posted 25 January 2005 07:56 AM            

• "...results here are not indicative of anything, except a general non-African nature for all these skulls. Display of POPKIN distances (infra) reinforces this and seems to find nearer neighbors among such more generalized populations as Peru, Guam, or Ainu, but also Europeans or even Easter Island.

  "Remembering that the Teita series (Bantu speakers of southeastern Kenya), and the recent East African skulls in table 4 above, do clearly exhibit African affiliations, it is fair to say, contra Rightmire, that there seems to be no clear continuity here in late prehistory. On the broad scale, looking at an 'Out-of-Africa' scenario, one would expect that, in some region between southern and northeastern Africa, some differentiation would have been taking place within a Homo sapiens stock, evolving into something beginning to approximate later Sub-Saharan peoples on the one hand, and evolving in another direction on the other hand. East Africa would be a likely locale for appearance of the latter. So anyone is welcome to argue that this is what Elmenteita et al. are manifesting. The ensuing picture for East Africa, that is to say, would later have been changed through replacement by the expansion of Bantu or other 'Negroid' tribes." [2]
  

To put it simply, pre-historic East Africans were proto-Caucasoid and proto-Mongoloid in race, carrying the blueprints, as it were, for modern non-African races. But they were not in any way Negroid. The black race formed independently after part of the original stock branched off into West Africa, and Negroid types didn't begin disseminating until c.1000 B.C., long after the last wave of African migrants had left the continent (including E3b-carriers 26,000 years ago). Hence, these migrants were not related to present-day sub-Saharan Africans, but belonged to a separate stock which has now been mostly replaced in Southeastern Africa.

[1] W.W. Howells (1989) Skull shapes and the map: craniometric analyses in the dispersion of modern Homo. Peabody Museum Papers 79:1-189.

[2] W.W. Howells (1995) Who's who in skulls: ethnic identification of crania from measurements. Peabody Museum Papers 82:1-108.

posted 25 January 2005 08:09 AM            

• "...results here are not indicative of anything, except [b]a general non-African nature for all these skulls. Display of POPKIN distances (infra) reinforces this and seems to find nearer neighbors among such more generalized populations as Peru, Guam, or Ainu, but also Europeans or even Easter Island.

  "Remembering that the Teita series (Bantu speakers of southeastern Kenya), and the recent East African skulls in table 4 above, do clearly exhibit African affiliations, it is fair to say, contra Rightmire, that there seems to be no clear continuity here in late prehistory. On the broad scale, looking at an 'Out-of-Africa' scenario, one would expect that, in some region between southern and northeastern Africa, some differentiation would have been taking place within a Homo sapiens stock, evolving into something beginning to approximate later Sub-Saharan peoples on the one hand, and evolving in another direction on the other hand. East Africa would be a likely locale for appearance of the latter. So anyone is welcome to argue that this is what Elmenteita et al. are manifesting. The ensuing picture for East Africa, that is to say, would later have been changed through replacement by the expansion of Bantu or other 'Negroid' tribes." [2]
  

To put it simply, pre-historic East Africans were proto-Caucasoid and proto-Mongoloid in race, carrying the blueprints, as it were, for modern non-African races. But they were not in any way Negroid. The black race formed independently after part of the original stock branched off into West Africa, and Negroid types didn't begin disseminating until c.1000 B.C., long after the last wave of African migrants had left the continent (including E3b-carriers 26,000 years ago). Hence, these migrants were not related to present-day sub-Saharan Africans, but belonged to a separate stock which has now been mostly replaced in Southeastern Africa.

[1] W.W. Howells (1989) Skull shapes and the map: craniometric analyses in the dispersion of modern Homo. Peabody Museum Papers 79:1-189.

[2] W.W. Howells (1995) Who's who in skulls: ethnic identification of crania from measurements. Peabody Museum Papers 82:1-108.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2004/09/racial-affinities-of-prehistoric-east.html[/B][/QUOT E]

posted 25 January 2005 09:00 AM            

quote:

---

When an idea is wanting, a word can always be found to take its place.
- Johoann W. von Goethe ( 1749-1832)

---

Jean Hiernaux
The People of Africa(Peoples of the World Series)
The oldest remains of Homo sapiens sapiens found in East Africa were associated with an industry having similarities with the Capsian. It has been called Upper Kenyan Capsian, although its derivation from the North African Capsian is far from certain. At Gamble's Cave in Kenya, five human skeletons were associated with a late phase of the industry, Upper Kenya Capsian C, which contains pottery. A similar associationis presumed for a skeleton found at Olduvai, which resembles those from Gamble's Cave. The date of Upper Kenya Capsian C is not precisely known (an earlier phase from Prospect Farm on Eburru Mountain close to Gamble's Cave has been dated to about 8000 BC); but the presence of pottery indicates a rather later date, perhaps around 400 BC. The skeletons are of very tall people. They had long, narrow heads, and relatively long, narrow faces. The nose was of medium width; and prognathism, when present, was restricted to the alveolar, or tooth-bearing, region......all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions.............
From the foregoing, it is tempting to locate the area of differentiation of these people in the interior of East Africa. There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. Neither of these populations, fossil and modern, should be considered to be closely related to the populations of Europe and western Asia.

