Newsgroup: it.scienza.geologia
Titolo: The reality of race, a mountain of evidence WAS : catastrofe globale e Medioevo.

relativamente poco e invece conta molto il DNA.
difatti, e' esattamente quanto sostengono gli scienziati SERI, cioe' quelli
obbiettivi, non i prostituti ad ogni regime "democratico"
posto questo articolo, tratto dalla biblioteca sulla razza di David Duke
http://www.duke.org/library/innate/baker_jackson.html
presto tradotto in  italiano dal sottoscritto.
The Reality of Race
by Thomas Jackson
From American Renaissance magazine     November, 1993
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Race is a veritable mountain of evidence, all of which can lead only to the
conclusion that the races differ in ability.  Nevertheless, Dr. Baker is
strictly the scientist.  He draws no further conclusions and makes no
suggestions about social policy.  There is no doubt in his mind that current
orthodoxy on this subject is absurd, but he limits his exegesis to the
interpretation of data."
John R. Baker, Race, Foundation for Human Understanding (original publisher:
Oxford Univ. Press), 1974
•Introduction •The Proper Study of Mankind •Race and Color •Equal or Unequal? •A
Mountain of Evidence 
Race, by John Baker, is a remarkable book. There is probably no other treatment
of the biology and physical anthropology of race that approaches it in breadth,
detail, erudition or style. Even more remarkable is the book's point of view.
Far from evading the issue of racial differences in ability, it was written for
the very purpose of investigating and clarifying those differences. 
Dr. Baker, now deceased, was the ideal author for this book. He was professor
emeritus of cytology at Oxford University, a Fellow of the Royal Society, and
president of the Royal Microscopical Society. To these professional
qualifications he added an abiding interest in what he called the "ethnic
question," that is to say, the entire range of ways in which the races differ. 
Written late in life, Race is Dr. Baker's definitive statement on what he
considered one of the most important issues of our time. From start to finish
the book is stuffed with little-known, eye-opening facts, and it is fascinating,
even essential reading for anyone with a serious interest in race. It is
supplemented with more than 80 illustrations, and some of the simpler line
drawings are reproduced here. 
Race is organized in four parts. The first is a summary of what was thought and
freely written about racial differences up through the end of the 1920s when, as
Dr. Baker puts it, "the curtain came down" on open discussion. The second is an
introduction to the biology of taxonomy or classification, including a thorough
treatment of how races and species are identified. The third is a detailed
inventory of the biological differences that distinguish the major races and
subraces. In this section Dr. Baker makes a particular study of whites, or
Europids as he calls them, and of Africans (Negrids), Bushmen (Sanids),
Australian aborigines (Australids), Celts, and Jews. In the final section, Dr.
Baker sets out what he considers to be the essential criteria for determining
what he bluntly calls superiority and inferiority. Not surprisingly, his
conclusions are at odds with current dogma. 
Dr. Baker's historical account of what has been written about ethnic differences
includes introductions to a number of people one might well expect, such as the
Comte de Gobineau, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, Nietzsche, Francis Galton, and
even Hitler. Dr. Baker also describes the pioneering but no longer recognized
work of men like Johann Blumenbach (1752-1840) and Samuel Sommerring
(1755-1830). 
Other famous men have pronounced themselves on the question of racial
differences and, until recently, few have had any sympathy for the notion of
equality. Rousseau, for example, thought the chimpanzee was a primitive form of
human being, and Kant, Voltaire, and Hume thought the Negro vastly inferior to
the European. Dr. Baker reminds us that even the Bible is hardly silent on the
ethnic problem. The Children of Israel routinely exterminated enemies, whom they
considered inferior, and in the tenth book of Joshua, they enslaved the entire
Hivite people. 
The Proper Study of Mankind 
In the more technical sections that follow, Dr. Baker draws on his scientific
training to treat homo sapiens as just one more member of the animal kingdom.
"No one knows man who knows only man," he observes, and adds: "One might almost
go so far as to say, in relation to the ethnic problem, that the proper study of
mankind is animals." By this he means that without a thorough grounding in
biology and taxonomy it is impossible to view man with the detachment that
science requires. Dr. Baker writes, he explains, in the spirit that inspired
T.H. Huxley to conclude that "Anthropology is a section of zoology [and] . . .
the problems of ethnology are simply those which are presented to the zoologist
by every widely distributed animal he studies." In this, Dr. Baker is out of
step with many contemporary social scientists who seem to believe that humans
are uniquely exempt from the laws of heredity and from the kind of scrutiny to
which all other animals are subject. 
Dr. Baker leads us firmly back to biology with an account of how evolution gave
rise to different species, how species are classified, the nature of hybridity,
and the circumstances under which animals can be made to mate with differing
species. Anthropology indeed becomes a branch of zoology. However, in this
discussion it becomes clear that man differs from animals in at least one
important way: humans are exceedingly unselective in their mating habits and
will copulate with individuals--across racial lines, for example--from whom they
are physically very different. 
The contrast with the seven kinds of European mosquito, for example, could not
be greater. Their eggs can be distinguished because of slight differences, but
adults are so similar that not even experts can tell them apart under a
microscope. What experts cannot do, the mosquitoes do without fail; they never
interbreed. 
Dr. Baker likewise reports that Grant's gazelle and Thompson's gazelle live
together in mixed herds and are so similar in appearance that it takes a trained
eye to tell them apart. They, too, never interbreed. It is only under
domestication that animals can be made to overcome their repugnance for mates
unlike themselves and thus produce mules or leopons (a cross between tiger and
leopard). Domesticated dogs breed indiscriminately with widely different types
but wild dogs like wolves, foxes, and coyotes breed only with their own kind. 
Man is the most domesticated of animals and the least exclusive in his
amours--but his promiscuity varies enormously by group and individual. As Dr.
Baker points out, the Indian caste system successfully prevented interbreeding
even among racially similar people. At the same time, there are individuals
whose lust for animals is so great that bestiality has had to be specifically
forbidden ever since Biblical times. 
The races and sub-races of man have evolved largely because of geographical
separation, but Dr. Baker also refers to what he calls "ecological races" that
evolved to fill different but overlapping niches. The small stature of African
pygmies, for example, fits them to forest life while the larger Negrids live in
clearings. 
If humans had continued to evolve in isolation or if they were as discriminating
as animals in their choice of mates, racial differences would eventually lead to
mutually infertile species. This would be diversity of a truly remarkable kind. 
Domestication and travel have led to increasing miscegenation, but Dr. Baker
speculates about another possible reason. The skulls of our remote ancestors
show that their olfactory organs were much better developed than ours. It is
also likely that ancient man had stronger odors than does modern man, and since
our ancestors' mating habits were probably governed by smell just like those of
animals, this discouraged mating with unfamiliar peoples. Even today the races
have different odors. 
Dr. Baker notes drily that although modern man is scrupulous in selecting only
the most promising breeding couples among his domestic animals, he almost never
gives the same attention to his own reproduction. "It follows," he adds, "that
we cannot look for any advance in inborn intelligence . . . ." 
Race and Color 
Dr. Baker writes at some length about skin color, but only because race and
color are sometimes confused. He himself thinks the subject is trivial and, in
fact, since at least Darwin's time scientists have recognized that color is
unimportant in distinguishing biological forms. Dr. Baker points out that to
make color the touch stone of race is as stupid as to think that a red rose is
more closely related to a red petunia than to a white rose. 
Australian aborigines are similar in color to Bushmen, for example, but it would
be difficult to think of two racial groups that are more dissimilar
biologically. Likewise, Dr. Baker explains that some of the inhabitants of
northern India have relatively dark skin but are racially very close to
Europids. 
Skin color is affected by the color of blood that may be visible through it, but
the main reason for variations in skin color is the presence of different
amounts of the pigment melanin. All humans make the same melanin and have much
the same number of melanocytes--the difference is in how much melanin is
produced. The darkest Africans have visible concentrations of melanin even in
the whites of their eyes and on their tongues. Melanin colors hair as well as
skin, though it is the presence of a slightly different substance, called
phaeomelanin, that causes "red" hair. 
Dr. Baker explains that blue eyes are not caused by a blue pigment but by the
absence of pigment. Eyes appear to be blue for the same reason the edges of a
snow bank may appear blue: red light and other long wave lengths pass through
but shorter, bluer wave lengths are refracted and scattered, and some are
reflected back towards the viewer. 
Light-skinned people are probably descended from dark-skinned people who
migrated from the tropics. The skin of Europeans transmits three and a half
times as much sunlight as the skin of Africans, and the ultraviolet rays convert
ergosterol in the body into vitamin D. Dark-skinned people, whose skins are
adapted to sunnier latitudes, may therefore get rickets--caused by vitamin D
deficiency--if they live in cold climates. 
The third section of Race, in which Dr. Baker describes the myriad ways in which
the races differ from each other physically is the most technical. It includes
general descriptions of blood chemistry, physiology and skeletal structure, with
a special emphasis on the characteristics of the skull. It introduces concepts
like brachycephaly, paedomorphism, and the cranial index. 
It is useful for the reader to have had some training in physiology but it is
not necessary. Even the most technical passages can usually be understood by a
non-specialist who has paid close attention to earlier explanations, and Dr.
Baker has set his most abstruse observations in smaller type as a signal to
laymen that they may skip over them without much loss. 
A certain level of scientific detail is necessary here not merely because
physiological differences between the races require a certain vocabulary. In
this section Dr. Baker is at pains to explain the extent to which some races
show the traits of primitiveness--the retention into the modern era of features
possessed by our remote ancestors--and paedomorphy--the retention as adults of
traits commonly associated with children. 
For example, it is indisputable that Australids are more primitive than other
races. Like Pithecanthropus, their teeth and lower jaws are strikingly large,
and their skulls are twice as thick as those of any other race. The forehead
recedes sharply, and the brow ridges are so well developed as to be reminiscent
of Pithecanthropus and of the larger apes. The brain is only about 85 percent
the size of that of Europids and the back part has lunate folds not found in
other races but similar to those in the brains of orang-utans. Likewise, the
nasal aperture is similar, in some respects, to that of the orang-utan. 
The Bushmen, or Sanids, show equally remarkable evidence of paedomorphy. Their
very small size--males are often no taller than 4'7" or 4'9"--is the most
obviously juvenile characteristic retained by adults. Their skulls are notably
short and squat like those of a Europid infant and their eyes are set wide apart
like a new-born's. The facial and body hair of both sexes is very weakly
developed and reminiscent of children. Among males, the scrotum is like that of
a pre-adolescent: so small and tightly drawn up that one might think only one
testicle had descended. 
As for Negrids, aside from a brain that is very slightly smaller than that of
Europids and Sinids (North Asians), Dr. Baker finds no characteristics that
could be called either primitive or paedomorphous. Negrids differ in blood
chemistry from other races, and have broader shoulders and thinner calves.
Certain tribes, such as the Hottentot, show extreme steatopygia or enlarged
buttocks. In some cases the posterior extends horizontally, almost like a shelf.
Francis Galton, who travelled among the Hottentot in 1850 and 1851, wrote of one
such woman that he was "perfectly aghast at her development." He wanted to
measure her dimensions but could not bring himself to ask her permission to do
so. Instead, he took observations through his sextant and, he says, "worked out
the results by trigonometry and logarithms." 
Equal or Unequal? 
The question of whether Africans are, on average, equal in intelligence to
whites is important both in the United States and in Britain. Dr. Baker
therefore devotes considerable space to 19th-century accounts of African
societies before they came into sustained contact with foreigners. This is the
only sure way to know how far they had been able to advance without outside
influence. 
Every explorer found a remarkable poverty of development. No black African
society had a written language or a calendar. None used the wheel or practiced
joinery or built multi-story buildings. Iron smelting was common but no black
Africans built what could be called a mechanical device, even one so simple as a
hinge. Africans apparently tamed no animals themselves but received
already-domesticated dogs and cattle from north of the Sahara. None used any
beast of burden, despite the presence of large mammals that could have been
tamed. 
Although African societies are today described as having rich oral histories,
this was by no means universal. A few tribes did have men who could recite the
histories of their kings, but many were completely ignorant of the past. The
Ovaherero tribe, for example, kept no count of years at all. 
Slavery and polygamy were widespread. Arbitrary execution of subjects by rulers
or wives by husbands was common. A few tribes ate human flesh though even some
of their own members seem to have rejected this custom. Some coastal natives,
seeing slaves being fed before being loaded onto ships for export, believed that
Europeans intended to eat them. 
Some people have argued that the reason Africans showed such poor development
was that the effort to maintain life was too great to permit the leisure for
advancement. On the contrary, the missionary and explorer, David Livingstone,
found that some parts of the continent were a veritable paradise: 
"To one who has observed the hard toil of the poor in old civilized countries,
the state in which the inhabitants here live is one of glorious ease. . . . Food
abounds, and very little labour is required for its cultivation; the soil is so
rich that no manure is required." 
Although Dr. Baker does not pursue this idea very far, he suggests that it was
the very ease of life in Africa that kept high intelligence from being as
necessary for survival as it was in harsher climates. 
In the concluding section of Race, Dr. Baker draws the only conclusions that the
data will permit: Just as they differ in biology, the races differ in their
mental traits. They are not equally intelligent or capable of building civilized
societies. Dr. Baker reviews the literature on mental testing and on the
heritability of intelligence and finds that it only confirms his conclusions. 
After setting out an interesting set of criteria for genuine civilization he
finds that the first people to achieve it were the Sumerians of the fourth
millennium B.C. Physically, it is likely that they were more closely related to
the Kurds than to any other present people. Europids and Sinids have also
created genuine civilizations, but Negrids and Australids have not. 
Dr. Baker puts the Maya of Central America in a category of their own. Their
astronomy and mathematics were extremely advanced and were at one time the most
sophisticated in the world. They built great cities and administered large
territories. However, Dr. Baker hesitates to call them genuinely civilized for
several reasons: they did not use the wheel or use commercial weights, their
written language was poorly developed and their religion was a mass of
superstitions that were often the basis for torture, human sacrifice, and mass
slaughter. 
A Mountain of Evidence
Race is a veritable mountain of evidence, all of which can lead only to the
conclusion that the races differ in ability. Nevertheless, Dr. Baker is strictly
the scientist. He draws no further conclusions and makes no suggestions about
social policy. There is no doubt in his mind that current orthodoxy on this
subject is absurd, but he limits his exegesis to the interpretation of data. 
In its realm, however, Race is a magisterial work to which justice cannot be
done in a review. It is probably the single most ambitious and comprehensive
volume on the subject ever attempted, and is surely without peer in its
treatment of the physical differences that distinguish races. It is not an easy
book -- Dr. Baker does not address himself to dullards or dilettantes -- but in
these blighted times it is a stroke of astonishing good fortune that a man of
his immense learning and ability should have chosen to take up a position on the
unpopular but truthful side of "the ethnic problem." 
<Immagine>

 slaughter.
Questa è una cazzata: anche i romani non brillavano certo per "umanità": presente le
crocifissioni, i "giochi" dei gladiatori, i roghi dei vivi, il pasto delle belve
ecc... Eppure tutti dicono che erano "evoluti" culturalmente. Bah...
Ciao,
Paolo

 <Immagine>
 Immagine there's no heaven
 and no religion, too.
 .........
Se traduci questa canzone, fai prima e fai meno danno..
f-up sul gruppo piu' appropriato.
Bye,
-- 
      Ermanno Polli   (INFN-LNF)
    user:      hostname:  subdomain:  domain:  country:
ermanno.polli    N/A        lnf         infn     it

Hai mandato il tuo messaggio dove si parla di razze
addirittura su it.scienza.astronomia e su it.scienza.geologia!!!
Esiste al mondo uno piu' idiota di te?
Sono sicuro di no, eppure continui a rompere parlando di
superiorita' dei bianchi sui negri!!!
E mica e' finita: ti presenti su it.scienza, pretendendo di
dare una giustificazione razionale alle tue argomentazioni idiote
sulle razze, e poi rifiuti le ragioni della genetica!!!!
Esiste al mondo un imbecille piu' imbecille di te?!?!?
Sono sicuro di no, eppure hai la faccia tosta di
continuare imperterrito a rompere con la tua ridicola
pretesa della superiorita' dei bianchi!!!!!!!
Ebbene Caudan ... ti ringrazio per la tua stupidita'!!!!!!
Caudan, a nome di tutti quelli che sono contrari al razzismo,
ti ringrazio di esistere, perche' sei la prova vivente che
non e' vero che i bianchi sono piu' intelligenti dei negri!!!!!!!!!
        Saluti

 a écrit dans le message :
39dd1699...@news.interbusiness.it...

| .Introduction .The Proper Study of Mankind .Race and Color .Equal or
Unequal? .A


involuzone, anzi: l'America č ai piů alti livelli di sviluppo e potere di sempre.
pensare che la ricchezza degli Usa provenga da qualche milione di
delinquenti alcoolizzati e drogati, che, in maggioranza non conoscono il proprio
padre e vivono di sussistenza pubblica chiusi nei ghetti fa solo parte del
nonsense che i compagni sono abituati a propinarci :  facciamogli una risata in
faccia e non badiamogli.

non e' vero che i bianchi sono piu' intelligenti dei negri!!!!!!!!!
probabilmente tieni la negretta anche tu.

 chissa'  se le fosse comuni riguardano la geologia ?
questa sarà la *seconda*  segnalazione per SPAM  alla Naming Authority
Italiana ed alla
Registration Authority Italiana.
-- 
Reply by removing one "z" in the email
Life is like a windows box. You never know what bluescreen you're gonna
get.

 ogni pagina !
L'intelligenza è un giusto rapporto tra ragione e emozione. Esistono sette tipi
d'intelligenza e solo uno ha a che vedere con la logica. Esitono anche altri tipi
d'intelligenza, quella di Gandhi, quella di Chomsky, quella di Freud, quella di Carla
Fracci e Jury Chechi (si chiama "intelligenza motoria").
Ciao,
Paolo

Ciao Ragazzi,
è la 2^ volta che posto per richiedere di evitare di ingaggiare qualunque
tipo di discussione con i TROLL.
Siccome ormai è chiaro che, al di là del fatto che il razzismo sia da
condannare, l'oggetto della discussione è fortemente OFF TOPIC, invito tutti
i frequentatori del Newsgroup a non replicare più ad alcuna provocazione.
E per i più "arrabbiati" che vorrebbero replicare con veemenza
(giustamente), ricordo che nulla ingenera più rabbia dell'essere ignorati.
Scusate se ho assunto il "tono" del padrone di casa ma è ora di finirla di
sprecare banda per i cretini.
Marco Zambianchi
Gruppo Astrofili DEEP SPACE - Lecco


Sei veramente limitato.
Ragioni, se nel tuo caso e' lecito usare questo termine, solo
entro i tuoi meschini e ristretti schemi mentali e non riesci a
capire nient'altro se non quello che qualche altro imbecille
ti ha messo in testa.
Secondo il tuo misero modo di vedere le cose, io DEVO
per forza avere un interesse personale nella discussione
e non arrivi a capire che ci potrei anche avere altre
motivazioni.
La realta' e' completamente diversa: semplicemente mi da'
fastidio se qualche stupido dice delle stupidaggini e tu
ne hai dette veramente di grosse e continui a dirle
imperterrito!!!

Sul conoscere, controllare e valorizzare le proprie emozioni.
e cosa centrerebbe con l' intelligenza ?
l' ho detto, vi hanno dato un obiettivo, la famosa "uguaglianza" di tutte le
razze e dovete solo contorcervi un po' ad inventare delle assurdita' per
giustificarla, vedi quel povero cazzaro, tale Jared Diamond, che sosteneva che i
bianchi si fossero evoluti piu' delle altre razze per PURO CASO.
Adesso quest' altra perla sull' intelligenza emozionale...
demenza politically-correct

eliminato per evitare che il tuo misero patrimonio genetico
Vedo che continui ad insultare, sbraitare e sbavare.
Tutti hanno visto che non sai cosa rispondere, evita almeno di dare spettacolo.
addio troll

Registration Authority Italiana.
Innanzitutto i miei post NON SONO SPAM, anche se li disapprovi, ma fanno parte
di discussioni, cui partecipo.  
Usenet esiste per questo.
Poi, caro il mio lamer i mei post non superano il  BI 20 index, e ti ricordo che
gli enti che hai citato si usano per i complaint solo contro 
                                              CHI POSSIEDE UN DOMAIN !
     _/             _/_/           _/     _/      _/_/_/     _/_/_/
   _/            _/    _/       _/_/_/_/      _/            _/    _/
  _/            _/_/_/       _/  _/ _/     _/_/        _/_/_/
 _/            _/    _/      _/     _/     _/            _/    _/
_/_/_/     _/    _/     _/     _/     _/_/_/     _/      _/

 bianchi si fossero evoluti piu' delle altre razze per PURO CASO.
Mah, probabilmente hanno avuto più fortuna di altri. È difficile stabilire quele sia
la causa. Visto il caso del Giappone, che è evolutissimo pur essendo di popolamento
mongolide, propenderei per la *distruzione del sistema delle caste*, seguito al
periodo feudale. Questo è accaduto sia in Europa che in Giappone.
Ciao,
Paolo

 Vedo che continui ad insultare, sbraitare e sbavare.
Caro tontolone,
vorrei che ti convincessi che il mio non e' un insulto,
ma e' solo una constatazione, addirittura lapalissiana, che
non e' fine a se stessa, ma serve come evidente dimostrazione
del fatto che le tue teorie sono completamente sballate.
Insomma, tanto per capirci, se stessimo discutendo del primo
principio della termodinamica, non mi permetterei mai e poi mai,
anche se risulta evidente, di farti notare che sei un idiota,
ma visto che la discussione, che e' partita da te, riguarda
proprio la presunta superiorita' dei bianchi sui negri, mi pare
logico che uno dei sistemi piu' immediati  per dimostrare
che hai torto, e' quello di evidenziare, cosa del resto
facilissima, che sei un colossale idiota e quindi e' assurdo
pensare che un imbecille come te si possa ritenere piu'
intelligente di chicchessia, figuriamoci poi di un intera
categoria di persone, come possono essere i negri
o i verdi o i gialli o i turchesi.

Poi, caro il mio lamer i mei post non superano il  BI 20 index
Caro il mio RAZZISTA, falla finita. La gente come te è stata già condannata
dalla storia.


intelligente di chicchessia, figuriamoci poi di un intera
....cioe'  continui ad insultare e sbraitare.
perche' non provi a dimostrare che io sia cosi' stupido ?
Io posso ipotizzare che il colossale idiota sia tu, ed i  fatti mi danno
ragione, almeno a giudicare dai tuoi "argomenti"
Egregio signore/a
Il vostro articolo e' stato selezionato per stupidita', volgarita', 
insulti personali, idiozia, incompetenza ed ipocrisia.
La vostra valutazione e' riportata sotto.
Speriamo che questo vi faccia riflettere su questa esperienza.
VOI  :
[X] Avete chiaramente postato un articolo troll
[X] Avete fatto una reply illeggibile
[X] Avete gravemente incompreso lo scopo di questo newsgroup
[X] Avete ipocritamente mentito su fatti alla conoscenza di tutti
[X] Avete postato degli sciocchi insulti personali
[X] Avete postato delle stronzate
[X] Avete postato qualcosa che non interessa a nessuno
[X] Avete postato un flamebait a basso Q.I.
[X] Siete troppo ignorante per pensare di imporre qualcosa
[X] Avete un newsreader del cavolo
[X] Avete vigliaccamente usato un alias/indirizzo falso
[X] Non sapete cosa inventarvi e postate cazzate
[X] Siete chiaramente un perdente
CONTENUTI : Il vostro articolo e' chiaramente:
[X] Abusivo                    [X] Insulso
[X] Arrogante                  [  ] Ipocrita
[X] Beota                      [X] Irrilevante
[X] Disprezzabile              [  ] Noioso
[X] Ignorante                  [  ] Sciocco
PERSONALE/IDENTITA'. Il vostro articolo suggerisce che voi siate: 
[X] Autonomo                   [X] Mantenuto
[X] Bassa forma di vita        [  ] Mezzasega
[  ] Bigotto                    [X] Mongoloide
[  ] Bugiardo                   [X] Negro
[  ] Burino                     [  ] Novellino
[X] Cervello di criceto        [  ] Pulotto
[X] Cialtrone                  [  ] Puzzone
[X] Coprofago                  [  ] Rigurgito
[X] Illetterato                [  ] Tossico
[X] Imboscato                  [  ] Troll
[X] Incompetente               [X] Un lettore di Repubblica
[X] Lamer                      [ X Un pidiessino
[  ] Leoncavallino              [X] Una merdaccia
[  ] Mancato aborto             [X] Zecca
CONSIGLI :
[X] Autopraticarvi una lobotomia frontale
[X] Cancellate l' abbonamento a TIN - LIBERO
[X] Evitare di fare il troll (o imparando a farlo seriamente)
[X] La masturbazione anale e' la miglior cosa per voi
[X] Portate le vostre farneticazioni da un altra parte
[X ] Smetterla di leccare il culo a tutti perche' fate schifo
[X ] Smetterla di postare e basta
[X] Usate un vero ISP
[  ] Provare a studiare:
     <o> Biologia
     <> Chimica
     <> Economia
     <> Fisica
     <> Geografia
     <> Informatica
     <o> Italiano
     <o> Logica
     <> Medicina
     <> Storia
     <> Grammatica
     <> Almeno per prendere le elementari
[  ] Tutte le precedenti
Grazie ed arrivederci
1.02

periodo feudale. Questo è accaduto sia in Europa che in Giappone.
le caste non esistevano in Europa, casomai classi sociali.
Le caste, piuttosto esistevano i India, e proprio la fine di quel sistema causo'
la rovina di quella grande civilta'.

 la rovina di quella grande civilta'.
Ah, quindi ti restano simpatici anche gl'indiani. A te basta che siano caucasidi (non
importa se mescolati con i vedidi australidi?). Bene, allora ti piaceranno anche gli
arabi...
Ciao,
Paolo


Imbecille, hai mai sentito parlare di BIANCHI che violentano
i propri figli?
Solo un idiota come te puo' ignorare certe mostruosita' e
parlare di "cartacce per terra".

dalla storia.
la vedremo.
La situazione di immigrazione sta cambiando le idee a parecchia gente.
Sara' meglio che inziate a convivere con queste idee.

 spalle.
Ma lo sai che sei proprio un povero inetto?
Ma perchè gli rispondete a questo?
Ma non avvertite la pochezza delle sue idee?
Adesso mi devi spiegare cosa c'entra il fatto di essere comunisti, quindi
favorevoli alla teoria del comunismo, con il colpire alle spalle?
Questa è secondo te una risposta a tono ad una obiezione che ti era stata
fatta!?
Questa è la dialettica del Bar Sport, del "Basta! non se ne puo' piu'!",
delle discussioni alla Maurizio Costanzo Show, fatte sulle frasi ad effetto,
enon sulle idee.
Non mi sembra che su un NG che dovrebbe favorire la diffusione della
scienza, questo sia quello che ci si aspetta...
un saluto a tutti
Andrea

Scusate,
mi rivolgo a tutti gli appartenenti ai newsgroup it.scienza,
it.scienza.astronomia, it.scienza.geologia: vi prego di porre attenzione ai
seguenti fatti:
1) Rispondere alle provocazioni razziste di Romeo Caudan spreca banda da
ormai tre settimane sui nostri newsgroup;
2) Rispondere con il tastino "Reply" a Caudan significa automaticamente
effettuare 2 crosspost, cioč magari, convinti di rispondedre ad un messaggio
letto su it.scienze, la vostra risposta finisce per essere inviata a 3
newsgroup: it.scienza, it.scienza.geologia, it.scienza.astronomia. Con
conseguente ulteriore spreco di banda.
3) Caudan č essenzialmente un provocatore,(Troll), che si diverte a buttare
benzina sul fuoco per vederci discutere e rispondere ai suoi messaggi
deliranti. Ignorarlo da qui in poi č la miglior tattica per far cessare i
suoi inutili schiamazzi.
4) Piccola provocazione personale per Caudan: e se tua figlia si innamorasse
di un bel negretto? :-)
BOICOTTATE CAUDAN DA ORA IN POI.
--
Marco Zambianchi da it.scienze.astronomia
Gruppo Astrofili DEEP SPACE - Lecco
Visita il sito 
www.deepspace.it

arabi...
veramente i caucasici bianchi mi piacevano di piu' prima di imbastardirsi con i
negroidi asiatici, erano anche un popolo straordinariamente evoluto, una delle
piu' antiche civilta' sulla terra.
Ma ora tutto questo e' finito e l' India e' una meravigliosa societa'
multirazziale, proprio come saranno l' Europa e gli Usa.
Dobbiamo essere felici ?

di un bel negretto? :-)
qui mi inviti a rispondere, quindi non si capisce cosa inviti a fare tutti gli
altri ad ignorarmi.
Quanto alla figlia degenere penso che la miglior terapia per questo genere di
malattie sia l' immunita' :  dopo aver provato a vivere assieme a scimmioni del
genere, generalmente una donna non vuole piu' nemmeno vederli, e la
dimostrazione e' l' altissimo tasso di fallimenti che hanno i matrimoni misti.
Purtroppo quando questo succede generalmente il nigger ha gia' compiuto il suo
"atto d' amore", cioe' violentare la donna, nella maniera animalesca e bestiale
tipica dei negri.
E' chiaro che pensare ad una qualsiasi donna bianca in quella situazione mi
rivolti, figuriamoci pensare ad un figlia !
Questa soluzione, quindi, per quanto defiitiva non e' molto attuabile.
Comunque, visto che ci stiamo avviando alla famosa "societa' multirazziale" il
problema circa i rapporti sessuali con i negri sia quello degli stupri, non dei
matrimoni misti, e quello lo preverro' adeguatamente,  dando a mia figlia
qualche attrezzo antinegro di mia creazione.

 multirazziale, proprio come saranno l' Europa e gli Usa.
No. Non c'entra la multirazzialità: c'entra il livello di cultura. "Cultura" in senso
amplissimo.
Ciao,
Paolo