quote:Originally posted by Apocalypse: Even if Tut was R1b isn't this also true?
quote:In human genetics, Haplogroup R1b is the most frequently occurring Y-chromosome haplogroup in Western Europe and amongst speakers of Chadic languages in northern parts of sub-Saharan Central Africa.
Obviously. As I asked Osirion to do. Verify that this haplogroups is European-specific. We need a review.
Recent PloS data suggesting greater diversity towards Anatolia, where Neolithic farmers brought it into Europe, breeding with cold adapted, indigenous foraging mother. Skeletal data suggests that the Natufians, the Anatolian farmers were African in "form" at the highest degree.
Since Afroholic is just an illiterate poster, I can't expect much there. That is, outside of a style that resembles Fox television. You be amazed on how many cultural anthropologists, have noted this phenomena. He still acts like we had a discussion regarding R1b. Is he forgetting that many Black ( almost close to leather shoes), carry the haplogroup? Besides these are autosomal STRs, so we're not getting much of this, village idiot.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
I just placed these STR values in Whit Athey's haplogroup predictor (http://www.hprg.com/hapest5/hapest5b/hapest5.htm), excluding DYS 19 and 47 due to the dual peaks, set the area selection to equal priors, and here are the results: R1a 0.4%, R1b 99.6%.
However, when I ran those numbers into the same program, I got no such results. In fact, results changed according to location of interest and by default it was set the "Northwest Europe" and there's no option for Africa. The R1b nonsense flying around among Euro bloggers seems to be total unchecked nonsense. Unless of course there's more to it than this kind of blatant wishful thinking.
And Bob, let it go. R1b is not common among Africans.. Be objective here, you're desparately scrambling and defending against an argument that isn't even valid.
Posts: 4021 | From: Bay Area, CA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: I've gone through the video a few times; yes, I could make out some peak and associated values, while others not so much. Not sure how the fellow above reached the above. If there is a clearer posting of the results somewhere, I'd be happy to re-examine them.
I noticed the same thing, i.e. that all of the data wasnt clear on the video. So I'm not sure how the individuals came to their conclusion.
These are supposed still shots I found of the video.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
Posts: 2036 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged |
I just placed these STR values in Whit Athey's haplogroup predictor (http://www.hprg.com/hapest5/hapest5b/hapest5.htm), excluding DYS 19 and 47 due to the dual peaks, set the area selection to equal priors, and here are the results: R1a 0.4%, R1b 99.6%.
However, when I ran those numbers into the same program, I got no such results. In fact, results changed according to location of interest and by default it was set the "Northwest Europe" and there's no option for Africa. The R1b nonsense flying around among Euro bloggers seems to be total unchecked nonsense. Unless of course there's more to it than this kind of blatant wishful thinking.
And Bob, let it go. R1b is not common among Africans.. Be objective here, you're desparately scrambling and defending against an argument that isn't even valid.
Exactly, it seems to be the r1b is not even as issiue just a guess by someone watching a clip, then word spreading around. Some Euro bloggers say it is due to Indo European Mittani heritage which would make more sense IF THE R1b is true as opposed to the B.S the professor is trying to say advocate. Then again the R1b is not even authentic.
Hammer post us the page where Hiwass says that R1b is true and that the Dynastic Race is true...You would get laughed out of Ciaro with that B.S and spat on by Native Egyptian Egyptologist suggesting a Dynastic Race theory.
Shut up and let the Intellegencia speak...
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
Hammer aren't you always asking why does the "race" of ancient Egyptians matter? So why the gloating and chest pounding? If you had any sense in your head you would take heed that this pronoucement (that Tut is R1b) is just wild and probably inaccurate speculation. Even if it were true it does not matter. We know that Tut was a black man from his very own portraits done during his life! That'll be the bottom line when whatever you're smoking clears.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
So you used the Y-DNA STR database and allowed mismatches.
Correct. It allows you to access what is available in the worldwide STR database of the particular DNA-testing organization that's hosting the site.
quote: I was using that initially as well. That was until I figured out the data was autosomal.
I'm not sure how that's possible. DYS-designated markers apply only to Y-chromosome markers; none other.
You are correct though, in that these organizations also have autosomal STR databases. Of course, for unfettered access, one will have to register.
quote: The video didn't seem to work for me, but from what I see, no clear headings et al. Seems like we're dealing with a basket case country.
I agree here. Moreover, if what's rashly shown in the video are to be given any grain of salt, then it ought to make sense to officially publish those very results in print for the curious-public out there as well; no? This is why I'm taking the Y-DNA markers MindoverMatter718 recited above from another interactive website above with a healthy dose of caution, i.e. aside from the fact that the STR clusters cited do NOT recall any known modal haplotypes from across different geographical locales.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Yeah, in these, one can make out some of the peaks and the associated number of repeats in perhaps the first two images above. I see one highlighted, under DYS393(?); if that is the value of interest, then should that not read "9" , as opposed to "13"?
Barely making out the specifics of the second image, it appears to be one associated with DYS458; therein, I do see what appears to be an unhighlighted relative peak at "16". The rest is fuzzy and/or don't show the readings complete enough to make an informed assessment.
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
Exactly, it seems to be the r1b is not even as issiue just a guess by someone watching a clip, then word spreading around. Some Euro bloggers say it is due to Indo European Mittani heritage which would make more sense IF THE R1b is true as opposed to the B.S the professor is trying to say advocate. Then again the R1b is not even authentic.
Hammer post us the page where Hiwass says that R1b is true and that the Dynastic Race is true...You would get laughed out of Ciaro with that B.S and spat on by Native Egyptian Egyptologist suggesting a Dynastic Race theory.
Shut up and let the Intellegencia speak...
Correct. The idea that Hg R1 or R1b could show up is not an issue here. It is found in African groups, with markers distinct from Europeans and others elsewhere. In fact, Egypt appears to be one of the two locations [the other was in the Indian sub-continent] where we also come across Hg R* paraphyletic clade, which is absent thus far in either Europe or the "Near East". So, if R1b was to be the marker at hand, matters need to go beyond that; the downstream mutations have to be identified to direct it to a particular sub-clade.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01:
Obviously. As I asked Osirion to do. Verify that this haplogroups is European-specific. We need a review.
Recent PloS data suggesting greater diversity towards Anatolia, where Neolithic farmers brought it into Europe, breeding with cold adapted, indigenous foraging mother. Skeletal data suggests that the Natufians, the Anatolian farmers were African in "form" at the highest degree.
Since Afroholic is just an illiterate poster, I can't expect much there. That is, outside of a style that resembles Fox television. You be amazed on how many cultural anthropologists, have noted this phenomena. He still acts like we had a discussion regarding R1b. Is he forgetting that many Black ( almost close to leather shoes), carry the haplogroup? Besides these are autosomal STRs, so we're not getting much of this, village idiot.
If memory serves me correctly, the 18th Dynasty crania formed closest clusters with "Nubian" examples than any other collection. 18th Dynasty royal remains bespeak anything but "European-like" peoples. Eurocentric loons are now of course, more than welcome to say "Nubians" are no longer synonymous with "Negroes", if it soothens their emotions.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: From a back migration from Central Asia, form where R1b originated, then distributed in central Africa like they also distributed in Western Europe,origins as where the Haplogroup first appeared.
Other than guesswork on your part, does this have any substance to it? My guess is that it doesn't.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Yeah, in these, one can make out some of the peaks and the associated number of repeats in perhaps the first two images above. I see one highlighted, under DYS393(?); if that is the value of interest, then should that not read "9" , as opposed to "13"?
Barely making out the specifics of the second image, it appears to be one associated with DYS458; therein, I do see what appears to be an unhighlighted relative peak at "16". The rest is fuzzy and/or don't show the readings complete enough to make an informed assessment.
Yea, I'm not too sure how these individuals managed to come to their conclusions or gathered the STR's, the images above seem rather fuzzy as you note, and after watching the video initially the data doesn't seem to be that clear, I.e., they take the camera off of the screen many times, not showing everything it seems. As I noted on the first page it's all speculation from individuals who think they read the whole data off of a video thats intent doesn't seem like it was to show it.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't lose it . . .guys. These people(the males) below are NOT R1b. What is floating around the net is just BS. Plus what percentage of Egyptians are R1b? It is a snowball chance in hell he is R1b. In their dreams. The numbers don't add up
Don't be so gullible. You are being played.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Are these Europeans. In your wet dreams. GTFOH!!!
Guest the Turkish Egytian Gov’t is really concerned about the dollars from NG and other Europeans. Did the stupid fughk fudge Tut to be Western European. . .not even Baltic (R1a).? ??? Someone bump Dougs’s portrait thread. Ahhhh never mind I will do it!! As a reminder of the thousand of portraits of the AE.
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Mindover, this board will be a ghost town by the weekend. Tut's DNA is going to blow you out of the water and revive the Dynastic Race Theory. Before you indult these guys you better do some checking. Info is coming out sand it will not be good for you.
It is going to be R1b.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: From a back migration from Central Asia, form where R1b originated, then distributed in central Africa like they also distributed in Western Europe,origins as where the Haplogroup first appeared.
Other than guesswork on your part, does this have any substance to it? My guess is that it doesn't.
This isn't guesswork, it is a fact put by scientists:
Paragroup R1b1* and haplogroup R1b1a (V88) are found most frequently in SW Asia **and** Africa.
In FACT, that particular lineage is even rarer in "SW Asia" than it is in Africa: Link
It also uses this word: "is believed" -- pretty much NOT fact!...but guesswork; educated or otherwise.
You have proven my point that you were not basing this on any solid evidence, but just speculation. In fact, in your case, it's even worse: You don't think for yourself; you just readily accept was is fed to you, simply because someone is called a "scientist". You don't look at evidence yourself, and connect the dots to see if this is consistent with what some researcher is hypothesizing, or if the alternative hypothesis is not equally plausible.
Not only is there a paragroup hg R1b1* in Africa, and the paragroup hg R1*, but unlike "southwest Asia", the paraphyletic hg R* -- the ancestor of hg R1* -- is also located on the African continent. Now, that is a FACT!
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Indeed, the issue of R clade origins has been discussed many times in this forum. There are rural West and Central Africans that carry R*, R1*, and other derivatives. I suppose these people are of European ancestry too. Posts: 26237 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Bantus as well. That's what I'm trying to tell PR, who seems confused as well. I am starting to think he's some Levatine migrant, who lives in the Caribbean. I hope they get respected there, since that doesn't apply in the Peninsula.
So it's guess work, and as I said earlier, uni-parental markers does not directly relate to specific phenotypes. Divergence does not have to coincide with the development of "European traits". Oh, and Lebanon isn't the world, so start understanding that white slavery during the Middle Ages had deeply impacted the population. It was, after all, the King of Kings, Mansa Musa, who purchased various assets on his way, such as Turkish concubines on his way to and from the Hajj.
We also understand that Southwest Asians, even during the Neolithic, looked much like those within sub-Saharan Africa. That is especially the case of the Natufians and Neolithic farmers within the Anatolia. So I asked, like I did earlier, do you have recent data suggesting otherwise? Do you have evidence that R is synonymous to European differentiation?
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Yet, that source says these very things:
Paragroup R1b1* and haplogroup R1b1a (V88) are found most frequently in SW Asia **and** Africa.
In FACT, that particular lineage is even rarer in "SW Asia" than it is in Africa: Link
It also uses this word: "is believed" -- pretty much NOT fact!...but guesswork; educated or otherwise.
You have proven my point that you were not basing this on any solid evidence, but just speculation. In fact, in your case, it's even worse: You don't think for yourself; you just readily accept was is fed to you, simply because someone is called a "scientist". You don't look at evidence yourself, and connect the dots to see if this is consistent with what some researcher is hypothesizing, or if the alternative hypothesis is not equally plausible.
Not only is there a paragroup hg R1b1* in Africa, and the paragroup hg R1*, but unlike "southwest Asia", the paraphyletic hg R* -- the ancestor of hg R1* -- is also located on the African continent. Now, that is a FACT!
And are those data also facts, and not just assumptions from the sicentists you get the info from, what makes your scientists more trustable then the ones I get my info, because if we go by what you say, we can't trust any scientist existant,haplogroup R has been oficcially proven to have been orginitade in Asia, and I am not speaking about the paragroup, but the original founder R*, who was first found in central Asia, descended from M45.
Posts: 1106 | From: Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: I am starting to think he's some Levatine migrant, who lives in the Caribbean. I hope they get respected there, since that doesn't apply in the Peninsula.
Don't listen to your imagination, perhaps I could have a distant Levantine ancestry, but I will tell you when my MTDNA results comes. Posts: 1106 | From: Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
Yes. They were collected from the gene pool of *real* living and breathing people; what else would they be?
quote: , and not just assumptions from the sicentists you get the info from
Is your DNA an assumption; think about it, and then come and ask me this question again.
quote: , what makes your scientists more trustable then the ones I get my info
What scientists are you talking about here? I got my FACTs from the same sources your link references. The difference between you and I, is 1) I actually read those sources, and 2)I actually know what is going on in those studies. Hence, I don't simply parrot what someone may or may not "believe". I look at the evidence presented.
quote:, because if we go by what you say
Which is?
quote: , we can't trust any scientist existant
Can you trust what they claim to have found, at the very least?
quote: ,haplogroup R has been oficcially proven to have been orginitade in Asia
"Officially" by whom? According to what?
quote: and I am not speaking about the paragroup, but the original founder R*, who was first found in central Asia, descended from M45.
By hg R* in my post, what did you think I was referring to? Putting that aside, give me the specific location, sample size, group and work wherein we come across the "original founder R* in central Asia".
Ps - Go on, read up real quick and then come and reply. You were obviously not read on these issues when you replied my post; but I'm a patient person. Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
I just placed these STR values in Whit Athey's haplogroup predictor (http://www.hprg.com/hapest5/hapest5b/hapest5.htm), excluding DYS 19 and 47 due to the dual peaks, set the area selection to equal priors, and here are the results: R1a 0.4%, R1b 99.6%.
However, when I ran those numbers into the same program, I got no such results. In fact, results changed according to location of interest and by default it was set the "Northwest Europe" and there's no option for Africa. The R1b nonsense flying around among Euro bloggers seems to be total unchecked nonsense. Unless of course there's more to it than this kind of blatant wishful thinking.
And Bob, let it go. R1b is not common among Africans.. Be objective here, you're desparately scrambling and defending against an argument that isn't even valid.
I did the same as well. Three mismatches had to be used to match with R1b. These STR variables are not from the nuclear DNA.
Umm, err, where did I ever claim that Hg R is of African origin? You need to look at the inane position of others. Those who really think their unsubstantiated claim could somehow influence valid information.
From what we know of variance studies, R1b (yes, the mother of R1b1b2) has a southwest Asian origin. Saying, let's slow it down, those pre-historic populations resembled tropically adapted sub-Saharan Africans.
Do you think that isn't the case? Please demonstrate that by referring to literature that suggests that the pre-historic southwest Asian populations anatomically resembled European populations. Where are the indigenous cold-adapted, pale-skinned, populations of southwest Asia?
PS: Remember we're all biased. I try not to substitute objectivity with, maintaining the dominant, sub-intellectual, paradigm. There's nothing admirable about that.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
here is a video giving details about Haplogroup R origins http://www.genebase.com/tutorial/item.php?tuId=11 [/QUOTE] You need to cite data. Remember, you're in pre-natal state, at the moment. I can't watch the video, but I doubt it states that the uni-parental marker developed amongst "Caucasoids", never mind, cold adapted peoples, who resembled Europeans.
I'll ask again, who were the indigenous peoples of southwest Asia, and who did they most resemble? I want literature on the pre-historic peoples physical traits, and who they most approximated to. It's a rather simple request, by the way.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: I'll ask again, who were the indigenous peoples of southwest Asia, and who did they most resemble? I want literature on the pre-historic peoples physical traits, and who they most approximated to. It's a rather simple request, by the way.
quote: Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful and are presumed to have been about 166 to 171 cm (about 5 feet 5 inches to 5 feet 7 inches) tall. The body was generally heavy and solid, apparently with strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges, and the face short and wide. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cc (100 cubic inches), somewhat larger than the average for modern humans. It is thought that Cro-Magnons were probably fairly tall compared with other early human species.
quote: According to an analysis of a sample of human remains from Natufian sites, the inhabitants of the region appeared to have some Sub-Saharan influences. Ricaut et al. associate these Sub-Saharan influences with the dispersal of haplogroup E1b1b lineages from Africa. The material culture of the Natufian also leaves open the possibility of some African influences.
The Ubaid and Uruk were related to Semitic people of the Levant, were the caucasian type originated.
Posts: 1106 | From: Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: I'll ask again, who were the indigenous peoples of southwest Asia, and who did they most resemble? I want literature on the pre-historic peoples physical traits, and who they most approximated to. It's a rather simple request, by the way.
quote: Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful and are presumed to have been about 166 to 171 cm (about 5 feet 5 inches to 5 feet 7 inches) tall. The body was generally heavy and solid, apparently with strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges, and the face short and wide. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cc (100 cubic inches), somewhat larger than the average for modern humans. It is thought that Cro-Magnons were probably fairly tall compared with other early human species.
quote: According to an analysis of a sample of human remains from Natufian sites, the inhabitants of the region appeared to have some Sub-Saharan influences. Ricaut et al. associate these Sub-Saharan influences with the dispersal of haplogroup E1b1b lineages from Africa. The material culture of the Natufian also leaves open the possibility of some African influences.
The Ubaid and Uruk were related to Semitic people of the Levant, were the caucasian type originated.
Why does the "Caucasian" type combine "Caucus" and "Asian" if the origin of such type is in the Levant?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: I'll ask again, who were the indigenous peoples of southwest Asia, and who did they most resemble? I want literature on the pre-historic peoples physical traits, and who they most approximated to. It's a rather simple request, by the way.
quote: Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful and are presumed to have been about 166 to 171 cm (about 5 feet 5 inches to 5 feet 7 inches) tall. The body was generally heavy and solid, apparently with strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges, and the face short and wide. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cc (100 cubic inches), somewhat larger than the average for modern humans. It is thought that Cro-Magnons were probably fairly tall compared with other early human species.
quote: According to an analysis of a sample of human remains from Natufian sites, the inhabitants of the region appeared to have some Sub-Saharan influences. Ricaut et al. associate these Sub-Saharan influences with the dispersal of haplogroup E1b1b lineages from Africa. The material culture of the Natufian also leaves open the possibility of some African influences.
The Ubaid and Uruk were related to Semitic people of the Levant, were the caucasian type originated.
Do you post in some other forum or something? It's rather obvious you're really investing in bullshit. What do these descriptions mean when there is no comparative assessment? How do those populations stand with neighboring populations?
As I said, the "Caucasoid" nonsense, is predicated on the idea that human traits redeveloped in "Caucasian". That is those traits cannot develop amongst Africans, because both are sisters. Why can't you get that into your thick skull?
The African population is the most diverse region. The world's genetic trait is derived from an African pool, which is well represented by the modern population. If some Lebanese turned into a polar bear, so could Africans. That's because European represent DAUGHTERS.
Those excerpt you post do not override the fact that the "West Asians" that influenced East Africans, looked like AFRICANS. That gene flow is not comparable to the specific J gene flow that is associated with the expansion of the Arabs into Northern Africa.
Provide a paper that these populations were COLD adapted peoples. I also wonder, when the hell did "Caucasoids" also include tropically adapted peoples? This idea seems rather bizarre, because the trait only developed in Africa once. I ask again, do you understand what race means? These "Caucasians" would have to have developed ALL the traits entailed (dark skin, tropically adapted body plain), independently, outside the development in Africa.
It must not be a daughter population, because umm, these daughter populations would undergo a separate recombination process. Those populations would have had local admixture within, and due to the small population (vs common parent source), would've underwent potential bottlenecks and natural selection, and turned to two rather distinct populations. The parent population, on the other hand, could potentially develop whatever traits those two populations have developed. Like mother, like daughter, not, like daughter, like mother. I swear, it's like I'm some insane asylum.
E.g
You're a bird. You **** another bird.
Your grand^10 child evolves into bat. Somehow.
Let's assume one marker was involved, for simplicity sake.
The bat marker is derived from the marker(s*) that produces bird traits.
That, bat-looking grand^15 CANNOT develop into a bird.
That bat would lack the genetic base to produce traits that its ancestors featured. In other words, our archaic human ancestors, earlier hominids, and what not, would have traits we likely won't develop. Some traits, maybe, however a human is not going to be pumping out some Australopithecus Africanus child.
PS: Listen, I'm immortal when you compare to that board. You also need to stop being schizophrenic as well. I've explained this several times, and it's rather basic Biology as well.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
One more thing, use better sources. It's well known that encyclopaedia are designed for a specific market. I could cite the White Supremacist Encyclopaedia to prove that Mindovermatter descended from a prehistoric Super Cacuasoid. That wikipedia article is rubbish.
As for Cromagnon population, it refers to a group of loosely defined populations. European hominids, more or less, resembled Africans. That is because they were still tropically adapted, and yes, I'm talking about the remains found in France.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: I'll ask again, who were the indigenous peoples of southwest Asia, and who did they most resemble? I want literature on the pre-historic peoples physical traits, and who they most approximated to. It's a rather simple request, by the way.
quote: Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful and are presumed to have been about 166 to 171 cm (about 5 feet 5 inches to 5 feet 7 inches) tall. The body was generally heavy and solid, apparently with strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges, and the face short and wide. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cc (100 cubic inches), somewhat larger than the average for modern humans. It is thought that Cro-Magnons were probably fairly tall compared with other early human species.
quote: According to an analysis of a sample of human remains from Natufian sites, the inhabitants of the region appeared to have some Sub-Saharan influences. Ricaut et al. associate these Sub-Saharan influences with the dispersal of haplogroup E1b1b lineages from Africa. The material culture of the Natufian also leaves open the possibility of some African influences.
The Ubaid and Uruk were related to Semitic people of the Levant, were the caucasian type originated.
Do you post in some other forum or something? It's rather obvious you're really investing in bullshit. What do these descriptions mean when there is no comparative assessment? How do those populations stand with neighboring populations?
As I said, the "Caucasoid" nonsense, is predicated on the idea that human traits redeveloped in "Caucasian". That is those traits cannot develop amongst Africans, because both are sisters. Why can't you get that into your thick skull?
The African population is the most diverse region. The world's genetic trait is derived from an African pool, which is well represented by the modern population. If some Lebanese turned into a polar bear, so could Africans. That's because European represent DAUGHTERS.
Those excerpt you post do not override the fact that the "West Asians" that influenced East Africans, looked like AFRICANS. That gene flow is not comparable to the specific J gene flow that is associated with the expansion of the Arabs into Northern Africa.
Provide a paper that these populations were COLD adapted peoples. I also wonder, when the hell did "Caucasoids" also include tropically adapted peoples? This idea seems rather bizarre, because the trait only developed in Africa once. I ask again, do you understand what race means? These "Caucasians" would have to have developed ALL the traits entailed (dark skin, tropically adapted body plain), independently, outside the development in Africa.
It must not be a daughter population, because umm, these daughter populations would undergo a separate recombination process. Those populations would have had local admixture within, and due to the small population (vs common parent source), would've underwent potential bottlenecks and natural selection, and turned to two rather distinct populations. The parent population, on the other hand, could potentially develop whatever traits those two populations have developed. Like mother, like daughter, not, like daughter, like mother. I swear, it's like I'm some insane asylum.
E.g
You're a bird. You **** another bird.
Your grand^10 child evolves into bat. Somehow.
Let's assume one marker was involved, for simplicity sake.
The bat marker is derived from the marker(s*) that produces bird traits.
That, bat-looking grand^15 CANNOT develop into a bird.
That bat would lack the genetic base to produce traits that its ancestors featured. In other words, our archaic human ancestors, earlier hominids, and what not, would have traits we likely won't develop. Some traits, maybe, however a human is not going to be pumping out some Australopithecus Africanus child.
PS: Listen, I'm immortal when you compare to that board. You also need to stop being schizophrenic as well. I've explained this several times, and it's rather basic Biology as well.
Nope, the people living in Southwest Asia weren't cold adapted because...they even't have gone that far at at time, so, yes, they will have a dark pigmentation due to the environment, but they would resemblence Levant people.
P.S. Try to avoid the stupid comments, because I haven't saying nothing to you and I expect the same from you.
Posts: 1106 | From: Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
You claim that the marker has "officially" been declared to have origin in "SW Asia", spurring requests for specifics of "whom", and according to "what", and you give me a "tutorial"; are you serious? LOL.
And I see that you didn't even take that advice of doing minimal reading before coming back to lazily give me that irrelevant link, which you no doubt likely have not read beyond skimming through.
It reads this:
The level of Haplogroup R is generally low in Africa (10% or much less) and found mostly in the Northeast. The interesting exception is in North Cameroon with levels ~75%, while surrounding regions lack this haplogroup.
And says:
Another interesting R1b1/P25 pocket lies in North Cameroon. The presence of the R haplogroup in Africa has been noted above, including the unusual abundance in North Cameroon (60-90%!). The best supported explanation for this finding is back migration from Asia and a TMRCA estimate for the R1/M173 parental lineage is ~4kya. The finding of a specific subclade rather than an undifferentiated R1 lineage may help to further understand the migrations of people from Asia back into Africa.
Notice how "interesting" is used many times, and "unusual"? It is because its noted presence in Africa busts [Eurocentric] conventional "expectations" of not only how much presence it should have that far down on the continent, but also what sort of markers these should be; hence, the author above is dismayed by the presence of undifferentiated R1 lineage, as opposed to a specific subclade which will make it hopefully more easier for said author to envision a "back-migration" scenario. In other words, the present evidence does not allow the author to make such a proposition, but a convenient "specific sub-clade" would be appealing, so as to allow the author to support a preconceived ideology. That is to say, the author is hopeful to make evidence work for an idea that had no material support to begin with, rather than, adjudge what present evidence speaks. Furthermore, the site says...
While the exact location for the origin of Haplogroup R is under debate, its general placement in West-Central Asia was followed by expansion in all directions, stretching to the ‘Seven Seas’.
This actually busts your intention for posting this link, as it makes it clear that there is no "official" consensus declaration, as evidenced by lack of a concise geographical origin. Again, merely guesswork within competing viewpoints, warranting a "general placement". Had you bothered actually reading and understanding what you cite, you would have caught onto these details.
The notes of site is also apparently out of date, as the paraphyletic Chromosomes of hg R1 have not only been identified in northern Cameroon, but has now been implicated in Chadic region, expectedly so, and spanning northern Africa, although Cameroon-to-Chad [Rwanda too was implicated in past publications], have by far the greatest incidences of these markers.
Fact is, you have not engaged actual evidence I gave you in my brief post earlier, along with a link. You have no case, and no mind of your own; just hearsay as a form of argument.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01:
Umm, err, where did I ever claim that Hg R is of African origin? You need to look at the inane position of others.
Sign me up; i.e. I have entertained the possibility of an African origin, and I am certainly open to learning about the fine details of what makes this position of mine "inane".
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: I'll ask again, who were the indigenous peoples of southwest Asia, and who did they most resemble? I want literature on the pre-historic peoples physical traits, and who they most approximated to. It's a rather simple request, by the way. [
quote: Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful and are presumed to have been about 166 to 171 cm (about 5 feet 5 inches to 5 feet 7 inches) tall. The body was generally heavy and solid, apparently with strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges, and the face short and wide. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cc (100 cubic inches), somewhat larger than the average for modern humans. It is thought that Cro-Magnons were probably fairly tall compared with other early human species.
quote: According to an analysis of a sample of human remains from Natufian sites, the inhabitants of the region appeared to have some Sub-Saharan influences. Ricaut et al. associate these Sub-Saharan influences with the dispersal of haplogroup E1b1b lineages from Africa. The material culture of the Natufian also leaves open the possibility of some African influences.
The Ubaid and Uruk were related to Semitic people of the Levant, were the caucasian type originated. [/qb]
Do you post in some other forum or something? It's rather obvious you're really investing in bullshit. What do these descriptions mean when there is no comparative assessment? How do those populations stand with neighboring populations?
As I said, the "Caucasoid" nonsense, is predicated on the idea that human traits redeveloped in "Caucasian". That is those traits cannot develop amongst Africans, because both are sisters. Why can't you get that into your thick skull?
The African population is the most diverse region. The world's genetic trait is derived from an African pool, which is well represented by the modern population. If some Lebanese turned into a polar bear, so could Africans. That's because European represent DAUGHTERS.
Those excerpt you post do not override the fact that the "West Asians" that influenced East Africans, looked like AFRICANS. That gene flow is not comparable to the specific J gene flow that is associated with the expansion of the Arabs into Northern Africa.
Provide a paper that these populations were COLD adapted peoples. I also wonder, when the hell did "Caucasoids" also include tropically adapted peoples? This idea seems rather bizarre, because the trait only developed in Africa once. I ask again, do you understand what race means? These "Caucasians" would have to have developed ALL the traits entailed (dark skin, tropically adapted body plain), independently, outside the development in Africa.
It must not be a daughter population, because umm, these daughter populations would undergo a separate recombination process. Those populations would have had local admixture within, and due to the small population (vs common parent source), would've underwent potential bottlenecks and natural selection, and turned to two rather distinct populations. The parent population, on the other hand, could potentially develop whatever traits those two populations have developed. Like mother, like daughter, not, like daughter, like mother. I swear, it's like I'm some insane asylum.
E.g
You're a bird. You **** another bird.
Your grand^10 child evolves into bat. Somehow.
Let's assume one marker was involved, for simplicity sake.
The bat marker is derived from the marker(s*) that produces bird traits.
That, bat-looking grand^15 CANNOT develop into a bird.
That bat would lack the genetic base to produce traits that its ancestors featured. In other words, our archaic human ancestors, earlier hominids, and what not, would have traits we likely won't develop. Some traits, maybe, however a human is not going to be pumping out some Australopithecus Africanus child.
PS: Listen, I'm immortal when you compare to that board. You also need to stop being schizophrenic as well. I've explained this several times, and it's rather basic Biology as well. [/qb]
Nope, the people living in Southwest Asia weren't cold adapted because...they even't have gone that far at at time,
What? I don't understand what you're suggesting. The population was tropically adapted, because the trait developed within Arica.
quote:so, yes, they will have a dark pigmentation due to the environment,
Yes, they'd be black skinned.
quote:but they would resemblence Levant people.
I'd expect you to maintain more honest and actually do some prior readings. Did you even READ the Brace paper you cited and I referred to?
quote:When the samples used in Fig. 1Fig. 1. are compared by the use of canonical variate plots as in Fig. 2Fig. 2., the separateness of the ****Niger-Congo speakers**** is again quite clear. Interestingly enough, however, the small Natufian sample falls between the Niger-Congo group and the other samples used. Fig. 2Fig. 2. shows the plot produced by the first two canonical variates, but the same thing happens when canonical variates 1 and 3 (not shown here) are used. This placement suggests that there may have been a Sub-Saharan African element in the make-up of the Natufians (the putative ancestors of the subsequent Neolithic), although in this particular test there is no such evident presence in the North African or Egyptian samples. As shown in Fig. 1Fig. 1., the Somalis and the Egyptian Bronze Age sample from Naqada may also have a hint of a Sub-Saharan African component. That was not borne out in the canonical variate plot (Fig. 2Fig. 2.), and there was no evidence of such an involvement in the Algerian Neolithic (Gambetta) sample. Link
Do you understand what this paper suggests? It suggests that the Natufians physical traits would be in between Congo speakers and other populations, which includes Somalis. The Natufians, in fact, are quite far from Middle Easterners.
The population, in other words, looked more "sub-Saharan" (euphemism for "Negroid") than the Somalis. It's obviously stupid, because Somalis are from that region, but he instead uses Coonian definitions. In other words, the phenotype would've resembled Somalis and other North Arican, Southern European, and West Asian Neolithic peoples (and Mesolithic) who'd resemble Africans according to cranio-facial indices.
That's on top of a tropically adapted body plain pushing them away from modern Levantine peoples. The environmental factor your bring up is predicated on the idea that somehow climate drastically changes when going through the Sinai peninsula. As I said, those traits you see in the Levant are likely not indigenous. The Sumerians (who were black-skinned), themselves, were also invaders from the East.
quote: P.S. Try to avoid the stupid comments, because I haven't saying nothing to you and I expect the same from you. [/qb]
Stop being stupid then, Levantine fool. I am not looking forward to be looked down by some plumber, who seems to lecture people without using material. The, whatever-my-illiterate-grandmother-said-is-Truth, mentality is rather rude, and I don't care if you act "nice". It's anything, but that.
As I said earlier, you've failed to demonstrate an understanding of what the classification of races entails. The same goes for assuming that modern Levantine peoples (how familiar are you with that land?) represent the pre-historic population without using a shred of evidence. Why would that be the case? There is no stark climatic differences, thus it wouldn't translate to drastic physical changes.
Do you know what my position regarding Ancient Egypt is? It's quite simple and suggests that I don't have a rather grand agenda as I've noticed of users such as yourself:
1. AE population most resembled Nile Valley populations..
2. Modern Egyptians descend from the ancient population.
3. The modern populations cluster more with BLACK Ancient Egyptians and Nile populations than the stereotypical "West Africans".
4. West Africans, stereotypical or otherwise, cluster more with Ancient Egyptians than Europeans or Middle Easterners (specifically those in the Anatolia, Levant).
quote:Sign me up; i.e. I have entertained the possibility of an African origin, and I am certainly open to learning about the fine details of what makes this position of mine "inane".
I was referring to Hg R1b. Sundjata argued that it wasn't African. I, on the other hand, suggested it is not European. As for Hg R1Y and it's ancestral clade, I also feel that it originates within Africa.
PS: It seems like these users post on a very similar board. Much of this information isn't exactly new either.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
I was referring to Hg R1b. Sundjata argued that it wasn't African. I, on the other hand, suggested it is not European.
Here is FACT: There has been more incidences of paraphyletic hg R1b chromosomes in African gene pool than either Europe or "SW Asia". What does this mean? It means that the African markers are dominated by more phylogenetically basal clades than the Europeans or "SW Asians". However, many though not all, fell into what Cruciani calls R-V88. That marker itself was more common in Africa, and rare elsewhere, according to Cruciani's own report.
It doesn't stop there: Africans have also reported for hg R1* markers lacking the P25 marker. The above clades all have the P25 marker.
Furthermore, the paraphyletic hg R, the clade that is even more basal than the paraphyletic hg R1*, has also been located on the continent. This clade, to my knowledge, has not been located in either Europe or "SW Asia".
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
I was referring to Hg R1b. Sundjata argued that it wasn't African. I, on the other hand, suggested it is not European.
Here is FACT: There has been more incidences of paraphyletic hg R1b chromosomes in African gene pool than either Europe or "SW Asia". What does this mean? It means that the African markers are dominated by more phylogenetically basal clades than the Europeans or "SW Asians". However, many though not all, fell into what Cruciani calls R-V88. That marker itself was more common in Africa, and rare elsewhere, according to Cruciani's own report.
It doesn't stop there: Africans have also reported for hg R1* markers lacking the P25 marker. The above clades all have the P25 marker.
Furthermore, the paraphyletic hg R, the clade that is even more basal than the paraphyletic hg R1*, has also been located on the continent. This clade, to my knowledge, has not been located in either Europe or "SW Asia".
Sounds interesting. I know that 6 January Cruciani paper deals R-V88. What other sources is your position based on?
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: What? I don't understand what you're suggesting. The population was tropically adapted, because the trait developed within Arica.
Exactly, that is what I meant.
quote:so, yes, they will have a dark pigmentation due to the environment,
Yes, they'd be black skinned.
quote:but they would resemblence Levant people.
I'd expect you to maintain more honest and actually do some prior readings. Did you even READ the Brace paper you cited and I referred to?
quote:When the samples used in Fig. 1Fig. 1. are compared by the use of canonical variate plots as in Fig. 2Fig. 2., the separateness of the ****Niger-Congo speakers**** is again quite clear. Interestingly enough, however, the small Natufian sample falls between the Niger-Congo group and the other samples used. Fig. 2Fig. 2. shows the plot produced by the first two canonical variates, but the same thing happens when canonical variates 1 and 3 (not shown here) are used. This placement suggests that there may have been a Sub-Saharan African element in the make-up of the Natufians (the putative ancestors of the subsequent Neolithic), although in this particular test there is no such evident presence in the North African or Egyptian samples. As shown in Fig. 1Fig. 1., the Somalis and the Egyptian Bronze Age sample from Naqada may also have a hint of a Sub-Saharan African component. That was not borne out in the canonical variate plot (Fig. 2Fig. 2.), and there was no evidence of such an involvement in the Algerian Neolithic (Gambetta) sample. Link
Do you understand what this paper suggests? It suggests that the Natufians physical traits would be in between Congo speakers and other populations, which includes Somalis. The Natufians, in fact, are quite far from Middle Easterners.
The population, in other words, looked more "sub-Saharan" (euphemism for "Negroid") than the Somalis. It's obviously stupid, because Somalis are from that region, but he instead uses Coonian definitions. In other words, the phenotype would've resembled Somalis and other North Arican, Southern European, and West Asian Neolithic peoples (and Mesolithic) who'd resemble Africans according to cranio-facial indices.
That's on top of a tropically adapted body plain pushing them away from modern Levantine peoples. The environmental factor your bring up is predicated on the idea that somehow climate drastically changes when going through the Sinai peninsula. As I said, those traits you see in the Levant are likely not indigenous. The Sumerians (who were black-skinned), themselves, were also invaders from the East.[/quote]But remember the Natufians didn't origin ate in the levant, but had Ancient African ancestry,as their Y-DNA E1b1b suggests, so it is logical for them to have Native African characteristics.
quote:As I said earlier, you've failed to demonstrate an understanding of what the classification of races entails. The same goes for assuming that modern Levantine peoples (how familiar are you with that land?) represent the pre-historic population without using a shred of evidence. Why would that be the case? There is no stark climatic differences, thus it wouldn't translate to drastic physical changes.
Nope, but the Cro-Magnon and Sub-Saharid people do represnt that place pre-history.
quote:Do you know what my position regarding Ancient Egypt is? It's quite simple and suggests that I don't have a rather grand agenda as I've noticed of users such as yourself:
1. AE population most resembled Nile Valley populations..
2. Modern Egyptians descend from the ancient population.
3. The modern populations cluster more with BLACK Ancient Egyptians and Nile populations than the stereotypical "West Africans".
4. West Africans, stereotypical or otherwise, cluster more with Ancient Egyptians than Europeans or Middle Easterners (specifically those in the Anatolia, Levant).
I also agree with it.
Posts: 1106 | From: Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Nope, but the Cro-Magnon and Sub-Saharid people do represnt that place pre-history. "
Stubborn brat. You sound like some illegitimate child who inflates himself. First of all, what the hell do there terms means? You still don't define the terms you use, nor apply them in a consistent manner.
These terms, as I said, are description. To Brace, Somalis, et al, who are SOUTH of the Sahara, you moron, were not considered such. That would result to LESS sub-Saharan matches.
Jesus Christ, Puerto Rico must be a race place as well. The Torah, itself, not to mention, Abrahmic religions, tied the Canaanites, the original people of Levant, with those from Egypt. That is those of Ham, who included the people of Abyssinia.
As I said earlier, the Natufian samples would be intermediate to SOMALIS and the so-called Niger-Congo peoples. That would resemble a tropically-adapted population that one would be able to find within Africa. Jesus, call the population whatever you want.
I'm still waiting for proof that:
1. Levantine peoples aren't child populations of sub-Saharan Africans, but rather sister to.
2. The population resembled modern populations more so than Somalis AND Neolithic Mediterraneans cluster.
3. Cro-Magnon is not a loose term of a variety of fossil types, and, that the primary trait is not one where the population was tropically adapted, and resembled Africans.
4. Saharans and sub-Saharans developed into two distinct populations, as sister populations. The mother population either disappeared or resides within the Sahara, and "sub-Saharans" do not represent the source of humanity.
5. Somalis are Saharan populations even though they live south of the Sahara. The Somali does not represent the local variation within the "sub-Saharan" region.
Your position seems to leaning towards to theories similar to Mathilda et al. I find it rather disturbing that you continue to maintain it despite being a poster on this user far longer than I.
The minute you argue that tropical adapted, traits present amongst African population redeveloped: I want evidence. That is, that these traits REDEVELOPED amongst archaic homo sapiens within these lands. The lack of consistency in your argument hinders your position, because it seems like to you, those African-esque populations, developed these traits independently outside of Africa.
I repeat: the Natufians were INTERMEDIATE to Niger-Congo speakers and Somalis. This is according to cranio-facial values, and Natufians be part of common twig with the "sub-Saharan" population. Remember, look at the study, not the abstract, which could be littered with a lot of bias.
PS: The mentality that runs around Puerto Rico is not unlike the Levant. It has a lot to do with fair people, who aren't accepted within the West, but attempt to compete with "Blacks" (Somalis included, ironically) in order to be part of the dominant class. That Afro-phobic behavior is hardly foreign in either lands.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: [QB]As I said earlier, the Natufian samples would be intermediate to SOMALIS and the so-called Niger-Congo peoples. That would resemble a tropically-adapted population that one would be able to find within Africa. Jesus, call the population whatever you want.
I call them native Africans who migrated to West Asia.
quote:I'm still waiting for proof that:
1. Levantine peoples aren't child populations of sub-Saharan Africans, but rather sister to.
2. The population resembled modern populations more so than Somalis AND Neolithic Mediterraneans cluster.
3. Cro-Magnon is not a loose term of a variety of fossil types, and, that the primary trait is not one where the population was tropically adapted, and resembled Africans.
4. Saharans and sub-Saharans developed into two distinct populations, as sister populations. The mother population either disappeared or resides within the Sahara, and "sub-Saharans" do not represent the source of humanity.
5. Somalis are Saharan populations even though they live south of the Sahara. The Somali does not represent the local variation within the "sub-Saharan" region.
if you mean the Y HG E1b1b people, then yes, they are brothers to Native Africans, Y HG J peoples are from another OOA migration(Y HG F people descendants).Also the Y HG F*n people represnt the Cro-Magnon man who was tropical adapted and didn't change when getting out of Africa(as you see many bearers of that haplogroup to be dark skinmned peoples)Natufians were Sub-Saharid who migrated to the Levant from East Africa,but there were other people on there who weren't related to Natufians.The Cro-Magnon was a human species from the Paleolithic, there are descndants within the Middle East and Europe, who has their physical characteristics(the stocky and Tall one)
quote:PS: The mentality that runs around Puerto Rico is not unlike the Levant. It has a lot to do with fair people, who aren't accepted within the West, but attempt to compete with "Blacks" (Somalis included, ironically) in order to be part of the dominant class. That Afro-phobic behavior is hardly foreign in either lands.
Some of us have the Afrophobic behavior I am afriad but I am not of these ones, I just want to find the truth.
Posts: 1106 | From: Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL!!! These Euro-idiots thought they were in the know when all along they were subscribing to gobbledeegook, reactionary pseudo scholarship, boy whitey sure is lame. God forgive My Caucasian Albino Brethren.
Another myth taught by my ex-Euroloons friends. This theory has been debunked a thousand times, even by white scholars. I am so baffled at the uneducated Caucasian Albinos
If fraud is the sign of a desperate person threatened by what others say than you are truly the most pitiful of fakes. You who pretends to be a Black man while posting the most anti-Black, racist nonsense.
I know, Iknow! I am so pathetic, but my bi-polar disorder takes over sometimes. I say things, and I do things totally against my character when I dont have my medication. Please forgive me, if I say some retarded stuff sometimes, but I just love to cause discord and mischeif.
Me and my other username are one in the same, dont be misled by my ex-EuroTalk, it was all nonsense.
Dirk8 you are the dumbest Mofo in the world, only after me, and the rest of the whites that wish they could steal the skin off my African black back.
No Hammer you should get a job. If your work ethic is anything like your intelligence level you are phucked albino.
Posts: 416 | From: Solar System | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: I'll ask again, who were the indigenous peoples of southwest Asia, and who did they most resemble? I want literature on the pre-historic peoples physical traits, and who they most approximated to. It's a rather simple request, by the way.
quote: Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful and are presumed to have been about 166 to 171 cm (about 5 feet 5 inches to 5 feet 7 inches) tall. The body was generally heavy and solid, apparently with strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges, and the face short and wide. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cc (100 cubic inches), somewhat larger than the average for modern humans. It is thought that Cro-Magnons were probably fairly tall compared with other early human species.
quote: According to an analysis of a sample of human remains from Natufian sites, the inhabitants of the region appeared to have some Sub-Saharan influences. Ricaut et al. associate these Sub-Saharan influences with the dispersal of haplogroup E1b1b lineages from Africa. The material culture of the Natufian also leaves open the possibility of some African influences.
The Ubaid and Uruk were related to Semitic people of the Levant, were the caucasian type originated.
Why does the "Caucasian" type combine "Caucus" and "Asian" if the origin of such type is in the Levant?
What Caucasian "type" originated in the Levant and where did you get the notion that the Caucasian comes from Caucus and Asian - Dirk. Those have no more to do with the name Caucasus then do the words Coc_ and As_. I couldn't think of any other analogy. Sorry - but your suggestion was a silly. one. Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
An examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development?
K. Goddea, b, Corresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author
aDepartment of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 250 South Stadium Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA
bDepartment of Science, South College, 3904 Lonas Dr, Knoxville, TN 37909, USA
Received 31 July 2008; accepted 10 August 2009. Available online 19 September 2009.
Abstract
Many authors have speculated on Nubian biological evolution. Because of the contact Nubians had with other peoples, migration and/or invasion (biological diffusion) were originally thought to be the biological mechanism for skeletal changes in Nubians. Later, a new hypothesis was put forth, the in situ hypothesis. The new hypothesis postulated that Nubians evolved in situ, without much genetic influence from foreign populations. This study examined 12 Egyptian and Nubian groups in an effort to explore the relationship between the two populations and to test the in situ hypothesis. Data from nine cranial nonmetric traits were assessed for an estimate of biological distance, using Mahalanobis D2 with a tetrachoric matrix. The distance scores were then input into principal coordinates analysis (PCO) to depict the relationships between the two populations. PCO detected 60% of the variation in the first two principal coordinates. A plot of the distance scores revealed only one cluster; the Nubian and Egyptian groups clustered together. The grouping of the Nubians and Egyptians indicates there may have been some sort of gene flow between these groups of Nubians and Egyptians. However, common adaptation to similar environments may also be responsible for this pattern. Although the predominant results in this study appear to support the biological diffusion hypothesis, the in situ hypothesis was not completely negated.
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
The nubian mesolithic: A consideration of the Wadi Halfa remains
References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.
Meredith F. Small*
Department of anthropology, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80302, U.S.A.
Received 4 June 1980; accepted 30 October 1980. Available online 5 April 2006.
Morphological variation of the skeletal remains of ancient Nubia has been traditionally explained as a product of multiple migrations into the Nile Valley. In contrast, various researchers have noted a continuity in craniofacial variation from Mesolithic through Neolithic times. This apparent continuity could be explained by in situ cultural evolution producing shifts in selective pressures which may act on teeth, the facial complex, and the cranial vault.
A series of 13 Mesolithic skulls from Wadi Halfa, Sudan, are compared to Nubian Neolithic remains by means of extended canonical analysis. Results support recent research which suggests consistent trends of facial reduction and cranial vault expansion from Mesolithic through Neolithic times.
Posts: 447 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
How everything came about, and not just popped out of thin air!!!!!!?
The continuum!
Nubia's Oldest House?
Some of the most important evidence of early man in Nubia was discovered recently by an expedition of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, under the direction of Dr. Kryzstof Grzymski, on the east bank of the Nile, about 70 miles (116 km) south of Dongola, Sudan. During the early 1990's, this team discovered several sites containing hundreds of Paleolithic hand axes. At one site, however, the team identified an apparent stone tool workshop, where thousands of sandstone hand axes and flakes lay on the ground around a row of large stones set in a line, suggesting the remains of a shelter. This seems to be the earliest "habitation" site yet discovered in the Nile Valley and may be up to 70,000 years old.
What the Nubian environment was like throughout these distant times, we cannot know with certainty, but it must have changed many times. For many thousands of years it was probably far different than what it is today. Between about 50,000 to 25,000 years ago, the hand axe gradually disappeared and was replaced with numerous distinctive chipped stone industries that varied from region to region, suggesting the presence in Nubia of many different peoples or tribal groups dwelling in close proximity to each other. When we first encounter skeletal remains in Nubia, they are those of modern man: homo sapiens.
Nubia's Oldest Battle?
From about 25,000 to 8,000 years ago, the environment gradually evolved to its present state. From this phase several very early settlement sites have been identified at the Second Cataract, near the Egypt-Sudan border. These appear to have been used seasonally by people leading a semi-nomadic existence. The people hunted, fished, and ground wild grain. The first cemeteries also appear, suggesting that people may have been living at least partly sedentary lives. One cemetery site at Jebel Sahaba, near Wadi Halfa, Sudan, contained a number of bodies that had suffered violent deaths and were buried in a mass grave. This suggests that people, even 10,000 years ago, had begun to compete with each other for resources and were willing to kill each other to control them.
Professor of African American Studies and History, Northeastern University
Timothy Kendall
Former Associate Curator, Dept. of Ancient Egyptian, Nubian, and Near Eastern Art, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; and Vice President, International Nubian Studies Society
Mission archéologique suisse au Soudan Université de Neuchâtel Institut de Préhistoire et des Sciences de l’Antiquité Matthieu Honegger
Three scale models—of the Mesolithic hut of el-Barga (7500 B.C.), the proto-urban agglomeration of the Pre-Kerma (3000 B.C.) and the ancient city of Kerma (2500-1500 B.C.)—give a glimpse of the world of the living. They show the evolution of settlements for each of the key periods in Nubian history. Huts indicate the birth of a sedentary way of life, the agglomeration confirms the settling of populations on a territory and the capital of the Kingdom of Kerma marks the culmination of the complexification of Nubian architecture with its ever more monumental constructions. The three models were created in Switzerland by Hugo Lienhard and were installed in the museum in January 2009.
