So what is it with hypocrites like you? Ethiopians are Caucasoid even if they have frizzy hair and dark skin but Paleo Indians, Malenisians and SE Asians are not Black even if they have typical Black facial features.
Look - Paleo Indians look like Sub-Saharan Blacks because of climate and some dietary commonality. Also people living in the same climate look similar to each other. And why would we not expect this? Certainly Ethiopians are closer related to Bantu than Bantu are related to Paleo Indian people regardless of them looking very similar.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It just bothers me the hypocrisy of people that are so obsessed with race. The liars will say that Ethiopians are Caucasian because the have narrow noses and no prognathism even though their skin and hair texture is that of a Negro. They will then say the Olmecs were not Negro, even if they have facial features of a Negro, because their skin texture and hair is not of a Negro.
I would advocate for everyone the idea of not using racially infused terminology but describe people based on the climate that they are adapted to.
Olmecs were tropically adapted Native Americans and the father of civilization in the new world. The same is true with Egyptians, they were the father of civilization in North Africa.
Tropically adapted people seem to have reached a state of civilization before most other groups of people but not all. The Turks were practicing civilization well before though interestingly the people of the Levant at the time were tropically adapted.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^ Exactly(So I guess Orion and I can agree:)...)
This has been explained to Afronut, that Tropically adapted is a more proper term...but then again Afronut and his aliases' posts showcase his level of mentality and psychology.
My advice is to not even waste your time Orion...
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^I guess nobody told you that "Tropically adapted" describes ALL homo-sapiens-sapiens; including the white ones.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^I guess nobody told you that "Tropically adapted" describes ALL homo-sapiens-sapiens; including the white ones.
Lets not split hairs here. Tropical adaptation that I am referring to is related to certain facial features that we associate, incorrectly, with Black people: wide nose, fleshy lips, prognathism, long limbs, hairless bodies, etc. Those features are more to do with adaptation to the tropics and random mutation than being Black. Africa is a large continent with highly varying climates and diets which result in various adaptations even though the people largely share a common ancestor (hence they are in the same race).
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have a question so u are claiming that those statues in Mexico and the Americas are recent migration froms africa into the Americas
Posts: 410 | From: Al-Ard | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ No, people with Tropical adaptation (basically having those types of features) have been in the Americas for over 15K years.
----------------- Read about Luiza. It is not something you'll read about in Time magazine of National Geographic. Mainstream media doesn't want to talk about Luiza. They like to talk about made up Caucasians like Kennewick man. The truth is out there for you to find but don't expect the White dominated media to teach you about the history of African people.
-------------------------
Phenotypical analysis of Luiza
Her facial features include a narrow, oval cranium, projecting face and pronounced chin, strikingly dissimilar to most native Americans and their indigenous Siberian forebears.
Anthropologists have variously described Luzia's features as resembling those of Africans, Indigenous Australians, Melanesians and the Negritos of South East Asia.
Walter Neves, an anthropologist at the University of São Paulo, suggests that Luzia's features most strongly resemble those of Australian Aboriginal peoples. Richard Neave of Manchester University, who undertook a facial reconstruction of Luzia (see the photograph above), stated that "I personally would stick my neck out and say it is conclusive support for his [Neve's] findings and demonstrates without any doubt at all" that Luzia was not closely related to Siberian peoples.[3] Neves and other Brazilian anthropologists have theorized that Luzia's Paleo-Indian predecessors lived in South East Asia for tens of thousands of years, after migrating from Africa, and began arriving in the New World, as early as 15,000 years ago. Some anthropologists have hypothesized that Paleo-Indians migrated along the coast of East Asia and Beringia in small watercraft, before or during the last Ice Age. A comparison in 2005 of the Lagoa Santa specimens, with the recently extinct Botocudos of the same region, also showed strong affinities, leading Neves to classify the Botocudos as Paleo-Indians.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Tropical adaptation that I am referring to is related to certain facial features that we associate, incorrectly, with Black people: wide nose, fleshy lips, prognathism
Where have you read that the above cranio-facial characteristics you mention are indicative of tropical adaptations?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ do you learn life from reading a book. Try traveling to various places. I for one, being the son of a missionary, have been around the world. People in the tropics look alike. From Cambodia to Columbia to Ghana. People look alike in the same types of climates.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^So in other words that was a matter of your own observatory opinion and not based on any fact. Since if those traits mentioned were only indicative of tropical adaptations and all people in the tropics had said features than shouldn't all tropical Africans look alike? We know this is not the case, and tropical Africans vary in cranio-facial characteristics.
What about those Africans who have thinner lips, thinner noses, and orthogonous profile, are they also adapted to the tropics or is this due to foreign admixture?
What about north east Asians who have broad noses, prognathism and fleshy lips, is this also indicative of their tropical adaptations? If so, why haven't these traits been lost since north east Asians have been residing outside of the tropics for millenia?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is so uplifting to see an idiot defeat another idiot with logic.
Makes me feel like there is hope for mankind (but I'm not getting carried-away, I know that it was probably an accident).
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^^So in other words that was a matter of your own observatory opinion and not based on any fact. Since if those traits mentioned were only indicative of tropical adaptations and all people in the tropics had said features than shouldn't all tropical Africans look alike? We know this is not the case, and tropical Africans vary in cranio-facial characteristics.
What about those Africans who have thinner lips, thinner noses, and orthogonous profile, are they also adapted to the tropics or is this due to foreign admixture?
What about north east Asians who have broad noses, prognathism and fleshy lips, is this also indicative of their tropical adaptations? If so, why haven't these traits been lost since north east Asians have been residing outside of the tropics for millenia?
