...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Deshret » European nations established only from Medieval times - whites are very new to Europe (Page 3)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 75 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  73  74  75   
Author Topic: European nations established only from Medieval times - whites are very new to Europe
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
From the piece


“establish a POSSIBLE chronology for said event” –

ie timeline .. .which I have been asking for.



many of the first Europeans carried a phenotype similar to modern Sub-Saharan Africans

– African looking people living in Europe ie black Europeans


It is safe to assume that by the Bronze Age (3300 BC) Europeans had phenotypes similar to what we see today in Western Northern Eurasia –

ie modern Europeans appeared. Supported by the Upenn study



These sorts of haplogroup I carrying Europeans represent the "Real Whites". Greeks look very different from these people because Greeks have substantial Sub-Saharan -

ie the Greek were NOT considered “real” white in 3300BC!!!!. My speculation is they remained that way for a long time that is why there still have african blood


There you go Rasol/Djehuti - Guys!! No need to reply. Keep working on that degree. Because if you cannot read between the lines you have a HARD road ahead. Regurgitating stuff you read does not imply intelligence. ANALYZING the data is where there is proof in the pudding.

Furthermore – it does matter what the topic is about it is what was said, once not taken out of context. My claim is out there again sustained in the piece. Greeks WERE NOT “real whites. Only about 3300BC there were “real whites’’ what was there before were AFRICANS.

Summary – AFRICANS inhabited Europe for several thousand years before the “real whites’ appeared. End of Story.


The truth is out now.


quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Here is more. It seems this is a ongoing topic -
From another thread [Big Grin] [Razz]


quote:
Originally posted by Thought2:
quote:
Originally posted by Djehuti:


Thought, what do you mean by "whites"??

Do you mean European-looking, or overall light-skinned Eurasians because that is a good question.


Thought Writes:

Indeed, you pose a very thoughtfull question
Djehuti. I think relative to a discourse about back migration from Western Northern Eurasia into the Middle East and eventually Africa it is first neccessary to establish a POSSIBLE chronology for said event. Then we can examine what possible physical characteristics were existent in Northern Eurasia (specifically Western Northern Eurasia). For example many of the first Europeans carried a phenotype similar to modern Sub-Saharan Africans. It is safe to assume that by the Bronze Age (3300 BC) Europeans had phenotypes similar to what we see today in Western Northern Eurasia (for example see Ötzi the Ice-Man). These sorts of haplogroup I carrying Europeans represent the "Real Whites". Greeks look very different from these people because Greeks have substantial Sub-Saharan and Middle Eastern lineages. Then we can look for evidence of said physical characteristics in northern AE. This would be a proper approach to such a topic.

quote:
Originally posted by Djehuti:


According to Spencer Wells, all northern Eurasians share a common ancestry in western Central Asia. Could this be where "caucasian" Near-Easterners come from or from another source like Anatolia or something?


Thought Writes:

Probably NOT. The first Europeans and the first East Asians had physical similarities to modern Sub-Saharan Africans, Melaneseans and Andaman Islanders. There is an attempt to sweep this baseline phenotype under the rug by labeling it "GENERALIZED". Modern European phenotype probably had derived bi the late mesolithic. Their population was small and grew when they were instructed on how to reap and sow by people whose ancerstors came out of Sub-saharan Africa within the last 10,000 years.



Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus:
Why should Greeks and Romans look like western Europeans? They were southern Europeans.

They also have African and SouthWest Asian lineages that Northern Europeans don't have.

There were no Northern Europeans during the Ice Age.

All Europeans [proper] descend from ice refugeum in the South.

 -

This corresponds to the following genetic lineages....

 -

^ However the *main* male lineage in Greece, is actually Neolithic dervied E3b, so modern Greeks are paternally Afro-Asian and European. Greeks are not fully European genetically, period.

There is no mystery regarding where Europeans come from.

Marc Washington, as Djehuti notes, is simply someone who photo-chops a make-believe history for anyone uneducated enough to take him seriously.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Below is the pictorial evidence of the Olmec and Maya. It is clear that the Maya were native Americans but the Olmecs were Africans.


 -

We claim the Olmecs as Africans because they came from Africa and spoke an African langauage.


Secondly, there is no evidence that all of the post mesolithic Europeans were white. It is clear that the Europeans were not native to Europe and that they originated in Anatolia, in the Caucasus mountains.


quote:
Originally posted by Tyrann0saurus:
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
It appears that the present today western European may not be a good representation of what the Iberians/Greeks/Romans looked like.

Why should Greeks and Romans look like western Europeans? They were southern Europeans.

quote:
The Macedonian Greeks eventually controlled Greece. So pictures of Macedonian Greeks is not going to fool anyone.
Those images Djehuti posted are self-depictions made by Greeks and Romans, not Macedonians (who BTW have never been Greek and actually loathe it when you confuse them with Greeks). We could show you dozens of such images proving their whiteness, but those suffice. Bottom line, Greeks and Romans were white, not black. So were Charlemagne, the Vikings, Beethoven (who came up with the idea that he was black anyway?), and almost all other indigenous, post-Mesolithic Europeans.

While we're at it, the Olmecs, Mayans, Chinese, Japanese, Easter Islanders, Mongols, Hebrews, and Babylonians weren't black either. But the ancient Egyptians, Kushites, Ethiopians, Malinese, Songhayians, Ghanaians were. Why not claim those civilizations instead of those of Native Americans, East Asians, Europeans, and other non-blacks?


Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thank you Marc/Rasol now we are getting someplace. Let’s analyze the data. But in the mean time I had this ready. . . .

I am assuming what Thought was saying is TRUE. I am not an anthropogist, archieologist geneticist etc (being a physical science major) I don’t have the Neolithic/Paleolithic thing down BUT I do understand absolute time(timelines). Most laymen do. So here it is . . . . .very simply.. . .let me break it down. Not sure how the “ice age” fit into all of this, RASOL, I thougt it was 10kya.

Pre- 3300bc = Africans throughout the continent

Post – 3300bc = Modern Western Europeans ie White Nord appeared in NORTHWEST “EUROPE”. Assuming the entire continent did not all turn white at once LOL.

POST – 3300bc – Africans still in Southern Europe ie Iberia, Greece etc.

Post 700bc – White Nords Spreading. Remnants of Africans in the south of Europe (Greek). Hun invasion being one reason.

300AD – Entire continent conquered by Germanic/White Nords.


Thank you guys Rasol/Djehuti for exposing the truth. I never knew. Now I do. And I am no Afrocentric.

Thank Marc for keeping up the push to get it out there. Don’t know much about the Olmec etc. But just looking at the Greek genetic study, understanding the time (chronology) when things happened. Reading about the recent spread of Germanic people on the Wikipedia. He has a strong case. Let the people/readers decided.

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:

From the piece

Piece of garbage made from mixed up facts, you mean.


quote:
“establish a POSSIBLE chronology for said event” –

ie timeline .. .which I have been asking for.

quote:
Originally posted by rasol:

There were no Northern Europeans during the Ice Age.

All Europeans [proper] descend from ice refugeum in the South.

 -

This corresponds to the following genetic lineages....

 -

^ However the *main* male lineage in Greece, is actually Neolithic dervied E3b, so modern Greeks are paternally Afro-Asian and European. Greeks are not fully European genetically, period.

There is no mystery regarding where Europeans come from.

Marc Washington, as Djehuti notes, is simply someone who photo-chops a make-believe history for anyone uneducated enough to take him seriously.

^ There you have it!
quote:
many of the first Europeans carried a phenotype similar to modern Sub-Saharan Africans
Correct.

quote:
– African looking people living in Europe ie black Europeans
Actually more like 'brown' since they probably became lighter than black from adapting to Central Asian climates, but..

quote:
It is safe to assume that by the Bronze Age (3300 BC) Europeans had phenotypes similar to what we see today in Western Northern Eurasia –
Yes they had those phenotypes by that time.

quote:
ie modern Europeans appeared. Supported by the Upenn study
They did not "suddenly appear". They developed from the first Europeans.


quote:
These sorts of haplogroup I carrying Europeans represent the "Real Whites". Greeks look very different from these people because Greeks have substantial Sub-Saharan
Greek WERE those white people only they MIXED with RECENT HAPLOGROUOP E CARRYING IMMIGRANTS! -
quote:
ie the Greek were NOT considered “real” white in 3300BC!!!!
EEEHH! Wrong!

quote:
My speculation is they remained that way for a long time that is why there still have african blood
Your speculation is wrong and stems from an incomprehension of data.

quote:
There you go Rasol/Djehuti - Guys!! No need to reply.
Of course we don't need to reply and correct your mixed-up jibberish!

quote:
Keep working on that degree. Because if you cannot read between the lines you have a HARD road ahead. Regurgitating stuff you read does not imply intelligence. ANALYZING the data is where there is proof in the pudding.
ROTFLH [Big Grin] One must first know how to comprehend what the data says in order for it to be properly analyzed! Sorry but you FAIL in that regard!

quote:
Furthermore – it does matter what the topic is about it is what was said, once not taken out of context. My claim is out there again sustained in the piece. Greeks WERE NOT “real whites. Only about 3300BC there were “real whites’’ what was there before were AFRICANS.

Summary – AFRICANS inhabited Europe for several thousand years before the “real whites’ appeared. End of Story.

WRONG. More like the end of YOUR story!

quote:
The truth is out now.
Of course! The truth has been out. And the truth is you are a complete idiot. [Big Grin]
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Below is the pictorial evidence of the Olmec and Maya. It is clear that the Maya were native Americans but the Olmecs were Africans.
^ It is clear that this is hot air due to a penchant for wishfull thinking.

The broadfaced phenotypes of the Olmec can be found in the Paleolithic Pacific, Australia and South Asia, so phenotype per se cannot prove that Olmec came across the Atlantic/Africa as opposed to Pacific/Asia.
 -
Pacific Islander

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Don’t misunderstand. . I am with you on the issue of there are no “races” of humanity but just different ethnic groups evolved/adapted best to survive in their particular environment. My aim is to understand the “truth” without prejudice. I had my doubts when Marc and others put out that stuff but the more I read the more I understand “some” of their point of view. To me the Greeks had/have a strong African influence/population. Looking at the genes and archaeological finds, and the eventual appearance and expansion of Germanic people. I get an idea of what they are talking about. That said let’s get back on topic.

When did the E3b lineage appear . . . in Africa. . . .. then Greece? When did the R* and R1a and R1b appear? Absolute time please. No ###lithic. Someone said this is a technology. And technology can appear in a civilization thousand of years after it appears in another group.

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^
quote:
When did the E3b lineage appear . . . in Africa.
The Upper Paleolithic.

quote:
. . .. then Greece?
Neolithic.

quote:
When did the R* and R1a and R1b appear?
Upper Paleolithic.

quote:
Absolute time please. No ###lithic.
Learn the meaning of ###lithic.

If you don't know the meaning of these terms, then you cannot understand any of the things you yourself are referencing, since your references use these terms.

You have to know what you're talking about, before making claims about it.

Moreover, your questions have already been answered by the sources you yourself quoted...

Their population was small and grew when they were instructed on how to reap and sow by people whose ancerstors came out of Sub-saharan Africa within the last 10,000 years.

But the answers contradict what you prefer to believe, so you ignore the answers and ask the questions again, standard denial mode - just like all other -debate losers-.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
quote:
Below is the pictorial evidence of the Olmec and Maya. It is clear that the Maya were native Americans but the Olmecs were Africans.
^ It is clear that this is hot air due to a penchant for wishfull thinking.

The broadfaced phenotypes of the Olmec can be found in the Paleolithic Pacific, Australia and South Asia, so phenotype per se cannot prove that Olmec came across the Atlantic/Africa as opposed to Pacific/Asia.
 -
Pacific Islander

You're right they could be pacific Islanders but they're not. They were Africans as proven by their language.
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
The best evidence for African Olmecs is the Cascajal tablet. This tablet was found last year in Mexico.
 -

The Olmec writing on the Cascajal tablet is an obituary for a King Bi Po. This writing is written in Hieroglyphic Olmec (Winters,2006). Hieroglyphic Olmec includes multiple linear Olmec signs which are joined together to make pictures of animals, faces and other objects.


Some researchers have recognized insects and other objects in the signs. In reality these signs are made up several different Olmec linear signs (Winters,1998).

To read the Olmec writing I use the Vai script. The Vai script includes a number of syllabic signs that have been used to engrave rocks in the Sahara for the past 4000 years. I read the signs in Malinke-Bambara which was the spoken language of the Olmec.


The Olmec writing is read right to left top to bottom. Each segment of the Olmec sign has to be broken down into its individual syllabic sign. In most cases the Olmec signs includes two or more syllabic characters. The Olmec signs can be interpreted as follows:
 -
  • 1. La fe ta gyo
    2. Bi yu
    3. Pa po yu
    4. Se ta I su
    5. Ta kye
    6. Beb be
    7. Bi Po Yu to
    8. Tu fa ku
    9. Tu pa pot u
    10. Ta gbe pa
    11. i-tu
    12. Bi Yu yo po
    13. Kye gyo
    14. Po lu
    15. Fe ta yo i
    16. Be kye
    17. Fe gina
    18. Po bi po tu
    19. Lu kye gyo to
    20. Kye tu a pa
    21. Yu gyo i
    22. Pa ku pa
    23. Po yu
    24. Day u kye da
    25. Po ta kye tap o
    26. Ta gbe
    27. Bi Fa yu
    28. Bi Yu / Paw

Translation
Reading the Cascajal Tablet from right to left we have the following:
  • (8) Bi Po lays in state in the tomb, (7) desiring to be endowed with mysterious faculties.

    (6) This abode is possessed by the Governor . (5)…. (4) Bi Po Po.

    (3) Bi (was), (2) an Artisan desires to be consecrated to the divinity. (1) (and He) merits thou offer of libations.

    (14). Admiration (for) the cult specialist’s hemisphere tomb. (13) The inheritance of thou vital spirit is consecration to the divinity.

    (12) In a place of righteous admiration, (11) Pure Bi (in a) pure abode

    (10) A pure mark of admiration (is) this hemispheric tomb.

    (9) [Here] lays low (the celebrity) [he] is gone.

    (22) The place of righteousness, [is] (21) the pure hemispheric tomb

    (20)
    (19) Thou (art) obedient to the Order. (18) Hold upright the Order (and) the divinity of the sacred cult.

    (17) Pure Admiration this place of, (16) Bi the Vital Spirit. (15) [Truly this is ] a place consecrated to the divinity and propriety.

    27) Lay low (the celebrity) to go to , (26) love the mystic order—thou vivid image of the race,

    (25) The pure Govenor and (24) Devotee [of the Order lies in this] hemispheric tomb ,desires [to be] a talisman effective in providing one with virtue, (23) [He] merits thou offer of Libations.

    (34) Command Respect. (33)….this place of admiration. (32) Thou sacred inheritance is propriety. (31) The Govenor commands existence in a unique state, (31) [in] this ruler’s hemispheric tomb. (29) The Royal (28) [was] a vigorous man.

    (36) The pure habitation (35) [of a ]Ruler obedient to the Order.
    (37) This abode is possessed by the governor.
    (38) Admiration to you [who art] obedient to the Order.
    (49) Pure admiration [for this] tomb.
    (48) Thou hold upright the pure law.
    (47). Pure admiration [for this tomb].
    (46) [It] acts [as] a talisman effective in providing one with virtue.
    (45) Bi Po, (44) a pure man, (43) of wonder, (42) [whose] inheritance is consecration to the Divinity.
    (41) Bi Po lays in state in the tomb, (40) desiring to be endowed with mysterious faculties.
    (62) Bi Po lays in state in the tomb.
    (61) [This] tomb [is a] sacred object, (60) a place of righteous wonder.
    (59) Bi’s tomb (58) [is in] accord [with] the law (57) Bi exist in a unique (and) pure state the abode of the Govenor is pure..
    (56) The inheritance of [this] Ruler is joy.
    (55) [In] this tomb of King Bi (54) lays low a celebrity, [he] is gone.
    (53) The tomb of Bi (52) is a dormitory [of] love. A place consacreted to the divinity.
    (51) Thou the vivid image of the race love(d) the mystic order.
    (50) [He] merits [your] offer of Libations.

This translation of the Cascajal tablet makes it clear that the tablet was written for a local ruler at San Lorenzo called Bi Po. This tablet indicates that Bi Po’s tomb was recognized as a sacred site. It also indicates that the Olmecians believed that if they offered libations at the tombs of their rulers they would gain blessings.

The Cascajal Tablet according to the road builders at the village was found in a mound. The fact that a mound existed where the tablet was found offers considerable support to the idea that the mound where the tablet was found is the tomb of BiPoPo.

The obituary on the Cascajal Tablet may be written about one of the Royals among Olmec heads found at San Lorenzo. The Cascajal Tablet may relate to the personage depicted in San Lorenzo monument 3.
Head 3 San Lorenzo

 -

We have found that the names of these rulers is probably found among the symbols associated with the individual Olmec heads. The headband on monument 3 is made up of four parallel ropes encircling the head. In the parallel ropes there are two serrated figures that cross the ropes diagonally.


There is also a plaited diadem or four braids on the back of the figure covered with serrated element. On the side of the head of monument 3, two serrated elements on four parallel lines hang. This element ends with a three-tiered element hanging.

 -
In the Olmec writing the serrated elements means Bi, while the boxes under the serrated element within the four parallel lines would represent the words PoPo. This suggest that the name for monument 3 was probably BiPoPo.

The hanging element on monument 3 is similar to one of the signs on the Cascajal tablet. Although symbol 57 on the Cascajal monument is hard to recognize it appears to include the Bi sign on the top of the symbol. This finding indicates that the BiPoPo of monument 3, is most likely the BiPo(Po) mentioned in the Cascajal Tablet.


Cascajal Sign 57
 -

Stirling said that monument 3 was found at the bottom of a deep ravine half-a-mile southwest of the principal mound of San Lorenzo, along with ceramic potsherds. This is interesting because the village of Cascajal is situated southwest of San Lorenzo.

According to reports of the discovery of the road builders who found the Cascajal Tablet, the tablet came from a mound at Cascajal which was located about a mile from San Lorenzo. The coincidence of finding San Lorenzo Monument 3 in the proximity of the Cascajal mound where the Cascajal Tablet was found suggest that these artifacts concern the same personage. This leads to the possibility that the Cascajal mound was the tomb of BiPoPo.


In conclusion the Cascajal Tablet is an obituary for a Olmec ruler named BiPoPo.

 -
Given the presence of similar signs on the Olmec head called San Lorenzo monument 3, which also read BiPoPo suggest that the Cascajal Tablet was written for the personage depicted in Olmec head 3.


Head 3 San Lorenzo

 -

If the Cascajal Tablet really corresponds to one of the Olmec heads suggest that Cascajal may have been a royal burial site. If this is the case it is conceivable that other tablets relating to Olmec rulers may also be found at this locale, since some of these other mounds may be the “hemispheric” tombs of other Olmec rulers.

References to African Inscriptions:

M. Delafosse, Vai leur langue et leur ysteme d'ecriture,L'Anthropologie, 10 (1910).

Lambert, N. (1970). Medinet Sbat et la Protohistoire de Mauritanie Occidentale, Antiquites Africaines, 4, pp.15-62.

Lambert, N. L'apparition du cuivre dans les civilisations prehistoriques. In C.H. Perrot et al Le Sol, la Parole et 'Ecrit (Paris: Societe Francaise d'Histoire d'Outre Mer) pp.213-226.

R. Mauny, Tableau Geographique de l'Ouest Afrique Noire. Histoire et Archeologie (Fayard);

Kea,R.A. (2004). Expansion and Contractions: World-Historical Change and the Western Sudan World-System (1200/1000BC-1200/1250A.D.) Journal of World-Systems Research, 3, pp.723-816

Winters, Clyde. (1998). The Decipherment of the Olmec Writing System. Retrieved 09/25/2006 at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/8919/Rtolmec2.htm

Winters,Clyde.(2006). The Olmec Hieroglyphic Script. Retrieved 09/25/2006 at:

http://geocities.com/olmec982000/hieromec.pdf

.



Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am beginning to think that your game is to use words to create a “smoke and mirrors” effect. Because what is the point referencing the Neolithic period when the African Neolithics period may be different to the African Greek Neolithic. Absolute time makes it clearer. Are you a gamesman? Thinking you are smart because you know the difference between Neolithic and Paleolithic but refuse to admit that Greek were African type pre-3300bc.. . . regardsless of ####lithic.

What we are trying to determine is . . .were the Greek originally Africans who were eventually overrun by the R1a and R1b. And how and when did this occur.

Some sources point to pre-3300bc the Greeks were mostly E3b (african). The Greeks could not of been R1a or R1b becasue it did not originate there but in north central europe. The R1a and R1b travelled south and west. The R1a and R1b eventually overcame the E3b, in Greece and south europe, which today makes up the 24% in Greece.


The R1a and R1b eventually overan ALL of Europe post-AD 300.

Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:

I am beginning to think that your game is to use words to create a “smoke and mirrors” effect. Because what is the point referencing the Neolithic period when the African Neolithics period may be different to the African Greek Neolithic. Absolute time makes it clearer. Are you a gamesman? Thinking you are smart because you know the difference between Neolithic and Paleolithic but refuse to admit that Greek were African type pre-3300bc.. . . regardsless of ####lithic.

LMAO @ "use words to create a smoke and mirrors affect" [Big Grin]

Nope. Sorry Xyz, but our words are clear. If you have a difficult (and an extremely difficult time at that) understanding us, then either you have a learning disability, or you refuse to believe it and rather go for Marc's whimsical world of Afro-nonsense.

quote:
What we are trying to determine is . . .were the Greek originally Africans who were eventually overrun by the R1a and R1b. And how and when did this occur.
The Greeks were Europeans who recieved African admixture during the Neolithic!

quote:
Some sources point to pre-3300bc the Greeks were mostly E3b (african). The Greeks could not of been R1a or R1b becasue it did not originate there but in north central europe. The R1a and R1b travelled south and west. The R1a and R1b eventually overcame the E3b, in Greece and south europe, which today makes up the 24% in Greece.

The R1a and R1b eventually overan ALL of Europe post-AD 300.

quote:
Originally posted by rasol:


There were no Northern Europeans during the Ice Age.

All Europeans [proper] descend from ice refugeum in the South.

 -

This corresponds to the following genetic lineages....

 -

Which sources claim the E3b carriers were "mostly" (as in the majority) present?! Especially since E3b originated in Africa whereas R and I are native to Europe (where Greece is). How can R1a and R1b and I originate in "northern Europe" if the map above shows that northern Europe was all frozen in ice?!
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

Some sources point to pre-3300bc the Greeks were mostly E3b (african).

Typical vaguely worded lying remark.

Name a geneticist who thinks that E3b1 alpha precedes R1b in Greece.

Just the name please.

quote:
The Greeks could not of been R1a or R1b becasue it did not originate there but in north central europe.
And where pray tell would Northern Europeans have lived during the Ice Age?

-->
 -

quote:

I am beginning to think that your game is to use words to create a “smoke and mirrors” effect.

If that were so, you could solve the problem if you only knew what the words mean.

If you don't try to learn them, it implies that you think you're dumb and anthropology is too hard for you.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
[qb] [QUOTE] Below is the pictorial evidence of the Olmec and Maya. It is clear that the Maya were native Americans but the Olmecs were Africans.

^ It is clear that this is hot air due to a penchant for wishfull thinking.

The broadfaced phenotypes of the Olmec can be found in the Paleolithic Pacific, Australia and South Asia, so phenotype per se cannot prove that Olmec came across the Atlantic/Africa as opposed to Pacific/Asia.
 -
Pacific Islander

quote:
You're right they could be pacific Islanders but they're not. They were Africans as proven by their language.
Yes, but according to you, everything from Meso-American Olmec, to Indo-European Kushana is really some kind of Mande-West African language.

Mosts linguists do not agree with this, and unfortunately, since you make so many broad and literally far-fetched connections via -linguistics- you aren't a reliable source, and we can't say Olmec language comes from West Africa.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This thread has unravelled into several different offshoots and comes back on target from time-to-time. Not a problem. The offshoot I want to bring attention to is the prehistoric African presence in the Grecian islands and even into Eurasia with Bulgaria as an example - this evidence is just a small portion of what could be used to show the point and topic numbers 1 through 6 in the web page below are the case-in-point:

 -

Whites weren't along for a long time. And when they came, they came leaving a path of mayhem and destruction behind them. At least there was some reprieve in the world before they came. We did have relative peace at one time.

The map on the page shows some white entry into the region starting at 3800 BC and this was initially in tiny movements with isolated tribes. But, archeologists speak of this entry as a period of destruction of existing civilizations, villages, and settlements.

But, to keep the focus, Aegean prehistory is by the lion's share African prehistory. Not white.

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone
Junior Member
Member # 14116

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Stone     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hi,
MW forgot to integrate these images of Etruscan Sarcophaguses and other Etruscan objects in his photo collage… [Cool]
6th century BC.
 -  -

Menead Antefix, 6th B.C.
 -

Apollo of Veii c. 520 - 550 BCE
 -
 -

Bust of Pedimental Statue of Juno, Temple at Lo Scasato, Falerii, 5th B.C.
 -

Posts: 21 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone
Junior Member
Member # 14116

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Stone     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Sarcophagus of Larthia Seianti from Chiuisi, 2nd B.C
 -
 -

Mother and Child from Chianciano, Limestone Cinerary Urn, 400 B.C.
 -
 -

Irene Papas “Greek” and these women from Asia Minor resembles Minoan and Etruscan images.
 -
 -

Posts: 21 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Still_Not_Done
Member
Member # 14230

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Still_Not_Done         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Stone posted:
quote:

Those people that you posted have high Africanidid admixture.

Some of those pictures clearly have African Northernadoids, African Easternopiopiads, and African Westernadids phenotopicalcal genominomes.

Posts: 35 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone
Junior Member
Member # 14116

Rate Member
Icon 14 posted      Profile for Stone     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Some ancient Greek Art.
Notice the black skin color.
Poseidon of Artemision” (460 B.C.)
 -
 -

Charioteer from Delphi (c470 BC)
 -
 -

Posts: 21 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
xyyman
Member
Member # 13597

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for xyyman   Author's Homepage         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Are these Macedonian Greeks?? They look diffrent ethnically to what Marc posted.

Marc can you simplify this? ie clearer picture as these and include the time(dating/period). You have the period but it is difficult to see what you are showing.

Marc from what you are showing these portraits do look like African Greeks.

quote:
Originally posted by Stone:
Some ancient Greek Art.
Notice the black skin color.
Poseidon of Artemision” (460 B.C.)
 -
 -

Charioteer from Delphi (c470 BC)
 -
 -


Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Huh?!!

Why don't go read some books on anthropology and studies on genetics instead of sustaining stupid arguments by writing 'huh'?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
This thread has unravelled into several different offshoots.
Ok, then let's get back on target.

quote:
There were no Northern Europeans during the Ice Age.

All Europeans [proper] descend from ice refugeum in the South.

 -

This corresponds to the following genetic lineages....

 -


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Still_Not_Done:

Those people that you posted have high Africanidid admixture.

Some of those pictures clearly have African Northernadoids, African Easternopiopiads, and African Westernadids phenotopicalcal genominomes.

Since you complain I don't offer any fact in my posts, here is a fact-- all of those terms you posted are utter rubbish! What the heck is an "Easternopiopiads" and what are "genominomes"?! LMAO [Big Grin]

It looks like you are making up your own scientific terms. Now how pathetic is that?!

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 9 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stone:
Some ancient Greek Art.
Notice the black skin color.
Poseidon of Artemision” (460 B.C.)
 -
 -

Charioteer from Delphi (c470 BC)
 -
 -

quote:
Originally posted by xyyman:
Are these Macedonian Greeks?? They look diffrent ethnically to what Marc posted.

LOL Either you are joking or you are in serious need of educational if not intellectual help! Those statues are early Classical Greek and have NOTHING to do with Macedonians. As for what Marc posted, everything that the guy posts is crap! Unless you believe in African vikings and African Charlemagne! [Eek!]

quote:
Marc can you simplify this? ie clearer picture as these and include the time(dating/period). You have the period but it is difficult to see what you are showing.

Marc from what you are showing these portraits do look like African Greeks.

I take that back. You are just as looney as Marc if not twice more for recieving education from that guy! [Eek!] [Eek!]
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Stone. I can appreciate the pictures you have posted and want to avoid passing judgement on them. I'll share my criteria for art collection with you and when I bend it and why. Then I'll make some comment about the ethnic transition in, for this instance, Grecian art as I see it. And I'm open to being corrected from any corner - my views aren't fixed in stone and I'll alter them if the proof makes sense.

DEFINITION: My short definition of African omits color and focues on phenotypes that often exist regardless of color. They are persons with a full nose and mouth with wooly or wiry hair. Whites won't have any of these features unless they have a black parent and then they would be classified as neither white nor African, per se, but mixed. Ancient Near Eastern populations, also called Asians, fall into this category.

MY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING AFRICAN ART: Others specialize in whatever they find suitable and all other fields being covered, my choice is the collection of African-featured individuals: full noses and mouths and when it's shown, wooly hair. I go for this "purity" as it can't be disputed except by people who argue for arguments sake (many do) and such pictures form my primary collection.

Secondary collection: So, I try to stay away from art showing individuals with African-white parentage. However, I will include some such individuals in my secondary collection as substitutes until I find something better for the category they represent (I know I didn't explain the details here). And, as I intend staying in this line of research for the next fifty or sixty years, my collection should become purer over time.

ETHNIC TRANSITION IN GREEK ART and Phase 1: Unfortunately, when the Christian Crusade hit Greece, they destroyed tens of thousands of statues, figurine, everything they could lay their hands on; so, we are left with a paltry remainder of a once flourishing, ubiquitous African art. Still, decimated though it is, there is enough to show that in its earliest phases, Grecian art featured Africans.

The tide turns: Now, The Iliad and the Odyessy (The I&O) recounts the steady influx of whites into the Grecian lands and islands and as they entered, they took servants and slaves (it's all in The I&O) and part of what happened is that whites started appearing more in art. And when they'd slay all the indigenous African men and take their women, they fathered children who were mixed.

Phase 2: So, for a millennium, maybe, we had art shifting from (1) African to (2) African and also appearing pure whites (straight hair), and tons of mulatto (wavy hair).

Phase 3: When Alexander the Mass Murderer came in the fourth century, he slaughtered untold tens of thousands of African men and from one day to the next, African art ceased to be produced in, for instance, Athens, after Alexander and just as suddenly there is an appearance of white art. [Note that they had wavy hair showing African mothers. Today, only straight hair is seen in Greece mostly!]. Now, it's this phase of art that I think characterizes some of the pictures you show (I'm not being critical and do support your efforts and will surely add those pictures to my secondary collection and some into the primary).

If you are going to begin amassing African art and make it your life-long ambition as I have done, let me suggest focusing on primary art while being diligent as you are widening your secondary art, too.

Thank you for this opportunity to see these beautiful pictures you've shared. As I stated, I have downloaded them and will from time-to-time use them.

Kind thanks,


Marc

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Stone. Those pictures you've shown are long after whites began entering Etrusca and wiping out the African population. Here are pictures spanning the earliest populations to those to the time of Hannibal. Note that they have undisputable African features - kinky hair, big lips, full noses like Hannibal [1] and pictures 6, 7, and 8 in particular:

 -

http://www.beforebc.de/all_africa/02-16-12.html

All the best,


Marc

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Self delusion.


Truth ->

 -


 -


The Origin of the Europeans; Combining Genetics and Archaeology, Scientists Rough Out Continent's 50,000-Year-Old Story


By NICHOLAS WADE

Some 6 percent of Europeans are descended from the continent's first founders, who entered Europe from the Near East in the Upper Paleolithic era 45,000 years ago, Dr. Richards calculates. The descendants of these earliest arrivals are still more numerous in certain regions of Europe that may have provided them with refuge from subsequent waves of immigration. One is the mountainous Basque country, where people still speak a language completely different from all other European languages. Another is in the European extreme of Scandinavia. Another 80 percent arrived 30,000 to 20,000 years ago, before the peak of the last glaciation, and 10 percent came in the Neolithic 10,000 years ago, when the ice age ended and agriculture was first introduced to Europe from the Near East.

It used to be thought that the most important human dispersals occurred in the Neolithic, prompted by the population increases made possible by the invention of agriculture. But it now seems that the world filled up early and the first inhabitants were quite resistant to displacement by later arrivals.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

http://www.beforebc.de/all_europe/05-09-05.html

 -

http://www.beforebc.de/all_europe/05-09-000-12.html

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone
Junior Member
Member # 14116

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Stone     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marc Washington:
Stone. I can appreciate the pictures you have posted and want to avoid passing judgement on them. I'll share my criteria for art collection with you and when I bend it and why. Then I'll make some comment about the ethnic transition in, for this instance, Grecian art as I see it. And I'm open to being corrected from any corner - my views aren't fixed in stone and I'll alter them if the proof makes sense.

DEFINITION: My short definition of African omits color and focues on phenotypes that often exist regardless of color. They are persons with a full nose and mouth with wooly or wiry hair. Whites won't have any of these features unless they have a black parent and then they would be classified as neither white nor African, per se, but mixed. Ancient Near Eastern populations, also called Asians, fall into this category.

MY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING AFRICAN ART: Others specialize in whatever they find suitable and all other fields being covered, my choice is the collection of African-featured individuals: full noses and mouths and when it's shown, wooly hair. I go for this "purity" as it can't be disputed except by people who argue for arguments sake (many do) and such pictures form my primary collection.

Secondary collection: So, I try to stay away from art showing individuals with African-white parentage. However, I will include some such individuals in my secondary collection as substitutes until I find something better for the category they represent (I know I didn't explain the details here). And, as I intend staying in this line of research for the next fifty or sixty years, my collection should become purer over time.

ETHNIC TRANSITION IN GREEK ART and Phase 1: Unfortunately, when the Christian Crusade hit Greece, they destroyed tens of thousands of statues, figurine, everything they could lay their hands on; so, we are left with a paltry remainder of a once flourishing, ubiquitous African art. Still, decimated though it is, there is enough to show that in its earliest phases, Grecian art featured Africans.

The tide turns: Now, The Iliad and the Odyessy (The I&O) recounts the steady influx of whites into the Grecian lands and islands and as they entered, they took servants and slaves (it's all in The I&O) and part of what happened is that whites started appearing more in art. And when they'd slay all the indigenous African men and take their women, they fathered children who were mixed.

Phase 2: So, for a millennium, maybe, we had art shifting from (1) African to (2) African and also appearing pure whites (straight hair), and tons of mulatto (wavy hair).

Phase 3: When Alexander the Mass Murderer came in the fourth century, he slaughtered untold tens of thousands of African men and from one day to the next, African art ceased to be produced in, for instance, Athens, after Alexander and just as suddenly there is an appearance of white art. [Note that they had wavy hair showing African mothers. Today, only straight hair is seen in Greece mostly!]. Now, it's this phase of art that I think characterizes some of the pictures you show (I'm not being critical and do support your efforts and will surely add those pictures to my secondary collection and some into the primary).

If you are going to begin amassing African art and make it your life-long ambition as I have done, let me suggest focusing on primary art while being diligent as you are widening your secondary art, too.

Thank you for this opportunity to see these beautiful pictures you've shared. As I stated, I have downloaded them and will from time-to-time use them.

Kind thanks,


Marc

Holy **** how do you come up with this stuff...
Even this stuff is more credible
Jesus Never Existed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth_hypothesis

Lol.
According to your own Photo collage the stuff you posted is younger in date to what I posted.
There are plenty of Etruscan coins and Carthage coins that show different motives why not show them also?

Carthage, Zeugitana (Tunisia) Most of them pre-date Hannibal's era...
http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/greece/zeugitana/carthage/t.html
One example of many
 -
Carthage AV Stater. ca 350-320 BC. Wreathed head of Tanit “Patron goddess at Carthage” left, in triple-pendant earring & necklace / Horse standing right on single ground line, three pellets to right of feet.

ETRURIA, Luca. Circa 300-250 BC. AR 5 Asses (11.25 gm).
 -

Posts: 21 | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Stone. Please forget the olive branch. Yes. Those are white-looking as you indirectly intend to say. Yes. These were during and after the genocides when Africans were being exterminated and whites were moving into the lands they established. Caoi.

But, to continue the thread focus: whites are completely new to Europe:

 -

http://www.beforebc.de/all_europe/02-16-500-00-07.html

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Holy **** how do you come up with this stuff...
^ Too much time on his hands. He is getting some attention which obviously produces some gratification even if most of the attention is negative. But he operates according to the principals of pseudo-science, the more blatantly ridiculous the idea the more persistent he becomes in defending it. Eventually this will end up with Afro Napolean and Afro Adolph Hitler. [Roll Eyes]

Time for a refresher on how to distinguish sense from non-sense....

Pseudoscience always achieves a reduction to absurdity if pursued far enough. ....>

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Distinguishing Science and Pseudoscience
Rory Coker, Ph.D.


