[[email protected]]

White Population in the World Set to Drop from 17% to 7% by 2050

While the populations of Europe, Russia, and the US have levelled off
and even decreased, the populations of China and Africa are
accelerating beyond all expectations. Immigration reduced the
percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when the US Constitution was
written to only 71% today, and similar patterns are being followed in
several European countries because of the failure by their governments
to do anything about unbridled immigration.

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/8...lation2hm0.gif

[The Henchman]

wrote in message
...
White Population in the World Set to Drop from 17% to 7% by 2050

While the populations of Europe, Russia, and the US have levelled off
and even decreased, the populations of China and Africa are
accelerating beyond all expectations. Immigration reduced the
percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when the US Constitution was
written to only 71% today, and similar patterns are being followed in
several European countries because of the failure by their governments
to do anything about unbridled immigration.


The White Population is the US was 99% at the time of the constitution.
LOL. You are funny!!!!!!!!!!!! Care to cite a reference for that? That
must be one of the biggest outright lies I have ever heard....

99% indeed. I'll be chuckling about that one for a long long time.

[Six String Stu[_2_]]

"The Henchman" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
White Population in the World Set to Drop from 17% to 7% by 2050

While the populations of Europe, Russia, and the US have levelled off
and even decreased, the populations of China and Africa are
accelerating beyond all expectations. Immigration reduced the
percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when the US Constitution was
written to only 71% today, and similar patterns are being followed in
several European countries because of the failure by their governments
to do anything about unbridled immigration.


The White Population is the US was 99% at the time of the constitution.
LOL. You are funny!!!!!!!!!!!! Care to cite a reference for that? That
must be one of the biggest outright lies I have ever heard....

99% indeed. I'll be chuckling about that one for a long long time.

I had the very same reaction. I guess the OP isn't factoring in the non
voting population.
Heck back then even the women had no say or vote in things.
Isn't it wonderful that the racists that use reverse discrimination have
such a broad shouldered target to rest thier justifacations upon?

[D C[_2_]]

Six String Stu wrote:

I had the very same reaction. I guess the OP isn't factoring in the non
voting population.
Heck back then even the women had no say or vote in things.
Isn't it wonderful that the racists that use reverse discrimination have
such a broad shouldered target to rest thier justifacations upon?


I was also gonna say that there would still have been a bunch of Native
Americans here, as well as Africans who had been brought over. Those two
populations would have to have been more than 1% of the overall population.

[Six String Stu[_2_]]

"D C" wrote in message
news
Six String Stu wrote:

I had the very same reaction. I guess the OP isn't factoring in the non
voting population.
Heck back then even the women had no say or vote in things.
Isn't it wonderful that the racists that use reverse discrimination have
such a broad shouldered target to rest thier justifacations upon?


I was also gonna say that there would still have been a bunch of Native
Americans here, as well as Africans who had been brought over. Those two
populations would have to have been more than 1% of the overall
population.
I do not mean to defend the actions of my forefathers and I have been an
honnorary member of the Lumbee nation for a few years now, so I see things
sort of red and white. It's a duality that I have had to come to grips with.
Being a son of the south I also have to deal with the vistages of my
southern heritage.
Sufice it to say that after years of soul searching and much inner
contemplation I have come to the conclusion that the color does not make the
man, it is how the person reacts to life's circumstance that determines the
calibur of the man;s depth and worth. All of the rest of that crap is just
crutch material.
I have known some white pieces of trash that I wouldn't think twice about
introducing to the toe of my engineers boots and quite a few persons of
color who deserved more then just my hand in friendship. Many of both colors
who would sell thier momma for a rock too.
Call me a bigot, lol , but trash is trash and if you look in the local dump
one can find every color under the rainbow. :-)

[Don Pearce]

On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 23:40:56 GMT, "The Henchman"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
White Population in the World Set to Drop from 17% to 7% by 2050

While the populations of Europe, Russia, and the US have levelled off
and even decreased, the populations of China and Africa are
accelerating beyond all expectations. Immigration reduced the
percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when the US Constitution was
written to only 71% today, and similar patterns are being followed in
several European countries because of the failure by their governments
to do anything about unbridled immigration.


The White Population is the US was 99% at the time of the constitution.
LOL. You are funny!!!!!!!!!!!! Care to cite a reference for that? That
must be one of the biggest outright lies I have ever heard....

99% indeed. I'll be chuckling about that one for a long long time.


He's typical of his type, I'm afraid. I'm always amused at American
cowboy films, with their virile white men doing brave things. The huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese - and what they actually did
was herd cattle. But I guess that won't put backsides on seats in
movie theatres.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Arny Krueger]

wrote in message


White Population in the World Set to Drop from 17% to 7%
by 2050

While the populations of Europe, Russia, and the US have
levelled off and even decreased,

Bad rendition of current events. The population of the US is continuing to
increase.

the populations of China
and Africa are accelerating beyond all expectations.

You forgot about India. No small omission. Yet another bad rendition of
current events.

Immigration reduced the percentage of Whites in the US
from 99% when the US Constitution was written to only 71%
today,

Even if this were true, so what? Do you think that non-whites are somehow
less worthy or less human than whites? Why would that be? Do you think that
genetics might have something to do with it? If so, forget that because very
few people in the world are racially pure.

Do you think that just because a person has dark skin they are non-white?
That's silly because there are plenty of examples of people whose majority
of genes come from white people, who have dark skin and other physical
traits of so-called non-whites, and vice-versa. If genes are that important,
why aren't you showing due respect for people's genes instead of the color
of their skin?

Do you think that racial purity is necessarily a good thing? Again, if
racial characteristic and genetics are that important to you, why are you
discounting the benefits of hybrid vigor?

Not only don't you have a clue about current events, you don't know much
about history. There were a ton of African slaves in the south when the US
Constitution was written, which is one reason why it was written in such a
way as to not obviously prohibit slavery. Some estimate that the population
of the US included about 20% african slaves during the mid 1700s.

and similar patterns are being followed in several
European countries because of the failure by their
governments to do anything about unbridled immigration.

Now cccccdfgdfgdgdfg, you're back talking trash about current population
trends.

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/8...lation2hm0.gif

Not sufficient evidence to support the hypothesis that was presented by the
OP.

[mg]

On Nov 17, 4:40 pm, "The Henchman"
wrote:
wrote in message

...

White Population in the World Set to Drop from 17% to 7% by 2050

While the populations of Europe, Russia, and the US have levelled off
and even decreased, the populations of China and Africa are
accelerating beyond all expectations. Immigration reduced the
percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when the US Constitution was
written to only 71% today, and similar patterns are being followed in
several European countries because of the failure by their governments
to do anything about unbridled immigration.

The White Population is the US was 99% at the time of the constitution.
LOL. You are funny!!!!!!!!!!!! Care to cite a reference for that? That
must be one of the biggest outright lies I have ever heard....

99% indeed. I'll be chuckling about that one for a long long time.

1790 Census

3,893,635 - Total population of the United States in 1790 according to
the U.S. Census.

694,280 / 59,150 - Population of enslaved Africans / free blacks in
the United States in 1790.
http://www.ushistory.org/presidentsh...es/numbers.htm

Percent of blacks in the U.S. in 1790 = 753,430 / 3,893,635 x 100
= 19.4%

[Bob Myers]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Even if this were true, so what? Do you think that non-whites are somehow
less worthy or less human than whites?

Gee, Arny, I would think that it's pretty obvious that, yes, this
moron thinks that non-whites are somehow "less worthy or
less human" than whites. I'm not sure which group you're seeing
this stuff in (guessing rec.audio.pro, from the days I used to see
you when I hung around the audio groups), but I'm getting it via
rec.motorcycles, where unfortunately we seem to attract more
than the usual share of brainless bigots who post the idiocy.
Exactly WHY they post it, I've never been really clear on - on
the surface, of course, it seems like an incredibly clumsy attempt
to demonstrate some supposed "superiority" of the white race, but
it always winds up being so completely lacking in anything even
resembling intelligence that it winds up doing just the opposite.
Assuming, of course, that the orignial posters are white; as far as
I can tell, many of them shouldn't even qualify as human.

Bob M.

[Danny T]

On Nov 18, 9:32 am, "Bob Myers" wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

...

Even if this were true, so what? Do you think that non-whites are somehow
less worthy or less human than whites?

Gee, Arny, I would think that it's pretty obvious that, yes, this
moron thinks that non-whites are somehow "less worthy or
less human" than whites. I'm not sure which group you're seeing
this stuff in (guessing rec.audio.pro, from the days I used to see
you when I hung around the audio groups), but I'm getting it via
rec.motorcycles, where unfortunately we seem to attract more
than the usual share of brainless bigots who post the idiocy.
Exactly WHY they post it, I've never been really clear on - on
the surface, of course, it seems like an incredibly clumsy attempt
to demonstrate some supposed "superiority" of the white race, but
it always winds up being so completely lacking in anything even
resembling intelligence that it winds up doing just the opposite.
Assuming, of course, that the orignial posters are white; as far as
I can tell, many of them shouldn't even qualify as human.

Bob M.

You just stuck a wrench in your credibility with the comment about the
white race. Those anthropologists that use to say there were 3 races
have all concluded that there is less then .001% DNA change between
any and all people and that we are ALL one race. There is no white
race recognized.

Having said that, it doesn't change the fact that we all have our pre
conceived hate and most of us got it from our parents. Take a look at
old movies and gasp with the hate people had just a few years back...

Anyway, my prejudice is simple, anyone that thinks to much of them
self or values money over life or acts stupid on purpose or doesn't
care about the well being of others if stepping on others will raise
something in there, life gets my hate vote.

[Danny T]

On Nov 18, 9:32 am, "Bob Myers" wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

...

Even if this were true, so what? Do you think that non-whites are somehow
less worthy or less human than whites?

Gee, Arny, I would think that it's pretty obvious that, yes, this
moron thinks that non-whites are somehow "less worthy or
less human" than whites. I'm not sure which group you're seeing
this stuff in (guessing rec.audio.pro, from the days I used to see
you when I hung around the audio groups), but I'm getting it via
rec.motorcycles, where unfortunately we seem to attract more
than the usual share of brainless bigots who post the idiocy.
Exactly WHY they post it, I've never been really clear on - on
the surface, of course, it seems like an incredibly clumsy attempt
to demonstrate some supposed "superiority" of the white race, but
it always winds up being so completely lacking in anything even
resembling intelligence that it winds up doing just the opposite.
Assuming, of course, that the orignial posters are white; as far as
I can tell, many of them shouldn't even qualify as human.

Bob M.

Tried to fix that to have a :-) face after credibility but it didn't
go through... anyway - I meant is kiddingly and not harsh -

[Charlie Self]

On Nov 18, 5:22 am, (Don Pearce) wrote:
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 23:40:56 GMT, "The Henchman"



wrote:

wrote in message
...
White Population in the World Set to Drop from 17% to 7% by 2050

While the populations of Europe, Russia, and the US have levelled off
and even decreased, the populations of China and Africa are
accelerating beyond all expectations. Immigration reduced the
percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when the US Constitution was
written to only 71% today, and similar patterns are being followed in
several European countries because of the failure by their governments
to do anything about unbridled immigration.

The White Population is the US was 99% at the time of the constitution.
LOL. You are funny!!!!!!!!!!!! Care to cite a reference for that? That
must be one of the biggest outright lies I have ever heard....

99% indeed. I'll be chuckling about that one for a long long time.

He's typical of his type, I'm afraid. I'm always amused at American
cowboy films, with their virile white men doing brave things. The huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese - and what they actually did
was herd cattle. But I guess that won't put backsides on seats in
movie theatres.

And what's your source for that bull****?

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 22:34:50 +0100, Chel van Gennip
wrote:

wrote:
Immigration reduced the percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when the US Constitution was
written

http://usapopulationmap.com/race_1790.html

Older figures, e.g. before 1492, would give a different picture.

What happened in 1492?

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Richard Crowley]

"Don Pearce" wrote ...
Chel van Gennip wrote:
wrote:
Immigration reduced the percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when
the US Constitution was
written

http://usapopulationmap.com/race_1790.html

Older figures, e.g. before 1492, would give a different picture.

What happened in 1492?

As if this thread hadn't reached the point of being ridiculous
before now.

[Michael R. Kesti[_2_]]

Don Pearce wrote:

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 22:34:50 +0100, Chel van Gennip
wrote:

http://usapopulationmap.com/race_1790.html

Older figures, e.g. before 1492, would give a different picture.

What happened in 1492?

Columbus sailed the ocean blue.

(Ah, c'mon. Somebody had to say it.)

--
================================================== ======================
Michael Kesti | "And like, one and one don't make
| two, one and one make one."
mrkesti at hotmail dot com | - The Who, Bargain

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:46:22 -0800, "Michael R. Kesti"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 22:34:50 +0100, Chel van Gennip
wrote:

http://usapopulationmap.com/race_1790.html

Older figures, e.g. before 1492, would give a different picture.

What happened in 1492?

Columbus sailed the ocean blue.

(Ah, c'mon. Somebody had to say it.)

Sure he did but what has that to do with North America? You are aware
that he never went near the place in his life? Specifically not in
1492, although he did make it to South America sometime around 1500,
but by then everybody and his dog was going there.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 22:51:16 +0100, Chel van Gennip
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 22:34:50 +0100, Chel van Gennip
wrote:

wrote:
Immigration reduced the percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when the US Constitution was
written
http://usapopulationmap.com/race_1790.html

Older figures, e.g. before 1492, would give a different picture.

What happened in 1492?


Leonardo da Vinci's Vitruvian Man was created
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitruvian_Man

Ah! good. Figured it must be something noteworthy.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Michael R. Kesti[_2_]]

Don Pearce wrote:

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:46:22 -0800, "Michael R. Kesti"
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

What happened in 1492?

Columbus sailed the ocean blue.

(Ah, c'mon. Somebody had to say it.)

Sure he did but what has that to do with North America? You are aware
that he never went near the place in his life? Specifically not in
1492, although he did make it to South America sometime around 1500,
but by then everybody and his dog was going there.

Sure, Don, but even if there is no direct cause and effect between
Columbus' specific expeditions and the en masse arrival of white
Europeans in North America, a rising North American white population
was a result of explorations such as Columbus'.

Perhaps more to the point, do you know any rhyming couplets involving
any of Columbus' contemporaries?

--
================================================== ======================
Michael Kesti | "And like, one and one don't make
| two, one and one make one."
mrkesti at hotmail dot com | - The Who, Bargain

[Scott Dorsey]

Don Pearce wrote:

Sure he did but what has that to do with North America? You are aware
that he never went near the place in his life? Specifically not in
1492, although he did make it to South America sometime around 1500,
but by then everybody and his dog was going there.

Cuba is pretty near North America. Near enough to scare Kennedy anyway.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Don Pearce]

On 18 Nov 2007 17:50:43 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Sure he did but what has that to do with North America? You are aware
that he never went near the place in his life? Specifically not in
1492, although he did make it to South America sometime around 1500,
but by then everybody and his dog was going there.

Cuba is pretty near North America. Near enough to scare Kennedy anyway.
--scott

Close, but no cigar (like the pun?). The first discovery was in 1497
by John Cabot. He named the place after his sponsor, Richard Americ.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Neil Larson]

Wow, so you just as completly backwards from the original poster. "The huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese"? what history book did you read?
There were too many racisits for this to be even remotly true.

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 23:40:56 GMT, "The Henchman"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
White Population in the World Set to Drop from 17% to 7% by 2050

While the populations of Europe, Russia, and the US have levelled off
and even decreased, the populations of China and Africa are
accelerating beyond all expectations. Immigration reduced the
percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when the US Constitution was
written to only 71% today, and similar patterns are being followed in
several European countries because of the failure by their governments
to do anything about unbridled immigration.


The White Population is the US was 99% at the time of the constitution.
LOL. You are funny!!!!!!!!!!!! Care to cite a reference for that? That
must be one of the biggest outright lies I have ever heard....

99% indeed. I'll be chuckling about that one for a long long time.


He's typical of his type, I'm afraid. I'm always amused at American
cowboy films, with their virile white men doing brave things. The huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese - and what they actually did
was herd cattle. But I guess that won't put backsides on seats in
movie theatres.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Paul Stamler]

He's typical of his type, I'm afraid. I'm always amused at American
cowboy films, with their virile white men doing brave things. The huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese - and what they actually did
was herd cattle. But I guess that won't put backsides on seats in
movie theatres.

Nope. And the vast majority of cowboys were still white or Hispanic guys;
there were certainly black cowboys, but they were still a minority. So far
as I know, very few Chinese, although a few may have been employed as trail
cooks. After the building of the transcontinental railroad lines, most
Chinese immigrants lived in the cities, as indeed they still do.

Peace,
Paul

[P. Roehling]

"Don Pearce" wrote

He's typical of his type, I'm afraid. I'm always amused at American
cowboy films, with their virile white men doing brave things. The huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese - and what they actually did
was herd cattle. But I guess that won't put backsides on seats in
movie theatres.

My goodness, little boy, what strange history books *you've* been reading!

There *were* black cowboys in the old west, and a fair number of Hispanics
as well, but they weren't a majority, and so far as recorded history goes
there were no Chinese cowboys worth mentioning unless you count the
occasional chuck-wagon cook, Etc.

In the heat of your fever you may have confused "Chinese cowboys" with
"Chinese construction workers" who actually *did* do the majority of the
dirty work in literally blasting the Central Pacific Railroad through
California's Sierra Nevada mountains on the way east to Promontory Point
(turned out the Irish weren't tough enough for the job) but there were very
few if any Chinese cowboys.

There's a good reason for this. A competent cowboy had typically been roping
and riding (and doing everything else cowboy-related as well) since about
the time he was big enough to sit astride a horse without being actually
tied on. This is still true in some parts of the American west.

Your typical Chinese immigrant on the other hand was a young-to-middle-aged
man of the peasant class who had most likely *seen* horses on several
occasions during his earlier life, but the odds of him having ever been in a
saddle were practically nil; much less had he ever learned to toss a lariat,
castrate bull calves, Etc., nor had he ever been afforded any way to acquire
*any* of the skills needed to perform the job in question.

These are *not* skills that one picks up overnight, and just as today,
employers preferred to hire workers who had at least *some* background in
the field. And spoke the same language as well.

Sorry.

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 23:01:30 -0800, "P. Roehling"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote

He's typical of his type, I'm afraid. I'm always amused at American
cowboy films, with their virile white men doing brave things. The huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese - and what they actually did
was herd cattle. But I guess that won't put backsides on seats in
movie theatres.

My goodness, little boy, what strange history books *you've* been reading!

There *were* black cowboys in the old west, and a fair number of Hispanics
as well, but they weren't a majority, and so far as recorded history goes
there were no Chinese cowboys worth mentioning unless you count the
occasional chuck-wagon cook, Etc.

Ah, I see you studied your history from such authoritative works as
Rawhide and Wagon Train. Certainly in the northern reaches there were
considerable numbers of white cowboys, but further south there were
countless operations staffed almost entirely by black labour even
after abolition. It is true that most of these men did their work on
foot rather than mounted - maybe you think this means they don't count
as real cowboys?

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 17:41:12 -0600, "Neil Larson"
wrote:

Wow, so you just as completly backwards from the original poster. "The huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese"? what history book did you read?
There were too many racisits for this to be even remotly true.

When you are hiring manual labour you go for the cheapest. It is true
today and it was true then. Racism could go hang when you were
counting the dollars.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[[email protected]]

On Nov 18, 2:22 am, (Don Pearce) wrote:
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 23:40:56 GMT, "The Henchman"





wrote:

wrote in message
...
White Population in the World Set to Drop from 17% to 7% by 2050

While the populations of Europe, Russia, and the US have levelled off
and even decreased, the populations of China and Africa are
accelerating beyond all expectations. Immigration reduced the
percentage of Whites in the US from 99% when the US Constitution was
written to only 71% today, and similar patterns are being followed in
several European countries because of the failure by their governments
to do anything about unbridled immigration.

The White Population is the US was 99% at the time of the constitution.
LOL. You are funny!!!!!!!!!!!! Care to cite a reference for that? That
must be one of the biggest outright lies I have ever heard....

99% indeed. I'll be chuckling about that one for a long long time.

He's typical of his type, I'm afraid. I'm always amused at American
cowboy films, with their virile white men doing brave things. The huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese - and what they actually did
was herd cattle. But I guess that won't put backsides on seats in
movie theatres.

d

--
Pearce Consultinghttp://www.pearce.uk.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If one examines the trends in the UK and France, you guys have a
pretty good chance you will be reading the Koran by then. We may have
a racial stew here in the States but you guys have a Kosovo waiting to
happen. Better get some flame retardent for your car...

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[P. Roehling]

"Don Pearce" wrote

Ah, I see you studied your history from such authoritative works as
Rawhide and Wagon Train.

Heh. I majored in history -and psychology- and taught at the University of
California for twelve years thereafter. That included reading really
honest-to-goodness history texts written by really honest-to-goodness
American history scholars, and it's pretty amusing to hear a Brit try to
teach American history to someone who was raised in the American southwest,
went to school there, and has taught the subject himself.

But hey; feel free to cite your authoritative texts that show that (in your
words) "the huge majority of cowboys were black or Chinese".

[Don Pearce]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 11:38:49 -0800, "P. Roehling"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote

Ah, I see you studied your history from such authoritative works as
Rawhide and Wagon Train.

Heh. I majored in history -and psychology- and taught at the University of
California for twelve years thereafter. That included reading really
honest-to-goodness history texts written by really honest-to-goodness
American history scholars, and it's pretty amusing to hear a Brit try to
teach American history to someone who was raised in the American southwest,
went to school there, and has taught the subject himself.

But hey; feel free to cite your authoritative texts that show that (in your
words) "the huge majority of cowboys were black or Chinese".


Don't believe you. Give me some references to your papers so I can
look you up. I thought Google's academic search might throw up a few,
but strangely there was nought but silence.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Mark Olson]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 11:38:49 -0800, "P. Roehling"
wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote

Ah, I see you studied your history from such authoritative works as
Rawhide and Wagon Train.

Heh. I majored in history -and psychology- and taught at the University of
California for twelve years thereafter. That included reading really
honest-to-goodness history texts written by really honest-to-goodness
American history scholars, and it's pretty amusing to hear a Brit try to
teach American history to someone who was raised in the American southwest,
went to school there, and has taught the subject himself.

But hey; feel free to cite your authoritative texts that show that (in your
words) "the huge majority of cowboys were black or Chinese".

Don't believe you. Give me some references to your papers so I can
look you up. I thought Google's academic search might throw up a few,
but strangely there was nought but silence.

Unless my reading comprehension is inferior to yours, Mr. Roehling
never claimed to have published any papers. He did say he read
history texts and taught history.

--
'01 SV650SK1 '99 EX250-F13 '98 ZG1000-A13
OMF #7

[Rob Kleinschmidt]

On Nov 19, 1:05 am, (Don Pearce) wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 17:41:12 -0600, "Neil Larson"

wrote:
Wow, so you just as completly backwards from the original poster. "The huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese"? what history book did you read?
There were too many racisits for this to be even remotly true.

When you are hiring manual labour you go for the cheapest. It is true
today and it was true then. Racism could go hang when you were
counting the dollars.

http://www.epcc.edu/nwlibrary/border...ck_cowboys.htm

Per this El Paso site, it's believed that perhaps 25% of cowboys may
have been black.

Chinese cowboys seem to have existed only in your imagination.

Cites to the contrary much appreciated.

[Don Pearce]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:12:10 -0600, Mark Olson
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 11:38:49 -0800, "P. Roehling"
wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote

Ah, I see you studied your history from such authoritative works as
Rawhide and Wagon Train.

Heh. I majored in history -and psychology- and taught at the University of
California for twelve years thereafter. That included reading really
honest-to-goodness history texts written by really honest-to-goodness
American history scholars, and it's pretty amusing to hear a Brit try to
teach American history to someone who was raised in the American southwest,
went to school there, and has taught the subject himself.

But hey; feel free to cite your authoritative texts that show that (in your
words) "the huge majority of cowboys were black or Chinese".

Don't believe you. Give me some references to your papers so I can
look you up. I thought Google's academic search might throw up a few,
but strangely there was nought but silence.

Unless my reading comprehension is inferior to yours, Mr. Roehling
never claimed to have published any papers. He did say he read
history texts and taught history.

When you teach at a University, one of your jobs is to write and
publish papers. It is what keeps you credible within the faculty. If
he wasn't publishing papers, he wasn't teaching.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Rob Kleinschmidt]

On Nov 19, 3:57 pm, (Don Pearce) wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:12:10 -0600, Mark Olson
wrote:



Don Pearce wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 11:38:49 -0800, "P. Roehling"
wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote

Ah, I see you studied your history from such authoritative works as
Rawhide and Wagon Train.

Heh. I majored in history -and psychology- and taught at the University of
California for twelve years thereafter. That included reading really
honest-to-goodness history texts written by really honest-to-goodness
American history scholars, and it's pretty amusing to hear a Brit try to
teach American history to someone who was raised in the American southwest,
went to school there, and has taught the subject himself.

But hey; feel free to cite your authoritative texts that show that (in your
words) "the huge majority of cowboys were black or Chinese".

Don't believe you. Give me some references to your papers so I can
look you up. I thought Google's academic search might throw up a few,
but strangely there was nought but silence.

Unless my reading comprehension is inferior to yours, Mr. Roehling
never claimed to have published any papers. He did say he read
history texts and taught history.

When you teach at a University, one of your jobs is to write and
publish papers. It is what keeps you credible within the faculty. If
he wasn't publishing papers, he wasn't teaching.

And the reason for your original assertion that the majority
of cowboys were non-white was what exactly ?

An economic theory perhaps ?

Any evidence of any kind ?

[P. Roehling]

"Don Pearce" wrote

Don't believe you.

Who cares what you believe? You also claim to believe that "the huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese". Now either cite your proofs for
that claim or admit you were wrong.

Once again: there were quite a few Chinese in the western United States
between the California Gold Rush of 1849 and the beginning of the 20th
century. They did lots of different jobs (in fact, the town I live in sports
hundreds of split-granite-boulder walls and curbs that were built pre-1900
almost exclusively by Chinese labor) but Chinese cowboys? While it's always
possible there were a few who got missed by the historians, I have seen no
records of them existing at all; much less being extremely numerous.

Give me some references to your papers so I can
look you up. I thought Google's academic search might throw up a few,
but strangely there was nought but silence.

Proving that you know even less about the hiring practices of the University
of California than you do about the American old west.

"Publish or perish" is still the rule for tenured faculty at UC, but I was
never tenured faculty, just a year-to-year contract employee who taught
night school. (Matter of fact, contract employees don't have to have a Ph.D,
or even a Master's degree to teach. All they have to do is be able to teach
a subject that the University needs taught and be willing to get paid
considerably less than the tenured instructors.)

[Don Pearce]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:14:42 -0800, "P. Roehling"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote

Don't believe you.

Who cares what you believe? You also claim to believe that "the huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese". Now either cite your proofs for
that claim or admit you were wrong.

Once again: there were quite a few Chinese in the western United States
between the California Gold Rush of 1849 and the beginning of the 20th
century. They did lots of different jobs (in fact, the town I live in sports
hundreds of split-granite-boulder walls and curbs that were built pre-1900
almost exclusively by Chinese labor) but Chinese cowboys? While it's always
possible there were a few who got missed by the historians, I have seen no
records of them existing at all; much less being extremely numerous.

Give me some references to your papers so I can
look you up. I thought Google's academic search might throw up a few,
but strangely there was nought but silence.

Proving that you know even less about the hiring practices of the University
of California than you do about the American old west.

"Publish or perish" is still the rule for tenured faculty at UC, but I was
never tenured faculty, just a year-to-year contract employee who taught
night school. (Matter of fact, contract employees don't have to have a Ph.D,
or even a Master's degree to teach. All they have to do is be able to teach
a subject that the University needs taught and be willing to get paid
considerably less than the tenured instructors.)


Your claim shrinks somewhat when challenged. You have failed.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Don Pearce]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 01:37:33 -0700, Turby
wrote:

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 08:12:29 GMT, (Don Pearce)
wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:14:42 -0800, "P. Roehling"
wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote

Don't believe you.

Who cares what you believe? You also claim to believe that "the huge
majority of cowboys were black or Chinese". Now either cite your proofs for
that claim or admit you were wrong.

Your claim shrinks somewhat when challenged. You have failed.

Your claim, OTOH, hasn't shrunk, it's damn well disappeared. Talk
about failure - can't you even fake a cite to support that ridiculous
claim?

No need, when the so-called academic experts prove to be just hot air.
Is that you too, or do you have something?

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Don Pearce]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:00:23 +0100, Chel van Gennip
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 01:37:33 -0700, Turby
wrote:

Your claim, OTOH, hasn't shrunk, it's damn well disappeared. Talk
about failure - can't you even fake a cite to support that ridiculous
claim?

No need, when the so-called academic experts prove to be just hot air.

I see one example of hot air, and that is your claim: "The huge majority
of cowboys were black or Chinese" and your repeated statement that there
is no need to support that claim. You don't have to question the
academic status of the questioners, just answer the question, and
support your claim. So far you have given nothing to support your claim,
except a lot of hot air.

I made no academic claim. My information comes from a variety of
sources, mainly investigative journalistic programmes on the TV. Had I
made an academic claim, you would be perfectly justified to call me on
it. I didn't. Roehling did, I called him and he proved not to have the
credentials he claimed.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Bob Myers]

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
I made no academic claim. My information comes from a variety of
sources, mainly investigative journalistic programmes on the TV. Had I
made an academic claim, you would be perfectly justified to call me on
it. I didn't. Roehling did, I called him and he proved not to have the
credentials he claimed.

OK, Don, but I think it may be time to admit that your
"investigative journalistic programmes" may have erred here.
I've lived in the western U.S. most of my life and am reasonably
familiar with the history of the region. While you are correct
in the belief that there were a fair number of black and Chinese
persons working here throughout the latter half of the 19th
century, it is simply not correct to think that the "huge majority
of cowboys were black or Chinese." There certainly were
cowboys of both races in the American Old West - but they
were definitely not the majority.

You may have confused what these programs were saying
re the West (within the continental U.S.) with what they may
have said about U.S. possessions in the late 19th and early
20th centuries. For example, Hawaii (although it's certainly
not the place you first think of when someone says "cowboy")
did (and still does) have a fair number of "cowboys," and
through the period in question brought in a LOT of Chinese
and Japanese laborers, some of whom certainly wound up in their
share of "ranch" jobs.

Bob M.

[Jay Kadis]

In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:12:10 -0600, Mark Olson
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 11:38:49 -0800, "P. Roehling"
wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote

Ah, I see you studied your history from such authoritative works as
Rawhide and Wagon Train.

Heh. I majored in history -and psychology- and taught at the University of
California for twelve years thereafter. That included reading really
honest-to-goodness history texts written by really honest-to-goodness
American history scholars, and it's pretty amusing to hear a Brit try to
teach American history to someone who was raised in the American
southwest,
went to school there, and has taught the subject himself.

But hey; feel free to cite your authoritative texts that show that (in
your
words) "the huge majority of cowboys were black or Chinese".

Don't believe you. Give me some references to your papers so I can
look you up. I thought Google's academic search might throw up a few,
but strangely there was nought but silence.

Unless my reading comprehension is inferior to yours, Mr. Roehling
never claimed to have published any papers. He did say he read
history texts and taught history.

When you teach at a University, one of your jobs is to write and
publish papers. It is what keeps you credible within the faculty. If
he wasn't publishing papers, he wasn't teaching.

d

Many if not most of us teaching at a university are lecturers and are
not expected to do research or publish.

-Jay

--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x ---- Jay's Attic Studio ----x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x

[Paul Stamler]

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Your claim shrinks somewhat when challenged. You have failed.

His claim is that your claim is wrong. Your claim, which is an extraordinary
one, is that most of the cowboys in the old west were black or Chinese.
You've produced precisely zero documentation of this claim. Until and unless
you can produce some references to back it up, you're in a pretty poor spot
to be saying someone else has failed.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." (- Carl Sagan) So far
you haven't even produced ordinary evidence. If you have some, produce it.
Otherwise climb down.

Peace,
Paul

[P. Roehling]

"Don Pearce" wrote

Your claim shrinks somewhat when challenged. You have failed.

"Pearce Consulting", huh?

I hope you don't really get paid for using that mind, but, if so, it goes a
long ways towards explaining the decline of the United Kingdom.

What a maroon.