On the plains of Wiltshire in England lie the remains of ancient giant stones. Exactly which people built these stones remains the eternal question. Just like the pyramids of Egypt its origins remain shrouded in mystery. Various theories have been put forward as to the race or otherwise of these builders, but still, much uncertainty remains.
A significant number of people believe that the present peoples of the British Isles were the builders, but a general amnesia seems to have clouded the fact that throughout history, there has been migrations and great dispersals of people, all over the world. The British Isles is no exception. Before the White race finally dominated the Isles, another race of people had long been established there and had left an indelible mark on the history of that territory.
The evidence is simply overwhelming that the earliest inhabitants of Britain and Ireland were in fact peoples of African descent - Blacks. Mythological, archeological, linguistic and other sources have substantiated this remarkable fact.
Candid authorities like the British Egyptologists Gerald Massey and Albert Churchward, the Scottish historian David Mac Ritchie, and the British antiquarian Godfrey Higgins, have done exhaustive research and brought many facts to our knowledge. Tacitus, Pliny, Claudian and other writers have described the Blacks they encountered in the British Isles as “Black as Ethiopians,” “Cum Nigris Gentibus,” “nimble-footed blackamoors,” and so on.
From all indications, the ancient dwellers of the British Isles and Ireland, like the Kymry (one of the names given to the earliest inhabitants, from whom the Picts and Scots descended), were Blacks. David Mac Ritchie has provided substantial evidence in his two-volume work, Ancient and Modern Britons that the Picts as well as the ancient Danes were Blacks.
The Partholans, Formorians, Nemeds, Firbolgs, Tuatha De Danann, Silesians of Ireland and the Picts of Northern Scotland were all Blacks. The Firbolgs (believed to be a section of the Nemeds) are believed to be so-called pygmies or the Taw. They are the dwarfs, dark elves or leprechauns in Irish History. The British Egyptologist Albert Churchward is convinced that the Tuatha-de-Donnas, who came to Ireland, were of the same race and spoke the same language as the Fir-Bogs and the Formorians
Tales of goblins, pixies, fairies, dwarves, leprechauns, ogres, trolls, gnomes, brownies, giants and so on are prevalent in the mythology of the British Isles and Ireland. But what has not been readily revealed is that they are representative of actual humans, the so-called “pygmy” and other Black races that frequented the British Isles and many other places in the dim past.
This book reveals much about the Black presence in the early British Isles, including the “mysterious” builders of Stonehenge. We learn about the Black Fomorians, Partholonians, Nemedians, Firbolgs, Tuatha De Danann, Black Danes, Black Douglases, the giants or Cyclopes and so on.
We also learn about the Black serpent-worshipping Druids who built serpentine monuments like those at Avebury and Carnac, as well as the builders of the Round Towers of Ireland.
The fact remains, that Blacks have played a very important role in the early history, traditions, religion and so on, of early Britain and elsewhere than is generally known and acknowledged.
Posts: 32 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nice post Hanni, but we have covered this subject; see Marc's thread "European nations established only from Medieval times - whites are very new to Europe"
But what we lack are documents and artifacts, do you intend to do any digging?
posted
I bet if stone-henge was located in Siberia and didn't receive the same amount of exagerated attention from the anglo-world, you guys posting above would have never claimed it. It's quite obvious that you unconciuosly highly admire the northwest Europeans even though you counciously behave as if they were your greatest enemy who have stripped you from everything.
Just a subjective observation, i might be wrong. Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hi Hinni i read the book Ancient And Modern Britons years ago. i too find the subject intresting. i made a thread a couple of weeks ago about the lithic monument, in South Africa dating back some, get this"75,000yrs" ago it's called the Adams Calender, said to be the oldest man made structure on the planet. for a look see check it out on youtube. type in Adams Calender and it will popup. btw i am still looking for more mainstream reading on the subject. sorry i dont know how to connect a link yet Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
One thing I notice about these "this and that civilization outside of Africa was built by black people" Afrocentrists is that they show very little interest in Africa itself. They'd rather claim non-Africans as African rather than research real African cultures and history. It's almost as if they've internalized the Eurocentric doctrine that Africa doesn't matter in world history.
posted
Hello Yonis2 i dident propose the builders of Stone-henge to be black or Africans,but Gerald Massey David MC Ritchie and other-19th centery Europeans said so. i beleive before making up my mind,physical antropology must have it's say. after all there used to be tropical adapted people in Europe check,Gemaraldi remains in France.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: There is Egypt and the fact that Humans are indigenous only to Africa.
Well, according to you the ancient Egyptians, and all Africans with thin noses and lips are Caucasian.
So how do you plan on claiming Egypt as an African civilization?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: There is Egypt and the fact that Humans are indigenous only to Africa.
Well, according to you the ancient Egyptians, and all Africans with thin noses and lips are Caucasian.
So how do you plan on claiming Egypt as an African civilization?
I forgot; where did I imply or say that again?
Don't you believe like Clyde and Marc et al. that humans can be separated into pigeonholed racial categories such as "Negroid" "Caucasoid", "Mongoloid" etc..?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by T. Rex: One thing I notice about these "this and that civilization outside of Africa was built by black people" Afrocentrists is that they show very little interest in Africa itself. They'd rather claim non-Africans as African rather than research real African cultures and history. It's almost as if they've internalized the Eurocentric doctrine that Africa doesn't matter in world history.
^ and look whose talking about internalizing Eurocentric doctrines!
quote:Don't you believe that humans can be separated into pigeonholed racial categories such as "Negroid" "Caucasoid", "Mongoloid" etc..?
You clearly mistook Bowcock et al. for Mike. Or vise versa. Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mindless-one Quote - Don't you believe like Clyde and Marc et al. that humans can be separated into pigeonholed racial categories such as "Negroid" "Caucasoid", "Mongoloid" etc..?
There is no etc. there is only three, well maybe only two. We recently proved that Mongols were originally really just slanty-eyed Khoisans.
The rest of that stuff, we developed one night over drinks at Clyde's house. We never expected the commotion that it caused, and we are of course, very sorry for the millions upon millions of deaths that it caused, because White people thought that we were serious.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great, I know you believe that nonsense, and you can believe whatever you want, but this doesn't save you from my question though..
So how do you plan on claiming Egypt as an African civilization, and all elongated Africans as African people, if they don't fit the Negroid morphology that you pigeonhole Africans under?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ how do you get to be asking questions in here when you run like a bitch from yours gringo? lol
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
MindoverMatter718 quote - So how do you plan on claiming Egypt as an African civilization, and all elongated Africans as African people, if they don't fit the Negroid morphology that you pigeonhole Africans under?
Sorry, I must have forgotten about this one too. So when was it I said that again?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^So you forgot already that you adhere to outdated white racialist classifications such as "Negroid" "Caucasoid" and "Mongoloid"?
Meaning that all Africans who do not fit a negroid morphology is admixed with Caucasoid or Mongoloid.
So again, how do you plan on claiming Egypt as an African civilization, and all elongated Africans as African people, if they don't fit the Negroid morphology that you pigeonhole Africans under?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
There have been some crazy posts on this board but this one is near the top. This one really is from the computer lab of a mental institution. British historians know who built Stonehenge and exactly when they did it. There are a good many reacent books on the period and can be found on Amazon at a reasonable price.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
MindoverMatter718 quote - Meaning that all Africans who do not fit a negroid morphology is admixed with Caucasoid or Mongoloid?
Mindless one - I think that you are a bit confused, so I will provide a little clarification.
The word Negro is a Spanish word, it means "Black" In past times, confused Blacks prefered Negro because they felt that it did not have as negative a connotation. Perhaps some still do - King?
But to your question: Yes, any people who do not fall within the normal range of Black Complexions, must necessarily be admixed with Albino White genes. This of course excludes Mongols; who as I stated before, were originally Black Khoisans. The modern Chinese are these original Black Mongols admixed with Albino White genes.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheAmericanPatriot: There have been some crazy posts on this board but this one is near the top. This one really is from the computer lab of a mental institution. British historians know who built Stonehenge and exactly when they did it. There are a good many reacent books on the period and can be found on Amazon at a reasonable price.
Find it and post it a-hole!
Damn you White boys are ignorant.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Look it up Mike. Order the books and read for a change. I told you where to find the books. Do I have to hold your hand to get you through it?
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
There are probably hundreds of myths and legends about Stonehenge. Various people have attributed the building of this great megalith to the Danes, Romans, Saxons, Greeks, Atlanteans, Egyptians, Phoenicians Celts, King Aurelius Ambrosious, Merlin, and even Aliens.
One of the most popular beliefs was that Stonehenge was built by the Druids. These high priests of the Celts, constructed it for sacrificial ceremonies. It was John Aubrey, who first linked Stonehenge to the Druids. Additionally, Dr. William Stukeley, another Stonehenge antiquary, also claimed the Druids were Stonehenge's builders. Stukeley studied Stonehenge a century later than Aubrey and became so involved in the study of the Druid religion that he himself became one. Through his work he was very instrumental in popularizing the theory that Stonehenge was built by Druids.
Unfortunately researchers have proven this age-old theory linking Stonehenge's construction to the Druids impossible. Through modern radio carbon dating techniques, scientists have discovered that its builders completed Stonehenge over a thousand years before the Celts ever inhabited this region, eliminating Druids from the possibilities. Usually Druids worshipped in marshes and forests, but it has been verified that they did use Stonehenge occasionally as a temple of worship and sacrifice when they moved into the region. Modern Druids, formally named the Grand Lodge of the Ancient Order of Druids, still congregate at Stonehenge on the midsummer solstice, clad in white robes and hoods. As recently as 1905, the Druids initiated 258 novices inside these stones on midsummer solstice. Today, for fear of its desecration, Stonehenge is usually shut off to public access on midsummer's eve.
Stonehenge 1905 Druids Most scientists agree on the modern theory that three tribes built Stonehenge at three separate times. In approximately 3000 B.C., it is believe the first people to work on the site were Neolithic agrarians. Archaeologists named them the Windmill Hill people after one of their earthworks on Windmill Hill, which is near Stonehenge. The Windmill Hill peoples built large circular furrows, or hill-top enclosures, dug around a mound and had collective burials in large stone-encased tombs. Most of their burial mounds point east-west. These people were a blend of the local peoples and Neolithic tribe members from Eastern England. They were one of the first semi-nomadic hunting and gathering groups with an agricultural economy and contained a strong reverence for circles and symmetry. They raised cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, grew wheat and mined flint.
The Beaker people, or Beaker Folk, came from Europe at the end of the Neolithic Period and invaded Salisbury Plain around 2000 B.C. Their name comes from one of their ancient traditions in which they would bury beakers, or pottery drinking cups, with their dead. Instead of burring their dead in mass graves, they showed more reverence for death by placing them in small round graves marked by mounds called tumuli. It is assumed by archaeologists that the Beaker People were more warlike in nature than most tribes of their time because they buried their dead with more weapons, such as daggers and battle axes. The Beaker Folk were highly organized, industrious, used sophisticated mathematical concepts, and managed their society by using a chieftain system. They began using metal implements and living in a more communal fashion. Scientists believe they were sun worshipers who aligned Stonehenge more exactly with certain important sun events, such as mid summer and winter solstices.
Stonehenge Markings The Wessex Peoples are considered the third and final peoples to work on the Stonehenge site. They arrived around 1500 B.C. at the height of the Bronze Age. They were by far one of the most advanced cultures outside the Mediterranean during this period. Since their tribal base were located where ridgeways, or ancient roads, met, they became skillful and well-organized traders, controlling trade routes throughout Southern Britain. These people are thought to have been responsible for the bronze dagger carving found on one of the large sarsen stones within Stonehenge. They were a very smart culture, wealthy, and used greater precision in their calculations and construction. It is felt they used these talents in finalizing Stonehenge into what we see today.
Search
Web aboutstonehenge.info
Website Sponsor Unlimited Access to Your PC from Anywhere. Get 45 Days Free!
Unlimited Gifts! The best place to download music, movies, games, and lots more.
posted
TheAmericanPatriot - Most scientists agree on the modern theory that three tribes built Stonehenge at three separate times. In approximately 3000 B.C.
A-hole, do I need to tell you that this means that THEY DON'T KNOW!!!!!!!
(pist - a givaway was the words "Most and Theory")
Plus whether you believe the Celts were Black or White, they didn't reach Britain until 500 B.C. and the Anglo-Saxons didn't get there until about 400 A.D. So guess what a-hole, Blacks were the only ones who COULD have Built Stonehenge!!!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And you just may be right. It's called the be-like complex.
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: I bet if stone-henge was located in Siberia and didn't receive the same amount of exagerated attention from the anglo-world, you guys posting above would have never claimed it. It's quite obvious that you unconciuosly highly admire the northwest Europeans even though you counciously behave as if they were your greatest enemy who have stripped you from everything.
Just a subjective observation, i might be wrong.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you still blowing him Jeeves? Please wash up before you bring my drink. lol
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
TheAmericanPatriot – I am going to make this as simple as I can. So that even a dumb-assed White boy like yourself can understand it. Problem is that you might need some math skills and be able to think a little bit.
As I see it, your problem is with the words Druids, Beaker people, Wessex people. This because your very own people are degenerate liars, especially when it comes to history. And they have told you that those named people were White.
So let’s do a little detective work: It is established scientific fact that the first modern man humans in Europe was the Khoisan type African called Grimaldi, he entered Europe at about 45,000 B.C.
In the scientific conversations (as posted here from wiki), concerning when Whites left the Central Asian plains to enter Europe, even the most wild theories don’t see Whites leaving the plains before about 3,000 B.C.
So unless you think that the original people in Britain were Mongols, the ONLY humans in Europe at 3,000 B.C. were Black.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike , You are incorrect. European tribles were in the area long before 3000 BC. The Windmill Hill people are related to other northern euro tribes. You have been reading too much afrocentric trash.
Posts: 2069 | From: Texas | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ For the thousandth time....SOURCE, or STFU!!!????
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
TheAmericanPatriot - because an ignorant White mind is a terrible thing to waste.
GAULS
The Gauls were a Continental Celtic people of Classical Antiquity, the inhabitants of Gaul (roughly corresponding to modern France, Belgium, Switzerland and northern Italy), and speakers of the Gaulish language.
Archaeologically, they were the bearers of the La Tène culture (5th to 1st centuries BCE). In the 3rd century BCE, the Gauls expanded towards the southeast in a series of invasions, including the Gallic Invasion of Greece, settling as far east as Anatolia, as the Galatians.
They were conquered by Julius Caesar in the Gallic Wars in the 50s BCE, and during the Roman Empire period became assimilated into a Gallo-Roman culture. During the crisis of the third century, there was briefly a breakaway Gallic Empire under Postumus, Marcus Aurelius Marius and Tetricus I. By the arrival of the Franks during the Migration period (5th century), the Gaulish language had been replaced by Vulgar Latin.
Although the tribes were moderately stable political entities, Gaul as a whole tended to be politically divided, there being virtually no unity among the various tribes. Only during particularly trying times, such as the invasion of Caesar, could the Gauls unite under a single leader like Vercingetorix.
DRUID
A druid was a member of the priestly and learned class in the ancient Celtic societies of Western Europe, Britain and Ireland. They were suppressed by the Roman government and disappeared from the written record by the second century CE. Druids combined the duties of priest, judge, scholar, and teacher. Little contemporary evidence for them exists, and thus little can be said of them with assurance, but they continued to feature prominently in later Irish myth and literature. Most of what is known about them comes from the Roman writers.
Julius Caesar, in his book, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, comments:
All Gaul is divided into three parts, one of which the Belgae inhabit, the Aquitani another, those who in their own language are called Celts, in ours Gauls, the third. All these differ from each other in language, customs and laws. The Garonne River separates the Gauls from the Aquitani; the River Marne and the River Seine separate them from the Belgae. Of all these, the Belgae are the bravest, because they are furthest from the civilisation and refinement of (our) Province, and merchants least frequently resort to them, and import those things which tend to effeminate the mind; and they are the nearest to the Germani, who dwell beyond the Rhine, with whom they are continually waging war; for which reason the Helvetii also surpass the rest of the Gauls in valour, as they contend with the Germani in almost daily battles, when they either repel them from their own territories, or themselves wage war on their frontiers. One part of these, which it has been said that the Gauls occupy, takes its beginning at the River Rhone; it is bounded by the Garonne River, the Atlantic Ocean, and the territories of the Belgae; it borders, too, on the side of the Sequani and the Helvetii, upon the River Rhine, and stretches toward the north. The Belgae rises from the extreme frontier of Gaul, extend to the lower part of the River Rhine; and look toward the north and the rising sun. Aquitania extends from the Garonne to the Pyrenees and to that part of the Atlantic (Bay of Biscay) which is near Spain: it looks between the setting of the sun, and the north star.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Yonis2: I bet if stone-henge was located in Siberia and didn't receive the same amount of exagerated attention from the anglo-world, you guys posting above would have never claimed it. It's quite obvious that you unconciuosly highly admire the northwest Europeans even though you counciously behave as if they were your greatest enemy who have stripped you from everything.
Just a subjective observation, i might be wrong.
Good post Yonis, some these brand name Negroes in these forums subconsciously love these whites and it shows in that they claim everything that the white man has done was done by a mythical group of blacks who created something and were mysteriously killed off rather quickly.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I rarely comment on the "Everything Black" made threads but really How can you expect people to believe that these Blacks created civilizations in Europe, or Asia then were somehow killed off so easily.
One thing you have to say about Blacks(Africans) is that they are a hard people to kill. Africans in America were under oppression, and yet there numbers bloomed to 45 million. In Brazil they tried to bleach the Blacks out of existence with allowing every "White" ethnicitie into the country. Yet Blacks are at least 85 million strong.
Now seeing all of this, How can anyone be convinced that these Blacks in europe or asia died(Genocide) when the Whites came along. It just seems unbelieveable.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
King, Bass - YOUR problem. All I know is that dumb niggers are dangerous, they almost kept us from being freed!
From “The Root”
In the black community, despite strident critiques of his attitudes about blacks by historians such as Bennett, Lincoln continues to occupy a place of almost holy reverence, the patron saint of race relations. But the truth is that until very late in his presidency, Lincoln was deeply conflicted about whether to liberate the slaves, how to liberate the slaves and what to do with them once they had been liberated. Whereas abolition was a central aspect of Lincoln’s moral compass, racial equality was not. In fact, Lincoln wrestled with three distinct but sometimes overlapping discourses related to race: slavery, equality and colonization. Isolating these three—like the three strands of a braid of hair—helps us to understand how conflicted the man was about African Americans and their place in this country.
Interspersed among these three discourses is the manner in which Lincoln seems to have wrestled with his own use of the “N-word.” Lincoln used the word far less than did Stephen Douglas, his Democratic challenger for the U.S. Senate, but he did indeed use it in prominent contexts including debates and public speeches. Even as late as April 1862, James Redpath recorded Lincoln’s saying of President Fabre Nicholas Geffard of Haiti (who had offered to send a white man as his ambassador to the United States), “You can tell the President of Haiti that I shan’t tear my shirt if he sends a nigger here!”
Lincoln despised slavery as an institution, an economic institution that discriminated against white men who couldn’t afford to own slaves and, thus, could not profit from the advantage in the marketplace that slaves provided. At the same time, however, he was deeply ambivalent about the status of black people vis-à-vis white people, having fundamental doubts about their innate intelligence and their capacity to fight nobly with guns against white men in the initial years of the Civil War.
Even as he was writing the Emancipation Proclamation during the summer of 1862, Lincoln was working feverishly to ship all those slaves he was about to free out of the United States. So taken was he with the concept of colonization that he invited five black men to the White House and offered them funding to found a black republic in Panama, for the slaves he was about to free. Earlier, he had advocated that the slaves be freed and shipped to Liberia or Haiti. And just one month before the Emancipation became the law of the land, in his Annual Message to Congress on Dec. 1, 1862, Lincoln proposed a constitutional amendment that would “appropriate money, and otherwise provide, for colonizing free colored persons with their own consent, at any place or places without the United States.”
Two things dramatically changed Lincoln’s attitudes toward black people. First, in the early years, the North was losing the Civil War, and Lincoln quickly realized that the margin of difference between a Southern victory and a Northern victory would be black men. So, despite severe reservations that he had expressed about the courage of black troops (“If we were to arm them, I fear that in a few weeks the arms would be in the hands of the rebels…”), Lincoln included in the Emancipation Proclamation a provision authorizing black men to fight for the Union. The other factor that began to affect his attitudes about blacks was meeting Frederick Douglass. Lincoln met with Douglass at the White House three times. He was the first black person Lincoln treated as an intellectual equal, and he grew to admire him and value his opinion.
Three days before he was shot, Lincoln stood on the second floor of the White House and made a speech to a crowd assembled outside celebrating the recent Union victory over the Confederacy. With his troops and Frederick Douglass very much in mind, Lincoln told the cheering crowd, which had demanded that he come to the window to address them, that he had decided to recommend that his 200,000 black troops and “the very intelligent Negroes” be given the right to vote.
Standing in the crowd was John Wilkes Booth. Hearing those words, Booth turned to a man next to him and said, “That means nigger citizenship. Now, by God! I'll put him through. That is the last speech he will ever make.” Three days later, during the third act of Our American Cousin, Booth followed through with his promise.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^ My context is that Lincoln was an intelligent man, he must have based his opinion on something. Fact is, that if I didn't know any better, and I ran across too many like King and Bass, I might have the same opinion.
Quote; At the same time, however, he was deeply ambivalent about the status of black people vis-à-vis white people, having fundamental doubts about their innate intelligence and their capacity to fight nobly with guns against white men in the initial years of the Civil War.
Thus; dumb niggers are dangerous, they almost kept us from being freed!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
What you posted is truth. I have no comeback because I am learning about just how hard African Americans had it in America.
Lincoln if what you posted is the truth(Which I think It is) then he was really as biased in his thinking like any other person of those time were.
I will never make fun of the plight of Blacks in America. There is a story to tell and to have us move forward as One people, we need to properly discuss what happened to move on.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike you are a deeply confused man. This is why you prefer a sanitised version of history from a Harvard English teacher to the truth from historian Lerone Bennett's book. Bennett in fact shows that the idea Lincoln was somehow "ambivalent" is not accurate. Mike you are becoming all too predictable now.
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
King I like your response, even though I was very harsh with you, you still understood that there was something for you to learn. So fine, I will teach you. Unfortunately I will have to impart some personal information, but what the hell.
Half Black – One more admixture with White and subject would be indistinguishable from average White person.
Half Black – One more admixture with White and subject would be indistinguishable from average White person.
Extended Coloured family with roots in Cape Town – Many levels of Black/White mixture
I am of a rare Y-DNA profile. The major element is below. There are NO known White Males in my line. All ancestral males were of a dark Brown complexion.
I hope that this will help you visualize what happened to the Blacks in Europe.
Please remember that we are talking about 2,000+ years of admixture. I AM NOT EUROPEAN!
Haplogroup I1 In human genetics, Haplogroup I1 is a Y chromosome haplogroup occurring at greatest frequency in Scandinavia, associated with the mutations identified as M253, M307, P30, and P40. These are known as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). It is a subclade of Haplogroup I. Before a reclassification in 2008, the group was known as Haplogroup I1a. Some individuals and organizations continue to use the I1a designation.
The group displays a very clear frequency gradient, with a peak of approximately 40 percent among the populations of western Finland and more than 50 percent in the province of Satakunta, around 35 percent in southern Norway, southwestern Sweden especially on the island of Gotland, and Denmark, with rapidly decreasing frequencies toward the edges of the historically Germanic sphere of influence.
For several years the prevailing theory was that during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) the predecessors of the I1 group sought refuge in the Balkans. For a time, the Ukraine was considered as an alternative. Yet, The Genographic Project claims that the founder of the I1 branch lived on the Iberian Peninsula during the LGM. Some have given southern France and the Italian peninsula as possible sites as well. Although the locations vary, proponents of the refuge theories do seem to agree on one issue: that the I1 subclade is from 15,000 to 20,000 years old.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Extended Coloured family with roots in Cape Town – Many levels of Black/White mixture
Mike, I'd like to meet the one third from right in middle row, and fourth from left, same row. I am single, successful, and can travel. Please forward each my picture.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
rasol was right, pure comedy.
Printer-friendly view of this topic