The word "pseudo" means fake. The surest way to spot a fake is to know as much as possible about the real thing -- in this case, about science itself. Knowing science does not mean simply knowing scientific facts (such as the distance from earth to sun, the age of the earth, the distinction between mammal and reptile, etc.) It means understanding the nature of science -- the criteria of evidence, the design of meaningful experiments, the weighing of possibilities, the testing of hypotheses, the establishment of theories, the many aspects of scientific methods that make it possible to draw reliable conclusions about the physical universe.

Because the media bombard us with nonsense, it is useful to consider the earmarks of pseudoscience. The presence of even one of these should arouse great suspicion. On the other hand, material displaying none of these flaws might still be pseudoscience, because its adherents invent new ways to fool themselves every day. Most of the examples in this article are related to my field of physics, but similar beliefs and behavior are associated with iridology, medical astrology, meridian therapy, reflexology, subluxation-based chiropractic, therapeutic touch, and other health-related pseudosciences.

Pseudoscience displays an indifference to facts.
Instead of bothering to consult reference works or investigating directly, its advocates simply spout bogus "facts" where needed. These fictions are often central to the pseudoscientist's argument and conclusions. Moreover, pseudoscientists rarely revise. The first edition of a pseudoscience book is almost always the last, even though the book remains in print for decades or even centuries. Even books with obvious mistakes, errors, and misprints on every page may be reprinted as is, over and over. Compare this to science textbooks that see a new edition every few years because of the rapid accumulation of new facts and insights.

Pseudoscience "research" is invariably sloppy.
Pseudoscientists clip newspaper reports, collect hearsay, cite other pseudoscience books, and pore over ancient religious or mythological works. They rarely or never make an independent investigation to check their sources.

Pseudoscience begins with a hypothesis -- usually one which is appealing emotionally,
and spectacularly implausible -- and then looks only for items which appear to support it.
Conflicting evidence is ignored. Generally speaking, the aim of pseudoscience is to rationalize strongly held beliefs, rather than to investigate or to test alternative possibilities. Pseudoscience specializes in jumping to "congenial conclusions," grinding ideological axes, appealing to preconceived ideas and to widespread misunderstandings.

Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence.
The emphasis is not on meaningful, controlled, repeatable scientific experiments. Instead it is on unverifiable eyewitness testimony, stories and tall tales, hearsay, rumor, and dubious anecdotes. Genuine scientific literature is either ignored or misinterpreted.

Pseudoscience relies heavily on subjective validation.
Joe Blow puts jello on his head and his headache goes away. To pseudoscience, this means jello cures headaches. To science this means nothing, since no experiment was done. Many things were going on when Joe Blow's headache went away -- the moon was full, a bird flew overhead, the window was open, Joe had on his red shirt, etc. -- and his headache would have gone away eventually in any case, no matter what. A controlled experiment would put many people suffering from headaches in identical circumstances, except for the presence or absence of the remedy it is desired to test, and compare the results which would then have some chance of being meaningful. Many people think there must be something to astrology because a newspaper horoscope describes them perfectly. But close examination would reveal that the description is general enough to cover virtually everyone. This phenomenon, called subjective validation, is one of the foundations of popular support for pseudoscience.

Pseudoscience depends on arbitrary conventions of human
culture, rather than on unchanging regularities of nature.
For instance, the interpretations of astrology depend on the names of things, which are accidental and vary from culture to culture. If the ancients had given the name Mars to the planet we call Jupiter, and vice versa, astronomy could care less but astrology would be totally different, because it depends solely on the name and has nothing to do with the physical properties of the planet itself.

Pseudoscience always achieves a reduction to absurdity if pursued far enough.
Maybe dowsers can somehow sense the presence of water or minerals under a field, but almost all claim they can dowse equally well from a map! Maybe Uri Geller is "psychic," but are his powers really beamed to him on a radio link with a flying saucer from the planet Hoova, as he has claimed? Maybe plants are "psychic," but why does a bowl of mud respond in exactly the same way, in the same "experiment?"

Pseudoscience always avoids putting its claims to a meaningful test.
Pseudoscientists never carry out careful, methodical experiments themselves -- and they also generally ignore results of those carried out by scientists. Pseudoscientists also never follow up. If one pseudoscientist claims to have done an experiment (such as the "lost" biorhythm studies of Hermann Swoboda that are alleged basis of the modern pseudoscience of biorhythms), no other pseudoscientist ever tries to duplicate it or to check him, even when the original results are missing or questionable! Further, where a pseudoscientist claims to have done an experiment with a remarkable result, he himself never repeats it to check his results and procedures. This is in extreme contrast with science, where crucial experiments are repeated by scientists all over the world with ever-increasing precision.

Pseudoscience often contradicts itself, even in its own terms.
Such logical contradictions are simply ignored or rationalized away. Thus, we should not be surprised when Chapter 1
of a book on dowsing says that dowsers use newly cut twigs, because only "live" wood can channel and focus the "earth-radiation"
that makes dowsing possible, whereas Chapter 5 states that nearly all dowsers use metal or plastic rods.

Pseudoscience deliberately creates mystery where none
exists, by omitting crucial information and important details.
Anything can be made "mysterious" by omitting what is known about it or presenting completely imaginary details. The "Bermuda Triangle" books are classic examples of this tactic.

Pseudoscience does not progress.
There are fads, and a pseudoscientist may switch from one fad to another (from ghosts to ESP research, from flying saucers to psychic studies, from ESP research to looking for Bigfoot). But within a given topic, no progress is made. Little or no new information or uncovered. New theories are seldom proposed, and old concepts are rarely modified or discarded in light of new "discoveries," since pseudoscience rarely makes new "discoveries." The older the idea, the more respect it receives. No natural phenomena or processes previously unknown to science have ever been discovered by pseudoscientists. Indeed, pseudoscientists almost invariably deal with phenomena well known to scientists, but little known to the general public -- so that the public will swallow whatever the pseudoscientist wants to claim. Examples include firewalking and "Kirlian" photography.

Pseudoscience attempts to persuade with rhetoric, propaganda, and
misrepresentation rather than valid evidence (which presumably does not exist).
Pseudoscience books offer examples of almost every kind of fallacy of logic and reason known to scholars and have invented some new ones of their own. A favorite device is the non sequitur. Pseudoscientists also love the "Galileo Argument." This consists of the pseudoscientist comparing himself to Galileo, and saying that just as the pseudoscientist is believed to be wrong, so Galileo was thought wrong by his contemporaries therefore the pseudoscientist must be right too, just as Galileo was. Clearly the conclusion does not follow! Moreover, Galileo's ideas were tested, verified, and accepted promptly by his scientific colleagues. The rejection came from the established religion which favored the pseudoscience that Galileo's findings contradicted.

Pseudoscience argues from ignorance, an elementary fallacy.
Many pseudoscientists base their claims on incompleteness of information about nature, rather than on what is known at present. But no claim can possibly be supported by lack of information. The fact that people don't recognize what they see in the sky means only that they don't recognize what they saw. This fact is not evidence that flying saucers are from outer space. The statement "Science cannot explain" is common in pseudoscience literature. In many cases, science has no interest in the supposed phenomena because there is no evidence it exists; in other cases, the scientific explanation is well known and well established, but the pseudoscientist doesn't know this or deliberately ignores it to create mystery.

Pseudoscience argues from alleged exceptions, errors, anomalies, strange events,
and suspect claims -- rather than from well-established regularities of nature.
The experience of scientists over the past 400 years is that claims and reports that describe well-understood objects behaving in strange and incomprehensible ways tend to reduce upon investigation to deliberate frauds, honest mistakes, garbled accounts, misinterpretations, outright fabrications, and stupid blunders. It is not wise to accept such reports at face value, without checking them. Pseudoscientists always take such reports as literally true, without independent verification.

Pseudoscience appeals to false authority, to emotion,
sentiment, or distrust of established fact.
A high-school dropout is accepted as an expert on archaeology, though he has never made any study of it! A psychoanalyst is accepted as an expert on all of human history, not to mention physics, astronomy, and mythology, even though his claims are inconsistent with everything known in all four fields. A movie star swears it's true, so it must be. A physicist says a "psychic" couldn't possibly have fooled him with simple magic tricks, although the physicist knows nothing about magic and sleight of hand. Emotional appeals are common. ("If it makes you feel good, it must be true." "In your heart you know it's right.") Pseudoscientists are fond of imaginary conspiracies. ("There's plenty of evidence for flying saucers, but the government keeps it secret.") And they argue from irrelevancies: When confronted by inconvenient facts, they simply reply, "Scientists don't know everything!"

Pseudoscience makes extraordinary claims and advances fantastic
theories that contradict what is known about nature.
They not only provide no evidence that their claims are true. They also ignore all findings that contradict their conclusions. ("Flying saucers have to come from somewhere -- so the earth is hollow, and they come from inside." "This electric spark I'm making with this electrical apparatus is actually not a spark at all, but rather a supernatural manifestation of psycho-spiritual energy." "Every human is surrounded by an impalpable aura of electromagnetic energy, the auric egg of the ancient Hindu seers, which mirrors the human's every mood and condition.")

Pseudoscientists invent their own vocabulary in which many terms lack
precise or unambiguous definitions, and some have no definition at all.
Listeners are often forced to interpret the statements according to their own preconceptions. What, for for example, is "biocosmic energy?" Or a "psychotronic amplification system?" Pseudoscientists often attempt to imitate the jargon of scientific and technical fields by spouting gibberish that sounds scientific and technical. Quack "healers" would be lost without the term "energy," but their use of the term has nothing whatsoever to do with the concept of energy used by physicists.

Pseudoscience appeals to the truth-criteria of scientific
methodology while simultaneously denying their validity.
Thus, a procedurally invalid experiment which seems to show that astrology works is advanced as "proof" that astrology is correct, while thousands of procedurally sound experiments that show it does not work are ignored. The fact that someone got away with simple magic tricks in one scientific lab is "proof" that he is a psychic superman, while the fact that he was caught cheating in several other labs is ignored.

Pseudoscience claims that the phenomena it studies are "jealous."
The phenomena appear only under certain vaguely specified but vital conditions (such as when no doubters or skeptics are present; when no experts are present; when nobody is watching; when the "vibes" are right; or only once in human history.) Science holds that genuine phenomena must be capable of study by anyone with the proper equipment and that all procedurally valid studies must give consistent results. No genuine phenomenon is "jealous" in this way. There is no way to construct a TV set or a radio that will function only when no skeptics are present! A man who claims to be a concert-class violinist, but does not appear to have ever owned a violin and who refuses to play when anyone is around who might hear him, is most likely lying about his ability to play the violin.

Pseudoscientific "explanations" tend to be by scenario.
That is, we are told a story, but nothing else; we have no description of any possible physical process. For instance, former psychoanalyst Immanuel Velikovsky (1895-1979) claimed that another planet passing near the earth caused the earth's spin axis to flip upside down. This is all he said. He gave no mechanisms. But the mechanism is all-important, because the laws of physics rule out the process as impossible. That is, the approach of another planet cannot cause a planet's spin axis to flip. If Velikovsky had discovered some way that a planet could flip another's spin axis, he would presumably have described the mechanism by which it can happen. The bald statement itself, without the underlying mechanism, conveys no information at all. Velikovsky said that Venus was once a comet, and this comet was spewed out of a volcano on Jupiter. Since planets do not resemble comets (which are rock/ice snowball-like debris with connection whatsoever to volcanoes) and since Jupiter is not known to have volcanoes anyway (or even a solid surface!), no actual physical process could underlie Velikovsky's assertions. He gave us words, related to one another within a sentence, but the relationships were alien to the universe we actually live in, and he gave no explanation for how these could exist. He provided stories, not genuine theories.

Pseudoscientists often appeal to the ancient human habit of magical thinking.
Magic, sorcery, witchcraft -- these are based on spurious similarity, false analogy, false cause-and-effect connections, etc. That is, inexplicable influences and connections between things are assumed from the beginning -- not found by investigation. (If you step on a crack in the sidewalk without saying a magic word, your mother will crack a bone in her body; eating heart-shaped leaves is good for heart ailments; shining red light on the body increases blood production; rams are aggressive so someone born in the sign of the ram is aggressive; fish are "brain food" because the meat of the fish resembles brain tissue, etc.)

Pseudoscience relies heavily on anachronistic thinking.
The older the idea, the more attractive it is to pseudoscience -- it's the wisdom of the ancients! -- especially if the idea is transparently wrong and has long been discarded by science. Many journalists have trouble in comprehending this point. A typical reporter writing about astrology may think a thorough job can be done by interviewing six astrologers and one astronomer. The astronomer says it's all bunk; the six astrologers say it's great stuff and really works and for $50 they'll be glad to cast anyone's horoscope. (No doubt!) To many reporters, and apparently to many editors and their readers, this would confirm astrology six to one!

This table contrasts some of the characteristics of science and pseudoscience


Science Pseudoscience
Their findings are expressed primarily through scientific journals that are peer-reviewed and maintain rigorous standards for honesty and accuracy. The literature is aimed at the general public. There is no review, no standards, no pre-publication verification, no demand for accuracy and precision.
Reproducible results are demanded; experiments must be precisely described so that they can be duplicated exactly or improved upon. Results cannot be reproduced or verified. Studies, if any, are always so vaguely described that one can't figure out what was done or how it was done.
Failures are searched for and studied closely, because incorrect theories can often make correct predictions by accident, but no correct theory will make incorrect predictions. Failures are ignored, excused, hidden, lied about, discounted, explained away, rationalized, forgotten, avoided at all costs.
As time goes on, more and more is learned about the physical processes under study. No physical phenomena or processes are ever found or studied. No progress is made; nothing concrete is learned.
Convinces by appeal to the evidence, by arguments based upon logical and/or mathematical reasoning, by making the best case the data permit. When new evidence contradicts old ideas, they are abandoned. Convinces by appeal to faith and belief. Pseudoscience has a strong quasi-religious element: it tries to convert, not to convince. You are to believe in spite of the facts, not because of them. The original idea is never abandoned, whatever the evidence.
Does not advocate or market unproven practices or products. Generally earns some or all of his living by selling questionable products (such as books, courses, and dietary supplements) and/or pseudoscientific services (such as horoscopes, character readings, spirit messages, and predictions).


This table could be greatly expanded, because science and pseudoscience are precisely opposed ways of viewing nature. Science relies on -- and insists on -- self-questioning, testing and analytical thinking that make it hard to fool yourself or to avoid facing facts. Pseudoscience, on the other hand, preserves the ancient, natural, irrational, unobjective modes of thought that are hundreds of thousands of years older than science -- thought processes that have given rise to superstitions and other fanciful and mistaken ideas about man and nature -- from voodoo to racism; from the flat earth to the house-shaped universe with God in the attic, Satan in the cellar and man on the ground floor; from doing rain dances to torturing and brutalizing the mentally ill to drive out the demons that possess them. Pseudoscience encourages people to believe anything they want. It supplies specious "arguments" for fooling yourself into thinking that any and all beliefs are equally valid. Science begins by saying, let's forget about what we believe to be so, and try by investigation to find out what actually is so. These roads don't cross; they lead in completely opposite directions.

Some confusion on this point is caused by what we might call "crossover." "Science" is not an honorary badge you wear, it's an activity you do. Whenever you cease that activity, you cease being a scientist. A distressing amount of pseudoscience is generated by scientists who are well trained in one field but plunge into another field of which they are ignorant. A physicist who claims to have found a new principle of biology -- or a biologist who claims to have found a new principle of physics -- is almost invariably doing pseudoscience. And so are those who forge data, or suppresses data that clash with their preconceptions, or refuse to let others see their data for independent evaluation. Science is like a high peak of intellectual integrity, fairness, and rationality. The peak is slippery and smooth. It requires a tremendous effort to remain near it. Slacking of effort carries one away and into pseudoscience. Some pseudoscience is generated by individuals with a small amount of specialized scientific or technical training who are not professional scientists and do not comprehend the nature of the scientific enterprise -- yet think of themselves as "scientists."

One might wonder if there are not examples of "crossovers" in the other direction; that is people who have been thought by scientists to be doing pseudoscience, who eventually were accepted as doing valid science, and whose ideas were ultimately accepted by scientists. From what we have just outlined, one would expect this to happen extremely rarely, if ever. In fact, neither I nor any informed colleague I have ever asked about this, knows of any single case in which this has happened during the hundreds of years the full scientific method has been known to and used by scientists. There are many cases in which a scientist has been thought wrong by colleagues but later -- when new information comes in -- is shown to be correct. Like anyone else, scientists can get hunches that something is possible without having enough evidence to convince their associates that they are correct. Such people do not become pseudoscientists, unless they continue to maintain that their ideas are correct when contradictory evidence piles up. Being wrong or mistaken is unavoidable; we are all human, and we all commit errors and blunders. True scientists, however, are alert to the possibility of blunder and are quick to correct mistakes. Pseudoscientists do not. In fact, a short definition of pseudoscience is "a method for excusing, defending, and preserving errors."

Pseudoscience often strikes educated, rational people as too nonsensical and preposterous to be dangerous and as a source of amusement rather than fear. Unfortunately, this is not a wise attitude. Pseudoscience can be extremely dangerous.

Penetrating political systems, it justifies atrocities in the name of racial purity
Penetrating the educational system, it can drive out science and sensibility;
In the field of health, it dooms thousands to unnecessary death or suffering
Penetrating religion, it generates fanaticism, intolerance, and holy war
Penetrating the communications media, it can make it difficult for voters to obtain factual information on important public issues.

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:

quote:
Holy **** how do you come up with this stuff...
^ Too much time on his hands. He is getting some attention which obviously produces some gratification even if most of the attention is negative. But he operates according to the principals of pseudo-science, the more blatantly ridiculous the idea the more persistent he becomes in defending it. Eventually this will end up with Afro Napolean and Afro Adolph Hitler. [Roll Eyes] ....
^ Yes, but not before an Afro-Leopald and an Afro-Queen Victoria. ROTFL [Big Grin]
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Whites are new to Europe there from the recent Migration Period. Their home (and the home of the two gentlemen posted directly above) is the Russian Steppes - not Europe.

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Ad nauseum fallacy -> repeating claims as if repetition were proof.


What is proven is that whites originated in Europe, and here is how, when and why....


 -


 -


 -

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Again. Europe's white populations are established virtually from the period following the Early Medieval period. All the wishing in the world won't change that.

The red "J" shows African populations back to 500 BC with the Venus of Willendorf, African [11] dating to 27,000 years ago. African-made pottery fills the German Neolithic [7] and Bronze Age [3b]. Charlemagne had African councillers portrayed [6] and with a wide nose and, in any event, officiating over a population that had always been African, he is shown to be as well [1].

 -

http://www.beforebc.de/all_europe/02-16-800-00-08.html

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Childish Photochop fantasy.


Actual genetic evidence, for adults ->

quote:
Originally posted by rasol:

What is proven is that whites originated in Europe, and here is how, when and why....


 -


 -


 -

Irrefutable facts ->

The Origin of the Europeans; Combining Genetics and Archaeology, Scientists Rough Out Continent's 50,000-Year-Old Story


By NICHOLAS WADE

Some 6 percent of Europeans are descended from the continent's first founders, who entered Europe from the Near East in the Upper Paleolithic era 45,000 years ago, Dr. Richards calculates. The descendants of these earliest arrivals are still more numerous in certain regions of Europe that may have provided them with refuge from subsequent waves of immigration. One is the mountainous Basque country, where people still speak a language completely different from all other European languages. Another is in the European extreme of Scandinavia. Another 80 percent arrived 30,000 to 20,000 years ago, before the peak of the last glaciation, and 10 percent came in the Neolithic 10,000 years ago, when the ice age ended and agriculture was first introduced to Europe from the Near East.

It used to be thought that the most important human dispersals occurred in the Neolithic, prompted by the population increases made possible by the invention of agriculture. But it now seems that the world filled up early and the first inhabitants were quite resistant to displacement by later arrivals.
[/QB][/QUOTE]

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mystery Solver
Member
Member # 9033

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mystery Solver         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Marc is making the right decision here to dismiss you, because rasol cheerleads, interjects and argues just for the sake of arguing, when he has no point to make.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ cute, but let's stay on topic.

Does anyone wish to dispute the facts presented?


quote:
Originally posted by rasol:

What is proven is that whites originated in Europe, and here is how, when and why....


 -


 -


 - [/qb]

Irrefutable facts ->

The Origin of the Europeans; Combining Genetics and Archaeology, Scientists Rough Out Continent's 50,000-Year-Old Story


By NICHOLAS WADE

Some 6 percent of Europeans are descended from the continent's first founders, who entered Europe from the Near East in the Upper Paleolithic era 45,000 years ago, Dr. Richards calculates. The descendants of these earliest arrivals are still more numerous in certain regions of Europe that may have provided them with refuge from subsequent waves of immigration. One is the mountainous Basque country, where people still speak a language completely different from all other European languages. Another is in the European extreme of Scandinavia. Another 80 percent arrived 30,000 to 20,000 years ago, before the peak of the last glaciation, and 10 percent came in the Neolithic 10,000 years ago, when the ice age ended and agriculture was first introduced to Europe from the Near East.

It used to be thought that the most important human dispersals occurred in the Neolithic, prompted by the population increases made possible by the invention of agriculture. But it now seems that the world filled up early and the first inhabitants were quite resistant to displacement by later arrivals.
[/QUOTE]

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Of course. What's more is that the pitifully perturbed man doesn't realize he contradicts himself!

quote:
Originally posted by Marc Washington:

Whites are new to Europe there from the recent Migration Period. Their home (and the home of the two gentlemen posted directly above) is the Russian Steppes - not Europe.

Eurasian steppes
 -

Europe
 -

^ Notice the Russian steppes which is the western part of the Eurasian steppes IS in Europe! LOL [Big Grin]

"Psuedo-science contradicts itself."

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 12 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Still no answer for the discrepancy, I see Marc.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ It's also clear that R1b the most common haplotype in Western Europe emergies primarily from the Iberian glacial refugeum, and *not* from 'the steppes' within the historical era.

Repeating - the steppes - as a mantra ignores the biohistory of Europe. There were ice-ages, populations retreated into 3 specific shelters.... the genetic structure in Europe still reflect this historical reality.

This thread is another sobering lesson for those who think they can keep quoting outdated/distorted 19th century race constructs and ignoring genetics.

You're using wooden sticks against sub-machine guns.

Your [arguments] are already dead, you just don't know it, yet....

 -

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Germanic invasions when they came and slaughtered. How many people here have Germanic ancestors? Here is the map showing where your ancestors were before coming to America.

 -

The verb, "to vandalize" came from the Vandals. The vocabulary leaves evidence of what indigenous people suffered through. Indigenous people mostly murdered.

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Ataulf, successor to Alaric as leader of the Visigoths, put the problem in these terms: I have found by experience that my Goths are too savage to pay obedience to law'. "


The Romans constantly had to defend themselves against raids or more massive attacks by the Germans on their eastern frontier. In AD 9 a Roman army of three legions (c.13,000) was caught in ambush and destroyed when on a punitive expedition against raiders. It had ventured beyond the Rhine into the German forests. After that disaster the Romans fell back to the Rhine. This frontier was then accepted as permanent and was strengthened. However, Germans continued to infiltrate in small war bands, and many found service with the Roman army. In the middle of the second century the Romans, because of increasing shortages of manpower for agriculture, for the trades, and for the army, began deliberately to recruit Germans as soldiers. This led to a gradual Germanization of the army and eventually even to a preponderance of the German element in the officer ranks, including commanding generals. Whole colonies of Germans were given land to settle on under ''guest rights'' in Roman law.

These peoples did not assimilate into the Romanized population of Gaul or the outer provinces where they settled. In 376 occurred the first mass invasion of Germans into Roman territory. Terror-stricken by a sudden attack of the Huns, the Visigoths had petitioned the emperor to let them cross the Danube and settle under Roman protection. He granted them ''asylum.'' Inevitably conflicts arose between these refugees and the local inhabitants and Roman imperial officials who supervised their settlements. The Visigoths revolted, defeated a hastily collected imperial army, and even killed the emperor.

The Germanic victory was a signal for a general movement of Germans from east to west. They settled mainly in the western provinces of the Empire. The routes of their incursions into western Europe have been traced. The Visigoths moved on into Italy, then in the century after the death of their leader Alaric (410), through southern France into Spain, where they established a Visigothic kingdom. The Franks, beginning in the fourth century, moved at a slower pace across the Rhine and down into the area of modern France. The Vandals, in less than two generations, fought their way across France, then down through Spain and across the Strait of Gibraltar, from west to east across northern Africa, and then back across the Mediterranean to attack Rome from the south (409- 455) . Everywhere they left behind them the kind of destruction that has immortalized their name.

Angles, Saxons, and Jutes settled in Britain, pushing the Celtic inhabitants into the rugged mountainous areas of the west and northwest (450 550) . The Roman legions had been withdrawn from Britain early in the fifth century, and the Roman commander of the imperial army in Gaul was deaf to the pleas of the Britons for help against the invaders.

Burgundians descended from the upper Rhine valley into the area east of the Rhone River in the latter half of the fifth century. Ostrogoths established a strong kingdom in Italy after Odoacer, an Ostrogothic chieftain, in 476 had deposed Romulus Augustulus, a twelve-year-old boy and the last Roman emperor in the west, who was living in retreat from Rome at Ravenna. Finally, the Lombards, the most savage of the invaders, attacked and occupied northern Italy in the latter part of the sixth century. This takeover of the west by the Germans had been briefly interrupted in the middle of the fifth century by a breakthrough of the Huns under their ablest king, Attila. They burst across the Rhine into northern Gaul and were only turned back with difficulty in a fierce battle near Chalons (451) by an army that was made up largely of Visigoths but commanded by a Roman general.

The German success in taking over the western Roman Empire would have been impossible if Roman institutions had not been disintegrating from within. The Germans by their onslaught completed the destruction of the Empire, although their intent was not necessarily to destroy. Some of their leaders appreciated the grandeur of Roman political institutions and would have preferred to preserve rather than destroy them. Ataulf, successor to Alaric as leader of the Visigoths, put the problem in these terms:

I have found by experience that my Goths are too savage to pay obedience to law', but I have also found that without laws a State is never a State; and so I have chosen the glory of seeking to restore and to increase by Gothic strength the name of Rome. Wherefore I avoid war and strive for peace. In the same spirit, Theodoric the Great, Ostrogothic king of Italy (496-526) , attempted to enforce a policy of religious toleration and of civilitas, that is, of the civic virtue of the citizen, on which Rome's political strength had rested. But the Germans were not city dwellers and understood little or nothing of Roman civil government. Roman cities and the spirit behind the words ''citizen'' and ''civilization'' had already fallen into decay before the mass migrations of the Germans began. The ''barbarians.' completed the destruction by taking over the land and bypassing or destroying the cities. The terror that they inspired as they overran the countryside was expressed by a fifth-century poet as follows:

In village, villa, cross-roads, district, field down every roadway, and at every turning, death, grief, destruction, arson are revealed. In one great conflagration Gaul is burning. Why tell the deathroll of a falling world which goes the accustomed way of endless fear? Why count how many unto death are hurled when you may see your own day hurrying near?

German society was tribal and rural rather than urban. It is difficult to obtain an understanding of a people so important in the history of the West, for there are relatively few sources about their early history and culture. They '.originated'' in the area around the Baltic Sea. Their home before they reached the Baltic area is nor known. The main Roman sources for their culture are Julius Caesar, writing about 55 BC, and Tacitus, writing about 100 AD.

To learn about their society one must turn to epic poems like Boewolf, written down several centuries after its original composition, the laws and customs gathered and written down by German rulers after contact with Roman administrators and Roman Christian clergy, and a few narrative histories written long years, even centuries, after the events they relate-for example, Bede's history of the victory of Christianity in Britain or Gregory of Tours: History of the Franks. There was a wide diversity in German customs and a wide range in the degree of Romanization depending on the proximity to Rome and the extent of the exposure to the Roman world. Some Germans were still nomadic or semi-nomadic and depended mainly on bunting and war for their living. Others, such as the inhabitants of the Rhine valley, bad a settled agriculture that was technically not very different from that of their Roman neighbors.

German political organization was simple compared to the state organization of the Roman Empire. The folk, or group of related tribes, was led by a king chosen from a royal family. His ''election'' depended on his ability to lead in war and to command loyalty from the nobility. He ruled people rather than land, and it was only gradually, as the Germans settled down, that government became at all territorialized. The Germans did not understand taxation in the Roman sense. Their kings supported their households and armies from plunder and from lands won from their enemies. They kept for their own use ''gifts'' contributed by their followers. As kings, they reciprocated with ''rings,'' feasts, and other gifts exemplifying their generosity and wealth. Their followers owed them nothing. In fact the freeborn German owed nothing to anyone except what he chose to give.

Kings were assisted in their task of leadership by tribal leaders from noble families, probably also chosen for leadership and lordship. According to Tacitus, German folk groups, or ''nations,.' held periodic assemblies to consider such matters as peace and war. Evidently these assemblies, like the assemblies of the Greeks encamped before Troy, consisted of the fighting men only, and the men of noble rank dominated the proceedings.

Tacitus speaks of magistrates ''who administer law in the cantons and the towns.'. This probably applies only to those Germans who had established fairly permanent settlements. Justice among the Germans consisted in enforcing through popular courts the law and custom of the tribe. Until contact with the Romans, the law and custom was carried in the minds of the freemen participating in the courts, and its application to individual cases was decided by them under the presidency of the magistrate. From a study of Germanic codes written down after German settlement within the Empire, certain principles emerge. No distinction was made between criminal and civil matters. The law was mainly concerned with the enforcement of the individual's ''peace,'' from the king down to the lowest freeman.

Individuals, of whatever rank (except for slaves) , were entitled to compensation for attacks on themselves, their families, their guests, or their slaves within their houses and environs. The amount to be paid for the breach of a man's peace depended on his rank in society. The master of a slave must be compensated for an attack on his slave. Injuries, including murder, could be paid for under an elaborate tariff of compensations: so much for a nose, so much for an eye, for a right thumb, for a big toe, and so forth; so much for a free Frank, for a Frank ''in the service of the king,'' for a Roman '.who eats in the king's palace,'' for a tribute-paying Roman. Money compensation for murder was called wergeld, the money worth of a man, and it obviously varied according to the man's rank in society.

Despite efforts of kings and chieftains to enforce the principle of compensation, the older blood feud and lex talionis (eye for eye, tooth for tooth) persisted. Theft and robbery, as well as personal injury, were subject to compensation-so much for a stud boar, so much for a breed sow, so much for a suckling pig. Cattle, sheep, and pigs were important in Germanic society; values were expressed in terms of them, and elaborate arrangements were provided for recovery of stolen cattle.

The law was personal, territorial. That is, a man accused had to prove his innocence according to the law of his particular folk, not, like the Roman citizen, according to a law of the land applying equally to all ''citizens.'' Bishop Agobard of Lyons, writing about 850, stated that very often when five people met in a case for judgment, each followed a different law'

The first stage in Germanic legal proceedings was accusation by a plaintiff. Defendants were expected to deny the accusation under oath and to support their oaths with a specified number of oath-helpers, depending on their rank. An ordinary freeman needed twelve; a king or a bishop needed none. Those who could not produce oath-helpers, either because they were untrustworthy or were strangers among the people where the injury occurred, had to submit to trial. The popular, or volk, court decided whether there should be a trial and, if trial was to be held, what method of trial was to used. The commonest methods were ordeals: the hot-water, the hot-rod, and the cold-water ordeals.

In the first, the accused was expected to plunge his arm to a specified depth into boiling water to pick up an object at the bottom. Afterward, his hand and arm were sealed in a bandage. If, after three days, his would showed signs of suppuration, he was guilty; otherwise he was not guilty. The ordeal of the hot iron was a variation. In trial by the cold-water ordeal, the accused was trussed up with a rope, knees to chest, and thrown into a pond. If he sank, he was innocent and was pulled out and revived (one hopes) . If he floated, he was thought to be in league with the devil and, therefore, guilty. In these methods of trial. resort was to divine judgment. God, it was assumed, would save the innocent and let the guilty perish' The Christian priesthood, who presided over these trials until they were forbidden to do so by the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 probably exercised some degree of personal judgment that mitigated the rigor of the ordeals for the innocent.

A common method of trial among northern people (although for unknown reasons, not among the Anglo-Saxons) was trial by battle. Here an elaborate set of rules prevailed. Combat was with wooden cudgels, and that party won who first drew blood from his opponent.s head. Priests, children, and women were permitted to choose champions to represent them. The most popular trials for women in medieval Europe were trial by cold water for commoners and trial by battle of champions for aristocratic women. This may have been a little hard on women of the lower orders. Women float better than men, and men often think that women are permanently in league with the devil!!!

The virtues most valued among the Germans were evidently courage, loyalty, and leadership, and the vices most severely punished were cowardice and treachery. A man's honor, that is, his reputation for bravery and loyalty, were his most important possessions. Unwarranted attacks on his honor, such as calling him a .'fox'' or his wife a ''harlot,'' entailed heavy penalties. The free fighting man among the Germans was an only partially tamed savage, and he was very much an individual. He had no civic virtues.

http://mars.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/wc1/lectures/15tribes.html

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 10 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Yes but nowhere on your map does not show the Vandals and other Germanic tribes originating from "the steppes". The Germanic tribes are indigenous to Europe also! And those indigenous people they terrorized and murdered were also white. LOL [Big Grin]

quote:
Originally posted by rasol:

It's also clear that R1b the most common haplotype in Western Europe emergies primarily from the Iberian glacial refugeum, and *not* from 'the steppes' within the historical era.

Repeating - the steppes - as a mantra ignores the biohistory of Europe. There were ice-ages, populations retreated into 3 specific shelters.... the genetic structure in Europe still reflect this historical reality.

This thread is another sobering lesson for those who think they can keep quoting outdated/distorted 19th century race constructs and ignoring genetics.

You're using wooden sticks against sub-machine guns.

Your [arguments] are already dead, you just don't know it, yet....

 -


Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
 -

http://www.beforebc.de/all_europe/05-09-10.html

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 11 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
^ Man, please do not corrupt that scientific map of early European genepools with your pseudo-historical nonsense! [Roll Eyes]
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 4 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This thread is another perfect example of scientifically illiterate people like Xyyman who does not know about the simple concept of micro-evolution. I won't even address Marc, because that guy is beyond any reasoning and is stuck in a psychotic delusional fantasy.

Now, I'm sure Xyyman knows about the biological concept of evolution or at least heard of it. The problem is that they have no clue that evolution goes on all the time and has gone on among the human species.

When most folks think of evolution, they think of macro-evolution which is evolution on a grand scale like speciation which is the development of new species. What they fail to understand is that macro-evolution is the result of multiple occurances of micro-evolution which is evolution in a small scale, or biological changes that occur among populations. A perfect example of that is skin color among humans. We have genetic evidence that not only verifies that *all* humans were originally black since they originated in sub-saharan Africa, but that some populations became lighter as they left the tropics and into less sunny climates. There are also other changes such as from tropical adopted bodies to more cold adapted bodies like you see among the Inuit (Eskimo) peoples.

The science is out there people. And it is up to you to go out there and educate yourselves on the subject and not simply refuse the material out of ignorance.

Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Marc Washington
Member
Member # 10979

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Marc Washington   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As my map above establishes, the ancient lineages of Europe are African and whites of today's Europe of recent Indo-European / Germanic origins that displaced historic African populations.

--------------------
The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation.

Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Clyde Winters
Member
Member # 10129

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Clyde Winters   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Marc Washington:
 -

http://www.beforebc.de/all_europe/05-09-10.html

Djehuti
quote:


The science is out there people. And it is up to you to go out there and educate yourselves on the subject and not simply refuse the material out of ignorance.



You are wrong. Marc is doing what any good researcher would do . Yes, the evidence is out there he is just making an independent interpretation of the evidence.

The archaeological evidence and skeletal record make it clear that Blacks entered Europe numerous times and Indo-European speakers or Kurgan folk entered the area only recently. The fact that the first carriers of many genes common to Europeans are found in Cameroon make it obvious that Europeans only acquired these genes recently through intermarriage etc., with recent Africans--not the ancient Blacks who lived in this area who carried haplogroups N and are associated with the CroMagnon people of 40,000-28,000BC. Another group entered Europe via the Levant between 20,000-18,000 BC who probably carried haplogroup M and were associated with Ethiopian speakers or Natufians according to most researchers.


Recent genetic research indicates that the
contemporary Europeans are not related to the ancient
Europeans.
quote:


Science 11 November 2005:
Vol. 310. no. 5750, pp. 1016 - 1018
DOI: 10.1126/science.1118725 Prev | Table of Contents
| Next

REPORTS
Ancient DNA from the First European Farmers in
7500-Year-Old Neolithic Sites
Wolfgang Haak,1* Peter Forster,2 Barbara Bramanti,1
Shuichi Matsumura,2 Guido Brandt,1 Marc Tänzer,1
Richard Villems,3 Colin Renfrew,2 Detlef Gronenborn,4
Kurt Werner Alt,1 Joachim Burger1
The ancestry of modern Europeans is a subject of
debate among geneticists, archaeologists, and
anthropologists. A crucial question is the extent to
which Europeans are descended from the first European
farmers in the Neolithic Age 7500 years ago or from
Paleolithic hunter-gatherers who were present in
Europe since 40,000 years ago. Here we present an
analysis of ancient DNA from early European farmers.
We successfully extracted and sequenced intact
stretches of maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA
(mtDNA) from 24 out of 57 Neolithic skeletons from
various locations in Germany, Austria, and Hungary. We
found that 25% of the Neolithic farmers had one
characteristic mtDNA type and that this type formerly
was widespread among Neolithic farmers in Central
Europe. Europeans today have a 150-times lower
frequency (0.2%) of this mtDNA type, revealing that
these first Neolithic farmers did not have a strong
genetic influence on modern European female lineages.
Our finding lends weight to a proposed Paleolithic
ancestry for modern Europeans.

This DNA found in the ancient Europeans was N1(a).

It seems to me that we may be asking the wrong
question. Instead of trying to explain why the Old
Europeans were not Indo-European speakers, or
contemporary Europeans, we should be asking the
question who these Old Europeans were. It appears to
me that they may have been Africans.

This is based on the reality that the haplogroup N1(a)
is common to Senegambians, modern Ethiopians and the
Dravidian speaking people of India (Richards et al,
2005; Toomas et al, 2004). The Old Europeans may be
related to African cattle raising farming groups,
originally from Africa and the Middle East who may
have planted the seeds of agriculture in ancient
Europe, especially descendants of the Natufians.


Many Researchers see Africans spreading into Europe in
ancient times. Brace et al (2006) recognized
Sub-Saharan Africans as associates of the Nufian
farmers that introduced farming to Europe.


Chris Stringer and Robin McKie wrote:

"Nor does the picture get any clearer when we move on
to the Cro-Magnons, the presumed ancestors of modern
Europeans. Some looked more like present-day
Australians or Africans, judged by OBJECTIVE
anatomical categorizations, as is the case with some
early modern skulls from the Upper Cave at Zhoukoudian
in China."

Africa in a sense kept pumping out migrations and
dispersals of people and this included people like the
Neanderthals who, equally, it doesn't seem were our
ancestors.

CL Brace (2006)–
“When 24 craniofacial measurements of a series of
human populations are used to
generate neighbor-joining dendrograms, it is no
surprise that all modern European groups, ranging all
of the way from Scandinavia to eastern Europe and
throughout the Mediterranean to the Middle East, show
that they are closely related to each other. The
surprise is that the Neolithic peoples of Europe and
their Bronze
Age successors are not closely related to the modern
inhabitants, although the prehistoric modern ties are
somewhat more apparent in southern Europe. It is a
further surprise that the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of
Israel from whom the Neolithic realm was assumed to
arise has a clear link to Sub-Saharan Africa. Basques
and Canary Islanders are clearly associated with
modern Europeans. When canonical variates are plotted,
neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once
suggested. The data treated here support the idea that
the Neolithic moved out of the Near East into the
circum-Mediterranean areas and Europe by a process of
demic diffusion but that subsequently the in situ
residents of those areas, derived from the Late
Pleistocene inhabitants, absorbed both the
agricultural life way and the people who had brought
it.”


The main problem with Brace et al’s attempt to make
the Late Pleistocene inhabitants of Europe =
contemporary Europeans is that these people were
Negroes or Blacks.


There have been numerous "Negroid skeletons" found in
Europe. Marcellin Boule and Henri Vallois, in Fossil
Man, provide an entire chapter on the Africans/Negroes
of Europe Anta Diop also discussed the Negroes of
Europe in Civilization or Barbarism, pp.25-68. Also
W.E. B. DuBois, discussed these Negroes in the The
World and Africa, pp.86-89. DuBois noted that "There
was once a an "uninterrupted belt' of Negro culture
from Central Europe to South Africa" (p.88).

Boule and Vallois, note that "To sum up, in the most
ancient skeletons from the Grotte des Enfants we have
a human type which is readily comparable to modern
types and especially to the Negritic or Negroid type"
(p.289). They continue, "Two Neolithic individuals
from Chamblandes in Switzerland are Negroid not only
as regards their skulls but also in the proportions of
their limbs. Several Ligurian and Lombard tombs of the
Metal Ages have also yielded evidences of a Negroid
element. Since the publication of Verneau's memoir,
discoveries of other Negroid skeletons in Neolithic
levels in Illyria and the Balkans have been announced.
The prehistoric statues, dating from the Copper Age,
from Sultan Selo in Bulgaria are also thought to
protray Negroids. In 1928 Rene Bailly found in one of
the caverns of Moniat, near Dinant in Belgium, a human
skeleton of whose age it is difficult to be certain,
but seems definitely prehistoric. It is remarkable for
its Negroid characters, which give it a reseblance to
the skeletons from both Grimaldi and Asselar (p.291).

Boule and Vallois, note that "We know now that the
ethnography of South African tribes presents many
striking similarities with the ethnography of our
populations of the Reindeer Age. Not to speak of their
stone implements which, as we shall see later ,
exhibit great similarities, Peringuey has told us that
in certain burials on the South African coast
'associated with the Aurignacian or Solutrean type
industry...."(p.318-319). They add, that in relation
to Bushman art " This almost uninterrupted series
leads us to regard the African continent as a centre
of important migrations which at certain times may
have played a great part in the stocking of Southern
Europe. Finally, we must not forget that the Grimaldi
Negroid skeletons sho many points of resemblance with
the Bushman skeletons". They bear no less a
resemblance to that of the fossil Man discovered at
Asslar in mid-Sahara, whose characters led us to class
him with the Hottentot-Bushman group.


Trenton W. Holliday, tested the hypothesis that if
modern Africans had dispersed into the Levant from
Africa, "tropically adapted hominids" would be
represented in the archaeological history of the
Levant, especially in relation to the Qafzeh-Skhul
hominids.
This researcher found that the Qafzeh-Skhul hominids
(20,000-10,000),were assigned to the Sub-Saharan
population, along with the Natufians samples (4000
BP). Holliday also found African fauna in the area.

Keita notes that:
quote:


"Epipaleolithic "mesolithic" Nile Valley remains have
these characteristics and diverge notably from their
Maghreban and European counterparts in key
cranio-facial characteristics (see comments in Keita
1990) although late Natufian hunters and early
Anatolian farmers (Angel 1972) shared some of these
traits, suggesting late Paleolithic migration out of
Africa, as supported by archeology **(Bar Yosef
1987)**. - Keita, 1993.

Holliday confirmed his hypothesis that the replacement
of the Neanderthal people were Sub-Saharan Africans.
The founders of civilization in South West Asia
were the people, archaeologists call Natufians. By
13,000 BC, according to J.D. Clark (1977) the
Natufians were collecting grasses which later became
domesticated crops in Southwest Asia. In Palestine the
Natufians established intensive grass collection. The
Natufians used the Ibero-Maurusian tool industry
(Wendorf, 1968). These Natufians , according to
Christopher Ehret Natufians were small stature folk
who spread agriculture throughout Nubia into the Red
Sea. The Natufians took the Ibero-Maurusian tools into
Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.

Some researchers believe that Natufian, or some
related population took the E3b alpha cluster to
Europe.

The Proto-Magyar were one of the many ethnic groups
which formerly lived in the Fertile African Crescent.
They offered prayers to *kan, e.g., Magyar kan,
konyorog, Manding kani, and Dravidian ka-n. They also
worshipped the god Amon, who they called Anya
(Winters, 1986).

The name Maa is found in many Proto-Saharan ethnonyms.
For example the Manding called themselves Ma-nde (the
children of Ma), the Sumerians called themselves
Mah-Gar-ri (exalted God's children), and the Magyar of
ancient times referred to themselves as Muh-ger-ri ,
or Ma-ka-r (exalted children) (Winters,1986).

According to David MacRitchies the most ancient Uralic
speakers were called czernii ugris or 'Black Ugris'.
The Ugris were also called Hunni. The name Ugrian, is
the origin for the word Hungarian. The Hungarians were
also called Sabatocospali ,"the Blacks".

The Carpathian blacks arrived in the area in the 4th
millennium B.C. The Tripolye culture dates from 3800
to 2100 B.C. The Tripolye culture was established in
the Ukraine, Moldavia and Romania along the Siret
River in the Ukraine.
The Tripolye people may have collected/cultivated
barley, millet and wheat. They also had domesticated
cattle, sheep-goats and pigs. As in Africa, their
principle domesticate at this time was cattle .

During the middle Neolithic copper was being exploited
in several mountainous regions of Europe. The center
for copper mining in Europe was the Carpathian
mountains. Many copper objects have been found on
Tripolyean sites .

Many animal and human figurines have been found on
Tripolyean sites. The Tripolye rotund ceramic female
figurines are analogous to the rotund female figurines
found in ancient Nubia.

It appears that for over a millennium the Linear
Pottery and Cris farming groups practiced agriculture
in the core region of Tripolyean culture. The middle
Neolithic Tripolye people on the other hand are
associated with cattle herding and mining.

The Vinca Tordos culture is very interesting because
of the evidence of writing found in this culture. The
famous Tartaria tablets were produced by the Vinca
Tordos culture. The Vinca Tordos culture is associated
with western Bulgaria, southwest Romania and
Yugoslavia.

The Vinca people in addition to possessing writing
were also engaged in copper metallurgy. They also made
clay and stone figurines and fine pottery. As among
the contemporary Nubians and Tripolyeans culture the
Vinca people made fine human and animal figurines .

This means that the original Africans carrying halogroups R1 and K had to have entered the area much later during the Neolithic sometime after 8kya. I would speculate that these Africans were the archaeological group called the Old European
who have left us many works of art like the stick people that acknowledge their African origin.

There is disagreement over where the Europeans originated and when they spread across Europe. Dr. M. Gimbutas maintains that Europeans had their origin in the Pontic steppe country on the north coast of the Black Sea and began to expand into Europe as Kurgan nomads after 4000 BC In 1987, Dr. C. Renfrew hypothesized that the Indo-Europeans lived in eastern Anatolia and spread into Europe around 7000 years ago with the spread of agriculture. Both of these views have little support based upon the ancestral culture terms used by the Proto-Indo-European which are predominately of non Indo-European (I-E) origin. After a comparison of the linguistic, agricultural and genetic evidence researchers have found little support for both of these theories. Sokal et al, noted that: "If the IEs originated in situ by local differentiation only, there should be no significant partial correlation , since geography should fully explain the observed genetic and linguistic distances. This was not the case. If the genetics-language correlation were entirely due to the spread of populations accompanying the origin of agriculture, then the origin-of-agriculture model should suffice, or at least there should be some effect due to origin of agriculture. But we saw that origin-of-agriculture distances (OOA) cannot reduce the partial correlations remaining after geography has been held constant."

The genetic evidence supporting the absence of an Indo-European origin in the Anatolian region is supported by the historical and archaeological evidence. The north and east of Anatolia was inhabited by non-Indo-European speakers.

It appears that Indo-Europeans did not enter Anatolia until sometime between 2000 -1800 BC At this time we note the appearance of Indo-European (Hittite) names in the literary records of the Old Kingdom of Hatti, a Kushite people. And at least as late as 1900 BC Anatolia was basically still Hattian (i.e., occupied by mainly by Blacks).

An important group in Anantolia in addition to the Hatti, were the Hurrians. The Hurrians enter Mesopotamia from the northeastern hilly area[1]. They introduced horse-drawn war chariots to Mesopotamia[2].

Hurrians penetrate Mesopotamia and Syria-Palestine between 1700-1500 BC. The major Hurrian Kingdom was Mitanni, which was founded by Sudarna I (c.1550), was established at Washukanni on the Khabur River. The Hurrian capital was Urkesh, one of its earliest kings was called Tupkish.

Linguistic and historical evidence support the view that Dravidians influenced Mittanni and Lycia. (Winters 1989a) Alain Anselin is sure that Dravidian speaking peoples once inhabited the Aegean. For example Anselin (1982, pp.111-114) has discussed many Dravidian place names found in the Aegean Sea area.

Two major groups in ancient Anatolia were the Hurrians and Lycians. Although the Hurrians are considered to be Indo-European speakers, some Hurrians probably spoke a Dravidian language.

The Hurrians lived in Mittanni. Mittanni was situated on the great bend of the Upper Euphrates river. Hurrian was spoken in eastern Anatolia and North Syria.

Most of what we know about Hurrian comes from the Tel al-Armarna letters. These letters were written to the Egyptian pharaoh. These letters are important because they were written in a language different from diplomatic Babylonian.

The letters written in the unknown language were numbered 22 and 25. In 1909 Bork, in Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatische Gesellschaft, wrote a translation of the letters.

In 1930, G.W. Brown proposed that the words in letters 22 and 25 were Dravidian especially Tamil. Brown (1930), has shown that the vowels and consonants of Hurrian and Dravidian are analogous. In support of this theory Brown (1930) noted the following similarities between Dravidian and Hurrian: 1) presence of a fullness of forms employed by both languages; 2) presence of active and passive verbal forms are not distinguished; 3) presence of verbal forms that are formed by particles; 4) presence of true relative pronouns is not found in these languages; 5) both languages employ negative verbal forms; 6) identical use of -m, as nominative; 7) similar pronouns; and 8) similar ending formations:
  • Dravidian Hurrian

    a a

    -kku -ikka

    imbu impu

There are analogous Dravidian and Hurrian terms:
  • English Hurrian Dravidian

    mountain paba parampu

    lady,woman aallay ali

    King Sarr,zarr Ca, cira

    god en en

    give tan tara

    to rule irn ire

    father attai attan

    wife,woman asti atti


Many researchers have noted the presence of many Indo-Aryan words in Hurrians. This has led some researchers to conclude that Indo –Europeans may have ruled the Hurrians. This results from the fact that the names of the Hurrian gods are similar to the Aryan gods:
  • Hurrian Sanskrit

    Mi-it-va Mitra

    Aru-na Varuna

    In-da-ra Indra

    Na-sa-at-tiya Nasatya


There are other Hurrian and Sanskrit terms that appear to show a relationship:
  • English Hurrian Sanskrit Tamil

    One aika eke okka `together'

    Three tera tri

    Five panza panca añcu

    Seven satta sapta

    Nine na nava onpatu


Other Hurrian terms relate to Indo-Aryan:

  • Enlglish Hurrian I-A Tamil

    Brown babru babhru pukar

    Grey parita palita paraitu `old'

    Reddish pinkara pingala puuval



    English Mitanni Vedic Tamil

    Warrior marya marya makan, maravan

Although researchers believe that the Hurrians-Mitanni were dominated by Indo-Aryans this is not supported by the evidence. Bjarte Kaldhol found that only 5 out of 500 Hurrian names were I-A sounding[3].

The linguistic evidence discussed above is consistent with the view that the only Indian elements in Anatolian culture were of Dravidian ,rather than Indo-Aryan origin. This evidence from Mittanni adds further confirmation to the findings of N. Lahovary in Dravidian Origins and the West, that prove the earlier presence of Dravidian speakers in Anatolia.

But none of the Hurrian terms are related to Kurdish.

Origin Indo-European Speakers

The usual method of Indo-European and Chinese invasion was two-fold. First, they settle in a country in small groups and were partly assimilated.

Over a period of time their numbers increased. Once they reach a numerical majority they joined forces with other Indo-European speaking groups to militarily overthrow the original inhabitants in a specific area and take political power. Since these communities occupied by the blacks often saw themselves as residents of a city-state, they would ignored the defeat of their neighbors. This typified their second form of invasion of the countries formerly ruled by the Proto-Saharans/ Kushites/Blacks.

Blacks have failed even today to recognize that even though whites are highly nationalistic and engaged in numerous fratricidal wars, they will unify temporarily to defeat non-European people. As a result in case where the Blacks have been politically organized into states or Empires, rather than isolated city-states, the large political units have lasted for hundreds of years as typified by ancient Egypt, Axum, Mali and ancient Ghana.

D'iakonov on the other hand, believes that the Indo-Europeans (I-E) homeland was the Balkan-Carpathian region. He has shown that the culture terms of the I-E group indicate that they made their way across forest-steppe and deciduous forest zones to settle other parts of the world. This view is highly probable.

The view that these people were farmers seem unlikely, since the ideal farming areas in Europe were already settled by the Black people carrying haplogroups N, M, K and R1. Instead of being farmers the I-E people were originally nomads.

The steppes could not have been the homeland of the Indo-Europeans because it was heavily occupied by the Proto-Saharan people who entered Europe after 3000BC and remained the dominant people in the area until after 1300 B.C.

In support of an early presence of Indo-European speakers on the steppes many scholars maintain that the Andronovo cultures and wheeled vehicles are markers of Indo-European "High" culture.

But this theory has been proven to be unsupportable by the archeological and linguistic data. The civilizations and economy that characterized "Old Europeans" are foreign to the Indo-European culture portrayed in the Indo-Aryan literature.

As outlined above the I-E speakers learned much about horsemenship from the Mitanni. Many scholars use the chariot and horsemanship as an ethnic marker for the Indo-Europeans. But it can not be proven that the horse drawn chariot was an exclusive Indo-European marker. Wheeled vehicles were used in Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley before the 3rd millennium. The presence of pre-Dynasty and early Dynasty wheeled toy animals from Egypt and elsewhere support the view that the wheel was a well known technology to the Kushites before the expansion of the Indo Europeans.

This view is further supported by the fact that the IE roots for "wheel" number four. Use of a number of terms to signify the "wheel" illustrates that this technological innovation must have come from elsewhere and was later adopted by the Proto-Indo-Europeans after there dispersal.

The horse can not be a marker for the Indo-European dispersal either. It would appear that in the steppes, the horse was not intensively used until the Iron age. V.M. Masson believes that horse domestication and riding developed in the 1st millennium BC, on the steppes.

The early I-E were Kurgan nomadic warriors. Kurgan is a name used by archaeologist for the early Europeans.The term I-E does not refer to a racial type, because many of the ancient I-E speakers may have been black , given the fact that among the depictions of the People of the Sea on Egyptian monuments their are African people. But today the only I-E people we have are Caucasian.

The Iranian and Indian speaking people belong to the Indo-Aryan group which is not closely related to the I-E.

Evolving in the Caucasus mountains, the Kurgan folk were pastoralist. They herded cattle, pigs and sheep.

The original whites or Kurgan people were a very destructive people. They destroyed vast regions of forest across Europe. By the Fourth millennium BC, wide tracts of forests were gone in Europe. Upon their encounter with civilized Africoid communities, the latter were enslaved while the Kurgans adopted their culture. The Kurgan warriors used these slaves to grow grain.

The Indo-Europeans remained an insignificant group until they learned the art of metal working from the Hittites of Asia Minor. This along with natural disasters that took place around the world after 1600 BC, helped the Kurgans to infiltrate civilized areas in the Aegean and Indus Valley.

The Kurgan people are also known as the Battle Axe/ Corded Ware Folk. By the Third millennium BC, the Kurgan were breeding horses and organized themselves into militarized chiefdoms. The symbol of the warrior class was the horned helmet common to the Sea Folk and later Vikings. Their common weapon was the double axe.

The Kurgan folk in small numbers slowly migrated into the centers of civilization, first in northern Mesopotamia, then India. By 3500 BC, the Kurgans were invading the Caucasus region. Beginning in 3700 B.C., Old European settlements had walls built around them to keep out the Kurgan warriors.

These early I-E people practiced human sacrifice. At the death of a man his wife was often killed and buried with him.

The Kurgan people mixed with the indigenous Africoid people. Some of them were made slaves by the warrior elites. If black communities were more powerful than the Kurgans, they formed an alliance between themselves and conquered weaker groups. Once the Kurgan tribe became stronger it would knock off its former ally.

No matter how you may want to get other forum members to ignore Marc's work his posters are compelling and put the lie to your comments. The research supporting an extra European origin for whites can not be ignored.


In conclusion the archaeological evidence suggest that The Old Europeans may have been Blacks who carried the N1 lineage to Europe that were later replaced by Indo-European speaking populations. There were probably no ancient white foragers of farmers in ancient Europe.

Years of research on the origin of the Indo-European speakers place there origin outside western Europe. Genetics can not change this history which is also supported by the ostelogical and iconographic evidence Marc has presented throughout this thread.

For once, Stop being jealous of Marc and try to learn something.

References:


[1] Timothy Potts, Mesopotamia and the East. Oxford Unversity Committee for Archaeology. Monograph 37.

[2] H.W.F. Sagy, Peoples of the Past: Babylonians. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1995.

[3] A. Gupta, How old is the Rig Veda (Part2). Retrieved: 14 January 2004
http://www.sawf.org/newedit/edi40205200/musings.asp.


Balter M. 2005. Ancient DNA yields clues to the puzzle
of European origins. Science 310:964-965. Full text
(subscription)

Clark, J.D. (1977).The origins of domestication in
Ethiopia", Fifth Panafrican Congress of prehistory and
quaternary Studies, Nairobi.

Haak W et al. 2005. Ancient DNA from the first
European farmers in 7500-year-old Neolithic sites.
Science 310:1016-1018. Full text (subscription)

Holiday, T. (2000). Evolution at the Crossroads:
Modern Human Emergence in Western Asia, American
Anthropologist,102(1) .

Mountain JL, Hebert JM, Bhattacharyya S, Underhill PA,
Ottolenghi C, Gadgil M,

Cavalli-Sforza LL (1995) Demographic history of India
and mtDNA-sequence
diversity. Am J Hum Genet 56:979–992 [PubMed].

Christopher Ehret,C. (1979).On the antiquity of
agriculture in Ethiopia", Jour.
of African History 20, p.161.

Richards M. 2003. The Neolithic invasion of Europe.
Annu Rev Anthropol 32:135-162. Full text

Richards M, Macaulay V, Hickey E, Vega E, Sykes B,
Guida V, Rengo C, et al (2000) Tracing European
founder lineages in the Near Eastern mtDNA pool. Am J
Hum Genet 67:1251–1276 [PubMed] [Free Full Text].

Richards M, Rengo C, Cruciani F, Gratrix F, Wilson JF,
Scozzari R, Macaulay V, Torroni A (2003) Extensive
female-mediated gene flow from sub-Saharan Africa into
Near Eastern Arab populations. Am J Hum Genet
72:1058–1064 [ Free Full text in PMC].

Toomas Kivisild,1 Maere Reidla,1 Ene Metspalu,1
Alexandra Rosa,1 Antonio Brehm,2 Erwan Pennarun,1 Jüri
Parik,1 Tarekegn Geberhiwot,3 Esien Usanga,4 and
Richard Villems.(2004)1 Ethiopian Mitochondrial DNA
Heritage: Tracking Gene Flow Across and Around the
Gate of Tears. Am J Hum Genet. 2004 November; 75(5):
752–770.

Wendorf,F. (1968).The History of Nubia,( Dallas,1968)
pp.941-46).


.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
As my map above establishes, the ancient lineages of Europe are African and whites of today's Europe of recent Indo-European / Germanic origins that displaced historic African populations.
Nope, your map only establishes your despair and confusion and shows that you would get and F in genetics.

Since you don't even grasp the basic relationships betwen the haplotypes.

For example, haplotype F, encompasses -everything- that is not E [in a European context].

Go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup

Look at the dendrogram of haplotype F.

Look at everything underneath F.

Understand better now?


Also R1b makes up not just 50, but as much as 90% of haplotypes in Western Europe.

90%!


All these haplotypes are of *paleolithic derivition* in Europe and derive ultimately from Africans, which means that modern white people are indeed descendant of Paleolithic [and non white] Europeans.

Of this fact you will not find a single current biologist in dispute.

The only folks who try to dispute this are internet-SPACE-CADETS who don't know DNA from STD.

Lastly haplotype E is found in Europe overwhelmingly in the form of E3b alpha which has neolithic origin - meaning, that's when Africans migrated into Greco-Europe - the neolithic, about 7000 thousand years ago, admixing with native European population that 1st settled Europe 30 thousand years ago [R1b, R1a, and I].

These 3 lineages denote Europes population because they TRACE RIGHT BACK TO THE ICE AGE REFUGEUM from which modern Europeans descend.

As shown....
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
^ It's also clear that R1b the most common haplotype in Western Europe emergies primarily from the Iberian glacial refugeum, and *not* from 'the steppes' within the historical era.

Repeating - the steppes - as a mantra ignores the biohistory of Europe. There were ice-ages, populations retreated into 3 specific shelters.... the genetic structure in Europe still reflect this historical reality.

This thread is another sobering lesson for those who think they can keep quoting outdated/distorted 19th century race constructs and ignoring genetics.

You're using wooden sticks against sub-machine guns.

Your [arguments] are already dead, you just don't know it, yet....

 -

^ PS -> I don't mind that you try to distort genetics now that you've been *forced* to address it's devastating evidentiary power.

You have no chance of doing so, especially since you don't understand how the haplotypes are related or denoted.

So by all means, continue to discuss genetics. [Smile]

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 75 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  ...  73  74  75   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3