Glow Madrid|Spain Travel Guide

A black african looks very different from a Korean. If you don’t want to call this race, give it another name, but whatever it is it definitely exists. Differences in phenotypes lead to inherited physical characteristics.

I believe that modern society is trying to do away with race all together. However this is laughable. IMO

You simply can’t. It’s a reality. The reason that modern society is trying to refute it is because their doctrine specifically states that genetics have no role in determining behaviors, actions, outcomes, etc, from a sociological point of view. This is simply not true.

Actually it is worse than that, because it is doublethink. Genetics play a determining factor in sports, as most championship marathon runners seem to be from Kenya. If race was a myth, then this would not be – the outcomes would be equally distributed throughout the entire world.

What started out as an intention to get rid or class has expanded outward to get rid of race. We must get rid of this awful system and relegate it to the ash-bin of history once and for all. You’re better dead that Red.

Modern society is an abstract concept that does not have a will of its own. It is made up of free-willed individuals who decide, mostly, what to do and who they have children with.
The concept of "race" is somewhat artificial, since there are no borders or clear definitions. You say that a black African and a Korean look different. Correct, but if you draw a line along the land from Sudan to Korea, and take a representative person from places about 100 kilometres apart, the gradation in appearance and colour will not be so apparent. At what point would you say a person is black, dark brown, light brown, dark yellow, yellow etc? Similarly with eye shape. Genetically, the differences within a race are larger than between the races. East-African negroes are more closely related to Caucasians than they are to negroes on the West of Africa. Yet we still speak of the two African groups as belonging to one race.
.

I dont refute it and no one can , it exists no matter how much anyone tries to ignore the facts. Its like entirely different once you shut the tv and walk into the real world.

These differences can be considered racial, it’s just that it’s not enough for itself race to be considered as relevant as a legitimate biological classification as it is as a social construct.

a left hander? so it appears on many left-handers lists

Obama is a lying Douchebag….Gandhi was all about the truth!!

I think Obama, like many great leaders, aspires to be somewhat like Gandhi, with integrity and statesmanship. However Gandhi is known as a campaigner and political philosopher, the leader of a great movement… Obama is not in that business. Presidency… presiding over a government is a specific job… it involves compromise and negotiation and it is very rare for a president to force through an idea no matter how good it is. A campaigner simply follows their cause… and chooses which compromises they are or are not willing to make to get what they want…in either case they remain loyal to their cause without regard to the millions of other issues.

Gandhi was a freedom fighter, not a president.

Gandhi fought for peace and for equality in India when India was under the British Empire, Obama is just a president of America who does president stuff

Is it?

Redheads have always had the label of being "fiery’.It might refer to their temper, or it might refer to their emotions overall.Who knows ?Originally, I believe the stereotype just referred to Irish redheads.

Yes because anger is something all humans have.It is part of our basic emotional structure.

Also, not all redheads are humans – there can be red headed woodpeckers, cats, dogs etc.These are also mammals and have a similar emotional structure to humans.I think not much research has been done on their emotional reactions as biologists tend to focus on observable behavior such as biting things or pecking on things or barking or snarling etc. etc.- it varies from species to species

One kind of redhead that does not have anger is a pretty flower with a read top like a rose.You could say a rose is a redhead that never gets angry.

Things like ‘redheads’ in anthropology are traits or genetic characteristics.

Recent DNA research has shown that for one, Modern Humans, Homo Sapiens that is, shared the same time and space with the Neanderthals. Traces of Neanderthal DNA and gene inheritence is clearly marked in our DNA, between 1 – 4.5%.

Now it is thought that the redheaded gene comes from Neanderthals too.

And blue eyes was a result of a mutation in one particular area in the Black Sea Region.

There is no connection between anger problems and red hair.

yes..and they are all Columbian Spies too. They’re sent to America to steal our coffee and bring it back to their homeland where they sell it again.

No,
I had like 3 friends that where redheads, they did not have any anger problems…

(P.S. you need to work on your spelling)

No that is simply a stereotype. Just as all blonde’s are air heads…. Just a stupid stereotype.

I was just wondering because I was watching Camelot and I keep seeing random black people in the background. I know camelot is just a show, but it made me wonder.

There were a few in Roman times but not many. Most of the Africans you hear about in regards to the the Romans were actually NORTH Africans, who are not black. One family group found in York, I believe,appeared to be mixed race.
Camelot takes place shortly after the Romans left, and it’s quite unlikely there were many if any black people left behind.The Romans were there as administrators rather than settlers, and they basically left the Britons ‘to it’ when they pulled out of the country. Certainly between tthis period and the 1700′s there have been no finds that would point to a continued presence; nor is there much admixture in the native genepool.

The Roman Army accepted non Romans as soldiers.After serving in the Roman army for twenty years, the soldiers earned the right to live in the Roman territories as other Romans did.The Roman ninth legion was stationed in Britain, and would have had black soldiers in it.Movies about the ninth legion, such as "The last legion" and "Centurion", had black soldiers who were fighting in Britain.

Relevant finds have been unearthed in early romano-british towns and cities.

I cba to find the source though – don’t forget however that the romans were pretty multicultural, they even had a black emperor at one point.

It started out in England as a game creatively called "The Lying Down Game" in which you basically laid face-down in strange locations and took a picture, with the goal of finding the most public and strange places possible.

Planking is basically the lying down game except the goal less about strange/public locations and more about potentially dangerous locations.

Im pretty sure it came from Australia….

do we have the instinct to seek new technology or not. i mean from the early cave mans who found a way to use fire to us. if we don’t have those kinds of instinct we would be happy sitting on a rock eating raw meat. or it’s just something else? i know it’s a weird, stupid, confusing, and awkward question but i need it for paperwork. do humans really have the instinct to create or seek for new technology? or is it just some doings to make our life easier? aren’t they the same thing?

(do we?)

Some anthropologists say that ‘technology made us’ and not the other way around.

From the very first moments when Humans picked up a large rock and gave a big cat a bloody nose, we were off on an oddyssy which was recipricating and affecting us and changing us, so our propensity for using primitive tools became an evolutionary factor. We became Homo Sapiens Technologicus.

Alvin Toffner, is his famous book Future Shock first made the statement ‘technology breeds technology.’ One technological advance can spurn five more and so on and so forth.

That process is easy enough to follow if you run through the development of primitive hunting and defence tools. It’s not hard to extropolate from the Rock and Club, through to the Spear and Sling-shot and then the Bow and Arrow. Each one of those is actually ‘a technology’ all of it’s own and yet they affected the whole development.

Flint nappjng, carving, containers made of gourds and basket weaving, processing hides, clothing and baby slings, mixing colours and wall paintings – it’s all there in the making and ready to explode into a whole pattern of techno-humans who would eventually land on The Moon and Mars.

Humans, like all other animals, have an instinct for survival.In our modern world, technology helps us survive and succeed, so we have an attraction to it.

Technology is cultural. Who’s to say that if you hadn’t spent your entire life sitting on sofas eating cooked meat that you wouldn’t be perfectly happy sitting on a rock with raw meat?

Your technology instinct hypothesis would certainly explain why I??ve been a life-long gadget man! However…

Once a social species evolves a sufficient intelligence, cultural transmission can supplement genetic transmission as a means of transferring behavioural traits from one individual to another, both among peers and between generations. There are many fascinating examples of this in non-human animals, such as:
? potato-washing in Japanese macaques
? the use of leaves, sticks, branches, and stones for communication, play, food gathering or eating, and comfort in chimpanzees
? group vocal dialects, foraging, and migratory traditions in bottlenose dolphins, humpback whales, orcas, and sperm whales
? More info ?C http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_cult??

Our bipedalism allows for a unique manual dexterity, which lends itself to tool design and use, and the subsequent cultural transmission of tool-making and tool-using skills. Factor in the evolution of general intelligence in our hominid ancestors, and the ability to create innovations predicated on existing tool-using culture arises. Indeed some consider that we??ve benefited from two different and interacting evolutionary processes: genetic evolution and cultural evolution.
? More info ?C http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_inheri??

So our capacity ??to create or seek for new technology?? is a learned behaviour, passed to us through cultural transmission from our society, and not an instinct, passed to us by genetic transmission from our parents. For instance, my dad showed me how to use a slide rule, but his sperm didn??t gift me with a ??technology gene??. These days, I carry a pocket computer with telephony capabilities (Nokia N900), and sometimes watch ??The Gadget Show?? ?C and pass on my enthusiasm for science and technology to my nephews using language and hands-on demonstrations (and to others using Yahoo! Answers).

Hope that helps broaden your understanding,

Share and Enjoy, Peace-&-Love, Dalinian
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
…__o….Cycling is the most energy efficient form of transport ever invented, easy,
._ <,_…fast, healthy exercise, improves self-esteem, & on-going use of a bicycle has
(_)/ .(_)..virtually NO carbon footprint ? http://www.ibike.org/encouragement/benef??
????????????????????????????????????
A folding bike travels with you inside trains, planes, & automobiles (& on the bus,
tram, taxi, subway, ship, helicopter) ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding_bic??
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

was it the islamic states or the west?

All of the above.

It has been ever thus. Consider the ancient Babylonians, the Hittites, the ancient Egyptians, the ancient Persians, the conflicts between the Maya city states, the ancient Chinese, the Mongols of Genghis Khan . . . the list can go on and on.

Who causes such clashes? Human beings do.

It goes all the way back to when Western Culture was formed and before. It’s not a who, it’s a why. Go back and study European/US Colonialism and Imperialism of the 15th-20th century.

In addition, study the Colonialism and Imperialism of the Sunni Muslim, Seljug Dynasty of the 11th -14th centuries. Does the 400 years of the latter a different framework than the 500 years of the former? It’s debatable.

Is the monopoly on fuel oil ethical? Do ethics have a standard definition? Does Religion consider current Peace & Conflict Resolution in its application? Your question is a great one for this section and can’t be answered in such a small space.

First I want you to look around and stare outside your window.Look at the trees and birds.(Yes, the sun will sting your eyes a bit since you never been outside in a while.)If you are not outside yet, go!You can’t stay in your mom’ basement forever.Now, while your back at your computer, think for a moment how everything was created.

Would it interest you to know that people use to think that people believed God created it?I bet your thinking why I am asking these ridiculous questions.I want you to know, are they really ridiculous as you perceive them to be.

Before, your parents would tell you that God did it.You would say okay and not say how you feel.In your head you go

Oh really?So a magical fairytale creature in the sky created everything with his magical pixie dust?Are you really this delusional you sheep?

We would go investigate further and come a hold new information.This my friends, is how we came across scientific discoveries.

Now lets examine how they would respond if you so much as questioned God.So lets just assume you replied with Do you think perhaps God didn’t create everything?

Your parents first emotion would be anger for threatening their beliefs and the next step after that would be ridicule.
You don’t question God boy!I don’t know who is brainwashing you with this nonsense but you are just being delusional.Who has been telling you this nonsense?God is proven, everything else isn’t.End of discussion!!!

Ouch!That was harsh!Why would the parents react that way if they felt so strongly that what they were saying is true?You can safely say that they are Closed-minded for rejecting anything that doesn’t fit into their ideology of what they believe to be true.You guys can agree with that right?

Now today, its a common belief that everything was arisen from evolution.

First I want you to look around and stare outside your window.Look at the trees and birds.(Yes, the sun will sting your eyes a bit since you never been outside in a while.)If you are not outside yet, go!You can’t stay in your mom’ basement forever.Now, while your back at your computer, think for a moment how everything was created.

Would it interest you to know that people think that people believe evolution created it?I bet your thinking why I am asking these ridiculous questions.I want you to know, are they really ridiculous as you perceive them to be.

Now, your parents would tell you that Evolution did it.You would say okay and you would assume them to be correct you don’t believe they would ever lie to you.Their your parents after all!Why would they lie?

but some people would go people would go

Oh really?So a magical unproven theory says that nothing came from nothing and magically created something which magically rearranged itself into self replicating bits which is what made up everything? ?Are you really this delusional you sheep?Do you know how complicated the cell is?The processes that occur in the cristae within the mitochondria are complex by just that alone?

We would go investigate further and come a hold new information.This my friends, is how we came across scientific discoveries.But now we don’t question evolution because if you do you are considered to have no knowledge about science.

Now lets examine how they would respond if you so much as questioned Evolution.So lets just assume you replied with Do you think perhaps Evolution didn’t create everything?

Your parents first emotion would be anger for threatening their beliefs and the next step after that would be ridicule.
You don’t question Evolution boy!I don’t know who is brainwashing you with this nonsense but you are just being delusional.Who has been telling you this nonsense?Evolution is proven, everything else isn’t.End of discussion!!!

Ouch!That was harsh!Why would the parents react that way if they felt so strongly that what they were saying is true?You can safely say that they are Closed-minded for rejecting anything that doesn’t fit into their ideology of what they believe to be true.You guys can agree with that right?

You see, our skepticism about the current science of the time has propelled our understand of life.There is a new mannerism now.We don’t question current science anymore.We accept it with open arms and we fail to discover any other possibilities.

We now believe that there is possibly no other explanation other than the fact that there is no god.We no longer question current beliefs.

If we even so much think that there is a designer we are ridiculed as being ignorant of science.We are told that we don’t know about the protein pumps within the cell membrane or the fact that only plant cells have a cell wall or even that humans do not have the proper tools to break down cellulose as to which is why we have

Stop what you are doing, and thinking. You are way out of sanity.

Your logic runs parallel to – I am the only one who can feel what I feel therefor I am the only one who exists and you do not.

Your logic is very flawed and long.What a waste of time.

Yeah, but who created God? And why?

evolution is true cba to read through all this

The real question should be, ‘Why do long-winded Trolls bother to carefully make their way to the Anthropology Q and A and belabour us with these Troll-like questions..?’

It’s O.K. to have Religious Belief. Nothing wrong with that.

What isn’t O.K. is to come to the wrong place and thump a religious drum. It’s a waste of your time and ours. Anthropology is no longer about defending itself against Religious Doctine. That went by the board in the famous debates after Darwin published his famour first works in the mid-1800′s.

As far as religion went, it was all downhillafter that. Science, and with it, anthropolgy, has gone on the great discoveries and amazing finds. Religion has become entrenched and somewhat defensive and these days the best religous minds can come up with is a completely non-scientific set of theories called ‘Creationism,’ which is a very poor second best as far as logical research goes.

Vehement long-windedness is no replacement for logic. Go back and do some homework. Who knows..? You might get bitten by the bug and develop an open mind again.

OK, thank you Mr Campbell. That??s our time up for this week, and I??m sorry to tell you that I cannot see any improvement in your condition. You cannot begin to benefit from our sessions together until you manage to let go of the compulsion to allow your religious mania to be in control, such that you prattle on and on in such a contradictory and ultimately meaningless way, endlessly. We??re going to try phasing out your Haldol injections, and phasing in Stelazine tablets, to see if you tolerate them better.

These two nice men in white coats will take you back to your room now. I shall see you again next week.

Actually we do still question all science, and I think that’s very important. I encourage everyone to question everything they’ve been told. Evolution has tons of evidence….can you give me evidence of a magical being in the sky? Just because you wish to believe in an ancient book doesn’t mean that evolution is false.

So you’re saying that some higher being magically making things appear makes more sense that life evolving?It has been proven that amino acids can be created spontaneiously with a few ingredients- its been replicated.

To simplify- if you put the evidence for evolution in one hand, and the evidence for God in the other hand, your God hand is empty.

Congratulations!

That is the most rambling dissertation I have ever had to wade through before actually getting your point.

God made everything. Why didn’t you simply say that instead of boring us all to death?

Right. So we don’t need science.

OK. So if your appendix ever bursts, or you are screaming with toothache, you won’t be needing a surgeon or a dentist then.

You will just get down on your knees, and pray, then God will put everything right for you.

Good luck to you!

l

i’m with belt here.

You a creationist!!!
Sames man earth is 6000 years old and the earth was created by magic
Sounds so true when you read it doesnt it
Yer man try it its not gay at all god appears and gives you pixie dust

how their style of music was ever recorded or reproduced? was it intergrated into Spanish music? how different probably ? and did the Spanish really mix biologically much with the natives in South America and Mexico? which percentage?

please explain what you can

DO THE NATIVES LOOK SIMILAR TO TURKISH PEOPLE OR INDIAN PEOPLES? HOW AND WHY?

thanks fo rour answers!

The classic example everyone always thinks of is the South American pan flute. But there was originally a vast range of different styles, probably as many as there were tribes prior to European contact.

The reason it’s always associated with Spanish music is because it tends to get lumped into "Latin American" or "Latino" music. A lot of modern Latin music is actually a mixture of Spanish and Native South American and sometimes African: bossa nova, cumbia, meringue, salsa, cha cha, rumba, and mambo are all examples. They are all the result of the mixing between these cultures that happened as Spanish settled and conquered South America, mixing with the native peoples and bringing African slaves to work the land.

Today, there is a wide range of people in Latin America who share some heritage with native peoples and some with Spanish or Portuguese. It varies a lot.

As for looking similar to Indian/Turkish, that’s more of a personal opinion than anything scientific. It depends on what criteria you use to compare the two.

the music of spain could never be associated with mexican or south americanmusic.
NATIVES from where you ask?
what do you mean:
did the Spanish really mix biologically much with the natives in South …?
do you mean did they have sex? YES!the spanish raped the women there!
what do you mean really?do you think it was so UNLIKELY because the women were …unfit to be fu cked…?explain!
indians from where?american indians,peruvian indians ,other type indians?which?

Turks have nothing to do with Latin Americans,
Here is an ordinary turkish http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKgB7UJ6o?? hahaha:D