posted
Species/subspecies in humid tropical areas are on average much smaller. Sweating is not effective because of the humidity, so instead most animals avoid overheating by lower body mass. Hence Pygmies are not elongated like desert (dry heat) adapted Nilotids.
The same zoological principles apply to Human races. Pygmies who are tropically adapted are small, yet desert adapted peoples are much taller. Khoisans don't contradict this, as their smaller stature is explained through the fact they bury their water in the sand. Hence as Coon (1982) shows, their shorter stature is explained through calcium deficiency.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^then why are Bantu not as short as Pygmies?
Is it because as Coon suggested in Living Races 1962 that they are Pygmies mixed with Caucasians?
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Coon's theory has an element of truth to it, however if you look you will see most Bantu inhabit the tropical savannas not rainforests. The savannas are humid and tropical, but not all year round. Hence populations there would be somewhat taller. In Baker's (1974) terminology the Bantu are mostly Kafrids. They fall intermediate between dry heat adapted Negroids, and the tropical adapted palaeo-Negrids and Pygmies. 'True Blacks' (Forest Negroids/palaeo-Negrids) look a lot like Pygmies and are also small. They are confined to only certain regions.
Here is a map -
I would personally though extend Kafrid more into the palaeo-negrid zone.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
YOU are the one who escaped this topic of discussion from one thread only to start another! LMAO
We already defined what 'tropical' is and explained what it entails. That you are now following your john Anglo-nut's idiocy of humid vs. arid within the tropics is not my problem. Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The other thread got hung up in an dendless back and forth about the sematics of the word Tropical.
Wet or dry climates can both be described in some cases as "Tropical", so here in this thread we can move on instead of beating a dead horse.
Animals including humans that live in wet humid climates have some differences from those that live in dry climates. And they have some similarities.
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Coon's theory has an element of truth to it, however if you look you will see most Bantu inhabit the tropical savannas not rainforests. The savannas are humid and tropical, but not all year round. Hence populations there would be somewhat taller. In Baker's (1974) terminology the Bantu are mostly Kafrids. They fall intermediate between dry heat adapted Negroids, and the tropical adapted palaeo-Negrids and Pygmies. 'True Blacks' (Forest Negroids/palaeo-Negrids) look a lot like Pygmies and are also small. They are confined to only certain regions.
Here is a map -
I would personally though extend Kafrid more into the palaeo-negrid zone.
^^^ no current anthropology books are using the terminology on this map.
You are not worth debating with until you update to the terms that are standard anthrolopolgy the past 15-20 years. The terms on that map were not even used by many in 1974, over 30 yrs ago.
If an African person has features that you classify as Caucasian but they acquired those features with no admixture from Caucus or Asian people they should not be said to have Caucasian features. If applied to Africans it does not reference any place in Africa. Does a narrow nose mean admixture from outside Africa? I don't think anybody knows for sure. The greater part of Ethiopia as well as the Oromia highlands, for example is temperate. Now are such people more similar to other Africans or Europeans?
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^then why are Bantu not as short as Pygmies?
Is it because as Coon suggested in Living Races 1962 that they are Pygmies mixed with Caucasians?
From what I know, Ghanians are on average short, and at least shorter than Nigerians. In contrast Nigerians are at times very tall, muscular and tough build. The desert type is more slender.
Most of what that man Coon wrote on Africans/ Africa is a load of crap. But I am not surprised by the outcome, since he was a supporter of the eugenic movement.
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
"The Northern Ibo and the Yoruba clusters of populations, who live in grassland, are considerably taller in stature than the other ones, who live in the forest. The stature of the latter is near to the African average for their biotype, 164 cm, whereas that of the Northern Ibo is equal to the average for the African savanna, 169cm" (Hiernaux,'The People of Africa1974, p. 168). This was Hiernaux's own personal observation, however.
" Actually, the supposed great height of the Tutsi is one of the most durable myths from the age of European exploration. Careful investigation reveals that today's Tutsi men average 5'7 " [1.70 m] and that they have maintained that average for more than 100 years. That means that back in the 1800s, when puny European men first met the Tutsi, the Europeans suffered strained necks from looking up all the time. The two-to-three-inch difference in average height back then could easily have turned into fantastic stories of African giants by European adventurers and writers.
Though the 1974 edition of Guinness Book of Records said the tallest known Tutsi was 2.29 m (7. ft. 6 in.) tall. Guinness has listed the average height of the Tutsi at anywhere from 1.80 m (5 ft. 11 in.) to 1.96 m (6 ft. 5 in.) for men, and up to 1.78 m (5 ft. 10 in.) for women. --Anshelm '77
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
In the space of about 150 years, the Dutch have gone from being one of Europe's smallest people to the tallest in the world. A look at why the Dutch are so tall.
. Tropical environments are humid with precipitation. Semi-tropical are the savannas that surround the true tropical environments and are 6 or more months humid (under Koppen they are therefore still counted as tropical).
- As soon as you move out of the humid heat zones nothing is tropically adapted and most africans are not tropical.
^^lol... you dumb muthafucka.. Tropical zones in Africa DO include savannah as any basic geographic textbook shows. Were you always this stupid or did the doctor puncture your head with the abortion forceps when you came out? He must have punctured it because your head is still dribbling shiit for brains. Here is yet ANOTHER example of your idiocy exposed re your alleged "non existent" savannas in the tropics.. QUOTE:
"Located well within the tropics (usually between latitudes 5° and 20° on either side of the equator), the tropical savanna climate has much in common with the tropical rainforest and monsoon.The sun's vertical rays at noon are never far from overhead, the receipt of solar energy is nearly at a maximum and temperatures remain constantly high. Days and nights are of nearly equal length throughout the year, as they are in other tropical regions.." --Gabler et al 2006. Essentials of Physical Geography
Moron, earlier on you said deserts could not be in the tropics. That was debunked. Running back and forth like a retarded chicken with its head cut off you change your story to say savannahs are not in the tropics, but credible science debunks you again. How much more idiotic can you be? lmao..
"non existent" tropical deserts Tropical desert: The part of a SUBTROPICAL desert that lies within the TROPICS, in a latitude lower than 23.5 N or S. Tropical desert climates fall within type BWh of the KOPPEN CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION, and type EA'd of the THORNTHWAITE CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION.
Tropical desert and steppe climate: In the STRAHLER CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION a climate in his group 1, which comprises climates controlled by equatorial and tropical AIR MASSES. This climate affects l and areas in latitudes 15-30 [degrees] in both hemispheres and is associated wit continental tropical air masses that develop in high-pressure cells in the upper TROPOSPHERE above land areas lying on TROPICS of Cancer and Capricorn. The climate is hot, with a moderate range of temperature over the year, and is arid or some-arid. This climate is designated BWb (desert) and BSb (steppe) in the KOPPEN CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION."
--Michael Allaby. 2002. Encyclopedia of weather and climate. Vol. 1: A-L
"The thermal requirement for a tropical climate is considered to be an average mean temperature above 18 degrees C for the coldest month. Within this average, tropics are also marked by receiving a large amount of solar radiation throughout the year with no true or distinct winter season. Tropics not only include jungle, but deserts and mountainous highlands as well. The cooler local temperatures of these highlands are still within the overall averages, and are still part of the tropic zone, receiving high levels of solar radiation and not having a thermally depressed winter season. (Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995)." --Kumar et al. 1999. Biodeterioration of Stone in Tropical Environments and Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995. HUmid Tropical Environments. WIley PUb.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Zaharan liar no. 2 writes:
quote:Your own Koppen map shows this- you keep debunking your own argument fool.
Idiot, take a look at Koppen's map:
Egypt and most of North Africa is non-tropical.
Stupid mothafucka- Egyptians are tropically adapted having come into the Nile Valley from the tropic zone. And almost 20% of Egypt lies within that zone. And below is a Koppen map. How stupid can you be Aspberger boy?
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: And Zaharan had the ignorance to claim Köppen's climate classification supported his definition, not mine. But look at the above map. Note how he never responded before when this was shown. I wonder why?
^^I have already responded in detail you stupid piece of shiit. You are not fooling anyone with your bogus diversions. Your moronic denials only expose you for the idiot you are. BUt if you want more, go ahead, be my guest. You ain't causing me any extra work.
LET'S RECAP:
Faheem dumba said: The term (tropical) I was using was putitive to the Afocentric definition of "tropical", which as I have shown is actually false and not climatic. Those of the tropical climatic region in Sub-Sahara Africa, such as Pygmies and Forest Negroids ('true Blacks') do not in fact show high brachial or crural indices -- they are adapted instead to humid heat environments.
Khoisans are adapated to the desert heat, but they are not tropical.
Tropical adaptation is adaptation to humid heat, not arid climatic conditions
The only thing you have shown Wanker boy is that you are an idiot. You can't even keep your arguments straight. If Pygmies and "forest negroids" live in the tropical forest then they DO live in a as you say "humid, heat environment." Think dumbass, think and exercise some logic... lmao...
And deserts do form part of the tropics you hapless buffoon. You are so incompetent that even your fellow racists are embarassed by your pathetic carcass.
"..Different authors use different terminology to denote a classification by rainfall, season, mean temperature etc.. but it makes no difference. Wetness, coolness, dryness, rainfall, temp, season, mix and match- makes no difference. They are all variants WITHIN the tropics as the Koppen climate map below shows.
And dummy, the labels "tropical wet" and tropical wet/dry" on your map all identify areas WITHIN the larger tropical zone. Your own Koppen map shows this- you keep debunking your own argument fool... DUH....
Koppen climate system map
Btw Zaharan, not even Keita uses your stupid terminology based on who can see the sun in the sky. He uses the term "Saharo-Tropical African Variant" (1981).
Hapless dullard! Must we yet again instruct you? Keita uses "tropical" yes- to identify those in the SAHARAN area that were tropical. Got it? He STILL identifies them as tropical. DUH.. And you are even more incompetent in your citation. Keita did not use the terminology in "1981" as you claim. Learn to cite accurately. End of today's lesson. Quote:
”The Tropic of Cancer and The Tropic of Capricorn The Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn each lie at 23.5 degrees latitude. The Tropic of Cancer is located at 23.5° North of the equator and runs through Mexico, the Bahamas, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, India, and southern China. The Tropic of Capricorn lies at 23.5° South of the equator and runs through Australia, Chile, southern Brazil (Brazil is the only country that passes through both the equator and a tropic), and northern South Africa. The tropics are the two lines where the sun is directly overhead at noon on the two solstices - near June and December 21. The sun is directly overhead at noon on the Tropic of Cancer on June 21 (the beginning of summer in the Northern Hemisphere and the beginning of winter in the Southern Hemisphere) and the sun is directly overhead at noon on the Tropic of Capricorn on December 21 (the beginning of winter in the Northern Hemisphere and the beginning of summer in the Southern Hemisphere). The reason for the location of the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn at 23.5° north and south respectively is due to the axial tilt of the Earth. The Earth is titled 23.5 degrees from the plane of the Earth's revolution around the sun each year. The area bounded by the Tropic of Cancer on the north and Tropic of Capricorn on the south is known as the "tropics." --From worldAtlas.com and Geographic Information - Page 33 Jenny Marie Johnson - 2003
Why do you think they are called the TROPIC of Cancer and the TROPIC of Capricorn? You big dummy…
You're using the definition of where the Sun reaches a point directly overhead at least once during the solar year --- a completely bogus definition in regards to population biology, and physical anthropology.
No stupid mothafuck. The definition, which I posted long ago is shown below. You are so stupid it went over your head. ANd do you realize that you continually debunk yourself with your "refutations"? The lines mark out the tropics which is defined by thermal requirements and, as the standard definition shows below, include jungle, deserts and mountainous highlands, at temperatures that can be quite cool...
.. QUOTE:
"The thermal requirement for a tropical climate is considered to be an average mean temperature above 18 degrees C for the coldest month. Within this average, tropics are also marked by receiving a large amount of solar radiation throughout the year with no true or distinct winter season. Tropics not only include jungle, but deserts and mountainous highlands as well. The cooler local temperatures of these highlands are still within the overall averages, and are still part of the tropic zone, receiving high levels of solar radiation and not having a thermally depressed winter season. (Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995)." --Kumar et al. 1999. Biodeterioration of Stone in Tropical Environments and Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995. HUmid Tropical Environments. WIley PUb.
The tropics are astronomically clearly defined latitudes.. the sun reaches its zenith at these two positions once a year, and within the area of the tropics twice a year. That is the main reason that, within the tropics, the annual variation of air temperature is smaller than its diurnal variation. Compared with other thermal delimitations this is also true for high altitude mountains without any limitations." --Tropical Glaciers: Glaciers and Glaciations of the Rwenzori Mountains, Uganda. 2002. Kaser and Osmaston -----------------------------------------------------------------
DEBUNKING ON KEITA he 1981 paper in a UNESCO report is first where "tropical-african" is first traced. The 1993 paper I said is where Keita claims North African coastals are not tropical-africans but southern europeans:
"[...]coastal northern africans are viewed here as perhaps being biologically more, but not only, related to southern Europeans, primarily by gene flow." (Keita, 1993)
^^No fool. The term "tropical African" occurs is not "traced" to 1981. It can be found in books going back to the 1800s.
Keita explicity excludes north african coastals and other north africans from his "saharo-tropical-african" grouping.
And Keita does not "exclude" "north african coastals and other north africans from his "saharo-tropical-african" grouping."
The very quote you proffer debunks your own claim. And diversionary smokescreens abut AC/DC wont save you, nor will trying to hide your debunking above re Diop and Vansertima.Let me quote your own proof:
"[...]coastal northern africans are viewed here as perhaps being biologically more, but not only, related to southern Europeans, primarily by gene flow." (Keita, 1993)
^^Dumbass, Keita says more "but not only". How therefore has he "excluded" "north african coastals and other north africans from his "saharo-tropical-african" grouping"? It is clear that southern Europeans are not the only relation to the coastals, and the Sahara itself makes up a large chunk of North Africa, that even in places extends close to the Medit coast. SO how could "north Africans" be "excluded" from the Saharan zone stupid muthafucka? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KHOISAN
"Several other long-range migration events have shaped the genetic l andscape of Africa. Analyses of mtDNA and the Y chromosome supports studies of classical polymorphisms as well as archaeological data indicating that Khoisian-speaking populations (those whose languages contain clicks, which includes the !Kung San) may have originated in Eastern Africa and migrated into southern Africa >20 - 10kya (Cavalli-Sforza, 1997, Scozzari, et al. 1999). Analyses of Y-Chromosome haplotype variation have identified that the most ancestral Y-chromosome haplotype is present at moderate to high frequency in East African Sudanese and Ethiopians, as well as in southern African !Kung San .." -- Michael Crawford 2006. Anthropological Genetics: Theory, Methods and Applications. p. 363-364
"The shallower slope, that of the INuit, has a value of 0.77 versus 0.86 for the Khoisan, indicating thjat the tibiae of the cold-adapted Inuit grow less per increment of femral growth theoughout their entire ontogenetic sequence tha do those of the Khoisan. The Neanderthal data points can be seen to follow the Inuit trajectory." --Nancy Minugh-Purvis, Kenneth J. McNamara. Human Evolution through Developmental Change 2001
"Variation in limb proportions between prehistoric Jomon and Yayoi people of Japan are explored by this study. Jomon people were the descendents of Pleistocene nomads who migrated to the Japanese Islands around 30,000 yBP. Phenotypic and genotypic evidence indicates that Yayoi people were recent migrants to Japan from continental Northeast Asia who likely interbred with Jomon foragers. Limb proportions of Jomon and Yayoi people were compared using RMA regression and "Quick-Test" calculations to investigate relative variability between these two groups. Cluster and principal components analyses were performed on size-standardized limb lengths and used to compare Jomon and Yayoi people with other groups from various climatic zones. Elongated distal relative to proximal limb lengths were observed among Jomon compared to Yayoi people. Jomon limb proportions were similar to human groups from temperate/tropical climates at lower latitudes, while Yayoi limb proportions more closely resemble groups from colder climates at higher latitudes. Limb proportional similarities with groups from warmer environments among Jomon foragers likely reflect morphological changes following Pleistocene colonization of the Japanese Islands. Cold-derived limb proportions among the Yayoi people likely indicate retention of these traits following comparatively recent migrations to the Japanese Islands. Changes in limb proportions experienced by Jomon foragers and retention of cold-derived limb proportions among Yayoi people conform to previous findings that report changes in these proportions following long-standing evolution in a specific environment." --Tempe et al. 2008. Variation in limb proportions between Jomon foragers and Yayoi agriculturalists from prehistoric Japan. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008 Oct;137(2):164-74.
Previous studies report that Jomon foragers had higher brachial and crural indices than Yayoi people and were similar in limb proportions to low latitude, tropical groups such as the African San (Yamaguchi, 1989). --Temple et al, 2008
quote: "At the same time, there is a genetic component. Low stature persists even under apparently favourable health conditions. The small body size and lean physique of living Khoisan peoples are often cited in human population biology texts as exemplary of adaptation to a hot, sometimes specifically desert, climate. Their low body-mass index is portrayed as support for Bergmann's and Allen's rules (cf. Molnar 1998, Relethford 1997)." --Sealy and Pfeiffer (2000) ------------------------------
AND YOU ARE STILL RUNNING AWAY FROM SWENET'S EXPOSURE OF YOUR FABRICATIONS AND IDIOCY
Running away as usual, like the faggot that you've demonstrated yourself to be, time after time again. None of your ideas have withstood the test of scrutiny, and that's why you've repeatedly backed away from them:
1.You've fabricated your claim that Bar Yosef said that the Mushabian was excavated in Upper and Lower Egypt
2.You've fabricated your claim that Indians never cluster with certain Africans, whether metrically or non-metrically
3.You've fabricated your claim that Mesolithic Nubians and Natufians had wavy hair
4.You've fabricated your claim that the Mediterranean 'race' is free of negroid traits per Coon
5.You've fabricated your claim that Wadi Halfans can't be negroid because of their browridges, since the remains you classify as undoubtedly negroid, (Asselar man and Iwo Eleru) have brow ridges
6.You've fabricated your claim that your fake Australoid phenotypical cluster (Palaeo-americans, Wadi Halfans, Jebel Sahabans, Natufians, European Eurafricans, Mesopotamian Eurafricans, Arabian Veddoids, Indian Veddoids etc) is a cluster of related people
7.You've failed to explain why modern descendants of those ancient populations have zero Australian aboriginal ancestry, but African ancestry with Mesolithic time depths instead.
8.You've fabricated your claim that sub species or races are identifiable by morphological clusters
9.You've fabricated your claim that there have never been studies that detected African affinities with Iranian/Iraqi prehistorical skeletal remains
10.You've fabricated your claim that the Natufian Homo 3 individual had brow ridges, since it consists out of a mandible
11.You've fabricated your claim that the Natufian Homo 3 individual was described as having prognathism
12.You've fabricated your claim that Homo 3 was the only Natufian individual with prognathism
13.You've fabricated your claim that Keith's analysis of the Shukbah remains were somehow refuted or inaccurate
14.You've fabricated your claim that Coon retracted his view of minor Negroid affinities in the Shuqbah Natufians series
15.You've fabricated your claim that Tigray Ethiopians are the only Ethiopians with leptorrhine averages
16.You've fabricated your claim that all Tigray Ethiopians are leptorrhine
17.You've fabricated your claim that non-leptorrhiny in Cushitic speaking groups is necessarily due to admixture with negroid groups.
17.You've fabricated your claim that Wolpoff's list of Erectus to Australoid continuation traits denote a special relationship indicative of continuation.
18.There is no evidence of lineage loss in Upper Palaeolithic Australian, European, West Asian and Amerindian fossils; all fossil mtDNA lineages are attested in contemporaries, and none are pre-M or pre-N. No form of lineage loss can account for the lack of pre-M and pre-N lineages in Eurasians, and no explanations have been offered as to why Sub Saharan Africans have managed to maintain their pre-M and pre-N mtDNA. Additionally, the derived state of Eurasian DNA is also confirmed in genome-wide analysis, which is not subject to Wolpoff's silly caveat that pre-M and pre-N lineages in Eurasians may have died out due to lineage loss.
THE FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-IDIOT EXPOSED PART 20: He tries ot make out that only rainforest areas define the tropics and says: ----------------------------------------------------------------- quote
The climatic tropical zone is limited to mostly western and central sub-sahara africa. Posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist osted 17 November, 2012 04:53 PM ____________________________________
When in fact any credible geography book denotes the tropics within the zone marked out by the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn, a denotation itself based on climate.
THE FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-IDIOT EXPOSED- PART 19: He says there is no OOA but the very "supporting reference" he proffers directy contradicts his claim. ------------------------- [b]Posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on 07 May, 2012 08:45 AM:
OOA never happened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans ----------------------------- The idiot gives a Wikipedia "reference" to back up his claim but the very same "supporting reference" he gives states that multi-regionalists acknowledge that hominid species came from Africa in the first place. Their argument is for continuity and distinct development in separate locations AFTER the initial OOA exit putting hominins in different places. This approach STILL recognizes and acknowledges hominin OOA.
Quote from FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Idiot's "supporting" reference: This species arose in Africa two million years ago as H. erectus and then spread out over the world, developing adaptations to regional conditions. Some populations became isolated for periods of time, developing in different directions, but through continuous interbreeding, replacement, genetic drift and selection, adaptations that were an advantage anywhere on earth would spread, keeping the development of the species in the same overall direction while maintaining adaptations to regional factors. By these mechanisms, surviving local varieties of the species evolved into modern humans, retaining some regional adaptations but with many features common to all regions.[10]
^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus came from Africa. In short, the FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-idiot's own "supporting" reference contradicts his claim. What a pathetic fool.
THE FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi- IDIOT EXPOSED - PART 18. The faker says Negroids are defined as having Caucasoid admixture. But when he sees bla-ck models with admixture he suddenly claims they aint black at all. Originally posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist: posted 12 June, 2012 05:34 PM http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008168 Topic: Carleton Coon: Negoids are hybrids of Pygmies and Caucasians [QB] Yes. A fact well known today.
''The Negroid type is not homogeneous.'' - Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994.
Hiernaux (1975) distinguishes the Pygmies to Negroids on the grounds the latter are a product of the former (a recent mutation) but that there was probable geneflow with Caucasoids as Coon (1967, 1982) maintains.
Also note that on page 123 of 'Living Races of Man', Coon also states that ''To this combination may have been added remnant Capoid genes''. So Negroids are basically a recent mutation from the Pygmies, but with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture.
^^Bitch please. Your own words contradict your punk ass. Up above you say that "NEgroids" are a recent mutation with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture. Look bich, look. You say blacks are defined as having that admixture, and quote your favorite racist, Carleton Coon to that effect. But when your hypocrisy is exposed, you all of a sudden deny that the black models posted are "really" black. IN one thread "admixed" Negroes like the black models are black, but when your idiocy is exposed, they suddenly ain't black. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-IDIOT EXPOSED PART 17: - He says there is no sexual diomorphism in Africans or skeletal differences between men and women, when the very anthropologists he quotes say the opposite.
---------]Originally posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi- Buffoon: FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist member # 18853 posted 03 June, 2012 05:47 PM
FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Buffoon 17a- "Frost and other anthropologists have noted that sexual dimorphism in Negroids is completely lacking. Check Frost's online blog."
FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Buffoon 17b- "Black females are not lighter or different to black males in craniofacial terms."
^^Stupid muthafucka. The very Frost quote you paste says this:
Men and women differ in complexion because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse, 1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and immediately before are actually darker than boys).." FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection? Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85–103u
------- Can't you read imbecile? ALL females differ from males and are lighter. ALL human humans have sexual dimorphism to one degree or another. SO how can blacks "completely lack" said dimorphism according to you, when your own boy Peter Frost says all human have it?
------- ANd in studies of crania men and women do show differences, and these differences can be detected with a battery of modern measurements, as already shown in previous threads where your idiocy was destroyed- example (zakrewski2004-Intra-population and temporal variation in ancient Egyptian crania)
your own peter frost debunks you: ---------------------------------------
"If this common selective force were sexual selection, it could have lightened European skin color by acting on an existing sexual dimorphism. Men and women differ in complexion because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse, 1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and immediately before are actually darker than boys). Investigators also try to exclude tanning by measuring under the arm, where there is less subcutaneous fat and probably less dimorphism in skin color, given that the lightness of a woman’s skin correlates with the thickness of her subcutaneous fat (Mazess, 1967). In any event, sexual selection may have targeted this sex difference, as suggested by a cross-cultural male preference for lighter complexioned women and, conversely, by some evidence of a female preference for darker complexioned men (Aoki, 2002; Feinman Feinman & Gill, 1978; Frost, 1988; Frost, 1994b; Frost, 2005; Van den Berghe & Frost, 1986)."
FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection? Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85–103
and:
"A different perspective on sexual dimorphism in skin pigmentation comes from the recognition that human females require significantly higher amounts of calcium during pregnancy and lactation and, thus, must have lighter skin than males in the same environment in order to maximize their cutaneous vitamin D3 production (Jablonski and Chaplin 2000)... Thus strong clinical evidence continues to support the hypothesis that lighter skin pigmentation in females evolved primarily as a means to enhance the the potential for cutaneous vitamin D production and maintain healthy long-term calcium status and skeletal health." -- Human Evolutionary Biology. 2010. By Michael P. Muehlenbein Damm you are one of the most pathetic idiots in existence.
Tell us -- were you born such a retarded shithead, or were you originally a slug who managed to rise to such prominence?
quote:Originally posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist: [QB] 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)
The foul faker doctored the quote not knowing the article has been much discussed at ES. Testifying even more to his incompetence, Cruciani actually does show E3b or E1b1b occuring in numerous places within "sub-Saharan" Africa. The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81, and E-M34) and the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously distributed on the African continent: E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa, E-M81 is restricted t o northern Africa, E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and E-M35* is shared by eastern and southern Africans (Cruciani et al. 2002)" --Cruciani
And there is no "page 74" in the Cruciani article. THE FAKER AND BUFFOON IS AGAIN BUSTED IN A LIE!
THE FAKER'S BOGUS CLAIM PART- 15 - QUOTE: [QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides: posted 14 January, 2012 11:41 AM If you are a white heterosexual male in Britain you have virtually zero chance of getting a job. All the jobs go to blacks or other immigrants.
^^LOL - Idiotic nonsense. As of 2001, 92.1% of the UK population identified themselves as White, leaving 7.9%[270] of the UK population identifying themselves as mixed race or of an ethnic minority. The population of the United Kingdom in the 2001 census was 58,789,194, UK Office for National Statistics- 2001.
That leaves approx 54 million white people. About 33% of that population were adult men. Let's take away 8% or so for minorities. So you are saying then that 25% of the approx 54 million white people in the UK are all unemployed? Damn you are dumb, but you only expose the bankruptcy of your racism. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Fake C-Ass -Hole exposed PART 14 - BOGUS "NORDIC BLONDS FLITTING AROUND EGYPT
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides: posted 29 December, 2011 06:05 AM
Hetepheres II was a blonde
^^Hapless dullard, you are exposed in another lie. Your own reference was checked. It yielded detailed citations which revealed a quite different story. Scholars say in the mainstream Cambridge Ancient History:
"We must give up the idea that she was of Libyan origin, an attractive theory which was based on blond hair of Hetepheres II, who was then thought to be her daughter. It is now evident that the yellow wig is part of a costume worn b other great ladies." --I. Edwards, C. Gadd, N. Hammond. 1971. The Cambridge Ancient History. 3ed Volume 1, Part 2, Early History of the Middle East
Yet another history says: "The walls of this interior room are decorated with hunting and fishing scenes, including a charming image of Meresankh and her mother, Hetepheres II picking lotus flowers from the river.. The pillars have images of Meresankh wearing a blond wig." --P. Lacovara. 2004. The pyramids and the SPhinx: tombs and temples of GIza
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 13- HIS BOGUS CLAIM OF "NORDIC" EGYPTIAN ROYALTY
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: posted 28 December, 2011 05:40 PM Early dynastic & old kingdom royalty was Nordic (blonde and fair skinned)
^^^Ha hahahahah you stupid mass of camel vomit! Up above you reference scholar Frank Yurco, but here is what Yurco said about the 12th Dynasty, debunking your claim of "Nordic" Egyptian royalty. You dumbass.... You are again debunked, with your own "supporting" references... lmao...
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region.4 As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne... Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989)
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 12 HE says Egyptologists like Frank Yurco says the Egyptians were "Caucasoid" --- "Virtually every egyptologist believes the egyptians were Caucasoid" --
BUt Yurco says nothing of the sort.. Here for example, is what he says about the 12the Dynasty rulers aho were Nubian descent: They seem really "Caucasoid"... yeah, right.. - quote-
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region.4 As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne... Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989) -
Another dodge is to twist an old chat/forum discussion statement by conservative Egyptologist Frank Yurco out of context. Yurco rejected those who "a priori" claimed the Egyptians were "black", that is, a dogmatic claim without presenting empirical evidence. He never rejected reasonable argument with data showing the Egyptians were an indigenous African population -QUOTE: .. basically a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times.. (Yurco 1996- An Egyptological Review, in Black Athena Revisited)
The Faker exposed- part 11
quote: Originally posted by cassiterides: ^You claim Vanessa Williams is a black woman when her heritage is white welsh and native american
According to the Faker, anyone with any white ancestry is not "really" black. SO since a majority of African Americans have white ancestry ranging from 5 to 30% then most Black Americans are not "truly" black you see...
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 10
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: ^ Eurafrican is Caucasoid.
^^You are once again exposed. You said EurAfrican is Caucasoid, and cited Serti in support. But using your own citation any reader can see that Sergi considers EurAfricans to be an amalgamation or mixture of many types, directly contradicting your claim.
SErgi says: QUOTE: "This human species, with cranial and facial characters thus well determined, I call Eurafrican; and this because, having had its origin in Africa, where it is still represented by many peoples, it has been diffused from prehistoric times in Europe... The Eurafrican species thus falls into three races: the African, with red-brown and black pigmentation.. Thus the Mediterranean stock is a race or variety of the Eurafrican species." --G. Sergi
You have again failed and are once again exposed. ------------------------------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED PART 9- HE CLAIMS ALL THESE HIGGINS "DISTORTIONS" BUT WHEN ASKED TO NAME THE SPECIFIC WEBSITES OF THIS ALLEGED "AFROCENTRIC' HORROR, HE RUNS AWAY. WHY IS THAT FAKER?
In fact, Godfrey Higgins ALSO says this about "negroes"
quote: "I believe all the Blavk bambinos of Italy are negroes- not merely blacks; this admitted, it would prove they very early date of their entrance into Italy." pg 286 pg 434 "the ancient Eturians had the countenances of Negroes, the same as the images of Buddah in INdia." pg 166 pg 474- "They aere in fact, all one nation, with one religion, that of Buddah, and they were originally NEgroes" pg 59: "nor can it be reasonably doubted, that a race of Negroes formerly had power and pre-eminence in India" pg 59- AS TO ETHIOPIA: And it is probable that an Ethiopian, a negro, correctly speaking, may have been meant, not merely a black person; and it seems probable that the following may have ben the real fact, viz, that a race of NEgroes or Blacks, but probably of the former, came to India to the west."
cASSIRETEDES own source debunks him. Note the footnote by his own author- QUOTE: "may not have been Negroes, though Blacks, though it is probably they were so."
His own source says they may not have been Negroes then adds: THOUGH IT IS PROBABLY THEY WERE SO."
^The Faker once again, debunks himself. And he seems not to realize that Ethiopia is in "sub-Saharan" Africa.. lol.. pathetic incompetent..
And he never shows these massive number of websites "all over the internet". Like what? How many? If they are "all over" then he should at least be able to give direct links to 6 showing pages where the "Afrocentrics: are "distorting" Higgins work. LEt's say what the faker has besides hot air. Post DIRECT LINKS to 6 of the huge number of alleged "Afrocentric" websites where the Afrocentrics are "distorting" Higgins. SHow how they are distorting Higgins with specific quotes and specific context.
Watch the Faker duck and run when he is again called on a claim, or make up yet another lie to cover his exposure... -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- part 8:
quote:
Originally posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Pyr/Cassiredes: "Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of Europe."
But then, in your own thread, by your own hand, you present a picture of an African albino that has pale skin, light brown or hazel eyes and fair hair. You said it was impossible, but then debunk yourself with your own posted picture.. This is like the 8-9th time you keep tripping over yourself with lies, contradictions, and bogus claims.
RECAP The Faker exposed- part 7 Originally posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Pyr/Cassiredes: "Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of Europe."
^^Your claim is is completely bogus. Native diversity or albinism causes some tropical Africans to have light eyes and light hair. You fail againn..
================================================
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6 1-- ^^Faker! In your initial posts you claimed that it was Cavalli-Sforza talking 'bout negroes "mutating" from Pygmies. Now in your "corrected" post, YOU STILL APPEAR A FAKE. You now remove Cavalli- Sforza's name on the "mutant" claim, admitting that you were lying all along! Bwa ha aha a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah..
2-- Second point- Peter Frost is debunked by Cavalli-Sforza who says as to his so-called "mutation" theory: QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
Frost mentions Cavalli-Sforza in connection with sexual selection, and movement of some groups from Nigeria-Cameroon to other parts of Africa. He never says Cavalli Sforza talks bout any "negro mutation" and in fact any mutation claim is directly contradicted by Sforza. Sucka, you not only lied bout Cavalli-Sforza, you lied about your own white writer- Peter Frost, and misrepresented him.
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6 FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Pyr/CassiREDES says: ''There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty''
^^LMAO! Totally fake! Credible up to date sources note that blondism is prevalent in early life BUT, contrary to your claim that: "There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty", the shade of color varies. In maturity the hair usually turns a darker brown color, but sometimes remains blond. See: "Gene Expression: Blonde Australian Aboriginals". Gnxp.com. http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2005/08/blonde-australian-aboriginals.php.
^^Here is one of your Australians over 20 years old who does have blonde hair. YOu are caught out spinning bogus claims AGAIN!. Bwa ha aha a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah.. -
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 5a [b]So where are these tropical african peoples with pale white or fair skin? blonde red hair?
^^You fail again. African populations can readily produce blond or reddish blond hair as noted by hair study author Hrdy 1978 himself, and he references Nubia as an example. Albinism is another source of red or blond hair in Africa, and albinism is much more prevalent in African populations than among Europeans. Even African Americans produce more albinos than white Americans. (The pigmentary system: physiology and pathophysiology- By James J. Nordlund 2006: 603) (E. Roach and V. Miller 2004. Neurocutaneous disorders.) QUOTE: "In general, the prevalence of albinism in Africa is much higher, in the range of 1 in 1 100 to 1 in 3900."
So Africa can and does routinely produce red and blond hair. All non-Africans are MORE LIMITED subsets of ORIGINAL African diversity. THe originals have more built-in diversity than the limited sub-set populations. This is straight science as noted by the quote from TIshkoff 2000.
Nor are Africans the only tropical peoples who can produce reddish hair or blond hair. Among Australian Aborigines, some tropical groups produce 100% of individuals with blond hair. Melanesians can also produce blond or reddish hair, and do so routinely.
White people have no monopoly at all on that hair color. They merely show more of it, but even among whites, red hair for example is minor- occurring in less than 5% of the overall European populations, mostly in northern Europe.
So the claim that there are no tropical Africans with such variation is once again, proved fake. You made the claim.
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 4 ime and time again, you stand debunked and exposed for falsifying claims and references. Let's recap:
Originally posted by CASSIFAKedes::
quote: The source is Cavalli-Sforza's book on the Pygmies entitled 'African pygmies' (Academic Press, 1986).
This work shows that Negroids mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 9,000 BC in West Africa. So the 'true' Black African today is a recent mutation. Caucasoids and Mongoloids predate them. [Wink] Negroids only migrated into other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion or slightly earlier. Prior to them, Caucasoids inhabited North Africa and Bushmen (Capoids) to the south who were displaced by the Caucasoids from the Mediterranean around 12,000 BC.
^^A bogus reference. Why should anyone take your word for it given past bogus references? Quote where Cavalli-Sforza says these so-called "negroids" "mutated" from Pygmies. The burden of proof is on you, since you made the claim.
While you scurry to cover your tracks with yet more bogus claims, Cavali Sforza, in his well known The History and Geography of Human Genes, 1994 Cavalli-Sforza summarizes his 1986 work on Pygmies and specifically debunks the "Pygmy as ancestor" theory held by other older writings. QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
SO much for your lying claims of "mutations" from "Pygymy" ancestors. In short, you lied about Cavalli-Sforza, creating a falsified claim and a bogus "supporting" reference to a claim that is nowhere supported in his work. You are once again exposed as yet another racist faker You are not fooling anyone.
------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED-PART 3- YOu then tried to cover up your lie with even more bogus nformation and STILL fail
You "modified" your Cavalli Sforza claim by including page numbers, and then changing some wording to "adaptive radiation" hoping to divert attention from your exposure.. lmao..
However pages 361-362 of Cavalli Sforza's 1986 book says absolutely nothing about any Negroes "mutating" from pygmies, nor any "adaptive radiation." It merely discusses Pygmy history and geography. You picked out a page at random, not knowing it can be verified via Google Books. You were asked to provide a direct quote but are still running. Now why is that?
""It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
--------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 2 And Your pathetic "modification" STILL turned out to be bogus. You then said:
"True" Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population — a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996).
^^But in fact, Watson 1996 has nothing to do with osteological data and does not even mention it. It has to do with mtDNA.
----------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 1C YOU THEN PROFFERED ANOTHER FAKE CLAIM BELOW: He says:
quote: "Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships.."
^^Complete Nonsense. In the Old Testament, the tribe of Zebulun is mentioned as specifically associated with ships and maritime elements. QUOTE:
Genesis 49:13 "Zebulun will dwell at the shore of the seas; Yea, he will be at the shore of the ships, And his side toucheth upon Sidon. "
FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Pyr/Cassi-Fakdes: MULTIPLE TIMES AT BAT, MULTIPLE EXPOSURES AS A FAKE...
--fake claim that no Australian Abo over 20 is blonde
-- fake claim that NO tropical Africans have any diversity in hair, skin or eye color
-- fake Cavalli-Sforza citation
-- 2nd fake Cavalli-Sforza reference
-- Faked Watson reference
-- Faked Biblical reference
-- FAke representation of Peter Frost's work
-- Fake claim that "studies" say "egyptians were dark are not like 'light-skinned Europeans". COnveniently, the alleged study is missing..
--Fake Higgins claims
--Fake claim that Guiseppe Sergi's EurAfrican race concept is negro-free
--Fake claim that Vanessa Williams has no black ancestry but is "white and Indian"
--Fake claim that Egyptologists like Yurco consider the Egyptians "Caucasoid"
--Fake claim of white Nordic Egyptian royalty
--Fake claim of "blond" Hetepheres
--Fake claim of white males in BRitain "unable to get jobs"
--fAKE Crucuiani "quote" with "citation"
--fake claim that blacks have no sexual diomorphism and no male-female cranial differences
--Fake CDC claim of AUgust 2006
--Hypocritical double standards- bashing African Americans as black when they can be demonized as criminals but when exposed for hypocritical double standards calling them non-black
--Bogus claim that OOA never happened backed by "supporting" references that say nothingof the sort and directly contradict him.
--Fake claim that the tropics is mostly rainforest area
-- Fake claims that savannas are not in the tropics
Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Coon's theory has an element of truth to it, however if you look you will see most Bantu inhabit the tropical savannas not rainforests. The savannas are humid and tropical, but not all year round..
^^You stupid piece of shiit.. You have just contradicted yourself again. Earlier on you said that savannas were not tropical. But now above you say that savannas where the "Bantu" dwell are humid and tropical. You cant even keep your own idiotic claims straight.- quote:
Earlier bellowed by Faheem Dumbers . Tropical environments are humid with precipitation. Semi-tropical are the savannas that surround the true tropical environments and are 6 or more months humid (under Koppen they are therefore still counted as tropical). - As soon as you move out of the humid heat zones nothing is tropically adapted and most africans are not tropical. -------------------
the Bantu are mostly Kafrids.
^^Asinine buffoon. Having been debunked multiple times, you are so desperate that you are now trying to redefine the Bantu as a separate race- your bogus "Kafrids" classification..
"Located well within the tropics (usually between latitudes 5° and 20° on either side of the equator), the tropical savanna climate has much in common with the tropical rainforest and monsoon.The sun's vertical rays at noon are never far from overhead, the receipt of solar energy is nearly at a maximum and temperatures remain constantly high. Days and nights are of nearly equal length throughout the year, as they are in other tropical regions.." --Gabler et al 2006. Essentials of Physical Geography
Moron, earlier on you said deserts could not be in the tropics. That was debunked. Running back and forth like a retarded chicken with its head cut off you change your story to say savannahs are not in the tropics, but credible science debunks you again. How much more idiotic can you be? lmao..
"non existent" tropical deserts Tropical desert: The part of a SUBTROPICAL desert that lies within the TROPICS, in a latitude lower than 23.5 N or S. Tropical desert climates fall within type BWh of the KOPPEN CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION, and type EA'd of the THORNTHWAITE CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION.
Tropical desert and steppe climate: In the STRAHLER CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION a climate in his group 1, which comprises climates controlled by equatorial and tropical AIR MASSES. This climate affects l and areas in latitudes 15-30 [degrees] in both hemispheres and is associated wit continental tropical air masses that develop in high-pressure cells in the upper TROPOSPHERE above land areas lying on TROPICS of Cancer and Capricorn. The climate is hot, with a moderate range of temperature over the year, and is arid or some-arid. This climate is designated BWb (desert) and BSb (steppe) in the KOPPEN CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION."
--Michael Allaby. 2002. Encyclopedia of weather and climate. Vol. 1: A-L
"The thermal requirement for a tropical climate is considered to be an average mean temperature above 18 degrees C for the coldest month. Within this average, tropics are also marked by receiving a large amount of solar radiation throughout the year with no true or distinct winter season. Tropics not only include jungle, but deserts and mountainous highlands as well. The cooler local temperatures of these highlands are still within the overall averages, and are still part of the tropic zone, receiving high levels of solar radiation and not having a thermally depressed winter season. (Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995)." --Kumar et al. 1999. Biodeterioration of Stone in Tropical Environments and Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995. HUmid Tropical Environments. WIley PUb.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Zaharan liar no. 2 writes:
quote:Your own Koppen map shows this- you keep debunking your own argument fool.
Idiot, take a look at Koppen's map:
Egypt and most of North Africa is non-tropical.
Stupid mothafucka- Egyptians are tropically adapted having come into the Nile Valley from the tropic zone. And almost 20% of Egypt lies within that zone. And below is a Koppen map. How stupid can you be Aspberger boy?
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: And Zaharan had the ignorance to claim Köppen's climate classification supported his definition, not mine. But look at the above map. Note how he never responded before when this was shown. I wonder why?
^^I have already responded in detail you stupid piece of shiit. You are not fooling anyone with your bogus diversions. Your moronic denials only expose you for the idiot you are. BUt if you want more, go ahead, be my guest. You ain't causing me any extra work.
LET'S RECAP:
Faheem dumba said: The term (tropical) I was using was putitive to the Afocentric definition of "tropical", which as I have shown is actually false and not climatic. Those of the tropical climatic region in Sub-Sahara Africa, such as Pygmies and Forest Negroids ('true Blacks') do not in fact show high brachial or crural indices -- they are adapted instead to humid heat environments.
Khoisans are adapated to the desert heat, but they are not tropical.
Tropical adaptation is adaptation to humid heat, not arid climatic conditions
The only thing you have shown Wanker boy is that you are an idiot. You can't even keep your arguments straight. If Pygmies and "forest negroids" live in the tropical forest then they DO live in a as you say "humid, heat environment." Think dumbass, think and exercise some logic... lmao...
And deserts do form part of the tropics you hapless buffoon. You are so incompetent that even your fellow racists are embarassed by your pathetic carcass.
"..Different authors use different terminology to denote a classification by rainfall, season, mean temperature etc.. but it makes no difference. Wetness, coolness, dryness, rainfall, temp, season, mix and match- makes no difference. They are all variants WITHIN the tropics as the Koppen climate map below shows.
And dummy, the labels "tropical wet" and tropical wet/dry" on your map all identify areas WITHIN the larger tropical zone. Your own Koppen map shows this- you keep debunking your own argument fool... DUH....
Koppen climate system map
Btw Zaharan, not even Keita uses your stupid terminology based on who can see the sun in the sky. He uses the term "Saharo-Tropical African Variant" (1981).
Hapless dullard! Must we yet again instruct you? Keita uses "tropical" yes- to identify those in the SAHARAN area that were tropical. Got it? He STILL identifies them as tropical. DUH.. And you are even more incompetent in your citation. Keita did not use the terminology in "1981" as you claim. Learn to cite accurately. End of today's lesson. Quote:
”The Tropic of Cancer and The Tropic of Capricorn The Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn each lie at 23.5 degrees latitude. The Tropic of Cancer is located at 23.5° North of the equator and runs through Mexico, the Bahamas, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, India, and southern China. The Tropic of Capricorn lies at 23.5° South of the equator and runs through Australia, Chile, southern Brazil (Brazil is the only country that passes through both the equator and a tropic), and northern South Africa. The tropics are the two lines where the sun is directly overhead at noon on the two solstices - near June and December 21. The sun is directly overhead at noon on the Tropic of Cancer on June 21 (the beginning of summer in the Northern Hemisphere and the beginning of winter in the Southern Hemisphere) and the sun is directly overhead at noon on the Tropic of Capricorn on December 21 (the beginning of winter in the Northern Hemisphere and the beginning of summer in the Southern Hemisphere). The reason for the location of the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn at 23.5° north and south respectively is due to the axial tilt of the Earth. The Earth is titled 23.5 degrees from the plane of the Earth's revolution around the sun each year. The area bounded by the Tropic of Cancer on the north and Tropic of Capricorn on the south is known as the "tropics." --From worldAtlas.com and Geographic Information - Page 33 Jenny Marie Johnson - 2003
Why do you think they are called the TROPIC of Cancer and the TROPIC of Capricorn? You big dummy…
You're using the definition of where the Sun reaches a point directly overhead at least once during the solar year --- a completely bogus definition in regards to population biology, and physical anthropology.
No stupid mothafuck. The definition, which I posted long ago is shown below. You are so stupid it went over your head. ANd do you realize that you continually debunk yourself with your "refutations"? The lines mark out the tropics which is defined by thermal requirements and, as the standard definition shows below, include jungle, deserts and mountainous highlands, at temperatures that can be quite cool...
.. QUOTE:
"The thermal requirement for a tropical climate is considered to be an average mean temperature above 18 degrees C for the coldest month. Within this average, tropics are also marked by receiving a large amount of solar radiation throughout the year with no true or distinct winter season. Tropics not only include jungle, but deserts and mountainous highlands as well. The cooler local temperatures of these highlands are still within the overall averages, and are still part of the tropic zone, receiving high levels of solar radiation and not having a thermally depressed winter season. (Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995)." --Kumar et al. 1999. Biodeterioration of Stone in Tropical Environments and Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995. HUmid Tropical Environments. WIley PUb.
The tropics are astronomically clearly defined latitudes.. the sun reaches its zenith at these two positions once a year, and within the area of the tropics twice a year. That is the main reason that, within the tropics, the annual variation of air temperature is smaller than its diurnal variation. Compared with other thermal delimitations this is also true for high altitude mountains without any limitations." --Tropical Glaciers: Glaciers and Glaciations of the Rwenzori Mountains, Uganda. 2002. Kaser and Osmaston -----------------------------------------------------------------
DEBUNKING ON KEITA he 1981 paper in a UNESCO report is first where "tropical-african" is first traced. The 1993 paper I said is where Keita claims North African coastals are not tropical-africans but southern europeans:
"[...]coastal northern africans are viewed here as perhaps being biologically more, but not only, related to southern Europeans, primarily by gene flow." (Keita, 1993)
^^No fool. The term "tropical African" occurs is not "traced" to 1981. It can be found in books going back to the 1800s.
Keita explicity excludes north african coastals and other north africans from his "saharo-tropical-african" grouping.
And Keita does not "exclude" "north african coastals and other north africans from his "saharo-tropical-african" grouping."
The very quote you proffer debunks your own claim. And diversionary smokescreens abut AC/DC wont save you, nor will trying to hide your debunking above re Diop and Vansertima.Let me quote your own proof:
"[...]coastal northern africans are viewed here as perhaps being biologically more, but not only, related to southern Europeans, primarily by gene flow." (Keita, 1993)
^^Dumbass, Keita says more "but not only". How therefore has he "excluded" "north african coastals and other north africans from his "saharo-tropical-african" grouping"? It is clear that southern Europeans are not the only relation to the coastals, and the Sahara itself makes up a large chunk of North Africa, that even in places extends close to the Medit coast. SO how could "north Africans" be "excluded" from the Saharan zone stupid muthafucka? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KHOISAN
"Several other long-range migration events have shaped the genetic l andscape of Africa. Analyses of mtDNA and the Y chromosome supports studies of classical polymorphisms as well as archaeological data indicating that Khoisian-speaking populations (those whose languages contain clicks, which includes the !Kung San) may have originated in Eastern Africa and migrated into southern Africa >20 - 10kya (Cavalli-Sforza, 1997, Scozzari, et al. 1999). Analyses of Y-Chromosome haplotype variation have identified that the most ancestral Y-chromosome haplotype is present at moderate to high frequency in East African Sudanese and Ethiopians, as well as in southern African !Kung San .." -- Michael Crawford 2006. Anthropological Genetics: Theory, Methods and Applications. p. 363-364
"The shallower slope, that of the INuit, has a value of 0.77 versus 0.86 for the Khoisan, indicating thjat the tibiae of the cold-adapted Inuit grow less per increment of femral growth theoughout their entire ontogenetic sequence tha do those of the Khoisan. The Neanderthal data points can be seen to follow the Inuit trajectory." --Nancy Minugh-Purvis, Kenneth J. McNamara. Human Evolution through Developmental Change 2001
"Variation in limb proportions between prehistoric Jomon and Yayoi people of Japan are explored by this study. Jomon people were the descendents of Pleistocene nomads who migrated to the Japanese Islands around 30,000 yBP. Phenotypic and genotypic evidence indicates that Yayoi people were recent migrants to Japan from continental Northeast Asia who likely interbred with Jomon foragers. Limb proportions of Jomon and Yayoi people were compared using RMA regression and "Quick-Test" calculations to investigate relative variability between these two groups. Cluster and principal components analyses were performed on size-standardized limb lengths and used to compare Jomon and Yayoi people with other groups from various climatic zones. Elongated distal relative to proximal limb lengths were observed among Jomon compared to Yayoi people. Jomon limb proportions were similar to human groups from temperate/tropical climates at lower latitudes, while Yayoi limb proportions more closely resemble groups from colder climates at higher latitudes. Limb proportional similarities with groups from warmer environments among Jomon foragers likely reflect morphological changes following Pleistocene colonization of the Japanese Islands. Cold-derived limb proportions among the Yayoi people likely indicate retention of these traits following comparatively recent migrations to the Japanese Islands. Changes in limb proportions experienced by Jomon foragers and retention of cold-derived limb proportions among Yayoi people conform to previous findings that report changes in these proportions following long-standing evolution in a specific environment." --Tempe et al. 2008. Variation in limb proportions between Jomon foragers and Yayoi agriculturalists from prehistoric Japan. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008 Oct;137(2):164-74.
Previous studies report that Jomon foragers had higher brachial and crural indices than Yayoi people and were similar in limb proportions to low latitude, tropical groups such as the African San (Yamaguchi, 1989). --Temple et al, 2008
quote: "At the same time, there is a genetic component. Low stature persists even under apparently favourable health conditions. The small body size and lean physique of living Khoisan peoples are often cited in human population biology texts as exemplary of adaptation to a hot, sometimes specifically desert, climate. Their low body-mass index is portrayed as support for Bergmann's and Allen's rules (cf. Molnar 1998, Relethford 1997)." --Sealy and Pfeiffer (2000) ------------------------------
AND YOU ARE STILL RUNNING AWAY FROM SWENET'S EXPOSURE OF YOUR FABRICATIONS AND IDIOCY
Running away as usual, like the faggot that you've demonstrated yourself to be, time after time again. None of your ideas have withstood the test of scrutiny, and that's why you've repeatedly backed away from them:
1.You've fabricated your claim that Bar Yosef said that the Mushabian was excavated in Upper and Lower Egypt
2.You've fabricated your claim that Indians never cluster with certain Africans, whether metrically or non-metrically
3.You've fabricated your claim that Mesolithic Nubians and Natufians had wavy hair
4.You've fabricated your claim that the Mediterranean 'race' is free of negroid traits per Coon
5.You've fabricated your claim that Wadi Halfans can't be negroid because of their browridges, since the remains you classify as undoubtedly negroid, (Asselar man and Iwo Eleru) have brow ridges
6.You've fabricated your claim that your fake Australoid phenotypical cluster (Palaeo-americans, Wadi Halfans, Jebel Sahabans, Natufians, European Eurafricans, Mesopotamian Eurafricans, Arabian Veddoids, Indian Veddoids etc) is a cluster of related people
7.You've failed to explain why modern descendants of those ancient populations have zero Australian aboriginal ancestry, but African ancestry with Mesolithic time depths instead.
8.You've fabricated your claim that sub species or races are identifiable by morphological clusters
9.You've fabricated your claim that there have never been studies that detected African affinities with Iranian/Iraqi prehistorical skeletal remains
10.You've fabricated your claim that the Natufian Homo 3 individual had brow ridges, since it consists out of a mandible
11.You've fabricated your claim that the Natufian Homo 3 individual was described as having prognathism
12.You've fabricated your claim that Homo 3 was the only Natufian individual with prognathism
13.You've fabricated your claim that Keith's analysis of the Shukbah remains were somehow refuted or inaccurate
14.You've fabricated your claim that Coon retracted his view of minor Negroid affinities in the Shuqbah Natufians series
15.You've fabricated your claim that Tigray Ethiopians are the only Ethiopians with leptorrhine averages
16.You've fabricated your claim that all Tigray Ethiopians are leptorrhine
17.You've fabricated your claim that non-leptorrhiny in Cushitic speaking groups is necessarily due to admixture with negroid groups.
17.You've fabricated your claim that Wolpoff's list of Erectus to Australoid continuation traits denote a special relationship indicative of continuation.
18.There is no evidence of lineage loss in Upper Palaeolithic Australian, European, West Asian and Amerindian fossils; all fossil mtDNA lineages are attested in contemporaries, and none are pre-M or pre-N. No form of lineage loss can account for the lack of pre-M and pre-N lineages in Eurasians, and no explanations have been offered as to why Sub Saharan Africans have managed to maintain their pre-M and pre-N mtDNA. Additionally, the derived state of Eurasian DNA is also confirmed in genome-wide analysis, which is not subject to Wolpoff's silly caveat that pre-M and pre-N lineages in Eurasians may have died out due to lineage loss.
THE FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-IDIOT EXPOSED PART 20: He tries ot make out that only rainforest areas define the tropics and says: ----------------------------------------------------------------- quote
The climatic tropical zone is limited to mostly western and central sub-sahara africa. Posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist osted 17 November, 2012 04:53 PM ____________________________________
When in fact any credible geography book denotes the tropics within the zone marked out by the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn, a denotation itself based on climate.
THE FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-IDIOT EXPOSED- PART 19: He says there is no OOA but the very "supporting reference" he proffers directy contradicts his claim. ------------------------- [b]Posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on 07 May, 2012 08:45 AM:
OOA never happened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans ----------------------------- The idiot gives a Wikipedia "reference" to back up his claim but the very same "supporting reference" he gives states that multi-regionalists acknowledge that hominid species came from Africa in the first place. Their argument is for continuity and distinct development in separate locations AFTER the initial OOA exit putting hominins in different places. This approach STILL recognizes and acknowledges hominin OOA.
Quote from FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Idiot's "supporting" reference: This species arose in Africa two million years ago as H. erectus and then spread out over the world, developing adaptations to regional conditions. Some populations became isolated for periods of time, developing in different directions, but through continuous interbreeding, replacement, genetic drift and selection, adaptations that were an advantage anywhere on earth would spread, keeping the development of the species in the same overall direction while maintaining adaptations to regional factors. By these mechanisms, surviving local varieties of the species evolved into modern humans, retaining some regional adaptations but with many features common to all regions.[10]
^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus came from Africa. In short, the FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-idiot's own "supporting" reference contradicts his claim. What a pathetic fool.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Asinine buffoon. Having been debunked multiple times, you are so desperate that you are now trying to redefine the Bantu as a separate race- your bogus "Kafrids" classification..
More fail.
Kafrids are a Negroid subrace. No one is saying they aren't Negroid, dumbass.
You get dumber and dumber.
Once you know you are exposed as a complete buffoon each time - all you can do is spam the threads with the same garbage in a desperate hope of covering up where you got owned.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [QB] "The Northern Ibo and the Yoruba clusters of populations, who live in grassland, are considerably taller in stature than the other ones, who live in the forest. The stature of the latter is near to the African average for their biotype, 164 cm, whereas that of the Northern Ibo is equal to the average for the African savanna, 169cm" (Hiernaux,'The People of Africa1974, p. 168). This was Hiernaux's own personal observation, however.
This quote backs up precisely what I was saying. African Pygmies (Bambutids) are tropically adapated, but those Negroids living in the adjacent savanna zones are taller because the climate is not all round humid.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^ yet you would never say that tall and short "Caucasians" are of separate races
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:^^^^ yet you would never say that tall and short "Caucasians" are of separate races
They are one taxon - Congoids. No one is claiming they are different subspecies. Within the Congoid falls Pygmies and Negroids - the latter are modified through adaptation and gene flow.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Fartheadbonkers, what do you call a sahel type environment? The Sahel is even drier than the savannah yet more humid than the desert.
Interestingly there is a Sahelian belt that stretches across the continent from the Atlantic on one side to the Red Sea on the other.
That's semi-arid-desert climate (type "BS[h]" in Koppen). It falls outside of tropical, but on the perhipery has a month or less humid climate.
From wikipedia: "has a short but well-defined wet season, but is not sufficiently wet overall to qualify as a tropical savanna climate."
- Tropical is red and pink.
Will you admit you are wrong yet? Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
This quote backs up precisely what I was saying. African Pygmies (Bambutids) are tropically adapated, but those Negroids living in the adjacent savanna zones are taller because the climate is not all round humid.
^^Asinine dullard. You fail again. The only thing "backing up" is the shiit you call for brains, in the toilet that is your head.
^^The unbearable dumbness of being...
Faheem dunkers: Originally bellowed by Faheem Idiotkers [b]Tropical environments are humid with precipitation. Semi-tropical are the savannas that surround the true tropical environments and are 6 or more months humid (under Koppen they are therefore still counted as tropical).
- As soon as you move out of the humid heat zones nothing is tropically adapted and most africans are not tropical.
^^ You said deserts were not in the tropical zone and got debunked. You said savannas were subtropical and not part of the tropic zone and got debunked. Pathetic fag boy, when will you learn? You then come up with the idiotic "Kafrids" to hide the fact that the people who you say aren't tropically adapted, indeed are, and they live in areas including tropical savanna. You cant even keep your own arguments straight. And its all one tropic zone idiot- including desert, savannah and forest. And numerous savanna areas themselves have high humidity. Your stupidity is once again exposed. Now lets have some more fun with your dumb ass.
but those Negroids living in the adjacent savanna zones are taller because the climate is not all round humid.
Moron, people in the savannas who are taller are not taller necessarily climate. You would know this if you had half-a brain, but then again, you must have got your brain very early- apparently the warranty has run out fool. Now let's school your pathetic carcass.
For one thing, the savanna climate is quite similar to forest climate as credible scholars show, and quoted above. So how come some of the tallest people in Africa live precisely in those similar hot, humid savannah climates? Think dumbass! Think!
And height is due to several things not merely your claimed humidity factor- things like diet, genetic inheritance, etc all enter into the picture. In fact credible scholars show that the height of the pygmies is not merely OR ONLY due to any forest adaptation but things like childbearing patters as well. Learn idiot! QUOTE:
Life history trade-offs explain the evolution of human pygmies Andrea Bamberg Migliano, Lucio Vinicius, and Marta Mirazon Lahr Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2007 10.1073/pnas.0708024105
Explanations for the evolution of human pygmies continue to be a matter of controversy, recently fuelled by the disagreements surrounding the interpretation of the fossil hominin Homo floresiensis. Traditional hypotheses assume that the small body size of human pygmies is an adaptation to special challenges, such as thermoregulation, locomotion in dense forests, or endurance against starvation. Here, we present an analysis of stature, growth, and individual fitness for a large population of Aeta and a smaller one of Batak from the Philippines and compare it with data on other pygmy groups accumulated by anthropologists for a century. The results challenge traditional explanations of human pygmy body size. We argue that human pygmy populations and adaptations evolved independently as the result of a life history tradeoff between the fertility benefits of larger body size against the costs of late growth cessation, under circumstances of significant young and adult mortality. Human pygmies do not appear to have evolved through positive selection for small stature - this was a by-product of selection for early onset of reproduction."
Tropical environments are humid with precipitation. Semi-tropical are the savannas that surround the true tropical environments and are 6 or more months humid (under Koppen they are therefore still counted as tropical).
- As soon as you move out of the humid heat zones nothing is tropically adapted and most africans are not tropical.
^^lol... you dumb muthafucka.. Tropical zones in Africa DO include savannah as any basic geographic textbook shows. Were you always this stupid or did the doctor puncture your head with the abortion forceps when you came out? He must have punctured it because your head is still dribbling shiit for brains. Here is yet ANOTHER example of your idiocy exposed re your alleged "non existent" savannas in the tropics.. QUOTE:
"Located well within the tropics (usually between latitudes 5° and 20° on either side of the equator), the tropical savanna climate has much in common with the tropical rainforest and monsoon.The sun's vertical rays at noon are never far from overhead, the receipt of solar energy is nearly at a maximum and temperatures remain constantly high. Days and nights are of nearly equal length throughout the year, as they are in other tropical regions.." --Gabler et al 2006. Essentials of Physical Geography
Moron, earlier on you said deserts could not be in the tropics. That was debunked. Running back and forth like a retarded chicken with its head cut off you change your story to say savannahs are not in the tropics, but credible science debunks you again. How much more idiotic can you be? lmao..
"non existent" tropical deserts Tropical desert: The part of a SUBTROPICAL desert that lies within the TROPICS, in a latitude lower than 23.5 N or S. Tropical desert climates fall within type BWh of the KOPPEN CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION, and type EA'd of the THORNTHWAITE CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION.
Tropical desert and steppe climate: In the STRAHLER CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION a climate in his group 1, which comprises climates controlled by equatorial and tropical AIR MASSES. This climate affects l and areas in latitudes 15-30 [degrees] in both hemispheres and is associated wit continental tropical air masses that develop in high-pressure cells in the upper TROPOSPHERE above land areas lying on TROPICS of Cancer and Capricorn. The climate is hot, with a moderate range of temperature over the year, and is arid or some-arid. This climate is designated BWb (desert) and BSb (steppe) in the KOPPEN CLIMATE CLASSIFICATION."
--Michael Allaby. 2002. Encyclopedia of weather and climate. Vol. 1: A-L
"The thermal requirement for a tropical climate is considered to be an average mean temperature above 18 degrees C for the coldest month. Within this average, tropics are also marked by receiving a large amount of solar radiation throughout the year with no true or distinct winter season. Tropics not only include jungle, but deserts and mountainous highlands as well. The cooler local temperatures of these highlands are still within the overall averages, and are still part of the tropic zone, receiving high levels of solar radiation and not having a thermally depressed winter season. (Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995)." --Kumar et al. 1999. Biodeterioration of Stone in Tropical Environments and Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995. HUmid Tropical Environments. WIley PUb.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Zaharan liar no. 2 writes:
quote:Your own Koppen map shows this- you keep debunking your own argument fool.
Idiot, take a look at Koppen's map:
Egypt and most of North Africa is non-tropical.
Stupid mothafucka- Egyptians are tropically adapted having come into the Nile Valley from the tropic zone. And almost 20% of Egypt lies within that zone. And below is a Koppen map. How stupid can you be Aspberger boy?
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: And Zaharan had the ignorance to claim Köppen's climate classification supported his definition, not mine. But look at the above map. Note how he never responded before when this was shown. I wonder why?
^^I have already responded in detail you stupid piece of shiit. You are not fooling anyone with your bogus diversions. Your moronic denials only expose you for the idiot you are. BUt if you want more, go ahead, be my guest. You ain't causing me any extra work.
LET'S RECAP:
Faheem dumba said: The term (tropical) I was using was putitive to the Afocentric definition of "tropical", which as I have shown is actually false and not climatic. Those of the tropical climatic region in Sub-Sahara Africa, such as Pygmies and Forest Negroids ('true Blacks') do not in fact show high brachial or crural indices -- they are adapted instead to humid heat environments.
Khoisans are adapated to the desert heat, but they are not tropical.
Tropical adaptation is adaptation to humid heat, not arid climatic conditions
The only thing you have shown Wanker boy is that you are an idiot. You can't even keep your arguments straight. If Pygmies and "forest negroids" live in the tropical forest then they DO live in a as you say "humid, heat environment." Think dumbass, think and exercise some logic... lmao...
And deserts do form part of the tropics you hapless buffoon. You are so incompetent that even your fellow racists are embarassed by your pathetic carcass.
"..Different authors use different terminology to denote a classification by rainfall, season, mean temperature etc.. but it makes no difference. Wetness, coolness, dryness, rainfall, temp, season, mix and match- makes no difference. They are all variants WITHIN the tropics as the Koppen climate map below shows.
And dummy, the labels "tropical wet" and tropical wet/dry" on your map all identify areas WITHIN the larger tropical zone. Your own Koppen map shows this- you keep debunking your own argument fool... DUH....
Koppen climate system map
Btw Zaharan, not even Keita uses your stupid terminology based on who can see the sun in the sky. He uses the term "Saharo-Tropical African Variant" (1981).
Hapless dullard! Must we yet again instruct you? Keita uses "tropical" yes- to identify those in the SAHARAN area that were tropical. Got it? He STILL identifies them as tropical. DUH.. And you are even more incompetent in your citation. Keita did not use the terminology in "1981" as you claim. Learn to cite accurately. End of today's lesson. Quote:
”The Tropic of Cancer and The Tropic of Capricorn The Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn each lie at 23.5 degrees latitude. The Tropic of Cancer is located at 23.5° North of the equator and runs through Mexico, the Bahamas, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, India, and southern China. The Tropic of Capricorn lies at 23.5° South of the equator and runs through Australia, Chile, southern Brazil (Brazil is the only country that passes through both the equator and a tropic), and northern South Africa. The tropics are the two lines where the sun is directly overhead at noon on the two solstices - near June and December 21. The sun is directly overhead at noon on the Tropic of Cancer on June 21 (the beginning of summer in the Northern Hemisphere and the beginning of winter in the Southern Hemisphere) and the sun is directly overhead at noon on the Tropic of Capricorn on December 21 (the beginning of winter in the Northern Hemisphere and the beginning of summer in the Southern Hemisphere). The reason for the location of the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn at 23.5° north and south respectively is due to the axial tilt of the Earth. The Earth is titled 23.5 degrees from the plane of the Earth's revolution around the sun each year. The area bounded by the Tropic of Cancer on the north and Tropic of Capricorn on the south is known as the "tropics." --From worldAtlas.com and Geographic Information - Page 33 Jenny Marie Johnson - 2003
Why do you think they are called the TROPIC of Cancer and the TROPIC of Capricorn? You big dummy…
You're using the definition of where the Sun reaches a point directly overhead at least once during the solar year --- a completely bogus definition in regards to population biology, and physical anthropology.
No stupid mothafuck. The definition, which I posted long ago is shown below. You are so stupid it went over your head. ANd do you realize that you continually debunk yourself with your "refutations"? The lines mark out the tropics which is defined by thermal requirements and, as the standard definition shows below, include jungle, deserts and mountainous highlands, at temperatures that can be quite cool...
.. QUOTE:
"The thermal requirement for a tropical climate is considered to be an average mean temperature above 18 degrees C for the coldest month. Within this average, tropics are also marked by receiving a large amount of solar radiation throughout the year with no true or distinct winter season. Tropics not only include jungle, but deserts and mountainous highlands as well. The cooler local temperatures of these highlands are still within the overall averages, and are still part of the tropic zone, receiving high levels of solar radiation and not having a thermally depressed winter season. (Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995)." --Kumar et al. 1999. Biodeterioration of Stone in Tropical Environments and Reading, Thompson and Millington 1995. HUmid Tropical Environments. WIley PUb.
The tropics are astronomically clearly defined latitudes.. the sun reaches its zenith at these two positions once a year, and within the area of the tropics twice a year. That is the main reason that, within the tropics, the annual variation of air temperature is smaller than its diurnal variation. Compared with other thermal delimitations this is also true for high altitude mountains without any limitations." --Tropical Glaciers: Glaciers and Glaciations of the Rwenzori Mountains, Uganda. 2002. Kaser and Osmaston -----------------------------------------------------------------
DEBUNKING ON KEITA he 1981 paper in a UNESCO report is first where "tropical-african" is first traced. The 1993 paper I said is where Keita claims North African coastals are not tropical-africans but southern europeans:
"[...]coastal northern africans are viewed here as perhaps being biologically more, but not only, related to southern Europeans, primarily by gene flow." (Keita, 1993)
^^No fool. The term "tropical African" occurs is not "traced" to 1981. It can be found in books going back to the 1800s.
Keita explicity excludes north african coastals and other north africans from his "saharo-tropical-african" grouping.
And Keita does not "exclude" "north african coastals and other north africans from his "saharo-tropical-african" grouping."
The very quote you proffer debunks your own claim. And diversionary smokescreens abut AC/DC wont save you, nor will trying to hide your debunking above re Diop and Vansertima.Let me quote your own proof:
"[...]coastal northern africans are viewed here as perhaps being biologically more, but not only, related to southern Europeans, primarily by gene flow." (Keita, 1993)
^^Dumbass, Keita says more "but not only". How therefore has he "excluded" "north african coastals and other north africans from his "saharo-tropical-african" grouping"? It is clear that southern Europeans are not the only relation to the coastals, and the Sahara itself makes up a large chunk of North Africa, that even in places extends close to the Medit coast. SO how could "north Africans" be "excluded" from the Saharan zone stupid muthafucka? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KHOISAN
"Several other long-range migration events have shaped the genetic l andscape of Africa. Analyses of mtDNA and the Y chromosome supports studies of classical polymorphisms as well as archaeological data indicating that Khoisian-speaking populations (those whose languages contain clicks, which includes the !Kung San) may have originated in Eastern Africa and migrated into southern Africa >20 - 10kya (Cavalli-Sforza, 1997, Scozzari, et al. 1999). Analyses of Y-Chromosome haplotype variation have identified that the most ancestral Y-chromosome haplotype is present at moderate to high frequency in East African Sudanese and Ethiopians, as well as in southern African !Kung San .." -- Michael Crawford 2006. Anthropological Genetics: Theory, Methods and Applications. p. 363-364
"The shallower slope, that of the INuit, has a value of 0.77 versus 0.86 for the Khoisan, indicating thjat the tibiae of the cold-adapted Inuit grow less per increment of femral growth theoughout their entire ontogenetic sequence tha do those of the Khoisan. The Neanderthal data points can be seen to follow the Inuit trajectory." --Nancy Minugh-Purvis, Kenneth J. McNamara. Human Evolution through Developmental Change 2001
"Variation in limb proportions between prehistoric Jomon and Yayoi people of Japan are explored by this study. Jomon people were the descendents of Pleistocene nomads who migrated to the Japanese Islands around 30,000 yBP. Phenotypic and genotypic evidence indicates that Yayoi people were recent migrants to Japan from continental Northeast Asia who likely interbred with Jomon foragers. Limb proportions of Jomon and Yayoi people were compared using RMA regression and "Quick-Test" calculations to investigate relative variability between these two groups. Cluster and principal components analyses were performed on size-standardized limb lengths and used to compare Jomon and Yayoi people with other groups from various climatic zones. Elongated distal relative to proximal limb lengths were observed among Jomon compared to Yayoi people. Jomon limb proportions were similar to human groups from temperate/tropical climates at lower latitudes, while Yayoi limb proportions more closely resemble groups from colder climates at higher latitudes. Limb proportional similarities with groups from warmer environments among Jomon foragers likely reflect morphological changes following Pleistocene colonization of the Japanese Islands. Cold-derived limb proportions among the Yayoi people likely indicate retention of these traits following comparatively recent migrations to the Japanese Islands. Changes in limb proportions experienced by Jomon foragers and retention of cold-derived limb proportions among Yayoi people conform to previous findings that report changes in these proportions following long-standing evolution in a specific environment." --Tempe et al. 2008. Variation in limb proportions between Jomon foragers and Yayoi agriculturalists from prehistoric Japan. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008 Oct;137(2):164-74.
Previous studies report that Jomon foragers had higher brachial and crural indices than Yayoi people and were similar in limb proportions to low latitude, tropical groups such as the African San (Yamaguchi, 1989). --Temple et al, 2008
quote: "At the same time, there is a genetic component. Low stature persists even under apparently favourable health conditions. The small body size and lean physique of living Khoisan peoples are often cited in human population biology texts as exemplary of adaptation to a hot, sometimes specifically desert, climate. Their low body-mass index is portrayed as support for Bergmann's and Allen's rules (cf. Molnar 1998, Relethford 1997)." --Sealy and Pfeiffer (2000) ------------------------------
AND YOU ARE STILL RUNNING AWAY FROM SWENET'S EXPOSURE OF YOUR FABRICATIONS AND IDIOCY
Running away as usual, like the faggot that you've demonstrated yourself to be, time after time again. None of your ideas have withstood the test of scrutiny, and that's why you've repeatedly backed away from them:
1.You've fabricated your claim that Bar Yosef said that the Mushabian was excavated in Upper and Lower Egypt
2.You've fabricated your claim that Indians never cluster with certain Africans, whether metrically or non-metrically
3.You've fabricated your claim that Mesolithic Nubians and Natufians had wavy hair
4.You've fabricated your claim that the Mediterranean 'race' is free of negroid traits per Coon
5.You've fabricated your claim that Wadi Halfans can't be negroid because of their browridges, since the remains you classify as undoubtedly negroid, (Asselar man and Iwo Eleru) have brow ridges
6.You've fabricated your claim that your fake Australoid phenotypical cluster (Palaeo-americans, Wadi Halfans, Jebel Sahabans, Natufians, European Eurafricans, Mesopotamian Eurafricans, Arabian Veddoids, Indian Veddoids etc) is a cluster of related people
7.You've failed to explain why modern descendants of those ancient populations have zero Australian aboriginal ancestry, but African ancestry with Mesolithic time depths instead.
8.You've fabricated your claim that sub species or races are identifiable by morphological clusters
9.You've fabricated your claim that there have never been studies that detected African affinities with Iranian/Iraqi prehistorical skeletal remains
10.You've fabricated your claim that the Natufian Homo 3 individual had brow ridges, since it consists out of a mandible
11.You've fabricated your claim that the Natufian Homo 3 individual was described as having prognathism
12.You've fabricated your claim that Homo 3 was the only Natufian individual with prognathism
13.You've fabricated your claim that Keith's analysis of the Shukbah remains were somehow refuted or inaccurate
14.You've fabricated your claim that Coon retracted his view of minor Negroid affinities in the Shuqbah Natufians series
15.You've fabricated your claim that Tigray Ethiopians are the only Ethiopians with leptorrhine averages
16.You've fabricated your claim that all Tigray Ethiopians are leptorrhine
17.You've fabricated your claim that non-leptorrhiny in Cushitic speaking groups is necessarily due to admixture with negroid groups.
17.You've fabricated your claim that Wolpoff's list of Erectus to Australoid continuation traits denote a special relationship indicative of continuation.
18.There is no evidence of lineage loss in Upper Palaeolithic Australian, European, West Asian and Amerindian fossils; all fossil mtDNA lineages are attested in contemporaries, and none are pre-M or pre-N. No form of lineage loss can account for the lack of pre-M and pre-N lineages in Eurasians, and no explanations have been offered as to why Sub Saharan Africans have managed to maintain their pre-M and pre-N mtDNA. Additionally, the derived state of Eurasian DNA is also confirmed in genome-wide analysis, which is not subject to Wolpoff's silly caveat that pre-M and pre-N lineages in Eurasians may have died out due to lineage loss.
THE FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-IDIOT EXPOSED PART 20: He tries ot make out that only rainforest areas define the tropics and says: ----------------------------------------------------------------- quote
The climatic tropical zone is limited to mostly western and central sub-sahara africa. Posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist osted 17 November, 2012 04:53 PM ____________________________________
When in fact any credible geography book denotes the tropics within the zone marked out by the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn, a denotation itself based on climate.
THE FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-IDIOT EXPOSED- PART 19: He says there is no OOA but the very "supporting reference" he proffers directy contradicts his claim. ------------------------- [b]Posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on 07 May, 2012 08:45 AM:
OOA never happened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans ----------------------------- The idiot gives a Wikipedia "reference" to back up his claim but the very same "supporting reference" he gives states that multi-regionalists acknowledge that hominid species came from Africa in the first place. Their argument is for continuity and distinct development in separate locations AFTER the initial OOA exit putting hominins in different places. This approach STILL recognizes and acknowledges hominin OOA.
Quote from FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Idiot's "supporting" reference: This species arose in Africa two million years ago as H. erectus and then spread out over the world, developing adaptations to regional conditions. Some populations became isolated for periods of time, developing in different directions, but through continuous interbreeding, replacement, genetic drift and selection, adaptations that were an advantage anywhere on earth would spread, keeping the development of the species in the same overall direction while maintaining adaptations to regional factors. By these mechanisms, surviving local varieties of the species evolved into modern humans, retaining some regional adaptations but with many features common to all regions.[10]
^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus came from Africa. In short, the FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-idiot's own "supporting" reference contradicts his claim. What a pathetic fool.
THE FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi- IDIOT EXPOSED - PART 18. The faker says Negroids are defined as having Caucasoid admixture. But when he sees bla-ck models with admixture he suddenly claims they aint black at all. Originally posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist: posted 12 June, 2012 05:34 PM http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008168 Topic: Carleton Coon: Negoids are hybrids of Pygmies and Caucasians [QB] Yes. A fact well known today.
''The Negroid type is not homogeneous.'' - Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994.
Hiernaux (1975) distinguishes the Pygmies to Negroids on the grounds the latter are a product of the former (a recent mutation) but that there was probable geneflow with Caucasoids as Coon (1967, 1982) maintains.
Also note that on page 123 of 'Living Races of Man', Coon also states that ''To this combination may have been added remnant Capoid genes''. So Negroids are basically a recent mutation from the Pygmies, but with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture.
^^Bitch please. Your own words contradict your punk ass. Up above you say that "NEgroids" are a recent mutation with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture. Look bich, look. You say blacks are defined as having that admixture, and quote your favorite racist, Carleton Coon to that effect. But when your hypocrisy is exposed, you all of a sudden deny that the black models posted are "really" black. IN one thread "admixed" Negroes like the black models are black, but when your idiocy is exposed, they suddenly ain't black. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-IDIOT EXPOSED PART 17: - He says there is no sexual diomorphism in Africans or skeletal differences between men and women, when the very anthropologists he quotes say the opposite.
---------]Originally posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi- Buffoon: FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist member # 18853 posted 03 June, 2012 05:47 PM
FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Buffoon 17a- "Frost and other anthropologists have noted that sexual dimorphism in Negroids is completely lacking. Check Frost's online blog."
FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi-Buffoon 17b- "Black females are not lighter or different to black males in craniofacial terms."
^^Stupid muthafucka. The very Frost quote you paste says this:
Men and women differ in complexion because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse, 1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and immediately before are actually darker than boys).." FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection? Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85–103u
------- Can't you read imbecile? ALL females differ from males and are lighter. ALL human humans have sexual dimorphism to one degree or another. SO how can blacks "completely lack" said dimorphism according to you, when your own boy Peter Frost says all human have it?
------- ANd in studies of crania men and women do show differences, and these differences can be detected with a battery of modern measurements, as already shown in previous threads where your idiocy was destroyed- example (zakrewski2004-Intra-population and temporal variation in ancient Egyptian crania)
your own peter frost debunks you: ---------------------------------------
"If this common selective force were sexual selection, it could have lightened European skin color by acting on an existing sexual dimorphism. Men and women differ in complexion because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse, 1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and immediately before are actually darker than boys). Investigators also try to exclude tanning by measuring under the arm, where there is less subcutaneous fat and probably less dimorphism in skin color, given that the lightness of a woman’s skin correlates with the thickness of her subcutaneous fat (Mazess, 1967). In any event, sexual selection may have targeted this sex difference, as suggested by a cross-cultural male preference for lighter complexioned women and, conversely, by some evidence of a female preference for darker complexioned men (Aoki, 2002; Feinman Feinman & Gill, 1978; Frost, 1988; Frost, 1994b; Frost, 2005; Van den Berghe & Frost, 1986)."
FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection? Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85–103
and:
"A different perspective on sexual dimorphism in skin pigmentation comes from the recognition that human females require significantly higher amounts of calcium during pregnancy and lactation and, thus, must have lighter skin than males in the same environment in order to maximize their cutaneous vitamin D3 production (Jablonski and Chaplin 2000)... Thus strong clinical evidence continues to support the hypothesis that lighter skin pigmentation in females evolved primarily as a means to enhance the the potential for cutaneous vitamin D production and maintain healthy long-term calcium status and skeletal health." -- Human Evolutionary Biology. 2010. By Michael P. Muehlenbein Damm you are one of the most pathetic idiots in existence.
Tell us -- were you born such a retarded shithead, or were you originally a slug who managed to rise to such prominence?
THE IDIOT'S FAKE QUOTES AND CITATIONS - PART 16 [QUOTE]Originally posted by FaheemDumbers_Anglo_Cassi_Pyramidologist: [QB] 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)
The foul faker doctored the quote not knowing the article has been much discussed at ES. Testifying even more to his incompetence, Cruciani actually does show E3b or E1b1b occuring in numerous places within "sub-Saharan" Africa. The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81, and E-M34) and the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously distributed on the African continent: E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa, E-M81 is restricted t o northern Africa, E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and E-M35* is shared by eastern and southern Africans (Cruciani et al. 2002)" --Cruciani
And there is no "page 74" in the Cruciani article. THE FAKER AND BUFFOON IS AGAIN BUSTED IN A LIE!
Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Fartheadbonkers, what do you call a sahel type environment? The Sahel is even drier than the savannah yet more humid than the desert.
Interestingly there is a Sahelian belt that stretches across the continent from the Atlantic on one side to the Red Sea on the other.
That's semi-arid-desert climate (type "BS[h]" in Koppen). It falls outside of tropical, but on the perhipery has a month or less humid climate.
From wikipedia: "has a short but well-defined wet season, but is not sufficiently wet overall to qualify as a tropical savanna climate."
- Tropical is red and pink.
Will you admit you are wrong yet?
Put the word "Tropical Desert" into google.
This is an accepted current term.
Your terminology, "Congoid" is not currently in use.
If you can't use the current standard environmental or anthropological terms you have no case. You use obsolete terms. some of them not even widely used when the were current,Congoid for example.
The term "tropical" can be used legitimately in more than one way, accept this and move on, this thread is not for that.
The general use of the term "tropically adpated" as often used in this forum refers to a common characteristic of it, heat. The tropical adapation adaptation in animals including humans means that the limbs are longer in proportion to to the trunk, Allen's Rule. With the pygmies, Bergman's rule also may be at play. Bergmann's rule is an ecogeographic principle that states that within a populations and species of larger size are found in colder environments, and species of smaller size are found in warmer regions. Note that Bergmann's rule describes a tendency of body mass variation within groups; it does not suggest that large-bodied animals do not occur in warm climates. Human populations who live near the poles, including the Inuit, Aleut, and Sami people, are on average heavier than populations from mid-latitudes, consistent with Bergmann's rule.They also tend to have shorter limbs and broader trunks, consistent with Allen's rule. According to Marshall T. Newman in a 1953 article for the Journal of the American Anthropologist, Native American populations are generally consistent with Bergmann's rule although the cold climate and small body size combination of the Eastern Eskimo, Canoe Indians, Yuki, Andes natives and Harrison Lake Lillouet runs contrary to the expectations of Bergmann's rule. Newman (1953), however, contends that Bergmann's rule holds for the populations of Eurasia, but it does not hold for those of sub-Saharan Africa
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lioness said: The general use of the term "tropically adpated" as often used in this forum refers to a common characteristic of it, heat. The tropical adapation adaptation in animals including humans means that the limbs are longer in proportion to to the trunk, Allen's Rule. With the pygmies, Bergman's rule also may be at play. Bergmann's rule is an ecogeographic principle that states that within a populations and species of larger size are found in colder environments, and species of smaller size are found in warmer regions. Note that Bergmann's rule describes a tendency of body mass variation within groups; it does not suggest that large-bodied animals do not occur in warm climates. Human populations who live near the poles, including the Inuit, Aleut, and Sami people, are on average heavier than populations from mid-latitudes, consistent with Bergmann's rule.They also tend to have shorter limbs and broader trunks, consistent with Allen's rule. According to Marshall T. Newman in a 1953 article for the Journal of the American Anthropologist, Native American populations are generally consistent with Bergmann's rule although the cold climate and small body size combination of the Eastern Eskimo, Canoe Indians, Yuki, Andes natives and Harrison Lake Lillouet runs contrary to the expectations of Bergmann's rule. Newman (1953), however, contends that Bergmann's rule holds for the populations of Eurasia, but it does not hold for those of sub-Saharan Afric
How do you explain the small stature of Eskimos if small people are only supposed to occur in rainforests as claimed by some?
Also keep in mind that body mass does not solely depend upon temperature but is heavily influenced by nutrition, as detailed in threads some time ago.
Better nutrition does not necessariy mean intensive sedentary agriculture. Better foraging and resources bases can boost nutrition as well. In the Nile Valley, a substantial, mixed subsistence economy was long in place. The ancient Egyptian Badarian, who in numerous studies cluster with tropical Africans had a subbstantial population and resource base- reflecting rich subsistence foraging and haversting, not merely sedentary agriculture. Such mixed economies including harvesting of wild grains and tubers is an early development in Africa and the Nile Valley scholars show, without needing any outside settlers. QUOTE:
"Here we demonstrate that this transition is also associated with a modest reduction and subsequent improvement in stature and body mass. This trend could be broadly interpreted in the context of models of relationship between body size and nutrition. In this case, the greater body size of early hunter-gatherers may reflect the benefit of broadly based hunting and gathering subsistence... Archaological evidence suggest that the Badarian civilization had higher population density than did other contemporaneous civilizations (Gabriel, 1987; Hassan 1988)." --Pihnasi and Stock (2011) Human Bioarchaeology of the Transition to Agriculture
“The adoption of this broad adaptive strategy provided the large food supply needed by a growing population, but achieving maximum production called for a good deal of planning and the management of labour. This marks the beginning of an organized food-producing system: agriculture.” “Dating from more than 15,000 years ago, the evidence from the Nile valley is arguably the earliest comprehensive instance of an organized food-producing system known anywhere on Earth.” --Africa: A Biography of the Continent, by John Reader, 1998, pp. 120-173
The transition to better nutrition & agriculture is associated with increases in sexual dimorphism, a pattern also occurring in the studies of ancient Americans. Quote: "The OK possesses the highest SDS of all temporal groups, including individual Predynastic sites (Table 10; Figure 10). The greatest increase in SDS is thus from the Predyn to OK." --Raxter 2011.
-----New World data - same pattern associated with better nutrition not influxes of outsiders
"Finally body mass has long been recognized as a morphological trait amongst humans that relates to ecogeographic patterns in association with climate (Holliday, 1997, Rull 1994). However, Auerbach (2007) found that the relationship between climatic factors and body mass amongst a broad sample of New World groups was inconsistent and may have been influenced by subsistence.. ..there is a similar trend amongst both males and females: the agriculturalists are taller and more massive, on the average. This is identical to patterns of diachronic change in stature documented using different samples from the southeast... There is also a coincident slight increase in sexual dimorphism among the agriculturalist samples, accompanied by a slight increase in overall variance in stature, body mass and bi-iliac breath.. In short, the long temporal perspective on the development of agriculture in the Southeast may be characterized by significant overall increases in body size for both males and females." -- Pinhasi and Stock (2011). Human Bioarchaeology of the Transition to Agriculture
A rich, indigenous foraging and harvesting strategy is old news in boosting better nutrition in ancient Africa.
“The adoption of this broad adaptive strategy provided the large food supply needed by a growing population, but achieving maximum production called for a good deal of planning and the management of labour. This marks the beginning of an organized food-producing system: agriculture.” “Dating from more than 15,000 years ago, the evidence from the Nile valley is arguably the earliest comprehensive instance of an organized food-producing system known anywhere on Earth.” --Africa: A Biography of the Continent, J. Reader, 1998, 120-173
Long native settlement- No mass influx of outsiders-
QUOTE: “Furthermore, the archaeology of northern Africa does not support demic diffusion of farming from the Near East. The evidence presented by Wetterstrom indicates that early African farmers in the Fayum initially incorporated Near Eastern domesticates into an INDIGENOUS foraging strategy, and only over time developed a dependence on horticulture. This is inconsistent with in-migrating farming settlers, who would have brought a more abrupt change in subsistence strategy. "The same archaeological pattern occurs west of Egypt..”
--Ehret, Keita, Newman, Bellwood (2004). The Origins of Afroasiatic Science 3 v306, n5702, p1680
------------------------------------------------------------ Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:
Tropically adapted means adaptation to the zone as defined above!
accordingly the many of the Khoisans and people of the whole Southern half of Austrailia are not Tropically adapted - unless you want to retract the above [/QUOTE]
^^You admit that there are tropical deserts, tropical forests and tropical savanna. But do you deny that the marked zone above is the tropics?
Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] Lioness said: The general use of the term "tropically adpated" as often used in this forum refers to a common characteristic of it, heat. The tropical adapation adaptation in animals including humans means that the limbs are longer in proportion to to the trunk, Allen's Rule. With the pygmies, Bergman's rule also may be at play. Bergmann's rule is an ecogeographic principle that states that within a populations and species of larger size are found in colder environments, and species of smaller size are found in warmer regions. Note that Bergmann's rule describes a tendency of body mass variation within groups; it does not suggest that large-bodied animals do not occur in warm climates. Human populations who live near the poles, including the Inuit, Aleut, and Sami people, are on average heavier than populations from mid-latitudes, consistent with Bergmann's rule.They also tend to have shorter limbs and broader trunks, consistent with Allen's rule. According to Marshall T. Newman in a 1953 article for the Journal of the American Anthropologist, Native American populations are generally consistent with Bergmann's rule although the cold climate and small body size combination of the Eastern Eskimo, Canoe Indians, Yuki, Andes natives and Harrison Lake Lillouet runs contrary to the expectations of Bergmann's rule. Newman (1953), however, contends that Bergmann's rule holds for the populations of Eurasia, but it does not hold for those of sub-Saharan Africa
How do you explain the small stature of Eskimos if small people are only supposed to occur in rainforests as claimed by some?
Also keep in mind that body mass does not solely depend upon temperature but is heavily influenced by nutrition, as detailed in threads some time ago.
It's dunkers who has been making these claims about stature.
It is clear that animals in Tropical rainforests are differrent in some wasy from animals in Tropical deserts.
It was always thought that there were two species of elephant in the world; the African savanna elephant,( Loxodonta africana) and the Asian elephant, (Elephas maximus). But now, through DNA testing, it has been discovered that there is a third species; the African forest elephant.
When a DNA identification system was set up to trace where poached ivory was coming from, scientists found that the African elephants consisted of two very different species. They expected slight variations in the genetic makeup of the savanna elephant, but were surprised to discover the two different species.
The new species, the forest elephant, was considered to be a subspecies of the African elephant, and was known as Loxodonta africana cyclotis. That means scientists thought that, although the elephants had adapted to their forest habitat, they were still savanna elephants. But DNA evidence shows that about 2.5 million years ago two genetically different strains of elephants evolved in Africa. The forest elephant, now known as Loxodonta cyclotis,found its niche in the equatorial forests of central and western Africa. Here they have lived hidden from view and practically forgotten.
Some scientists consider the two species as different as lions are from tigers, or horses are from zebras. Genetically the difference between the two species of elephant is more than half as big as the differences between the African elephant and the Asian elephant, or 58%.
When you think of the African elephant you probably picture the savanna elephant. It is a huge animal, standing almost 12 feet tall at the shoulders. It has large ears that come to a point at the bottom. The tusks are long and slightly curved. They live on large, dry grasslands with a few thorny acacias dotting the plains.
The forest elephants look very different from savanna elephants. For one thing, they are smaller and stockier than savanna elephants. Forest elephant males only get to be about 8 feet in height while large savanna elephants can reach 13 feet. Their ears are rounded and their tusks are straight and thin with a pinkish tinge to the ivory. The lower jaw is longer, giving the forest elephant a long, narrow face. Forest elephants also live in smaller family groups. Forest elephants are also darker than savanna elephants.
Forest elephants are adapted to living in dense forests. Their tusks are straight since curved ones might get caught in the underbrush and vines of the forest. They are smaller so they can move around the dense forests more easily.
Not much was known about the forest elephants because tracking them was very difficult. Scientists have begun tagging forest elephants with tracking devices so they can be more easily followed. It has recently been discovered that forest elephants can have a home range of about 2,000 square kilometers (1,243 square miles).
Seventy years ago three to five million elephants inhabited Africa. Today only about 500,000 elephants remain. One third of these are forest elephants. Because there are now two separate species, there are fewer elephants of each species. Elephants in Africa are now more endangered than previously thought. The hard and pink ivory of the forest elephant is highly prized by poachers who are difficult to catch in the cover of the rainforest. Logging is another threat to the forest elephant.
The African elephant, Loxodont africana, is listed as endangered under the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES). Conservationists are afraid that declaring the forest elephant as a separate species could open a loophole under the current treaty and open up hunting of forest elephants for their ivory. A study of the forest elephant's status is under way, sponsored by the National Geographic Society, European Union, National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
posted
Eskimos make up for their smaller size through their diet. They eat high calorie foods, increasing their basal metabolic rate resulting in extra body heat.
Khoisans are also small with lower brachial/crural indices despite living in the desert (when they should be elongated) because they bury their water. This leads to calcium deficiency.
The minor exceptions to climatic adaptation are explained through diet.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Eskimos make up for their smaller size through their diet. They eat high calorie foods, increasing their basal metabolic rate resulting in extra body heat.
Khoisans are also small with lower brachial/crural indices despite living in the desert (when they should be elongated) because they bury their water. This leads to calcium deficiency.
The minor exceptions to climatic adaptation are explained through diet.
what's more similar to a Nilotic person a Bantu or a European?
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
Djehootie: Tropically adapted means adaptation to the zone as defined above!
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,
accordingly the many of the Khoisans and people of the whole Southern half of Austrailia are not Tropically adapted - unless you want to retract the above
^^You admit that there are tropical deserts, tropical forests and tropical savanna. But do you deny that the marked zone above is the tropics?
Yes I admit to it look at the thread title. accordingly 85% of Egypt and South Africa are not tropical, nor is the Southern half of Austrailia
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Yea lol. Funny that. Note how virtually none of North Africa fits into Zaharan's own definition of "Tropical", but he then claims coastal north africans and egyptians are "tropical/black".
So much for "wandering caucasoids", Zaharan's model is entirely based on "wandering negroids".
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keep in mind that tropical Africans are not static entities, they do move into other zones at will and settle there, just as they did in the Nile Valley. Likewise Khosians moved from various tropic zone areas into southern Africa. RECAP:
"Several other long-range migration events have shaped the genetic l andscape of Africa. Analyses of mtDNA and the Y chromosome supports studies of classical polymorphisms as well as archaeological data indicating that Khoisian-speaking populations (those whose languages contain clicks, which includes the !Kung San) may have originated in Eastern Africa and migrated into southern Africa >20 - 10kya (Cavalli-Sforza, 1997, Scozzari, et al. 1999). Analyses of Y-Chromosome haplotype variation have identified that the most ancestral Y-chromosome haplotype is present at moderate to high frequency in East African Sudanese and Ethiopians, as well as in southern African !Kung San .." -- Michael Crawford 2006. Anthropological Genetics: Theory, Methods and Applications. p. 363-364
"The shallower slope, that of the INuit, has a value of 0.77 versus 0.86 for the Khoisan, indicating thjat the tibiae of the cold-adapted Inuit grow less per increment of femral growth theoughout their entire ontogenetic sequence tha do those of the Khoisan. The Neanderthal data points can be seen to follow the Inuit trajectory." --Nancy Minugh-Purvis, Kenneth J. McNamara. Human Evolution through Developmental Change 2001
"Variation in limb proportions between prehistoric Jomon and Yayoi people of Japan are explored by this study. Jomon people were the descendents of Pleistocene nomads who migrated to the Japanese Islands around 30,000 yBP. Phenotypic and genotypic evidence indicates that Yayoi people were recent migrants to Japan from continental Northeast Asia who likely interbred with Jomon foragers. Limb proportions of Jomon and Yayoi people were compared using RMA regression and "Quick-Test" calculations to investigate relative variability between these two groups. Cluster and principal components analyses were performed on size-standardized limb lengths and used to compare Jomon and Yayoi people with other groups from various climatic zones. Elongated distal relative to proximal limb lengths were observed among Jomon compared to Yayoi people. Jomon limb proportions were similar to human groups from temperate/tropical climates at lower latitudes, while Yayoi limb proportions more closely resemble groups from colder climates at higher latitudes. Limb proportional similarities with groups from warmer environments among Jomon foragers likely reflect morphological changes following Pleistocene colonization of the Japanese Islands. Cold-derived limb proportions among the Yayoi people likely indicate retention of these traits following comparatively recent migrations to the Japanese Islands. Changes in limb proportions experienced by Jomon foragers and retention of cold-derived limb proportions among Yayoi people conform to previous findings that report changes in these proportions following long-standing evolution in a specific environment." --Temple et al. 2008. Variation in limb proportions between Jomon foragers and Yayoi agriculturalists from prehistoric Japan. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008 Oct;137(2):164-74.
quote: "At the same time, there is a genetic component. Low stature persists even under apparently favourable health conditions. The small body size and lean physique of living Khoisan peoples are often cited in human population biology texts as exemplary of adaptation to a hot, sometimes specifically desert, climate. Their low body-mass index is portrayed as support for Bergmann's and Allen's rules (cf. Molnar 1998, Relethford 1997)." --Sealy and Pfeiffer (2000) ------------------------------
ANd as to tropical Africans in the Nile Valley:
RECAP:
Even in the far northern Nile Valley limb proportions cluster the early dynastic inhabitants more with Africans than Europeans
Numerous Pharaohs show tropical limb proportions
Limb proportions to not change quickly but are more stable and are heavily genetically embedded. The distinctive presence of such limb proportions in Egypt shows that the fundamental core populations were tropical Africans. Skin color or nose shape changes under the Medit climate do not change this pattern. In any event, desert conditions can produce narrow noses, and Africans as a whole have the highest skin color diversity, without needing any "race mix" to explain why.
Even in the North, Egyptians cluster with other tropical people like US Blacks rather than Europeans or Middle Easterners
Genesis of Egyptian Dynastic civilization was fromt he tropical south
Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
"tropical Africans are not static entities" -- not according to you, however by claiming "tropical africans" wandered all over the globe, you've limited Caucasoids to virtually nothing.
The hypocrisy is that you accuse the Caucasoid model of "wandering caucasoids", despite the fact your model is based on the idea Caucasoids are static while "tropical africans" magically wandered all over the place.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wrong again. Today's scholars dismiss claims like yours of bogus mass "Hamitic" migrations into the Nile Valley and into Africa as an explanation for the diversity of the African peoples. You rely heavily on obsolete, long debunked writers like Carleton Coons, who is precisely one of the early types debunked and dismissed by modern researchers. Let's see what the scholar who coined the phrase "wandering Caucasoids" has to say. - QUOTE:
'An earlier generation of anthropologists tried to explain face form in the Horn of Africa as the result of admixture from hypothetical “wandering Caucasoids,” (Adams, 1967, 1979; MacGaffey, 1966; Seligman, 1913, 1915, 1934), but that explanation founders on the paradox of why that supposedly potent “Caucasoid” people contributed a dominant quantity of genes for nose and face form but none for skin color or limb proportions. It makes far better sense to regard the adaptively significant features seen in the Horn of Africa as solely an in situ response on the part of separate adaptive traits to the selective forces present in the hot dry tropics of eastern Africa. From the observation that 12,000 years was not a long enough period of time to produce any noticeable variation in pigment by latitude in the New World and that 50,000 years has been barely long enough to produce the beginnings of a gradation in Australia (Brace, 1993a), one would have to argue that the inhabitants of the Upper Nile and the East Horn of Africa have been equatorial for many tens of thousands of years." -C.L. Brace (1993)
Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: "tropical Africans are not static entities" -- not according to you, however by claiming "tropical africans" wandered all over the globe, you've limited Caucasoids to virtually nothing.
The hypocrisy is that you accuse the Caucasoid model of "wandering caucasoids", despite the fact your model is based on the idea Caucasoids are static while "tropical africans" magically wandered all over the place.
quote: Northern Egypt near the Mediterranean shows the same pattern- limb length data puts its peoples closer to tropically adapted Africans that cold climate Europeans
"...sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine.
The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans."
Barry Kemp, "Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation. (2005) Routledge. p. 52-60
quote:"When the Elephantine results were added to a broader pooling of the physical characteristics drawn from a wide geographic region which includes Africa, the Mediterranean and the Near East quite strong affinities emerge between Elephantine and populations from Nubia, supporting a strong south-north cline."
Barry Kemp. (2006) Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization. p. 54
Your "hypothetical cacasoids" which you claim as "the Berbers" live in the Mediterranean area at the coast and mountains were it even snows. It isn't "tropical". Consult the map you've been boasting with!
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: "tropical Africans are not static entities" -- not according to you, however by claiming "tropical africans" wandered all over the globe, you've limited Caucasoids to virtually nothing.
The hypocrisy is that you accuse the Caucasoid model of "wandering caucasoids", despite the fact your model is based on the idea Caucasoids are static while "tropical africans" magically wandered all over the place.
J Hum Evol. 1997 May;32(5):423-48. Holliday TW.
quote: Body proportions covary with climate, apparently as the result of climatic selection.
Body proportions in Late Pleistocene Europe and modern human origins.
Holliday TW.
Source
Department of Anthropology, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23187-8795, USA.
Abstract
quote: Body proportions covary with climate, apparently as the result of climatic selection. Ontogenic research and migrant studies have demonstrated that body proportions are largely genetically controlled and are under low selective rates; thus studies of body form can provide evidence for evolutionarily short-term dispersals and/or gene flow. Following these observations, competing models of modern human origins yield different predictions concerning body proportion shifts in Late Pleistocene Europe. Replacement predicts that the earliest modern Europeans will possess "tropical" body proportions (assuming Africa is the center of origin), while Regional Continuity permits only minor shifts in body shape, due to climatic change and/or improved cultural buffering. This study tests these predictions via analyses of osteometric data reflective of trunk height and breadth, limb proportions and relative body mass for samples of Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP), Late Upper Paleolithic (LUP) and Mesolithic (MES) humans and 13 recent African and European populations. Results reveal a clear tendency for the EUP sample to cluster with recent Africans, while LUP and MES samples cluster with recent Europeans. These results refute the hypothesis of local continuity in Europe, and are consistent with an interpretation of elevated gene flow (and population dispersal?) from Africa, followed by subsequent climatic adaptation to colder conditions. These data do not, however, preclude the possibility of some (albeit small) contribution of genes from Neandertals to succeeding populations, as is postulated in Bräuer's "Afro-European Sapiens" model.
J Hum Evol. 1999 May;36(5):549-66.
Brachial and crural indices of European late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans.
Holliday TW.
quote:
Among recent humans brachial and crural indices are positively correlated with mean annual temperature, such that high indices are found in tropical groups.
However, despite inhabiting glacial Europe, the Upper Paleolithic Europeans possessed high indices, prompting Trinkaus (1981) to argue for gene flow from warmer regions associated with modern human emergence in Europe. In contrast, Frayer et al. (1993) point out that Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans should not exhibit tropically-adapted limb proportions, since, even assuming replacement, their ancestors had experienced cold stress in glacial Europe for at least 12 millennia.
This study investigates three questions tied to the brachial and crural indices among Late Pleistocene and recent humans. First, which limb segments (either proximal or distal) are primarily responsible for variation in brachial and crural indices? Second, are these indices reflective of overall limb elongation? And finally, do the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europeans retain relatively and/or absolutely long limbs? Results indicate that in the lower limb, the distal limb segment contributes most of the variability to intralimb proportions, while in the upper limb the proximal and distal limb segments appear to be equally variable.
Additionally, brachial and crural indices do not appear to be a good measure of overall limb length, and thus, while the Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic humans have significantly higher (i.e., tropically-adapted) brachial and crural indices than do recent Europeans, they also have shorter (i.e., cold-adapted) limbs.
The somewhat paradoxical retention of "tropical" indices in the context of more "cold-adapted" limb length is best explained as evidence for Replacement in the European Late Pleistocene, followed by gradual cold adaptation in glacial Europe.
Holliday, T. 2000. Evolution at the Crossroads. Amr Anthr, 102. 54-68
quote:
“Results indicate that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids have African-like, or tropically adapted, proportions, while those from Amud, Kebara, Tabun, and Shanidar (Iraq) have more European-like, or cold-adapted, proportions. This suggests that there were in fact two distinct Western Asian populations and that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids were likely African in origin - a result consistent with the "Replacement" model of modern human origins.. What we can say, however, is that in the Holocene, humans from southwest Asia do not exhibit tropically adapted body shape..”
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Fartheadbonkers, what do you call a sahel type environment? The Sahel is even drier than the savannah yet more humid than the desert.
Interestingly there is a Sahelian belt that stretches across the continent from the Atlantic on one side to the Red Sea on the other.
That's semi-arid-desert climate (type "BS[h]" in Koppen). It falls outside of tropical, but on the perhipery has a month or less humid climate.
From wikipedia: "has a short but well-defined wet season, but is not sufficiently wet overall to qualify as a tropical savanna climate."
Citation: deMenocal, P. B. & Tierney, J. E. (2012) Green Sahara: African Humid Periods Paced by Earth's Orbital Changes. Nature Education Knowledge 3(10):12
Paleoclimate and archaeological evidence tells us that, 11,000-5,000 years ago, the Earth's slow orbital 'wobble' transformed today's Sahara desert to a land covered with vegetation and lakes.
quote: The most thorough studies on the prehistory of North Africa come from the land included within the present borders of Egypt and northern Sudan. The Nile river and the Sahara desert have alternatively affected each other on both cultural and environmental levels and Eastern Saharan populations have acted as intermediaries between central Saharans and Nilotic peoples in both east–west and west–east directions. The Eastern Sahara is often referred to as the Western Desert, as it is located west of the Nile river. However, the Eastern Sahara proper extends east of the Nile river, as well. This article regards the most relevant events of past human populations in the area. Main topics include: the spread of early anatomically modern humans (e.g., at Kurkur Oasis, Bir Tarfawi, BirSahara); the reoccupation of the Sahara after 10 000 years ago; the earliest herders (e.g., at Bir Kiseiba and Nabta Playa); the earliest production and the spread of pottery (e.g., at Nabta Playa, Bir Kiseiba, Gilf Kebir, Great Sand Sea); caprine herding (e.g., at Sodmein Cave, Dakhleh Oasis, Nabta Playa); the origins of farming (e.g., at Farafra Oasis); and the development of sedentism (e.g., at Dakhleh Oasis, Nabta Playa).
AFRICA, NORTH Sahara, Eastern, Elena A.A. Garcea et al.
Lakeside Cemeteries in the Sahara: 5000 Years of Holocene Population and Environmental Change
Citation: deMenocal, P. B. & Tierney, J. E. (2012) Green Sahara: African Humid Periods Paced by Earth's Orbital Changes. Nature Education Knowledge 3(10):12
Paleoclimate and archaeological evidence tells us that, 11,000-5,000 years ago, the Earth's slow orbital 'wobble' transformed today's Sahara desert to a land covered with vegetation and lakes.
quote: The most thorough studies on the prehistory of North Africa come from the land included within the present borders of Egypt and northern Sudan. The Nile river and the Sahara desert have alternatively affected each other on both cultural and environmental levels and Eastern Saharan populations have acted as intermediaries between central Saharans and Nilotic peoples in both east–west and west–east directions. The Eastern Sahara is often referred to as the Western Desert, as it is located west of the Nile river. However, the Eastern Sahara proper extends east of the Nile river, as well. This article regards the most relevant events of past human populations in the area. Main topics include: the spread of early anatomically modern humans (e.g., at Kurkur Oasis, Bir Tarfawi, BirSahara); the reoccupation of the Sahara after 10 000 years ago; the earliest herders (e.g., at Bir Kiseiba and Nabta Playa); the earliest production and the spread of pottery (e.g., at Nabta Playa, Bir Kiseiba, Gilf Kebir, Great Sand Sea); caprine herding (e.g., at Sodmein Cave, Dakhleh Oasis, Nabta Playa); the origins of farming (e.g., at Farafra Oasis); and the development of sedentism (e.g., at Dakhleh Oasis, Nabta Playa).
AFRICA, NORTH Sahara, Eastern, Elena A.A. Garcea et al.
Lakeside Cemeteries in the Sahara: 5000 Years of Holocene Population and Environmental Change
^^Good info Patrol. It shows that the Sahara 8-16kya was not at all the desert it now is, but was a variable climate- very humid at times- the AHP or African Humid Period the article talks about. So we have a humid climate in place as the Nile Valley culture/civilization began to develop- giving rise to the African aqualithic fishing/hunting / foraging cultures. As scholar Angel below shows, this "aqualithic" culture likely stretched in a broad span from today's Zaire, to the Nile Valley, to the Medit coast.
The Wadi Kubbaniya Skeleton: A Late Paleolithic Burial from Southern Egypt Description and comparison of the skeleton
By J. Lawrence Angel and Jennifer Olsen Kelley 1986
QUOTE:
“It is also similar to that of other desert-adapted or even savannah-adapted populations of Upper Paleolithic to modern times in the range from Morrocco and Egypt to the lake country of East Africa.”
“The proper comparisons would be with the hunting and fishing populations between 20,000 and 8,000 B.P., along and between the Nile drainage, from the mountains and forested terrain of Zaire to the savannah lake country. Northwards, toward the Delta (actual Nile Delta sites obviously are very deeply buried) and finally with the chain of North African populations.”
“If we had Upper Paleolithic to early Mesolithic samples from Egypt, Libya and the northern Sahara, we would probably find a smooth transition from the Ishango-Lothagam-Elementeita proto-Nilotics to the Mecha-Afalou proto- Moors and proto-Berbers.”
“The Wadi Kubbaniya skeleton is a link in a chain of hunting and fishing peoples present in Africa, from 20,000 B.P. to 8,000 B.P. They are the direct ancestors of modern Nilotics, Nubians, Egyptians, probably Libyans and Berbers.” -----------------------------------------------------------
[b]And as the article by deMenocal and Tierney show the peoples of this culture as it developed not only hunted/fished/foraged but were also pastoralists. One of the most fascinating aspects of the African Humid Period is its impact on North African human sustainability and cultural development (Hoelzmann et al., 2002; Kuper and Kröpelin, 2006). North Africa was nearly completely vegetated during the height of the AHP (Jolly et al., 1998) and populated with nomadic hunter-gatherer communities that increasingly practiced pastoralism (husbandry of cattle, sheep, and goats; Hoelzmann et al., 2002; Kuper and Kröpelin, 2006). The rock art images in Figure 1 depict impressions of this life. Towards the end of the African Humid Period between 7,000 and 5,000 years ago the progressive desiccation of the region led to a widespread depopulation and abandonment of North African sites. These populations did not disappear, however. The large-scale exodus was coincident with the rise of sedentary life and pharaonic culture along the Nile River (a perennial water source) and the spread of pastoralism throughout the continent (Kuper and Kröpelin, 2006)." --(deMenocal, P. B. & Tierney, J. E. (2012) Green Sahara: African Humid Periods Paced by Earth's Orbital Changes. Nature Education Knowledge 3(10):12)
John Reader and EHret also note the beginning of agriculture with the harvesting and storing wild grains, tubers and other edibles. Sedentary agriculture as it developed later was not necessary to have a good population size and to and exploit the resource base.
In addition, one of the oldest humans found in the Nile Valley- Nazlet Khater clusters with sub-Saharan populations.
------------
Furthermore scholars note movement in the area was much easier south to north from East Africa, the SUdan and the Sahara into the Nile Valley than along the more arduous and resource poor Mediterranean coast. QUOTE:
"Paleoanthropologists tend to regard North Africa as one large geographical zone, thus assuming population affinities between the Maghreb and the Upper Nile Valley, are more likely that between the latter and sub-Saharan Africa. However, a quick glance at the map indicates that the distance between the Maghreb and the Nile Valley is larger than between the Nile Valley and Ethiopia, or Kenya. Moreover, north-south population movements along East Africa and the Nile Valley is more likely than an eastbound migration along the winding southern Mediterranean coast. Plentiful sources of water, availability of game and favorable climatic conditions (i.e. no hot and dry ecological zones) probably spurred population movements along this route. However the size of the Mediterranean coastal belt varied during the Middle and Late Pleistocene. Thus during periods of extremely arid conditions, the availability of water and game along the coast was more than likely rather limited. " -- Pierre M. Vermeersch. 2002. Palaeolithic Quarrying Sites in Upper and Middle Egypt
----------------
Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have seen no data as to limb proportions of Southern Europeans. ex. Southern Spain, Southern Italy, Greece, or Southern Turkey also
Who is more related to an ancient Egyptian on an overall basis a Malyasian or an Iranian?
^^When you find the answer let us know.
But as credible scholars show, Middle Easterners do not show the tropical proportions of the Egyptians.
Holocene Middle Easterners didn’t have tropical body plan like Egyptians – QUOTE: “Results indicate that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids have African-like, or tropically adapted, proportions... What we can say, however, is that in the Holocene, humans from southwest Asia do not exhibit tropically adapted body shape..”
