Chuck Norris tells it like it is

That is pretty much what I said. The Bushmen are the same as the San hunter-gatherers, which together with their pastoral relatives the Khoi make up the Khoisan.
 
What skin color essentially indicates is how close to the equator your ancestors tended to live.

This is why we see non-immigrant populations with darker skin the closer to the equator we go. Central Africa, Andamans, and Southern India, Indonesia and Aboriginal Australia.

[However, I'm not sure whether or not this applies to South America. If it does, I'm not aware of it. My impression is that very dark skin is not prevalent there. Of course, the Americas have gone through a decimation level of depopulation in recent history, so that may have sort of reset the melanin clock.][/speculation]
 
What skin color essentially indicates is how close to the equator your ancestors tended to live.

This is why we see non-immigrant populations with darker skin the closer to the equator we go. Central Africa, Andamans, and Southern India, Indonesia and Aboriginal Australia.

[However, I'm not sure whether or not this applies to South America. If it does, I'm not aware of it. My impression is that very dark skin is not prevalent there. Of course, the Americas have gone through a decimation level of depopulation in recent history, so that may have sort of reset the melanin clock.][/speculation]


As far as I know, and this may be hard to prove since so little of those people survived, or survived unmixed with others, the equatorial native Americans were notably darker than other native Americans. As for how dark, keep in mind that they did not have as long in that location in isolation. Aboriginal Australians were there some 40,000 years. Native Americans maybe 11,000 or so.
 
South America isn't appreciably darker:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_skin_color

350px-Unlabeled_Renatto_Luschan_Skin_color_map.svg.png
 
Yeah, lets not rehash the evolution of skin color debate. /thread
 
Well, to be fair, all the glood and doom the Dems predict if Romney gets elected wont happen either....

That we will go back to a G.W.Bush like presidency ? (Which is pretty scarey when you think about it)
 
If Obama now wins in spite of Norris's critique, will this put an end to Norris jokes and usher in the era of Obama jokes?
 
He references a remark by Reagan about how our freedom is always just one generation away from being lost, that it must always be fought for.
He's right.
That just doesn't apply to opposing Obama all that well. There's a lot of freedom to be fought for in America. Most of the necessary fighting would be about kicking conservatives in the nuts, though.
If Obama wins, are we destined to slide down that slope of socialism and oppression?
The top marginal tax rate will go back to Clintonian levels and apart from that not much will happen. I don't know whether that is a 'yes' or a 'no' by your standards.
Gena said:
a thousand years of darkness
Political eras that are supposed to last a thousand years typically end up a bit shorter.
Some are 988 years shorter. I guess that's the margin of error on these things.
Gena said:
last best hope for man on earth
What? Something is wrong with Denmark?!
Ah. I see. You are still talking about America. You're just being typically delusional...
 
He's right.
That just doesn't apply to opposing Obama all that well. There's a lot of freedom to be fought for in America. Most of the necessary fighting would be about kicking conservatives in the nuts, though.

The top marginal tax rate will go back to Clintonian levels and apart from that not much will happen. I don't know whether that is a 'yes' or a 'no' by your standards.
Obama has lead a sustained attack on whistleblowers.
He's signed into law more civil liberties roll-backs than Bush.
He has a more expansive view of solitary executive power than Bush.
He's expanded domestic surveillance far beyond what Bush started.

Those are things that conservatives may champion in one form or another, but you can't pretend that Obama feels differently. At least, based on his actions he's just as freedom-hating as his predecessor.

Lastly, foreign policy under Romney looks like it would be quite different than what we've had from Obama. Have you read about Romney's team?
 
Lets not forget he threw out the Churchill bust from the oval office :rolleyes:
 
Their naked anti-government spending campaign stump broadsides to largely white suburban, rural and strongly male crowds further drive the point home that blacks are not even an after-thought in their drive to snare the White House. Their campaign approach would be enough to insure the lowest of single digit support from blacks even if their opponent isn't a popular, and history making African-American president. One would have to hark back to Ronald Reagan in his reelection bid in 1984 to find a GOP president that has ticked off African-Americans to the extent Romney-Ryan have. Even Reagan, despite the low intensity warfare he waged against civil rights organizations and black Democrats, still managed to get three percent of the black vote.

what the hell is he popular vfor? hope and change?
 
Back
Top Bottom