Above is a picture of Cro-Magnon man, the first anatomically modern European. The first Europeans were the Bushman or Khoisan people.
This is a bushman or San.
Hottentot
As I mentioned earlier the Bushman created much of the early civilization of Eurasia. They left us numerous figurines showing their type.
Venus Figurines
The Bushman continue to carry this ancient form.
The Aurignacian civilization was founded by the Cro-Magnon people who originated in Africa. They took this culture to Western Europe across the Straits of Gibraltar. The Cro-Magnon people were probably Bushman/Khoi.
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.
The Boule and Vallois research makes it clear that the Bushman expanded across Africa on into Europe via Spain as the Grimaldi people. This makes it clear that the Bushman/Khoisan people were not isolated in South Africa. The Khoisan people carry the haplogroup N. The Hadza are Bushman they carry haplogroup N.
Cro-Magnon people carried haplogroup N:
quote:
Specific mtDNA sites outside HVRI were also analyzed (by amplification, cloning, and sequencing of the surrounding region) to classify more precisely the ancient sequences within the phylogenetic network of present-time mtDNAs (35, 36). Paglicci-25 has the following motifs: +7,025 AluI, 00073A, 11719G, and 12308A. Therefore, this sequence belongs to either haplogroups HV or pre-HV, two haplogroups rare in general but with a comparatively high frequencies among today's Near-Easterners (35). Paglicci-12 shows the motifs 00073G, 10873C, 10238T, and AACC between nucleotide positions 10397 and 10400, which allows the classification of this sequence into the macrohaplogroupN,containing haplogroups W, X, I, N1a, N1b, N1c, and N*. Following the definition given in ref. 36, the presence of a single mutation in 16,223 within HRVI suggests a classification of Paglicci-12 into the haplogroup N*, which is observed today in several samples from the Near East and, at lower frequencies, in the Caucasus (35). It is difficult to say whether the apparent evolutionary relationship between Paglicci-25 and Paglicci-12 and those populations is more than a coincidence. Indeed, the haplogroups to which the Cro-Magnon type sequences appear to belong are rare among modern samples, and therefore their frequencies are poorly estimated. However, genetic affinities between the first anatomically modern Europeans and current populations of the Near East make sense in the light of the likely routes of Upper Paleolithic human expansions in Europe, as documented in the archaeological record (37).
posted
False, the first europeans were Upper Paleolithic Whites, they do look similat to Khoisan because they share some body characteristics, but they aren't Khoisan(it would be the same as saying the latter euros were Mongolians, because some of them also share Mongolic traits.You will find similar characteristic in all races, as they are all human.
Posts: 1106 | From: Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: False, the first europeans were Upper Paleolithic Whites, they do look similat to Khoisan because they share some body characteristics, but they aren't Khoisan(it would be the same as saying the latter euros were Mongolians, because some of them also share Mongolic traits.You will find similar characteristic in all races, as they are all human.
prmiddleeastern: To say that stupidity without even attempting to substantiate it with artifact or data, puts you in the same league with Dirkie and the Afroidiots. Congratulations, you have finally reached your natural level.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: False, the first europeans were Upper Paleolithic Whites, they do look similat to Khoisan because they share some body characteristics, but they aren't Khoisan(it would be the same as saying the latter euros were Mongolians, because some of them also share Mongolic traits.You will find similar characteristic in all races, as they are all human.
This is the first European. Is he white to you? Please explain.
This is the first European. Is he white to you? Please explain.
.
Is that a mumified body or just an illustrative artwork from the imagination of an artist?
Posts: 1106 | From: Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Ha,Ha, Ha-you're funny...and Sad.
No,is it a mumified body or th imagiantion of an artist?Because I don't consider an artist imagiantion a fact.
Posts: 1106 | From: Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde - I see that you are determined to continue with the Cro-magnon as modern-man assertion.
Well simply calling Grimaldi a Cro-Magnon will not provide any help. As any creditable source will tell you, Cro-magnon entered Europe at about 30,000 B.C. (See Wiki article below).
The term Cro-Magnon (pronounced /kroʊˈmæɡnən/, French [kʀomaɲɔ̃]) refers to one of the main types of early modern humans (Homo sapiens) of the European Upper Paleolithic. The earliest known remains of Cro-Magnon like humans are dated to 30,000 radiocarbon years. The name is taken from the cave of Crô-Magnon in southwest France, where the first specimen was found.
The Cro-Magnon term falls outside the usual naming conventions for early humans and is often used in a general sense to describe the oldest modern people in Europe, while remaining, anthropologically speaking, a specific (but very frequent) subtype among the fossil remains. In recent scientific literature the term "European early modern humans" is used instead.
The oldest definitely dated European early modern humans (EEMH) specimen [1] with modern and archaic, possibly Neanderthal, mosaic of traits is Oase 1 from 34,000–36,000 14C years ago.
Yet the story that accompanies your skull above says that it is from 36-40,000 B.C. So even though, in the story, they - like you, call the skeletons Cro-Magnon, they cannot be. But of course their PURPOSE is to confuse the issue.
In my opinion, by caving-in to terminology that Whites want, you are helping the White world to continue ignoring the actual and real modern Human Grimaldi skeletons in southern France.
As long as those skeletons are allowed to be ignored, the White man will have an opportunity to continue falsifying history.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I disagree Mike. The term for the Grimaldi is Cro-Magnon. As a result, I use the term so people can find information about the first Europeans.
Just because the Europeans use this term does not make it a negative term. What people need to know and what I am doing is making people aware of the fact that Europeans have replaced the term Grimaldi with Cro-Magnon. In this way people will know the trickology Eurocentrists use to "white" African people out of history.
quote: Keith, Arthur. Ancient Types of Man, (1911) Chapter VI, The Grimaldi or Negroid Type in Europe, page 59-63:
In the cliffs which flank the beach near Men-tone there are a number of caves which for a long period of time afforded a habitation for ancient man. At the close of the last and at the beginning of the present century, largely owing to the interest taken in the history of primitive man by the Prince of Monaco, systematic excavations were carried out in deep strata of their floors. In one of these, the "Grotte des Enfants," usually named the Grimaldi Cave, the various strata of the floor made up a thickness of 8 1/2 metres (28 feet). In the lowest layer of all were found two skeletons—one of a woman past middle life, with a stature estimated at 1570 mm. (5 ft. 2 in.), and the other of a boy about sixteen to seventeen years of age, and about 1550 mm. (5 ft. 1 in.) in height.
As you can see the name for the Cro-Magnon Caves, is really Grimaldi Cave.
.
.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Clyde - I see that you are determined to continue with the Cro-magnon as modern-man assertion.
Well simply calling Grimaldi a Cro-Magnon will not provide any help. As any creditable source will tell you, Cro-magnon entered Europe at about 30,000 B.C. (See Wiki article below).
The term Cro-Magnon (pronounced /kroʊˈmæɡnən/, French [kʀomaɲɔ̃]) refers to one of the main types of early modern humans (Homo sapiens) of the European Upper Paleolithic. The earliest known remains of Cro-Magnon like humans are dated to 30,000 radiocarbon years. The name is taken from the cave of Crô-Magnon in southwest France, where the first specimen was found.
The Cro-Magnon term falls outside the usual naming conventions for early humans and is often used in a general sense to describe the oldest modern people in Europe, while remaining, anthropologically speaking, a specific (but very frequent) subtype among the fossil remains. In recent scientific literature the term "European early modern humans" is used instead.
The oldest definitely dated European early modern humans (EEMH) specimen [1] with modern and archaic, possibly Neanderthal, mosaic of traits is Oase 1 from 34,000–36,000 14C years ago.
Yet the story that accompanies your skull above says that it is from 36-40,000 B.C. So even though, in the story, they - like you, call the skeletons Cro-Magnon, they cannot be. But of course their PURPOSE is to confuse the issue.
In my opinion, by caving-in to terminology that Whites want, you are helping the White world to continue ignoring the actual and real modern Human Grimaldi skeletons in southern France.
As long as those skeletons are allowed to be ignored, the White man will have an opportunity to continue falsifying history.
posted
For the newbies; These are the skeletons that we are talking about.
Clyde, to see how wrong you are, just remember back a few years; If you entered Grimaldi in your search engine, all you would have gotten was a very few Black sites like Myra's.
Now, you will find all sorts of White sites, and they all want to claim Grimaldi as Cro-magnon instead of modern man African Khoisans. You are simply helping them in this falsification of history.
It will become clear that the White man is using his control of media to falsify history and deny that modern man Africans were the first actual Humans to settle Europe.
From Wiki Grimaldi man
The name of Grimaldi man has been given in the early 20th century to a supposedly new species of paleolithic men, which was then believed to have negroid features. Today, the existence of a separate "negroid" species is believed to be partly an error, partly a hoax [1], and the two Grimaldi skeletons are considered to be Cro-Magnons. An article by Masset, based on the work of P. Legoux [2], distinguishes between the malevolent hoax of the Piltdown man and the Grimaldi hoax, as Masset discards the hypothesis of deceit.
In June 1901, canon de Villeneuve discovered two prehistoric skeletons in a cave of Grimaldi. One was an older woman, the other an adolescent. Reportedly, de Villeneuve was struck by the prognathism of the skulls [3]. The skulls having been damaged by the earth pressure, such observation would not have made much sense, but it has been established later that the old woman was indeed prognathic. Having lost all the molars of the lower jaw, she suffered from a phenomenon known in orthodontics, where the upper dental group is progressively translated forward. The lower part of the face becomes more protruded [4]. The adolescent had all his teeth, but these were manipulated by the anthropologists M. Boule and R. Verneau, when trying to reconstruct the skull and the face. M. Boule drilled the maxillaries in order to release the wisdom teeth that were still inside them. By doing this, he changed the face, as the natural growth of the wisdom teeth would have remodeled the dental arc in a natural way, which had not taken place yet. Having then too many teeth, he displaced them, possibly bearing in mind the prognathism of the woman, as a solution for the puzzle he was facing. The reconstruction was however not physiologically credible. The diagnosis of "prognathism" in the adolescent is hence without foundation - artificial and more or less intentionally created. Based on these characteristics, Boule and Verneau concluded that the two specimen were "negroid". Other non-negroïd characteristics were discarded. The fact that nowhere else in Europe such discoveries had been made did not seem to raise any concern, as it was believed that more were to follow. [edit] Museum Display Cro-Magnon, remains of Grimaldi, found at Monaco
The manipulation was then improved by preparing the fossils for museographic display. In order to make the prognathism very visible, the skeletons were not displayed as they had been found, the adolescent on his back and the woman face-down, but were prepared lying on their side, moreover suggesting a ritual burial. Photos of this display can be found in textbooks, without reference to the manipulations.
However, according to Masset, Dr. Verneau, although being the author of a hoax, should not be considered as a cheater. He documented his manipulations (at least partially), which he perfomed with the sole intention to accentuate a feature he really believed to be present. His honesty is further corroborated as he also made photos of the excavation, where one can see the old woman lying in a face-down position. Such photos were quite rare for that time. [edit] Motivation
The Piltdown Man, discovered in 1912 (and definitively unmasked as hoax in 1953) was immediately accepted by many paleontologists, because it conveniently satisfied the need for a proof of the "missing link" between ape and man. Moreover, it helped the British paleontologists, who had no prestigious counterparts for the many discoveries on the continent. In spite of Boule's conclusion that Piltdown was a forgery (in 1915), scientists continued to believe in it, until modern dating methods finally exposed the fraud. In the same way, Grimaldi satisfied the need for an ancestor for Black people. The Cro-Magnon was an acceptable "white" ancestor, and findings in Chancelade suggested one for the "yellow" race[5]. Hence the wish to see negroid features in the skeletons, the lack of scientific prudence, and the extraordinary consequences claimed by some upon this finding[6]. Marianne Cornevin and Jean Leclant [7]are less tolerant in their judgment: they suggest that the Grimaldi man and the Chancelade man are imaginations resulting from the theories of Arthur de Gobineau, to prove the superiority and anteriority of the white race. [edit] References in literature
No new discoveries of this type have been made, though some have been reported (without substance or reference): reportedly Mikhail Gersasimov identified other skeletons as Grimaldi [8]. The Grimaldi Man still lives further in literature, unexposed as a hoax, though rather as a footnote, possibly because of its relative obscurity, or because most references are in French. Sir Arthur Keith[9] points out that the Grimaldi skeletons also show non-negroid features, but concludes then that Grimaldi must have been of a mixed type[10]. He provides explanation for the oddity of finding "negroid" features in Europe: the land connections between Africa and Europe have been much closer in the time of Grimaldi (however, the Strait of Gibraltar is known to be open for the last 5.33 million years[11], today 14 km wide from rock to rock, and, during the deepest Ice Age, some 7-10 km). The belief in its reality as a separate species is held by many afrocentrists[12]. The belief sustains a theory that white man only appeared around 20,000 years ago, as a mutant of the negroid Grimaldi. State of the art science, based on genetics, places the origins of Europeans in a migration from Africa to the Middle-East around 70,000 years ago, see Wikipedia article: Recent African origin of modern humans.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
It will become clear that the White man is using his control of media to falsify history and deny that modern man Africans were the first actual Humans to settle Europe.
From Wiki Grimaldi man
The name of Grimaldi man has been given in the early 20th century to a supposedly new species of paleolithic men, which was then believed to have negroid features. Today, the existence of a separate "negroid" species is believed to be partly an error, partly a hoax [1], and the two Grimaldi skeletons are considered to be Cro-Magnons. An article by Masset, based on the work of P. Legoux [2], distinguishes between the malevolent hoax of the Piltdown man and the Grimaldi hoax, as Masset discards the hypothesis of deceit.
In June 1901, canon de Villeneuve discovered two prehistoric skeletons in a cave of Grimaldi. One was an older woman, the other an adolescent. Reportedly, de Villeneuve was struck by the prognathism of the skulls [3]. The skulls having been damaged by the earth pressure, such observation would not have made much sense, but it has been established later that the old woman was indeed prognathic. Having lost all the molars of the lower jaw, she suffered from a phenomenon known in orthodontics, where the upper dental group is progressively translated forward. The lower part of the face becomes more protruded [4]. The adolescent had all his teeth, but these were manipulated by the anthropologists M. Boule and R. Verneau, when trying to reconstruct the skull and the face. M. Boule drilled the maxillaries in order to release the wisdom teeth that were still inside them. By doing this, he changed the face, as the natural growth of the wisdom teeth would have remodeled the dental arc in a natural way, which had not taken place yet. Having then too many teeth, he displaced them, possibly bearing in mind the prognathism of the woman, as a solution for the puzzle he was facing. The reconstruction was however not physiologically credible. The diagnosis of "prognathism" in the adolescent is hence without foundation - artificial and more or less intentionally created. Based on these characteristics, Boule and Verneau concluded that the two specimen were "negroid". Other non-negroïd characteristics were discarded. The fact that nowhere else in Europe such discoveries had been made did not seem to raise any concern, as it was believed that more were to follow. [edit] Museum Display Cro-Magnon, remains of Grimaldi, found at Monaco
The manipulation was then improved by preparing the fossils for museographic display. In order to make the prognathism very visible, the skeletons were not displayed as they had been found, the adolescent on his back and the woman face-down, but were prepared lying on their side, moreover suggesting a ritual burial. Photos of this display can be found in textbooks, without reference to the manipulations.
However, according to Masset, Dr. Verneau, although being the author of a hoax, should not be considered as a cheater. He documented his manipulations (at least partially), which he perfomed with the sole intention to accentuate a feature he really believed to be present. His honesty is further corroborated as he also made photos of the excavation, where one can see the old woman lying in a face-down position. Such photos were quite rare for that time. [edit] Motivation
The Piltdown Man, discovered in 1912 (and definitively unmasked as hoax in 1953) was immediately accepted by many paleontologists, because it conveniently satisfied the need for a proof of the "missing link" between ape and man. Moreover, it helped the British paleontologists, who had no prestigious counterparts for the many discoveries on the continent. In spite of Boule's conclusion that Piltdown was a forgery (in 1915), scientists continued to believe in it, until modern dating methods finally exposed the fraud. In the same way, Grimaldi satisfied the need for an ancestor for Black people. The Cro-Magnon was an acceptable "white" ancestor, and findings in Chancelade suggested one for the "yellow" race[5]. Hence the wish to see negroid features in the skeletons, the lack of scientific prudence, and the extraordinary consequences claimed by some upon this finding[6]. Marianne Cornevin and Jean Leclant [7]are less tolerant in their judgment: they suggest that the Grimaldi man and the Chancelade man are imaginations resulting from the theories of Arthur de Gobineau, to prove the superiority and anteriority of the white race. [edit] References in literature
No new discoveries of this type have been made, though some have been reported (without substance or reference): reportedly Mikhail Gersasimov identified other skeletons as Grimaldi [8]. The Grimaldi Man still lives further in literature, unexposed as a hoax, though rather as a footnote, possibly because of its relative obscurity, or because most references are in French. Sir Arthur Keith[9] points out that the Grimaldi skeletons also show non-negroid features, but concludes then that Grimaldi must have been of a mixed type[10]. He provides explanation for the oddity of finding "negroid" features in Europe: the land connections between Africa and Europe have been much closer in the time of Grimaldi (however, the Strait of Gibraltar is known to be open for the last 5.33 million years[11], today 14 km wide from rock to rock, and, during the deepest Ice Age, some 7-10 km). The belief in its reality as a separate species is held by many afrocentrists[12]. The belief sustains a theory that white man only appeared around 20,000 years ago, as a mutant of the negroid Grimaldi. State of the art science, based on genetics, places the origins of Europeans in a migration from Africa to the Middle-East around 70,000 years ago, see Wikipedia article: Recent African origin of modern humans.
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: False, the first europeans were Upper Paleolithic Whites,
They weren't white, as white skin didn't arise until thousands of years later.
And they weren't Khoisan either as cranio-metric and genetic data indicates.
Indeed the first Europeans resembled modern tropical peoples I.e. Oceanic's and Africans.
This is the point of the Explorers thread, he notes the resemblance Cro-Magnon shares with the type Mechta-Afalou and Mechtoids from north Africa, but no apparent specific ties are noted with any early AMH from central or southwest Asia.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The term for the Grimaldi is Cro-Magnon.
Clyde, you do understand that Grimaldi and Cro-Magnon are names given to anatomically modern humans in Europe because of the area they were found in right?
Both resembling modern tropical people.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey KIK. The man said Grimaldi=San/Khoisan/Bushmen. . .you DO know THEY are modern men. But . . .a second thought. . . maybe YOU don't believe they are AMH.
You seem to be a knowledgeable guy. Try to process all that knowledge now. LOL
I beleive the Afrocentrics are pulling ahead. Genetics is giving us the momentum.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Hey KIK. The man said Grimaldi=San/Khoisan/Bushmen. . .you DO know THEY are modern men. But . . .a second thought. . . maybe YOU don't believe they are AMH.
You seem to be a knowledgeable guy. Try to process all that knowledge now. LOL
I beleive the Afrocentrics are pulling ahead. Genetics is giving us the momentum.
Hey twit, the man actually said the term for Grimaldi is Cro-Magnon, of which I noted is false as Cro Magnon and Grimaldi are simply the locations that AMH were named after since that's where they were found.
Btw, did you forget your obligations on the first page of the Explorers thread?
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: In one breath they talk like CM is AMM and in another he is a different species and he went extinct.
Can you cite a reference that states the skeletal remains found in Cro-Magnon cave, France, was another species separate from AMH?
Question #2 is how would the AMH dubbed Cro-Magnon be of a different species when its noted by numerous anthropologists to resemble modern Australians and Africans like all other early humans in Europe?
Question #3 do you know of the ties Cro-Magnon shares with Mechta-Afalou and Mechtoids from north Africa?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The term for the Grimaldi is Cro-Magnon.
Clyde, you do understand that Grimaldi and Cro-Magnon are names given to anatomically modern humans in Europe because of the area they were found in right?
Both resembling modern tropical people.
Yes I do. Just like we use the term African to refer to where this population is mainly found.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The term for the Grimaldi is Cro-Magnon.
Clyde, you do understand that Grimaldi and Cro-Magnon are names given to anatomically modern humans in Europe because of the area they were found in right?
Both resembling modern tropical people.
Yes I do. Just like we use the term African to refer to where this population is mainly found.
Just like Omo I found in Omo Ethiopia and Hofmeyr found in Hofmeyr south Africa or Qazfeh found in Qazfeh Isreal. Neanderthal named after Neander valley, Germany.
Then there shouldn't have been any reason for you to say the term for Grimaldi is Cro-Magnon, correct?
Which is like saying the term for Omo I is actually Hofmeyr...
The terms are simply names applied to anatomically modern humans who are dubbed after the places they were found.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
Below is the mythical Cro-Magnon man created by the Eurocentrist to make it appear the first people of European looked like contemporary Europeans.
European early modern humans and the fate of the Neandertals
Erik Trinkaus*
"As a result of an ongoing cleansing of the fossil record through direct radiometric dating, a series of obviously modern, and in fact Late Upper Paleolithic or Holocene, human remains have been removed from consideration (7). This cleansing has helped to dilute the impression that the earliest modern humans in Europe were just like recent European populations.Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
Cro-Magnon is officially described as an archaic form of Modern Humans. Now Scientifically defined as Homo Sapien.
Archaic means:
2 : of, relating to, or characteristic of an earlier or more primitive time.
4 : surviving from an earlier period; specifically : typical of a previously dominant evolutionary stage.
Since Africans are indisputably "Modern Humans" and "up-to-date" in every way, and NOT Archaic Humans, I just don't see why you find the difference difficult to understand.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^Neither of which is actually true.
Cro-Magnon is officially described as an archaic form of Modern Humans. Now Scientifically defined as Homo Sapien.
Archaic means:
2 : of, relating to, or characteristic of an earlier or more primitive time.
4 : surviving from an earlier period; specifically : typical of a previously dominant evolutionary stage.
Since Africans are indisputably "Modern Humans" and "up-to-date" in every way, and NOT Archaic Humans, I just don't see why you find the difference difficult to understand.
Hey kid, Hofmeyr, Omo I, Qazfeh, Cro-Magnon, Grimaldi etc...
are all considered archaic anatomically modern humans who possess certain throwback characteristics.
Australians also exhibit archaic features associated with early anatomically modern humans.
So are you saying Australians are not modern humans since they possess certain archaic features?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think the term Cro-Magnon was only used for the osteo remains found there. Anthropologists used it in general. Likewise for Grimaldi before it fell out of use (to hide unquestionable advanced culture in Europe from a people undeniably of inner African phenotype). Anywhere a certain type of relics were found they were attributed to Grimaldi as far away from Italy as Russia.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I don't think the term Cro-Magnon was only used for the osteo remains found there. Anthropologists used it in general. Likewise for Grimaldi before it fell out of use (to hide unquestionable advanced culture in Europe from a people undeniably of inner African phenotype). Anywhere a certain type of relics were found they were attributed to Grimaldi as far away from Italy as Russia.
Well now we know better and are informed that both populations resembled modern tropical people, essentially Africans, more than the modern population in the area.
And were simply named after the places they were found, correct?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The term for the Grimaldi is Cro-Magnon.
Clyde, you do understand that Grimaldi and Cro-Magnon are names given to anatomically modern humans in Europe because of the area they were found in right?
Both resembling modern tropical people.
Yes I do. Just like we use the term African to refer to where this population is mainly found.
Just like Omo I found in Omo Ethiopia and Hofmeyr found in Hofmeyr south Africa or Qazfeh found in Qazfeh Isreal. Neanderthal named after Neander valley, Germany.
Then there shouldn't have been any reason for you to say the term for Grimaldi is Cro-Magnon, correct?
Which is like saying the term for Omo I is actually Hofmeyr...
The terms are simply names applied to anatomically modern humans who are dubbed after the places they were found.
No incorrect. The Cave were Grimaldi remains were found is now called "Cro-Magnon" Cave. As a result, the Grimaldi are Cro-Magnon.
Above is a picture of Cro-Magnon man, the first anatomically modern European. The first Europeans were the Bushman or Khoisan people.
Hottentot
As I mentioned earlier the Bushman created much of the early civilization of Eurasia. They left us numerous figurines showing their type.
Venus Figurines
The Bushman continue to carry this ancient form.
The Aurignacian civilization was founded by the Cro-Magnon people who originated in Africa. They took this culture to Western Europe across the Straits of Gibraltar. The Cro-Magnon people were probably Bushman/Khoi.
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.
The Boule and Vallois research makes it clear that the Bushman expanded across Africa on into Europe via Spain as the Grimaldi people. This makes it clear that the Bushman/Khoisan people were not isolated in South Africa. The Khoisan people carry the haplogroup N. The Hadza are Bushman they carry haplogroup N.
Cro-Magnon people carried haplogroup N:
quote:
Specific mtDNA sites outside HVRI were also analyzed (by amplification, cloning, and sequencing of the surrounding region) to classify more precisely the ancient sequences within the phylogenetic network of present-time mtDNAs (35, 36). Paglicci-25 has the following motifs: +7,025 AluI, 00073A, 11719G, and 12308A. Therefore, this sequence belongs to either haplogroups HV or pre-HV, two haplogroups rare in general but with a comparatively high frequencies among today's Near-Easterners (35). Paglicci-12 shows the motifs 00073G, 10873C, 10238T, and AACC between nucleotide positions 10397 and 10400, which allows the classification of this sequence into the macrohaplogroupN,containing haplogroups W, X, I, N1a, N1b, N1c, and N*. Following the definition given in ref. 36, the presence of a single mutation in 16,223 within HRVI suggests a classification of Paglicci-12 into the haplogroup N*, which is observed today in several samples from the Near East and, at lower frequencies, in the Caucasus (35). It is difficult to say whether the apparent evolutionary relationship between Paglicci-25 and Paglicci-12 and those populations is more than a coincidence. Indeed, the haplogroups to which the Cro-Magnon type sequences appear to belong are rare among modern samples, and therefore their frequencies are poorly estimated. However, genetic affinities between the first anatomically modern Europeans and current populations of the Near East make sense in the light of the likely routes of Upper Paleolithic human expansions in Europe, as documented in the archaeological record (37).
This suggest that haplogroup N was taken to Western Eurasia by the San people=Cro-Magnon.
This makes it clear, to me, that hg N in Africa is not the result of a back migration.
.
Greetings.
You know, I really wondered how many 'White' peoples' heads exploded (think Chapelle's Black White Supremist) when that picture and accompanying article was first released to the masses Anyway, that photo of the San man just reinforces the 'amusement' (the SMDH kind) I felt towards a racist 'White' female on another forum who referred to herself as "KhoisonGirl" and was just so sure of herself that Khoison people are not Black people, lol, surely they are not 'White' people no doubt about it ....I also wonder how many noticed that the epicanthal (sp?) fold of the eye is not just an Asian trait, but an African trait as well (which makes sense, because as we know, the African is the blueprint for the rest of HUEmanity): all peoples have this fold in the womb, but not all are born with it....
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, David MacRitchie has a good book, actually it's printed in two volumes: Ancient and Modern Britons....and he makes it quite clear the Original People of that region were not pale/'white.' This is where I learned of the origin of the word "blackmail" and it has everything to do with Black People but and yet NOTHING derogatory towards Black People in the meaning...when I looked it up online, the definitions I did find, when compared to what was contained in said book, was not quite complete, lol....When I am at home, and when I have time to go through the book and look it up, I will post it word for word from the book....
htp.
-------------------- "TRUTH IS LIKE LIGHTNING WITH ITS ERRAND DONE BEFORE YOU HEAR THE THUNDER" - Gerald Massey "TRUTH IS FINAL" -Mumia Abu-Jamal Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: The term for the Grimaldi is Cro-Magnon.
Clyde, you do understand that Grimaldi and Cro-Magnon are names given to anatomically modern humans in Europe because of the area they were found in right?
Both resembling modern tropical people.
Yes I do. Just like we use the term African to refer to where this population is mainly found.
Just like Omo I found in Omo Ethiopia and Hofmeyr found in Hofmeyr south Africa or Qazfeh found in Qazfeh Isreal. Neanderthal named after Neander valley, Germany.
Then there shouldn't have been any reason for you to say the term for Grimaldi is Cro-Magnon, correct?
Which is like saying the term for Omo I is actually Hofmeyr...
The terms are simply names applied to anatomically modern humans who are dubbed after the places they were found.
No incorrect. The Cave were Grimaldi remains were found is now called "Cro-Magnon" Cave. As a result, the Grimaldi are Cro-Magnon.
.
I've never heard of this, I.e, Grimaldi being dubbed Cro-Magnon.
Like I said it's similar to calling Omo I the same name as Qazfeh, or Hofmeyr understand?
They're all early anatomically modern humans who are simply named after the places they were found.
All of whom as noted resembled modern tropical peoples.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
That why we should waste our breath on "debates" with bigots, stupid beaacht did not know Khoisan are Africans. . probably the first.
Quote from TAR - - -
. . . reinforces the 'amusement' (the SMDH kind) I felt towards a racist 'White' female on another forum who referred to herself as "KhoisonGirl" and was just so sure of herself that Khoison people are not Black people, lol, surely they are not 'White' people no doubt about it . . .
= = = =
Yawn!!! Football season is about done. Hopefully McNabb can perform better on Saturday.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^It seems that all of you are having a hard time understanding the White Mans motives for all of the lies and this Bullsh1t that he is spewing. Well here it is.
HE IS STILL TRYING TO DENY THAT HE IS AN ASIAN, HE IS STILL TRYING TO PROVE THAT HE EVOLVED IN EUROPE, AND AS SUCH, IS THE CREATOR OF THE ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS IN EUROPE: SUCH AS THE ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS IN GREECE AND ITALY!!!!!!
That's it, that's the whole point of this Cro-Magnon Bullsh1t.
A 28,000 Years Old Cro-Magnon mtDNA Sequence Differs from All Potentially Contaminating Modern Sequences.
Conclusions/Significance:
The Paglicci 23 individual carried a mtDNA sequence that is still common in Europe, and which radically differs from those of the almost contemporary Neandertals, demonstrating a genealogical continuity across 28,000 years, from Cro-Magnoid to modern Europeans. Because all potential sources of modern DNA contamination are known, the Paglicci 23 sample will offer a unique opportunity to get insight for the first time into the nuclear genes of early modern Europeans.
Preamble;
The anatomically-archaic Europeans, the Neandertal people, are documented in the fossil record from approximately 300,000 to 30,000 years ago. Around 45,000 years ago, anatomically-modern humans of the Cro-Magnoid type expanded in Europe from the Southeast. Neandertals coexisted with them for between 1,000 to 10,000 thousand years, depending on the region [1], but eventually their skeletons disappeared from the fossil record. Individuals of intermediate morphology have not been observed. With the possible exception of one 25,000 years old child [2], all known specimens in the relevant time interval can be classified without ambiguity either as Neandertals or Cro-Magnoids.
The interpretation of these findings is not straightforward. Under the so-called Out-of-Africa model, Neandertals are considered to be extinct, and modern Europeans are regarded as descending exclusively from Cro-Magnoids who replaced Neandertals in the course of their expansion from Africa [3]. Conversely, recent versions of the alternative, multiregional model, propose that Neandertals gave a limited, but non-negligible, contribution to the gene pool of modern Europeans by admixing with Cro-Magnoids.
Clyde - I must say; I thought that you were more astute to the White Man's methods in building a base for his lies and concoctions.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Above is a picture of Cro-Magnon man, the first anatomically modern European. The first Europeans were the Bushman or Khoisan people.
This is a bushman or San.
Hottentot
As I mentioned earlier the Bushman created much of the early civilization of Eurasia. They left us numerous figurines showing their type.
Venus Figurines
The Bushman continue to carry this ancient form.
The Aurignacian civilization was founded by the Cro-Magnon people who originated in Africa. They took this culture to Western Europe across the Straits of Gibraltar. The Cro-Magnon people were probably Bushman/Khoi.
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.
The Boule and Vallois research makes it clear that the Bushman expanded across Africa on into Europe via Spain as the Grimaldi people. This makes it clear that the Bushman/Khoisan people were not isolated in South Africa. The Khoisan people carry the haplogroup N. The Hadza are Bushman they carry haplogroup N.
Cro-Magnon people carried haplogroup N:
quote:
Specific mtDNA sites outside HVRI were also analyzed (by amplification, cloning, and sequencing of the surrounding region) to classify more precisely the ancient sequences within the phylogenetic network of present-time mtDNAs (35, 36). Paglicci-25 has the following motifs: +7,025 AluI, 00073A, 11719G, and 12308A. Therefore, this sequence belongs to either haplogroups HV or pre-HV, two haplogroups rare in general but with a comparatively high frequencies among today's Near-Easterners (35). Paglicci-12 shows the motifs 00073G, 10873C, 10238T, and AACC between nucleotide positions 10397 and 10400, which allows the classification of this sequence into the macrohaplogroupN,containing haplogroups W, X, I, N1a, N1b, N1c, and N*. Following the definition given in ref. 36, the presence of a single mutation in 16,223 within HRVI suggests a classification of Paglicci-12 into the haplogroup N*, which is observed today in several samples from the Near East and, at lower frequencies, in the Caucasus (35). It is difficult to say whether the apparent evolutionary relationship between Paglicci-25 and Paglicci-12 and those populations is more than a coincidence. Indeed, the haplogroups to which the Cro-Magnon type sequences appear to belong are rare among modern samples, and therefore their frequencies are poorly estimated. However, genetic affinities between the first anatomically modern Europeans and current populations of the Near East make sense in the light of the likely routes of Upper Paleolithic human expansions in Europe, as documented in the archaeological record (37).
This suggest that haplogroup N was taken to Western Eurasia by the San people=Cro-Magnon.
This makes it clear, to me, that hg N in Africa is not the result of a back migration.
.
Then if ancient Europeans looked like Bushmen, then modern Europeans are nothing like it(even the supposed "Cro-Magnoid"ones.
Posts: 1106 | From: Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
For those that still don't get it. It is really very simple. Even the Afroslayer idiots have a hard time swallowing the lie that whites in Europe were originally Khoisans who suddenly turned White.
Therefore a new lie had to be created. In this one, modern Africans like us didn't enter Europe at 45,000 B.C. and were then followed by Cro-Magnons from the middle-east at about 35,000 B.C.
The new lie says that it was the subspecies Cro-magnon who entered Europe, NOT modern people like us. That gives them room to say that over time, the Cro-magnon EVOLVED into the modern White people that we find in Europe TODAY.
Therefore they CANNOT be Asians who MIGRATED INTO EUROPE! And therefore they are the creators of the European Civilizations.
So you see Clyde, once you allow them to con you into accepting PART of their lie, it won't be long before you are forced into accepting ALL of their lie.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Newbies - I hope that you are learning something;
First, the White man lays down a bogus foundation for his lies, THEN, he tells his lie.
To the lying White assholes below, who wrote that lie of a study;
You are BUSTED!!!
Evidence for a genetic discontinuity between Neandertals and 24,000-year-old anatomically modern Europeans
1. David Caramelli†, 2. Carles Lalueza-Fox‡, 3. Cristiano Vernesi§, 4. Martina Lari†, 5. Antonella Casoli¶, 6. Francesco Mallegni∥, 7. Brunetto Chiarelli†, 8. Isabelle Dupanloup§, 9. Jaume Bertranpetit††, 10. Guido Barbujani§, and 11. Giorgio Bertorelle§,‡‡
+ Author Affiliations
1. †Dipartimento di Biologia Animale e Genetica, Università di Firenze, Via del Proconsolo 12, 50122 Florence, Italy 2. ‡Departament de Biologia Animal, Universitat de Barcelona, Avenida Diagonal 645, 08028 Barcelona, Spain 3. §Dipartimento di Biologia, Università di Ferrara, via Borsari 46, 44100 Ferrara, Italy 4. ¶Dipartimento di Chimica Generale e Inorganica, Chimica Analitica, Chimica Fisica, Università di Parma, Parco Area delle Scienze 17/A, 43100 Parma, Italy 5. ∥Dipartimento di Scienze Archeologiche, Università di Pisa, via Galvani 1, 56100 Pisa, Italy 6. ††Facultat de Ciències de la Salut i de la Vida, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Doctor Aiguader 80, 08003 Barcelona, Spain
1.
Edited by Henry C. Harpending, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, and approved March 27, 2003 (received for review January 20, 2003)
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes the first found Cro-Magnon and Grimaldi types were found in those respective locations, the former in France and the latter in Italy, but that doesn't stop the names from applying to many other finds in far flung locations. See Boule and Vallois' book Fossil Men for example.
Anyway the names are not limited to just the finds at Cro-Magnon and Grimaldi. When did it become the practice to do so?
While Cro-Magnon remained in use, fear of Grimaldi's blatant inner African physical type caused all kinds of attack leading to its disuse and replacement with the Cro-Magnon label for the skeleton and Gravettian (Austria) and/or Aurignacian for the culture.
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I don't think the term Cro-Magnon was only used for the osteo remains found there. Anthropologists used it in general. Likewise for Grimaldi before it fell out of use (to hide unquestionable advanced culture in Europe from a people undeniably of inner African phenotype). Anywhere a certain type of relics were found they were attributed to Grimaldi as far away from Italy as Russia.
Well now we know better and are informed that both populations resembled modern tropical people, essentially Africans, more than the modern population in the area.
And were simply named after the places they were found, correct?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Yes the first found Cro-Magnon and Grimaldi types were found in those respective locations, the former in France and the latter in Italy, but that doesn't stop the names from applying to many other finds in far flung locations. See Boule and Vallois' book Fossil Men for example.
Anyway the names are not limited to just the finds at Cro-Magnon and Grimaldi. When did it become the practice to do so?
quote:Originally posted by MindoverMatter718:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: I don't think the term Cro-Magnon was only used for the osteo remains found there. Anthropologists used it in general. Likewise for Grimaldi before it fell out of use (to hide unquestionable advanced culture in Europe from a people undeniably of inner African phenotype). Anywhere a certain type of relics were found they were attributed to Grimaldi as far away from Italy as Russia.
Well now we know better and are informed that both populations resembled modern tropical people, essentially Africans, more than the modern population in the area.
And were simply named after the places they were found, correct?
Which is why they were dubbed as such. Just like Omo I found in Omo Ethiopia and Hofmeyr found in Hofmeyr south Africa or Qazfeh found in Qazfeh Isreal, Nazlet Khater found in Nalzet Khater Egypt, Mungo man after Mungo Australia.
Neanderthal was named after Neander valley, Germany.
This didn't stop anthropologists from applying Neanderthal to specimens found outside of Neander valley.
It became the practice to do so ever since they started dubbing specimens after where they were found.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bottomline and on focus, neither Cro-Magnon nor Grimaldi can be limited to just the finds at those locations and anthropology has subsumed Grimaldi as a type of Cro-Magnon man though the former was first found Italy not France.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Bottomline and on focus, neither Cro-Magnon nor Grimaldi can be limited to just the finds at those locations and anthropology has subsumed Grimaldi as a type of Cro-Magnon man though the former was first found Italy not France.
Bottom line is they were dubbed as such because of where they were found.
How some anthropologists apply said terms is not withstanding this fact.
All early European modern humans resembled their African ancestors more than the present inhabitants.
Regardless of what they're called.
P.s the point noted to Clyde was that Grimaldi isn't another term for Cro-Magnon.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
n (Anthropol) a type of Aurignacian man having a negroid appearance, thought to be a race of Cro-Magnon man
(C20: named after the Grimaldi caves, Italy, where skeletons of this type were found)
Collins English Dictionary
In current anthropology Grimaldi Man has been given the label Cro-Magnon. Dr. Winters didn't make that up, it's from current anthropology.
I'm not saying this because I agree with it. Quite to the contrary Grimaldi was subsumed under Cro-Magnon in fear of it's blatant inner African physical feaytures and what that meant in opposition of a pure white Europe.
I maintain the distinction between Grimaldi and Cro-Magnon in the face of what current anthropology posits.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
n (Anthropol) a type of Aurignacian man having a negroid appearance, thought to be a race of Cro-Magnon man (C20: named after the Grimaldi caves, Italy, where skeletons of this type were found)
Collins English Dictionary
In current anthropology Grimaldi Man has been given the label Cro-Magnon. Dr. Winters didn't make that up, it's from current anthropology.
I'm not saying this because I agree with it. Quite to the contrary Grimaldi was subsumed under Cro-Magnon in fear of it's blatant inner African physical feaytures and what that meant in opposition of a pure white Europe.
I maintain the distinction between Grimaldi and Cro-Magnon in the face of what current anthropology posits.
Noted.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^No, Clyde did not make it up, but he did mistakenly accept it.
But thankfully, like all previous White man lies and bullsh1t (remember when they started calling modern man "homo sapien-sapien" in order to make room for Neanderthal and Cro-magnon as homo-sapiens?) this current fad of a lie will die of it's own weight and pass.
To further clarify;
Ancient Europe by about 35,000 B.C. was a MULTI-SPECIES area. Neanderthal had entered at about 70,000 B.C. The Khoisan Modern man Grimaldi entered at about 45,000 B.C. and he was followed by the Cro-Magnon humanoid at about 35,000 B.C.
So during the periods between 45,000 B.C. and the time that Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons died-out and became extinct in Europe, they ALL lived TOGETHER in Europe!
And since a good camp-site is a good camp-site, the different species would sometimes (over the course of thousands of years), wind-up using the same camp-sites.
Case in point: At grotte des enfants. (the 'children's cave' at Mentone, on the border between France and Italy: Grimaldi skeletons were found layers BELOW Neanderthal skeletons. Indicating that Modern man Grimaldi had used that particular cave even before Neanderthals had done so.
And of course, the very fact of ancient Europe's multi-species nature, provides unscrupulous Whites with fodder to spin their wild and untrue theories.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So Clyde is correct. The first European were Khoisans
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Greetings. Yes, I recall learning that the Grimaldi were of an "African type"....thank you for the information that you have shared, I am thankful for the lesson (the indepth detail)...
Why do some equate Greece and Italy with Europe/Europeans...two waaaay different peoples and cultures- the Greeks and Italians were very familiar with Africans for ages (and on another note: does it escape anyone the VERY short distance between southern Europe and Northern Africa...and I think it was Napoleon who said that Africa ended at the Pyrnees (sp?) Mountains)... I did not watch what-was-the-name-of-that-movie that had something to do with ancient Greece or Rome (not 360 which I know was the about the Greeks) (I think Brad Pitt or someone played a major role in it), because there were next to no Black men playing roles as soldiers in that movie and a good part of both the Roman and Greek armies in those times were African- what a lot of people do not real-eyes is that Greek and Roman are not necessarily synonymous (sp?) with "White"...if one was a citizen of either/or one was called just that "Greek" or "Roman" without much attention necessarily being called to ones' skin complexion....any 'White' person who thinks there is such a thing as a "pure 'White'" person is fooling theirself: there never has been, is not, and never will be such a thing to exist...besides all that has been discussed, there is also the fact that Africans were a large part of Caeser's army that moved up through what is now Europe- does anyone think that seed was not sown as has always been done in times of war and/or conquest...the African Roman Septimus Severus (sp?) ruled for a time in Britain....not just a few ancient Greeks and Romans preferred Black men and women over 'White' as the ancient view of Black people was much different than it is now..prejudice was based on "national chuvanism" (sp?) which had nothing to do with one's skin color but wherein one resided as a citizen (Frank Snowden has a good book on the topic of how Black people were viewed: "Before Color Prejudice The Ancient View of Blacks" is the title I think)...both Runoko Rashidi and Dr. Ivan van Sertima, as well as a few others, have some excellant writings/lectures/books on the topics of the presence of Black People in early Asia and in early Europe...J.A. Rogers also has a few good writings/books re; the issue of sex and race...
I say all that to ask:
"Pure 'White' people which part?" That's like saying there is such a thing as a Negro...as I have yet to find Negroland on any globe and/or map of the world...
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: So Clyde is correct. The first European were Khoisans
*Sighs* The Khoisan do not carry N nor did they carry it into Europe, and the cranio-metric data indicates that these individuals from UP Europe were not Khoisan.
Don't you think if it were that simple Explorer would've made a post questioning the connection that Cro-Magnon has with Mechta Afalou and Mechtoids from north Africa, while there seems to be none in southwest or central Asia the supposed entry for AMH into Europe?
And if Khoisan were any sort of candidate there would've been mention about it in his post?
Come on xyz step into reality.
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
TruthAndRights - A few months back, we did a thread on when racism started, perhaps you would like to peruse the old threads.
But regardless of when it started, it certainly is in full force now. And as you correctly alluded to, it seems to be centered in White media, and has been since the creation of media in America.
And since White media in America is mostly in the hands of the Khazar Jews, you have to wonder if there is a Jewish agenda that we have not uncovered as yet.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: False, the first europeans were Upper Paleolithic Whites,
They weren't white, as white skin didn't arise until thousands of years later.
And they weren't Khoisan either as cranio-metric and genetic data indicates.
Indeed the first Europeans resembled modern tropical peoples I.e. Oceanic's and Africans.
This is the point of the Explorers thread, he notes the resemblance Cro-Magnon shares with the type Mechta-Afalou and Mechtoids from north Africa, but no apparent specific ties are noted with any early AMH from central or southwest Asia.
quote:Originally posted by prmiddleeastern: False, the first europeans were Upper Paleolithic Whites,
They weren't white, as white skin didn't arise until thousands of years later.
And they weren't Khoisan either as cranio-metric and genetic data indicates.
Indeed the first Europeans resembled modern tropical peoples I.e. Oceanic's and Africans.
This is the point of the Explorers thread, he notes the resemblance Cro-Magnon shares with the type Mechta-Afalou and Mechtoids from north Africa, but no apparent specific ties are noted with any early AMH from central or southwest Asia.
Are you saying the Khoisan are not Africans?
.
From where did you come to this conclusion Clyde?
Posts: 6572 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
Cro-Magnon is officially described as an archaic form of Modern Humans. Now Scientifically defined as Homo Sapien.
Archaic means:
2 : of, relating to, or characteristic of an earlier or more primitive time.
4 : surviving from an earlier period; specifically : typical of a previously dominant evolutionary stage.
Since Africans are indisputably "Modern Humans" and "up-to-date" in every way, and NOT Archaic Humans, I just don't see why you find the difference difficult to understand.
Hey kid, Hofmeyr, Omo I, Qazfeh, Cro-Magnon, Grimaldi etc...
are all considered archaic anatomically modern humans who possess certain throwback characteristics.
Australians also exhibit archaic features associated with early anatomically modern humans.
So are you saying Australians are not modern humans since they possess certain archaic features?
Question: What archaic features are we told about the Cro-Magnon?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Anyway, that photo of the San man just reinforces the 'amusement' (the SMDH kind) I felt towards a racist 'White' female on another forum who referred to herself as "KhoisonGirl" and was just so sure of herself that Khoison people are not Black people, lol, surely they are not 'White' people no doubt about it ....I also wonder how many noticed that the epicanthal (sp?) fold of the eye is not just an Asian trait, but an African trait as well (which makes sense, because as we know, the African is the blueprint for the rest of HUEmanity): all peoples have this fold in the womb, but not all are born with it....![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
That's like saying there is such a thing as a Negro...as I have yet to find Negroland on any globe and/or map of the world... ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic