posted 13 November 2004 01:50 AM            

quote:

---

Where do you get your information from? I don't want you to think I'm attacking you but you are NOT coherent at all. You accept a fact then try to subjectively argue against that fact. This is not logical!

---

It is psychologically definable though, from earlier in the thread:

quote:

---

cognitive dissonance: psychological conflict resulting from incongruous beliefs and attitudes held simultaneously

---

This observation was before he acknowledged the reality of the Black African origins of Kemet, and then began arguing against it, because he doesn't 'like' it. He's looking for an argument that will give him some hope of changing reality. Talk about being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Ausar: I think Keino, Supercar and everyone else is being very considerate, polite and patient in this discussion, all things considered. m2c.

posted 13 November 2004 02:03 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
This observation was before he acknowledged the reality of the Black African origins of Kemet, and then began arguing against it, because he doesn't 'like' it. He's looking for an argument that will give him some hope of changing reality. Talk about being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

---

I think you guys take most (if not all) of your views from black Athena: The Afro-Asiatic roots of civilizations (1987).

I think the book was refuted in the same language it came up with.

Although white Bernal is not considered an Afrocentrist, his book is seen by Afrocentrists as supporting their claims of African Egypt as a black civilization and of ancient Greece as having stolen much of its culture from the Egyptians. Mainstream scholars have charged Afrocentrism with intellectual inaccuracy, scholarly ineptitude, and blatant racism.

First of all let me correct you again. KMT was a name in reference to the dark, fertile soil that remained after the Nile floodwaters had receded and not to the people's skin color!

They also used another term, Deshret, or “the Red Land,” a designation for the desert sands that burned under the blazing Sun.

quote:

---

Ausar: I think Keino, Supercar and everyone else is being very considerate, polite and patient in this discussion, all things considered. m2c.

---

Don't lie. Supercar and you are the same person.

[This message has been edited by Orionix (edited 13 November 2004).]

posted 13 November 2004 02:18 AM            

quote:

---

Why is the origin of pale skin in Germany a mystery?

The origin of pale skin in northern Europe is not a mystery,

Pale skin is the genetic adaptation of human beings to different environmental conditions.

---

origins: the point at which something begins;
as distinct from cause: the reasons for a condition.

mystery: See Ancient Germans weren't fair

quote:

---

KMT was a name in reference to the dark, fertile soil

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
[Don't lie. Supercar and you are the same person.

---

posted 13 November 2004 02:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
Don't lie. Supercar and you are the same person.

---

posted 13 November 2004 02:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
This observation was before he acknowledged the reality of the Black African origins of Kemet, and then began arguing against it, because he doesn't 'like' it. He's looking for an argument that will give him some hope of changing reality. Talk about being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

---

You didn't like to acknowledge 4 facts:

1. Berbers are genetically closer to Near Easters than to other Africans. Berbers were present in Egypt since at least 3000 BC.

2. Ethiopians cluster with Yemenis as a recent study showed to be, rather than with other sub-Saharan Africans.

3. Kemet was not a name in refference to people's skin color.

4. The people of present-day Egypt are basically very similar to how they looked once.

Your personal attacks and psychological stubbornness will not change human biodiveristy. I think you have some desperate need to defend yourself from something. Although i did not attack you or anyone else here.

Edit: Again the Greeks did not steal anything from Egypt. That's a fallcy. In the old Meditarranean world cultural influences moved around a lot.

The Berbers of North Africa had never been black Africans but they have never been white Europeans either. Genetically they are just intermediate between Europeans and sub-Sahalian Africans. Berbers were present in Egypt since at least 3,000 ago.

I think that Afrocentrism is reactionary to white racism against blacks which has taken place in the last 500 years of human history. But it's still racism, exactly as European one is. This is why it is putting blacks down.

posted 13 November 2004 10:11 AM            

Thought wrote: Proto-Berber branched off from Afro-Asiatic which originated south of Egypt AND Nubia

Rasol writes:
* Conceiving of Berber as a ethnic group is bit like conceiving of anglophone as an ethnic group.

* Using cluster illusion anglo's are "intermediate between Europe and Africa" due to the simple fact of 100's of millions of English speakers in Africa.

* Ignoring the fact that English and related languages originate among the pale skinned people of Europe, we can pronounce that "English have never been white", and the mental self abuse is now complete.

Berber

posted 13 November 2004 11:27 AM            

Thought Posts:

American Journal of Human Biology

2004 Nov-Dec;16(6):679-89.

Exploring northeast African metric craniofacial variation at the individual level: A comparative study using principal components analysis.

SOY Keita

“The Y genetic profiles of the Horn-Nile Valley region are DIFFERENT from those of the core Near East, who are characterized by a high frequency of M89 variants in the J and R haplogroups.”

{2. The (present-day) people of the horn of Africa are not in sub-Saharan Africa and genetically they were proved to be intermediate:

Ethiopian mitochondrial DNA heritage: tracking gene flow across and around the gate of tears.

Kivisild T, Reidla M, Metspalu E, Rosa A, Brehm A, Pennarun E, Parik J, Geberhiwot T, Usanga E, Villems R.

Estonian Biocentre and Tartu University, Tartu, Estonia. tkivisil@ebc.ee

Both Ethiopians and Yemenis contain an almost-equal proportion of Eurasian-specific M and N and African-specific lineages and therefore cluster together in a multidimensional scaling plot between Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African populations. }

Thought Writes:

I know you are yanking our chain, but for the fun of the debate I will play along. The problem with the Kivisild statement that Ethiopians plot between Near Eastern and Sub-Saharan populations lies in the Ethiopian samples used and the fact that he is allotting M1 to Eurasia instead of Africa. Check out his opinion on M1 in this study:

Thought Posts:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/5/26

Most of the extant mtDNA boundaries in South and Southwest Asia were likely shaped during the initial settlement of Eurasia by anatomically modern humans

Mait Metspalu1 , Toomas Kivisild1 , Ene Metspalu1 , Jüri Parik1 , Georgi Hudjashov1 , Katrin Kaldma1 , Piia Serk1 , Monika Karmin1 , Doron M Behar2 , M Thomas P Gilbert6 , Phillip Endicott7 , Sarabjit Mastana4 Surinder S Papiha5 , Karl Skorecki2 Antonio Torroni3 and Richard Villems1

1Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, Tartu University, Tartu, Estonia
2Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine and Research Institute, Technion and Rambam Medical Center, Haifa, Israel
3Dipartimento di Genetica e Microbiologia, Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy
4Department of Human Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom
5Department of Human Genetics, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, United Kingdom
6Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
7Henry Wellcome Ancient Biomolecules Centre, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PS,United Kingdom

BMC Genetics 2004, 5:26 doi:10.1186/1471-2156-5-26

posted 13 November 2004 11:33 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
I agree with you that most Upper Egyptians were always dark skinned or "black" but whether the origin of the subsequent dynastic Egyptian civilizations was Lower Nubia (the land south to Aswan) is still obscure.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 13 November 2004 11:38 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
[b] We know that the Egyptians spoke Afro-Asiatic languages (the speakers of this language are somewhere genetically related) but experts are not sure whether the Afro-Asiatic language spread from eastern Africa to the Near East or the other way around: from the Near East to Africa.

According to Cavalli-Sforza the Afro-Asiatic language originated in SW Asia some 15,000 years ago and from there spread to Africa.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 13 November 2004 11:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
[b] Don't hurry too much. It's not a fact, it's obscure.

We know that the Egyptians spoke Afro-Asiatic languages (the speakers of this language are somewhere genetically related) but experts are not sure whether the Afro-Asiatic language spread from eastern Africa to the Near East or the other way around: from the Near East to Africa.

According to Cavalli-Sforza the Afro-Asiatic language originated in SW Asia some 15,000 years ago and from there spread to Africa.

Recent genetic studies indicate that this is very possible...

[b]A predominantly neolithic origin for Y-chromosomal DNA variation in North Africa.

Arredi B, Poloni ES, Paracchini S, Zerjal T, Fathallah DM, Makrelouf M, Pascali VL, Novelletto A, Tyler-Smith C.

Istituto di Medicina Legale, Universita Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Roma, Rome, Italy. b_arredi@libero.it

We have typed 275 men from five populations in Algeria, Tunisia, and Egypt with a set of 119 binary markers and 15 microsatellites from the Y chromosome, and we have analyzed the results together with published data from Moroccan populations. North African Y-chromosomal diversity is geographically structured and fits the pattern expected under an isolation-by-distance model. Autocorrelation analyses reveal an east-west cline of genetic variation that extends into the Middle East and is compatible with a hypothesis of demic expansion. This expansion must have involved relatively small numbers of Y chromosomes to account for the reduction in gene diversity towards the West that accompanied the frequency increase of Y haplogroup E3b2, but gene flow must have been maintained to explain the observed pattern of isolation-by-distance. Since the estimates of the times to the most recent common ancestor (TMRCAs) of the most common haplogroups are quite recent, we suggest that the North African pattern of Y-chromosomal variation is largely of Neolithic origin. Thus, we propose that the Neolithic transition in this part of the world was accompanied by demic diffusion of Afro-Asiatic-speaking pastoralists from the Middle East.

A predominantly neolithic origin for Y-chromosomal DNA variation in North Africa.

[This message has been edited by Orionix (edited 13 November 2004).][/B]

---

Thought Writes:

The problem with this study is the same problem you are having. Arredi provides absolutly NO archaeological or linguistic evidence for this claim. In fact if you read her paper she admits that E3b originated in East Africa.

Arredi et al 2004

posted 13 November 2004 12:01 PM            

Here you say:

{As it turns out, DNA analysis shows that the dramatic change in European complexion happened around the Baltic in about 3000 B.C. -- just yesterday, geologically speaking.}

Yet here you state:

{We know that lighter skinned people (some call them "Caucasoids") were present in North Africa since 30,000 ago.}

This demonstrates yet another flaw in your reasoning If as you claim Europeans did not have a dramatic change in their melanin levels until 3000 B.C. (it actually happened much earlier during the Mesolithic period circa 12,000 B.C.). How could it happen in North Africa circa 30K B.C.? North Africa is south of the Baltic Sea and hence closer to the equator!

{This people were present in Lower Egypt (since at least 3000 BC, Lybia and (costal) NW Africa.}

Thought Writes:

Really. Where can I find ANY evidence of this?

posted 13 November 2004 12:50 PM            

Proof of this is the persistence of research magazines like National Geographic and Scientific American in portraying AE's as being of European phenotype even when the actual portrayals are close at hand. Ian Hodder's Scientific American article(January 2004), for instance, portrays one of the first(9KYA) settled villages of the Neolithic--Catalhoyuk in Turkey--as being peopled by pale skinned people when their self portrayals were obviously those of dark/black skinned persons. The paintings of these people showed cattle, deer, etc. so obviously they were able to get their fair share of vitamin D. So this brings up the question of the mutational human transformation from dark brown to a virtually unpigmented skin. I just don't see how unpigmented skin could be selected for given that we don't have any evidence that temperate zone vegetarians suffer inordinately from rickets. Maybe it's Lamarckianism in action--if there's no need for some trait it just gradually disappears without the help of the principle of natural selection.

posted 13 November 2004 01:00 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
Proof of this is the persistence of research magazines like National Geographic and Scientific American in portraying AE's as being of European phenotype even when the actual portrayals are close at hand. Ian Hodder's Scientific American article(January 2004), for instance, portrays one of the first(9KYA) settled villages of the Neolithic--Catalhoyuk in Turkey--as being peopled by pale skinned people when their self portrayals were obviously those of dark/black skinned persons.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 13 November 2004 01:03 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

If you agree that the original Upper Egyptians were Black, do you also agree that Egyptian civilization pre-dates the conquest of the delta? If so then that would mean that the states that existed in Upper Egypt and Lower Nubia were indeed Black and Egyptian and that the Egyptians proper were Black.

---

Yes, like Ausar wrote, we have relatively recent archeological evidences of cultures which took place at least 8,000 ago near the present-day Egypto-Sudanese border.

Ancient Egypt - Historical framwork (from Encarta)

The biochemical systems of Asian and European populations appear to be more similar to each other than those of either group are to African populations.

Thus, Asians and Europeans may have shared a common ancestry some 40,000 years ago and a common ancestry with African populations almost three times as long ago.

Cavalli-Sforza writes that anatomically modern African peoples are believed to have appeared about 100,000 years ago in sub-Saharan Africa and somewhat later in northern Africa. Exactly how and when the modern "races" emerged is not known, though the northern and southern groups are believed to have been distinct for some time. For example we know that the ancient Iberians were from North Africa, including the people of Sardinia.

Moreover, investigations of human mitochondrial DNA reveal two facts: that the variation among modern human populations is small compared, for example, with that between apes and monkeys, which points to the recency of human origin; and that there is a distinction between African and other human mitochondrial DNA types, suggesting the substantial antiquity of the African peoples and the relative recency of other human populations.

posted 13 November 2004 01:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

Great point Lamin! In fact gnetic and skeletal data do indeed exist that links the mesolithic/early neolithic populations of Anatolia and Macedonia with a RECENT dispersal from the East Efrican homeland.

---

The period of time involved in human evolution is at least three to four million years and probably much longer. During this time the world has undergone a number of climatic changes, including glaciations and warm periods, which can be detected by studying the geologic record. The variety of dating methods that are available to paleontologists makes it possible to place fossils in time and succession.

Evolution may be defined as change in the genetic composition of a population through time (see also genetics, human). The time is set up to about 100 generations.

posted 14 November 2004 09:33 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
The thesis that there is some qualitative distinction between the mtDNA of African populations and the rest of the world is an ideological claim not a scientific one. Africa occupies some 20% of the world's landmass so if intraAfrican migration did take place in Africa at the same time that migration out of Africa was taking place then what is the basis for establishing the Africa-Rest of the World divide in terms of genetic distance unless Africa's populations constantly criss-crossed each other exchanging genetic material--this is the multiregional model which has not passed scsientific muster? This didn't happen because of huge distances and because Africa's peoples show the same levels of genetic distance as found elsewhere in the world--some have shared recent ancestors while others have not shared recent ancestors. But here's the problem: how does one determine genetic relatedness?

---

Thought Writes:

In terms of male lineage Y Chromosome analysis Africans DO share a recent inter-African gene pool based upon the PN2 (from group 3) Clade.

posted 14 November 2004 01:14 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by lamin:
The thesis that there is some qualitative distinction between the mtDNA of African populations and the rest of the world is an ideological claim not a scientific one. Africa occupies some 20% of the world's landmass so if intraAfrican migration did take place in Africa at the same time that migration out of Africa was taking place then what is the basis for establishing the Africa-Rest of the World divide in terms of genetic distance unless Africa's populations constantly criss-crossed each other exchanging genetic material--this is the multiregional model which has not passed scsientific muster? This didn't happen because of huge distances and because Africa's peoples show the same levels of genetic distance as found elsewhere in the world--some have shared recent ancestors while others have not shared recent ancestors. But here's the problem: how does one determine genetic relatedness? Is it by cladistic methods or by taxonomy? Similarity of environment would establish similarity of environmentally adaptive traits despite no genetic interaction between groups. Case in point: the naive observer could assume that dolphins are more closely related to tuna and salmon than to humans simply by naive observation. Similarly some Africans may demonstrate particular phenotypical traits that would lead excited Europeans to coin scientifically meaningless terms like "Hamite", "half-Hamite" "negroid but not negro" "true negroes", "pure negroes", and even the problematic "full-blooded negro". It's the same scientific naivete that has led to much tendentious debate about the lineage of the peoples of the Horn of Africa and those of Ancient Egypt.

---

Population genetics is the study of the distribution of and change in allele frequencies under the influence of the four evolutionary forces: natural selection, genetic drift, mutation and migration. All those need to be calculated.

Geneticisits are correct. Asians and Europeans may have shared a common ancestry some 40,000 years ago and a common ancestry with African populations 2.5 times as long ago.

posted 14 November 2004 01:20 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
In general, North Africans are closer to Near Easterns rather than sub-Saharan Africans.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 14 November 2004 02:01 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

Nope, not true. North Africans are diverse. Some North Africans link with populations from Inner Africa, others with the Near East and still others with Europe. Post your data that supports this broad assertion.

---

North Africans (who are ethnically predominantly Berber) are closer to Near Easterns than to black Africans.

Of course they are not "Caucasoid" as Eurocentrics claim them but they are not black Africans either.

1. "So far, our analyses have allowed a clear dissection of almost all NW African...paternal lineages into several components with distinct historical origins. In this way, the historical origins of the NW African Y-chromosome pool may be summarized as follows: 75% NW African Upper Paleolithic (H35, H36, and H38), 13% Neolithic (H58 and H71), 4% historic European gene flow (group IX, H50, H52), and 8% recent sub-Saharan African (H22 and H28)."

(Bosch et al., Am J Hum Genet, 2001)

(Hammer et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci, 2000)

posted 14 November 2004 03:47 PM            

This study is cited by storm-fronters based on erroneous assumptions regarding "caucasoid". (we are supposed to presume that NW African defined haplotypes are caucasoid; to consider the absurdity of this notion, simple note the origins of Berber languages and associated Haplotypes in tropical East Africa)

Without those assumptions, nothing here to help Orionix.

posted 14 November 2004 04:42 PM            

{North Africans (who are ethnically predominantly Berber) are closer to Near Easterns than to black Africans.}

Sight Writes:

1) Define what you mean when you say North Africa

2) Show me some population statistics that prove that Berber’s are predominate in North Africa

3) Show me a genetic study that lumps all of your North African groups into ONE cluster.

posted 14 November 2004 04:44 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
This study does not define by Black African, Near Eastern and Berber....again mismatched conceptions, and somewhat falsified by Orionix; it defines by NW Africa, Europe and sub-sahara. Even here it specifically notes twice as much geneflow from sub sahara to NW Africa (8%) compared to Europe (4%).

This study is cited by storm-fronters based on erroneous assumptions regarding "caucasoid". (we are supposed to presume that NW African defined haplotypes are caucasoid; to consider the absurdity of this notion, simple note the origins of Berber languages and associated Haplotypes in tropical East Africa)

Without those assumptions, nothing here to help Orionix.

next...

---

Again, forget about "Caucasoid" and "Negroid". It is not revelant to population geneticists.

According to genetic studies undetaken in the last 10 years the great majority in North African do not cluster with sub-Saharan Africans or southern Europeans. The are closer to Near Easterns.

According to genetic researches it is possible that Yemenis were the ancestors of the Berbers:

1. Genetic differentiation of Yemeni people according to rhesus and Gm polymorphisms.

Chaabani H, Sanchez-Mazas A, Sallami SF.

Laboratoire de Genetique Humaine, Faculte de Pharmacie de Monastir, 5000 Monastir, Tunisia. hassen.chaabani@fphm.rnu.tn

For introducing Yemeni population in synthesis of genetic relationships of human populations, analysis of rhesus and Gm polymorphisms have been carried out for a population sample of 210 Yemenites. Rhesus haplotype frequencies were compared to those estimated in an original sample of 171 Tunisians and to available data for other populations. Gm haplotype frequencies were introduced in a wide synthesis of genetic relationships for 67 populations from Africa, Europe, the Near East and India. The genetic profile of Yemeni people would be close to that of a highly diversified ancestral population. The first inhabitants of North Africa, the Berbers and Yemenites have very likely a common origin and were not subject to important genetic drift after their geographic differentiation. While, the divergence between Yemenites and their neighbours of sub-Saharan Africa would have occurred with a founder effect and a long isolation. An important parallelism is observed for the Gm system between genetic and linguistic differentiations

Also, the present-day Egyptians are basically almost the same as they were once...

2. Y-chromosome analysis in Egypt suggests a genetic regional continuity in Northeastern Africa.

Manni F, Leonardi P, Barakat A, Rouba H, Heyer E, Klintschar M, McElreavey K, Quintana-Murci L.

Laboratoire d'Anthropologie Biologique (CNRS FRE 2292); Musee de l'Homme MNHN, Paris, France.

The geographic location of Egypt, at the interface between North Africa, the Middle East, and southern Europe, prompted us to investigate the genetic diversity of this population and its relationship with neighboring populations. To assess the extent to which the modern Egyptian population reflects this intermediate geographic position, ten Unique Event Polymorphisms (UEPs), mapping to the nonrecombining portion of the Y chromosome, have been typed in 164 Y chromosomes from three North African populations. The analysis of these binary markers, which define 11 Y-chromosome lineages, were used to determine the haplogroup frequencies in Egyptians, Moroccan Arabs, and Moroccan Berbers and thereby define the Y-chromosome background in these regions. Pairwise comparisons with a set of 15 different populations from neighboring European, North African, and Middle Eastern populations and geographic analysis showed the absence of any significant genetic barrier in the eastern part of the Mediterranean area, suggesting that genetic variation and gene flow in this area follow the "isolation-by-distance" model. These results are in sharp contrast with the observation of a strong north-south genetic barrier in the western Mediterranean basin, defined by the Gibraltar Strait. Thus, the Y-chromosome gene pool in the modern Egyptian population reflects a mixture of European, Middle Eastern, and African characteristics, highlighting the importance of ancient and recent migration waves, followed by gene flow, in the region.

3. Present-day Egyptians are also related to Moroccan Berbers...

HLA genes in Arabic-speaking Moroccans: close relatedness to Berbers and Iberians.

posted 14 November 2004 04:57 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
{North Africans (who are ethnically predominantly Berber) are closer to Near Easterns than to black Africans.}

Sight Writes:

1) Define what you mean when you say North Africa

---

The region of Lower Egypt and the Maghreb. This region lies north to the present-day Sahara.

2)

quote:

---

Show me some population statistics that prove that Berber’s are predominate in North Africa

---

The original population of most of North Africa (except Upper Egypt) were Berbers. Ethnically/Racially they still predominate there.

3)

quote:

---

Show me a genetic study that lumps all of your North African groups into ONE cluster.

---

That's pretty inapplicable.

I'm not saying there aren't black Berbers in North Africa but most are not black like you imagine.

[/B][/QUOTE]

posted 14 November 2004 05:04 PM            

quote:

---

Again, forget about "Caucasoid" and "Negroid". It is not revelant to population geneticists.

---

posted 14 November 2004 05:06 PM            

Thought Writes:

You do realize that this is not all of North Africa. But okay.

{The original population of most of North Africa (except Upper Egypt) were Berbers. Ethnically/Racially they still predominate there.}

Thought Writes:

Again, show me some population statistics that prove that Berber’s are predominate in North Africa

{That's pretty inapplicable.}

Thought Writes:

How so? You made a broad generalization and now you seem to want to back pedal…..

posted 14 November 2004 05:09 PM            

quote:

---

I'm not saying there aren't black Berbers in North Africa

---

tsk tsk....

quote:

---

The Berbers of North Africa had never been black Africans

---

fibbing goes on too long, then gets frantic, sloppy, not good Orionix, not good.

posted 14 November 2004 05:30 PM            

quote:

---

Also, the present-day Egyptians are basically almost the same as they were once...

---

quote:

---

2. Y-chromosome analysis in Egypt suggests a genetic regional continuity in Northeastern Africa.

"Thus, the Y-chromosome gene pool in the modern Egyptian population reflects a mixture of European, Middle Eastern, and African characteristics, highlighting the importance of ancient and recent migration waves"

---

posted 14 November 2004 05:31 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
In which case the fact that NorthWest Africa has 8% sub sahara vs. vs. only 4% percent European dna [b]hurts your claims, although i admit it's beating a dead horse, and, since you are now moving on to another miscomprehended genetic study quote, let's continue......[/B]

---

My claims? It's hurts the Eurocetric claims who see North Africans as Caucasoid (white) people.

However recent genetic studies indicate that Berbers do not belong to the European cluster. They do not to the sub-Saharan cluster either.

posted 14 November 2004 05:37 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
basically, almost; (?) sounds like you are pleading, and even then your own citation clearly contradicts you....

---

Dude i suggest you to take reading classes...

Y-chromosome analysis in Egypt suggests a genetic regional continuity in Northeastern Africa.

posted 14 November 2004 06:03 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
According to genetic studies undetaken in the last 10 years the great majority in North African do not cluster with sub-Saharan Africans or southern Europeans. The are closer to Near Easterns.

---

What does "Near Eastern" comprise of?

quote:

---

Orionix:
According to genetic researches it is possible that Yemenis were the ancestors of the Berbers:

---

You keep forgetting that the Yemeni are heterogeneous, and also with ancestors from East Africa.

quote:

---

as referenced by Orionix:
1. Genetic differentiation of Yemeni people according to rhesus and Gm polymorphisms.

Chaabani H, Sanchez-Mazas A, Sallami SF.

Laboratoire de Genetique Humaine, Faculte de Pharmacie de Monastir, 5000 Monastir, Tunisia. hassen.chaabani@fphm.rnu.tn

For introducing Yemeni population in synthesis of genetic relationships of human populations, analysis of rhesus and Gm polymorphisms have been carried out for a population sample of 210 Yemenites. Rhesus haplotype frequencies were compared to those estimated in an original sample of 171 Tunisians and to available data for other populations. Gm haplotype frequencies were introduced in a wide synthesis of genetic relationships for 67 populations from Africa, Europe, the Near East and India. The genetic profile of Yemeni people would be close to that of a highly diversified ancestral population. The first inhabitants of North Africa, the Berbers and Yemenites have very likely a common origin and were not subject to important genetic drift after their geographic differentiation. While, the divergence between Yemenites and their neighbours of sub-Saharan Africa would have occurred with a founder effect and a long isolation. An important parallelism is observed for the Gm system between genetic and linguistic differentiations

---

You need much more than this, to show strong affinity between Yemeni and Berbers (whom are diverse). Need the specific data of the haplotypes, that suggest their strong affinity and how Yemenites are the ancestors of Berbers. Need to know which samples, from which specific countries and populations. The only country mentioned here is Tunisia, with 171 subjects. Need to be specific.

posted 14 November 2004 06:31 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
You need much more than this, to show strong affinity between Yemeni and Berbers (whom are diverse). Need the specific data of the haplotypes, that suggest their strong affinity and how Yemenites are the ancestors of Berbers. Need to know which samples, from which specific countries and populations. The only country mentioned here is Tunisia, with 171 subjects. Need to be specific.

---

Man your insistence is very unrelevant. 171 subjects is way enough.

I showed you enough genetic studies.

Population Genetics doesn't work this way, they just use scientific sampling between populations.

You could not found 1 genetic study to support your argument about North Africans being black Africans.

posted 14 November 2004 06:35 PM            

quote:

---

Y-chromosome analysis in Egypt suggests a genetic regional continuity in Northeastern Africa.

---

Orionix: That is the title appended to the study, not the study itself, and althought it's reasonable to use continuity in the context of continual "waves of immigration";

It is the genetic change due to waves of immigration that are actually documented as causal of genetic change (and I concur) and thereby refuting what you want to suggest- genetic stasis or homogeniety. Which is decidely NOT what is documented therin.

Sorry, but again, your own sources rebuke you. By the way, that has also been a continuous process in this discussion.

posted 14 November 2004 06:41 PM            

quote:

---

I showed you enough genetic studies.

---

However you have proven:

* a lack of comprehension about the subject you drone on about.

* a lack of intellectual honesty so much so as to resort to fabrication of data in and attempt to support your conclusions.

posted 14 November 2004 07:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Orionix: That is the title appended to the study, not the study itself, and althought it's reasonable to use continuity in the context of continual "waves of immigration";

It is the genetic change due to waves of immigration that are actually documented as [b]causal of genetic change (and I concur) and thereby refuting what you want to suggest- genetic stasis or homogeniety. Which is decidely NOT what is documented therin.

Sorry, but again, your own sources rebuke you. By the way, that has also been a continuous process in this discussion.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 14 November 2004).][/B]

---

The Hadramawt of Yemen are very close to Ethiopians.

We have evidences that mainly females migrated from eastern African to southern Arabia and than back to eastern Africa.

Taken together, these results indicate that historical male-mediated gene flow from Ethiopia to Yemen has been low, in striking contrast to the results from mtDNA (maternal lineage). This seems likely to be true for other parts of the Near East, too, again in contrast to the pattern from mtDNA.

The mtDNAs of sub-Saharan origin that are present in Near Eastern populations show a striking phylogeographic pattern. They are virtually restricted to Arab populations, occurring at 35% in the Yemen Hadramawt and 10%15% in other Arab populations. They are absent or almost so from Turks, Armenians, Azeris, Georgians, and Near Eastern Jews and present at lower levels in Turkish Kurds. In Europe, they are detected at appreciable levels only in regions which experienced Arab rule during the medieval period. This pattern suggests that most female gene flow from sub-Saharan Africa into the Near East probably took place relatively recently, within the last 2,500 years. Y-chromosome data indicate that recent male gene flow was substantially less. This appears to be the case even for the Yemen, where more than a third of mtDNAs derive from Africa.

In summary, these results are consistent with mainly female migration from eastern Africa into Arab communities within the last few thousand years. There have been many opportunities for such migrations between eastern Africa and southern Arabia during this period. However, the most likely explanation for the presence of predominantly female lineages of African origin in other parts of the Arab world is that these may trace back to women brought from Africa as part of the Arab slave trade, assimilated into the Arabian population as a result of miscegenation and manumission. Indeed, unlike the situation in the Americas, there are no substantial communities of African descent in the Near East today. This is thought to be because relatively few menmainly employed in manual labor and military service or castrated and employed as eunuchsleft descendants. Women, by contrast, were imported specifically for the sexual gratification of élite males and for their reproductive potential. The practice of manumission meant that their offspring were born free. Female slaves were, therefore, readily integrated into Islamic society (Lewis 1992; Segal 2001).

Extensive Female-Mediated Gene Flow from Sub-Saharan Africa into Near Eastern Arab Populations

*In the AJHG, some recent genetic studies are electronically accessible only 6 month after publication (in case you're not a subscriber).

posted 14 November 2004 07:13 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
Man your insistence is very unrelevant. 171 subjects is way enough.

---

What do you mean my insistence is irrelevant, when you have been bombarding us with irrelevant studies, just so you can prove to us that Egyptians weren't black. It is for the same reason, you've decided to focus on the Horn of Africa genetic variations. Nobody here has ever said entire North African populations are black, but that Upper Egypt population was and still is predominantly black. You had to agree several times, given that you exhausted your "resources" for proving otherwise. But then, you try to look from another angle, only to be discredited again.

Moreover, the 171 samples you are talking about, is from only one country; Tunisia. Is that suppose to provide the data for all Berbers? You are also leaving out linguistic and specifics of the gene types, that is suppose to prove your point that the Yemeni are indeed the ancestors of Berbers. You still haven't even provided the statistics that supports your assertion that Berbers are the predominant North Africans.

quote:

---

Orionix:
You could not found 1 genetic study to support your argument about North Africans being black Africans.

---

Nor did I setout to look for one, because I never said or argued for North Africans being entirely black. That was something you futilely setout to do. All this, having no bearing on southern origins of the Nile Valley civilization by tropical Africans (Black Africans).

posted 14 November 2004 07:30 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
and in so doing completely disproven your own thesis,

However you have proven:

* a lack of comprehension about the subject you drone on about.

* a lack of intellectual honesty so much so as to resort to fabrication of data in and attempt to support your conclusions.

So you see, we are fair here, and give credit where it is due.

---

Al least i have represented more than enough evidences to support my arguments while you were just trolling around, make a compelete ignorant of yourself.

And of course most genetic studies undertaken so far prove me to be right about 5 things:

1. Most North African Berbers do not cluster together with the SS sub-Straum nor with with present-day southern European populations.

2. Most present-day Ethiopians share more in common (both culturally and genetically) with southern Arabians than with other SS Africans (Hadramawt). This is true since ~2,500 years ago.

3. There is genetic regional continuity in Egypt, since medieval times to present day.

4. The origin of present-day Upper Egyptian populations is probably eastern Africa (or the Sahara).

5. The existence of various migratory events from eastern Africa to: A. North Africa and B. Iberian Europe in Neolithic times c. The Middle East and back to Africa are undeniable.

I guess this sums it up...

posted 14 November 2004 07:44 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
What do you mean my insistence is irrelevant, when you have been bombarding us with irrelevant studies, just so you can prove to us that Egyptians weren't black. It is for the same reason, you've decided to focus on the Horn of Africa genetic variations. Nobody here has ever said entire North African populations are black, but that Upper Egypt population was and still is predominantly black. You had to agree several times, given that you exhausted your "resources" for proving otherwise. But then, you try to look from another angle, only to be discredited again.

Moreover, the 171 samples you are talking about, is from only one country; Tunisia. Is that suppose to provide the data for all Berbers? You are also leaving out linguistic and specifics of the gene types, that is suppose to prove your point that the Yemeni are indeed the ancestors of Berbers. You still haven't even provided the statistics that supports your assertion that Berbers are the predominant North Africans.

---

Upper Egyptians are dominatly black but they were only part of ancient Egypt.

You might be right about the fact that the Neolithic ancestors (from 8,000 BC) of predynastic Egyptians were from eastern Africa or the Sahara but this is only the first part of the picture.

We have archeological evidences of Neolithic cultures which took place in Lower Egypt (in the area of the Nille Delta) since 5,000 BC while in the same time there were cultures in Upper Egypt.

Now who dominated who is not important. During or after dynasy 0 after King Menes united the land Lower Nubia remained quiet weak.

posted 14 November 2004 07:59 PM            

quote:

---

1. Most North African Berbers do not cluster together with the SS sub-Straum nor with with present-day southern European populations.

---

quote:

---

2. Most present-day Ethiopians share more in common (both culturally and genetically) with southern Arabians than with other SS Africans (Hadramawt). This is true since ~2,500 years ago.

---

quote:

---

3. There is genetic regional continuity in Egypt, since medieval times to present day.

---

quote:

---

4. The origin of present-day Upper Egyptian populations is probably eastern Africa (or the Sahara).

---

quote:

---

5. The existence of various migratory events from eastern Africa to: A. North Africa and B. Iberian Europe in Neolithic times c. The Middle East and back to Africa are undeniable.

---

quote:

---

I guess this sums it up...

---

posted 14 November 2004 07:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
Upper Egyptians are dominatly black but they were only part of ancient Egypt.
[This message has been edited by Orionix (edited 14 November 2004).]

---

Thought Writes:

If you :

1) Agree that the Upper Egyptians were Black

2) Agree that Egyptian civilization began in Upper Egypt

3) Agree that there was an Egyptian state BEFORE Upper Egyptians conquered the Delta

posted 14 November 2004 07:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by supercar:
Nor did I setout to look for one, because I never said or argued for North Africans being entirely black. That was something you futilely setout to do. All this, having no bearing on southern origins of the Nile Valley civilization by tropical Africans (Black Africans).

---

The origin of Nille Valley civilization was probably Nubia (present-day Sahara).

However this doesn't mean that black Nubians were the dominant part in ancient Egypt above other people, except a number of dynasties.

This is only part of the picture.

posted 14 November 2004 08:05 PM            

quote:

---

However this doesn't mean that black Nubians

---

posted 14 November 2004 08:06 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thought2:
Thought Writes:

If you :

1) Agree that the Upper Egyptians were Black

2) Agree that Egyptian civilization began in Upper Egypt

3) Agree that there was an Egyptian state BEFORE Upper Egyptians conquered the Delta

Then you have to agree that the original Egyptians were Black!

---

posted 14 November 2004 08:10 PM            

quote:

---

Then you have to agree that the original Egyptians were Black!

---

Thought, he has already admitted and said exactly that...long ago in this thread. He just doesn't like the truth and so needs to argue about it for some reasion.

posted 14 November 2004 08:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Nubia is geography in early dynastic times, not ethnicity, so this also moot.

---

posted 14 November 2004 08:15 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Orionix:
And of course most genetic studies undertaken so far prove me to be right about 5 things

---

...that you weren't arguing for to begin with.

quote:

---

Orionix:
1. Most North African Berbers do not cluster together with the SS sub-Straum nor with with present-day southern European populations.

---

...supposed to be your argument for North African Berbers not being black, but being more related to (inferred) homogenous "North Easterners", which your studies again fall short of vindicating.

quote:

---

Orionix:
2. Most present-day Ethiopians share more in common (both culturally and genetically) with southern Arabians than with other SS Africans (Hadramawt). This is true since ~2,500 years ago.

---

...cultures which you still haven't pointed out, and the genetics which is used in a flawed manner to prove that Ethiopians aren't black Africans, because the reality is that Ethiopians do indeed have strong affinities with other Sub-Saharan Africans in their neighborhood. Conclusion: Ethiopians are black Africans, and your studies don't suggest otherwise.

quote:

---

Orionix:
3. There is genetic regional continuity in Egypt, since medieval times to present day.

---

...actually in no way proves your fallacious claim that the population remained the same, throughout the years.

quote:

---

Orionix:
4. The origin of present-day Upper Egyptian populations is probably eastern Africa (or the Sahara).

---

...which you have actually second guessed many times, in your quest to deny Upper Egyptians being mainly black Africans.

quote:

---

Orionix:
5. The existence of various migratory events from eastern Africa to: A. North Africa and B. Iberian Europe in Neolithic times c. The Middle East and back to Africa are undeniable.

---

...which is actually supposed to support your ideology of Ethiopians not being black Africans, in which case your studies fall short of disproving.

quote:

---

Orionix:
I guess this sums it up...

---

Your inability to make sense, or prove that you aren't racist, or discuss in a civilized manner, or stick with points relevant to the subject matter and issues raised.

posted 14 November 2004 08:22 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Thought, he has already admitted and said exactly that...long ago in this thread. He just doesn't like the truth and so needs to argue about it for some reasion.

The mental process seems to be that if you argue against the truth, maybe you can make it go away.

---

I agreed with you that the Neolithic inhabitants of Upper Egypt were from what is the present-day Egypro-Sudanane boarder.

However this is only part of the picture since during Dinasty 0 (3100-2925) Egyptian scirpt developed, Upper and Lower Nubia became united while Lower Nubia became weaker.

posted 14 November 2004 08:28 PM            

After the merging of Upper and Lower Egypt does not necessarily meant that both shared a cultural proximity towards each other. We hear reports from at late as the Second dyansty that the Northern[Lower] part of Egypt has invaded into Nekhen, Khasekhmwy on his statue bases shows the bodies of contorted bodies of enemies from northern Egypt. Such early examples would be the rekhyt of the Scrpion mace head and palette from Narmer. Images of the Delta dwellers or marshmen were shown on the Narmer palette.

Egypt in times of disunity retracted back to a tribal base of nomarchs. During the Late Old Kingdom Egypt was divided amungst lines of nomarchs. Around this time there were nomes that united with each other,and others like the nome in Thebes[Waset] that chose to stay independent from the country. Some nomes like in Edufu chose not to alingn themselves with any particular nomes.

Trade with Lower and Upper Nubia was important to the 5th and 6th dyansty pharaohs based on exotic goods. This trade had been going on since the pre-dyanstic era,and continued until the very close of Egypt. Read the Autobiography of Harkhuf, a local govenor of Aswan, to see that donkey caravans went all the way to Dongola to a mysterious place the Egyptians called Yam. Around Luxor-Farshut there was an ancient road that connected donkey caravans to trade with Yam. Even interpreters of the language of the Yamites.

You had friendly and hostile Nubian groups. Harkhuf even uses the local assistance of the people of Yam to protect against the more hostile nomadic tribes.

posted 14 November 2004 08:29 PM            

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Orionix:
I guess this sums it up...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your inability to make sense, or prove that you aren't racist, or discuss in a civilized manner, or stick with points relevant to the subject matter and issues raised.

---