221998 Bullies, 4200 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 1,091 to 1,100 of 1126
Page 110 of 113 FirstFirst ... 1060100106107108109110 111112113 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Grashnak is offline
    Grashnak's Avatar

    Old School DM

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    1,055

    Posted On:
    6/22/2007 9:25am

    supporting member
     Style: Nothing current

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Mantis
    I have offered my arguments for why I believe. Am I absolutly right? I honestly don't know. But I contend that what is thought to be a 6,000 year old history of what people call Comba-Tai is facinating to me.
    Actually, you've contended, indeed insisted, on numerous occasions that the 6,000 year old history of Comba-Tai is a proven fact.

    If all you were saying is that the possibility of a 6,000 year old history is fascinating, I doubt many people would argue with you. It is interesting and fascinating to speculate about what historical events influence other events, and how ideas ands technologies spread throughout the world.

    Thats a lot different than claiming to have a proven, unbroken, 6,000 year old lineage.
    Jesus loves you. I think you're an asshole.
      #1091
  2. kohadril is offline
    kohadril's Avatar

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Seoul, ROK
    Posts
    551

    Posted On:
    6/22/2007 10:23am


     Style: BJJ, Debate-Fu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Mantis
    All of your posts are your opinion. I am not so closed minded so as to shut your opinions out, because they offend my world view of history.
    I don't shut yours out either. I'm merely arguing that the claims being made by the advocates of Comba-Tai are not rationally supportable from the evidence thus far provided. That is not the same thing as "shutting opinions out."

    I don't have the proof and I did not write the manuscripts on Comba-Tai.
    The person who wrote the most significant manuscript we've been able to find, Dr. Jones, couldn't provide such evidence in his piece either. The fact that you have been silent about that criticism suggests that you don't dispute it.

    Regardless of what you think about them, I believe they present a good argument for the possibility of a 6,000 year old tradition that “Is Out of Africa.”
    1) The claim at issue is that Comba-Tai represents the culmination of an unbroken 6,000 year royal warrior tradition, is the oldest martial art, and that its precursor was the basis for the development of most if not all other martial arts. That is not the same as "the possibility of a 6,000 year old tradition that 'Is Out of Africa'."

    2) Support for systematized Nubian wrestling, made available so far, falls way, way short of the 6,000 year mark. This is problematic; while it certainly doesn't PROVE that the wrestling games currently practiced by the Nuba aren't that old, it also doesn't give us any reason to believe that it is. 6,000 years, it seems, is a number plucked wholly out of thin air.

    Now I say I believe it and you say that I shouldn't believe it because in your opinion my arguments are faulty?
    Believe whatever you want. But you're the one making the claims, so the burden of proof is on you. I have debated and argued for basically my entire life, and I understand that it is very rare that one side in a debate will convince the other. But we're not really having a debate here; we're having a meta-debate. We can't engage the substance of the issue because we have plumbed the depths of what "research" is available and found it wanting, at least as far as the initial claim we were investigating is concerned. To continue to prosecute the debate, you have resorted to every rhetorical trick imaginable, and have engaged in a tactic of denial and defense. If you attack all the normal standards of evidence, no one can prove or disprove anything. If you impugn the character of others, you can try to appear more credible by comparison. If you refuse to address arguments, they enter into the discourse less frequently. And if you consistently revise the wording of the original claim, you can avoid the problem of insufficiency and falsifiability.

    You're in good company, though. It was by those very rhetorical tools that Athanasius defeated the Arians at Nicaea. Athanasius did pretty much everything you've done, in the face of Arius' rational criticisms of the difficulty of the doctrine that Jesus was of the same substance as God. He criticized the methods of rational Greek philosophy (which Arius used), he impugned Arius' character, he consistently revised the nature of his initial claim, and he consistently mischaracterized Arius' view so that it appeared blasphemous. Indeed, Arianism is to this day a synonym for blasphemy. Your response to rational criticism bears a striking, indeed uncanny resemblance to the tactics of the keepers of religious doctrines.

    That line of reasoning—if it can be called that-- proves or disproves nothing.
    No, but an exposure of poor reasoning damages the underpinning of an argument. We'd love to have somebody else to debate, but you're here, not somebody else. The fact that you're making bad arguments indeed does not mean that the only arguments that can be advanced in favor of Comba-Tai's claims are bad--but on the other hand, it's not giving us any reason to believe that there are better arguments out there.

    Come On, it is not my responsibility to prove anything about Comba-Tai.
    Then leave this thread. It's not hard. You came here looking to dispute the criticisms of others, right? You put yourself in the position of defending Comba-Tai. You can remove yourself at any time. If you didn't want to be responsible for supporting Comba-Tai's claims, coming here to advocate for them was a dumb idea. Once you make an argument on a site like this, the argument becomes your own; take responsibilty for what you say, or admit that you're unwilling or unable to produce the evidence that would defend it.

    They don’t have to be peer reviewed … that is stupid.
    It's not stupid. It's a check against people just making things up. We're not going to accept citations of people who haven't submitted their work for criticism, or who themselves don't cite peer-reviewed sources, or who when they do cite them incompletely or out of context. We're not going to accept as evidence things you heard but cannot support, or things that inferentially provide no support at all for the claims we're discussing. We're not going to accept names pulled out of thin air or some map of strange and complicated links between things that are perceived to be historically connected, and we're not going to accept your interpretation of ancient paintings in the face of scholarly interpretations of the very same paintings that differ from yours.

    Peer review is one way to make sure that all the work has been done on historical scholarship like this. Oral traditions especially need thorough cross-cultural and anthropological investigation. The nature of the evidence Comba-Tai exponents claim makes academic rigor all the more necessary--and that the very same time, you are claiming that academic rigor results in biases and prejudice. Still, you haven't responded to the point that bias and prejudice exist independent of peer-review, and you've completely missed the arguments that have been made that a world without peer-review results in more racism, more bias, in addition to far less accurate scholarship.

    So, I gave you the why. Then you say, yes but you have to prove it in a peer review ... well I think we have already agreed, the success of peer review depends on what scholars you send it to and their particular biases.
    That's true of anything, and it's true without peer review as well; before you can get anything from this argument, you have to respond to our arguments that while peer review can indeed be biased and racist, the empirical evidence, including evidence you provided, shows that it eventually checks itself in a way that pure editorial discretion simply could not. Peer review is better and less racist than the alternative, therefore scholarship is better off with a peer review process.

    Additionally, you haven't submitted any evidence that Comba-Tai exponents have even tried to get published. Is the world of peer review so racist that they need not even bother?

    You are lying if you say anything else.
    What's the point of saying something like this?

    But in any case, I do not have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt anything about what I believe as it relates to a collaboration of the evidence.
    No, you have to prove something more than what everyone already knew (that wrestling has existed everywhere for a really long time). You have to give us solid evidence of a 6,000 year unbroken royal warrior lineage. You have done nothing of the sort.

    I have clearly shown the mechanism that would have facilitated a 6,000 year old history of martial arts.
    The initial claim wasn't "there was wrestling a really long time ago in Africa," since no one would have disputed that. The initial claims were that Comba-Tai has a 6,000 year lineage, that Africa was the origin of all martial arts (this statement is meaningless if interpreted as 'humans came from here, so they fought here first'--the only way this can be interpreted as a valuable statement is if we assume that Dr. Jones meant that the systematization of martial arts began in Africa and all subsequent systematizations flowed therefrom), and that Comba-Tai possesses an unbroken lineage that makes it the oldest martial art. Stop shifting the debate away from the claims you can't defend to make things easier on yourself.

    If you say I haven’t you are being dishonest.
    What's dishonest is consistently moving away from your initial claims towards ones that no one has ever disputed in an attempt to make yourself appear to be the reasonable party. You're defending the idea of a 6,000 year royal warrior tradition, which Dr. Jones suggests is the foundation of all martial arts since then, along with the claims of an unbroken lineage.

    You may disagree with that mechanism, but your disagreements or criticisms do not make it wrong.
    No, but unaddressed, they do cast a great deal of additional doubt on what was already an extremely unlikely set of propositions.

    After all, thousands of you believe God has existed for all eternity ... OK, prove that God exists. Go right ahead, I am waiting.
    This is actually a great example.

    First, it's a good example of the "tu quoque" fallacy; "you use bad reasoning too, so I shouldn't have to use good reasoning."

    Second, it's a tacit acceptance that your argument is more like a religious conviction than it is like an academic or logical theory. Seriously, I can't imagine a more perfect way for you to have tripped over your own rhetoric than this; you are literally comparing your argument with theology. That is a comparison with which I wholeheartedly concur.

    Third, it's represents an assumption that something should only be considered false if it's proved false, while simultaneously acknowledging that total proof or disproof of anything is impossible. From that contradictory reasoning follows anything.

    Fourth, I'm the person you quoted at the top of this post, so I'll assume your challenge to prove that God exists was levied against me. You're right. I can't prove that God exists. Hoever, since I DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD, this argument, even were it close to valid, still wouldn't apply to me. Now, others here may believe in God, but you weren't responding to their posts, you were responding to mine.

    I'm going to stop myself here before I start screaming passages from Aristotle's Rhetoric at my screen.
      #1092
  3. Mantis is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    379

    Posted On:
    6/22/2007 11:01am


     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Grashnak
    Actually, you've contended, indeed insisted, on numerous occasions that the 6,000 year old history of Comba-Tai is a proven fact.

    If all you were saying is that the possibility of a 6,000 year old history is fascinating, I doubt many people would argue with you. It is interesting and fascinating to speculate about what historical events influence other events, and how ideas ands technologies spread throughout the world.

    Thats a lot different than claiming to have a proven, unbroken, 6,000 year old lineage.

    THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE ABOUT COMBA-TAI

    (Most of this is widely known now, but at the time the developer of Comba-Tai wrote about this, the information was not widely known or none existent.)

    The art of Comba-Tai is not 6,000 years old, but a Component of Comba-Tai-- Gezerit el Malik-- is thought to be a 6,000 years old system that is believed to be traced to the Kushite/Nubian Medjay from an Unbroken Lineage. (Also see Gukurana) http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/nubianarchers.html It was the first recorded organized system of hand to hand combat. http://www.hickoksports.com/history/boxing01.shtml , http://www.madehow.com/Volume-6/Boxing-Gloves.html , http://www.answers.com/topic/boxing-1?cat=technology I don’t think there is evidence anywhere that people from Africa to Asia developed complex military skills in isolation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_warfare ( also see: Cambridge Encyclopedia on Africa regarding the Bow) I also believe the documented hand to hand combat that began in Ethiopia was a systematic skill. I believe the Medjay who lived in Ethiopia at this time who developed Kingship engaged in complex systems. http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bi...rames/read/812 I do not believe they were hunter gathers. The evidence does not support a primitive milieu in Ethiopia among the Medjay. http://www.nubianet.org/about/about_history3.html http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/qustul.html

    Alternate View: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=002...3E2.0.CO%3B2-J



    I never suggested Comba-Tai was a proven fact ... how could I, I am only scantly aware of the research … I don’t know … But I am aware it has been research by the developer for 20 years. I have said that I believe a collaboration of the evidence suggest that in fact it is probable and therefore possible. Admittedly such a stretch in the distant past is hard to prove by specific evidence. I have said I believe we can take a broader look at, and link evidence as it relates to a Big History concept http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_History. I believe that there are other ways of transmitting evidence other than the written record and oral traditions which admittedly is problematic but possible. Yet I do not believe any historian discounts Oral history even if it is second hand. So if we are to believe the oral history that collaborates with the written record, artifacts, symbols and transference of military skills and philosophies, I still contend that the 6,000 year old tradition is possible. Does this prove that Comba-Tai can be traced to a 6,000 year old tradition, again, I don't know, but I strongly believe it is likely. Is the lineage claimed to be unbroken? Yes! Do I believe it is unbroken? Yes I do. If one technique or philosophies is transmitted in tact--and they suggest over 30--than yes the tradition is in fact unbroken. But again, you would have to believe their presupposition about Africa and the Comba-Tai descent.
    Most of this is widely known now, but at the time the developer of Comba-Tai wrote about this, the information was not widely known or none existent.)

    The art of Comba-Tai is not 6,000 years old, but a Component of Comba-Tai-- Gezerit el Malik-- is thought to be a 6,000 years old system that is believed to be traced to the Kushite/Nubian Medjay from an Unbroken Lineage. (Also see Gukurana) http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/nubianarchers.html It was the first recorded organized system of hand to hand combat. http://www.hickoksports.com/history/boxing01.shtml , http://www.madehow.com/Volume-6/Boxing-Gloves.html , http://www.answers.com/topic/boxing-1?cat=technology I don’t think there is evidence anywhere that people from Africa to Asia developed complex military skills in isolation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_warfare ( also see: Cambridge Encyclopedia on Africa regarding the Bow) I also believe the documented hand to hand combat that began in Ethiopia was a systematic skill. I believe the Medjay who lived in Ethiopia at this time who developed Kingship engaged in complex systems. http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bi...rames/read/812 I do not believe they were hunter gathers. The evidence does not support a primitive milieu in Ethiopia among the Medjay. http://www.nubianet.org/about/about_history3.html http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/qustul.html

    Alternate View: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=002...3E2.0.CO%3B2-J




    I am disappointed how you guys used race to seemingly disprove my arguments, i.e. “Comba-Tai was configured to help African Americans to respect their history.” This was insulting to all Americans to include me ... I honestly can not tell you that I am not emotionally connected to this because it is just this type of pseudo scholarship that has dismissed Wing Chung, and all the Asian Heroes...not to mention we have an entire book rack called Afrocentric and Black History. You some how suggested this was a black thing, while ignoring other races involved in the development of this art.

    Please, please don't make this an issue of race; it is an issue of perception based on environmental norms. To understand this, you might want to read a book written by two “White Gentleman”:

    Alienable Rights - The Exclusion of African Americans in a White Man's Land 1619-2000

    Francis D. Adams -- is an independent scholar.

    Barry Sanders -- teaches at Pitzer College, the Claremont Colleges, in California.

    Both authors live in southern California.

    No gentleman, it is not about race, it is about fear that leads to dishonesty.

    By the way, I have been making a mistake, i.e.

    Most of this is widely known now, but at the time the developer of Comba-Tai wrote about this, the information was not widely known or none existent.)

    The art of Comba-Tai is not 6,000 years old, but a Component of Comba-Tai-- Gezerit el Malik-- is thought to be a 6,000 years old system that is believed to be traced to the Kushite/Nubian Medjay from an Unbroken Lineage. (Also see Gukurana) http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/nubianarchers.html It was the first recorded organized system of hand to hand combat. http://www.hickoksports.com/history/boxing01.shtml , http://www.madehow.com/Volume-6/Boxing-Gloves.html , http://www.answers.com/topic/boxing-1?cat=technology I don’t think there is evidence anywhere that people from Africa to Asia developed complex military skills in isolation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_warfare ( also see: Cambridge Encyclopedia on Africa regarding the Bow) I also believe the documented hand to hand combat that began in Ethiopia was a systematic skill. I believe the Medjay who lived in Ethiopia at this time who developed Kingship engaged in complex systems. http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bi...rames/read/812 I do not believe they were hunter gathers. The evidence does not support a primitive milieu in Ethiopia among the Medjay. http://www.nubianet.org/about/about_history3.html http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/qustul.html

    Alternate View: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=002...3E2.0.CO%3B2-J
      #1093
  4. Mantis is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    379

    Posted On:
    6/22/2007 11:33am


     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by kohadril
    I don't shut yours out either. I'm merely arguing that the claims being made by the advocates of Comba-Tai are not rationally supportable from the evidence thus far provided. That is not the same thing as "shutting opinions out."

    .

    Yes it is and you are being dishonest. All of your arguments are based on the fallacies of this statement. By the way, I will continue to say that I believe in the unbroken linage of the 6,000 royal warrior lineage. You have simply disprove my claims by saying you have not seen all the evidence or a Peer Reviewed Article. You are so dishonest to continue to claim that Peer Review has been fair to African Scholar ship. I disagree that it ever will be. Do you consider this claim racist?

    You have myopically shut Comba-Tai out because you are not willing to truly look and research the evidence I have presented. It is a shame. It is interesting how you are enthusiastically willing to make claims against the authenticity of Comba-Tai without having all the evidence.

    You are not really debating, you are arguing out of desperation. Not only I, but many people believe this about you. Not one time have you said; these are the points I've found against what I've seen. I brought of Wing Chung issue up because you dishonestly said you said based on your research they admitted the stories of Wing Chung were not true. But you were incorrect …

    Are you a historian? If you are not, perhaps you are right, we should end this conversation because all your claims against the historicity of the Comba-Tai claims revolve around a foundation of ignorance.

    Are there any historians on this thread? If so, I would be willing to listen to your view of the possibility of an ancient lineage of African Martial arts. By the way, your presuppositions don't have to be peer reviewed, I don't believe in the peer review process as it realties to anything African.

    If a historian says I cannot make such claims about history, I will consider adjusting my views.



    THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE ABOUT COMBA-TAI

    (Most of this is widely known now, but at the time the developer of Comba-Tai wrote about this, the information was not widely known or none existent.)

    The art of Comba-Tai is not 6,000 years old, but a Component of Comba-Tai-- Gezerit el Malik-- is thought to be a 6,000 years old system that is believed to be traced to the Kushite/Nubian Medjay from an Unbroken Lineage. (Also see Gukurana) http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/nubianarchers.html It was the first recorded organized system of hand to hand combat. http://www.hickoksports.com/history/boxing01.shtml , http://www.madehow.com/Volume-6/Boxing-Gloves.html , http://www.answers.com/topic/boxing-1?cat=technology I don’t think there is evidence anywhere that people from Africa to Asia developed complex military skills in isolation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_warfare ( also see: Cambridge Encyclopedia on Africa regarding the Bow) I also believe the documented hand to hand combat that began in Ethiopia was a systematic skill. I believe the Medjay who lived in Ethiopia at this time who developed Kingship engaged in complex systems. http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bi...rames/read/812 I do not believe they were hunter gathers. The evidence does not support a primitive milieu in Ethiopia among the Medjay. http://www.nubianet.org/about/about_history3.html http://www.homestead.com/wysinger/qustul.html

    Alternate View: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=002...3E2.0.CO%3B2-J
    Last edited by Mantis; 6/22/2007 11:40am at .
      #1094
  5. kwoww is offline
    kwoww's Avatar

    poser

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley / Rochester
    Posts
    1,986

    Posted On:
    6/22/2007 12:00pm


     Style: punching bag / crew jitsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Why did you post the first paragraph 3 times?!

    Not only that, but your post doesn't prove any kind of lineage at all. It's already been established that boxing existed in Ethiopia 6,000 years ago. But you claim that Gezerit el Malik, "a component of Comba-Tai," is "thought to be a 6,000 years [sic] old system that is believed to be traced to the Kushite/Nubian Medjay from an unbroken lineage." It's hard enough to believe that Gezerit el Malik is based off of ancient Nubian wrestling and boxing. To claim that there is a direct, unbroken link, however, is idiocy. As has been said, the chances of such a lineage, particularly an oral one as you said in another post, surviving through earthquakes, storms, famines, plagues, wars, conquerings, slavery, imperialism, World Wars I and II, civil war, and almost six thousand years of obscurity, only to end up in the United States of America at the height of a martial arts craze, are infinitely small.

    edit: I'm not an historian, and I don't think kohadril is either. Are YOU an historian? That's not the issue. It doesn't take an historian to know what is and isn't good evidence. Anyone can do good research, and you, so far, have not. By making a claim, you are implying that you have evidence to back it up. If you do not have proper evidence, take it like a man and admit you were wrong. Take your rhetorical bullshit somewhere else.
    Last edited by kwoww; 6/22/2007 12:09pm at .
      #1095
  6. Mantis is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    379

    Posted On:
    6/22/2007 12:15pm


     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Gwinn
    Congratulations!
    You have proven the historical authenticity of:

    1. Troy
    2. The Trojan War
    3. The House of Atreus
    4. The Trojan Horse
    5. Achilles
    6. Hector
    7. Mars, God of War
    8. Laocoon
    9. Odysseus
    10. Scylla (See 11)
    11. Charybdis (See 10)
    12. The Island of the Sirens
    13. The Cyclops

    Yay for you.

    http://www.vpc.org/studies/nrafamst.htm
    http://www.commondreams.org/news2000/0516-03.htm
    http://www.commondreams.org/news2000/1020-03.htm
    http://www.spectacle.org/1095/sep.html

    So yes, your views are probably objective:mblah05:
      #1096
  7. Grashnak is offline
    Grashnak's Avatar

    Old School DM

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    1,055

    Posted On:
    6/22/2007 12:22pm

    supporting member
     Style: Nothing current

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by kwoww
    Why did you post the first paragraph 3 times?!

    Not only that, but your post doesn't prove any kind of lineage at all. It's already been established that boxing existed in Ethiopia 6,000 years ago.
    Actually, he hasn't even proven that. At best, he's proven that some drew some figures on a tomb in Egpyt in about 1400BC that might be doing a form of wrestling. Some historians have speculated that the figures might be Nubians, and that wrestling existed in Nubia at that time.

    So he has at best posted evidence for believing that there MIGHT have been organized wrestling in Nubia about 3,400 years ago.

    His reasoning appears to be:

    1. The first people were in Africa.

    2. At some point in the past, those people in Africa developed hand to hand fighting.

    3. 6,000 years ago in Ethiopia seems as good a place as any to start tracing the history of wrestling.

    4. Nubians wrestled way back in 1,400 BC and Nubians wrestle today.

    5. Nubians are Africans.

    6. Comba-Tai represents a 6,000 year old lineage of martial arts from Africa.

    7. Anyone who questions this must hate the idea that Africans invented stuff.
    Jesus loves you. I think you're an asshole.
      #1097
  8. Mantis is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    379

    Posted On:
    6/22/2007 12:22pm


     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by kwoww
    Why did you post the first paragraph 3 times?!


    It doesn't take an historian to know what is and isn't good evidence.
    Hey, I appreciate your opinions. Thanks.

    Ok, he's not a historian! He cannot even help us with peer review. He is disqualified from this discussion!
      #1098
  9. Mantis is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    379

    Posted On:
    6/22/2007 12:26pm


     Style: Judo

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Grashnak
    Actually, he hasn't even proven that. At best, he's proven that some drew some figures on a tomb in Egpyt in about 1400BC that might be doing a form of wrestling. Some historians have speculated that the figures might be Nubians, and that wrestling existed in Nubia at that time.

    So he has at best posted evidence for believing that there MIGHT have been organized wrestling in Nubia about 3,400 years ago.

    His reasoning appears to be:

    1. The first people were in Africa.

    2. At some point in the past, those people in Africa developed hand to hand fighting.

    3. 6,000 years ago in Ethiopia seems as good a place as any to start tracing the history of wrestling.

    4. Nubians wrestled way back in 1,400 BC and Nubians wrestle today.

    5. Nubians are Africans.

    6. Comba-Tai represents a 6,000 year old lineage of martial arts from Africa.

    7. Anyone who questions this must hate the idea that Africans invented stuff.

    You have an opinion … Great! Thanks.

    I am just guessing, but judging from his opinion, he's not a historian! He cannot help with peer review. He is disqualified from furthering this discussion!


    Useless None Historian Debaters:

    1. Kwoww (disqualified from peer reveiw)

    2. Grashnak (disqualified from peer review)
    Last edited by Mantis; 6/22/2007 12:29pm at .
      #1099
  10. Grashnak is offline
    Grashnak's Avatar

    Old School DM

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ottawa
    Posts
    1,055

    Posted On:
    6/22/2007 12:26pm

    supporting member
     Style: Nothing current

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    You know, for someone who doesn't want people to make generalizations about people based on race etc, you really ought to practice what you preach.

    What exactly was the point of posting those articles? Are you suggesting that Don Gwinn is Newt Gingrich? That he hates gays? That you're illiterate?

    Just once, I'd love to see you stay on topic.

    Its just about the lowest form of debate to ignore the point of a comment by saying the equivalent of "No, you smell!"

    Kindergarden called, it wants its ability to reason back.
    Jesus loves you. I think you're an asshole.
      #1100

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.