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the University of Alberta
BACKGROUND
Nubia served in antiquity as an important north-south corridor for trade and military contacts with civilizations of Egypt and the Ethiopian highlands, and as a route east to the Red Sea and west through the Chad depression to West Africa. Much of our knowledge of ancient Nubia comes from a series of archaeological surveys and salvage excavations that began in 1907, prior to the raising of the first Aswan dam. The last salvage campaign was directed by UNESCO and involved 27 countries in excavation and preservation work during the 1960s and 1970s along a stretch of the Nile River that was to be flooded by the construction of the Aswan High Dam, south of Aswan.
The skeletal remains examined in this study of biological affinities and palaeopathology were excavated by the Scandinavian Joint Expedition in 1963-1964 and are now curated at the Laboratory of Biological Anthropology at the University of Copenhagen. The A-Group sample is from Site 277 and dates to the Classic/Terminal A-Group, corresponding to the Egyptian protodynastic or Archaic periods, the time of Egyptian unification.
The C-Group remains are from Site 179, which is most likely contemporaneous with the First Intermediate Period or early Middle Kingdom of dynastic Egyptian civilization
One of the oldest remains from Upper Egypt, shows strong sub-Saharan affinities, and early northern Egypt also shows sub-Saharan affinities through cultural traits- the 'Nubian complex' of technology and production.
"The morphometric affinities of the 33,000 year old skeleton from Nazlet Khater, Upper Egypt are examined using multivariate statistical procedures.. The results indicate a strong association between some of the sub-Saharan Middle Stone Age (MSA) specimens, and the Nazlet Khater mandible. Furthermore, the results suggest that variability between African populations during the Neolithic and Protohistoric periods was more pronounced than the range of variability observed among recent African and Levantine populations." (PINHASI Ron, SEMAL Patrick (2000). The position of the Nazlet Khater specimen among prehistoric and modern African and Levantine populations. Journal of human evolution. 2000, vol. 39, no3, pp. 269-288 )
"..Middle Paleolithic and the transition to the Upper Paleolithic in the Lower Nile Valley are described... the Middle Paleolithic or, more appropriately, Middle Stone Age of this region starts with the arrival of new populations from sub-Saharan Africa, as evidenced by the nature of the EarlyOne of the oldest remains from Upper Egypt, shows strong sub-Saharan affinities, and early northern Egypt also shows sub-Saharan affinities through cultural traits- the 'Nubian complex' of technology and production.
"The morphometric affinities of the 33,000 year old skeleton from Nazlet Khater, Upper Egypt are examined using multivariate statistical procedures.. The results indicate a strong association between some of the sub-Saharan Middle Stone Age (MSA) specimens, and the Nazlet Khater mandible. Furthermore, the results suggest that variability between African populations during the Neolithic and Protohistoric periods was more pronounced than the range of variability observed among recent African and Levantine populations." (PINHASI Ron, SEMAL Patrick (2000). The position of the Nazlet Khater specimen among prehistoric and modern African and Levantine populations. Journal of human evolution. 2000, vol. 39, no3, pp. 269-288 )
"..Middle Paleolithic and the transition to the Upper Paleolithic in the Lower Nile Valley are described... the Middle Paleolithic or, more appropriately, Middle Stone Age of this region starts with the arrival of new populations from sub-Saharan Africa, as evidenced by the nature of the Early to Middle Stone Age transition in stratified sites. Throughout the late Middle Pleistocene technological change occurs leading to the establishment of the Nubian Complex by the onset of the Upper Pleistocene." (Van Peer, Philip. Did middle stone age moderns of sub-Saharan African descent trigger an upper paleolithic revolution in the lower nile valley? Anthropologie. vol. 42, no3, pp. 215-225 ) to Middle Stone Age transition in stratified sites. Throughout the late Middle Pleistocene technological change occurs leading to the establishment of the Nubian Complex by the onset of the Upper Pleistocene." (Van Peer, Philip. Did middle stone age moderns of sub-Saharan African descent trigger an upper paleolithic revolution in the lower nile valley? Anthropologie. vol. 42, no3, pp. 215-225 )
Posts: 447 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
Egypt, 8000–2000 b.c. Encompasses ancient Egypt and northern ancient Nubia
ca. 4500–3800 B.C.(Badarian Period) Although most sites of this period are cemeteries located in the low desert of the Nile valley proper, the Delta site of Merimde Beni Salama is the largest known in Egypt from this time. The Nile valley sites located in Middle Egypt in the vicinity of the modern town of Badari give the period its name. The numerous Badarian cemeteries reveal a formal burial program that includes constructing a tomb, positioning the body, and supplying the deceased with equipment for an afterlife. The most common burial objects are finely made bowls of Nile clay in brown or red. Tombs occasionally contain jewelry—including the earliest glazed stone beads—and sometimes small human figures of ivory.
Some Notes about an Early African Pool of Cultures from which Emerged Egyptian Civilization
These archaeological data outline a new map of the formation of ancient Egypt: Tasian and Badarian Valley sites were not the centres of a predynastic culture, but peripheral provinces of a network of earlier African cultures where Badarians, Saharans, Nubian and Nilotic peoples regularly circulated along (Darnell 2008) and Nabta Playa could be one of the ceremonial high circles.
The pottery collection consists of 14,285 pottery sherds, including some worked sherds used as tools, four entire vessels and half of a big pot. There are also thin sections of prehistoric sherds and clay samples, both from the Western Desert....etc
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
Egypt, 8000–2000 b.c. Encompasses ancient Egypt and northern ancient Nubia
ca. 4500–3800 B.C.(Badarian Period) Although most sites of this period are cemeteries located in the low desert of the Nile valley proper, the Delta site of Merimde Beni Salama is the largest known in Egypt from this time. The Nile valley sites located in Middle Egypt in the vicinity of the modern town of Badari give the period its name. The numerous Badarian cemeteries reveal a formal burial program that includes constructing a tomb, positioning the body, and supplying the deceased with equipment for an afterlife. The most common burial objects are finely made bowls of Nile clay in brown or red. Tombs occasionally contain jewelry—including the earliest glazed stone beads—and sometimes small human figures of ivory.
Some Notes about an Early African Pool of Cultures from which Emerged Egyptian Civilization
These archaeological data outline a new map of the formation of ancient Egypt: Tasian and Badarian Valley sites were not the centres of a predynastic culture, but peripheral provinces of a network of earlier African cultures where Badarians, Saharans, Nubian and Nilotic peoples regularly circulated along (Darnell 2008) and Nabta Playa could be one of the ceremonial high circles.
The pottery collection consists of 14,285 pottery sherds, including some worked sherds used as tools, four entire vessels and half of a big pot. There are also thin sections of prehistoric sherds and clay samples, both from the Western Desert....etc
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
NUBIA AND EGYPT- Nubians and Egyptians were so close in various eras that they were virtually indistinguishable
“The ancient Egyptians referred to a region, located south of the third cataract the Nile River, in which Nubians dwelt as Kush.. Within such context, this phrase is not a racial slur. Throughout the history of ancient Egypt there were numerous, well documented instances that celebrate Nubian-Egyptian marriages. A study of these documents, particularly those dated to both the Egyptian New Kingdom (after 1550 B.C.E.) and to Dynasty XXV and early Dynasty XXVI (about 720-640 BCE), reveals that neither spouse nor any of the children of such unions suffered discrimination at the hands of the ancient Egyptians. Indeed such marriages were never an obstacle to social, economic, or political status, provided the individuals concerned conformed to generally accepted Egyptian social standards. Furthermore, at times, certain Nubian practices, such as tattooing for women, and the unisex fashion of wearing earrings, were wholeheartedly embraced by the ancient Egyptians." (Bianchi, 2004: p. 4)
'It is an extremely difficult task to attempt to describe the Nubians during the course of Egypt's New Kingdom, because their presence appears to have virtually evaporated from the archaeological record.. The result has been described as a wholesale Nubian assimilation into Egyptian society. This assimilation was so complete that it masked all Nubian ethnic identities insofar as archaeological remains are concerned beneath the impenetrable veneer of Egypt's material; culture.. In the Kushite Period, when Nubians ruled as Pharaohs in their own right, the material culture of Dynasty XXV (about 750-655 B.C.E.) was decidedly Egyptian in character.. Nubia's entire landscape up to the region of the Third Cataract was dotted with temples indistinguishable in style and decoration from contemporary temples erected in Egypt. The same observation obtains for the smaller number of typically Egyptian tombs in which these elite Nubian princes were interred.(Bianchi, 2004, p. 99-100)
Robert Bianchi ( 2004). Daily Life of the Nubians. Greenwood Publishing Group Posts: 447 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
Quote:
Determination of optimal rehydration, fixation and staining methods for histological and immunohistochemical analysis of mummified soft tissues
A-M Mekota1, M Vermehren2
Biotechnic & Histochemistry 2005, 80(1): 7_/13
"Materials and methods In 1997, the German Institute for Archaeology headed an excavation of the tombs of the nobles in Thebes-West, Upper Egypt. At this time, three types of tissues were sampled from different mummies: meniscus (fibrocartilage), skin, and placenta. Archaeological findings suggest that the mummies dated from the New Kingdom (approximately 1550_/1080 BC)...... The basal epithelial cells were packed with melanin as expected for specimens of neriod origin."
History in the Interpretation of the Pattern of p49a,f TaqI RFLP Y-Chromosome Variation in Egypt: A Consideration of Multiple Lines of Evidence,
"ABSTRACT"
The possible factors involved in the generation of p49a,f TaqI Y-chromosome spatial diversity in Egypt were explored. The object was to consider explanations beyond those that emphasize gene flow mediated via military campaigns within the Nile corridor during the dynastic period. Current patterns of the most common variants (V, XI, and IV) have been suggested to be primarily related to Middle Kingdom and New Kingdom political actions in Nubia, including occasional settler colonization, and the conquest of Egypt by Kush (in upper Nubia, northern Sudan), thus initiating the Twenty-Fifth Dynasty. However, a synthesis of evidence from archaeology, historical linguistics, texts, distribution of haplotypes outside Egypt, and some demographic considerations lends greater support to the establishment, before the Middle Kingdom, of the observed distributions of the most prevalent haplotypes V, XI, and IV. It is suggested that the pattern of diversity for these variants in the Egyptian Nile Valley was largely the product of population events that occurred in the late Pleistocene to mid-Holocene through the First Dynasty, and was sustained by continuous smaller-scale bidirectional migrations/interactions. The higher frequency of V in Ethiopia than in Nubia or upper (southern) Egypt has to be taken into account in any discussion of variation in the Nile Valley. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 17 :"
Haplotypes and percentages Region (n) IV V XI VII VIII XI XV Lower Egypt (162) 1.2 51.9 11.7 8.6 10.5 3.7 6.8 Upper Egypt (66) 27.3 24.2 28.8 4.6 3.0 0.0 6.1 Lower Nubia (46) 39.1 17.4 30.4 2.2 2.2 0.0 0.0 1From Lucotte and Mercier (2002).
Posts: 447 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hammer: Here we go with the spin. These loons will duck and dodge on this insteading of doing what they should do and leave the forum in shame. This is EXACTLY what happens when you do sloppy research. I have been telling you that all along. The Dynastic Race theory is back alive and funcctioning. I am wondering now if the 25th dynasty was even black at the top? Hawass said that his ancestors were European farmers. When the smoke clears on this you are going to find that they migrated down into North africa and over to the Nile.
QUOTE:
"Despite the difference, Gebel Ramlah [the Western Desert- Saharan region] is closest to predynastic and early dynastic samples from Abydos, Hierakonpolis, and Badari.."
the Badarians were a "good representative of what the common ancestor to all later predynastic and dynastic Egyptian peoples would be like"
"A comparison of Badari to the Naqada and Hierakonpolis samples .. contradicts the idea of a foreign origin for the Naqada (Petrie, 1939; Baumgartel, 1970)"
Evidence in favor of continuity is also demonstrated by comparison of individual samples. "Naqada and especially Hierakonpolis share close affinities with First-Second Dynasty Abydos.. These findings do not support the concept of a foreign dynastic ''race''"
"Thus, despite increasing foreign influence after the Second Intermediate Period, not only did Egyptian culture remain intact (Lloyd, 2000a), but the people themselves, as represented by the dental samples, appear biologically constant as well."
(Joel D. Irish (2006). Who Were the Ancient Egyptians? Dental Affinities Among Neolithic Through Postdynastic Peoples. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2006 Apr;129(4):529-43.) Africans have the highest dental diversity "Previous research by the first author revealed that, relative to other modern peoples, sub-Saharan Africans exhibit the highest frequencies of ancestral (or plesiomorphic) dental traits... The fact that sub-Saharan Africans express these apparently plesiomorphic characters, along with additional information on their affinity to other modern populations, evident intra-population heterogeneity, and a world-wide dental cline emanating from the sub-continent, provides further evidence that is consistent with an African origin model." (Irish JD, Guatelli-Steinberg D.(2003) Ancient teeth and modern human origins: an expanded comparison of African Plio-Pleistocene and recent world dental samples. Hum Evol. 2003 Aug;45(2):113-44. )
Posts: 447 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: From a back migration from Central Asia, form where R1b originated, then distributed in central Africa like they also distributed in Western Europe,origins as where the Haplogroup first appeared.
Other than guesswork on your part, does this have any substance to it? My guess is that it doesn't.
This isn't guesswork, it is a fact put by scientists:
quote:R1b (M343) is believed to have arisen in southwest Asia and today its sublcades are bound in various distributions across Eurasia and Africa.
"is believed"
# is believed to have arisen on the Eurasian Steppe or the Indus Valley, and today is most frequently observed in eastern Europe and in western and central Asia. Haplogroup R1a1a7 (M458) is found at frequencies approaching or exceeding 30% in Eastern Europe.
"is believed"
# R1b (M343) is believed to have arisen in southwest Asia and today its sublcades are bound in various distributions across Eurasia and Africa.
Posts: 447 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: According to an analysis of a sample of human remains from Natufian sites, the inhabitants of the region appeared to have some Sub-Saharan influences. Ricaut et al. associate these Sub-Saharan influences with the dispersal of haplogroup E1b1b lineages from Africa. The material culture of the Natufian also leaves open the possibility of some African influences.
The Ubaid and Uruk were related to Semitic people of the Levant, were the caucasian type originated.
The Natufian Culture in the Levant, Threshold to the Origins of Agriculture.
Barbed bone points are common in sites where fishing was undertaken but they were also used as arming tips for hunting land animals. Barbed points were hafted alone or in sets of two or three at the end of long thrusting spears and used for fishing. The barbs ensured that the point would not become dislodged and made it easlier to lift the fish from the water.
Points of this type vary in length from very small -- only a few centimetes -- to over 30 centimeters.
Simon Fraser University. Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology
Barbed bone points from Central Sudan and the age of the "Early Khartoum" tradition
D. Adamson*, J. D. Clark† & M. A. J. Williams‡
*School of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, New South Wales 2113, Australia †Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720 ‡School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, New South Wales 2113, Australia
Barbed bone points, typical of those from the early Holocene settlement of "Early Khartoum", have been found at three sites along the White Nile, south of Khartoum. The form of the fragments and the stratigraphy of the sites throw light on the environment and technology of the early settlements along this part of the Nile.
"We had evidence that there was agriculture by 5,200 B.C. but not how it was used in a domestic context," said excavation co-leader René Cappers, a professor of paleobotany at the University of Groningen, the second-oldest university in the Netherlands. "Now, for the first time, we have domesticated plants and animals in a village context."
The latest findings date to the Neolithic period, a stage of human development that occurred at various times around world, beginning in 8,600 B.C. Sometimes called the New Stone Age, the period is characterized by the introduction of farming, animal husbandry and a movement away from hunting and gathering and toward a less nomadic way of life, with pots, tools and settlements.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: I'll ask again, who were the indigenous peoples of southwest Asia, and who did they most resemble? I want literature on the pre-historic peoples physical traits, and who they most approximated to. It's a rather simple request, by the way.
quote: Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful and are presumed to have been about 166 to 171 cm (about 5 feet 5 inches to 5 feet 7 inches) tall. The body was generally heavy and solid, apparently with strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges, and the face short and wide. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cc (100 cubic inches), somewhat larger than the average for modern humans. It is thought that Cro-Magnons were probably fairly tall compared with other early human species.
quote: According to an analysis of a sample of human remains from Natufian sites, the inhabitants of the region appeared to have some Sub-Saharan influences. Ricaut et al. associate these Sub-Saharan influences with the dispersal of haplogroup E1b1b lineages from Africa. The material culture of the Natufian also leaves open the possibility of some African influences.
The Ubaid and Uruk were related to Semitic people of the Levant, were the caucasian type originated.
(The terminology they used during that time is sometimes very shocking.)
BONES OF CANNIBALS A PALESTINE RIDDLE Wireless to THE NEW YORK TIMES.
New York Times 1857; Aug 4, 1932; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2003) pg. 21
Negroid people of 5000 B. C.Unlike Any Modern Race Described by Keith.
ATE BODIES OF ENEMIES
Men, Short of Stature, Burned Bones of Dead After Burial, London Session Hears. TEETH OF WOMEN DRAWN
Linking relics to Burnt Skeletons from Ur scientist speculate an old cremation custom.
Wireless to NEW YORK TIMES London Aug. 3
Seven or eight thousand years ago in what geologist call modern times a race of negroid cannibals lived In Palestine, burned the bones of their dead after burial, and devoured the bodies of their enemies.
Skulls and thighbones of this race were unearthed within the last four years, first at Shukbah near Jerusalem and later in caves at Mount Carmel, and because they puzzled the excavators who found them they received the new name “Natufians.” Today the first authoritative account of them was given by Sir Arthur Keith to the congress of Prehistoric and Proto-historic Sciences and showed them to be one of the greatest riddles of archeology.
They were clearly a Negroid people, said Sir Arthur, with wide faces flat- noses and long large heads.
They were short of stature 5 feet 3 or 4 inches tall-and their thighs and legs were remarkably strong. While their arms and shoulders were weak. Alone Among prehistoric peoples they had a custom of extracting the two upper central incisor teeth of their women. Jagged holes in the fronts of their skulls indicate that they ate human brains.
Unlike Any present Race.
They may have been ancestors or the Arabs or Semites of biblical times, in Sir Arthur's opinion. They had some facial characteristics like those of the Neolithic or late Stone Age men of Malta and the remoter Aurignacian men of Southern Europe. But whatever the similarities sir Arthur declared, they lived between 5000 and 6000 B. C. and cannot be identified with any race on earth today.
In addition to all these riddles, Sir Arthur propounded another linking them unaccountably to ancient Ur of the Chaldees and the prehistoric man of South Africa.
From piles of charred and fragmented bones found in Palestine-mostly women's bones- Sir Arthur concluded they did not cremate their dead, but burned them long after burial.
"By a strange coincidence," he said. "At the time the burnt remains came to me Leonard Woolley sent me a box of human remains from under the foundations of Ur. These burnt bones from Ur-of about the third dynasty also represented not ordinary cremation-cremation of dead bodies clothed with flesh-but Cremation of dried skeletons. In the remains from Ur women's bones were preponderant.
“Two years ago Miss Gertrude Catton-Thompson sent me burned bones from under the foundations of Zimbabwe in Southern Rhodesia.
These represented the skulls of two women which had been burned long after the flesh had disappeared from them.
Was there once a custom in ancient times of digging up the bones of ancestors and then subjecting them to an ordeal of fire?” Boxes of charred bones from Palestine were on the table while Sir Arthur spoke, together with a dozen curiously shaped reddish skulls that stared across the lecture room. Scientists who listened were startled and bewildered.
Miss Dorothy Garrod, British Archaeologist, who had found the remains while working for the British School of Archaeology and the American School of Prehistoric Studies, assured the audience that they were comparatively modern and they were of the Mesolithic period.
Natufian remains, it should be remembered, are in no way connected with the more recent discoveries of a new race of fossil men, also in caves, near Mt Carmel. The fossil men, so remarkably different from all others yet found, became extinct in the remotely distant past, while the Natufians may still have been living when the first city-states of Sumeria arose.
Sir Arthur based his conclusions today on twenty comparatively complete skulls of eighty-seven found by Miss Garrod.
Cites Features of Race
“Several features stand out quite definitely'' he asserted; first the Natufians were a long-headed people - they had cap-shaped occiputs (the lower back part of the head). Secondly, the dimensions or their heads were greater than in the pre-dynastic Egyptians. Thirdly, their faces were short and wide. Fourthly, they were prognathous (with projecting jaws). Fifthly, their nasal bones were not narrow and high, but formed a wide, low arch. Sixthly, their chins were not prominent, but were masked by the fullness of the teeth-bearing parts of the jaw.
“The Natufians at Shukbah seem to have practiced cannibalism, for it is only by making this supposition that one can explain the cutting and fracturing of bones. The characters of the cuts and the broken surfaces show the bones were still in a fresh state when the damage was done.
I believe the Shukbah people ate human brains.” The cannibalism theory was strongly disputed by Professor Elliott smith, eminent geologist, who said he was entirely skeptical of it. Also Professor Smith said it was not uncommon in Egypt to find burned bones in graves.
“But it is a question of remarkable interest to know what these charred bones mean,” he said. “And if it should be shown that cutting teeth was in vogue it will make us revise all our knowledge, for the earliest instance we know is in 300 B.C.”
Professor Smith objected, too, that it was hardly possible that these people had had Negro blood, but Sir Arthur speedily corrected him. By the word Negroid he meant merely Negro-like characteristics such as are found throughout Europe and even in Scandinavia. Sir Arthur drew the inference that the Natufians had carried Aurignacian culture into Palestine after the last glacier age, which was approximately 35000 years ago.
Later Sir Arthur read and discussed a paper form Lewis S. B. Leakey, British Archaeologist working in East Africa, announcing the discovery of a new kind of anthropoid ape from an imaginary far-off Lower Pliocene period of perhaps a million years ago.
It was just a fragment of bone that Sir Arthur held up for the audience to see – a piece of limb bone, he said, of a great ape like the chimpanzee. “Maybe this is the Miocene ancestor of the chimpanzee,” he said, “or the common ancestor of the gorilla and the chimpanzee.”
Unlike Dr. Leakey’s announcement of Oldoway man, now thoroughly discredited, his latest find made a deep impression on the scientists present.
Posts: 447 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: I'll ask again, who were the indigenous peoples of southwest Asia, and who did they most resemble? I want literature on the pre-historic peoples physical traits, and who they most approximated to. It's a rather simple request, by the way.
quote: Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful and are presumed to have been about 166 to 171 cm (about 5 feet 5 inches to 5 feet 7 inches) tall. The body was generally heavy and solid, apparently with strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges, and the face short and wide. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cc (100 cubic inches), somewhat larger than the average for modern humans. It is thought that Cro-Magnons were probably fairly tall compared with other early human species.
quote: According to an analysis of a sample of human remains from Natufian sites, the inhabitants of the region appeared to have some Sub-Saharan influences. Ricaut et al. associate these Sub-Saharan influences with the dispersal of haplogroup E1b1b lineages from Africa. The material culture of the Natufian also leaves open the possibility of some African influences.
The Ubaid and Uruk were related to Semitic people of the Levant, were the caucasian type originated.
"OLDER populations more closely resembling AFRICANS than modern Europeans. Early Neolithic populations, like the Nautifians, in what is now Israel, show sub-Saharan 'negroid' affinities."
Afrocentric critic C. Loring Brace's 2005 study groups ancient Egyptian populations like the Naqada closer to Nubians and Somalis than European, Mediterranean or Middle Eastern populations. Brace's study shows that the closest European linking with Africans in Egypt or Nubia are Middle Stone Age Portugese and Neolithics, OLDER populations more closely resembling AFRICANS than modern Europeans. Early Neolithic populations, like the Nautifians, in what is now Israel, show sub-Saharan 'negroid' affinities.(Brace, et al. The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 January 3; 103(1): p. 242-247.)
"The Niger-Congo speakers, Congo, Dahomey and Haya, cluster closely with each other and a bit less closely with the Nubian sample, both the recent and the Bronze Age Nubians, and more remotely with the Naqada Bronze Age sample of Egypt, the modern Somalis, and the Arabic-speaking Fellaheen (farmers) of Israel. When those samples are separated and run in a single analysis as in Fig. 1, there clearly is a tie between them that is diluted the farther one gets from sub-Saharan Africa" (Brace, 2005)
The surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and their Bronze Age successors are not closely related to the modern inhabitants, although the prehistoric/modern ties are somewhat ore apparent in southern Europe. It is a further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa... Interestingly enough, however, the small Natufian sample falls between the Niger-Congo group and the other samples used. Fig. 2 shows the plot produced by the first two canonical variates, but the same thing happens when canonical variates 1 and 3 (not shown here) are used. This placement suggests that there may have been a Sub-Saharan African element in the make-up of the Natufians (the putative ancestors of the subsequent Neolithic),.. When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. The data treated here support the idea that the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ residents of those areas, derived from the Late Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the agricultural life way and the people who had brought it." (Brace, 2005)
Both skeletal/cranial and DNA studies by other authors confirm that some Neolithics did not derive from the Near East. They most likely resembled African populations. Hence comparisons using older European Neolithics versus Africans are comparisons with older prehistoric Europeans who looked more like Africans, than modern 'white' Europeans, as shown by Brace (2005), and Hanihara (1996) also, who states "Early West Asians looked like Africans."
"The absence of mtDNA haplogroup J in the ancient Portuguese Neolithic sample suggests that this population was not derived directly from Near Eastern farmers. The Mesolithic and Neolithic groups show genetic discontinuity implying colonisation at the Neolithic transition in Portugal." (CHANDLER, H.; SYKES, B.; ZILHÃO, J.(2005)— Using ancient DNA to examine genetic continuity at the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in Portugal, in ARIAS, P.; ONTAÑÓN, R.; GARCÍA-MONCÓ, C.(eds.)—«Actas del III Congreso del Neolítico en la Península Ibérica», Santander, Monografías del Instituto Internacional de Investigaciones Prehistóricas de Cantabria 1, p. 781-786.)
Early West Asians looked like Africans. Thus any ancient returnees or "backflow" from West Asia back to Africa is by people who look like Africans to begin with. Brace 2005 shows this as to Europeans. Hanihara 1996, demonstrates this below as to West Asians (i.e.'Middle easterners').
More data showing early Europeans were tropically adapted types like Africans
"Body proportions are under strong climatic selection and evince remarkable stability within regional lineages. As such, they offer a viable and robust alternative to cranio-facial data in assessing hypothesised continuity and replacement with the transition to agro-pastoralism in central Europe. Humero-clavicular, brachial and crural indices in a large sample (n=75) of Linienbandkeramik (LBK), Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age specimens from the middle Elbe-Saale-Werra valley (MESV) were compared with Eurasian and African terminal Pleistocene, European Mesolithic and geographically disparate recent human specimens. Mesolithic Europeans display considerable variation in humero-clavicular and brachial indices yet none approach the extreme "hyper-polar" morphology of LBK humans from the MESV. In contrast, Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age peoples display elongated brachial and crural indices reminiscent of terminal Pleistocene and "tropically adapted" recent humans. These marked morphological changes likely reflect exogenous immigration during the terminal Fourth millennium cal BC. Population expansion and diffusion is a function of increased mobility and settlement dispersal concomitant with significant technological and subsistence changes in later Neolithic societies during the late fourth millennium cal BCE."
-- Gallagher et al. "Population continuity, demic diffusion and Neolithic origins in central-southern Germany: the evidence from body proportions." Homo. 2009;60(2):95-126. Epub 2009 Mar 4.
Structural position of the Pleistocene Gesher Benot Ya'aqov site in the Dead Sea Rift zone
N. Goren-Inbar and S. Belitzky Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel 91905 Department of Geology, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel 91904
Received 29 June 1988. Available online 19 November 2004.
Abstract
Newly discovered outcrops of the middle Pleistocene Benot Ya'aqov Formation are strongly disturbed due to recent tectonic activity along the Dead Sea Rift. The lacustrine-fluviatile sediments of this formation comprise the littoral facies of a paleo-lake that occupied the adjacent Hula Basin. Acheulian artifacts, found embedded in the formation, have typical African characteristics. The geographical position of the site (the northern extension of the East African Red Sea Rift System) is important for understanding hominid diffusion from Africa to Eurasia.
THIS INFO YOU NEED TO LINK TO THE NATUFIANS!
The Earliest Peoples in Nubia: The Old Stone Age (Paleolithic)
quote:Originally posted by Bob_01: I'll ask again, who were the indigenous peoples of southwest Asia, and who did they most resemble? I want literature on the pre-historic peoples physical traits, and who they most approximated to. It's a rather simple request, by the way.
quote: Cro-Magnons were robustly built and powerful and are presumed to have been about 166 to 171 cm (about 5 feet 5 inches to 5 feet 7 inches) tall. The body was generally heavy and solid, apparently with strong musculature. The forehead was straight, with slight browridges, and the face short and wide. Cro-Magnons were the first humans (genus Homo) to have a prominent chin. The brain capacity was about 1,600 cc (100 cubic inches), somewhat larger than the average for modern humans. It is thought that Cro-Magnons were probably fairly tall compared with other early human species.
quote: According to an analysis of a sample of human remains from Natufian sites, the inhabitants of the region appeared to have some Sub-Saharan influences. Ricaut et al. associate these Sub-Saharan influences with the dispersal of haplogroup E1b1b lineages from Africa. The material culture of the Natufian also leaves open the possibility of some African influences.
The Ubaid and Uruk were related to Semitic people of the Levant, were the caucasian type originated.
Journal of Genetic Genealogy, 5 (1):35-65, 2009
Y Haplogroups, Archaeological Cultures and Language Families: A
Review of the Possibility of Multidisciplinary Comparisons Using the Case of Haplogroup E-M35
Scenario 3 . More recent Afroasiatic, originating in Africa. Despite its large impact, the founding population.
Our review of the E-M35 evidence gives many insights useful for multidisciplinary consideration in both linguistics and archaeology:
Berber populations, while overwhelmingly dominated by specific E-M35 male lineages, are not in the same sub-clades as found along the Nile and into the Horn of Africa.
"The evidence strongly suggests that the male lineage most strongly associated with Afroasiatic, E-M35, clearly has an origin far from the Levant, in Africa."
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic