quote:The one drop rule was made under racist ideas that homogeneity was superior yea. But even in a world thats nott racist,social groups were formed by this standard. By that I mean that people of completely African descent as well as those mixed with Europeans formed a culture that is today black society. So as a social construct its not racist, or at least it doesn't have to be to use the one drop rule. Denying mulattoes and quadroons the status of black would be to eradicate history and to overlook that they were part of the black social group and helped to form it. I think the real motivation behind classifying them as white among the 'powers' that be has more to do with interests in keeping Egypt, Greece and Rome as examples of "white civilizations."
First, I fully recognise that people don't create or define themselves. The problem with the racist "one drop" rule/law was not that whites only wanted to protect "white race purity", they sincerely believed, and still do--at least most of them--that the "white race" is "biologically[in the human sense] and culturally superior to the African race".
Thus to allow African DNA to enter the gene pool of the whites would be akin to allow a dysgenic poison to seep into the white blood stream and hence pollute and degrade it. That was the basis for the creation of the "quadroon" and "octoroon" classes. Such individuals in the U.S. were eventually shunted off into the black community as leaders and as a "superior kind of being and an enhancement to the African race--in terms of brains, beauty, temperament, etc.".
In South Africa such groups were placed between the whites and the blacks to sustain the idea that European ancestry improved the racial stock of the African. In fact, that idea was practiced everywhere the Europeans established societies that included the both whites, blacks, and others. The same for Latin America and places like Haiti. The same too in Africa for Cape Verde, Angola, Mozambique and Guinea Bissau.
Again and to put it another way: "the one drop rule and its different permutations was/is an egregious assault on the humanity of Africans".
You say that the idea of "blackness" should be stretched to include so-called "quadroons" and "octoroons". All well and good, but is frankly irritating when in the U.S., South America, and places like South Africa they are taken to represent a "better and improved" version of Africans.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:The one drop rule was made under racist ideas that homogeneity was superior yea. But even in a world thats nott racist,social groups were formed by this standard. By that I mean that people of completely African descent as well as those mixed with Europeans formed a culture that is today black society. So as a social construct its not racist, or at least it doesn't have to be to use the one drop rule. Denying mulattoes and quadroons the status of black would be to eradicate history and to overlook that they were part of the black social group and helped to form it. I think the real motivation behind classifying them as white among the 'powers' that be has more to do with interests in keeping Egypt, Greece and Rome as examples of "white civilizations."
First, I fully recognise that people don't create or define themselves. The problem with the racist "one drop" rule/law was not that whites only wanted to protect "white race purity", they sincerely believed, and still do--at least most of them--that the "white race" is "biologically[in the human sense] and culturally superior to the African race".
Thus to allow African DNA to enter the gene pool of the whites would be akin to allow a dysgenic poison to seep into the white blood stream and hence pollute and degrade it. That was the basis for the creation of the "quadroon" and "octoroon" classes. Such individuals in the U.S. were eventually shunted off into the black community as leaders and as a "superior kind of being and an enhancement to the African race--in terms of brains, beauty, temperament, etc.".
In South Africa such groups were placed between the whites and the blacks to sustain the idea that European ancestry improved the racial stock of the African. In fact, that idea was practiced everywhere the Europeans established societies that included the both whites, blacks, and others. The same for Latin America and places like Haiti. The same too in Africa for Cape Verde, Angola, Mozambique and Guinea Bissau.
Again and to put it another way: "the one drop rule and its different permutations was/is an egregious assault on the humanity of Africans".
You say that the idea of "blackness" should be stretched to include so-called "quadroons" and "octoroons". All well and good, but is frankly irritating when in the U.S., South America, and places like South Africa they are taken to represent a "better and improved" version of Africans.
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
As it turns out 1/3 of "white" Americans have black blood in them and if not for the mass influx of European immigrants in 1920s and 30s the number would be higher. So many whites have been "passing" since 1600.
N***er who?
-------------------- It was high time Posts: 314 | From: Home | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Smiley Coast: Both the choices for an are off. Being part African doesn't mean a person is part black. Blackness encompassed mixed people as well...whitness was defined by genetic homogeneity or 'purity' as they so characterized it. BTW mulattoes/quadroons were understood to be black long before JC.
let's look at a quadroon for a moment. They are 1/4 black by definition, "quad" means four what is the remaining 3/4 ?
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow! Humans are now seeds. Unfortunately that's not how it works.
The point is that people are confusing genetics with cultural sociology. The U.S. introduced its own set of racist definitions, the Brazilians another set, and the South Africans their own equally racist definitions. A so-called octoroon in Apartheid South Africa could take a "comb test" and pass into the white race if the results satisfied the testers. There have been documented adjustments of this sort in legal archives of Apartheid South Africa.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Wow! Humans are now seeds. Unfortunately that's not how it works.
The point is that people are confusing genetics with cultural sociology. The U.S. introduced its own set of racist definitions, the Brazilians another set, and the South Africans their own equally racist definitions. A so-called octoroon in Apartheid South Africa could take a "comb test" and pass into the white race if the results satisfied the testers. There have been documented adjustments of this sort in legal archives of Apartheid South Africa.
lol, it's Mendels law. Of dominant and recessive genes, alleles.
The South African apartheid system has its foundation in the American segregation system.
Brazil has it's own set. Differences is they started to name and segragate based on color complexion. So you will find a "billion" names and levels. Same game different name!
quote:
Document Type Article
Publication Date 7-2010
Abstract
Law students and recent graduates who spent the Spring 2010 semester studying the land rights of Afro-Brazilian communities have submitted their final report to community leaders and Brazilian government officials, institutions, and non-government organizations engaged in the issue.
Written under the supervision of Laurence R. Helfer, the Harry R. Chadwick, Sr. Professor of Law, the report contains insights gleaned from the students’ intense study and research, both at Duke Law and on the ground in Brazil. Along with Helfer, the students spent their 2010 Spring break in Brazil as part of the seminar. They met with members of quilombos -- Afro-Brazilians communities descended from slaves -- who are seeking to secure legal title to lands they have long occupied. The students also interviewed government officials, civil society groups, anthropologists, and legal scholars who work on land rights issues in Brazil.
The report outlines the difficulties Afro-Latino communities have had in obtaining land rights in Central and South America, where six countries recognize some form of collective rights. The problems are especially stark in Brazil. “Nowhere are the connections between Afro-Latinos, access to land, and socioeconomic development more apparent than in Brazil,” the report states. “Afro-Brazilians comprise 45 percent of the Brazilian population, yet constitute 69 percent of those living in extreme poverty. Land ownership remains sharply concentrated, with 3.5 percent of landowners controlling over half of the arable land.”
Brazil’s 1988 constitution included a provision allowing quilombos to apply for collective title to lands where they have long resided. But implementation has been problematic. Applications filed by many quilombos are enmeshed in a bureaucratic quagmire, the report found.
And how about the cross between a lioness and an jackass(male donkey)? lionass?
I'm not looking to cross with a male donkey. That's not how we lioness' do. I do realize there are many available here but I have higher aspirations
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: [QB] Oshun: First, I fully recognise that people don't create or define themselves. The problem with the racist "one drop" rule/law was not that whites only wanted to protect "white race purity", they sincerely believed, and still do--at least most of them--that the "white race" is "biologically[in the human sense] and culturally superior to the African race".
Thus to allow African DNA to enter the gene pool of the whites would be akin to allow a dysgenic poison to seep into the white blood stream and hence pollute and degrade it.
Here's the problem with that theory and pointing it out is easy to do if we do not cast off quadroons, mulattoes, etc as white. If nothing else acknowledge them as a colored people if you really want to help the black community. Homogenous European lineages have relied heavily on lineages that are mixed to help create the foundations for their cultures/societies. Italy is mixed, Greece is mixed.. Meds in general seem to be more mixed than North Western Europe. Even the anti black Egypt or anti black moor theorists would have to at the very least acknowledge mixture.
Why is this so important? Because if the homogenous European lineages were so much better, and all success should be attributed to them, why did the mixed lineages excel beyond them? Why did they need a jump start from the mixed lineages if not ones that are completely foreign. This is difficult to grasp and easy for whites to ignore when you do not force them to see that the "white civilizations" carried on about are not homogenous, they are not "pure." But of course white racists are already a step ahead of most blacks and they're trying to define whiteness as more heterogeneous because they will be unable to answer this question if blacks were ever to catch on.
quote: Again and to put it another way: "the one drop rule and its different permutations was/is an egregious assault on the humanity of Africans".
That is only because people do not know how the one drop rule could actually be used to dispel myths of "pure Euro" superiority as I have just explained. The biggest problem is that blacks as a people do not know the genealogical make up of those homogenous Europeans claim represent "their"..."achievements" and black people do not know their history and Africa's history to the extent that they should.
Again if white Europeans are identified with homogenous lineages as is reflected through the one drop rule, then to justify their superiority, they would have to at the very least reap the consequences of explaining why the homogenous lineages relied on those that were more heterogeneous. They cannot which is why no one outside of academics will know that the hailed Greeks, Romans, etc are not actually a homogenous European people.
quote:You say that the idea of "blackness" should be stretched to include so-called "quadroons" and "octoroons".
I'm saying that's how it was originally anyway. There would be no 'stretching' necessary.
quote: All well and good, but is frankly irritating when in the U.S., South America, and places like South Africa they are taken to represent a "better and improved" version of Africans.
The notion of racial superiority collapses when it is made evident to the homogenous European racist his ancestors' reliance on heterogeneous peoples of Europe as well as from people outside of Europe who do not harbor the homogenous European's lineages. Whites saying they "improved" the African in an effort to divide the black community doesn't change that mixed peoples helped to create the black community too.
And even as many blacks have tried to cast aside quads, ocatroons and mulattoes whites have only found other means to divide the black community. Be it by gender, or by dividing blacks between those who have assimilated to white values and norms from those who refuse. You will not get any peace thinking that by cutting those that are mixed off, that resolution will be found in the efforts to divide and to establish hierarchies within the community. Rather from running, it is best to how learn to stop it as best we can.
Concepts of whiteness dispel their own notions of superiority and the one drop rule is helpful in assisting this because it is an easy to cite example that the common man can use that shows whiteness is defined by Euro homogeneity. When whites can claim heterogeneous societies without consequence they have effectively shifted the goalposts. You will just be running around decades from now trying to dispel racism through yet another set of standards if you do not hold whites to their initial standards.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I look at Italian TV and I see Greeks a lot on the news and really I don't get the impression that they are qualitatively different from other Europeans. When I see Italians or Greeks or Spaniards[I look at Spanish soccer a lot] I just see white people. No big deal if they are white. But I object strongly when they throw bananas at African players at their soccer matches.
Hey, I am indifferent to how octoroons and other white-black permuatations call themselves. That looks more like a U.S. problem. Of very little significance in the short of long run.
All I am saying that when whites shunted their near-white offspring on to the blacks that was sheer racism. I don't believe that African ancestry is dysgenic--and that was what the "one drop" law/rule was based on.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:lol, it's Mendels law. Of dominant and recessive genes, alleles.
Sure. Medel's pea experiments show that some genes are dominant and others are recessive at the phenotypical level but that does not negate the actual genomic expression itself.
We know that the allele for blue eyes are recessive when crossed with the allele for brown eyes, but that does not erase the existence of the genes for blue-eyes in the DNA structure of the individual.
That's why the blondest Scandinavian still carries in recessivity those genes of his/her African forbears that characterised the African phenotype thousands of years ago. But it would wrong to say that the Sxcandinavian is "black" because of his/her African ancestry.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm not looking to cross with a male donkey. That's not how we lioness' do. I do realize there are many available here but I have higher aspirations
You do have a sense of humour--you gave me LOL moment there.
"Higher aspirations"? A horse maybe? Humans have tried that you know--with disastrous results. So don't try it home or in the barn.
I am not sure though whether you missed my pun on your moniker re the crossing.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: I look at Italian TV and I see Greeks a lot on the news and really I don't get the impression that they are qualitatively different from other Europeans.
Phenotype does not equate to ancestry, although many even whites have proclaimed the Greeks not to be black due to the greater incidence of an olive complexion among them among other qualities but this is besides the point. Greeks are less than 1/2 European in origin even if they may not look that way to you. There is plenty different between them and Northwestern, homogenous Europeans.
quote: When I see Italians or Greeks or Spaniards[I look at Spanish soccer a lot] I just see white people. No big deal if they are white.
But it is a "big deal."
Ok first, Spainards are not as heterogenous as the Italians or Greeks. They come in because the jumpstart to their culture by Euro standards was greatly influenced by heterogeneous and foreign peoples like the Moors. The same could be said for Portugal as well. So second why is it not "ok" to simply call them white instead of "mixed" or "colored" which is a more accurate? Because it implies whiteness can include peoples whose heritage comes from outside of Europe to a substantial degree. Furthermore the white racist can employ a "true negro" model without ever being forced to demonstrate a "true blanco" that models the success of Euros who have the genetic and cultural absence of Africa and Asia.
Its all important because you just allowed a shifting of the goalposts. Its gonna allow racism to continue if the definition of whiteness is constantly allowed to shift to the convenience of whites. Greeks and Italians are Europeans, but they are not white Europeans. They are at best people color (Greeks especially). More than half of their origins come from Asia and Africa. If white racists are trying to say that the white heritage is what can be attributed to the success of whomever is mixed, they need to provide an example of a 'pure' lineage that outperformed the mixed peoples and foreigners that helped them. When you allow them to simply claim a Greek or a Italian as white and not as say, colored, you've allowed them to ignore this flaw in their reasoning. The one drop rule can be negative in it's impact to the black community but only if you allow these sorts of things to happen.
quote: All I am saying that when whites shunted their near-white offspring on to the blacks that was sheer racism. I don't believe that African ancestry is dysgenic--and that was what the "one drop" law/rule was based on.
It doesn't matter what the rule was based off of. It helped form our community as those whom were mixed were part of it. But even more important is that in the now the rule can be used in a helpful and meaningful way of dispelling notions of white supremacy while allowing more people to feel a greater sense of connectedness to Africa.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think this topic is just being over-discussed. I really don't understand why you don't want to accept the fact that Greeks, Italians, Spaniards are white people. I also see Spaniards as tourists coming to Africa on chartered tours. Hey, everybody here calls them white--what's the big deal? And they accept that they themselves are whites.
Have you seen the Spanish soccer team? I have, and they are all white--something they are proud off, claiming that they can win without hosting black players. As you might know France, Germany, and England do have black players on their teams. After winning the last World Cup their soccer pundits claimed that black[African] players are not necessary for winning.
I just don't see how Africans are deprived of anything because Spaniards, Italians, and Greeks are whites. Just don't get it.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Where was I arguing Spain cause I wasn't. My arguments are more towards areas like Greece and Italy. Anyway didn't say you have to view Africa as "deprived" of culture w/o Greece and Rome. What is a disservice to Africa is playing Italians and Greeks as white like many Northwestern European and saying that it is okay to thus overlook their mixed or colored heritage. Not only does it oversimplify their origins it ignores completely that they are of mixed stock. To say it again if I've gotta, ignoring theyre colored lets the racists to use them as examples of 'civilizations' whites were able to produce without any African/Asiatic influences. And of course we know where that leads, accusations that any success (by Euro standards) Africa's descendants get is because of their European heritage. Your anxiety towards the one drop rule is cause of this.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Negroid admixture in Greece and Italy is virtually non-detectable, it only appears in Spain because of the Moors, but even in Spain it is as low as 2%.
Oshun is just a troll with an agenda to spread lies. It simply upsets them ancient greece and rome were both white civilizations, so they are fixated in trying to proove somehow the greeks are partially black.
If the greeks are heavily black admixed, why do they have high IQ's?
Black African IQ: 70 Greek IQ: 100
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Anglo-Battywashologist: just a troll with an agenda to spread lies.
Yes, we here are all aware and agree that's just exactly what you are.... Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
lol... you are claiming that somehow the Greeks are heavily black admixed, but why then do they have zero Negroid phenotype features?
Genetics and anthropology shows the Greeks are Caucasoid. Since ancient greece though is one of the most renowned classical civilizations, it simply pains black people to come to accept the fact that it was a white civilization.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Negroid admixture in Greece and Italy is virtually non-detectable, it only appears in Spain because of the Moors, but even in Spain it is as low as 2%.
earlier you said:
quote:E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.” - Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
You can find Sub Saharan Africans with E-M78, like the Masalit and the Fur and they are highest in these populations.
Masalit
Fur
quote: "From the Mesolithic to the early Neolithic period different lines of evidence support an out-of-Africa Mesolithic migration to the Levant by northeastern African groups that had biological affinities with sub-Saharan populations. From a genetic point of view, several recent genetic studies have shown that sub-Sabaran genetic lineages (affiliated with the Y-chromosome PN2 clade; Underhill et al. 2001) have spread through Egypt into the Near East, the Mediterranean area, and, for some lineages, as far north as Turkey (E3b-M35 Y lineage; Cinniogclu et al. 2004; Luis et al. 2004), probably during several dispersal episodes since the Mesolithic (Cinniogelu et al. 2004; King et al. 2008; Lucotte and Mercier 2003; Luis et al. 2004; Quintana-Murci et al. 1999; Semino et al. 2004; Underhill et al. 2001). This finding is in agreement with morphological data that suggest that populations with sub-Saharan morphological elements were present in northeastern Africa, from the Paleolithic to at least the early Holocene, and diffused northward to the Levant and Anatolia beginning in the Mesolithic.
In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005), in concordance with a process of demie diffusion accompanying the extension of the Neolithic revolution (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994)."
hooi...
quote:Black African IQ: 70 Greek IQ: 100
I'll just repost this response someone else gave you...
Now explain why 43.8 percent of African immigrants had achieved a college degree and why only 28.9 percent of European, Russian and Canadian immigrants have achieved college degrees
posted
the one drop rule clearly indicates Greeks are Black ^^^look at the hip hop influenced attitude and black skin tone. -also note Greek version of kangol cap
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Are all blacks Igbo? No, but one can argue Igbo black. Do Greeks being black mean
is Greek? No. At least I'd be surprised if YOU argued that of all people since you were the one asking if people here if they had Egyptian background. So by your own reasoning even the most it'd imply they are of a similar race. What happened lioness? The funny thing is that you'll be on here one minute asking "are any of you Egyptians" trying to make the clear distinction that race =/= ethnic background, only to now fumble on yourself and switch gears the moment you see an opening. More twisting things with logical fallacies and back pedaling from lioness.
quote:
And the funny thing is, in the US there are people who look like that, if not even more "yellow/high yellow" in complexion that will tell you they are black.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
You are wrong on this. Why do you just make things up out of thin air?
Archconservative Richard Lynn has a table of world IQ scores in which the Greek score is put at 92[b].
You also wrote very erroneously that East African IQ is higher than West African--on account of your spurious assumption that it's due to some bogus "caucasoid" admixture. Nonsense: Here are the East African scores: Zambia(77), Uganda(73), Tanzania(72), Kenya(72), Malawi(71), Somalia(68), Ethiopia(63).
I have to do a LOL on your reaction to the above scores.
And by the way the African-American score of 85 is higher than some of your "caucasoid" nations such as those with ancient and prestigious civilisations:
India: 81 Iran(Ancient Persia): 84 Iraq(Ancient Mesopotamia-and the claimed source of Western civilisation): 80(Lynn, 1978)
Spain: 87(Lynn, 1978), 99(Lyn IQ and the Wealth of Nations).
From Lynn(1978):
IQ tests given to 3,600 immigrant European children to the U.S. between WWI and WWII:
Northern Europe IQ: 97 Southern and Eastern Europe: 85
Lynn(1978)
Ugandan children scored 88 on IQ tests(1972). Tanzanian children scored 88 on IQ tests(1967).
Lynn(1978, "Ethnic and Racial Differences in Intelligence: Some International Comparisons".)
"In India there is a considerable literature on intelligence testing....A more recent investigation using a small sample of [b] 25 post-graduate students at the University of Calcutta showed an incredibly low mean IQ of 75.(Sinha, 1968)".
The truth is that IQ scores simply reflect the educational and technological levels of different societies based on tests created for industrialised societies, not for peasant, agricultural societies where literacy levels are low--by modern standards.
The Flynn effect also bears this out. See Flynn(2007) "What is Intelligence".
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
You keep saying that the IQ of "Orientals"[ meaning East Asians] is 106. Not so. There is a big spread.
China is given a score of 100(Lynn) but there are some studies that put that score at 95, and lower yet for the rural areas--something like 80-85.
But assume that the Chinese score is 100. Now China's population is 1.4 billion. Factor in Japan(130 million), Koreas(65 million), Taiwan(20 million). Their higher scores will hardly influence the Chinese score of 100--purely because of China's population number.
Now when you factor in the lower scores of the rest of East Asia the total average will drop to under 100. Philippines, Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, Burma, Laos, etc. and possibly Indonesia together carry some 200-400 people(if you include Indonesia). So after the balance-out we are back to the Chinese score of ~ 100. Not 106 at all.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
You keep saying that the IQ of "Orientals"[ meaning East Asians] is 106. Not so. There is a big spread.
China is given a score of 100(Lynn) but there are some studies that put that score at 95, and lower yet for the rural areas--something like 80-85.
But assume that the Chinese score is 100. Now China's population is 1.4 billion. Factor in Japan(130 million), Koreas(65 million), Taiwan(20 million). Their higher scores will hardly influence the Chinese score of 100--purely because of China's population number.
Now when you factor in the lower scores of the rest of East Asia the total average will drop to under 100. Philippines, Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, Burma, Laos, etc. and possibly Indonesia together carry some 200-400 people(if you include Indonesia). So after the balance-out we are back to the Chinese score of ~ 100. Not 106 at all.
I see now what your problem is. You're another Frank Snowden. You're miseducated. You believe these grand lies white people set up and you're trying to work within it. Incredible. For your information Intelligence Quotient is a fraud.
Posts: 314 | From: Home | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
You are wrong on this. Why do you just make things up out of thin air?
Archconservative Richard Lynn has a table of world IQ scores in which [b]the Greek score is put at 92[b].
You also wrote very erroneously that East African IQ is higher than West African--on account of your spurious assumption that it's due to some bogus "caucasoid" admixture. Nonsense: Here are the East African scores: Zambia(77), Uganda(73), Tanzania(72), Kenya(72), Malawi(71), Somalia(68), Ethiopia(63).
Independant countries are not relevant in regards to race (only ethnicity), the overall or average statistic is combined.
Caucasoid IQ is 100 Negroid IQ is 70
East Africans overall score higher by 5-8 points than Negroids.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
You are just wrong again. A hat-trick for me and more on your 3 points.
The IQ argument is that genetics trumps the environment in the scores individuals and peoples make on IQ tests. In other words, wherever you find whites they will score approximately 100 on IQ tests.
I showed you that the IQ spread for whites is significant. Israel 94, and Germany 102. Greece 92, Ireland 93, and Sweden 101.
Surely those ~10 point differences are not due to genetics because you will have to say that some white groups are more intellectually endowed than others. After all, Greece produced, Plato, Thales, Aristotle, Zeno, etc. when the Austrians and Germans were rude, crude, and unschooled. So what happened?
When it comes to the so-called caucasoid areas things get worse: India scores a whopping 81 while AAs score 85.
Question: Are AAs more intellectually gifted than Indians? Than Persians(Iran)--home to a "great civilisation" as the whites say. Or Iraq--home of many intellectual firsts in world history--as the whites say. Iraq just squeaked through with 84. Wow!
Again, IQ is just about the environment and the knowledge imparted in industralised societies. Simple.
And it seems that your arguments are so weak--e.g. trying to ignore the environmental score differentials for white countries and trying to hide them in some bogus average.
Again, EXPLAIN why Israel is 94 and Germany 102. Or why India is 81 and African Americans score--as the race theorists claim--85. And that 85--according to Flynn and Dickens--has shifted up to 92 in the last 40 years.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:East Africans overall score higher by 5-8 points than Negroids.
So what then are Kenyans, Tanzanians, Ugandans, Malawians in your bogus racial world?
You run the equally bogus nonsense that so-called "Horners"(Ethiopia and Somalia) are so-called "caucasoid"[ a silly made-up Euro pseudo-science term] yet these 2 nations are the lowest of the East African scores. LOL. Not even cracking 70.
Just having fun with this--like a tiger playing with a mouse before the big moment! LOL.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Negroid admixture in Greece and Italy is virtually non-detectable, it only appears in Spain because of the Moors, but even in Spain it is as low as 2%.
earlier you said:
quote:E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.” - Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
You can find Sub Saharan Africans with E-M78, like the Masalit and the Fur and they are highest in these populations.
Masalit
Fur
quote: "From the Mesolithic to the early Neolithic period different lines of evidence support an out-of-Africa Mesolithic migration to the Levant by northeastern African groups that had biological affinities with sub-Saharan populations. From a genetic point of view, several recent genetic studies have shown that sub-Sabaran genetic lineages (affiliated with the Y-chromosome PN2 clade; Underhill et al. 2001) have spread through Egypt into the Near East, the Mediterranean area, and, for some lineages, as far north as Turkey (E3b-M35 Y lineage; Cinniogclu et al. 2004; Luis et al. 2004), probably during several dispersal episodes since the Mesolithic (Cinniogelu et al. 2004; King et al. 2008; Lucotte and Mercier 2003; Luis et al. 2004; Quintana-Murci et al. 1999; Semino et al. 2004; Underhill et al. 2001). This finding is in agreement with morphological data that suggest that populations with sub-Saharan morphological elements were present in northeastern Africa, from the Paleolithic to at least the early Holocene, and diffused northward to the Levant and Anatolia beginning in the Mesolithic.
In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005), in concordance with a process of demie diffusion accompanying the extension of the Neolithic revolution (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994)."
hooi...
quote:Black African IQ: 70 Greek IQ: 100
I'll just repost this response someone else gave you...
Now explain why 43.8 percent of African immigrants had achieved a college degree and why only 28.9 percent of European, Russian and Canadian immigrants have achieved college degrees
Added to that is:
The Northeast Africa-based E1b1b1a subclade is defined by SNP M78. Somalia, Sudan and Egypt are among the present day countries with very high frequencies (60-90%) of the E1b1b1a M78 subclade. The STR data also support its origin in this area with a TMRCA estimated at 14-23 kya.
The E1b1b1a1b (V32) subclade is a descendant of E1b1b1a1 (V12). E1b1b1a1b/V32 is highest in Somalia (47-75%),
This somewhat rare haplogroup, E1b1b1e (V6), has only been observed in East Africa with the most appreciable levels seen in Ethiopia (4-17%). Kenya and Somalia also harbor a moderate frequency (5%) of this subclade.
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: The IQ argument is that genetics trumps the environment in the scores individuals and peoples make on IQ tests. In other words, wherever you find whites they will score approximately 100 on IQ tests.
[quote]Surely those ~10 point differences are not due to genetics because you will have to say that some white groups are more intellectually endowed than others. After all, Greece produced, Plato, Thales, Aristotle, Zeno, etc. when the Austrians and Germans were rude, crude, and unschooled. So what happened?
When it comes to the so-called caucasoid areas things get worse: India scores a whopping 81 while AAs score 85.
Question: Are AAs more intellectually gifted than Indians? Than Persians(Iran)--home to a "great civilisation" as the whites say. Or Iraq--home of many intellectual firsts in world history--as the whites say. Iraq just squeaked through with 84. Wow!
Again, IQ is just about the environment and the knowledge imparted in industralised societies. Simple.
And it seems that your arguments are so weak--e.g. trying to ignore the environmental score differentials for white countries and trying to hide them in some bogus average.
Again, EXPLAIN why Israel is 94 and Germany 102. Or why India is 81 and African Americans score--as the race theorists claim--85. And that 85--according to Flynn and Dickens--has shifted up to 92 in the last 40 years.
100 is the average combined for Caucasoid (White) Europeans, while Negroid (Black) Africans in contrast are 70, which is in the mental retard category, or bordering it.
Are you aware Black Sub-Saharan African tribes can't even count their fingers? Nor can the Australian Aborigines. In fact the aborigines score lower than Negroids.
And within science there is no denial regarding genetics and intelligence. The IQ difference between Blacks and Whites is observable by age 3, indicating that it is genetic (Levin, 1997).
India, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon etc are all around 84 in IQ (Lynn, 2006).
The obvious reason these places are lower than Europe is because they are less homogenous. There are far purer Caucasoids/Whites there than in Europe. The majority of South Asians, like Indians for example are racially admixed with Veddid. No one has ever claimed modern Indians are pure Caucasoid, you are setting up straw man arguments.
In Europe the IQ is close together, a few points differ but not by much. A country with a national IQ below about 85 is likely to be an economic failure. (Lynn, 2006b).
No European countries are below 85.
IQ tests show that there are huge differences in intelligence between the races.
Nonsuprisingly the only people who object to IQ and race data are black people. Why? Because they are always at the bottom... its just common denialism but personal emotions have nothing to do with scientific data.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:East Africans overall score higher by 5-8 points than Negroids.
So what then are Kenyans, Tanzanians, Ugandans, Malawians in your bogus racial world?
You run the equally bogus nonsense that so-called "Horners"(Ethiopia and Somalia) are so-called "caucasoid"[ a silly made-up Euro pseudo-science term] yet these 2 nations are the lowest of the East African scores. LOL. Not even cracking 70.
Just having fun with this--like a tiger playing with a mouse before the big moment! LOL.
Ethiopians and Somalia are not Caucasoid, they just have Caucasoid (Eurasian) admixture, wich is why some have Caucasoid features such as thinner noses and wavy hair.
posted
Essential nonsense. And besides Ethiopians and Somalis generally don't have wavy hair. Just check the hair of the males. Females tend to straighten their hair these days. The hair ranges from kinky to curly, not wavy.
Wavy hair is what you find among Australian Aboriginese and many West Asians--Jordan, Syria, Lebanon,etc.
But you are still running away and beating around your bush[please do that in private].
Look: you say that East Africans have higher IQS than West Africans because of "caucasoid admixtures". Right?
I documented the IQ scores of East Africans and I asked you to answwr the following: What exactly is the racial lineages of Ugandans, Kenyans, Tanzanians, because they make up the bulk of East Africans? You haven't answered.
I also asked you to explain why Ethiopia and Somalia--supposedly, as your pseudo race-science claims, admixed with caucasoids--scored the LOWEST on the IQ scores of East Africa. You haven't. Just a lot of transparent prevarications.
Again, explain why AAs score higher than past high-achieving "caucasoids" like Iraqis and Iranians. And Greece the intellctual parent of the West comes in with a measly 92.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: The obvious reason these places are lower than Europe is because they are less homogenous.
Never you mind homogenous Europeans relying on these heterogeneous societies to jumpstart their own societies. I wonder why that was since of course they were far less intelligent.
quote:Are you aware Black Sub-Saharan African tribes can't even count their fingers? Nor can the Australian Aborigines. In fact the aborigines score lower than Negroids
Funny thing is, the earliest forms of mathematics are apparently found in Sub Saharan Africa.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
You keep saying that the IQ of "Orientals"[ meaning East Asians] is 106. Not so. There is a big spread.
China is given a score of 100(Lynn) but there are some studies that put that score at 95, and lower yet for the rural areas--something like 80-85.
But assume that the Chinese score is 100. Now China's population is 1.4 billion. Factor in Japan(130 million), Koreas(65 million), Taiwan(20 million). Their higher scores will hardly influence the Chinese score of 100--purely because of China's population number.
Now when you factor in the lower scores of the rest of East Asia the total average will drop to under 100. Philippines, Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, Burma, Laos, etc. and possibly Indonesia together carry some 200-400 people(if you include Indonesia). So after the balance-out we are back to the Chinese score of ~ 100. Not 106 at all.
I see now what your problem is. You're another Frank Snowden. You're miseducated. You believe these grand lies white people set up and you're trying to work within it. Incredible. For your information Intelligence Quotient is a fraud.
You are smart Omo Baba,you are smart like the Nigerians them.
I marvel at how you smoked this guy out so quickly?
Lol Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Essential nonsense. And besides Ethiopians and Somalis generally don't have wavy hair. Just check the hair of the males. Females tend to straighten their hair these days. The hair ranges from kinky to curly, not wavy.
Craniometric studies cluster Ethiopians with Caucasoids. Their other features though are predominantly Negroid. They are an intermediate race as genetics shows (though more Negroid than Caucasoid), they are Aethiopids.
Go on Youtube and you will see Ethiopians calling West Africans ''monkeys'' for their broad Negroid traits. Most Ethiopians don't consider themselves Black.
quote: What exactly is the racial lineages of Ugandans, Kenyans, Tanzanians, because they make up the bulk of East Africans? You haven't answered.
Negroids make up the bulk majority of these places. However the minority Nilotes (such as Maasai) have Caucasoid admixture.
quote:I also asked you to explain why Ethiopia and Somalia--supposedly, as your pseudo race-science claims, admixed with caucasoids--scored the LOWEST on the IQ scores of East Africa. You haven't. Just a lot of transparent prevarications.
Again, explain why AAs score higher than past high-achieving "caucasoids" like Iraqis and Iranians. And Greece the intellctual parent of the West comes in with a measly 92.
They are predominantly still Negroid. Genetics puts their Caucasoid (Eurasian) admixture around 40%, so they are 60% Negroid. The point is though if you compare E. Africa with W. Africa, there is a difference in average IQ. W. Africa which had no Caucasoid admixture is 5-8 points lower. Care to explain?
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Richard Lynn made a mistake on Ethiopia. He's updated:
Richard Lynn has found a new study on intelligence in Ethiopia. It is: Aboud, F., Samuel, M., Hadera, A. & Addus, A. (1991). ―Intellectual, social, and nutritional status of children in an Ethiopian orphanage.‖ Social Science and Medicine, 33, pp. 1275-1280. This study is based on a sample of 134 children in an orphanage in Jimma tested in 1989. According to Richard Lynn, Ethiopia's national IQ would be 71 on the basis of this study.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ If you add that new study it now puts the IQ difference between E. Africans and W. Africans over 15. I think this confirms the fact E. Africans have Caucasoid admixture.
I believe the initial 63 figure was an error or misprint.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
Obviously when the facts are uncomfortable you claim that they are a "misprint".
Obviously you know very little about Africa. White anthropologists have been caught in so many contradictions that it's just embarrassing. An example of what I mean is this. Racist Western anthropology has long argued that the Peuls of West Africa have "caucasoid" affiliations Ethiopians, Somalis, Tutsis, etc. Now The Peuls are the majority ethnic group in Guinea, West Africa. The IQ score for Guinea is 63. In Nigeria the the Hausas and Fulani(Peuls) and other Northern groups are some 50% of the population of Nigeria. The Hausas themselves have been subject to the same racist speculation by white anthropologists re the Hausa language and the Hausa ethnicity. The subtle claim is that the Hausa have Afro-Asiatic[a euphemism for "caucasoid"] connections. Yet the Lynn IQ for Nigeria is 67. The Hausas and Peuls live in large numbers in places like Niger, Mali and Chad--all West Africa.
So the argument is just nonsensical to claim--on white pseudoanthropology's own terms--that West Africa is more "negroid" than East Africa.
I will say it again: IQ scores reflect the technological level of any particular society thus are heavily influenced by environmental considerations and are subject to change over time.
In the case of Africa IQ scores are highly problematic given that the conditions under which such tests are given are very suspect.
To extrapolate and to disprove the Eurocentric IQ thesis consider the following: the IQ that is associated with Ph.Ds in physics, electrical engineering,and mathematics is minimally put at 130-135. Thus if the true African IQ were 70--as the Eurocentric anthropology puts it--it would be extremely rare(probability of ~0.00001) for an African to receive such. Well, lo and behold, there are thousands of such in Africa and abroad in the West. Most African universities offer doctorates in the areas of physics and mathematics and the students who are instructed thereon are taught by Africans with doctorates in physics and mathematics--many of whom have graduated from places like MIT, Cal Tech, Swiss Institute of Technology(Einstein's Alma Mater), Imperial College, London, etc.
To get an idea I tried googling "Mathematicians of the African Diaspora" but no entry. This website lists hundreds of African mathematicians in Africa and the U.S. As a sample consider this one http://www.ogbomoso.net/adebisi.html.
Point is that if you consider the normal bell curve with a mean of 70. It would be virtually impossible to have an item at the 130 level. Yet that is not the case with Africa. So that bogus score of 70 has to fall by the wayside.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Race" in humans is a social construct it can't be reduced to specific measurement numbers, there is simply too much overlap.
lamin, one can see your point that you don't like the idea of one drop of blood rule ( a rul devised by white supremacists to discourage "race mixing") as a form of tainting something pure, as if it is so vile a small amount of it ruins "white purity"
On the other hand what if you ignore why this rule was made and say "ok fine you want it that way we will take in this person with their one drop and accept them as black, beacause that it it contributes to black people having more strength in numbers politcially and that bypasses the original racist intent of the rule. As long as the said multi racial person accepts being categorized "black" then it is more votes and power for black people. If anybody complains we can blame it one the white people who came up with these Jim Crow laws/concepts in the first place.
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Negroid admixture in Greece and Italy is virtually non-detectable, it only appears in Spain because of the Moors, but even in Spain it is as low as 2%.
earlier you said:
quote:E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.” - Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
You can find Sub Saharan Africans with E-M78, like the Masalit and the Fur and they are highest in these populations.
Masalit
Fur
quote: "From the Mesolithic to the early Neolithic period different lines of evidence support an out-of-Africa Mesolithic migration to the Levant by northeastern African groups that had biological affinities with sub-Saharan populations. From a genetic point of view, several recent genetic studies have shown that sub-Sabaran genetic lineages (affiliated with the Y-chromosome PN2 clade; Underhill et al. 2001) have spread through Egypt into the Near East, the Mediterranean area, and, for some lineages, as far north as Turkey (E3b-M35 Y lineage; Cinniogclu et al. 2004; Luis et al. 2004), probably during several dispersal episodes since the Mesolithic (Cinniogelu et al. 2004; King et al. 2008; Lucotte and Mercier 2003; Luis et al. 2004; Quintana-Murci et al. 1999; Semino et al. 2004; Underhill et al. 2001). This finding is in agreement with morphological data that suggest that populations with sub-Saharan morphological elements were present in northeastern Africa, from the Paleolithic to at least the early Holocene, and diffused northward to the Levant and Anatolia beginning in the Mesolithic.
In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005), in concordance with a process of demie diffusion accompanying the extension of the Neolithic revolution (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994)."
hooi...
quote:Black African IQ: 70 Greek IQ: 100
I'll just repost this response someone else gave you...
Now explain why 43.8 percent of African immigrants had achieved a college degree and why only 28.9 percent of European, Russian and Canadian immigrants have achieved college degrees
Added to that is:
The Northeast Africa-based E1b1b1a subclade is defined by SNP M78. Somalia, Sudan and Egypt are among the present day countries with very high frequencies (60-90%) of the E1b1b1a M78 subclade. The STR data also support its origin in this area with a TMRCA estimated at 14-23 kya.
The E1b1b1a1b (V32) subclade is a descendant of E1b1b1a1 (V12). E1b1b1a1b/V32 is highest in Somalia (47-75%),
This somewhat rare haplogroup, E1b1b1e (V6), has only been observed in East Africa with the most appreciable levels seen in Ethiopia (4-17%). Kenya and Somalia also harbor a moderate frequency (5%) of this subclade.
As we can all see the "Eurasian' component ('light blue') is insignifigant in Ethiopians/Northeast Africans. So you can reburry that "admixture" theory in the same patch that you dug it up from!
Louisvilleslugger
Pseudo Angelo, pisspot hilarious!
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Obviously when the facts are uncomfortable you claim that they are a "misprint".
Obviously you know very little about Africa. White anthropologists have been caught in so many contradictions that it's just embarrassing. An example of what I mean is this. Racist Western anthropology has long argued that the Peuls of West Africa have "caucasoid" affiliations Ethiopians, Somalis, Tutsis, etc. Now The Peuls are the majority ethnic group in Guinea, West Africa. The IQ score for Guinea is 63. In Nigeria the the Hausas and Fulani(Peuls) and other Northern groups are some 50% of the population of Nigeria. The Hausas themselves have been subject to the same racist speculation by white anthropologists re the Hausa language and the Hausa ethnicity. The subtle claim is that the Hausa have Afro-Asiatic[a euphemism for "caucasoid"] connections. Yet the Lynn IQ for Nigeria is 67. The Hausas and Peuls live in large numbers in places like Niger, Mali and Chad--all West Africa.
So the argument is just nonsensical to claim--on white pseudoanthropology's own terms--that West Africa is more "negroid" than East Africa.
I will say it again: IQ scores reflect the technological level of any particular society thus are heavily influenced by environmental considerations and are subject to change over time.
In the case of Africa IQ scores are highly problematic given that the conditions under which such tests are given are very suspect.
To extrapolate and to disprove the Eurocentric IQ thesis consider the following: the IQ that is associated with Ph.Ds in physics, electrical engineering,and mathematics is minimally put at 130-135. Thus if the true African IQ were 70--as the Eurocentric anthropology puts it--it would be extremely rare(probability of ~0.00001) for an African to receive such. Well, lo and behold, there are thousands of such in Africa and abroad in the West. Most African universities offer doctorates in the areas of physics and mathematics and the students who are instructed thereon are taught by Africans with doctorates in physics and mathematics--many of whom have graduated from places like MIT, Cal Tech, Swiss Institute of Technology(Einstein's Alma Mater), Imperial College, London, etc.
To get an idea I tried googling "Mathematicians of the African Diaspora" but no entry. This website lists hundreds of African mathematicians in Africa and the U.S. As a sample consider this one http://www.ogbomoso.net/adebisi.html.
Point is that if you consider the normal bell curve with a mean of 70. It would be virtually impossible to have an item at the 130 level. Yet that is not the case with Africa. So that bogus score of 70 has to fall by the wayside.
You can sit and debate the IQ all day, but it won't change the genetics and physical anthropology. Whether you like it or not, East Africans are 40% Caucasoid. This shows up in cranio-metric data, but also genetic studies.
Negroids in East Africa stand out, the same way a Native American would in Sweden. Even the Afronuts admit this, but they would have you believe that East Africans look different because they are apart of some bogus ''tropical'' diversity. Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
BUMPER THE BUMP!!!!! ABOVE WE CAN SEE A PSEUDO FILE BY THE ANGLO PISSPOT VERSUS THE PEER REVIEWED ACADEMIC SOURCES IN THIS POST!!!
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Negroid admixture in Greece and Italy is virtually non-detectable, it only appears in Spain because of the Moors, but even in Spain it is as low as 2%.
earlier you said:
quote:E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.” - Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
You can find Sub Saharan Africans with E-M78, like the Masalit and the Fur and they are highest in these populations.
Masalit
Fur
quote: "From the Mesolithic to the early Neolithic period different lines of evidence support an out-of-Africa Mesolithic migration to the Levant by northeastern African groups that had biological affinities with sub-Saharan populations. From a genetic point of view, several recent genetic studies have shown that sub-Sabaran genetic lineages (affiliated with the Y-chromosome PN2 clade; Underhill et al. 2001) have spread through Egypt into the Near East, the Mediterranean area, and, for some lineages, as far north as Turkey (E3b-M35 Y lineage; Cinniogclu et al. 2004; Luis et al. 2004), probably during several dispersal episodes since the Mesolithic (Cinniogelu et al. 2004; King et al. 2008; Lucotte and Mercier 2003; Luis et al. 2004; Quintana-Murci et al. 1999; Semino et al. 2004; Underhill et al. 2001). This finding is in agreement with morphological data that suggest that populations with sub-Saharan morphological elements were present in northeastern Africa, from the Paleolithic to at least the early Holocene, and diffused northward to the Levant and Anatolia beginning in the Mesolithic.
In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005), in concordance with a process of demie diffusion accompanying the extension of the Neolithic revolution (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994)."
hooi...
quote:Black African IQ: 70 Greek IQ: 100
I'll just repost this response someone else gave you...
Now explain why 43.8 percent of African immigrants had achieved a college degree and why only 28.9 percent of European, Russian and Canadian immigrants have achieved college degrees
Added to that is:
The Northeast Africa-based E1b1b1a subclade is defined by SNP M78. Somalia, Sudan and Egypt are among the present day countries with very high frequencies (60-90%) of the E1b1b1a M78 subclade. The STR data also support its origin in this area with a TMRCA estimated at 14-23 kya.
The E1b1b1a1b (V32) subclade is a descendant of E1b1b1a1 (V12). E1b1b1a1b/V32 is highest in Somalia (47-75%),
This somewhat rare haplogroup, E1b1b1e (V6), has only been observed in East Africa with the most appreciable levels seen in Ethiopia (4-17%). Kenya and Somalia also harbor a moderate frequency (5%) of this subclade.
As we can all see the "Eurasian' component ('light blue') is insignifigant in Ethiopians/Northeast Africans. So you can reburry that "admixture" theory in the same patch that you dug it up from!
Louisvilleslugger
Pseudo Angelo, pisspot hilarious!
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic