, chairman of the Louis Dreyfus Energy Services.

eek.gif
Click to expand...
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW
 
JVthaGr8 said:
RottenPieces said:
^^^ are you sure this isn't from Arrested Development season 4?
Click to expand...

Haha yes I'm sure, I had to Google it because I don't watch the show, I wonder if that was the basis of the episode.

And just to add, that's how Blade and Daredevil film rights has reverted back to Marvel Studios after years of inactivity.

Speaking of DD, Fox in fact was developing a reboot and asked for more time, Marvel willing to do so in exchange for the rights to use Galactus and Silver Surfer.

Here is more information on the low budget FF4 movie

http://www.teako170.com/ffmovie.html

http://geekdom.hubpages.com/hub/Fantastic-Four-1994-Movie

Tr1ll said:
This was the one with the black Dr Fantastic?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
The actual movie right here

 
angels47 said:
 
paulprince3730 said:
 
large yea

diverse, lol, you guys are a step up from Asians
Click to expand...
You know Caucasian isn't just "white people", right bruh?
Click to expand...
well thats where things get screwed up

caucasian at one point wasnt used to describe all white people, it was a more specific term, i remember my world history teacher in hs telling me (hes white) that most white people are actually not caucasian, i vaguely remember what he told me, but i believe theres actually a mountian range named the caucas moutains, and thats closer to asia, and most of those people dont look like what we consider white people 

so youre right, caucasians probably have as much variation as negroids (but is dude caucasian?) but if you want to just say white people (which is what i meant) then nah, theyre just a step up from east asian people
 
Gotcha.

Honestly, I think each individual color of people look at another and think they all look alike.
 
paulprince3730 said:
angels47 said:
 
paulprince3730 said:
 
large yea

diverse, lol, you guys are a step up from Asians
Click to expand...

You know Caucasian isn't just "white people", right bruh?
Click to expand...
well thats where things get screwed up

caucasian at one point wasnt used to describe all white people, it was a more specific term, i remember my world history teacher in hs telling me (hes white) that most white people are actually not caucasian, i vaguely remember what he told me, but i believe theres actually a mountian range named the caucas moutains, and thats closer to asia, and most of those people dont look like what we consider white people 

so youre right, caucasians probably have as much variation as negroids (but is dude caucasian?) but if you want to just say white people (which is what i meant) then nah, theyre just a step up from east asian people
Click to expand...

techincally yes, caucasian refers to a broader spectrum of people than 'white' folk (which like 'black' is a generic catch all term, of course) but colloquially when caucasian is used there isn't typically any confusion as to what people are being referred to...as i mentioned earlier in this thread, there is actually more genetic diversity among/in africans/africa than any other peoples/place(this may not be true for any given specific gene like eye-color or lactose tolerance, but it is generally true), so it is generally true that as a species we (humans) aren't that diverse. a quick trip to google will break it down basically to caucasiods (middle east, northern africa, europe), mongoloids (east asia, polynesia, alaska, native americans), negroids (sub-saharan africa, native australians & new zealanders) & maybe 1 or 2 smaller groups which may overlap or be distinct in their own right.

as a #sidebar to this subject, this technicality always irked my when i'd hear/read/talk with people who would note moors, egyptians, berbers, etc. as african, while that is geographically true and there was 'mixing' going on, from a genetic perspective & even culturally, those are distinct peoples from what we typically think of as 'black africans' and therefore a separate from any history we as black people should be trying to claim (we were the 1st peoples, technically everyone is african)...just always struck me as a thirsty (yes there are reasons for this, but still) argument...like the history sub-saharan africans isn't good enough to claim, it'd be like canadians claiming credit for american accomplishments (which may not be that much of a reach?) #forcedanalogies

similarly the depiction of jesus as a fair skinned always bothered me as well, while i wouldn't go as far as to say he was black as some are wont to do, he probably (that is if you believe that he was a real person, and wanted to be historically accurate!) wasn't fair of skin, but likely a caucasoid so in that sense it could be seen as a generically accurate representation?
 
tokes99 said:
as a #sidebar to this subject, this technicality always irked my when i'd hear/read/talk with people who would note moors, egyptians, berbers, etc. as african, while that is geographically true and there was 'mixing' going on, from a genetic perspective & even culturally, those are distinct peoples from what we typically think of as 'black africans' and therefore a separate from any history we as black people should be trying to claim (we were the 1st peoples, technically everyone is african)...just always struck me as a thirsty (yes there are reasons for this, but still) argument...like the history sub-saharan africans isn't good enough to claim, it'd be like canadians claiming credit for american accomplishments (which may not be that much of a reach?) #forcedanalogies
Click to expand...

It's not a separate history though. I know those people on YouTube make it difficult to watch because it seems like they're spewing out unverifiable, but the black Americans of today are the Egyptians of past. I'm not talking about the dynastic ones who mixed with others races, I'm talking about the ones who built the pyramids and were chased out of the country based on jealousy. Follow the migration patten and you can see the spirituality/culture in the places that they touched. Eventually, they made it to western places like Ghana where it was easy to give them up to slavery because they weren't indigenous to that area. Add in the jealousy and it's a wrap.

Just like the Egyptians of past, it's still the black Americans who set the cultural trends everyone follows today. Whether you agree with the trend isn't the point I'm trying to make here.

Not trying to attack you personally, but I've seen people try and exploit the disconnect between African Americans and Egypt only to provide no insight where they actually come from.
 
hallywoodxo said:
tokes99 said:
as a #sidebar to this subject, this technicality always irked my when i'd hear/read/talk with people who would note moors, egyptians, berbers, etc. as african, while that is geographically true and there was 'mixing' going on, from a genetic perspective & even culturally, those are distinct peoples from what we typically think of as 'black africans' and therefore a separate from any history we as black people should be trying to claim (we were the 1st peoples, technically everyone is african)...just always struck me as a thirsty (yes there are reasons for this, but still) argument...like the history sub-saharan africans isn't good enough to claim, it'd be like canadians claiming credit for american accomplishments (which may not be that much of a reach?) #forcedanalogies
Click to expand...

It's not a separate history though. I know those people on YouTube make it difficult to watch because it seems like they're spewing out unverifiable, but the black Americans of today are the Egyptians of past. I'm not talking about the dynastic ones who mixed with others races, I'm talking about the ones who built the pyramids and were chased out of the country based on jealousy. Follow the migration patten and you can see the spirituality/culture in the places that they touched. Eventually, they made it to western places like Ghana where it was easy to give them up to slavery because they weren't indigenous to that area. Add in the jealousy and it's a wrap.

Just like the Egyptians of past, it's still the black Americans who set the cultural trends everyone follows today. Whether you agree with the trend isn't the point I'm trying to make here.

Not trying to attack you personally, but I've seen people try and exploit the disconnect between African Americans and Egypt only to provide no insight where they actually come from.
Click to expand...

not to derail this thread too much...but I heard something the other day that went "history is not the same as the past" so while think that is true, and the what we're taught in books is not the complete story/truth; there has always been cultural exchange when peoples are in proximity but from my albeit limited understanding, the linking of northern africans to western africans is being grossly overestimated and furthermore none of those people would be considered black or related to peoples that were taken from western africa into slavery by culture or by the genetic group. the closest related would be north eastern africans like ethiopians, eritreans, somalis, maybe (who generally weren't slaves and you'd have to go way back to the 1st modern humans). separate may be not be quite the right word because nothing is truly separate, different is prolly more appropriate...my point is more that by the time egyptians were building pyramids there were people living in western africa, so how do people skip that and make the case that 'we built the pyramids"????...people are entitled to believe whatever they want, but when it is presented as fact(s) I think it is really false, and more importantly unnecessary because the more direct things that could/should be claimed...
 
In Tennessee Nashville at least the passenger can have a open container and actually drink alcohol while the driver is driving, even in front of the police

Also don't have to use blinkers, If no car is near us

Beale st. In Memphis can drink in public downtown


Speaking bout dat anyone live in Memphis with a hotel hookup?
 
Last edited:
tokes99 said:
 
paulprince3730 said:
 
angels47 said:
 
paulprince3730 said:
 
large yea

diverse, lol, you guys are a step up from Asians
Click to expand...
You know Caucasian isn't just "white people", right bruh?
Click to expand...
well thats where things get screwed up

caucasian at one point wasnt used to describe all white people, it was a more specific term, i remember my world history teacher in hs telling me (hes white) that most white people are actually not caucasian, i vaguely remember what he told me, but i believe theres actually a mountian range named the caucas moutains, and thats closer to asia, and most of those people dont look like what we consider white people 

so youre right, caucasians probably have as much variation as negroids (but is dude caucasian?) but if you want to just say white people (which is what i meant) then nah, theyre just a step up from east asian people
Click to expand...
techincally yes, caucasian refers to a broader spectrum of people than 'white' folk (which like 'black' is a generic catch all term, of course) but colloquially when caucasian is used there isn't typically any confusion as to what people are being referred to...as i mentioned earlier in this thread, there is actually more genetic diversity among/in africans/africa than any other peoples/place(this may not be true for any given specific gene like eye-color or lactose tolerance, but it is generally true), so it is generally true that as a species we (humans) aren't that diverse. a quick trip to google will break it down basically to caucasiods (middle east, northern africa, europe), mongoloids (east asia, polynesia, alaska, native americans), negroids (sub-saharan africa, native australians & new zealanders) & maybe 1 or 2 smaller groups which may overlap or be distinct in their own right.

as a #sidebar to this subject, this technicality always irked my when i'd hear/read/talk with people who would note moors, egyptians, berbers, etc. as african, while that is geographically true and there was 'mixing' going on, from a genetic perspective & even culturally, those are distinct peoples from what we typically think of as 'black africans' and therefore a separate from any history we as black people should be trying to claim (we were the 1st peoples, technically everyone is african)...just always struck me as a thirsty (yes there are reasons for this, but still) argument...like the history sub-saharan africans isn't good enough to claim, it'd be like canadians claiming credit for american accomplishments (which may not be that much of a reach?) #forcedanalogies

similarly the depiction of jesus as a fair skinned always bothered me as well, while i wouldn't go as far as to say he was black as some are wont to do, he probably (that is if you believe that he was a real person, and wanted to be historically accurate!) wasn't fair of skin, but likely a caucasoid so in that sense it could be seen as a generically accurate representation?
Click to expand...
first para true

second para, it shouldnt irk you, there are major cultural and genetic differences amongst typical 'black africans' that are similar to their differences when compared to northern africans so why is it ok to lump them together but not the northern africans? the portrayal that all northern africans look like jasmine and aladdin is far from reality, and the reality is that the people who invented calculus look more like 'black people', everyone claiming to be related/descendants of pharaohs and mathematicians can be a stretch tho

third para, although you have a point, that is not why jesus is depicted as fair skinned and you know it, most people dont know the true meaning of a caucasoid person, which is why if you told them jesus was caucasian they would think you just mean white, even though most white people dont qualify as caucasian 
 
Superb said:
In Tennessee Nashville at least the passenger can have a open container and actually drink alcohol while the driver is driving, even in front of the police

Also don't have to use blinkers, If no car is near us

Beale st. In Memphis can drink in public downtown


Speaking bout dat anyone live in Memphis with a hotel hookup?
Click to expand...

I'd love if it was like this where I live. We damn near can't have it locked in the trunk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

crumps brother
What’s your move? Ordering on fast food apps
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
wayniac211
wayniac211
P
Jordan 5 aqua made in Vietnam legit check
Replies
0
Views
588
placeholderusername
P
numbah1
Curbing cell phone addiction
2 3
Replies
56
Views
5K
jpzx
jpzx
feeninlikejodeci
Went Off On Some Kids in the Wal-Mart Parking Lot.
2 3
Replies
59
Views
6K
DCAllAfrican
DCAllAfrican

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom