What do you mean political boundaries? God damn it, what's wrong with you?
I had the same question. What's wrong with you, saying things that you cannot support?
quote:
This was during ancient times, thousands of years ago, there were no borders or political boundaries just communities, kingdoms, realm of influence etc
Which is it, from the above? And as evidenced by what?
quote: , that flactuated depending on current strength, there existed no international organizations that guarded borders and Sovereignty of nations. Countries are a modern construct.
The land of punt was a community somewhere in the southern red sea coast, an area that could have streched as far as the knowledge of this land was known to them, the dwarfs came from this "land of punt".
In other words, you had no idea of what the "land of punt is". No? Were they nomadic? Or did they have a territory?
Come on, Yonis? I thought you were on a roll, trying to beat Marc Washington's "thread on Europeans" in providing an uncontested twilight zone of creepy quack-jargon coupled with quack-ideological redundancy and a sense of endlessness. You are backing down on me, are you?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
What do you mean political boundaries? God damn it, what's wrong with you?
...
This was during ancient times, thousands of years ago, there were no borders or political boundaries just communities, kingdoms, realm of influence etc
So, you understand Dynastic Egypt to be a borderless *state*, which did not need to defend its sovereignty. The same goes for ancient Greece, Kush, Rome et al.?
What about Kingdoms; what's the point of having one, without a territory, that needs to have sovereignty?
Why would you need a "realm of influence" that cannot be marked territorially?
Entertain us with your wisdom. Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Btw Yonis, what can you tell us about how long the Khoisan and say, Ethiopian populations, have been separated, and how long the Khoisans have been living in southern Africa, in light of your revelation of Khoisan "dwarfs" living on the red sea coast during Dynastic Egypt?
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: providing an uncontested twilight zone of creepy quack-jargon coupled with quack-ideological redundancy and a sense of endlessnes
You mean like your twilight zone of six million gassed Jews supported by your "primary document backed" Dawidowicz? lol
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Explorer wrote: So, you understand Dynastic Egypt to be a borderless *state*, which did not need to defend its sovereignty. The same goes for ancient Greece, Kush, Rome et al.?
Of course Egypt was a borderless community, they had no borders, however they had realm of influence that continuesly fluctuated depending on current strenght. Different Powers advanced their influence and different powers were pushed away from their influence, an endless circle, no real borders, just influence.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
Of course Egypt was a borderless community, they had no borders
So, them Egyptians were a bunch of clowns who built militarized fortresses on their borders, oops I meant -- on their "borderless" nowhere, merely for decoration and entertain; ain't that right, Yonis?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
somalid kid, come and entertain me on these...
quote:they had realm of influence that continuesly fluctuated depending on current strenght.
How do you have a "realm of influence" without a border so as to warrant "fluctuating"?
quote: Different Powers advanced their influence and different powers were pushed away from their influence
How do they get pushed away from an "influence" that was not territorially marked as their's?
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Of course Egypt was a borderless community, they had no borders
So, them Egyptians were a bunch of clowns who built militarized fortresses on their borders, oops I meant -- on their "borderless" nowhere, merely for decoration and entertain; ain't that right, Yonis?
They were not a bunch of clowns they were a strategic community, why would they not build fortresses when the rulers/elite always faced threat? Egyptian rulers continuesly invaded the areas that are today coastal levant and northern Sudan and vice versa, and if victory came then these areas were part of the Egyptian elite's influence and belonged to the rulers of Egypt. Same goes with those who advanced their influence on the heartland of the Egyptian rulers, everything belonged to them. It was about territory of influence depending on the might of the rulers, no borders.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
They were not a bunch of clowns they were a strategic community, why would they not buiild fortresses when the rulers/elite alwys faced threat?
Remember, they were "borderless" and in that context, other than just clowning around, as you ask yourself, what else would they have needed these militarized fortresses for? That's a good question, yonis; how about an answer?
quote:It was about territory of influence depending on the might of the rulers, no borders.
Whoa, whoa; hold on your horse breaks; I thought they had no territory to begin with, as per your somalid logic.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Explorer wroe: Remember, they were "borderless" and in that context, other than just clowning around, as you ask yourself, what else would they have needed these militarized fortresses for? That's a good question, yonis; how about an answer?
Do i have to repeat myself?
This is how Egypt looked like during the height of it's strenght.
Interestingly all these areas covered by the Ancient Egyptian rulers and the realm of their influence are the exact areas where the somalids are concentrated today in the levant coast. Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
No, you don't have to repeat yourself, as expected of you; remember this:
I thought you were on a roll, trying to beat Marc Washington's "thread on Europeans" in providing an uncontested twilight zone of creepy quack-jargon coupled with quack-ideological redundancy and a sense of endlessness.
You can do better, and actually *start* providing answers to the mounting "Yonis-evaded" questions above.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
This is how Egypt looked like during the height of it's strenght.
Interestingly all these areas covered by the Ancient Egyptian rulers and the realm of their influence are the exact areas where the somalids are concentrated today in the levant coast.
Your map covers Upper Egypt and Nubia, yet you say these areas are "where the somalids are concentrated today in the levant coast." I don't quite get your meaning. If the Somalids are concentrated on the Levant Coast how are they exercising influence in Nubia and Egypt today, as well as in ancient Egypt and Nubia? Are the Somalids from the Levant? If so did they migrate to Egypt, Nubia and the Horn of Africa to exercise said influence? Please clarify.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
This is how Egypt looked like during the height of it's strenght.
Interestingly all these areas covered by the Ancient Egyptian rulers and the realm of their influence are the exact areas where the somalids are concentrated today in the levant coast.
E1b1b people were naturally allied to Egypt. The coastal Proto-Phoenician towns & Philistines were majority Somalid people on the coasts.
Arabids were a minority in the coastal Levant that increased in size with the Mesopotamian & Peninsular invasions of the Coasts for the next 2000years
Posts: 135 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Zaharan wrote: Your map covers Upper Egypt and Nubia, yet you say these areas are "where the somalids are concentrated today in the levant coast." I don't quite get your meaning. If the Somalids are concentrated on the Levant Coast how are they exercising influence in Nubia and Egypt today, as well as in ancient Egypt and Nubia? Are the Somalids from the Levant? If so did they migrate to Egypt, Nubia and the Horn of Africa to exercise said influence? Please clarify.
Wow, your kidding me right? Ok, i might have expressed myself poorly.
I said/meant, of all the people of the levant, those who live today at the coast (which was also historically part of dynastic Egyptian influence) are the most concentrated Somalids of them all (in relative to the rest of levantines), that is Somalids of the levant, not somalids of the world. Since NE Africa has the greatest concentration of Somalids, not the levant.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Yonis, do you promote negrids, Australids, Arabids, Nordids etc; like the ones who came up with the term Somalid?
Which in turn means you're assigning lineages to phenotypes, and promoting race as a biological entity; is this what you promote yonis?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
This is how Egypt looked like during the height of it's strenght.
Interestingly all these areas covered by the Ancient Egyptian rulers and the realm of their influence are the exact areas where the somalids are concentrated today in the levant coast.
Your map covers Upper Egypt and Nubia, yet you say these areas are "where the somalids are concentrated today in the levant coast." I don't quite get your meaning. If the Somalids are concentrated on the Levant Coast how are they exercising influence in Nubia and Egypt today, as well as in ancient Egypt and Nubia? Are the Somalids from the Levant? If so did they migrate to Egypt, Nubia and the Horn of Africa to exercise said influence? Please clarify.
Like all quacks, Yonis does a good job of posting things that defeat his intentions; though not a nation state, but an empire, the map displays a "bounded"-area for a specific time frame. Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
This is how Egypt looked like during the height of it's strenght.
Interestingly all these areas covered by the Ancient Egyptian rulers and the realm of their influence are the exact areas where the somalids are concentrated today in the levant coast.
E1b1b people were naturally allied to Egypt. The coastal Proto-Phoenician towns & Philistines were majority Somalid people on the coasts.
