Topic: There are some things the Catholics have always been right about, never wavered, bringing prosperity
Anonymous A started this discussion 3 weeks ago #134,597
Like being smart enough to know never to have nigger pope LOL
There may be twice as many Africants as Europeans, but one blacky would fuck up the whole thing. Think about it, did you ever meet a nigguh who knew how to read properly? The idiot wouldn't know what scripture was even saying!
There may be twice as many Africants as Europeans, but one blacky would fuck up the whole thing. Think about it, did you ever meet a nigguh who knew how to read properly? The idiot wouldn't know what scripture was even saying!
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #1,432,666
There are no African popes…
…except for the Africa popes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:African_popes
…except for the Africa popes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:African_popes
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 3 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,667
2,000 years ago, North Africa and Europe were one country. People forget that for some reason. Africans were also Roman.
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 11 minutes later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,670
The modern concept of race didn’t really exist in Roman times. They had slavery, but it wasn’t based on race. They mostly enslaved prisoners of war. Except, they had a system where a slave would work for a number of years before becoming a citizen of Rome, and it wasn’t that uncommon for former slaves to own slaves. So in Ancient Rome it wouldn’t be unheard of for someone from Africa to end up in a position of relative status (like being the pope for example). Prejudice against Africans is a relatively recent invention in history, in the past 500 years or so.
TheDarkChad quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,673
…also Muhammad hadn’t been born yet so Islam didn’t exist yet so North Africa wasn’t Muslim yet, so there’s that too.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 21 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,674
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 seconds later, 21 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,675
technically, the last three popes have been nigger popes, which im quite grateful for.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 51 seconds later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,676
@1,432,670 (TheDarkChad)
> The modern concept of race didn’t really exist in Roman times.
Megacope. They could tell light and darkskins apart, and not once in the entire history of the Catholic church did they have a dark skinned pope.
> The modern concept of race didn’t really exist in Roman times.
Megacope. They could tell light and darkskins apart, and not once in the entire history of the Catholic church did they have a dark skinned pope.
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 10 seconds later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,677
@1,432,674 (A)
They were North African, those paintings on Wikipedia were painted hundreds of years after they died.
They were North African, those paintings on Wikipedia were painted hundreds of years after they died.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 57 seconds later, 23 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,678
@previous (TheDarkChad)
Same energy as calling Elon Musk African.
Do you think it's a coincidence they never had a single dark skinned pope?
Same energy as calling Elon Musk African.
Do you think it's a coincidence they never had a single dark skinned pope?
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 50 seconds later, 24 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,679
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Gelasius_I
For example, pope Gelasius I, the depiction of him on Wikipedia is from 1760, but he died in 496, so that was painted 1,264 years after his death. The person who painted that never saw him.
For example, pope Gelasius I, the depiction of him on Wikipedia is from 1760, but he died in 496, so that was painted 1,264 years after his death. The person who painted that never saw him.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 25 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,680
This is like arguing that Jesus was Chinese because Chinese depictions of Jesus look Asian.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 27 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,681
@1,432,679 (TheDarkChad)
There have been 266 popes, and not a single one was dark skinned.
You are grasping at straws. "Uhh, his painting was white, but maybe he was black because it took them a long time to make it".
You are in a religion that has only ever been led by white people, for the same reason you are in a country that is known for white supremacy. You are terrified of existing in any culture that is controlled by niggers or gooks. You have the option to change cultures, but you would never, ever do it.
There have been 266 popes, and not a single one was dark skinned.
You are grasping at straws. "Uhh, his painting was white, but maybe he was black because it took them a long time to make it".
You are in a religion that has only ever been led by white people, for the same reason you are in a country that is known for white supremacy. You are terrified of existing in any culture that is controlled by niggers or gooks. You have the option to change cultures, but you would never, ever do it.
Anonymous C replied with this 3 weeks ago, 17 seconds later, 27 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,682
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 49 seconds later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,683
@1,432,680 (TheDarkChad)
> This is like arguing that Jesus was Chinese because Chinese depictions of Jesus look Asian.
Jesus was a Jew, no one thinks he was Chinese. What the fuck are you talking about?
There's no one in the Catholic church that thinks there's been a black pope ever, this is all you desperately trying to bend reality as a cope.
> This is like arguing that Jesus was Chinese because Chinese depictions of Jesus look Asian.
Jesus was a Jew, no one thinks he was Chinese. What the fuck are you talking about?
There's no one in the Catholic church that thinks there's been a black pope ever, this is all you desperately trying to bend reality as a cope.
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 14 seconds later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,684
Actually the irony of this whole thing is that you don’t think that North Africans are black, except most of the Christians in Africa live in sub Saharan Africa. North Africa today is mostly Muslim and sub Saharan Africa today is mostly Christian.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/africas-north-south-religious-divide/
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/africas-north-south-religious-divide/
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,685
@1,432,683 (A)
Yeah, that’s my point. Pope Gelasius I was born in what’s now modern day Tunisia. But you’re saying he was white because you looked at a picture painted by Europeans over a thousand years after he died, it doesn’t make sense.
Yeah, that’s my point. Pope Gelasius I was born in what’s now modern day Tunisia. But you’re saying he was white because you looked at a picture painted by Europeans over a thousand years after he died, it doesn’t make sense.
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 31 seconds later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,686
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 20 seconds later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,687
@1,432,684 (TheDarkChad)
There are black in North Africa, but the Catholic church never picked one of them to lead the Church. Understanding the culture of the time (490s), this should be immediately obvious to you.
There's a reason not a single Church historian has even floated the idea, because only a complete idiot could think that guy was black.
There are black in North Africa, but the Catholic church never picked one of them to lead the Church. Understanding the culture of the time (490s), this should be immediately obvious to you.
There's a reason not a single Church historian has even floated the idea, because only a complete idiot could think that guy was black.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 39 seconds later, 32 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,688
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 31 seconds later, 32 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,689
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 33 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,690
@1,432,688 (A)
I’ve been friends with Arabs before and never in my life have I heard an Arab identify as white. They identify with Islam and with the Arabic language.
I’ve been friends with Arabs before and never in my life have I heard an Arab identify as white. They identify with Islam and with the Arabic language.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 weeks ago, 6 seconds later, 33 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,691
@1,432,689 (TheDarkChad)
I said there were no blacks that ever led the church and then you started arguing.
If you aren't implying that he was black, good, we agree. There was never a black pope.
I said there were no blacks that ever led the church and then you started arguing.
If you aren't implying that he was black, good, we agree. There was never a black pope.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 33 seconds later, 34 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,692
@1,432,690 (TheDarkChad)
No shit.
So when I said that ZERO of 266 popes were black, you would agree?
No shit.
So when I said that ZERO of 266 popes were black, you would agree?
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 44 seconds later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,693
@1,432,691 (A)
Because the vast majority of black people have always lived south of the Sahara desert. The Romans didn’t have a racial ideology about blacks being inferior, they just interacted with blacks less than they interacted with other cultures due to geography, and due to the fact the Romans didn’t have sophisticated sailing ships that came in later centuries.
Because the vast majority of black people have always lived south of the Sahara desert. The Romans didn’t have a racial ideology about blacks being inferior, they just interacted with blacks less than they interacted with other cultures due to geography, and due to the fact the Romans didn’t have sophisticated sailing ships that came in later centuries.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,694
@1,432,692 (A)
They had African popes. Black is a broad category created by Europeans based on how people look that doesn’t have much to do with the actual cultural diversity of Africa.
They had African popes. Black is a broad category created by Europeans based on how people look that doesn’t have much to do with the actual cultural diversity of Africa.
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 38 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,695
There’s evidence that the Romans did have expositions to sub Saharan Africa, but they were relatively rare. The Roman Empire didn’t have the technological capability to exert influence south of the Sahara the way they could in North Africa, which is why there were North African popes and not black popes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romans_in_sub-Saharan_Africa
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romans_in_sub-Saharan_Africa
TheDarkChad quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 40 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,696
It’s sort of roughly the equivalent of their relationship with China. They could send a few people to China, they knew China existed. There were no Chinese popes, but this doesn’t have anything to do with judgement of their culture or their race, it’s just the fact that they were geographically isolated from each other. The Romans knew sub Saharan Africa existed, but it’s not a place any random Roman could just get up and go to whenever they felt like, it’s not a place where they could send the Roman army to conquer. It was just a far away place maybe some curious Romans might have been to a few times for the sake of exploring or whatever.
TheDarkChad quintuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,697
And you have to use your brain here. The western Roman Empire lasted 500 years. Slavery in Ancient Rome wasn’t race based. They had Germanic slaves because they considered Germanic people to be barbarians. They had all sorts of different ethnicities of slaves and slaves could work to earn their freedom. Rome wasn’t founded on a racial ideology. The United States was founded on an ideology of race based slavery. Black slaves in the United States could never earn their freedom, and their children were also slaves. However, the US is only 250 years old, and in that time the US went from having chattel slavery to electing a black man president twice. If Rome wasn’t founded on chattel slavery, and it lasted longer than the United States, the reason why there weren’t black people in positions of power in Rome probably has more to do with the fact that there would have been fewer black people living in Europe during the Roman Empire than were living in the United States during slavery.
(Edited 32 seconds later.)
TheDarkChad sextuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,699
It’s also a fallacy to assume that being in positions of power inherently means you’re not discriminated against. For example, there’s never been an Asian American president. Asian Americans earn more than black Americans. That doesn’t mean white people aren’t racist against Asians, they are, but it’s not as intense, so Asians can perform better in the United States than black Americans. But there are more black Americans in political positions of power than Asian Americans because there are just twice as many black people so it doesn’t matter.
(Edited 23 seconds later.)
TheDarkChad septuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 57 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,700
Which if you google how many blacks vs Asians there are in congress, this logic holds. There are roughly 3x as many blacks in congress as Asians despite the fact that Asians earn more on average than black Americans and therefore are less oppressed.
TheDarkChad octuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 18 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,701
Like you could make this same stupid argument about white people and ask me why there hasn’t been a white Chinese president.
Anonymous B nonuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 16 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,703
Actually the more I look into it online, the Romans didn't document the skin color of the popes that were from Africa because it wasn’t considered to be important so they’re actually not 100% sure what they’re ethnicity was.
This is from a BBC article:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c787y082l47o
This is from a BBC article:
Prof Bellitto says there is no way of knowing with any degree of accuracy what the three popes looked like.
"We have to remember that the Roman Empire, and indeed the Middle Ages, didn't think of race as we think of it nowadays. It had nothing to do with skin colour," he told the BBC.
"People in the Roman Empire didn't deal with race, they dealt with ethnicity."
Prof Philomena Mwaura, an academic at Kenya's Kenyatta University, told the BBC that Roman Africa was very multicultural, with local Berber and Punic groups, freed slaves and people who had come from Rome found there.
"The North African community was quite mixed, and it was a trade route also for many people who were involved in trade in the earlier antiquity," she explained.
"We have to remember that the Roman Empire, and indeed the Middle Ages, didn't think of race as we think of it nowadays. It had nothing to do with skin colour," he told the BBC.
"People in the Roman Empire didn't deal with race, they dealt with ethnicity."
Prof Philomena Mwaura, an academic at Kenya's Kenyatta University, told the BBC that Roman Africa was very multicultural, with local Berber and Punic groups, freed slaves and people who had come from Rome found there.
"The North African community was quite mixed, and it was a trade route also for many people who were involved in trade in the earlier antiquity," she explained.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c787y082l47o
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,720
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 9 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,721
@1,432,667 (TheDarkChad)
> 2,000 years ago, North Africa and Europe were one country. People forget that for some reason. Africans were also Roman.
"People forget that for some reason". That reason is people weren't alive back then.
> 2,000 years ago, North Africa and Europe were one country. People forget that for some reason. Africans were also Roman.
"People forget that for some reason". That reason is people weren't alive back then.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,723
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,736
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 8 hours later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,767
@1,432,721 (E)
> > 2,000 years ago, North Africa and Europe were one country. People forget that for some reason. Africans were also Roman.
>
> "People forget that for some reason". That reason is people weren't alive back then.
Anybody can just google a map of the Roman Empire and clearly see that North Africa was part of the Roman Empire. It’s just lazy white supremacists who are projecting a worldview that was invented hundreds of years after the Roman Empire fell onto the Roman Empire.
> > 2,000 years ago, North Africa and Europe were one country. People forget that for some reason. Africans were also Roman.
>
> "People forget that for some reason". That reason is people weren't alive back then.
Anybody can just google a map of the Roman Empire and clearly see that North Africa was part of the Roman Empire. It’s just lazy white supremacists who are projecting a worldview that was invented hundreds of years after the Roman Empire fell onto the Roman Empire.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,769
It’s like if 2,000 years in the future, some low IQ idiot with something against people from the far north was like, "Alaskans weren’t American idiot, they’re a different race" when nobody in our time even had that concept in their head.
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,772
Imagine somebody 2,000 years from now being like, "Uh, how come there was never a president of the United States from Alaska, they must have been smart enough to know 2,000 years ago that Alaskans are inferior and that must be why the US never elected an Alaskan president." It’s fucking stupid!
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 59 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,781
@1,432,769 (TheDarkChad)
Romans could tell lights and darks apart without modern concepts of race, dumb nig.
Romans could tell lights and darks apart without modern concepts of race, dumb nig.
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 24 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,784
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,785
I don’t get how anyone’s supposed to believe the IQ bullshit racists promote when you are some of the most mentally retarded people on the planet. None of you know anything about anything.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,808
@previous (TheDarkChad)
Are you actually going to explain how IQ tests, which have questions like this are somehow racist and biased this time?
Or are you going to completely ignore that and just make multiple posts calling people dumb and racist?
If you can never explain the problem with IQ tests, why should anyone believe you?
Are you actually going to explain how IQ tests, which have questions like this are somehow racist and biased this time?
Or are you going to completely ignore that and just make multiple posts calling people dumb and racist?
If you can never explain the problem with IQ tests, why should anyone believe you?
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 hours later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,823
@previous (D)
Africa is 18% of the population, right? Any day that says the average African IQ is an IQ score that is defined as being less than 18% of the population is statistically impossible.
Africa is 18% of the population, right? Any day that says the average African IQ is an IQ score that is defined as being less than 18% of the population is statistically impossible.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,824
One really large issue with this when comparing IQ between regions, is that the population of a particular region will change what the minimum possible average IQ is. Since Africa has a growing population and the rest of the world has birth rates below replacement, for the next century, Africa’s portion of the world population will increase while after a certain point, the west will start to decrease. This will have the effect of making it look like the IQ of African countries is increasing while the IQ of western countries is decreasing, just because that’s the only way the math can work out, but it doesn’t mean anybody’s intelligence is actually changing.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,825
Also the average IQ is always 100, because an IQ score of 100 is defined as average. So if you say the average isn’t 100, you’re doing something weird with the data to try and push some narrative that isn’t true, and saying that a continent as large as Africa that makes up 18% of humanity has an IQ of 70, which only 2% of people have, you really have to fuck with the data to make that happen.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
TheDarkChad quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,826
You’ll also notice if you look at older IQ data, they say that Africans have much lower IQs than what you’ll see in newer data. This is for a couple reasons, part of it is because back in the day before the internet it was easier to lie and people were more racist against black people in the past. The other part of the reason is that, in the past, up until the 1990s, Africa was always smaller than Europe in terms of population. Even during World War Two Europe had twice as many people as Africa did, so it would have been possible for Africans on average to score lower on average. But now there are more Africans than Europeans so it becomes harder and harder to mathematically justify that they have lower IQs on average the larger their population becomes. When Africa stops growing, they’ll be about 40% of the world population, and it would be mathematically impossible to claim they have IQs lower than 97 on average, because anything lower would become an impossible distribution.
TheDarkChad quintuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,827
Of course, by then, Africa will be more developed, so with increased in education and better diets, etc. by 2100, their IQ data would probably match East Asia if the statistics were done honestly. Especially given that Asia will decline from 60% of the world population to 45%.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
TheDarkChad sextuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 6 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,830
Which also means if Asia is 45% of the world population in 2100, and Africa is 40%, Africa and Asia together will be 85% of the world population, and the other western countries will make up the remaining 15%.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 14 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,832
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 38 seconds later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,835
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,837
I’m sure when white people are rich it’s because they’re smart and hardworking, which is why black people don’t deserve reparations for slavery even though a United Nations resolution on it was passed, but the Jews are rich because they’re evil, and if you’re too stupid to tell this is sarcasm.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/03/1167199
https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/03/1167199
(Edited 31 seconds later.)
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 32 seconds later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,840
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 38 seconds later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,842
@previous (D)
Asians are 60% of the population so they should have 60% of the wealth in a fair world.
Asians are 60% of the population so they should have 60% of the wealth in a fair world.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 18 seconds later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,843
Unless you’re arguing against fairness, in which case, that makes you the problem.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,848
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,849
And by the way, why did you preemptively tell me to not call you stupid? I should be able to call you stupid when you say stupid things like this:
@1,432,840 (D)
> No, instead it should be 6 whites a black and a yellow.
If you’re a dumb racist, and I call you a dumb racist, I wouldn’t have called you a dumb racist if you weren’t being dumb and racist.
@1,432,840 (D)
> No, instead it should be 6 whites a black and a yellow.
If you’re a dumb racist, and I call you a dumb racist, I wouldn’t have called you a dumb racist if you weren’t being dumb and racist.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,851
@1,432,848 (D)
> Your problem your people couldn't make a nuke.
I’m American. My people have over 5,000 nuclear weapons.
> Your problem your people couldn't make a nuke.
I’m American. My people have over 5,000 nuclear weapons.
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 6 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,857
You know, in case we get bored and decide to ragequit geopolitics and end humanity.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,858
@1,432,849 (TheDarkChad)
> why did you preemptively tell me to not call you stupid?
Quote it, or it's a strawman.
Since you won't, like always, bye bye.
> why did you preemptively tell me to not call you stupid?
Quote it, or it's a strawman.
Since you won't, like always, bye bye.
(Edited 13 seconds later.)
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,859
@1,432,808 (D)
> Are you actually going to explain how IQ tests, which have questions like this are somehow racist and biased this time?
>
> Or are you going to completely ignore that and just make multiple posts calling people dumb and racist?
>
> If you can never explain the problem with IQ tests, why should anyone believe you?
You’re so retarded you can’t even remember what you wrote lol
> Are you actually going to explain how IQ tests, which have questions like this are somehow racist and biased this time?
>
> Or are you going to completely ignore that and just make multiple posts calling people dumb and racist?
>
> If you can never explain the problem with IQ tests, why should anyone believe you?
You’re so retarded you can’t even remember what you wrote lol
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,862
@previous (TheDarkChad)
So you don't know the difference between "ignoring a question and distracting with [topic]" and "being asked to not talk about [topic]"?
Go ahead and repeat the same insults you always do, but don't ignore the question if you actually have an answer.
Everyone knows why you will never say how those questions are racist.
You could prove me wrong and then insult me, but you always ignore that quesion. Hmm 🤔
So you don't know the difference between "ignoring a question and distracting with [topic]" and "being asked to not talk about [topic]"?
Go ahead and repeat the same insults you always do, but don't ignore the question if you actually have an answer.
Everyone knows why you will never say how those questions are racist.
You could prove me wrong and then insult me, but you always ignore that quesion. Hmm 🤔
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,883
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,885
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 42 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,886
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,888
Like, I said you told me to not call you stupid, you told me to quote you, I did quote you, and now you’re still trying to get me to not call you stupid. But I can’t, because you’re too stupid for me to pretend you’re not.
Anonymous C replied with this 3 weeks ago, 23 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,895
@1,432,720 (D)
Niganon believes that spamming a deluge of garbage means he won the arguement, which is emblematic of how the brown species stumble through life.
Niganon believes that spamming a deluge of garbage means he won the arguement, which is emblematic of how the brown species stumble through life.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,897
@1,432,886 (TheDarkChad)
It would actually be
Yes, you are. No answer as to why it's racist to solve simple puzzles with shapes. Just saying insults.
It would actually be
Yes, you are. No answer as to why it's racist to solve simple puzzles with shapes. Just saying insults.
Anonymous D double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,898
@1,432,888 (TheDarkChad)
You can call me whatever, just answer the question:
What is racist about those questions?
Do you bring up IQ just so we can remember that your whole premise is nonsense?
You can call me whatever, just answer the question:
What is racist about those questions?
Do you bring up IQ just so we can remember that your whole premise is nonsense?
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,899
@1,432,897 (D)
> It would actually be
>
> Yes, you are. No answer as to why it's racist to solve simple puzzles with shapes. Just saying insults.
Isn’t that a strawman?
> It would actually be
>
> Yes, you are. No answer as to why it's racist to solve simple puzzles with shapes. Just saying insults.
Isn’t that a strawman?
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,901
You always ignore 95% of what I say and pretend I didn’t respond to you.
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,902
It’s like, if you don’t want me to insult you, you only respond to me when I insult you. I can talk about a lot of things but the only thing you care about is when I insult you.
TheDarkChad quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,904
I also really don’t see why I shouldn’t insult you. You’ve insulted me for my race plenty of times. It’s like you don’t realize I’m human or something. If you hurt me, that makes me want to hurt you twice as much, but you’re retarded so you don’t understand anything, and you probably never will. That’s okay, ignorance is bliss I guess. If you died you would understand the same amount about life. It’s a waste of existence.
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,905
I guess the part I don’t understand is, why do you still need to lie to yourself? I’d understand it if you were just evil and willing to hurt people, but you need to dehumanize people in order to convince yourself not to feel guilt. That’s weird. I mean, I understand that you’re human and you have thoughts and feelings and an inner world and I also understand that I don’t care if you die. I don’t need to lie to myself, so you’re weaker than I am.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,907
@1,432,899 (TheDarkChad)
No, a strawman would be making up an argument for you. You are just refusing to give an answer.
What is your answer? Why is completing a pattern on an IQ test not a fair measure of intelligence?
If I made a strawman, than steelman the argument for me here. Just in case any readers missed it.
No, a strawman would be making up an argument for you. You are just refusing to give an answer.
What is your answer? Why is completing a pattern on an IQ test not a fair measure of intelligence?
If I made a strawman, than steelman the argument for me here. Just in case any readers missed it.
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 51 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,908
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 34 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,909
@1,432,905 (TheDarkChad)
It's not dehumanizing to say some people are less intelligent.
If it was, acknowledging that some people are disabled would be dehumanizing them. If someone can't understand basic life skills, does that mean they're less human? No. Just stupid.
It's not dehumanizing to say some people are less intelligent.
If it was, acknowledging that some people are disabled would be dehumanizing them. If someone can't understand basic life skills, does that mean they're less human? No. Just stupid.
Anonymous D double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 18 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,910
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 4 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,911
That’s the other thing, you lie too much.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 22 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,912
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 9 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,913
@1,432,910 (D)
Why? You can make up an infinite number of false statements, I shouldn’t have to waste time disproving every one.
Why? You can make up an infinite number of false statements, I shouldn’t have to waste time disproving every one.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 26 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,914
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 27 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,915
@1,432,913 (TheDarkChad)
If one side makes their case and one side refuses to, who do you think looks better?
If one side makes their case and one side refuses to, who do you think looks better?
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 13 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,916
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 25 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,917
@1,432,914 (TheDarkChad)
How is it a retarded game to say that completing patterns isn't biased?
No one is being quizzed on white pop culture.
How is it a retarded game to say that completing patterns isn't biased?
No one is being quizzed on white pop culture.
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 17 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,918
I swear to god a brick could hit you in the head and you would pretend it didn’t happen.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 9 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,919
@1,432,916 (TheDarkChad)
No, you called IQ tests racist, and then refused to ever say how you got there.
No, you called IQ tests racist, and then refused to ever say how you got there.
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 24 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,920
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 24 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,921
@1,432,918 (TheDarkChad)
Black people can read and write, they can answer a "what shape is next" quiz.
Black people can read and write, they can answer a "what shape is next" quiz.
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 32 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,922
@1,432,919 (D)
I never called IQ tests racist, I said the data white supremacists cite is fake. Those are two different claims. If you can’t tell the difference, you probably have a low IQ yourself.
I never called IQ tests racist, I said the data white supremacists cite is fake. Those are two different claims. If you can’t tell the difference, you probably have a low IQ yourself.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 24 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,923
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,924
If you actually bothered reading my explanation for my position when you asked me, you would realize I never said that IQ tests are racist. You never bothered reading what I actually said, you always fucking do this.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 5 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,925
@1,432,825 (TheDarkChad)
> Also the average IQ is always 100, because an IQ score of 100 is defined as average.
Here's a direct quote.
The average IQ of blacks scored against all Americans doesn't have to be 100.
The average IQ of blacks only has to be 100 when scored against the same group of blacks.
> Also the average IQ is always 100, because an IQ score of 100 is defined as average.
Here's a direct quote.
The average IQ of blacks scored against all Americans doesn't have to be 100.
The average IQ of blacks only has to be 100 when scored against the same group of blacks.
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,926
@previous (D)
You took my direct quote and then you wrote two statements that are different from my quote, but neither statement is a counter example.
You took my direct quote and then you wrote two statements that are different from my quote, but neither statement is a counter example.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,927
An IQ score of 100 is defined as the average IQ score. That’s a fact, that’s how the scale was defined. There’s nothing false about that statement that I made. Try again.
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,928
You basically just said that the average of a subset of all data is not necessarily equal to the average of the data, but I never said that it was. That’s a strawman argument you’re making. You were trying to be clever by making like I was saying something that contradicts those other two statements, but my statement contradicts neither. Why do you always lie like this?
TheDarkChad quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 33 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,929
In fact, a lot of my argument relies on the fact that it’s not the same.
TheDarkChad quintuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,930
The reason actually why I said that the average IQ score is always 100 is because if you’re doing an IQ test of the entire planet, then the global IQ should be 100. But Africa is 18% of the population, if you say all Africans have an IQ of 70 for example, that’s impossible because an IQ of 70 is defined as scoring lower than 98% of people. But Africans can’t score lower than 98% of people, because they’re 18% of people, so it doesn’t work, it can’t work. The only way it can work is if you’re intentionally presenting data in a misleading way to make it seem like Africans are less intelligent than they really are.
TheDarkChad sextuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 57 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,931
NOTICE HOW THIS ARGUMENT DOESNT FUCKING HINGE ON ME SAYING IQ TESTS ARE RACIST BECAUSE YOU DONT FUCKING LISTEN!
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,932
Now go ahead and do your usual bullshit demanding me to answer some bullshit question about some bullshit accusation pretending you’re superior and completely ignoring what I just said.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,933
@1,432,930 (TheDarkChad)
> The reason actually why I said that the average IQ score is always 100 is because if you’re doing an IQ test of the entire planet
And here's the actual strawman.
I never said that the IQ of the continent of Africa is 70 as scored in a pool of the entire planet.
The actual study I gave in the original thread, and its follow ups, was the National Longitudinal Study of Youth. It measures African Americans in an overall group of Americans, and it didn't give African-Americans an average IQ of 70.
You called the NLSY racist, and then never explained how it was.
To distract from that, you made up a strawman (africa has 70iq) to argue against because you don't want to address the steelman (NLSY data).
> The reason actually why I said that the average IQ score is always 100 is because if you’re doing an IQ test of the entire planet
And here's the actual strawman.
I never said that the IQ of the continent of Africa is 70 as scored in a pool of the entire planet.
The actual study I gave in the original thread, and its follow ups, was the National Longitudinal Study of Youth. It measures African Americans in an overall group of Americans, and it didn't give African-Americans an average IQ of 70.
You called the NLSY racist, and then never explained how it was.
To distract from that, you made up a strawman (africa has 70iq) to argue against because you don't want to address the steelman (NLSY data).
Anonymous D double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,935
@1,432,932 (TheDarkChad)
Oh look, you were doing the same thing 6 months ago.
https://minichan.net/topic/130295#reply_1398490
Same exact tactic. Pretend we talking about a global norm, ignore the NLSY, never answer how it's racist.
Oh look, you were doing the same thing 6 months ago.
https://minichan.net/topic/130295#reply_1398490
Same exact tactic. Pretend we talking about a global norm, ignore the NLSY, never answer how it's racist.
(Edited 16 seconds later.)
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,939
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,942
@previous (TheDarkChad)
Are you saying this is a different person who used the exact same two tactics to dismiss IQ tests and race?
What a coincidence! The same topic on the same website, and they tried the exact same trick.
Are you saying this is a different person who used the exact same two tactics to dismiss IQ tests and race?
What a coincidence! The same topic on the same website, and they tried the exact same trick.
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,943
@previous (D)
I said I don’t care about a random debate you had six months ago. You’re clearly an ideologically obsessed weirdo who needs to get a life.
I said I don’t care about a random debate you had six months ago. You’re clearly an ideologically obsessed weirdo who needs to get a life.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,946
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,948
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,949
@previous (TheDarkChad)
You never give a reason the test is flawed, and then you try and distract by pretending its a global scoring.
The NLSY scored blacks and compared them to other Americans. Why are their scores lower?
You never give a reason the test is flawed, and then you try and distract by pretending its a global scoring.
The NLSY scored blacks and compared them to other Americans. Why are their scores lower?
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 33 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,950
@previous (D)
I never give a reason the test is flawed because I never said the test was flawed, that’s something you made up.
I never give a reason the test is flawed because I never said the test was flawed, that’s something you made up.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 37 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,951
@1,432,949 (D)
> The NLSY scored blacks and compared them to other Americans. Why are their scores lower?
What do you think?
> The NLSY scored blacks and compared them to other Americans. Why are their scores lower?
What do you think?
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,953
I looked back at that link you posted, you were arguing with more than one person at the same time. Which one do you think I was?
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,954
I tongue white arseholes
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 19 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,955
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 56 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,956
If you’re going to impersonate me at least be smart enough to know the difference between British and American English, because that was pathetic.
Anonymous D replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,967
@1,432,951 (TheDarkChad)
Because its an intelligence test, and they're less intelligent than average.
Because its an intelligence test, and they're less intelligent than average.
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,972
I like pretending im being impersonated.
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,982
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 15 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,983
@1,432,967 (D)
> Because its an intelligence test, and they're less intelligent than average.
Then if you think that, why do you care if I’m not at all convinced? No matter how much data you showed me to the contrary, you could never convince me a fly is smarter than a dog. This is the same sort of thing. You’re not intelligent yourself, and I’ve met plenty of white people who are less intelligent than I am, so to me I can’t be convinced that white people are more intelligent. I already explained why it’s mathematically impossible for there to be a significant difference in IQ between blacks and whites. IQ itself can’t tell you how many x times smarter other people are than you. If you gave 50 people an IQ test, everyone got 100% of the questions right, but one person got one question wrong, that person would have an IQ of 70. On top of that, if someone scores lower on an IQ test, that doesn’t tell you much about why. You seem to think that the test is infallible, I just think differences in education lead to different outcomes and there’s nothing particularly interesting about this.
> Because its an intelligence test, and they're less intelligent than average.
Then if you think that, why do you care if I’m not at all convinced? No matter how much data you showed me to the contrary, you could never convince me a fly is smarter than a dog. This is the same sort of thing. You’re not intelligent yourself, and I’ve met plenty of white people who are less intelligent than I am, so to me I can’t be convinced that white people are more intelligent. I already explained why it’s mathematically impossible for there to be a significant difference in IQ between blacks and whites. IQ itself can’t tell you how many x times smarter other people are than you. If you gave 50 people an IQ test, everyone got 100% of the questions right, but one person got one question wrong, that person would have an IQ of 70. On top of that, if someone scores lower on an IQ test, that doesn’t tell you much about why. You seem to think that the test is infallible, I just think differences in education lead to different outcomes and there’s nothing particularly interesting about this.
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,984
There’s also the problem that intelligence isn’t an innate trait that never changes. I think you’ve made yourself less intelligent by adopting a worldview that doesn’t require you to think critically about anything and completely reject different perspectives if they come from a group of people you don’t like. I think you’re stupid, but I don’t think you were born stupid, I think you made a choice.
TheDarkChad quadruple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,985
The IQ differences between countries also don’t really say a whole lot. I mean, take this for example:
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/average-iq-by-country
It says Nigeria has an IQ of 92, Japan has an IQ of 106, but the normal IQ range is between 90 and 110, so they’re both within the average range. My IQ is 140, so the difference between my IQ and the average IQ in Japan is much larger than the difference in IQ between Japan and Nigeria, so it’s like, idk. I don’t see how you can necessarily make huge judgements about differences between different racial groups, given that Nigeria is significantly poorer than Japan, but they don’t really score that much lower on IQ tests. Then if you look at outcomes between Nigerian immigrants and Chinese immigrants in higher education, Nigerians perform basically equally well as far East Asians do academically. Given that IQ was invented as a way to predict academic success, if Nigerians and Chinese people score differently on IQ tests but they have virtually the same educational outcomes, that would suggest that something else is going on, probably with the validity of the test.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/average-iq-by-country
It says Nigeria has an IQ of 92, Japan has an IQ of 106, but the normal IQ range is between 90 and 110, so they’re both within the average range. My IQ is 140, so the difference between my IQ and the average IQ in Japan is much larger than the difference in IQ between Japan and Nigeria, so it’s like, idk. I don’t see how you can necessarily make huge judgements about differences between different racial groups, given that Nigeria is significantly poorer than Japan, but they don’t really score that much lower on IQ tests. Then if you look at outcomes between Nigerian immigrants and Chinese immigrants in higher education, Nigerians perform basically equally well as far East Asians do academically. Given that IQ was invented as a way to predict academic success, if Nigerians and Chinese people score differently on IQ tests but they have virtually the same educational outcomes, that would suggest that something else is going on, probably with the validity of the test.
TheDarkChad quintuple-posted this 3 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,989
There’s also the issue that the average doesn’t tell you as much as you think it does. If hypothetically intelligence was caused by genetics, sub Saharan Africans have about a million more genetic variants than everyone else in the rest of the world does. So if hypothetically intelligence was genetic, that wouldn’t imply that if Africans score lower on average that all Africans are inferior to non-Africans. You would expect that some Africans would be significantly less intelligent and some would be significantly more intelligent. Which makes sense, because according to the IQ tests you obsess over I am significantly more intelligent than the vast majority of people in every country in the world and I’m black. So you can’t use this to prove that all Africans are inferior.
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,991
Nobody talks about IQ tests except you
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,992
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,993
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,995
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU replied with this 3 weeks ago, 34 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,996
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 16 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,997
TheDarkChad double-posted this 3 weeks ago, 19 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,998
Erik = thunder balls = svet
It’s one guy
It’s one guy
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,432,999
@1,432,997 (TheDarkChad)
You are imagining users again. This is like that time you were certain there was someone called Anger Man who kept impersonation. So many topics about Anger Man.
You are imagining users again. This is like that time you were certain there was someone called Anger Man who kept impersonation. So many topics about Anger Man.
TheDarkChad replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,433,000
@previous (Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU)
I like how you randomly decide to be contrarian for no reason.
I like how you randomly decide to be contrarian for no reason.
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU replied with this 3 weeks ago, 12 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,433,001
@previous (TheDarkChad)
I just worry for your health. You're imagining a guy who changes identities and names and argues with you about Japanese IQ tests, it's concerning.
