Are you proud of your country?

[theAlphaDuck]

Originally Posted by JoshAussie

So shake it around a bit, Right? Right?? But seriously. I got no idea.

lol

or you could sing it a song and dance with it...

hmmmm

"pot...pot beautifull pot...
pot of clay... for my water today
if only i wasnt an aborigini
then you could've been made by me"

also on the lines of music.... i find it quite cool the way that they managed to work out circular breathing (for the didge) a couple of thousand years before us white folks....

* them there pygmy people shure are smart..hiuck huick *

[clairebear]

....

Oh dear.

[theAlphaDuck]

the time taken for standing water to become dangerous to drink depends 2 main factors

1. impurities or particulate matter within the water
2. temperature

and as they gonna fill the pot with impure water anyway...to then leave that in the cooking sun...that which has not evaporated....will be warm..and teeming with bacteria

and yes...EVEN deserts contain natural springs.... did you NOT learn survival or something?....water can be found practically anywhere there are large rock formations.....

also carrying enough water for a 3 day hunting trip...in a clay pot?....
so your going to carry around a 12 litre pot.... EACH!....
and what your gonna just strap that to your back?
and then how do you take your kill home if you are each carrying a pot?

think about it tenchu...can you actually think of anything LESS practical than a clay pot, for a 3 day hunting expedition?

and i'm not arrogant... i'm just right

[kireikoori]

I don't understand the purpose of pride.
I mean, it's the place I was born, and, lived most of my life, so...it's getting kind of boring.

[ArabianPrincess]

yes I do >>

I am proud of the U.A.E

[Luciferos]

Not really.
The country i was born in was poor and corrupted, and people are selfish.
I currently live on the US, and though theres still a few things i dislike about this country as well, its far better than what i lived through back then when i lived on Paraguay.

[Tain]

in a way i am. but i am not looking forward going back (to the netherlands), a lot of things are going wrong in that country.

[keken]

yup! i love my country..

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Tenchu

Why does everyone always want to argue about what a word means, even though it changes the argument not the least. I don't have to say race, it is just easily understood that way. If you do not want to use that word then lets just replace every time I used it with the words "genetic traits passed and formed through isolated breeding"... or can I stick with saying "race" instead of that... I think I will. None of it changes the least of what I have said, either.

As for the rest of your BS. Okay, saying my statistics are wrong, that the probability of a African being faster in running than and Indonesian is an incorrect assumption. This may be like saying just because a man has a black father and a black mother it does not mean he will be a black child, because, of course "triats are not genetic" as we all know. You fucking goof brain.

Stadial: Stadial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If it has nothing to do with big winters then what is it?

There is such a thing as superior genetics, you are just an idiot, again. But you have to put them in their field to decide what is superior. It is the reason I suck at running but excel at lifting weights, it is genetics. If someone were to say why I suck at running (and they have) it would not be incorrect to say it is inferior genetics.

It is not uncommon, also, for children to excel in similar physical and mental abilities as their parents. Not only looking and sounding the same, but also thinking and performing the same. It is passed through a blood line. Some blood line holds weight over others, hence; the grey hound out runs the mastif (yet not every hound will be champion), the Arabian horse out runs the mustang (yet not every Arabian steed will be fastest), the African out runs the Indonesian (yet not every Indonesian will be slow). This is not an uncommon thing, and it borders on the line between scientific and common sense; something you seriously lack.

If you do not understand that long periods of isolated breeding can result in specific traits, both mental and physical, then you are not worth talking to.

This conversation is over, do not troll me again.

An explanation of stadial theory

Sociocultural evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Your argument is so incoherent that I could barely understand a word you just said. You have demonstrated a lack of knowledge of genetics and your pseudo-scientific rant is terribly similar to the beliefs which a certain Adolph Hitler based his final solution of off. Your ignorance astounds me.

I will make a couple of points in response.

-Humans haven't evolved into sub-species like dogs have idiot. Read the information I give you next time. It states in one of the websites I gave you that NO human society has been isolated enough long enough to develop into a subspecies. This includes aborigines.
-Saying that parents pass on their genes to children is supposed to explain what exactly?

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Tenchu

No, dogs are not sub species. As Noodle and Ivon pointed out very clearly to me; they are in no way genetically different from wolves, they have not evolved one bit, technically. The difference is due to isolated breeding lines that highlight individual features. Like two blonde people giving birth to other blondes. If they never breed with a dark haired then they will never produce that feature.

And we are the same. But some dogs are smarter than others. And you will loose all your money betting on a poodle that was meant as a gag at the hound races. Idiot.

Why don't you come back with some common sense, or at least give me a single answer as to why 90% of the aboriginal race has turned out a social failure in the new world regardless of free land for development and industry and obscene welfare assistance?

Retard.

Maybe you should also look up the definition of subspecies before you post a reply that is completely wrong. Different types of dog are categorized as subspecies because genetic distinctions can be made between these differences. We've already been over the fact that there is as much genetic variation within a race as there is between races therefore race cannot be defined along genetic lines (meaning the differences between a poodle and a greyhound cannot be compared with the differences between a white person and an aboriginal).

The current plight of the aborigines can be explained via circumstance and history. As to your assertions that even before the arrival of the white man in Australia they remained technologically stagnant? Well I don't have an answer for that one (though MY common sense says circumstance is the reason for that also).

It wasn't due to inferior genes and that's a scientific FACT.