Since this was written in the '70's it has been clearly proven that most Africans, including Cushites and Bantu [speakers] have a common ancestry, defined by E3 (Pn2 clade) chromosome and it's child hapolotypes E3a and E3b.
http://www.geogene.com/images/geogeneYwallchart.pdf http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/Forum8/HTML/001387.html

rasol wrote:

quote:

---

To understand why Euro-eccentrics need to assert that Black East Africans are 'caucasian' we need to go back to the origin of the caucasian race classification system by Johann Blumenbach.

Blumenbach's central idea was that whites, originating in the caucasus regions of Eurasia were the first and most highly evolved race, other 'races' from Jews, on 'down' to Blacks, were degenerate from the pure white race.

Coon maintained that the caucasoid race evolved 200,000 years before the Congoloid http://comm.colorado.edu/jjackson/research/coon.pdf#search='Congoid'

As anthropological findings began to demonstrate the 'opposite', that in fact Black Africans were the original peoples,this idea was exploded.

So several different bad ideas were postulated in order to continue to assert the racial superiority of whites.

One claim was that whites were the progeny of a unique and separate lineage from early African hominids.

Another claim was that Africans constitute 'proto' caucasians - primative froms of whites.

Imagine Blumenbach's ideas as a line sloping down and rightward \.

Reading left to right Caucasian would be at the top and first. Negro would be at the bottom and last. [deginerate]

This idea now being very obviously ridiculous [even on white supremacist websites]...
simply make a mirror inverted image of the line -> /.

Now it slopes from the lower left to the upper right.

'Negro' is 1st, yes... but still least [proto]; 'caucasian' is last but greatest.

Now you are consistant with at least the most basic of anthropological realities regarding human origins.

However, both bad ideas depend ultimately on racial narcisism and grandstanding.

Whites are no different than any other non-African people. They migrated out of Africa 50-100 kya and adapted to their respective enviroment. Most of the physical features, except for the de-melanated skin tones can be found amongst Africans for the same reason that most of the features of most people on Earth can be found in Africa.

Europeans are not different or special in any way. They do not define a source point origin of a 'race-group', but rather one of many small African derived outlets.

This is deflating to the ethno-egocentricism of some Europeans who will invent and convince themselves of the most far-fetched nonsenses rather than face the facts of modern bioanthropology.

Genetics reveals most Africans ranging from Somali to Zulu and including Ancient 'Egyptians and Nubians'to be of common descent via haplogroup 'E3'. E3 haplotype is not native to Europe, and Europeans, including the majority of Nordic types most geographically and genetically distant, and somatically different from Africans are E3 negligable.

This is because E3 first entered Europe as genetic admixture from somatically tropically adapted [Black] Africans at a critical juncture in history associated with the dawn of civilisation:

There are at least seven or eight ­ maybe eleven to thirteen ­ world regions which independently invented agriculture. None in Europe, by the way. - Chistopher Ehret.

No wonder then, that Eurocentrists need to make honorary pseudo-scientific whites out of Black East Africans.

Proto-Caucasianism is desperate dogma flying in the face of the facts; an old exploded idea, patched up from rubble, cobbled together piecemeal and given a new name.

---

posted 26 January 2005 08:01 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by fromashes_rise:
hi euro

so are you saying ancient nubians/kushites ethiopians/egyptians are caucasians?

---

That's a separate and more complicated issue. What I'm saying -- actually, what Howells is saying -- is that pre-historic East Africans were more racially similar to contemporary European and Asian peoples than they were to contemporary African peoples. And it makes perfect sense because these East Africans were the direct ancestors of all non-African races. There's no reason that they should ever have resembled Negroids, who developed much later in West Africa.

posted 26 January 2005 08:28 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
That's a separate and more complicated issue. What I'm saying -- actually, what Howells is saying -- is that pre-historic East Africans were more racially similar to contemporary European and Asian peoples than they were to contemporary African peoples. And it makes perfect sense because these East Africans were the direct ancestors of all non-African races. There's no reason that they should ever have resembled Negroids, who developed much later in West Africa.

---

You are still continueing this. It was proven that Ethiopoids are NOT Caucasoids. This race originates in Central Asia, Ethiopians originate from Ethiopia.

quote:

---

What happened in Neolithic and historical times was 1) back-migrations of Middle Eastern Caucasoids into Northern and Eastern Africa, and 2) the spread of Negroid peoples into the Eastern and Southern regions of the continent. This latter process coincided with all of the cultures you mentioned, so that Ethiopians, Egyptians and Nubians would have received different degrees of Negroid influence over the course of their development.

---

1) Proven Wrong. You have never even proven this, but it has been proven that the earliest migration was South-to-North. This is why Italians and Greece carry Africoid or East African origin genes.

posted 26 January 2005 09:05 AM            

quote:

---

It is obvious that East Africans have a substantial amount of Caucasian and/or Mongoloid genes.

---

East Africa is highly diverse, some populations have West Asian haplotypes and some do not.

relevant post from Thought:

quote:

---

The Model For The Peopling Of The Egyptian Nile

1) North Africans and all non-Africans descend from a Sub-Saharan East African background.

Tishkoff et al.

2) Sub-Saharan East Africa is in tropical Africa.

3) Glogger’s Rule indicates that Sub-Saharan East Africans would be dark skinned.

4) Humans traveled out of Africa via the Nile Valley, settling along the way.

Luis et al. 2004

5) The most recent wave out of Sub-Saharan East Africa occurred during the early Holocene. This is supported in the genetic record (E-M78), archaeological record (micro-burins and grind stones), linguistics (Afro-Asiatic language origin in Horn and spread TO Eurasia), and skeletal remains (“Negroid” nasal and mouth forms in Neolithic Greece).

6) Population size was larger in Africa than elsewhere prior to the Neolithic period. Hence the direction of the population feed between Africa and Eurasia would be mainly one going FROM Africa to Eurasia.

Source:

Relethford, J.H. and Jorde, L.B. (1999) Genetic evidence for larger African population size during recent human evolution. Am. J. Phys. Anthrop., 108, 251–260.

7) This early Holocene migration from Sub-Saharan East Africa was the main source of the peopling of Egypt and the Maghreb with some spill over into the Fertile Crescent and the Aegean.

Keita et al. 2004

8) The Natufians of the Levant had genetic characteristics and physical features that linked them with East Africans. Hence any back migration from this region would have brought populations that resembled East Africans back into Africa!

9) The two main genetic clusters found in Modern Egypt are Haplogroups E (E-M2, E-M78 and E-M81) and J-M267. The E clusters are all originate within Sub-Saharan East Africa or Central Africa. E-M81 derived from the ancestral East African E-M35 lineage that spread to North Africa along with E-M78 during the early Holocene. J-M267 is derived from the Arab invasion. Hence f we deduct J-M267 from the pool that would have existed during the Pharonic period we can see that the Ancient Egyptians were primarily of a early Holocene East African origin.

---

posted 26 January 2005 09:25 AM            

quote:

---

What I'm saying -- actually, what Howells is saying --

---

quote:

---

And it makes perfect sense because these East Africans were the direct ancestors of all non-African races.

---

Ancient Africans are the ancestors of all peoples....'period', and so cannot be catagorized teleologically as precursor to 'races' that did not exist at that time....even based upon the flawed assumption that said races exist today.

Here is a critical assessment of Howell's fallacious methodology:

Assessment of classification of crania using Fordisc 2.0: Nubian X-Group Test.

J. Edwards, A. Leathers, et al.

...based on Howell’s sampling Fordisc 2.0 authors state that "there are no races, only populations," yet it is clear that Howell was intent on providing known groups that would be distributed among the continental "racial" groups.

We tested the accuracy and effectiveness of Fordisc 2.0 using twelve cranial measurements from a homogeneous population from the X-Group period of Sudanese Nubia (350CE-550CE). When the Fordisc program classified the adult X-Group crania, only 51 (57.3%) of 89 individuals were classified within groups from Africa. Others were placed in such diverse groups as Polynesian (11.24%), European (7.86%), Japanese (4.49%), Native American (3.37%), Peruvian (3.36%), Australian (1.12), Tasmanian (1.12%), and Melanesian (1.12%). The implications of these findings suggest that classifying populations, whether by geography or by "race", is not morphologically or biologically accurate because of the wide variation even in homogeneous populations.

posted 26 January 2005 10:42 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
That's a separate and more complicated issue. What I'm saying -- actually, what Howells is saying -- is that pre-historic East Africans were more racially similar to contemporary European and Asian peoples than they were to contemporary African peoples. And it makes perfect sense because these East Africans were the direct ancestors of all non-African races. There's no reason that they should ever have resembled Negroids, who developed much later in West Africa.

What happened in Neolithic and historical times was 1) back-migrations of Middle Eastern Caucasoids into Northern and Eastern Africa, and 2) the spread of Negroid peoples into the Eastern and Southern regions of the continent. This latter process coincided with all of the cultures you mentioned, so that Ethiopians, Egyptians and Nubians would have received different degrees of Negroid influence over the course of their development.

---

I cannot help but notice how you carefully avoid my posts. Thats the best indication that what you're saying is bullshit.

posted 26 January 2005 11:08 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
I cannot help but notice how you carefully avoid my posts.

---

posted 26 January 2005 03:05 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
You reason and write like a child. And your reading comprehension is poor. Please stop addressing me.

---

Wait a second, wasn't it you that had poor reading comprehension earlier, not to mention the frequent BS, and the usual habit of ignoring facts presented to you. Quit trying to place your bad qualities on others. I suggest you to read the earlier replies to your posts, especially those by S.Mohammad.

The reply that I have made did not need to be presented with the prior proof presented by others. This is because your Mickey Mouse theories been proven false. Instead of wasting time (now I am wondering if you actually have a life?), why don't you post arguments that...

i) Coherent: YOU are intellectually bankrupt troll. Let's not forget you lacking the ability to read your sources correctly.]

ii) Strong:
There is no need for recycled junk. We know you love the Ethiopians, and want them to prove that they are 'Caucasoid', but you have clearly failed. Move on to Atlantis.

Next time you really need to start grasping the facts that has been presented. You will actually do a much better job in this discussion if you update yourself.

Allow me to Rehash:

1) E3b originated in Sub-Saharan Africa, not the Caucasus.

2) Phenotypically, Ethiopians are not Caucasoid, but Black. It would make more sense if it was the other way around.

posted 26 January 2005 03:39 PM            

It is obvious that East Africans have a substantial amount of Caucasian and/or Mongoloid genes. Two eyes in one's head are all that is needed to see that. That may well be why they were able to build a complex society like Nubia and make a contribution to ancient egypt as well.

posted 27 January 2005 07:25 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
Here is a critical assessment of Howell's fallacious methodology:

Assessment of classification of crania using Fordisc 2.0: Nubian X-Group Test.

[i]J. Edwards, A. Leathers, et al.

...based on Howell’s sampling Fordisc 2.0 authors state that "there are no races, only populations," yet it is clear that Howell was intent on providing known groups that would be distributed among the continental "racial" groups.

---

Maybe they'd have more credibility if they weren't such overt race-deniers and could spell Howells' name right. Anyway, his findings are based on two different methods that are in perfect agreement:

"The DISPOP results here are not indicative of anything, except a general non-African nature for all these skulls. Display of POPKIN distances (infra) reinforces this and seems to find nearer neighbors among such more generalized populations as Peru, Guam, or Ainu, but also Europeans or even Easter Island."

posted 27 January 2005 07:30 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
I cannot help but notice how you carefully avoid my posts. Thats the best indication that what you're saying is bullshit.

---

posted 27 January 2005 07:44 AM            

quote:

---

Maybe they'd have more credibility if they weren't such overt race-deniers and could spell Howells' name right.

---

quote:

---

So whether you believe in races or not, this basic fact stands: Out-of-Africa migrants and Bantu-expansion Africans represent two physically distinct populations

---

Regarding ancient East Africans:
all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. They should not be considered closely related to Europeans - Jean Hiernaux, the People of Africa.

We keep repeating the facts because you don't engage them, but rather use red herring and straw argument to evade. Most unimpressive.

posted 27 January 2005 07:52 AM            

THERES NO FREAKING WAY ANY AFRICAN FROM ANY PART OF EGYPT WEN IT ALL STARTED ORIGINATED FROM CAUCASIONS WHEN THEY EXIST BECAUSE OF THE AFRICANS

THIS IS FREAKING DUMB AND STUPID THERE IS IS NO SUCH THINGS AS ANY RACE ON THIS EARTH ORIGINATING FROM THE CAUCASION RACE ALL RACES ARE BEFORE THE EXISTENCE OF THIS RACE PERIOD POINT BLANK DNA HAS PROVED IT IN FACT WHITE SCHOLARS WILL ADMIT THIS QUICKLY TOO MANY WHITE PEOPLE I KNOW SAY EVERYONE HAS CONNECTIONS TO THE BLACK AFRICANS EVEN THE WHITEST PEOPLE FROM THE NETHERLANDS

posted 27 January 2005 02:26 PM            

*In two earlier studies of Cole's ('28) series from Mechta-el-Arbi (Briggs, '50, '51), and a third of Mouhaad 5(Briggs, '53), I have called attention already to certain "Boskopoid" characters in some members of our Type B females series.*

(Briggs, Stone Age Races of Northwest Africa, pg 62)

posted 27 January 2005 02:45 PM            

quote:

---

For Evil Euro: Cabot Briggs said that Type B Northwest Africans had Negroid traits and 'Boskopoid' traits. Boskop Man is believed to be abcestral to modern day Bushmen.

---

posted 28 January 2005 12:43 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
No problem. Add the Khoisan to the ever expanding list of caucasoids, along with the Nubians, the Gabonese Bantu, the Siwa.....Hey, in for a penny, in for a pound.

---

I'm laughing at Evil Euro because Lawrence Angel said Nubian and Bushmen traits were found in Natufian crania which is the SAME thing that Briggs says in his book. Natufian crania were very similar to Type b as i've already pointed out. Thought said the SAME thing in another debate with Dienekes sometime ago. I have more quotes but I'll defer somewhat and let Evil Euro make an even bigger ass out of himself.

posted 28 January 2005 01:06 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by fromashes_rise:

are you saying you must have white blood to make complex societys?

---

posted 28 January 2005 01:57 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by fromashes_rise:

are you saying you must have white blood to make complex societys?

---

posted 28 January 2005 07:45 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
translation: i can't dispute their critique of Howells's's's work, so i will distract with a red herring and move on. weak

---

Maybe the reason Nubian crania couldn't be clearly classified is that Nubians are a very mixed group. Howells was able to accurately classify modern Kenyan skulls as fully African. But when he compared them to pre-historic Kenyan skulls, he found significant differences. It's really not rocket science.

quote:

---

Regarding ancient East Africans:
all their features can be found in several living populations of East Africa, like the Tutsi of Rwanda and Burundi, who are very dark skinned and differ greatly from Europeans in a number of body proportions There is every reason to believe that they are ancestral to the living 'Elongated East Africans'. They should not be considered closely related to Europeans - Jean Hiernaux, the People of Africa.

---

posted 28 January 2005 07:56 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by S.Mohammad:

...Type B which fits, in all essential respects, the usual definition of the Mediterranean racial type, but sometimes shows also certain morphological peculiarities commonly known as "Boskopid," as well as Negroid features among females. Type B therefore was classified as African Mediterranean...It may have well acquired its "Boskopid" traits on the road, near the headwaters of the Nile, and kidnapped a few Negro or heavily Negroid women on its way west before turning northward into Northwest Africa. The peculiar characteristics of such women could have been restricted largely to females, at least for a time, by artificial selection in the form of preferential mating.

(Briggs, Stone Age Races of Northwest Africa, pgs 81,89)

---

Do you ever bother to read what you post? All that passage says is that Type B individuals absorbed minor Negroid elements when they migrated across the Sahara, not that Type B is Negroid. In fact, it reiterates that Type B in its unaltered form is a "Mediterranean racial type", like Angel's Type B:

posted 28 January 2005 07:57 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
I don't doubt that modern East Africans are descended from ancient ones, but Hiernaux fails to account for the demographic impact of the Bantu expansion.

---

Wrong, I have Hiernaux's book and I can post that he in fact DID account for the Bantu expansion, don't make assumptions you cannot support asd you did with Briggs book

quote:

---

The reason the Tutsi are so dark and different from Europeans is that they've been absorbing West African racial elements since 1000 BC. This, too, isn't rocket science.

---

Wrong, Hiernaux said that even if a West African element was present in the Tutsi, if it were subtracted, the Tutsi would be even MORE differentiated from Europeans and West Asians, so you're still wrong, once again! MORON!

posted 28 January 2005 08:03 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stupid Euro:
I don't doubt that modern East Africans are descended from ancient ones, but Hiernaux fails to account for the demographic impact of the Bantu expansion. The reason the Tutsi are so dark and different from Europeans is that they've been absorbing West African racial elements since 1000 BC. This, too, isn't rocket science.

---

Stupid Euro once again puts his foot in his mouth:

The Tutsi and Hutu have intermixed to some degree but, as groups, they reamin strikingly different. The Tutsi exhibit 'Hamitic' facial features to a marked degree. Do they systematically differ from the Hutu in the direction of Caucasoids?

The Tutsi are taller than the Hutu by nearly ten centimetres; the average male stature is 176 cm. such tallness is by no means characteristic of North Africa or Western Asia: for example, the inhabitants of the central plateau of Yemen have an average stature of 164 cm. In skin colour, the Tutsi are darker than the Hutu, in the reverse direction to that leading to the caucasoids. Lip thickness provides a similar case: on an average the lips of the Tutsi are thicker than those of the Hutu. In most cases, however, they are not everted as in many West Africans. Like that of the Hutu, the hair of the Tutsi is spiralled(perhaps less tightly so, but this has not been quantified).

In detailed study, relative growth in the two groups and in Europeans has been compared. In the development of a number of body proportions with age, which appears to be largely determined by heredity, the Tutsi are more different from Europeans than the Hutu[96]. In cephalic index, the Hutu are nearer to Yemenites than the Tutsi, whose long, narrow head makes their index lower than that of the other two groups..............

These comparisons do not lend support to the idea that the Tutsi are a mixture of Caucasoids and West Africans. If the West African element, introduced by mixing with the Hutu, were subtracted, their physique would differ even more from North Africans or Western Asians. Apparently, either 'Hamitic' facial features developed in the Tutsi's ancestral line independently of any exotic source or, if an exotic element was introduced, it was such a long time ago that selection has thoroughly remodelled the resulting gene pool. Even if the second hypothesis was correct, the physical appearance of the Tutsi would result from evolution which took place in sub-Saharan Africa.

Jean Hiernaux

The People of Africa

pg 61

Busted once again, none of what you ever say is correct!

posted 28 January 2005 08:06 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Do you ever bother to read what you post? All that passage says is that Type B individuals absorbed minor Negroid elements when they migrated across the Sahara, [b]not that Type B is Negroid. In fact, it reiterates that Type B in its unaltered form is a "Mediterranean racial type", like Angel's Type B:

[/B]

---

Read this moron, apparently you attempt to pick and chose what you want to read:

The Negroid increment of which there is evidence in some of our Northern Neolithic Series, notably Kef-el-Agab 1 and Troglodytes 1, may have well come in the same way from the South to add to the already slightly Negroid Hamitic cast of the African Mediterraneans and of their partial derivative, the Mechta-Afalou Type.

posted 28 January 2005 08:13 AM            

quote:

---

Maybe the reason Nubian crania couldn't be clearly classified is that Nubians are a very mixed group. Howells was able to accurately classify modern Kenyan skulls as fully African. But when he compared them to pre-historic Kenyan skulls, he found significant differences. It's really not rocket science.

---

posted 28 January 2005 10:54 AM            

as it is to the much later but nearly identical population of Siwa Oasis

remarkably close to the population of Lower Nubia

strikingly close resemblance to a series of West African crania from Fernand Vaz in the Gabon

have called attention already to certain "Boskopoid" characters in some members of our Type B females series

The Negroid increment of which there is evidence in some of our Northern Neolithic Series

Your type B caucasoid is a sham, a transparent attempt to hide the reality of ethnic diversity in Europe behind phoney labeling conventions, which mushroomed into something that borders on the burlesque.

EuroDisney, this fight is over, and S. Muhammad has won.

I suggest you find another Eurocentric topic, and move on. Repeat posts of those ugly fellows who look nothing like the peoples mentioned, isn't helping you one bit.

posted 28 January 2005 11:07 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:

The above picture has been posted as an explanation of the following comments about medit type B pure caucasoids of EuroDisneyland...

as it is to the much later but nearly identical population of [b]Siwa Oasis

remarkably close to the population of Lower Nubia

strikingly close resemblance to a series of West African crania from Fernand Vaz in the Gabon

have called attention already to certain "Boskopoid" characters in some members of our Type B females series

The Negroid increment of which there is evidence in some of our Northern Neolithic Series

Your type B caucasoid is a sham, a transparent attempt to hide the reality of ethnic diversity in Europe behind phoney labeling conventions, which mushroomed into something that borders on the burlesque.

EuroDisney, this fight is over, and S. Muhammad has won.

I suggest you find another Eurocentric topic, and move on. Repeat posts of those ugly fellows who look nothing like the peoples mentioned, isn't helping you one bit.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 28 January 2005).][/B]

---

Whats even worse was his rushed judgement about the Tutsi being dark skinned because of Bantu/West African mixture. I swiftly and decisively snuffed out that argument before it even had a chance. This fool knows nothing about African crania and morphological affinities other than his normal "they're certainly not Negroid" logic, which has backfired on him time and time again. His only course of action now is to call Gabonese, Nubians, Sanid-Boskop, and Saharan Neolitic people Mediterranean Caucasoids, in order to preserve southern european racial purity.

posted 29 January 2005 07:29 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
"The Tutsi exhibit 'Hamitic' facial features to a marked degree. [...] Apparently, either 'Hamitic' facial features developed in the Tutsi's ancestral line independently...."

---

posted 29 January 2005 07:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by S.Mohammad:
"may have well come in the same way from the South to add to the already slightly Negroid Hamitic cast of the African Mediterraneans and of their partial derivative, the Mechta-Afalou Type."

---

Key word: slightly

Your original claim was that "Type B is without a doubt Negroid" and that its similarity to Angel's Type B meant that "Greeks have Negroid affinities". That was idiotic and wrong.

The truth is that Briggs' Type B is without a doubt Classic Mediterranean (as Briggs himself states unambiguously), but has been slightly altered by the absorption of Negroes. Furthermore, this has no bearing on Angel's Type B, which is purely Mediterranean, as his description and three examples demonstrate.

posted 29 January 2005 09:18 AM            

quote:

---

S. Muhammad wrote: Stupid Euro once again puts his foot in his mouth

---

Proof of point:

quote:

---

Hiernaux says flat out that the Tutsi show Hamitic/Caucasoid affinities,

---

Typically when you don't like the answer you try [and fail] to distort it.

Either that or....

quote:

---

population genetics determined East Africans to be racial hybrids

---

posted 29 January 2005 09:21 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
A crude Carelton Coonian caveman concept long ago rejected by the majority of bioanthropologists, and descredited by molecular genetics.

---

I see why this hypothesis was rejected.

posted 29 January 2005 09:28 AM            

Modern Molecular biology shows that much of Africa, including elongated and broad types are related via PN2-clade.

quote:

---

rasol write:

There are 18 known haplogroups or top level clades labeled A thru R. Clades have sub clades - which are children of their respective top level clade. The children are known as sister clades in terms of their relationships to each other. Those children in turn have children and so on.

E3a and E3b are sister haplotypes and children of of E3 (pn2 clade). E3, E3a and E3b all originate in Africa. The Pn2 clade is the dominment Y chromosome type in Africa.

The sister clades themselves do not determine phenotype. No clades do. There are elongated and broad African types of E3a and E3b

Elongated and broad Africans likely diverge based on morphological adaptation to dry and humid tropical climates respectively. Accordingly both types are Black. The haplotypes originate after the base european asian and australian populations migrated out of Africa and so are not indigenous to those regions.

E3a and E3b appear to have split geographically with E3a carriers generally traveling central west and south, and E3b carriers traveling east north and west.

Haplotypes do not determine language [of course], but E3b is most closely associated with the Afrasan speakers an E3a with Bantu speakers - for instance.

And none of this has anything to do with European peoples [self labeled caucasians] other than that they inherit ithe haplotypes as African admixture either directly or indirectly thru either the Levantine corridor; Egypto/Nubian colonisation in the Agean and Southwest Europe from across the Maghreb during the Moorish occupation.

---

posted 29 January 2005 09:43 AM            

quote:

---

This fool knows nothing about African crania and morphological affinities

---

posted 29 January 2005 02:59 PM            

quote:

---

The polygenic aspects of Coon's theory were racist and widely recognized to be wrong (Dobzhansky 1963, 1968; Hulse 1963; Montagu 1963; Oschinsky 1963; Washburn 1963 [based on the presidential address at the AAA]).

---

posted 29 January 2005 10:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasol:
He needs east Africans to be mixed-white so that Southern European can be 'pure white', so that Northern Europeans can stop calling Southern Europeans mulatto-mongrel.
Isn't that pathetic?

Modern Molecular biology shows that much of Africa, including elongated and broad types are related via PN2-clade.

---

Thought Writes:

posted 29 January 2005 10:57 PM            

July 25, 2003

by Jean-Philippe Omotunde, Mounza Shabaka

The molecular Biology, left biological sciences of point studying genes (ADN), does not cease providing elements confirming the character négro-African of the inhabitants of old Egypt (Kemet) and African diaspora starting from the valley of the Nile.

However, these results although published in specialized scientific reviews only are little transmitted to French general public through the newspapers of popularization.

The truth makes fun of the color of skin but rare are the scientist to admit it when it acts of the négro-African history.

Eric Crubézy, Professor of anthropology at the University Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, makes surely party of these rare men of science.

Its research published in an article of the scientific magazine of popularization "the Search for May 2002" (1) on the old ADN of the bones of the population of Adaïma in Egypt, 3700 years before our era, is conclusive; one can read there on page 46:

"These two adult men, buried together in the necropolis of Adaïma, in Egypt, 3700 years before our era, were brothers or cousins, according to the analysis of their ADN. This one also connects them with populations of sub-Saharan origin what consolidate of the morphological and epidemiologic elements concerning the whole of the populations ".

One cannot be more explicit any more.

The whole of the population of predynastic Egypt, it there has 3700 years, is Nègre. It is not a Sheik Anta DIOP which speaks to invent a glorious African past: it is scientific reality. In addition, the taking away of ADN were carried out by the European researchers of CNRS: no the risk of contamination by ADN négro-African!

Moreover, the morphological and epidemiologic elements consolidate Négritude of the Egyptians predynastic. Why the results of professor Crubézy do not appear in the newspapers of popularization the such "WORLD", "the EXPRESS TRAIN"? On the contrary, of the articles flamers to the soft arguments against Negro Egypt, are flourishing in these magazines (Lire Jean-Marc Egouy: Roots of old Egypt, Sheik Anta Diop and media trickery, Menaibuc, 2003)

ADAÏMA II - NECROPOLE PREDYNASTIQUE

WORK:

ERIC CRUBEZY, THIERRY JANIN, BEATRIX MIDANT REYNES

IF 887, FIFAO 47, 2002

Research of the team of the geneticist, Antonio Arnaiz-Villena, chief of the Department of Immunology and Molecular Biology at the University Complutense, Hospital 12 of Octubre, Madrid on genes of systems HLA of Europeans theirs was worth great surprises, surprised all relative for an expert of the African History...

Their article is entitled "HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of the Greeks" (2) translation: "genes HLA of the Macedonians and the sub-Saharan origin of Greek" published in "Tissue Antigens 2001".

The title in itself is very evocative. In the summary of the article, they mean

"Greeks are found to cuts has substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups"

Translation "It is proven that the Greek ones had substantial relations with the sub-Saharan people, which separate them from the other Mediterranean groups".

It continue while saying:

"The time period when these relationships might cuts occurred was ancient... and might Be related to the displacement of Egyptian-Ethiopian people living room in pharaonic Egypt"

"the period during which these relations took place (between Greek and Négro-Africans) was old... and can be related to the displacement of the Egypto-Ethiopian populations living in Pharaonic Egypt".

RESULT OF TEST ADN OF THE OLD GREEKS

The authors conclude:

"Indeed, ancient Greeks believed that to their religion and culture cam from Egypt"

"Indeed, the Greek old ones believe that their religion and their culture come from Egypt"

Arnaiz-Villena and its group of research confirm by the genetics "the négro-African origin of the knowledge Greek" of J-P Omotunde and by the same occasion, reaffirms the migrations égypto-Nubian.

The authors quoted Hérodote (History II, Euterpe) and Martin Bernal (Black Athena) as references but did not quote the principal source of Martin Bernal concerning the African origin of Greek civilization, i.e. Sheik Anta Diop! Is this intellectual dishonesty or an error?

I personally contacted by mall Professor Arnaiz-Villena for him meant this lack in his bibliography but it ensured me that it knew already work of Sheik Anta Diop.

Then why it did not quote them because a good scientist must respect the chronology. Perhaps it has was afraid not to be published in the European scientific magazines... More serious, why the magazines of popularizations scientific such "Sciences and Life" do not speak about this article?

Force is to note that in this scientific circle, the diagram hégélien trace its road, one attends the falsification of the history, and its twin, obscurantism...

C. A. DIOP had put forth assumptions on the interbreeding of the Jews with the population black during serfdom in Egypt in negro Nations and cultures. In the same way, Pierre Nilon, in "Moïse the African" had argued on the parallels between designs of divine of the Semites and Bantous.

Here biological confirmations of these exchanges between Negros and Semites:

Some extracts of work of the group of search for D. Rund (Department of Hematology, Hadassah University Hospital, Jerusalem, Israel) published in their article "The origin of sickle cell alleles in Israel" (3), or "the origin of the alleles of the drépanocytose in Israel". (an allele being the shape of a gene)

"The Jewish family... was discovered to cuts the most common African haplotype of the beta-globin gene cluster, Benin."

"the Jewish family... was discovered like having the African haplotype most common of the drépanocytose, the Bénin. type"

The haplotype Bénin of the drépanocytose is a type of allele drépanocytaire found exclusively at the Western populations African of Ghana in Nigeria while passing by Ivory Coast, Bénin, Togo, i.e. among people Akan, Yoruba, Fon... Curieusement, this same genetic signature Ouest-africaine is found in Semites in Israel...

"Similarly, 8 of the Arab families were also found to curry the Benin haplotype, whereas the ninth has the BUS (Central African Republic gold Bantu) haplotype"

"In the same way, 8 of the Arab families also proved to carry the haplotype of the Benign one, while the ninth has the haplotype of BUS (CENTRAL AFRICA OR BANTOU). "

The haplotype Bantou or BUS of the drépanocytose is exclusively found among Bantous Negros. Once again, another genetic signature bantoue is found in Semites in Israel...

For the authors:

"The results suggest that sickle alleles in Israel originated in Africa, probably in two different areas, and migrated north into Arab and Jewish populations."

"the results suggest that the alleles of drépanocytose in Israel come from Africa, probably in two different areas, and emigrated in North in the Arab and Jewish populations"

These alleles négro-African did not migrate only towards Israel! They are relations between the people of West Africa (Akan, Yoruba...) and Bantou with the Semites. When do these relations date? Only valid assumption that the educated scientists with Hegel cannot hear: Exchanges between négro-African population of ancient Egypt ou/et of the précoloniaux African Kingdoms with the people Semites. It is known that the drépanocytose existed in predynastic Egypt by work of Sailor A, Cerutti N, Massa ER (Dipartimento di Biologia Animale E dell' Uomo, Universita degli Studi di Torino, Italy). (4).

It would be judicious to determine the haplotypes drépanocytose in old Egypt knowing that one detects 5 haplotypes négro-African of the drépanocytose (Benign, Bantou, Senegal, Cameroun) and an arabo-Indian...

The team of Doctor M.G. Thomas (The Center for Genetic Anthropology, Departments of Biology and Anthropology, University London College, United Kingdom) assure us the assumption of the interbreedings of these populations Sémites and Negro Bantou.

In "Y chromosomes dolly south: the cohen modal haplotype and the origins of the Lemba -- the "Black Jews of Southern Africa" (5) or "Travels of the Y chromosome towards the South: The haplotype Cohen and the origin of Lemba - the Blacks judaïsant of the South-African ", the team of research studied the Y chromosome, only transmitted by the fathers. The authors discovered that:

"The high resolution afforded by the markers shows that Lemba Y chromosomes are clearly divided into Semitic and Bantu clades."

"the high resolution granted by the markers (genetic) proves that Y chromosomes of Lemba (Balemba) are clearly divided into Semite and Bantou."

In other terms, the Y chromosomes of Balemba proves that these people come from interbreeding between Sémites and Bantou.

They continue:

"Interestingly, one of the Lemba clans carries, At has very high frequency, has particular standard There-chromosome termed the" modal Cohen haplotype, "which is known to Be characteristic of the paternally inherited Jewish priesthood and is thought, more generally, to Be has potential signature haplotype of Judaic origin".

"Made suprenant, one of the clans of Lemba (Balemba) carries, at very high frequency, a particular type of Y chromosome named" the modal haplotype of Cohen ", which is known to be characteristic of the paternally inherited Jewish priesthood and which is known, more generally, to be a potential haplotype of signature of origin judaïque."

The presence of modal genetics COHEN among Bantous Africans, proves that this interbreeding Bantou-Semites was done in large Jewish clans. This confirms the assumption diopienne interbreeding Négro-African with Hebrews in Pharaonic Egypt. Falashas are not only judaïsant Négro-African! ! !

In the light of does this work, one wonder why it does not have there a true study on the migrations of the people Négro-Africans which they are Pygmies, Bantous, Wolofs, Peuls, Manding, Khoisans..., their exchanges with the close or remote close people (Semites, Européens, Amerindians...) using molecular biology? The majority of the works treating of the genetics of the négro-African populations voluntarily omit a great part of the negro historical aspect to treat only prehistoric aspect: thus, one passes directly from African prehistory to slavery without speaking about African civilizations.

However, the tools do not miss:

study of the ADN mitochondrial (transmitted only by the mother),

Y chromosomes (transmitted only by the father),

ADN microsatellites,

genes of systems HLA,

molecular epidemiology of the drépanocytose, virus HTLV 1, of Mycobacterium africanum of tuberculosis...

comparisons of ADN of mummies of Old Egypt with that of current negro people

The study of the migrations of the African people starting from the valley of the Nile can be made on genetic bases just like Sheik Anta Diop, Theophilus Obenga, Aboubacry Moussa Lam, Oum Ndigi... did it on cultural, linguistic bases...

Solemn call with all the Panafrican students in biology: how Sheik Anta Diop said, "Arm with science to the teeth! ! ! ".

You do not limit solely to your discipline, have the spirit of opening towards other disciplines like Imhotep (physicist, architect, doctor, philosophical, priest), Sheik Anta Diop (physicist, chemist, historian, linguist...). the interaction of the exact sciences and natural and of historical sciences a field of reflexion opens to us on our African people.

That the forgers know: one can falsify the history by uttering lies but one cannot lie to our genes, genuine markers of our History, whatever it was.

How the Science of Thot protects us and That the Truth of Mâat is made!

Mounza SHABAKA, Doctor of Biology

Sources:

1. "surprises of the old ADN" of E CRUBEZY and Al published in the scientific magazine of popularization Research n°353 of May 2002.

2. "HLA genes in Macedonians and the sub-saharan origin of the Greeks" of A Arnaiz-Villena and Al published in Tissue Antigens 2001: 57: 118: 127.

3. "The origin of sickle cell alleles in Israel." D. Rund and Al published in Human Genetics. October 1990 85:521-4

4. Use of the amplification refractory change system (ARMS) in the study of HbS in predynastic Egyptian remains. Sailor A, Cerutti N, Massed ER published in Boll. Ploughshare. Ital. Biol. Sper. 1999 May-Jun;75(5-6):27-30

5. "Y chromosomes traveling south: the modal Cohen haplotype and the origins of the Lemba -- the "Black Jews of Southern Africa". "Thomas MG and Al, published in The American Newspaper of Human Genetics. 2000 Feb;66 (2):674-86

posted 30 January 2005 03:19 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Hiernaux says flat out that the Tutsi show Hamitic/Caucasoid affinities, but he postulates that they're just Negro variants. Of course, that hypothesis dates back to 1975, long before population genetics determined East Africans to be racial hybrids. Clearly, he was off the mark. Coon actually came closer to the truth.

---

Wrong once again moron, your so called racial hybrid East Africans are nothing more than Ethiopians, quote me one source that says that Tutsis and Masai are hybrids. And you apparaently cannot understand what Hiernaux was saying, everything that he was saying was against Tutsis being Hamitic, once again you selectively took Hiernaux's information and distorted it to fit your Eurocentric agenda. Yes, he said Tutsi had 'Caucasoid Hamitic features, but he says they should NOT be considered as being related to populations from West Asia and Europe, point blank you've been refuted again!