I just worry for your health. You're imagining a guy who changes identities and names and argues with you about Japanese IQ tests, it's concerning.
POTATO NIGGER replied with this 3 weeks ago, 11 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,433,084
@previous (Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU)
I DO BELIEVE JUPITER HAS BECOME RETARDED EVEN BY NIGGER STANDARDS BECAUSE HE HAS NEGLECTED HIS COLLECTION OF ANALWHITE.
I DO BELIEVE JUPITER HAS BECOME RETARDED EVEN BY NIGGER STANDARDS BECAUSE HE HAS NEGLECTED HIS COLLECTION OF ANALWHITE.
Anonymous R joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,433,086
Americans say tyranny is wonderful because Canada is also a police state.
Anonymous T joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,433,090
The African pope candidate was probably the most hardline and conservative of all the candidates and I wouldn't put it past him to try and undo Vatican II.
Anonymous R replied with this 3 weeks ago, 34 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,433,096
Americans say stories about plastic bag bans are fake news, but what do you think when you go to the grocery store and they won't give you a bag?
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 3 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,433,099
@1,433,090 (T)
> The African pope candidate was probably the most hardline and conservative of all the candidates and I wouldn't put it past him to try and undo Vatican II.
Ngl, Africans are very conservative. Black people in general are very conservative. Which is confusing because we all vote democrat. Have you ever been over at a black house party before? Have you ever been to a black thanksgiving? I know black people who ran for office for the Democratic Party, you would not believe how conservative these people are.
> The African pope candidate was probably the most hardline and conservative of all the candidates and I wouldn't put it past him to try and undo Vatican II.
Ngl, Africans are very conservative. Black people in general are very conservative. Which is confusing because we all vote democrat. Have you ever been over at a black house party before? Have you ever been to a black thanksgiving? I know black people who ran for office for the Democratic Party, you would not believe how conservative these people are.
Anonymous R replied with this 3 weeks ago, 25 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #1,433,114
Americans think that the collapse of the USA is a funny joke.
Famous Amos joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 5 days later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,021
(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
> Any of you niggers want to seed my wife?
Let the seeding begin niggas.
> Any of you niggers want to seed my wife?
Let the seeding begin niggas.
Anonymous V joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 4 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,022
@1,433,099 (TheDarkChad)
It's hard to have delusional luxury beliefs when you're economically precarious.
It's hard to have delusional luxury beliefs when you're economically precarious.
TheDarkChad joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 23 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,024
@previous (V)
That’s not really the reason why. Black people tend to be pretty progressive on some things, it doesn’t really have to do with wealth, it’s more of their take on Protestant Christianity. Technically most of them aren’t evangelical, but they have the whole very conservative, very literal interpretation of the Bible thing going on.
That’s not really the reason why. Black people tend to be pretty progressive on some things, it doesn’t really have to do with wealth, it’s more of their take on Protestant Christianity. Technically most of them aren’t evangelical, but they have the whole very conservative, very literal interpretation of the Bible thing going on.
Anonymous V replied with this 2 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,025
@previous (TheDarkChad)
Why do black people choose protestant? Is it because they can't name a black pope.
Why do black people choose protestant? Is it because they can't name a black pope.
TheDarkChad replied with this 2 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,026
@previous (V)
No that’s not the reason why. Most black Americans are Protestant because the United States was originally settled by the English who are Protestant. They’re Protestants because the slave owners were Protestant. In Africa, there are places like the DRC for example where most of black people in the DRC (weird way of phrasing it when practically everybody there is black) are Catholic.
No that’s not the reason why. Most black Americans are Protestant because the United States was originally settled by the English who are Protestant. They’re Protestants because the slave owners were Protestant. In Africa, there are places like the DRC for example where most of black people in the DRC (weird way of phrasing it when practically everybody there is black) are Catholic.
TheDarkChad double-posted this 2 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,027
In the United States, most of the Catholics are from Irish or Italian descent. Which is ironic because there are a lot of Irish Americans in the north who have ancestors that fought against the confederacy, but there aren’t many black Catholics because they were originally converted by the slave owners, not by Irish or Italian or Polish immigrants.
TheDarkChad triple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,029
Also, Catholics are a minority in the United States, but Latin America was colonized by Spain and Portugal, so the Americas actually have a lot of Catholics, the US is kind of an oddball.
Anonymous V replied with this 2 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,031
TheDarkChad replied with this 2 weeks ago, 48 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,032
Meta joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,033
ＰＲＯＴＥＳＴＡＮＴ ＡＳＣＥＮＤＡＮＣＹTheDarkChad replied with this 2 weeks ago, 15 minutes later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,041
TheDarkChad double-posted this 2 weeks ago, 23 seconds later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,042
… washing machine giving two thumbs up
Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU replied with this 2 weeks ago, 7 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,078
Mr. Black Boi joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 3 hours later, 1 week after the original post[^] [v] #1,434,095
@previous (Oatmeal Fucker !BYUc1TwJMU)
Jews and Italians are algo saxons because some people are that retarded they want to say that out loud.
Jews and Italians are algo saxons because some people are that retarded they want to say that out loud.