--Holliday, T. 2000. Evolution at the Crossroads. Amr Anthr, 102. 54-68
Northern Egyptians group with Africans: QUOTE – Smith 2002: "Limb length proportions in males from Maadi and Merimde group them with African rather than European populations. Mean femur length in males from Maadi was similar to that recorded at Byblos and the early Bronze Age male from Kabri, but mean tibia length in Maadi males was 6.9cm longer than that at Byblos. At Merimde both bones were longer than at the other sites shown, but again, the tibia was longer proportionate to femurs than at Byblos (Fig 6.2), reinforcing the impression of an African rather than Levantine affinity.“
-- Smith, P. (2002) The palaeo-biological evidence for admix.. In: Egypt & the Levant.. Leicester Univ. 118-28
Egyptians group with other tropical African populations
“Previously estimated intralimb indices for ancient Egyptians are generally quite similar to ours, and are more similar to US Blacks than to US Whites… Intralimb indices are not significantly different between Egyptians and American Blacks... Many of those who have studied ancient Egyptians have commented on their characteristically ''tropical'' or ''African'' body plan..” - Raxter & Ruff, et al. (2008) Stature estimation in ancient Egyptians. Amer J. Phy Anthro 136 (2), 147-55.
Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lioness, what do you have on alien populations?
Heh.. heh., this oughta be a change of pace on the dull thread material ... WOnder if Truthcentric can draw like this...
Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] I have seen no data as to limb proportions of Southern Europeans. ex. Southern Spain, Southern Italy, Greece, or Southern Turkey also
Who is more related to an ancient Egyptian on an overall basis a Malyasian or an Iranian?
^^When you find the answer let us know.
But as credible scholars show, Middle Easterners do not show the tropical proportions of the Egyptians.
There is some very limited data but not much available on Middle Easterners. Southern Europeans are not Middle Easterners but may have some ancestry from them.
A Malaysian man might have higher limb ratios due to their closer proximity to the equator, I don't know, and they also have somewhat dark skin. It's possible Malaysians might have certain physical similarities to ancient Egyptians but that doesn't mean overall more relatedness to anceint Egyptians compared to an Iranian. I suspect the Iranian has more genetic affinites. So limb ratio similarity is only one type of similarity.
For argumenst sake we will assume that Malaysians are more similar in body plan to ancient Egyptians. What about modern Egyptians ?? You'd think tere would be some data available on their average limb proportions but I have never seen any.
What about noses? In ancient Egyptian art there are some Egyptians with wide noses others with narrow noses. It's like limb ratios, it's one thing that doesn't prove much in an of itself.
^^^^^ Who has limb ratios that are more similar to West Africans? This man or this woman? The man probably does. Without even getting into who came first, I ask you who has facial features more similar to this man, Europeans or West Africans? While some West Africans may have similar facial features, on average this Maasai man has features more similar to the average European. I told you don't get emotional, I didn't say who came first just that there is more similarity on average for whatever reason.
So it's a complex situation an it's hard for anybody to know for sure why people look the way they do. The man has features, nose, no prognthis, small lips, more similar to the average European than the average West African (or Khoisan) Yet his skin and assumimg he had an afro, are more similar to West Africans.
To know for sure how all this came about is impossible to know for sure.
Malaysia is very far from Egypt so there can't be too much true relatedness between them an ancient Egyptians. North Western Europe is also fairly far away from Egypt. Sudan howver is very close as well as the Middle East and the Mediterranean.
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] Lioness, what do you have on alien populations?
make a new thread on alien art, you rarely make your own threads.
maybe Truthcentric can make some hot black alien chicks for you with three tits and one eye and big afro puffs Set it up, I'll PM Vansertimavindicated and see if he has any materials on it. Lahote had some stuff
anyway this thread got boring because people didn't stick to the animal topic
hey wait a minute, Ant's origin is that she got hit by a car and saw an ant shortly before losing consciousness. She's part ant not alien, ok I guess it's animal
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Fartheadbonkers, what do you call a sahel type environment? The Sahel is even drier than the savannah yet more humid than the desert.
Interestingly there is a Sahelian belt that stretches across the continent from the Atlantic on one side to the Red Sea on the other.
That's semi-arid-desert climate (type "BS[h]" in Koppen). It falls outside of tropical, but on the perhipery has a month or less humid climate.
From wikipedia: "has a short but well-defined wet season, but is not sufficiently wet overall to qualify as a tropical savanna climate."
- Tropical is red and pink.
Will you admit you are wrong yet?
ROTFLMAO
You must be as delusional as you are stupid! I'm NOT the one who is wrong. YOU are!!
You keep clinging to the Koppen system of vegetation based biome for a narrow definition of 'tropical'. I am using the orginal and more valid definition which is based on its very etymology!
The very etymology of the word tropic has to do with the sun!! late 14c., "either of the two circles in the celestial sphere which describe the northernmost and southernmost points of the ecliptic," from L.L. tropicus "of or pertaining to the solstice" (as a noun, "one of the tropics"), from L. tropicus "pertaining to a turn," from Gk. tropikos "of or pertaining to a turn or change, or to the solstice" (as a noun, "the solstice"), from trope "a turning" (see trope). The notion is of the point at which the sun "turns back" after reaching its northernmost or southernmost point in the sky. Extended 1520s to the corresponding latitudes on the earth's surface (23 degrees 28 minutes north and south); meaning "region between these parallels" is from 1837. Tropical "hot and lush like the climate of the tropics" is first attested 1834.
Your dumbass on another thread tried to argue that I'm using an "astronomical" definition, when the definition is very much geological because it has to due with the curvature of the earth. The arc of the earth that receives the most sunlight is the tropical zone. This is also the zone that has the least change in seasons merely a difference of spring to summer and in the equator itself is perpetual summer all year long. Humidity or aridity has NOTHING to do with it!
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Put the word "Tropical Desert" into google.
This is an accepted current term.
Your terminology, "Congoid" is not currently in use.
If you can't use the current standard environmental or anthropological terms you have no case. You use obsolete terms. some of them not even widely used when the were current,Congoid for example.
The term "tropical" can be used legitimately in more than one way, accept this and move on, this thread is not for that.
The general use of the term "tropically adpated" as often used in this forum refers to a common characteristic of it, heat. The tropical adaptation adaptation in animals including humans means that the limbs are longer in proportion to to the trunk, Allen's Rule. With the pygmies, Bergman's rule also may be at play. Bergmann's rule is an ecogeographic principle that states that within a populations and species of larger size are found in colder environments, and species of smaller size are found in warmer regions. Note that Bergmann's rule describes a tendency of body mass variation within groups; it does not suggest that large-bodied animals do not occur in warm climates. Human populations who live near the poles, including the Inuit, Aleut, and Sami people, are on average heavier than populations from mid-latitudes, consistent with Bergmann's rule.They also tend to have shorter limbs and broader trunks, consistent with Allen's rule. According to Marshall T. Newman in a 1953 article for the Journal of the American Anthropologist, Native American populations are generally consistent with Bergmann's rule although the cold climate and small body size combination of the Eastern Eskimo, Canoe Indians, Yuki, Andes natives and Harrison Lake Lillouet runs contrary to the expectations of Bergmann's rule. Newman (1953), however, contends that Bergmann's rule holds for the populations of Eurasia, but it does not hold for those of sub-Saharan Africa
Correct! One of those rare occasions lioness makes sense. Tropical desert IS a real term meaning deserts that fall within the tropical zone. It is scientifically valid unlike the outdated and debunked racial terminology that Castrated throws around. What's also current is the biological term of tropically adapted. What's interesting is that those human populations who inhabit the Sahel belt as well as the Sahara exhibit a physique that bio-anthropologists call supra-tropically adapted. The old term that was once used was 'super-negroid' but of course it was dropped due to the bankrupt racial term 'negroid'. A negroid body plan originally meant tropical body plan in general.
What's interesting is that Sahelian blacks have body plans more tropically adapted than so-called "forest negroes" who live in the rainforests. Or the converse-- West and Central African so-called "negroids" have body plans less tropical than Sahelian and Saharans.
Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
Djehootie: Tropically adapted means adaptation to the zone as defined above!
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,
accordingly the many of the Khoisans and people of the whole Southern half of Austrailia are not Tropically adapted - unless you want to retract the above
^^You admit that there are tropical deserts, tropical forests and tropical savanna. But do you deny that the marked zone above is the tropics?
Yes I admit to it look at the thread title. accordingly 85% of Egypt and South Africa are not tropical, nor is the Southern half of Austrailia
Look at the map highlighting the tropical zone. Although they are not labeled, the other seasonal zones are marked via latitudinal lines. Thus the latitudinal bands lying just outside of the tropical zone are the sub-tropical zones which are bordered by the next latitudinal lines. After that is the temperate zone which in the northern hemisphere includes the northernmost parts of Egypt, Libya, the Maghreb, the Levant and most of Europe. In the the southern hemisphere, a fraction of South Africa and the tiny country of Lesotho lie in the temperate zone. This is why it snows in South Africa especially in the Cape area because they actually get the season of winter. Immediately after the broad temperate zones are thin bands which represent the sub-polar zones. In the northern hemisphere you can see it cut across the middle of Scandinavia. Lastly are the polar zones which are the coldest because they receive the least of the sun's rays.
As for the indigenous populations of southern Africa and Australia, just as it was explained to you in the other thread, who said these populations lost their tropical adaptations, especially since their ancestors originated in the tropics just farther north?? The Khoisan are more adapted to the temperate zone than Aussie aborigines because they have lived in that zone for far longer which is why they among Africans are a relative outlier in limb proportions yet they are still tropical compared to temperate populations of Eurasia.
Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
What's interesting is that Sahelian blacks have body plans more tropically adapted than so-called "forest negroes" who live in the rainforests. Or the converse-- West and Central African so-called "negroids" have body plans less tropical than Sahelian and Saharans. [/QB]
As per adaptation to heat two different types of adapation can occur elongated limbs (Allen's rule) OR smaller size-short stature (Bergman's rule)
In my view "tropical adaptation" is not always elongated limbs in relation to trunk
So as there are Wet and dry climates that are tropical the tropical adaptation to them is not the same. Looking at the animal world differences are clear. A smaller person may be more suited to move through thick jungles
Posts: 42940 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
If tropical adaptations are not elongated what are they? Can you show any credible scholar saying they do not involve elongation?
"As with all the other limb/trunk indices, the recent Europeans evince lower indices, reflective of shorter tibiae, and the recent sub-Saharan Africans have higher indices, reflective of their long tibiae... The Dolno Vestonice and Pavlov humans.. have body proportions similar to those of other Gravettian specimens. Specifically, they are characterized by high bracial and cural indices, indicative of distal limb segment elongation.. .. as a whole, in body shape the Gravettian sample (including most of the specimens from Dolni Vestonice and Pavlol) are morphologically closer to the recent Africans than to the recent Europeans. In many cases, recent Europeans of the same sex with index values identical to the Dolbi Vestonice and Pavlov individuals are rare indeed. Therefore the overal pattern that emerges is that the GRavettian himans, despite living in Europe during a glacial period, evince relatively tropically adapted physiques (Trinkhaus, 1981; Ruff, 1994; Holliday, 1997a, 1999). The limb and body proportions of the Dolni Vestonice and (to a lesser degree) Pavlov fossils conform well to this overall pattern." --Trinkaus and Svoboda. 2005. Early Modern Human Evolution in Central Europe]
Posts: 5906 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I have seen no data as to limb proportions of Southern Europeans. ex. Southern Spain, Southern Italy, Greece, or Southern Turkey also
Who is more related to an ancient Egyptian on an overall basis a Malyasian or an Iranian?
None of them! Point blank!
However, it's these people who do. Point blank!
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: If tropical adaptations are not elongated what are they? Can you show any credible scholar saying they do not involve elongation?
"As with all the other limb/trunk indices, the recent Europeans evince lower indices, reflective of shorter tibiae, and the recent sub-Saharan Africans have higher indices, reflective of their long tibiae... The Dolno Vestonice and Pavlov humans.. have body proportions similar to those of other Gravettian specimens. Specifically, they are characterized by high bracial and cural indices, indicative of distal limb segment elongation.. .. as a whole, in body shape the Gravettian sample (including most of the specimens from Dolni Vestonice and Pavlol) are morphologically closer to the recent Africans than to the recent Europeans. In many cases, recent Europeans of the same sex with index values identical to the Dolbi Vestonice and Pavlov individuals are rare indeed. Therefore the overal pattern that emerges is that the GRavettian himans, despite living in Europe during a glacial period, evince relatively tropically adapted physiques (Trinkhaus, 1981; Ruff, 1994; Holliday, 1997a, 1999). The limb and body proportions of the Dolni Vestonice and (to a lesser degree) Pavlov fossils conform well to this overall pattern." --Trinkaus and Svoboda. 2005. Early Modern Human Evolution in Central Europe]
Above it says
" As with all the other limb/trunk indices, the recent Europeans evince lower indices, reflective of shorter tibiae, and the recent sub-Saharan Africans have higher indices, reflective of their long tibiae"
^^^this is simplistic and incorrect for some SSA populations
The Pygmies are by latitude more tropical than North Africans.
Pygmies in proportion to their trunks and in comparison to Euroepans have longer arms
> and yet much shorter legs, unkike Nilotes who have longer legs
In proportion of legs to trunks Nilotes are closer to Austrailians bantus and even Europeans than they are to pygmies. In proportion of arms to trunks Nilotes are closer to Pygmies than Europeans.
You like to talk abut African variation. Well if you want to get into it "tropical" is too general to speak precisely about all African populations, pygmies are Sub saharans but they clearly do not have have "higher indices, reflective of their long tibiae", quite the opposite. In fact the have lower indices reflective of their short tibiae. Is so pronounced you can easily see it in a photo.
To talk about variation in Africans is to recognize examples of it. Tropical rainforest and Tropical ddeserts are vey different environments and so are the animals within them, humans included. There is something called a forest giraffe. It's pretty rare much smaller than a regular giraffe and their necks are not nearly so long in proprtion to their bodies. The common giraffe with it's very long neck and long legs lives in savannas, grasslands, and open woodlands not humid rainforests. Some animals will die if they are not in their natural environment. It is because of different adaptation and just to say "tropical" doesn't tell the whole story. The pygmies are tropical sub subsaharans, despite what Coon said, they are belived be contemporayy anthropolgists to be very ancient. Yet thier legs have cold adapted limb ratios even more so than Scandinavian Europeans. Most other phenotypical traits they have are common to most Africans.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: What's interesting is that Sahelian blacks have body plans more tropically adapted than so-called "forest negroes" who live in the rainforests. Or the converse-- West and Central African so-called "negroids" have body plans less tropical than Sahelian and Saharans.
As per adaptation to heat two different types of adapation can occur elongated limbs (Allen's rule) OR smaller size-short stature (Bergman's rule)
In my view "tropical adaptation" is not always elongated limbs in relation to trunk
So as there are Wet and dry climates that are tropical the tropical adaptation to them is not the same. Looking at the animal world differences are clear. A smaller person may be more suited to move through thick jungles
That's incorrect. It's not a matter of either Allen's rule or Bergman's rule applying because BOTH rules occur at the same time, silly! Thus someone who is tropical adapted has BOTH elongated limbs and a taller narrower body, and vice versa with cold adaptation.
The shorter stature observed among tropical forest dwellers especially in the case of Pygmies or Pygmy-like populations has NOTHING to do with Bergman's rule but is the result of Pygmism, and it has nothing to do with "mobility" through thick jungles. Pygmism is the result of lack of protein since jungles are not inhabited by large animals probably due to the fact that the plants themselves do not yield as much protein due to the thin soil. Thus humans who dwell in jungle type environments do not have a rich source of protein in their diets so to compensate their growths are literally stunted.
That you don't know this and speculate some alternative form of tropical adaptation only reveals your ignorance in biology.
By the way, other than Allen's rule and Bergman's rule, there is a third rule for endothermic animals called Glogger's rule which simply says animals living in tropical i.e. sunnier environments have darker coloring i.e. more melanin. You probably didn't know that either.
Posts: 26311 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If tropical adaptations are not elongated what are they?
Non-elongnated. Pygmies and palaeo-Negroids (Forest Negroes) show lower brachial/crural indices than dry heat adapted peoples.
Dry heat and humid heat populations though cluster in body breadth.
Elongnation is a responce to dry heat atmosphere, which increases the body surface to increase sweating. In humid heat, sweating is ineffective, hence Pygmies are not elongnated in limb indices.
As I stated - your use of the term tropical is wrong. Your tropical = dry heat when the actual definition of tropical climate is humid heat.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic