Speculation is growing that ancient "racists" living in North Africa helped create the Sahara Desert as a means of preventing immigration into their lands by the group subsequently known as Sub-Saharan Africans, who, it is reported, are still "getting their lives together."

The "blue sky thinking" about this ancient mystery follows research by archaeologists working with Seoul National University that suggests that the Sahara Desert was once a green and wet area that was dried out as a result of the deliberate actions of ancient people.

The massive area now covered by the desert was teeming with life until some 6,000 years ago, when it became a hot, waterless wasteland, impossible to cross without the aid of camels. It thus served as an extremely effective barrier against Sub-Saharan Africans keen to take advantage of the much higher living standards in the affluent societies that grew up in North Africa, like Ancient Egypt and Carthage. 

For many years, this desertification of the Sahara was seen as a random act of Mother Nature and connected to the melting of some glaciers, but now the process is thought to have been man-made. Archaeologist David Wright has published a paper in "Frontiers in Earth Science" in which he argues that the cause of the Sahara's drying out was human activity. 

Some 8,000 years ago, humans in the Middle East and North Africa underwent the Neolithic Revolution, which included deforesting, farming, and herding techniques. While most areas were farmed in a careful and sustainable way in order to maintain a constant supply of food, the Sahara area was apparently farmed in a way that led to its complete desertification. 

This would be a senseless act unless it was done with a clear "racist" purpose, namely to create a barrier to prevent Black Africans moving North. 

This thesis suggest that even in Neolithic times the problem of racism was deeply embedded in human nature, although it appears that some groups North of the Sahara mixed freely due to the institution of slavery.

The desertification theory is also problematic for "Black Pride" activists and Hoteps, because it makes it clear that Blacks could not have been present in ancient Egypt and so could not have been "kangz." On the plus side, the theory opens the way for Blacks to demand reparations from Ancient Egypt or its successor states for this ancient injustice.
Share on Google Plus

2 Replies so far - Add your comment

  1. Interesting, and this might make good sense. However, I would like to offer a very different and surprising explanation:


  2. The slaves in the iron and copper age deforested the Sahara desert in order to reduce the melted ore to iron and copper. You need carbon for the reducing process and to fire up their melting furnaces. We use coal too in our melting processes nowadays, so that tells me they have deforested the Sahara into a desert during the iron and copper age.

    These slaves were not capable of doing anything for themselves the same way as the Aboriginals didn't do anything for themselves for the 65000 years that they lived in Australia according to Archeologists. There was nothing developed in Australia when Cook set foot on land in the 1700's. These slaves did basically the same as the Abo's. Plundering and murdering nature and ate each other until the liberals showed up and tried to breed them out of their misery.

    Today they call that racial mongrelizing, EVOLUTION. These goblins evolved to more cunning and clever goblins and the liberals got themselves out of a human state to a lower goblin state.