Arabids were a minority in the coastal Levant that increased in size with the Mesopotamian & Peninsular invasions of the Coasts for the next 2000years
True! I also suspect that the Somalids lived in the levant and Sinai before the west asians arrived from the East (northern Syria/Iraq). The Phoenicians and Philistines (closest group of the levant located to NE Africa) were likely a hybrid between these incomming west-asians and the somalids that they encountered on the levant coast. Phoenicians were afterall from the coast of Lebanon where the Somalid lineage is at it's highest frequency even today in the whole levant.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Yonis, do you promote negrids, Australids, Arabids, Nordids etc; like the ones who came up with the term Somalid?
Which in turn means you're assigning lineages to phenotypes, and promoting race as a biological entity; is this what you promote yonis?
Not really! I think a better choice than the term "Negrid" could be applied, other than that i don't see these distinctions deviating from reality.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: ugh. bugbog has no photoshop skill at all.
at least learn to screen rather than scribble when posting homemade fake maps to "illustrate" dumb ideas.
quote:
quote:This is getting annoying and deep down, Yonis knows that he doesn't make any sense.
Stormfront has destroyed the last of your remaining brain cells Yonis, I honestly remember you as being a lot sharper/smarter than this. Oh well..
^ stormfront traffics in racist fantasy to boost the ego of insecure ethnocentrists.
not all of whom are white, oh, excuse me -> Aryans.
Or perhaps this isn't the original Yonis, but simply a much less intelligent poseur.
LMAO
Why am I not surprise that this thread with it's title has become another Horner-Somali supremacist attack via Eurocentric garbage? Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Yonis, do you promote negrids, Australids, Arabids, Nordids etc; like the ones who came up with the term Somalid?
Which in turn means you're assigning lineages to phenotypes, and promoting race as a biological entity; is this what you promote yonis?
Not really! I think a better choice than the term "Negrid" could be applied, other than that i don't see these distinctions deviating from reality.
Well, why wouldn't "Negrid" be a well enough term for you, but "Somalid" is?
Both promote the same nonsense, which is biological race.
Btw, what is this reality you speak of, care to elaborate?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Yonis, do you promote negrids, Australids, Arabids, Nordids etc; like the ones who came up with the term Somalid?
Which in turn means you're assigning lineages to phenotypes, and promoting race as a biological entity; is this what you promote yonis?
Not really! I think a better choice than the term "Negrid" could be applied, other than that i don't see these distinctions deviating from reality.
Well, why wouldn't "Negrid" be a well enough term for you, but "Somalid" is?
Both promote the same nonsense, which is biological race.
Btw, what is this reality you speak of, care to elaborate?
Since i find "negrid" kind of offensive due to how it's been used by new world Europeans and the oppresed connotation it carries, a better neutral term could fit. Same as i don't like the term "niger-congo", it just sounds somehow racist.
And as for your question of "reality", well what is there to prove? You just need to check all the accumulated data to find the reality, these distinctions fit well with all the current emperical evidence.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: Yonis, do you promote negrids, Australids, Arabids, Nordids etc; like the ones who came up with the term Somalid?
Which in turn means you're assigning lineages to phenotypes, and promoting race as a biological entity; is this what you promote yonis?
Not really! I think a better choice than the term "Negrid" could be applied, other than that i don't see these distinctions deviating from reality.
Well, why wouldn't "Negrid" be a well enough term for you, but "Somalid" is?
Both promote the same nonsense, which is biological race.
Btw, what is this reality you speak of, care to elaborate?
Since i find "negrid" kind of offensive due to how it's been used by new world Europeans and the oppresed connotation it carries, a better neutral term could fit. Same as i don't like the term "niger-congo", it just sounds somehow racist.
And as for your question of "reality", well what is there to prove? You just need to check all the accumulated data to find the reality, these distictions fit well with all the current emperical evidence.
Point is Yonis, they both promote biological races, the ones (sf posters) who coined said terms(Negrids, Australids, Somalids, Arabids, Nordids etc..) are promoting biological races; hence, you can't sit there and take the term "Somalid" (because you like it, since you're a Somalian) and run with it, as if its separate from the original racial entity that the term was actually created to promote.
Since you already know race doesn't exist biologically; you should have already known Somalid was erroneous.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mindovermatter wrote: Since you already know race doesn't exist biologically; you should have already known Somalid was erroneous.
Not really, Somalid doesn't promote simplistic "races" based on ulterior bone morphology and phenotype, it promotes 'genetic races', much deeper. A way to track down your basic origin from the male side and the blood structure you carry. Everyone regardless if they look South asian, Siberian or West african and carry NE African lineage can trace their original root to NE Africa as where their ancestors were located from the start. Same goes with the other origins.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: Not really, Somalid doesn't promote simplistic "races" based on ulterior bone morphology and phenotype, it promotes 'genetic races', much deeper.
Curiously enough, mindlessmatter does promote "genetic races" which is why he argues that "African specific" population mated with an "Asian specific" population to create a "hybrid" European. He seems to want to keep both Africa and Asian "pure" so as to label them fundamental units (a race) creating the European hybrid. If the Asian was not a "pure" population but a mixture of African and Asian genes then both Asian and European would owe their existence to something else and not be "fundamental". Both would be in essence "hybrids" under the racial schema.
So early Asians (stereotypically defined) and Africans (stereotypically defined) are made out to be consisting of specific non overlapping genes having specific (stereotypical) phenotypes i.e. races. Of course all this is just his bullshit justification of Bowcock (1991) and is not espoused by real scholars but it does show gringo's hypocrisy in pointing fingers at Yonis for promoting "biological races".
posted
i am new to this forum and belong to e3b1c1 m34 marker i would like to say that soamalid v13 to lump al e1b1b1 as somalids is stupit as m81 e3b2 isnt somalid and also my clade e3b3 m123 so i would descried e3b as east african instead to mystery solever yes we are related to e3a but very far in time in terms of genetic evoulution its and half man dead sea
quote:Originally posted by e3b1c1: i am new to this forum and belong to e3b1c1 m34 marker i would like to say that soamalid v13 to lump al e1b1b1 as somalids is stupit as m81 e3b2 isnt somalid and also my clade e3b3 m123 so i would descried e3b as east african instead to mystery solever yes we are related to e3a but very far in time in terms of genetic evoulution its and half man dead sea
This person is "new" to ES yet he knows Jew boy's old posting name. lol
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
i want to figure out why guy slumped all e3b as somalians whle e3b2 in north west african and e3b3 my clade is middle eastern/ ethiopian not somalian
quote:Mindovermatter wrote: Since you already know race doesn't exist biologically; you should have already known Somalid was erroneous.
Not really, Somalid doesn't promote simplistic "races" based on ulterior bone morphology and phenotype, it promotes 'genetic races' , much deeper. [/qb]
That's biological race kid.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by e3b1c1: i am new to this forum and belong to e3b1c1 m34 marker i would like to say that soamalid v13 to lump al e1b1b1 as somalids is stupit as m81 e3b2 isnt somalid and also my clade e3b3 m123 so i would descried e3b as east african instead to mystery solever yes we are related to e3a but very far in time in terms of genetic evoulution its and half man dead sea
This person is "new" to ES yet he knows Jew boy's old posting name. lol
Obviously a troll, a bad one at that, Lol
Lol@ naming "Mystery solver", you are new, eh?
"e3b1c1" you've failed miserably go back yo your old screen name you suck at trolling.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
You and your fabricated rants; what a pathetic distraught stalker you are.....
You're definitely only good for one thing; and that's for a laugh. Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by e3b1c1: i am new to this forum and belong to e3b1c1 m34 marker i would like to say that soamalid v13 to lump al e1b1b1 as somalids is stupit as m81 e3b2 isnt somalid and also my clade e3b3 m123 so i would descried e3b as east african instead to mystery solever yes we are related to e3a but very far in time in terms of genetic evoulution its and half man dead sea
This person is "new" to ES yet he knows Jew boy's old posting name. lol
Obviously a troll, a bad one at that, Lol
Lol@ naming "Mystery solver", you are new, eh?
"e3b1c1" you've failed miserably...
Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MaximallyAbstract_Faith: [QB] And where is West Africa in all this?
Phenotypic classification is diff, I think there is atleast 10 Phenotypes in Africa, but thats another subject.
West Africans in genetic classification are Negrids, they cluster with the rest of the Subsaharans.
Somalids are a majority amongst the Supra Saharan population & primary genotype in the Med.
Genetically I am Somalid, but phenotypically I am East Med. More Med genetic Europids will share the same phenotype with me than with other other genetic Europids from Northern Europe.
Posts: 135 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
E1b1b and E1b1a are both sub Saharan African genetic markers, and will cluster closer together before any other genetic marker, especially, and way before a non African haplotype.
You are not genetically Somalid, there's is no such thing, E1b1b is an African genetic marker same way E1b1a is, plain and simple.
quote:"a Mesolithic population carrying Group III lineages with M35/M215 mutation [E3b] expanded northwards from sub-Saharan to north Africa and the Levant" (Underhill et al., 2001, p. 55; see also Bosch et al., 2001; Bar-Yosef, 1987) [Keita, 2005, p. 562]
The M35/M215 sub-clade cluster of haplotypes fragments a lineage (Ht 4) described previously (Hammer et al. 1997). We suggest that a population with this sub-clade of the African YAP/M145/M203/PN2 cluster expanded into the southern and eastern Mediterranean at the end of the Pleistocene...These lineages would have been introduced then from the Middle East into southern Europe (and to a lesser extent northern India and Pakistan) by farmers during the Neolithic expansion. [Underhill et al., 2001, p. 51]
A more recent dispersal out of Africa, represented by the E3b-M35 chromosomes, expanded northward during the Mesolithic (Underhill et al. 2001b). The East African origin of this lineage is supported by the much larger variance of the E3b-M35 males in Egypt versus Oman (0.5 versus 0.14; table 3).
Since the E3b*-M35 lineages appear to be confined mostly to the sub-Saharan populations, it is conceivable that the initial migrations toward North Africa from the south primarily involved derivative E3b-M35 lineages.
This is how they cluster....
^E3a now E1b1a, and E3b now E1b1b.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^^...hey genius,
E1b1b and E1b1a are both sub Saharan African genetic markers
So Morroco, Algeria, Somalia are the new subsaharan hinterland
E1b1b & E1b1a were split 30,000 years ago!
The distance between them is the same as J & I, let me guess you also think The Nordid subrace of teh EUropids are also Mideastern because they had a common genetic origin 30,000years ago
Keep in mind 60,000 yrs ago all genoms were still somewhere in East Africa, so again by your generous classification all markers are simplay East African markers!
Posts: 135 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: ^^...hey genius,
E1b1b and E1b1a are both sub Saharan African genetic markers
So Morroco, Algeria, Somalia are the new subsaharan hinterland
Morocco and Algeria are both north of the Sahara, but they indeed carry E derivatives which ultimately comes from sub Saharan Africa.
Btw if you didn't know, Somalis, as is the whole horn of Africa, is in sub Saharan Africa.
quote:Originally posted by Somalid_V13: E1b1b & E1b1a were split 30,000 years ago!
The distance between them is the same as J & I, let me guess you also think The Nordid subrace of teh EUropids are also Mideastern because they had a common genetic origin 30,000years ago
Lol, didn't you see how your friend massinissa was destroyed trying to erroneously compare the derivatives of IJ which creates I and J (which are like cousins) to that of two derivatives of the same brother E haplogroup PN2 clade derivatives E1b1b and E1b1a?
Anyway.....
E is the father lineage, E1b1b and E1b1a are descended and derivatives of the same E lineages, still same haplogroup; this is genetics kid.
Derivatives of one E haplogroup will always be closer related than I is to J, plain and simple.
Ex..
Derivatives of the I haplogroup, will be closer related to eachother, than would say, AB haplogroup derivatives, if it did split at the same time (as the I derivatives) resulting in A and B.
The derivatives of I, will be closer than A and B are to eachother.
Same thing with E derivatives; E1b1b and E1b1a. Who are closer than I is to J which derived from IJ.
Show us how I and J are related in the same way as below..
quote: This underscores the common root of PN2 clade Y chromosome as shown....
quote:Originally posted by Somalid_V13: Keep in mind 60,000 yrs ago all genoms were still somewhere in East Africa, so again by your generous classification all markers are simplay East African markers!
Wrong, ancestors of non Africans left Africa over 60,000 yrs ago, and their genome was to become non African lineages. There are indeed non African lineages and post OOA African.
I.e, haplogroup J is Asian, then there are also post OOA African (meaning lineages which arose in Africa, after the ancestors of non Africa left over 60kya.) Both E1b1b and E1b1a are post OOA African lineages, and arose in sub Saharan Africa well after the ancestors of non Africans migrated off from East Africa.
All Africans sharing this common ancestor split from the PN2 clade, E1b1b and E1b1a, about 25kya, which is way after the ancestors of all non Africans had already left Africa.
Wherein, the ancestors of all non Africans left Africa over 60-80 thousand years ago.
Therefore; all non Africans (Europeans near easterners etc..) are extremely far, genetically speaking, from both E1b1a and E1b1b carriers.
Africans carrying E1b1b and E1b1a, are and will always be genetically related to eachother, before any other haplogroup, especially a non African lineage.
Unless those said non Africans, carry one of these African lineages; E1b1b or E1b1a.
The only thing that unites any non African to these Africans is the fact that they are carrying a sub Saharan African lineage.
I challenge you to show me another lineage that is closer to this lineage, and diverged as recently from eachother as these lineages, E1b1a and E1b1b did?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ The problem as usual is that some folks' racial ideology hinders their understanding of genetics, and the converse-- genetics refutes racial ideology which is why some choose not to understand it.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ The problem as usual is that some folks' racial ideology hinders their understanding of genetics, and the converse-- genetics refutes racial ideology which is why some choose not to understand it.
Genetics in many cases refutes Phenotypic racial ideology, cultural mythological races...etc
If people want to have true pure races -for whatever purpose- then genetic racism is the only way to go
Posts: 135 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MaximallyAbstract_Faith: [QB] And where is West Africa in all this?
Phenotypic classification is diff, I think there is atleast 10 Phenotypes in Africa, but thats another subject.
Please make another topic about this subject. That you could narrow Africa to merely 10 phenotypes is laughable. Make sure you include your criteria for identifying what distinguishes one from another.
Posts: 72 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ The problem as usual is that some folks' racial ideology hinders their understanding of genetics, and the converse-- genetics refutes racial ideology which is why some choose not to understand it.
correct statement, and obliteration of thread premise.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Please make another topic about this subject. That you could narrow Africa to merely 10 phenotypes is laughable. Make sure you include your criteria for identifying what distinguishes one from another. [/QB]
Oh Rude Negrids...
Phenotypic classification has no clear lines, but I am not even go to go there because you are having a hardtime accepting genetic facts!
You want me to start atopic about phenotypes...again this thread is enough evidence that Negrids are very diff than Somalids liek myself! Jesus on a cross! Negrids please stick to your race Posts: 135 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ is right! It's obvious you are one of those Somalis whose minds are weak enough to be warped by the racialist pseudo-science of white supremacists. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ is right! It's obvious you are one of those Somalis whose minds are weak enough to be warped by the racialist pseudo-science of white supremacists.
Djehu I am not a Somali
I am a Sicilian American
Gentically I am Somalid, just like Koreans or Some Estonians are genetically Mongolid, that doesn't make them Mongolian Posts: 135 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I thought you were on a roll, trying to beat Marc Washington's "thread on Europeans" in providing an uncontested twilight zone of creepy quack-jargon coupled with quack-ideological redundancy and a sense of endlessness. You are backing down on me, are you?
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic