posted
You must be on methamphetamine. Leave the drugs alone Pink Trash, and learn to read.
Here:
In a report in today’s issue of the journal Science, a research team led by Frederick E. Grine of the State University of New York at Stony Brook concluded that the South African skull provided critical corroboration of the archaeological and genetic evidence indicating that humans in fully modern form originated in sub-Saharan Africa and migrated, almost unchanged, to populate Europe and Asia.
posted
^Perhaps the problem is you don't know how to update your research. From your article (2007):
Some scientists, on the other hand, have contended that the migration could have begun as early as 100,000 years ago and that in the intervening time, contact with more archaic populations like the Neanderthals could have produced recognizable changes in what became the modern humans of Eurasia. But no scientists in the migration debate have disputed that ancestors of the human species originated in Africa.
That was 2007, moron, and this is the current view :
humans and Neanderthals had sex and had hybrid offspring. A small amount of that genetic mingling survives in "non-Africans" today: Neanderthals didn't live in Africa, which is why sub-Saharan African populations have no trace of Neanderthal DNA (201).
Posts: 1340 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
Mike/Iron Lion doesn't know anything except how to be rude and obnoxious.
The whole issue about the ancient skull found in South Africa is that it reveals Eurasian traits. Proto-caucasoids coming out of Africa does not mean they were a sub-group of negroids.
quote:Dr. Grine and his colleagues said in an announcement by Stony Brook that the skull was the first fossil evidence “in agreement with the out-of-Africa theory, which predicts that humans like those that inhabited Eurasia should be found in sub-Saharan Africa around 36,000 years ago.”
'Humans like those in Eurasia', nb. not like those in negro-land! Evidently it's IronLion who needs to learn to read.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Nordic white race are depigmentated Meds.
''The Nordic division, a partially depigmized branch of the Meditterranean group.'' - Claude Alvin Villee (Biology, 1972, p. 786)
''It has been further suggested that the depigmentation of the ''Nordic'' represents a mutation from the Mediterranean stock.'' - Ahsley Montagu (Physical Anthropology, 1960, p. 450ff)
''To many physical anthropologusts Nordic means a group with an especially high percentage of blondness, which represent a depigmentated Mediterranean'' - Melville Jacobs (Outline of Physical Anthropology, 1947, p. 49)
The anthropologist Melville Jacobs (General Anthropology, 1963) wrote:
''Nordic is currently thought of as that northerly population which is essentially Mediterranean but depigmented''(p. 57ff).
The depigmentation of the Nordic represents a mutation from the original Mediterraneanoid Caucasoid stock, though it is debated precisely what Meditterenean subrace (e.g. Gracile, Pontid, Atlantid).
Francis Owen in his renowned work The Germanic People (1960) wrote that: ''The Nordic secondary race shows the most pronounced deviations from the Primary Caucasian'' (p. 15).
These 'deviations' or mutations from the original Caucasoid type occured through depigmentation by moving into a more northern climate, sexual selection or selective breeding among specific Metteranid populations who had blonde hair, as a minor strain in some Meditterenean populations is blonde hair 2 - 5% (Coon, 1939).
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
Very interesting. An ancient Caucasoid Sub-Saharan African. Clearly this puts to rest that Caucasoid is an appropriate term. The Caucasian mountains have nothing to do with these Africans nor does Neanderthal admixture in Europeans.
Frankly I think this entire race debate should have ended with this picture:
All so called racial morphological features can easily be derived from Sub-Saharan Africans in a very short time period.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Although 'caucasoid' is useful shorthand for the sort of facial features seen in Europe and in N. and E. Africa. I've been increasingly coming to suspect that 'Caucasian' is an erroneous term. It seems possible that the 'Mediterranean' race substantially evolved inside Africa, probably having its purest representatives in the Berbers.
However it seems genetics prove that modern Europeans have ancestors who spent some amount of time in the Near East and Mesopotamia. There was likely a lot of back-migration into North and East Africa across Sinai and the Red Sea, additionally.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Dr. Grine and his colleagues said in an announcement by Stony Brook that the skull was the first fossil evidence “in agreement with the out-of-Africa theory, which predicts that humans like those that inhabited Eurasia should be found in sub-Saharan Africa around 36,000 years ago.”
'Humans like those in Eurasia', nb. not like those in negro-land! Evidently it's IronLion who needs to learn to read.
Rahotep
The joke is on you. The article says talks of the former inhabitants of Eura-asia, nto the present.
LoL! It says .."like those that INHABITED Eurasia.."
Those former Europeans came from south Africa, not Caucasus as your wacky theory claims.
What happened to them? That is the question.
What a tiring dunce you are!
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
Very interesting. An ancient Caucasoid Sub-Saharan African. Clearly this puts to rest that Caucasoid is an appropriate term. The Caucasian mountains have nothing to do with these Africans nor does Neanderthal admixture in Europeans.
Frankly I think this entire race debate should have ended with this picture:
All so called racial morphological features can easily be derived from Sub-Saharan Africans in a very short time period.
Point of correction. The skull is clearly non-caucasiod (non-albinoid). Each the Albinoid so-called white nationalists admit that.
I agree with the rest of your inference!
Case closed... Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
We seem to be having the same debate in two differnet threads. Here is what I said on the other one, validating the description 'proto-Caucasoid' for the Hofmeyr skull which was found in South Africa:
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: Obviously that's not the case, is it? Analysis of the ancient skull found in S. Africa found it less like the negroid inhabitants of the region and more akin to specimens that had been found in Eurasia. As Mathilda puts it: 'Its strongest morphometric affinities are with Upper Paleolithic (UP) Eurasians rather than recent, geographically proximate people.'
Now why should that be? The Hofmeyr skull indicates an African prototype for the European cro-magnon type. Mathilda speculates about a prehistoric movement from East Africa to S. Africa as an expanation for the skull's presence. As E. Africans are often called 'Caucasoid' (or proto~) it seems reasonable to apply that term to this skull, but I will not niggle about semantics.
Hofmeyr skull
Cro Magnon:
The similarities, apart from the cranial measurements, include the squareish eye sockets and the triangular nasal aperture, although it is obviously wider on the Hofmeyr skull.
Modern Caucasian skull has different nose bridge, different crown, different facial brow, different jaw bones than all the other skulls below, which appear more similar to each other:
Modern Caucasian - the outlier
Hofmeyr skull
Cro Magnon:
African:
Notice the difference?
The modern Caucasian is the stranger.
-------------------- Lionz Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
Modern Caucasian skull has different nose bridge, different crown, different facial brow, different jaw bones than all the other skulls below, which appear more similar to each other:
Modern Caucasian - the outlier
The modern Caucasian is the stranger.
Here's some familiar looking company for the 'Modern Caucasian'.
posted
There have been many instances when the Mediterranean race has bordered on facial features not belonging to its own criteria revealing its own dishonest undertone.
One can witness this in the case when some western anthropologists have attempt to re-classify some African populations i.e Horners as Mediterranean or belonging to a sub race of the white race irrespective of the fact that some of those African populations do not suit the description defining the Mediterranean race.
quote:
"characterized by moderate to short stature, long (dolichocephalic) or moderate (mesocephalic) skull, aquiline nose, dark hair, dark eyes and olive complexion."
According to some Eurocentrics and their disciples, Liya Kebede belongs to the sub race of the Caucasian white race i.e Mediterranean.
Posts: 535 | From: From the Darkest of the Abyss | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: Here's some familiar looking company for the 'Modern Caucasian'.
Ancient Egyptian:
How about noting some specifics of those skulls you presented in contrast to your particular Caucasian skull?
Posts: 535 | From: From the Darkest of the Abyss | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
Modern Caucasian skull has different nose bridge, different crown, different facial brow, different jaw bones than all the other skulls below, which appear more similar to each other:
Modern Caucasian - the outlier
Hofmeyr skull
Cro Magnon:
African:
Notice the difference?
The modern Caucasian is the stranger.
So all can now see the clear relationship between the Hofmeyr skull, and skulls from East and West Africa. And how very different the Albinoid skull appears from the set.
The people that lived in southern Europe from 35,000 years ago through the stone age, and iron age were people like the black peoples of Est and West Africa .
They originated in South Africa according to recent studies. Their bones tell their stories.
The shocker is that it is impossible to find an Albinoid skeletal remains in Europe going back 2,500 years. Nothing. At that time, there were no "caucausiod" skeletons. Only Africans such as the Hofmeyr man, the Gravetians, the Grimaldis, the Cro-Magnon, very same in colour, skeletal frame, as modern East and South African blacks.
What happened to them?
Where do the Albinos who call themselves caucasiods come from?
Look at the skulls again and give me a response...
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's some justification for this it seems to me. Horn Africans have affinity to Egptians who are lighter, and Berbers, who are lighter still and often look identical to southern Europeans. The highest concentration of E1b1b in Somalia tends to indicate a movement from there towards the Med rather than the reverse. If horn Africans are included in the Mediterranean race then one is forced to conclude that it started off 'black' (but caucasoid in terms of skull shape) and lost pigment as it moved north as an adaptation to climate.
This seems to vindicate the theory of anthropologist Guiseppe Sergi (d. 1936), who attributed the Mediterranean Race with African origins, and that Europeans were related to Horn Africans, which he called Hamitic. Sergi also grouped the Britons as Mediterraneans, but denigrated nordic aryans as less creative and civilized incomers originally from the Hindu Kush (north of India).
A bitchy editor of 'Essence' once said that Somali model Iman resembled a white woman dipped in chocolate, and the same thing could easily be said for Liya Kebede.
Horn Africans have picked up some Arabian infulence since antiquity but if Egyptians are anything to go by the general 'caucasoid' type of feature seems to go back a long way in East Africa. Sergi grouped the Egyptians with the Libyans.
Posts: 870 | From: uk | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
'Albinoid' is negroid, since most albinos are negros. Modern European types are far older than IronLion says, and include some of the oldest natural mummies. This is Otzy the Alpine 'ice mummy', (5,300 years old) for instance:
Otzy was of European race, obviously enough:
quote:Researchers discovered that "Ötzi's mtDNA belonged to a broad genetic category called K1, which is still common in Europe today.... However, modern Europeans today belong to three sub-lineages of K1, whereas ... Ötzi belonged to a previously unidentified lineage of K1 that has not been seen to date in modern European populations." According to Martin Richards, a professor of biology at the University of Leeds in northern England, "Our research suggests that Ötzi's lineage may indeed have become extinct."
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: There's some justification for this it seems to me. Horn Africans have affinity to Egptians who are lighter, and Berbers, who are lighter still and often look identical to southern Europeans. The highest concentration of E1b1b in Somalia tends to indicate a movement from there towards the Med rather than the reverse. If horn Africans are included in the Mediterranean race then one is forced to conclude that it started off 'black' (but caucasoid in terms of skull shape) and lost pigment as it moved north as an adaptation to climate. ...
This seems to vindicate the theory of anthropologist Guiseppe Sergi (d. 1936), who attributed the Mediterranean Race with African origins, and that Europeans were related to Horn Africans, which he called Hamitic. Sergi also grouped the Britons as Mediterraneans, but denigrated nordic aryans as less creative and civilized incomers originally from the Hindu Kush (north of India).
A bitchy editor of 'Essence' once said that Somali model Iman resembled a white woman dipped in chocolate, and the same thing could easily be said for Liya Kebede.
Horn Africans have picked up some Arabian infulence since antiquity but if Egyptians are anything to go by the general 'caucasoid' type of feature seems to go back a long way in East Africa. Sergi grouped the Egyptians with the Libyans.
Decoded: This is my face saving way of saying Early Europeans were black Africans!
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: 'Albinoid' is negroid, since most albinos are negros. Modern European types are far older than IronLion says, and include some of the oldest natural mummies. This is Otzy the Alpine 'ice mummy', (5,300 years old) for instance:
Otzy was of European race, obviously enough:
quote:Researchers discovered that "Ötzi's mtDNA belonged to a broad genetic category called K1, which is still common in Europe today.... However, modern Europeans today belong to three sub-lineages of K1, whereas ... Ötzi belonged to a previously unidentified lineage of K1 that has not been seen to date in modern European populations." According to Martin Richards, a professor of biology at the University of Leeds in northern England, "Our research suggests that Ötzi's lineage may indeed have become extinct."
Are you forgetting the criteria for racial classification?
Where is the skull measurement and photos?
The Haplogroup K is shared by many different racial profile. You will find K from southern Europe to Kenya, on to India, so its no help in determining phenotype.
In any event, K is rare is Northern Europe, the present home of the Albinoid pink people.
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: The highest frequency of K mt DNA in Europe is actually in France, Norway, Austria, Britain and Bulgaria, so that's wrong.
I was referring to Y-DNA Haplogroup K.
In any event, where is the measurement for Otiz's skull? I am waiting so don't try deflecting the focus.
What is your basis for claiming he is Albinoid?
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rahotep101: Although 'caucasoid' is useful shorthand for the sort of facial features seen in Europe and in N. and E. Africa. I've been increasingly coming to suspect that 'Caucasian' is an erroneous term. It seems possible that the 'Mediterranean' race substantially evolved inside Africa, probably having its purest representatives in the Berbers.
However it seems genetics prove that modern Europeans have ancestors who spent some amount of time in the Near East and Mesopotamia. There was likely a lot of back-migration into North and East Africa across Sinai and the Red Sea, additionally.
quote: Albinism (from Latin albus, "white"; see extended etymology, also called achromia, achromasia, or achromatosis) is a congenital disorder characterized by the complete or partial absence of pigment in the skin, hair and eyes due to absence or defect of an enzyme involved in the production of melanin...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albinism
Observe:
quote:Originally posted by IronLion: Albinoids: Diane Kruger
Naomi Watts
...
Nuff said:
Whereas an Albino Green snake is pink:
An Albino Brown baby is pink: Psoraisis already?
Albino piglets:
Albinoid with albino pork chop:
Albinoid
[/qb][/QUOTE][/qb][/QUOTE][/qb][/QUOTE]
[/QB][/QUOTE]
Posts: 7419 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic