Black Man Created All Other Races
Posted: October 10, 2001
An analysis by
Dr. Kwame Nantambu

It is quite clear that any human that had its birth in Afrika could not have survived in an equatorial region without pigmentation. According to Senegalese scientist, deceased Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop (pronounced Jop), the world’s modern-day multi-genius or Imhotep, since nature does not do anything by chance, then humankind that was born in a sub-equatorial region was given melanin to protect its skin from the hot rays of the sun.

For this reason, it is certain that the first man had to be a BLACK man.

It is only after that Black race left Mother Afrika to people other parts of the world that had different climate conditions that that original Black man changed and took on different aspects or physical characteristics.

He acquired a different look as a result of his migration. Indeed, scientific evidence suggests that nature created six specimens of man before we get to man as we know him today.

According to this evidence, it appears that the first three of these species never acquired the potential to leave Afrika. Three others did leave Afrika.

The fourth and fifth of these species disappeared. What remains is man as we know him today B that is, the sixth species. The fifth species did not have a forehead; the eyes were situated very close to the top of the head.

However, the brain inside this species was very different from the brain of man today. He did not have the anterior lobe of the brain. That’s the major difference between Homo sapiens sapiens B what we are today and the fifth specimen.

This species was never able to overcome nature to an extent that he was able to create works of art.

The sixth species was a BLACK man who in pre-historic history is called Grimaldi man. He is the man whom we are today.

Between 40,000 and 20,000 years ago, this BLACK man left Mother Afrika and went into Father Europe at a time during the last glaciazation. The climate in Europe was extremely cold; it was much colder than it is now and during this period of some 20,000 years, this BLACK man underwent significant physical adaptations to eventually become what we call or know today as the WHITE man.

This original BLACK man had to adapt or adjust to his new cold environment.

In other words, this BLACK MAN DID NOT need his sun-required melanin in this cold environment. He lost that. He DID NOT need Black skin in this cold environment. He lost that.

He DID NOT need his sun-required broad nose, large, thick lips and hair in this new cold environment. His environmental adaptation caused him to loose all of these Afrikan physical features. As a result, his nose had to contract and become thin and narrow so that the cold could not enter, his lips also became thin and the colour and thickness of his hair had to change.

He thus became WHITE to survive in his new cold climatic surroundings. However, a more vital adaptation took place.

In his original Afrikan form, this human man was in-tuned with nature but in his derived European human form, he became anti-nature as a result of 20,000 years spent in the ice cold caves during the Ice Age. According to Dr. Diop, it is very clear to all the scientists in this field that the man we know conventionally today to be a White man evolved from a Black man over a period of some 20,000 years of adaptation to a different climate.

That is the only scientific conclusion at which to arrive. If this sixth specimen has never left Afrika to people in other parts of the world and if those people in other parts of the world in different climates had not through the process of adaptation become what they are in various regions of the world, all humankind would be homogenous and all humankind would be BLACK.

If that sixth species, that Black man, had not left Mother Afrika then the rest of the world would be just a desert; it would never have been peopled.

The bottom-line is that the first man was BLACK and it was he who gave birth to other races of the world.

In terms of human anthropology, there are two theories in regard to the origin of man.

They are first; the monogenetic theory which contends that man was born in one place and subsequently became different as he migrated to populate other parts of the world. There is only one source for the origin of humankind.

The second is the polygenetic theory, which suggests that man was born in Africa and also in Europe and Asia. In other words, there are different and several sources or locations for the origin of humankind. Africa is just one of them but NOT the primary one. At face value, the polygenetic theory may seem to make a lot of sense but under very strict scientific scrutiny and analysis, it quickly falls apart and collapses just like a deck of stacked Euro-centric, racist, supremist cards.

There are two basic flaws in this theory; namely first, nature never creates the same being twice or it never strikes twice in its evolution.

Second, in the animal kingdom, throughout the evolution of animals, a being was created and it either disappeared or changed somewhat or a new being was created completely.

The same being was never created twice. And if we are to remain strictly scientific, it does not make common sense to say that man was created twice.

This is total circular reasoning which does not even compute in the arena of historical sanity.

In Kenya, the most ancient evolutionary information of humankind is found and it is for this reason scientists can state with certainty that man can only have been created one time.

All fossils that were found outside Mother Afrika have only been found much recently compared to those found in Afrika.

In fact, no other Continent contains the complete set of the six human species of man but Afrika.

The only species that appears in America is that Homo sapiens sapiens. America was peopled through the Bering Strait at the end of the final glaciazation and it is only for that reason we find only Homo sapiens sapiens in America.

In Asia, we have Homo erectus, Neanderthal man and Homo sapiens. In Europe, we have Homo erectus, Neanderthal man and Homo sapiens. Through their migration process from Mother Afrika to populate and civilise the rest of the world, the original Afrikans used the Suez Canal or the Isthmus of Suez to go into Asia and Eastern Europe or the Straits of Gibraltar to the north into Europe.

It must be borne in mind that the polygenetic or polycentric theory seeks to establish a hierarchy among races and to indicate that some races are superior to others.

This theory thus represents European anthropological supremacy at its racist zenith.

This is all part of the manifestation of “the evil genius of Europe” in their attempt to maintain, perpetuate and strengthen their global power control intent.

In sum, the polygenetic theory represents the Euro-centric thought process in its geo-politically coded, multi-diversified supremist context.

It seeks to deny Afrika and Afrikans of any sense of human originality.

It suggests that Mother Afrika and Afrikans cannot stand-alone; we need a European or Asian connection or imprimatur to make us legit. Indeed, history of humankind totally rejects this European racist and supremist master-plan.

It must be understood that within the context of European global supremacy, Asians are regarded, treated and respected as “honorary Whites” or “quasi Europeans”.

In the United States of America, they are regarded, treated and respected as “probationary Whites”.

On the contrary view, if man has the same origin then, of course, there can be no intellectual hierarchy because all the three races of the world have the same intellectual ability and capacity.

If the three races had different origins then one can argue that they had different intellectual capacity as a result of having a different intellectual history.

The polygenetic theory is essential to defend the position that there must be inequality between races.

On the other hand, the monogenetic theory supports the notion and contention that because our origins are the same then we have the same intellectual capacity.

This theory DOES NOT contend that BLACKS are superior to Whites; that would also be false in the reverse.

The salient fact of the matter is that no race is superior to any other; all races have the same intellectual capacity and human dignity.

However, as a result of the original and derivative aspects of the human race, we now have two different peoples existing on the planet today.

We have the Afrikan from the so-called “Southern Cradle” and the European from the “Northern Cradle”. These are two different modern-day peoples with two different ways of life, mind-sets and value systems.

According to Dr. Diop, the characteristics of the “Southern Cradle”, Afrika, are:
1. Abundance of Vital resources
2. Sedentary agricultural economy
3. Gentle, idealistic peaceful nature
4. Matriarchal family structure
5. Emancipation of women in domestic life
6. Territorial state
7. Xenophilia
8. Cosmopolitanism
9. Social Collectivism
10. Material solidarity of right for each individual which makes moral or
material misery unknown
11. Ideal, peace, justice, goodness and optimism Literature emphasis, novel, tales, fables and comedy

Those of the “Northern Cradle”, Europe, are:

1. Bareness of resources
2. Nomadic hunting economy (piracy)
3. Ferocious, war like nature with a spirit survival
4. Patriarchal family structure
5. Debasement/enslavement of women in domestic life
6. City, state
7. Xenophobia
8. Parochialism
9. Individualism
10. Moral solitude
11. Disgust for existence, pessimism
12. Literature favours tragedy

The fact of the matter is that as a result of this ancient Afrikan global migration and adaptation, if one were to go to any part of the world, including Europe and Asia, one would find remains, remnants and reminders of Afrikan original life forms.

The monogenetic theory proves scientifically that Afrikans are the ancestors of Europeans.

This theory rejects the slightest notion of Afrikan superiority; it only proves the Afrikan human originality in Mother Afrika.

It does not represent reverse supremacy.

The monogenetic theory coincides with the reality that in real life, there is only one original life to live, not three as the polygenetic theory contends.

Furthermore, in the musical arena, there is only one original master copy, not three; in real life, a child has only one original mother and father, not three.

Afrikans are the original peoples with original ideas; we are the global majority.

Every human being on this planet, whether European, Asian, Chinese, Syrian, Indian, Portuguese or even “Dougla” is derived from the original Black, Afrikan race.

Shem Hotep

Dr. Nantambu is an Associate Professor, Dept. of Pan-African Studies, Kent State University, U.S.A. a Public Policy versus Human Needs

Previous Page / Nantambu’s Homepage / Trinicenter Home

Pantrinbago | Trinicenter | Trinidad and Tobago News | Trini View | Trini Soca
Race and History | U.S.Crusade | Amon Hotep | RootsWomen | Africa Speaks
Rasta Times | Rootsie Roots | HowComYouCom
S.E.L.F. hosted 100% non-profit Website.
Copyright © 2000-2005 S.E.L.F.

This chart is taken from the booklet, Black Reparations Now! Part 1 40 Acres, $50.00 and a Muel by Dorothy Benton-Lewis, BRC; and borrowed from N’COBRA
History of Reparations Payments
1990 U.S.A $1.2 Billion or $20.000 Each JAPANESE AMERICANS
1990 AUSTRIA $25 Million to Holocaust Survivors JEWISH CLAIMS ON AUSTRIA
1988 CANADA 250,000 Sq. Miles of Land INDIANS & ESKIMOS
1988 CANADA $230 Million JAPANESE CANADIANS
1986 U.S.A. $32 Million 1836 Treaty OTTAWAS OF MICHIGAN
1985 U.S.A. $31 Million CHIPPEWAS OF WISCONSIN
1985 U.S.A. $12.3 Million SEMINOLES OF FLORIDA
1985 U.S.A. $105 Million SIOUX OF SOUTH DAKOTA
1980 U.S.A. $81 Million KLAMATHS OF OREGON
1971 U.S.A. $1 Billion + 44 Million Acres of Land ALASKA NATIVES LAND SETTLEMENT
1952 GERMANY $822 Million to Holocaust Survivors GERMAN JEWISH SETTLEMENT

It is fascinating to see what a turnaround the human race has made. Only two hundred years ago, slavery was accepted, encouraged, and even expected in nearly every single country in the world. It had always been that way throughout history. Two hundred years is a drop in the bucket compared to the 10,000 or so years of recorded history we have. Now even the mention of slavery sets people’s heads on fire. So does trying to pass the blame for it, which is what the original post essentially does.

Also, at what period did this supposedly occur? In the 1860s-1880s a workingman, say on the railroads, might make a couple of dollars a day. At what time would anyone have accepted a half-cent per day? In Ben Franklin’s time a penny would buy a big loaf of bread, so even then it sounds like an insufficient wage.

Very well, the oppressed will work for less, but for nothing? Doesn’t it seem that one would literally starve on that pay? You would get half a loaf of bread per day for a hard day’s work, then have nothing for clothes or shelter nor for your family. So working for that wage seems pointless.

I seem to recall wages in the mid-1800s (in England) as a few SHILLINGS a day, which would have been 12p to the shiling.

Given your declared origin perhaps you would better serve by explaining Irish slurs. I think I recall that “mick” came from so many “Mc-” names. I don’t know any other Irish slurs off the top of my head, that’s where you would come in, but I think “ginni” is right out.

Restricting access to equal education opportunities was only one aspect. Red-lining banking practices prevented the black community from naturally accumulating hundreds of billions of dollars in estate wealth, the way everyone else could do it, by growing equity in their homes.

The twin evils of our government dealing drugs, and the profound hypocrisy of then incarcerating those government customers, invidiously targeting blacks at far greater proportions (although most drug users, coke snorters, and crack smokers were white), and with the sentencing disparities of crack to powder cocaine, has led to about 54% of all black men, ages 18 to 49, being in jail, having felony convictions, or in the parole system, mainly from the war on drugs and its detritus.

So the notion of, hey, it was 135 years ago, when are they going to get over it, etc., is ahistorical nonsense. All I mention above occured in my lifetime, in (one of the) current generations, with black unemployment continuing at double the rate of whites. (Yes, it is harder to get a job with a drug conviction on your record, surprisingly enough.)

As for this post and the whole idea of reparartions. I might have to agree with some of what Marc said. When the Chinese were brought here to build the railroads west of the Mississippi, they were paid in opium. They worked to the death and were buried under the tracks as we laid them. That is close to slavery

When my family came here at the beginning of the last century, we were told, “No Irish need apply!”
Am I owed something because it took my Grandparents extra years to obtain what they worked for, because of their Irish roots.

What is a Ginni? A Ginni is a half-cent piece. That is right a half-cent. Why are Italians known as Ginnis. Because you could get one to work all day for a half-cent. That is right, after the Irish were allowed to start working businessmen would always say, “Why hire an Irishman, when you can higher a ginni”

That said, we are ALL owed SOMETHING, or NOTHING. I am going to go with nothing. And if anyone thinks that it is wrong that they are here, just say so and we will send you back to where it is you think you belong.