So if it is in a book it is a fact where as what you can see with your own eyes are not?
I have been to Korea and it has tropical zones. I have been to Okinawa and it is tropical. I have also been to places in China and there are tropical areas as well. People move around and mix and there is also random mutation. And Africa is not all tropical now is it. There are desserts and mountains, plateaus at high levels, etc.
Are you trying to tell me that facial features has nothing to do with adaptation? Certainly this discussion will bring the likes of Mike111 and Clyde into the thread so that they can try to convince us that Black Africans were circum navigating the world in space ships.
Its all silly. The way people look has to do with their origins and the climate and diet of their ancestors. When it comes to NE Asians the question you have to consider his what is in the food they are eating and not only their climate. The body plan of Mongoloid peoples varies considerably from that of SE Asians - haven't you ever noticed that dark skin Asian ladies have a bit more going on in their trunk if you know what I mean.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^^So in other words that was a matter of your own observatory opinion and not based on any fact. Since if those traits mentioned were only indicative of tropical adaptations and all people in the tropics had said features than shouldn't all tropical Africans look alike? We know this is not the case, and tropical Africans vary in cranio-facial characteristics.
What about those Africans who have thinner lips, thinner noses, and orthogonous profile, are they also adapted to the tropics or is this due to foreign admixture?
What about north east Asians who have broad noses, prognathism and fleshy lips, is this also indicative of their tropical adaptations? If so, why haven't these traits been lost since north east Asians have been residing outside of the tropics for millenia?
So if it is in a book it is a fact where as what you can see with your own eyes are not?
Let me give you an example from which you should know very well.
Oceanic populations to the laypersons eyes, at first would appear to be African, but when we read and learn the science behind it, we know that these Oceanic populations cluster genetically with mainland Asia, before they do with Africans. and are best representative genetically of original descendants of OOA populations who also stood in tropical areas, and are ancestral to Eurasians hence why they cluster with them.
I'm not asking you for something particularly from a book, it could be from bio-anthropological studies etc... I'm simply asking you where have you read or learned this. Obviously it wasn't from any scientists, but rather from your own opinion.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: I have been to Korea and it has tropical zones. I have been to Okinawa and it is tropical. I have also been to places in China and there are tropical areas as well.
It doesn't matter where you've been, Ive seen all these people you mention right here in N.Y.C., but tell me are these places you mentioned above or below the tropic of cancer?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: People move around and mix and there is also random mutation.
Ok? And this has what to do with you saying broad features and prognathism were result of tropical adaptations?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: And Africa is not all tropical now is it.
Nope, but there are Africans who are adapted to the tropics of Africa that don't exhibit the broad nose, fleshy lips and prognathism you speak, and you know this, so how do you explain this?
Some of these Africans who exhibit thinner noses and lips in fact actually exhibit higher brachial and crural indices indicating a more extreme tropical adaptation than many other African populations that might exhibit fleshy lips broad noses and prognathism that you speak of.
Broad features in Africa are result of adaptation to a hot and humid climate, while the thinner is adapted to a hot and dry climate. Learn that.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Are you trying to tell me that facial features has nothing to do with adaptation?
Where did I try to tell you this?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Its all silly. The way people look has to do with their origins and the climate and diet of their ancestors.
Ok. This has nothing to do with you equating broad features and prognathism with tropical adaptations.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: When it comes to NE Asians the question you have to consider his what is in the food they are eating and not only their climate.
Where is it that you come to your conclusions from, if not reading it somewhere in a scientific journal or something of the like? I mean, are you publishing your own field work? Are you qualified?
Listen, NE Asians are adapted to a low UV environment, hence their lighterskin, and hence less tropical adaptations, shorter limbs etc.. yet they still tend to exhibit broad noses, prognathism and fleshy lips just like those found in populations in tropical Africa. Why? And why don't those Africans I mentioned earlier who are adapted to the tropics in Africa exhibit these broad fleshy and prognathous profiles, yet NE Asians who are not adapted to the tropics do?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: The body plan of Mongoloid peoples varies considerably from that of SE Asians
So now we're back to using outdated terms again?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ You are making a lot of sense. However, people do move around from one area to another. I am tropically adapted and live in Seattle. I was talking about people's origins. Essentially the indigenous people of an area.
Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same. There is also random mutation, etc.
In terms of climate and diet adaptation - no that is not my idea. It is the idea of clinal adaptation variation that you will get from so called geographical specialization theories.
Tropical adaptation features is really not my concept.
-------------------- Across the sea of time, there can only be one of you. Make you the best one you can be. Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
So what is it with hypocrites like you? Ethiopians are Caucasoid even if they have frizzy hair and dark skin but Paleo Indians, Malenisians and SE Asians are not Black even if they have typical Black facial features.
Look - Paleo Indians look like Sub-Saharan Blacks because of climate and some dietary commonality. Also people living in the same climate look similar to each other. And why would we not expect this? Certainly Ethiopians are closer related to Bantu than Bantu are related to Paleo Indian people regardless of them looking very similar.
Is it your position that Paleo Indians, Malenisians and SE Asians are black if they have typical Black facial features?
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: ^ You are making a lot of sense.
I know.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: However, people do move around from one area to another.
Yea and?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: I am tropically adapted and live in Seattle.
So? And how do you know you're tropically adapted?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: I was talking about people's origins. Essentially the indigenous people of an area.
Ok, and?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
Again, I already addressed when you said this earlier. I agreed, and I noted Africans who are indeed tropically adapted and in some cases show higher brachial and crural indices than many populations in Africa of whom would possess broad noses thicker lips and prognathism whom are adapted to a hot and humid climate.
The only indigenous African population I know of that has adapted for a considerable amount of time outside of tropical areas in Africa are the Khoisan of southern Africa who are said to reside in these sub-tropical environments for millenia.
Do you know of any other?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: There is also random mutation, etc.
Ok and?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: In terms of climate and diet adaptation - no that is not my idea.
I know it's not your idea, that's why I asked you for references.
Have any?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: It is the idea of clinal adaptation variation that you will get from so called geographical specialization theories.
Clinal adaptation and theories huh? So now you're getting your information from reading? LOL. Not from eyeball speculation? Ok, so please let me know of these "so called geographical specialization theories" that promote what you're saying...possible?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Tropical adaptation features is really not my concept.
Ok, I know tropical adaptations isn't your concept. But you equated broad faces, prognathism and thicker lips as indications of tropical adaptations, as if you knew what tropical adaptations entailed, and hence were asked for the correlative evidence showing this adaptation with broader features fuller lips and prognathism. Do you have any?
You were given examples of NE Asians who are not adapted to the tropics yet exhibit the features you originally mentioned and attributed to tropical adaptations, along with those from Africa who actually are adapted to the tropics, and in some cases extremely tropically adapted, yet they don't exhibit the features you mentioned. I.e., broad noses fleshy lips and prognathism.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lion: Is it your position that Paleo Indians, Malenisians and SE Asians are black if they have typical Black facial features?
What is considered "typical black facial features" and how did the populations you mentioned acquire said features?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
Let me just remind you in case you have forgotten, But their is no typical Black features.
Black's are the most diverse when it comes with facial features. Thats why in the past, Narrow Features were considered because of invading caucasoids. We know now that this is wrong and not accurate. Whats TRUTH is that Africans have Narrow and Broad features and has nothing to do with mixing. Thats why the Olmec can have these features and not be linked with Africans, but Melanesians and other Asians.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
So what is it with hypocrites like you? Ethiopians are Caucasoid even if they have frizzy hair and dark skin but Paleo Indians, Malenisians and SE Asians are not Black even if they have typical Black facial features.
Look - Paleo Indians look like Sub-Saharan Blacks because of climate and some dietary commonality. Also people living in the same climate look similar to each other. And why would we not expect this? Certainly Ethiopians are closer related to Bantu than Bantu are related to Paleo Indian people regardless of them looking very similar.
Is it your position that Paleo Indians, Malenisians and SE Asians are black if they have typical Black facial features?
Do you consider Samoans, Australians and people from Fiyi Black? Really, the concept of Black is really whatever people want it to mean. It doesn't really mean much to me.
My point was that they are tropical people. I guess I should be more careful in defining "tropical" people. It is probably best to say - "Rain forest" adapted people. There's a lot of variations of tropical climates.
Being Black means different things in different socieities. Not sure what to think of the Olmecs. I think based on hair texture and lighter skin tone we would think they were something quite different than what we are use to. Probably something like "The Rock".
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: [QUOTE]Originally posted by osirion:
You were given examples of NE Asians who are not adapted to the tropics yet exhibit the features you originally mentioned and attributed to tropical adaptations, along with those from Africa who actually are adapted to the tropics, and in some cases extremely tropically adapted, yet they don't exhibit the features you mentioned. I.e., broad noses fleshy lips and prognathism.
Don't flatter yourself too much. If I claim that somone is tropically adapted because of a set of features it doesn't mean only tropically adapted people have those features.
Consider the context before making an argument. The Olmecs lived in a tropical rain forest. They are directly related to other new world people yet their features are significantly different. The difference is primarily the climate and diet of the people. In fact I would say Olmecs are a great example of climate adaptation diversity.
Apparently all new world people are related and yet they have significantly diverged in terms of facial features. So we can see the affects of tropical rain forrest climate on people isolated from migration admixture by studying these people.
As for you points about elongated Africans. There are many different types of tropical climates. Some tropical climates are rain forrest, others are steppes, and yet more are savanna and so on. There are even dry areas in the tropical zones. What we are talking about is highly complex and some times highly localized weather patterns.
Sorry if I minimized the complexity by simply saying tropical adaptation.
Should say - high precipitation tropics. But in Africa you are also dealing with more migration and a longer time span for those migrations to occur. Also dealing with the Sahara dessert that used to be teeming with life and that entire population being forced into equatorial Africa or to the Nile Valley. There's a lot more churn in Africa resulting in more mixture of adaptive types.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wrong. AFRICANs have the most diversity intra-populationally. Not inter populationally. Truth is, that there are no Africans that have wide noses, are orthognathic, thick lips, are brachicephalic and flat faced.
Is the Above True i need more information
Posts: 410 | From: Al-Ard | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: Wrong. AFRICANs have the most diversity intra-populationally. Not inter populationally. Truth is, that there are no Africans that have wide noses, are orthognathic, thick lips, are brachicephalic and flat faced.
Is the Above True i need more information
African facial features vary more so than any other population group. Their features match the diversity of climate in Africa - the most extreme diversification.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: [QUOTE]Originally posted by osirion:
You were given examples of NE Asians who are not adapted to the tropics yet exhibit the features you originally mentioned and attributed to tropical adaptations, along with those from Africa who actually are adapted to the tropics, and in some cases extremely tropically adapted, yet they don't exhibit the features you mentioned. I.e., broad noses fleshy lips and prognathism.
Don't flatter yourself too much.
Huh?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: If I claim that somone is tropically adapted because of a set of features it doesn't mean only tropically adapted people have those features.
Then your claim makes no sense. How can you claim someone is tropically adapted because of a set of features, that you also admit are found in non tropical populations adapted to more frigid environments, yet even Africans adapted to the tropics don't possess said features? Understand? You make no sense.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Consider the context before making an argument.
I have, in fact there is no argument, just baseless claims so far from you.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: The Olmecs lived in a tropical rain forest.
How long had the Olmecs lived in this tropical rain forest? I.e., when did they arrive in Mexico?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: They are directly related to other new world people yet their features are significantly different.
Quite possibly.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: The difference is primarily the climate and diet of the people. In fact I would say Olmecs are a great example of climate adaptation diversity.
How?
Are you insinuating the Olmecs adapted their features due to living in the tropics of Mexico and their diet?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Apparently all new world people are related and yet they have significantly diverged in terms of facial features.
Can you cite some anthropological examples (studies) of this significant diversity in facial features?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: So we can see the affects of tropical rain forrest climate on people isolated from migration admixture by studying these people.
You can refer above, this would rely on you proving that the Olmec adapted their features as a result of living in this tropical rain forest of Mexico.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: As for you points about elongated Africans. There are many different types of tropical climates. Some tropical climates are rain forrest, others are steppes, and yet more are savanna and so on. There are even dry areas in the tropical zones. What we are talking about is highly complex and some times highly localized weather patterns.
Hey genius, the point is regardless of the varying climates in tropical Africa (which I already noted to you I.e, hot and dry vs hot and humid), they're all still tropically adapted, and hence as you said, since broad features and prognathism are indicative of tropical adaptations, then all tropical Africans from Somalians to Nigerians to Sudanese, to Malians etc...should look exactly alike with broad features and prognathism, in essence fit the "true negroid" profile, according to you, no? So then you should be over, and like I said you had no point to begin with.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Sorry if I minimized the complexity by simply saying tropical adaptation.
Nope you didn't minimize anything, what you did was say broad features and prognathism are result of simply being adapted to the tropics and were given examples to the contrary.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Should say - high precipitation tropics. But in Africa you are also dealing with more migration and a longer time span for those migrations to occur.
Non sequitur. Unless you feel you can elaborate on how this has anything to do with your claim.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Also dealing with the Sahara dessert that used to be teeming with life and that entire population being forced into equatorial Africa or to the Nile Valley. There's a lot more churn in Africa resulting in more mixture of adaptive types.
As I already told you, broad features are adapted to the hot and HUMID environment of Africa, while those thinner nosed, longer faced Africans are result of hot and DRY environments.
Learn this, maybe you won't have a problem in the future.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
Where is your evidence of this claim?
Modern studies show diversity in how people look is heavily based on distance from sub-Saharan Africa, not merely climate.
In genetically diverse Africa, broad-nosed people live on the cool or cold mountain slopes of East Africa or the hot, dry Sahara, and narrow-nosed peoples like many Fulani like in the wet tropics of West Africa. Yellowish-skinned San tribes live in the hot zones of Southern Africa.
"The relative importance of ancient demography and climate in determining worldwide patterns of human within-population phenotypic diversity is still open to debate. Several morphometric traits have been argued to be under selection by climatic factors, but it is unclear whether climate affects the global decline in morphological diversity with increasing geographical distance from sub-Saharan Africa. Using a large database of male and female skull measurements, we apply an explicit framework to quantify the relative role of climate and distance from Africa. We show that distance from sub-Saharan Africa is the sole determinant of human within-population phenotypic diversity, while climate plays no role. By selecting the most informative set of traits, it was possible to explain over half of the worldwide variation in phenotypic diversity. These results mirror those previously obtained for genetic markers and show that 'bones and molecules' are in perfect agreement for humans." (Distance from Africa, not climate, explains within-population phenotypic diversity in humans.
(2008) by: Lia Betti, François Balloux, William Amos, Tsunehiko Hanihara, Andrea Manica, Proceedings B: Biological Sciences, 2008/12/02)
Posts: 447 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
Where is your evidence of this claim?
What's my claim, can you be specific?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
The Sahara Desert covers over 3.5 million square miles and has only 2.5 million inhabitants - roughly 1 person per square mile (0.4 sq km)- which is one of the lowest population densities on earth. Wherever abundant food and water sources occur, one will find relatively large masses of people and wildlife. On the whole, the Sahara is one of the harshest environments known to man.
Many researchers have gone into the Sahara looking for clues as to how long ago humans began inhabiting the desert. According to archeologists, the Sahara was much more densely populated thousands of years ago when the desert's climate was not as harsh as it is today. Fossils, rock art, stone artifacts, bone harpoons, shells and many other items have been found in areas which today are considered too hot and dry to inhabit. This suggests that these areas were quite habitable thousands of years ago, but that the climate of the Sahara has since changed drastically. The artifacts found were located near remains of giraffe, elephant, buffalo, antelopes, rhinoceros, and warthog, as well as the remains of fish, crocodiles, hippopotamuses and other aquatic animals which suggests that thousands of years ago water was quite abundant in the Sahara.
The Sahara itself is at least as large as the whole of Europe, if not bigger. lol
The Sahara Desert in Africa World's Largest Non-Polar Desert
The Sahara Desert is the largest non-polar Desert in the world. It's length spans 3000 miles across northern Africa - from the Atlantic ocean in the west to the Red Sea on the east. It's width spans from the Mediterranean Sea on the north and extends 1200 miles to the south to central Africa. It covers an area of approximately 3.5 million square miles, occupying portions of Morocco, Western Sahara, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Ethiopa, Eritrea and Somalia.
Sahara Desert Map
The Sahara Desert is Earth's largest non-polar desert. Tour the Sahara using the Google map below. Click on the red icons to learn more about some of the volcanoes, irrigation, meteor impacts, sand dunes, shrinking lakes and mountains of the Sahara Desert. Use the navigation buttons to zoom and move about.
The Sahara's desert climate is believed to have been established over five million years ago during the Pliocene Epoch. Since then the Sahara has been subject to short- to medium-length dry and humid conditions, which have contributed to the unique climate of the Sahara today. For the past 2,000 years, the climate of the Sahara has remained quite consistent, except for a period of time in the 16th and 18th century when there was a "Little Ice Age" in Europe. This ice age significantly increased the amount of precipitation over the whole Sahara Desert until around the 19th century. By this time, the climate had become quite stable again and resembled the desert climate of today.
Dry, subtropical climate
Generally, the dry subtropical climate found in the north is caused by constant high-pressure cells over the tropic of Cancer. The winters are considered cool for desert conditions, with an average temperature of 55° F (13° C). The summers are very hot, with the highest ever recorded temperature at 13° F (58° C). The average rainfall in the subtropical region is approximately 3 inches (76 mm) per year. Precipitation generally falls between December and March, with the maximum rain falling in August and almost no rain at all during May and June. The August storms have been known to cause flash floods which send water to parts of the desert that rarely receive precipitation.
Dry Tropical Climate
The climate of the southern tropical region of the Sahara is dictated by a stable continental air mass and an unstable marine air mass. The average temperature in this region is about 31.5° F (17.5° C), however in the higher elevations, the temperature has been recorded at 5° F (-15° C), which is quite typical. The average annual precipitation is around five inches and includes snow in the higher elevations. In the western part of the tropical region, the cold Canary Current reduces the amount of rainfall, lowers the average temperature, and increases the humidity and the probability of fog.
The Sahara's topographical features include shallow basins, large oasis depressions, serirs or regs (gravel-covered plains), plateaus, mountains, sand sheets, dunes and sand seas (ergs). The highest part of the desert is at the summit of Mount Koussi, which is 11,204 feet (3,415 m) high. However, the lowest point of the Sahara is 436 feet (133 m) below sea level: in the Qattera Depression in Egypt.
Over 25 percent of the Sahara's surface is covered by sand sheets and dunes. The most common types of dunes include tied dunes, blowout dunes, barchan and transverse dunes, longitudinal seirfs, and complex sand seas. Within the Sahara are several pyramidal dunes that reach over 500 feet in height while the draa, a mountainous sand ridge, reaches over 1,000 feet. Researchers have for many years tried to figure out how these dunes were formed, but the case remains unsolved.
Posts: 447 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
"Estimates of genetic diversity in major geographic regions are frequently made by pooling all individuals into regional aggregates. This method can potentially bias results if there are differences in population substructure within regions, since increased variation among local populations could inflate regional diversity. A preferred method of estimating regional diversity is to compute the mean diversity within local populations. Both methods are applied to a global sample of craniometric data consisting of 57 measurements taken on 1734 crania from 18 local populations in six geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, Europe, East Asia, Australasia, Polynesia, and the Americas. Each region is represented by three local populations.
Both methods for estimating regional diversity show sub-Saharan Africa to have the highest levels of phenotypic variation, consistent with many genetic studies."
(Relethford, John "Global Analysis of Regional Differences in Craniometric Diversity and Population Substructure". Human Biology - Volume 73, Number 5, October 2001, pp. 629-636)
Posts: 447 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
One could wonder why genetic mutations occur?
Sarah Tishkoff, Ph.D
Africa is most genetically diverse continent, DNA study shows
In the most comprehensive study of African genetic diversity to date, a team of international scientists, led by Dr Sarah Tishkoff from the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, US, has revealed Africa to be the most genetically diverse continent on Earth. The findings could be used as a foundation to study genetic risk factors for diseases and the genetic basis of the differences in drug responses in these populations.
The research, published in the journal Science, used data from almost 4,000 people to reveal 14 ancestral populations from which modern Africans are descended. Their results correlated well with differences in culture and language, and they were able map the migration of populations across the continent.
Dr Tishkoff said 'we also think that non-Africans originate from a small founding population that probably migrated out of East Africa. In fact, our study shows that the source of the migration out of Africa was centred on the Dead Sea'. One of the researchers, Muntaser Ibrahim, from the University of Khartoum, Sudan, said 'This is a spectacular insight into the history of African populations and therefore the history of mankind'. Genetic studies in Africa have been severely limited, largely owing to the logistics involved in sample collection and storage, travel to remote villages, and gaining ethics approval in each country. This is the first time such a comprehensive study has been undertaken. The researchers have, over the last ten years, traversed Africa by four-wheel drive collecting blood samples from people in 121 African populations. The study also included four African-American and 60 non-African populations. The DNA from these individuals was then screened for 1,327 markers that cover highly variable DNA markers of the type used in forensic studies. Scientists from other teams have previously screened individuals from mostly non-African populations for the same set of markers. Dr Tishkoff said 'by using the same set of markers we have this wonderful comparative data set, and we can look at African genetic diversity in the context of the rest of the globe'. The results of the genetic scans were analysed using a program that separates individuals into groups depending on their genetic similarity across these markers.
'Our goal has been to do research that will benefit Africans. I hope this will set the stage for future genomics research there, and future biomedical research' Dr Tishkoff said.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
?
lol @ this clown
Revelation of the racist fabrications by this group of handlers, or more specifically Western museum directors, is reported in the current issue of Archaeology Magazine 54 (September-October 2001, p. 27). This report is associated with an article by Peter Lacovara et al. Archaeology reported that in the absence of scholarship the directors of the Niagara Falls Museum in Ontario, Canada “fabricated pedigrees” for many of their Egyptian mummies in the mid-nineteenth century. The most imaginative of these fake pedigrees, or false identities, was created for a bearded male mummy of the Roman period. The museum officials invented the following elaborate story for him which is a complete myth:“General Ossipumphnoferu the General in Chief of Thotmes III.... He was a man of military skill, also a famous magician. He was 60 years old when he died. The scar on his forehead was caused by an enraged elephant while defending the king from his onslaughts. A palace was erected for the general near that of the king.” The museum officials took their scandalous activity even further, as for many years the “general” was displayed in the coffin of Iawttayesheret, a high-ranking woman from the 25th dynasty, which was 700 years before his time! It is incredible that the directors of a public museum would take an unidentified Roman period mummy, with a European facial appearance, put him in a woman’s coffin from 700 years earlier, and then create a bogus identity for him as a famous general during a period which was another 700 years earlier than the coffin he was buried in! Eventhough this mummy and other artifacts at the museum were not studied comprehensively by an Egyptologist, this is yet another case which documents that Western museum directors would go to any lengths in the 19th and early 20th century to falsify evidence.
Currently, there is no doubt that this list of conspirators includes local Egyptian government workers, who are carrying out many acts of destruction on a regular basis. These men either work for the Egyptian government on “conservation” projects, or for various European or North American archeological teams. On several occasions in the 1980s and 1990s, these unsupervised minimally-skilled government workers have been caught on video tape plastering over temple images and inscriptions! In fact, it is impossible to visit the Karnak Temple in Luxor and not see the recent defacement, and it is suspicious that with rare exception Egyptologists are silent about this matter.
New Life for the Dead Volume 54 Number 5, September/October 2001
By Peter Lacovara, Sue D'Auria, And Thérèse O'Gorman
Atlanta's Emory University unveils a unique collection of Egyptian mummies and decorated coffins.
Abraham Lincoln, General Grant, Edward VII, and Theodore Roosevelt were among those who once admired the ancient Egyptian coffins and mummies displayed at the Niagara Falls Museum in Ontario. Brought to Canada in the mid-nineteenth century, the collection languished as fewer and fewer visitors patronized the museum, which in its final incarnation included the "Daredevil Hall of Fame" and was housed in an old corset factory. Despite the apparent quality of the individual coffins and mummies, no Egyptologist had ever studied them comprehensively and they were never published. Now, after nearly 150 years in Niagara Falls, the collection, reinstalled at the Michael C. Carlos Museum at Emory University, has been rescued from public obscurity and scholarly neglect.
The collection--over 145 items, including ten coffins and mummies along with funerary figures, canopic jars, amulets and jewelry, bronze sculptures, pottery, basketry, wooden objects, and relief fragments--dates from the 21st Dynasty (1070-946 B.C.) to the Roman period (31 B.C.-A.D. 395). Particularly well represented in this group, the 21st Dynasty was a period of great artistic achievement in funerary art. It marked the beginning of the Third Intermediate Period (1075-656 B.C.), a time of political turmoil and economic decline that saw control of the country split between pharaohs reigning in the Delta and the priesthood of the temple of Amun at Karnak ruling in Thebes. All the effort that had once gone into creating elaborately decorated tombs was now concentrated on coffins, the designs on which have been justifiably compared to stained glass windows in medieval cathedrals for their complex rendition of theological concepts in intricate, jewel-like colors.
After their long journey, the coffins and mummies will be unveiled in new galleries opening on October 6. Emory's museum is fondly known by many Atlantans as the "Mummy Museum." With these new acquisitions, the Michael C. Carlos Museum is indeed worthy of the name.
Peter Lacovara is curator of ancient Egyptian, Nubian, and Near Eastern art at the Michael C. Carlos Museum. Sue D'Auria is assistant curator at the Huntington Museum of Art in West Virginia and an expert on mummification. Thérèse O'Gorman is head of conservation at the Michael C. Carlos Museum.
posted
I fail to see your point is it supposed to counter something I said? Specifically?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
?
lol @ this clown
Huh, elaborate, what exactly is your point?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
Where is your evidence of this claim?
Modern studies show diversity in how people look is heavily based on distance from sub-Saharan Africa, not merely climate.
In genetically diverse Africa, broad-nosed people live on the cool or cold mountain slopes of East Africa or the hot, dry Sahara, and narrow-nosed peoples like many Fulani like in the wet tropics of West Africa. Yellowish-skinned San tribes live in the hot zones of Southern Africa.
"The relative importance of ancient demography and climate in determining worldwide patterns of human within-population phenotypic diversity is still open to debate. Several morphometric traits have been argued to be under selection by climatic factors, but it is unclear whether climate affects the global decline in morphological diversity with increasing geographical distance from sub-Saharan Africa. Using a large database of male and female skull measurements, we apply an explicit framework to quantify the relative role of climate and distance from Africa. We show that distance from sub-Saharan Africa is the sole determinant of human within-population phenotypic diversity, while climate plays no role. By selecting the most informative set of traits, it was possible to explain over half of the worldwide variation in phenotypic diversity. These results mirror those previously obtained for genetic markers and show that 'bones and molecules' are in perfect agreement for humans." (Distance from Africa, not climate, explains within-population phenotypic diversity in humans.
(2008) by: Lia Betti, François Balloux, William Amos, Tsunehiko Hanihara, Andrea Manica, Proceedings B: Biological Sciences, 2008/12/02)
(Distance from Africa, not climate, explains within-population phenotypic diversity in humans.)
This means that people are more homogeneous as you get further from Africa. It does not mean that phenotype cannot be correlated to climate. That is not the arguments being made.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
I said I minimized the types of tropics that exist. Since there are various types of tropical zones in Africa, the climatic adaptations in the tropics would vary. There is also dessert type climates that Black Africans have adapted to. Also mountainous regions in the tropics.
In terms of NE Asia, there are actually very good examples of climate adaptations of isolated groups of people that support my theory.
These two people are directly related to each other genetically. One appears almost like a European and the other almost like the Bantu.
The Ainu of Japan are the indigenous people of Japan and Russia. They look almost like Caucasians.
For a long time Europeans claimed an Eastern European origin for the Ainu. However, what is rather remarkable, is that genetic tests show these people to be closely related to the people of the Andaman Islands. Essentially, the Ainu are descendent's of Negrito people.
The Ainu are adapted to the colder climate on Northern Japan which is similar to Europe. And the Andaman peoples are tropically adapted.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
I said I minimized the types of tropics that exist.
Actually, what you did was limited tropical adaptations to a specific phenotype (broad nose, fleshy lips and prognathism).
Admit to your fault, and move on.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
I said I minimized the types of tropics that exist. Since there are various types of tropical zones in Africa, the climatic adaptations in the tropics would vary.
Extending; Indeed as I noted, and hence why not all indigenous Africans look alike.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: There is also dessert type climates that Black Africans have adapted to. Also mountainous regions in the tropics.
Like which dessert type climates have indigenous Africans adapted to?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: In terms of NE Asia, there are actually very good examples of climate adaptations of isolated groups of people that support my theory.
Really? Elaborate please on your theory and present these examples, thanks. Below the tropics of cancer? Remember that.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: These two people are directly related to each other genetically.
Genetic evidence of direct relation?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: One appears almost like a European
What does a European look like?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: and the other almost like the Bantu.
What does a Bantu look like?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: The Ainu of Japan are the indigenous people of Japan and Russia. They look almost like Caucasians.
^^What makes him look like a "Caucasian"?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: For a long time Europeans claimed an Eastern European origin for the Ainu.
Old news.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: However, what is rather remarkable, is that genetic tests show these people to be closely related to the people of the Andaman Islands.
Remarkable to you of course. Just like it was remarkable that for example Tutsis and Fulani are actually indigenous tropically adapted Africans right?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Essentially, the Ainu are descendent's of Negrito people.
Genetic evidence please, that they (Ainu) descend from "Negrito people"?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: The Ainu are adapted to the colder climate on Northern Japan which is similar to Europe.
Yea, which lightened their skintone, of course.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: And the Andaman peoples are tropically adapted.
Yes, the Andamin islanders are tropically adapted, because they reside in the tropics
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stop acting like you dont know what a Caucasian looks like. Weren't you the one promoting Bowcock's work in here?
Posts: 4254 | From: dasein | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
I said I minimized the types of tropics that exist.
Actually, what you did was limited tropical adaptations to a specific phenotype (broad nose, fleshy lips and prognathism).
Admit to your fault, and move on.
No, my concept of what is tropical was incorrect. I typically only consider high humid and hot air mass to be tropical such as what we see in rain forest areas. However, when I reviewed this there are variations. Those variations explain the different types of adaptations we see in the tropical zones in Africa.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
I said I minimized the types of tropics that exist. Since there are various types of tropical zones in Africa, the climatic adaptations in the tropics would vary.
Extending; Indeed as I noted, and hence why not all indigenous Africans look alike.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: There is also dessert type climates that Black Africans have adapted to. Also mountainous regions in the tropics.
Like which dessert type climates have indigenous Africans adapted to?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: In terms of NE Asia, there are actually very good examples of climate adaptations of isolated groups of people that support my theory.
Really? Elaborate please on your theory and present these examples, thanks. Below the tropics of cancer? Remember that.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: These two people are directly related to each other genetically.
Genetic evidence of direct relation?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: One appears almost like a European
What does a European look like?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: and the other almost like the Bantu.
What does a Bantu look like?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: The Ainu of Japan are the indigenous people of Japan and Russia. They look almost like Caucasians.
^^What makes him look like a "Caucasian"?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: For a long time Europeans claimed an Eastern European origin for the Ainu.
Old news.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: However, what is rather remarkable, is that genetic tests show these people to be closely related to the people of the Andaman Islands.
Remarkable to you of course. Just like it was remarkable that for example Tutsis and Fulani are actually indigenous tropically adapted Africans right?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Essentially, the Ainu are descendent's of Negrito people.
Genetic evidence please, that they (Ainu) descend from "Negrito people"?
quote:Originally posted by osirion: The Ainu are adapted to the colder climate on Northern Japan which is similar to Europe.
Yea, which lightened their skintone, of course.
quote:Originally posted by osirion: And the Andaman peoples are tropically adapted.
Yes, the Andamin islanders are tropically adapted, because they reside in the tropics
You are not honestly debating so I won't post footnotes.
I think my examples speak for themselves and you can easily look up genetic data on the Ainu and the Andaman people.
As for the Fulani and Tutsi, they used to live in the green Sahara. They were pushed into the rain forest as the Sahara dried up. The result is that they have some dry weather adaptations similar to Horn Africans.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Again, Africa is not all tropical and as a result not all Black Africans look the same.
On a second look, this above statement from you is a pure example wherein you're trying (still) to pigeonhole tropical adaptations to a single phenotype, you seem to believe the variation amongst Africans has something to do with adapting inside and outside of the tropics of Africa. This is something you've failed to prove. As I've noted already the only indigenous Africans who have moved out of the tropics and resided there enough to alter their limb proportions and skin color would be the Khoisan of southern Africa.
I said I minimized the types of tropics that exist. Since there are various types of tropical zones in Africa, the climatic adaptations in the tropics would vary. There is also dessert type climates that Black Africans have adapted to. Also mountainous regions in the tropics.
In terms of NE Asia, there are actually very good examples of climate adaptations of isolated groups of people that support my theory.
These two people are directly related to each other genetically. One appears almost like a European and the other almost like the Bantu.
The Ainu of Japan are the indigenous people of Japan and Russia. They look almost like Caucasians.
For a long time Europeans claimed an Eastern European origin for the Ainu. However, what is rather remarkable, is that genetic tests show these people to be closely related to the people of the Andaman Islands. Essentially, the Ainu are descendent's of Negrito people.
The Ainu are adapted to the colder climate on Northern Japan which is similar to Europe. And the Andaman peoples are tropically adapted.
A study on the haplo D marker.
YAP insertion signature in South Asia
by: A. Chandrasekar, S. Y. Saheb, P. Gangopadyaya, S. Gangopadyaya, A. Mukherjee, D. Basu, G. R. Lakshmi, A. K. Sahani, B. Das, S. Battacharya, S. Kumar, D. Xaviour, D. Sun, V. R. Rao
"while the founder effect may have resulted in the highest incidence of haplotype D among the Andaman Islanders."
"The results of YAP insertion and the evidence of previous mtDNA studies indicate an early out of Africa migration to the Andaman and Nicobar Islands."
A total of 2169 samples from 21 tribal populations from different regions of India were scanned for the Y-chromosome Alu polymorphism. This study reports, for the first time, high frequencies (8–65%) of Y Alu polymorphic (YAP) insertion in northeast Indian tribes. All seven Jarawa samples from the Andaman and Nicobar islands had the YAP insertion, in conformity with an earlier study of Andaman Islanders.The results of YAP insertion and the evidence of previous mtDNA studies indicate an early out of Africa migration to the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.. YAP insertion frequencies reported in the mainland Indian populations are negligible, according to previous studies. Genetic drift may be the causative factor for the variable frequency of the YAP insertion in the mainland populations, while the founder effect may have resulted in the highest incidence of haplotype D among the Andaman Islanders. The results of YAP insertion and the evidence of previous mtDNA studies indicate an early out of Africa migration to the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. The findings of YAP insertion in northeast Indian tribes are very significant for understanding the evolutionary history of the region.
Y-DNA haplogroup D is seen primarily in Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and in Japan and was established approximately 50,000 years ago. Sub-group D1 (D-M15) is seen in Tibet, Mongolia, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia, and the sub-groups D*(D-M174) and D3 (D-P47) are seen in Central Asia. The sub-group D2 (D-M55) is seen almost exclusively in Japan. The high frequency of haplogroup D in Tibet (about 50%) and in Japan (about 35%) implies some early migratory connection between these areas. Examination of the genetic diversity seen in sub-group D2 in Japan implies that this group has been isolated in Japan for between 12,000-20,000 years. The highest frequencies of D2 in Japan are seen among the Ainu and the Ryukyuans.
The Ainu people
A Dutch- Japanese website.
They show old photos of Japan.
Ainu Chief
Here is the site, it’s in English, Dutch and of course in Japanese.
Ainu chiefs played an important role in their society. Each Ainu village was administered by three hereditary chiefs. Interestingly, they were not allowed to judge criminals. This function was performed by other members of the community.
The Ainu are a distinctive ethnic group which used to have a culture completely different from that of the Japanese. This culture was virtually destroyed during the Meiji Period when policies aimed at assimilating the Ainu into Japanese culture outlawed their language and restricted their activities.
The word Ainu is derived from the word Aynu, which means human. These days some Ainu prefer the term Utari. During the Edo Period they were often referred to as Ezo, Yezo or Emishi. Although the Ainu probably inhabited large areas of Japan, they are now mainly found in Hokkaido.
During the 20th century heated debate raged over the origins of the Ainu. This was finally settled by the mid 1990’s when genetic studies showed that they are “the descendants of Japan’s ancient Jomon inhabitants, mixed with Korean genes of Yayoi colonists and of the modern Japanese.”1
1 Diamond, Jared (June, 1998). Japanese Roots. Discover Magazine Vol. 19: 86-94.
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: I fail to see your point is it supposed to counter something I said? Specifically?
What I showed was, the diversity of the sub-Saharan landscape. And the diversity of the people in that area. I also showed you a map, so you could see the scale of Africa as a whole. AS well as a map of climatic differences in within Africa, sub-Sahara. You have to take into consideration that tribes moved around or stayed in one place. This had effect on their diet and adaption into that environment as it changed over time, and effected their physical appearances.
Personally, I think that this is where genetic mutations started to occur.
Within China alone you will see multiple ethnic groups/ tribes ranging from darker to lighter complexion, I've heard that even the hight of Chinese in the North differs from those who live in the South, due to Mountain area and coastal areas adaption over time.
In India it the same, you will see light complexion as well as dark complexion. (Also known as ethnic groups). And you may say again, I don't see it I fail to see your point.
But that is exactly why Africa is more diverse BECAUSE EVEN NUT-JOBS LIKE YOU CAN SEE IT. Africa has more ethnic groups/ TRIBES (within the same "race").
Siberians are mongoloids, yet are very pale compared to other mongoloids.
Ethnic Minorities in China
From the hinterlands of the north, to the lush jungles in the south, from the mountains of Taiwan in the east, to the top of the world in the west, China serves as home to 56 official ethnic groups. The largest group, the Han, make up over 92% of China's vast population, and it is the elements of Han civilization that world considers "Chinese culture." Yet, the 55 ethnic minorities, nestled away on China's vast frontiers, maintain their own rich traditions and customs, and all are part of Chinese culture.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic