In his book Deep Ancestry: Inside the Genographic Project (National Geographic Publishing: 2007) Spencer Wells states:
“Around 20,000 years ago, the M35 marker appeared in the Middle East among the first farmers who helped spread agriculture from the Middle East into the Mediterranean region.”
The most up-to-date information indicates that the M35 Marker (E3b) first appeared in East Africa. Near, but not quite the “Middle East”. Why does Wells make the strange claim that the M35 marker appeared in the “Middle East” versus Africa. He is personally associated Peter Underhill who states:
Ann. Hum. Genet. (2001), 65, 43±62
The phylogeography of Y chromosome binary haplotypes and the origins of modern human populations
“As mentioned before in relation to African NRY history, a Mesolithic population carrying Group III lineages with the M35}M215 mutation expanded northwards from sub-Saharan to north Africa and the Levant.”
Why does Wells chose to locate the E3b haplogroup in the “Middle East” versus Sub-Saharan East Africa as noted by his colleague Underhill?
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dissembling. [to intentionally mislead without outright lying]
quote:Why does Wells chose to locate the E3b haplogroup in the “Middle East” versus Sub-Saharan East Africa as noted by his colleague Underhill?
-> Middle East is a political geography, which can be conceptualised to include NorthEast Africa.
--> Sub-sahara is a political geography that can be conceptualised to exclude "Egypt" and "Nubia".
Political geography can be a tool of deception meant to imply things which are not true, without requiring outright lies. [dissembling]
Specifically:
* Middle-East is meant to imply that something is Asiatic when in fact it is of African origin.
** Sub-sahara is meant to delimit the *territory* of Blacks, so that anything outside of "sub-sahara" is implied to be non-Black.
Of course, both suggestions are false as M35 is African in origin, and Blacks are the original population of the Sahara.
Therefore we should challenge Wells dissembling by correcting it:
"Around 20,000 years ago, the M35 marker originated in East Africa, these Africans were among the pioneers of sedantism, or settled living, they made some of the earliest pottery, and domesticated cattle.
They helped spread sedentism from Africa to the Levantine [Natufians], where this African marker would spread along with agriculture and animal domestication, throughout Western Asia and eventually into Europe as well."
^ How would you correct Wells dissembling Evergreen?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Wells has done good work, but that doesn't excuse his dissembling in this instance of course.
For me, the bottom line is that we have to continue to work to moot the root assumptions of Eurocentrism inherent in terminology like Middle East and Sub-sahara.Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Therefore we should challenge Wells dissembling by correcting it:
"Around 20,000 years ago, the M35 marker originated in East Africa, these Africans were among the pioneers of sedantism, or settled living, they made some of the earliest pottery, and domesticated cattle.
They helped spread sedentism from Africa to the Levantine [Natufians], where this African marker would spread along with agriculture and animal domestication, throughout Western Asia and eventually into Europe as well."
^ How would you correct Wells dissembling Evergreen?
Evergreen Writes:
I think your assessment and commentary are correct. However, I would not categorize your assessment or commentary as correction or challenge to Wells pronouncement. I advocate an anarchist and more confrontational approach. We need to do a better job a driving the dialogue deeper into the "mainstream". The entire discourse on Egyptsearch is still fringe in many ways. Look at the dialogue we have had here regarding the National Geographic and the "Black Pharaohs". One way discourse not a dialgoue. We have to force the Eurocentrists into a dialgoue and prove that the "devil is a liar".
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Have you read elsewhere where Wells classifies the Levant as Africa?
But maybe I'm being too charitable in this current instance?
Evergreen Writes:
Neo-liberal Eurocentrists are willing to discuss "Africa" in broad terms. Until we speak of Africa and how its people looked in specific timeframes and regions the term is shallow and unsubstantive. Some still project an image of blue-eyed, blond haired paleolithic North Africans. Until we force specifics and drill-down in the discussion the term "Africa" is superficial.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rather than merely moot we need to nullify.
I can't say much about this current instance because I've only read that one out of context sentence and I remember Wells previously calling the Levant an extension of Africa.
Can't say that I'm pleased with the Genographic website though I've noticed slight revisions in it but have to remember the institution behind it is Nat'l Geo an institution working in the best interest of whites of Euro descent.
Too bad blacks of African descent aren't concerned enough to create and fund such objective human interest institutions that will serve their interests in the same objective universalist fashion.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ^ Wells has done good work, but that doesn't excuse his dissembling in this instance of course.
For me, the bottom line is that we have to continue to work to moot the root assumptions of Eurocentrism inherent in terminology like Middle East and Sub-sahara.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Africa" is a pseudo-landmass. Without discussing in specific terms the people of Africa and contextualizing them temporally and spatially the term is shallow. I would encourage Africanists to “take no shorts”.
-------------------- Black Roots. Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're reading in. No where in Wells writing is there any indication of what you intimate. But if so please do cite it and in the meantime can you post the contextual paragraph of yur previous quote.
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Have you read elsewhere where Wells classifies the Levant as Africa?
But maybe I'm being too charitable in this current instance?
Evergreen Writes:
Neo-liberal Eurocentrists are willing to discuss "Africa" in broad terms. Until we speak of Africa and how its people looked in specific timeframes and regions the term is shallow and unsubstantive. Some still project an image of blue-eyed, blond haired paleolithic North Africans. Until we force specifics and drill-down in the discussion the term "Africa" is superficial.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Africa is a false landmass? interesting. Then how can you speak of in terms of a "people of Africa?" Pseudo landmass must house a pseudo people, no?
OK. Black black black black black black. How's that? Is that black enough 4 u?
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: "Africa" is a pseudo-landmass. Without discussing in specific terms the people of Africa and contextualizing them temporally and spatially the term is shallow. I would encourage Africanists to “take no shorts”.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: You're reading in. No where in Wells writing is there any indication of what you intimate.
Evergreen Writes:
What I intimate is that Eurocentrists have over the last 100 plus years propagated an image of a "Africa" populated by "Caucasoids" in the northern half of the continent. Claiming that the Levant is an extension of "Africa" is hence no great pronouncement.
Wells lacks the fortitude to "spill the beans" on the fact that Blacks have migrated from Africa within the recent epoch (Holocene). Underhill was very transparent on this issue and I take my hat off to him for this.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:One way discourse not a dialgoue. We have to force the Eurocentrists into a dialgoue and prove that the "devil is a liar".
Like Diop and Obenga did at the Cairo Symposium, yes.
Diop/Obenga at the Cairo Forum is a good example. I also believe our generation has an opportunity to use technology more effectively. For example, I am found of posing very direct questions to scholars via email and cc'ing their peers for visibility.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I understand what you intimate. I also understand you cannot quote Wells propagating an image of an Africa populated by caucasoids in the northern half of the continent. I f so, please do cite and again I please ask you to post the contextual paragraph of your initial post.
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: You're reading in. No where in Wells writing is there any indication of what you intimate.
Evergreen Writes:
What I intimate is that Eurocentrists have over the last 100 plus years propagated an image of a "Africa" populated by "Caucasoids" in the northern half of the continent. Claiming that the Levant is an extension of "Africa" is hence no great pronouncement.
Wells lacks the fortitude to "spill the beans" on the fact that Blacks have migrated from Africa within the recent epoch (Holocene). Underhill was very transparent on this issue and I take my hat off to him for this.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I also understand you cannot quote Wells propagating an image of an Africa populated by caucasoids in the northern half of the continent.
Evergreen Writes:
Why would I need to quote something I never claimed? Please go back and re-read my post carefully. Thank you.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Although there are four separate threads on the Nat'l Geo article since Seeking first broached it 2 weeks ago in the posts beginning here I present reason to believe ES AE&E was not so fringe or one way discoursing as you think. It very much looks like the preparer of the quiz was not only familiar but dead set on countering our position.
We need to carry on proactively and not jumping toward each direction Eurocentrics point. That will leave them calling the shots. In making the observations that we did we made Nat'l Geo come to terms with us without rvrn having to individually focus in on them. Who knows what other institutions similarly feel the need to counter our findings? I say let them be reactionary while we forge on several steps ahead of them.
quote:Originally posted by Evergreen: I advocate an anarchist and more confrontational approach. We need to do a better job a driving the dialogue deeper into the "mainstream". The entire discourse on Egyptsearch is still fringe in many ways. Look at the dialogue we have had here regarding the National Geographic and the "Black Pharaohs". One way discourse not a dialgoue. We have to force the Eurocentrists into a dialgoue and prove that the "devil is a liar".
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've no need to reread anything, I'm disecting your dialectic. By poopooing Wells' opinion of the Levant being an extension of Africa you bring up caucasoid North Africa implying Wells promotes such views. This is the logical follow through of the extremist premise serving as the subject header to this thread, as if one out of context quote wobbling beside all his other stuff makes him either uninformed or worst yet a charlatan with no other choices possible.
For the 3rd time please post that quote in its contextual paragraph or is there something there you don't want us to see? And yes Wells is sure in disagreemen with most of his colleagues, i.e. Cruciani et al 2004
quote:Several observations point to eastern Africa as the homeland for haplogroup E3b—that is, it had (1) the highest number of different E3b clades (table 1), (2) a high frequency of this haplogroup and a high microsatellite diversity, and, finally, (3) the exclusive presence of the undifferentiated E3b* paragroup.
when he places E3b-M35 origins in the Middle-East (Levant) instead of East Africa proper. In that he is pandering to his Nat'l Geo bosses and the need to free E3b bearing Euros from onestep African origins.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I also understand you cannot quote Wells propagating an image of an Africa populated by caucasoids in the northern half of the continent.
Evergreen Writes:
Why would I need to quote something I never claimed? Please go back and re-read my post carefully. Thank you.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
My question is, what does Wells mean by "appears?" Does he mean originates or migrates? His 20kya figure is a few kyas later than E3b's TMRCA and 10ky earlier than others calculate for its Levantine expansion.
Evergreen, though extreme I must say your criticism is warranted.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I also understand you cannot quote Wells propagating an image of an Africa populated by caucasoids in the northern half of the continent.
Evergreen Writes:
Why would I need to quote something I never claimed? Please go back and re-read my post carefully. Thank you.
Evergreen Writes:
The point is it is less about what Wells said and more about what he did not say. The context of the discourse is that for over 100 years popular anthropologists have promoted a North Africa peopled by "Caucasoids". Images presented in the popular press, including Wells' National Geographic have facilitated this image. Wells is a close colleague and associate of Dr. Peter Underhill and has to be aware of the fact that haplogroup E3b derived in East Africa, not the "Middle East" or even North Africa (unless the Horn of Africa is defined now as North Africa). He seems to be purposely misleading.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: when he places E3b-M35 origins in the Middle-East(Levant) instead of East Africa proper. In that he is pandering to his Nat'l Geo bosses and the need to free E3b bearing Euros from onestep African origins.
Evergreen Writes:
I agree with this. Essentially haplogroup E3b puts a nail in the coffen on the theory of a White or Arab Ancient Egypt. There is an effort in the popular press to obscure the origins of this lineage.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course Wells is not uninformed as Evergreen stated he an associate of Underhill and knows Underhill's work.
So of course the answer to Evergreen's topic question is that the guy is a charlatan!
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Dissembling. [to intentionally mislead without outright lying]
quote:Why does Wells chose to locate the E3b haplogroup in the “Middle East” versus Sub-Saharan East Africa as noted by his colleague Underhill?
-> Middle East is a political geography, which can be conceptualised to include NorthEast Africa.
--> Sub-sahara is a political geography that can be conceptualised to exclude "Egypt" and "Nubia".
Political geography can be a tool of deception meant to imply things which are not true, without requiring outright lies. [dissembling]
Specifically:
* Middle-East is meant to imply that something is Asiatic when in fact it is of African origin.
** Sub-sahara is meant to delimit the *territory* of Blacks, so that anything outside of "sub-sahara" is implied to be non-Black.
Of course, both suggestions are false as M35 is African in origin, and Blacks are the original population of the Sahara.
Therefore we should challenge Wells dissembling by correcting it:
"Around 20,000 years ago, the M35 marker originated in East Africa, these Africans were among the pioneers of sedantism, or settled living, they made some of the earliest pottery, and domesticated cattle.
They helped spread sedentism from Africa to the Levantine [Natufians], where this African marker would spread along with agriculture and animal domestication, throughout Western Asia and eventually into Europe as well."
^ How would you correct Wells dissembling Evergreen?
Yes, and dissembling is the most favorite MO of charlatans. Being dishonest without telling lies by telling half-truths.
quote:Evergreen Writes: I think your assessment and commentary are correct. However, I would not categorize your assessment or commentary as correction or challenge to Wells pronouncement. I advocate an anarchist and more confrontational approach. We need to do a better job a driving the dialogue deeper into the "mainstream". The entire discourse on Egyptsearch is still fringe in many ways. Look at the dialogue we have had here regarding the National Geographic and the "Black Pharaohs". One way discourse not a dialgoue. We have to force the Eurocentrists into a dialgoue and prove that the "devil is a liar".
I couldn't agree more! The information that is discussed on this forum daily as well as that accumulated and amassed over the years is just too incredibly devastating to Eurocentric and white racist bias in academia. I mean, seriously if such info was made known to the public that would literally be it for Eurocentrism-- it is destroyed!!
Posts: 26316 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: My question is, what does Wells mean by "appears?" Does he mean originates or migrates.
See my above post on the art of dissembling.
You suggest something that is not true, by saying something that can be interpreted so as to mislead; but covering yourself, in vague terms so that if pressed, you can deny having spoken any falsehood.
I have absolutely no doubt, that Wells if pressed - will say that he never claimed that M35 originated in the Levantine, and that he never denied that it originated in Africa.
He used the term *appears*, and *Middle East* for just this reason.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ In other words, Charlatan Spencer is just being slick about it.
Posts: 26316 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
How can Africa be a pseudo landmass when it is separated and more distinct when compared to what we call the Eurasian landmass!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Not Africa, but Sub-Saharan Africa and especially North Africa.
Posts: 26316 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by yazid904: How can Africa be a pseudo landmass when it is separated and more distinct when compared to what we call the Eurasian landmass!
Evergreen Writes:
Africa is a psuedo-landmass because it is naturally connected to Eurasia. The Suez Cannel is a man-made construction. Humans have travled to and from Africa in every major human epoch. The real detail is focused on the magnitude and timing of gene flow. The evidence seems to indicate greater gene flow from Africa to Eurasia during the early Holocene in conjunction with the establishment of agricultural society and greater gene flow from Eurasia to Africa in conjunction with the decline of Nile Valley civilization.
Posts: 2007 | From: Washington State | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
At 45,000 B.C. he shows only Neanderthals in Europe. He shows U6 in North Africa, But no indication of anyone crossing over at Gibralter. So how did these people get there? (From Myra's site)
Re: Ancient types of man: Arthur Keith (1911) Fossil Men: Boule, Marcellin & Vallois (1957 Diop: (1981)
At 40,000 B.C. He shows N1 in Turkey, and explains that it is almost unique to Ashkenazi Jews (White Jews). But he is careful NOT to say that they were there at 40,000 B.C. Instead he says that they desend from just four mothers, and by 1,300 A.D. there were about 25,000 of them in the world. A Turk in Turkey, how unusual.
Encyclopedia:
The Khazars were another ancient Turkic people who first appeared in Transcaucasia, {the transitional region between Europe and Asia, extending from the Greater Caucasus to the Turkish and Iranian borders, between the Black and Caspian seas.} in the 2nd century A.D, and subsequently settled in the lower Volga region. They emerged as a force in the 7th century and rose to great power. By the 8th century the Khazar empire extended from the northern shores of the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea to the Urals and as far westward as Kiev. Also in the 8th Century, the Khazars converted to the Hebrew religion and made Judaism the State religion. “Itil” the Khazar capital in the Volga delta, was a great commercial center. The Khazar Empire fell, when Sviatoslav, duke of Kiev (945–72), son of Igor and of St. Olga, defeated its army in 965 A.D. The Khazars are the progenitors of European Jewry.
At 35,000 B.C. He shows Cro-Magnon in Europe, and to him he attributes the cave paintings and other art, all the while knowing that there is a fully modern human already there.
But it's not just him, one of the great things about Wiki, is that many people contribute, and they don't always get to compare notes.
Neanderthal Hunter, (American Museum of Natural Hististory.)
Reconstruction of a Neanderthal child from Gibraltar (Anthropological Institute, University of Zürich)
ANYBODY KNOW HOW YOU GET A WHITE CHILD FROM A BLACK FATHER?
Cro-Magnon: Russian site
Cro-Magnon: Britannica.
They control media and academia, so it’s tough fighting them.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ To fight lies and misperceptions you have be very careful to 'know' what you are talking about.
quote:At 45,000 B.C. he shows only Neanderthals in Europe.
Correct.
quote: He shows U6 in North Africa
U6 is not 46 thousand years old. Perhaps 30 thousand years old.
quote: But no indication of anyone crossing over at Gibralter.
There is no direct predecessor to U6 in Europe or anywhere else.
U6 is considered a North African Halotype. It is rare in the Levantine, and usually found in the form of U6a1.
U6 is North African, U6a is NorthWest African. U6a1 is NorthEast African.
Levantines with U6a1 have NorthEast African ancestry...and *NOT* the other way around.
Finally, Neanderthal has nothing whatsover to do with this.
U6 lineage is derived from L3 which is derived from L1[L0], which is perhaps 120 thousand years old.
Every human is descendant from L1.
The human species [homo sapiens sapiens] originates aprox. 150 thousand years ago [Herto Man] ethiopia.
Neanderthal species has *no L lineages* and certainly no U6.
Neanderthal diverged from the hominid ancestors of homo sapiens up to 1/2 million or more years ago.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rasol - After the first couple of lines I didn't need to read any further.
I related accurately what was found on the website. As to what appeared to be your lessons that followed, if someone wishes to give credence to it, that's on them. As for myself, I am extremely tired and bored with your attempts to appear knowledgeable about this or anything else for that matter.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Quite so, yes.
Printer-friendly view of this topic