posted
Not everything in the following article i agree with, but i agree with the fact Negroids (Black Africans) are a recent mutation.
Peter frost is a well known Canadian anthropologist who specialises in the origin of skin colour. His essay on the origin of the Negroid (Black African) can be found below -
''On the basis of genetic and archaeological data, black Africans seem to have radiated from a relatively small West African and possibly pygmy population within the last 20,000 years (Coon, 1962, pp. 651-656; Spurdle et al., 1994; Watson et al., 1996). The time and place of origin can be further narrowed down with linguistic data. Speakers of proto-Niger-Congo broke up c. 10,000 BP and the oldest derived group appear to be proto-Mande speakers, whose descendants inhabit the Niger's headwaters near the Mali-Guinea border (Blench, 1984, pp. 128-129; Ehret, 1984; Murdock, 1959, pp. 44, 64-68).''
''All of these physical and hormonal characteristics seem to have arisen within a narrow timeframe. In sub-Saharan Africa, the beginnings of proto-agriculture cannot be pushed back much further than 12,000 BP. A tall, clearly black African skeleton has been dated to 6,500 BP (Camp, 1974, p. 241; Coon, 1962, pp. 649-650). This leaves a window of barely six thousand years for the changes that differentiate black Africans from their hunter-gatherer ancestors,''
''By 6,000 to 7,000 years ago, the transition to agriculture had been completed in West Africa and these early agriculturalists were able to support much higher population densities than they had as hunter-gatherers. Inevitably, this nucleus of farming populations began to spread outward at the expense of more sparsely distributed Khoisan and pygmy peoples. By about 4,000 BP, the expansion had reached as far east as the middle Nile, when black Africans first appear in paintings from Pharaonic Egypt and in skeletal remains from Nubia (Junker, 1921). About 3,000 BP, another wave of advance began along the Nigerian-Cameroon border and spread rapidly throughout central, eastern, and southern Africa (Cavalli-Sforza, 1986c, pp. 361-362; Diamond, 1997; Oliver, 1966). By 300 AD, pioneering groups had advanced as far south as KwaZulu-Natal''
Frost, quite correctly concludes:
''Thus, black Africans were still absent from most of sub-Saharan Africa even within historic times.''
- I have been posting something similar to this for several months, but people have called me a liar or distorting sources. Now you have an article from a world renowned anthropologist Peter Frost who confirms precisely what i've been saying:
* Negroids (Black Africans) are a recent mutation. * They mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 10,000 B.P. in West Africa. * Until 2,000 BC they were absent from North Africa and only appeared in Egypt around 2000 BC. * Caucasoids predate Blacks in Egypt by 10,000 years.
Those are the facts folks. It's up to you if you want to digest them or live in denial.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
1-- ^^Faker! In your initial posts you claimed that it was Cavalli-Sforza talking 'bout negroes "mutating" from Pygmies. Now in your "corrected" post, YOU STILL APPEAR A FAKE. You now remove Cavalli- Sforza's name on the "mutant" claim, admitting that you were lying all along! Bwa ha aha a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah..
2-- Second point- Peter Frost is debunked by Cavalli-Sforza who says as to his so-called "mutation" theory: QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
Frost mentions Cavalli-Sforza in connection with sexual selection, and movement of some groups from Nigeria-Cameroon to other parts of Africa. He never says Cavalli Sforza talks bout any "negro mutation" and in fact any mutation claim is directly contradicted by Sforza. Sucka, you not only lied bout Cavalli-Sforza, you lied about your own white writer- Peter Frost, and misrepresented him.
EVEN IN YOUR CONTINUED ATTEMPTS AT DAMAGE CONTROL, YOU EXPOSE YOURSELF WITH YET MORE FAKERY -------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by CASSIFAKedes::
quote: The source is Cavalli-Sforza's book on the Pygmies entitled 'African pygmies' (Academic Press, 1986).
This work shows that Negroids mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 9,000 BC in West Africa. So the 'true' Black African today is a recent mutation. Caucasoids and Mongoloids predate them. [Wink] Negroids only migrated into other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion or slightly earlier. Prior to them, Caucasoids inhabited North Africa and Bushmen (Capoids) to the south who were displaced by the Caucasoids from the Mediterranean around 12,000 BC.
^^A bogus reference. Why should anyone take your word for it given past bogus references? Quote where Cavalli-Sforza says these so-called "negroids" "mutated" from Pygmies. The burden of proof is on you, since you made the claim.
While you scurry to cover your tracks with yet more bogus claims, Cavali Sforza, in his well known The History and Geography of Human Genes, 1994 Cavalli-Sforza summarizes his 1986 work on Pygmies and specifically debunks the "Pygmy as ancestor" theory held by other older writings. QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
SO much for your lying claims of "mutations" from "Pygymy" ancestors. In short, you lied about Cavalli-Sforza, creating a falsified claim and a bogus "supporting" reference to a claim that is nowhere supported in his work. You are once again exposed as yet another racist faker You are not fooling anyone.
------------------------
YOu then tried to cover up your lie with even more bogus nformation and STILL fail
You "modified" your Cavalli Sforza claim by including page numbers, and then changing some wording to "adaptive radiation" hoping to divert attention from your exposure.. lmao..
However pages 361-362 of Cavalli Sforza's 1986 book says absolutely nothing about any Negroes "mutating" from pygmies, nor any "adaptive radiation." It merely discusses Pygmy history and geography. You picked out a page at random, not knowing it can be verified via Google Books. You were asked to provide a direct quote but are still running. Now why is that?
""It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
--------------------------------------
And Your pathetic "modification" STILL turned out to be bogus. You then said:
"True" Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population — a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996).
^^But in fact, Watson 1996 has nothing to do with osteological data and does not even mention it. It has to do with mtDNA.
----------------------------------------
YOU THEN PROFFERED ANOTHER FAKE CLAIM BELOW: He says:
quote: "Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships.."
^^Complete Nonsense. In the Old Testament, the tribe of Zebulun is mentioned as specifically associated with ships and maritime elements. QUOTE:
Genesis 49:13 "Zebulun will dwell at the shore of the seas; Yea, he will be at the shore of the ships, And his side toucheth upon Sidon. "
Cassi-fakedes says: ''There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty''
^^LMAO! Totally fake! Credible up to date sources note that blondism is prevalent in early life BUT, contrary to your claim that: "There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty", the shade of color varies. In maturity the hair usually turns a darker brown color, but sometimes remains blond. See: "Gene Expression: Blonde Australian Aboriginals". Gnxp.com. http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2005/08/blonde-australian-aboriginals.php.
^^Here is one of your Australians over 20 years old who does have blonde hair. YOu are caught out spinning bogus claims AGAIN!. Bwa ha aha a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah.. -
Cassi-Fakdes: MULTIPLE TIMES AT BAT, MULTIPLE EXPOSURES AS A FAKE... Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Cavalli-Sforza quote is valid, it is his book on Pygmies and i've given the reference - 1986:361-362.
You are so dumb you didn't even realise, it was Peter Frost who himself wrote this -
''True" Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation in the above dendrograms, apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population — a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996). This radiation seems to have occurred somewhere in West Africa. Before the Bantu expansion about 3,000 years ago, true Black Africans were absent from the continent's central, eastern, and southern regions (Cavalli-Sforza 1986:361-362; Oliver 1966). They were also absent from the middle Nile until about 4,000 years ago, at which time they begin to appear in paintings from Pharaonic Egypt and in skeletal remains from Nubia (Junker 1921).''
Peter Frost" <pfrost#globetrotter.qc.ca> To: <genetics@darwin.psy.fsu.edu>, <h-bd@egroups.com> Date sent: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 09:30:46 -0500 Subject: [h-bd] African sex ratios and polygyny
- Try to keep up retard. Peter Frost is a world renowned anthropologist, he obviously knows these quotes are valid but like an idiot you keep claiming they aren't.
You only make yourself look dumber and dumber in every post. This is why you have resorted to spamming the same crap over and over.
Btw, i'm still waiting for you to post a photo of a light skinned straight red-haired tropical african - since you claim they exist. You've failed to do this and resorted to spamming - a basic admission of defeat.
I would also like to know the following:
* Why do you link to scientific studies on US Whites and US African-Americans but then claim white people or Caucasoids don't exist?
Do you not see the contradiction?
* Why do you claim race doesn't exist, but at the same time claim 'black people' do?
A mere search of your name on google shows all the black forums you are on where you talk about blacks (and whites). Here is one of your posts here -
In this post you also mention ''white folk'', so who exactly are ''white folk'' if race (as you claim) doesn't exist?
On some forums you are claiming white people exist, while on this forum you deny race.
You can't have it both ways.
Either race doesn't exist or it does. You can't say race doesn't exist and then say only blacks do (but more confusingly you seem to change your views on race on every different forum you use).
Do you have a split personality disorder?
You seem to be very confused/insecure on the topic of race. Your posts are so confusing - no one has a clue what your stance is. According to your definition of 'tropical african' phenotype diversity - everyone (including white europeans) are tropically adapted africans. But then you fail to show a photo of a white skinned or straight red haired tropical african (despite the fact you claim they exist)... then on other forums you are claiming white people exist (as a seperate race) but on this forum they don't.
Please make up your mind. I don't read your spams but if you would actually like to adress this post properly to clarify what on earth your stance is and why you keep changing it. Perhaps you think its a joke to join different forums posting different contradictory views? It makes it hard though for someone to take you serious.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cassi-FAKER, Don't try to wriggle your way out. You first represented the "mutation" claim as that of Cavalli-Sforza hisself. But Cavalli-Sforza says no such thing in his book. In fact in another work he specifically debunks the notion:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
SO you are caught out in a lie. Then you try to cover your lie after it is exposed by now saying the quote is from Frost. Only thing is, Frost does not reference Cavalli- Sforza to support his so-called mutation claim. You fudged Frosts' initial quote to add Cavalli-Sforza- a lie, and thus also misrepresenting your own boy Frost.
On the tropical Africans, you denied that they had any variation of hair, eye or skin color. I am waiting for you to prove that they did not show said variation either natively or via albinism. You are debunked by credible scientists as shown below, and in your own multiple spammed threads over the weeks with Mike who shows light skin and red hair via African albinism, and further debunked by the native blondism shown in multiple "hair" threads, or by light-skinned San Bushmen shown by Djheuti, Troll Patrol etc in others. You keep denying that such things exist, but in your own threads they show up. I am not going to get pictures for you. They are already in your own threads over the weeks where people already debunked you. You keep running away from your own claims, in your own threads.
As for "white folks": witless dullard, the "race" referred to is a SOCIAL construct, not a biological one. That is an elementary point for anyone debating the issue and has been several numerous times not only by me but numerous others as well. I have never "changed" this outlook. You have not even begun to grasp these basics. You are truly a dunce, who does not understand the issues. Quit trying to divert attention from your exposure via yet another bogus red herring.
You have no way out- you have to face up to your fakery. Cut your losses now before you are exposed even more.
1-- ^^Faker! In your initial posts you claimed that it was Cavalli-Sforza talking 'bout negroes "mutating" from Pygmies. Now in your "corrected" post, YOU STILL APPEAR A FAKE. You now remove Cavalli- Sforza's name on the "mutant" claim, admitting that you were lying all along! Bwa ha aha a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah..
2-- Second point- Peter Frost is debunked by Cavalli-Sforza who says as to his so-called "mutation" theory: QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
Frost mentions Cavalli-Sforza in connection with sexual selection, and movement of some groups from Nigeria-Cameroon to other parts of Africa. He never says Cavalli Sforza talks bout any "negro mutation" and in fact any mutation claim is directly contradicted by Sforza. Sucka, you not only lied bout Cavalli-Sforza, you lied about your own white writer- Peter Frost, and misrepresented him.
EVEN IN YOUR CONTINUED ATTEMPTS AT DAMAGE CONTROL, YOU EXPOSE YOURSELF WITH YET MORE FAKERY
-------------------------
Sorry buffoon... you can;t escape.. I am still waiting on you to show that Africans don;t have this range of variation via native diversity or albinism.
--------------------- You conveniently leave out the FULL quote.. You arent fooling anyone.. -QUOTE - "Dolt.. you still lose. As shown even on your other multiple threads, which you desperately keep linking to, to get attention, light skin and multi-colored eyes occur in Africa as (a) part of built-in diversity or (b) as part of albinism. Africa has much more albinism than Europe, indeed than any other continent.
So the traits you claim to be missing in Africa do occur in Africa, the original source of anatomically modern humans, as part of built in variation or albinism."
Dont try to run away from your debunking with more strawmen.. and "replying" to yourself under another troll name won't save you..
Cassi-fakedes says: ''There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty''
^^LMAO! Totally fake! Credible up to date sources note that blondism is prevalent in early life BUT, contrary to your claim that: "There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty", the shade of color varies. In maturity the hair usually turns a darker brown color, but sometimes remains blond. See: "Gene Expression: Blonde Australian Aboriginals". Gnxp.com. http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2005/08/blonde-australian-aboriginals.php.
^^Here is one of your Australians over 20 years old who does have blonde hair. YOu are caught out spinning bogus claims AGAIN!. Bwa ha aha a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah.. -
So where are these tropical african peoples with pale white or fair skin? blonde red hair?
^^You fail again. African populations can readily produce blond or reddish blond hair as noted by hair study author Hrdy 1978 himself, and he references Nubia as an example. Albinism is another source of red or blond hair in Africa, and albinism is much more prevalent in African populations than among Europeans. Even African Americans produce more albinos than white Americans. (The pigmentary system: physiology and pathophysiology- By James J. Nordlund 2006: 603) (E. Roach and V. Miller 2004. Neurocutaneous disorders.) QUOTE: "In general, the prevalence of albinism in Africa is much higher, in the range of 1 in 1 100 to 1 in 3900."
So Africa can and does routinely produce red and blond hair. All non-Africans are MORE LIMITED subsets of ORIGINAL African diversity. THe originals have more built-in diversity than the limited sub-set populations. This is straight science as noted by the quote from TIshkoff 2000.
Nor are Africans the only tropical peoples who can produce reddish hair or blond hair. Among Australian Aborigines, some tropical groups produce 100% of individuals with blond hair. Melanesians can also produce blond or reddish hair, and do so routinely.
White people have no monopoly at all on that hair color. They merely show more of it, but even among whites, red hair for example is minor- occurring in less than 5% of the overall European populations, mostly in northern Europe.
So the claim that there are no tropical Africans with such variation is once again, proved fake.
Time and time again, you stand debunked and exposed for falsifying claims and references. Let's recap:
Originally posted by CASSIFAKedes::
quote: The source is Cavalli-Sforza's book on the Pygmies entitled 'African pygmies' (Academic Press, 1986).
This work shows that Negroids mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 9,000 BC in West Africa. So the 'true' Black African today is a recent mutation. Caucasoids and Mongoloids predate them. [Wink] Negroids only migrated into other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion or slightly earlier. Prior to them, Caucasoids inhabited North Africa and Bushmen (Capoids) to the south who were displaced by the Caucasoids from the Mediterranean around 12,000 BC.
^^A bogus reference. Why should anyone take your word for it given past bogus references? Quote where Cavalli-Sforza says these so-called "negroids" "mutated" from Pygmies. The burden of proof is on you, since you made the claim.
While you scurry to cover your tracks with yet more bogus claims, Cavali Sforza, in his well known The History and Geography of Human Genes, 1994 Cavalli-Sforza summarizes his 1986 work on Pygmies and specifically debunks the "Pygmy as ancestor" theory held by other older writings. QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
SO much for your lying claims of "mutations" from "Pygymy" ancestors. In short, you lied about Cavalli-Sforza, creating a falsified claim and a bogus "supporting" reference to a claim that is nowhere supported in his work. You are once again exposed as yet another racist faker You are not fooling anyone.
------------------------
YOu then tried to cover up your lie with even more bogus nformation and STILL fail
You "modified" your Cavalli Sforza claim by including page numbers, and then changing some wording to "adaptive radiation" hoping to divert attention from your exposure.. lmao..
However pages 361-362 of Cavalli Sforza's 1986 book says absolutely nothing about any Negroes "mutating" from pygmies, nor any "adaptive radiation." It merely discusses Pygmy history and geography. You picked out a page at random, not knowing it can be verified via Google Books. You were asked to provide a direct quote but are still running. Now why is that?
""It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
--------------------------------------
And Your pathetic "modification" STILL turned out to be bogus. You then said:
"True" Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population — a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996).
^^But in fact, Watson 1996 has nothing to do with osteological data and does not even mention it. It has to do with mtDNA.
----------------------------------------
YOU THEN PROFFERED ANOTHER FAKE CLAIM BELOW: He says:
quote: "Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships.."
^^Complete Nonsense. In the Old Testament, the tribe of Zebulun is mentioned as specifically associated with ships and maritime elements. QUOTE:
Genesis 49:13 "Zebulun will dwell at the shore of the seas; Yea, he will be at the shore of the ships, And his side toucheth upon Sidon. "
Cassi-Fakdes: MULTIPLE TIMES AT BAT, MULTIPLE EXPOSURES AS A FAKE...
--fake claim that no Australian Abo over 20 is blonde
-- fake claim that tropical Africans do not have any diversity in hair, skin or eye color
-- fake Cavalli-Sforza citation
-- 2nd fake Cavalli-Sforza reference
-- Faked Watson reference
-- Faked Biblical reference
-- Fke representation of Peter Frost's work
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: But Cavalli-Sforza says no such thing in his book.
You've been given the page reference. Cavalli-Sforza in the work cited claims Negroids sprung from an ancestral pygmy population.
Nothing is stopping you from buying the work and looking up those pages.
quote:In fact in another work he specifically debunks the notion:[/b]
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
This has nothing to do with his earlier work. All this proves is that between 1986 and 1994 he changed his view on Negroid origins.
Are you also aware Cavilla Sforza's claims support mine but not yours? His 1994 work shows East Africans are more Caucasoid than Sub-Saharan African through genetics. Furthermore he adheres to Coon's five race typology and clusters North Africans as Caucasoid.
quote:SO you are caught out in a lie. Then you try to cover your lie after it is exposed by now saying the quote is from Frost.
The quote is from Frost, its from an email dating back to 1999. As i said i never made that post hence i always posted it in brackets.
Are you saying someone other than Frost used his own email to send the message?
Peter Frost" <pfrost#globetrotter.qc.ca> To: <genetics@darwin.psy.fsu.edu>, <h-bd@egroups.com> Date sent: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 09:30:46 -0500 Subject: [h-bd] African sex ratios and polygyny
quote:Only thing is, Frost does not reference Cavalli- Sforza to support his so-called mutation claim. You fudged Frosts' initial quote to add Cavalli-Sforza- a lie, and thus also misrepresenting your own boy Frost.
Frost's 1999 email uses Cavalli-Sforza as a reference.
Do you understand how wrong and dumb your position is? You would have a better chance trying to claim the Earth is flat.
You only have to google the quote to see it came originally from Frost's 1999 email.
quote: On the tropical Africans, you denied that they had any variation of hair, eye or skin color.
Not true. I deny Negroids have natural heritable variations of hair, eye or skin colour.
Tropical African is a bogus scientific term only used by Afrocentrics - so they can cluster other races all under one label (Australoids, Capoids, Pygmies, Negroids, heck even Dravidians) when in reality all these races are phenotypically distinct.
Negroids, Capoids and Australoids look nothing a like. In fact Australoids have more phenotypic features in common with Caucasoids than Negroids.
quote:I am waiting for you to prove that they did not show said variation either natively or via albinism.
Albinism isn't natural its a medical defect or anomaly. The equivilant would me be claiming white people are phenotypically Mongoloid through Down Syndrome - since people with Down's have Asian features. In fact up to the 1970's Down syndrome people were nicknamed ''Mongols''.
So by your logic -
Built in White European Phenotypic Diversity - Mongoloid Features:
So still waiting for you to show a Negroid/Tropical African with straight red hair or white skin. Albinism doesn't count. You are the one repeatedly claiming blacks are physically diverse but cannot show one photo of such diversity.
quote:You are debunked by credible scientists as shown below,
Scientists who don't agree with what you post. They claim Africa is phenotypically diverse NOT 'tropical africans'.
Africa has been inhabited by different races for thousands of years. North African Berbers are Caucasoid.
quote: and in your own multiple spammed threads over the weeks with Mike who shows light skin and red hair via African albinism,
doesn't help you. albinism is a genetic defect. Look at the down syndrome child above -
Is that evidence white europeans are phenotypically diverse and are Mongoloid?
quote: and further debunked by the native blondism shown in multiple "hair" threads,
Among Australoids who are:
*Not African *Not Negroid
Australoids originated in South-east ASIA.
In no way do Australoids help your claim that black africans have blonde or red hair (when they don't).
quote:
or by light-skinned San Bushmen shown by Djheuti, Troll Patrol etc in others.
Yes the 'light skinned' Bushmen who Djheuti posted who were DARK BROWN.
Their skin gets nowhere near pale white of northern europeans or most Caucasoids.
Again - fail on your behalf. If you think dark brown Bushmen are 'light skinned' then you clearly don't have a clue about dermatology.
Light skin is 1 - 15 on the luschan scale -
So come back when you find a Bushman with 1 - 15...
quote:You keep denying that such things exist, but in your own threads they show up. I am not going to get pictures for you. They are already in your own threads over the weeks where people already debunked you. You keep running away from your own claims, in your own threads.
You mean like the dark brown skinned Bushman who you claim is 'light skinned'?
Or Australoids who you claim are tropical african when they originated from ASIA...
Everytime you are asked something you end up replying with something regarding another race.
So are you racially a Capoid (Bushman) or Australian Aborgine?
If not, why are you clustering yourself with them?
quote:As for "white folks": witless dullard, the "race" referred to is a SOCIAL construct, not a biological one. That is an elementary point for anyone debating the issue and has been several numerous times not only by me but numerous others as well. I have never "changed" this outlook. You have not even begun to grasp these basics. You are truly a dunce, who does not understand the issues. Quit trying to divert attention from your exposure via yet another bogus red herring.
Race is a biological reality, but you don't live in the real world as a scientist do you? Only behind your keyboard...
quote:You have no way out- you have to face up to your fakery. Cut your losses now before you are exposed even more.
The only one who has been exposed as a fraud is you.
Tell me are you still going to deny Frost wrote that email?
Ok well then i suppose you should email him here - and tell him someone hacked his email and posted that...
Basically you have no way of getting out of this one - so i expect a reply of spams or you directly ignoring how i have exposed you.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
It really takes a complete idiot to compare a poor child who unfortunately has mental and physical challenges to millions of Africans whose natural diversity includes the epicanthic fold only attained by blancos who are admixed with amarillos. The true blanco only has non-epicanthic eyelids.
This guy didn't know the quote was Frost's until I pointed it out a few days ago. Now he's trying to play up Frost when he's justa a garden variety anthropologist with an internet blog. Big deal.
Cheez Cheezy
As predicted Tinman acts as if the quote hasn't been properly refuted and just repeats it again. And no he's not playing stupid. He's strategically using an advertising/propaganda tactic. He's working the "repeat a lie enough times and it becomes ingrained truth" effect.
=-=-= Originally posted here by alTakruri 17 November, 2011:
As nothing but a propaganda peddler Tin Isles keeps repeating non-existant sources even after being shown that there is no so-called reference as he put up.
A favoured tactic of propagandists is repetition. It is known that false information can eventually be assimilated by the majority of people who find it appealing regardless of factuality if it is but repeated over and over and over again. Just ask the mad ad men on Madison Avenue who's televised cigarette advertisements were so inculcating that the USA government had to step in and ban for the health concerns of that nation.
No matter how many times Coonian pseudo-anthropology is repeated it will never be true. It was even rejected by his colleagues in the very years Coon presented it. And Baker, Coon's disciple, was just as soundly rejected.
Unfortunately, the only way to counter Tinman is to re-post the exposure of the lies even though this ties up time and distracts from positive sourced presentations of non-racialist subjects.
quote: Tinman says: Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population — a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996).
quote: Science says: "It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population." Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
quote:Zarahan adds: Watson 1996 has nothing to do with osteological data ... It has to do with mtDNA.
.
quote: Tinman says: Black Africans were absent from the middle Nile until about 4,000 years ago
quote:Science says: "The Oldest human skeleton found in Egypt." Nazlet Khater man was the earliest modern human skeleton found near Luxor, in 1980. The remains were dated from between 35,000 and 30,000 years ago. The report regarding the racial affinity of this skeleton concludes: "Strong alveolar prognathism combined with fossa praenasalis in an African skull is suggestive of Negroid morphology [form & structure]. The radio-humeral index of Nazlet Khater is practically the same as the mean of Taforalt (76.6). ... A flint tool, which was laid carefully on the bottom of the grave, dates the burial as contemporaneous with a nearby flint quarry. Thoma A., Morphology and affinities of the Nazlet Khater man Journal of Human Evolution, vol 13, 1984.
Fact is, Tinman's whole quote in his last post is only a msg in some chat list by some blogger Peter Frost back in 1999 which was picked up by several pro-race melanophobe boards since 2005. It was ridiculed by Brandon and shot down by Rasol then as soon as it was picked up. See Racial "Reality" on Negroid History (LOL) http://thenile.phpbb-host.com/sutra4388.php
Tinman's response, as always, will be to act as if though none of the above were ever posted and to post yet again the exact same rubbish. In the case of the above example he has been doing so since October when the original correspondants posted the science.
You would think the embarassment of exposure would make an honest man recant and make a dishonest one scurry back to his gutter sewer hole. But no no.
Tinman will be back and will post the same piece of exposed garbage once again for the accept by repetition effect. Just you wait and see.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: Africans whose natural diversity
Who do you mean by African?
Here are some native North African Kabyles:
They are Caucasoid.
Africa is diverse because different races have been living in it for thousands of years. The Afronuts though just can't accept this fact and have some bizarre fantasy that everyone living in Africa today is apart of some 'tropical african' group.
quote:The true blanco only has non-epicanthic eyelids.
Actually Lapps are Caucasoid but have semi-oblique eyes. Full Mongoloid slanted? No. But Negroids don't have slanted eyes either, so i don't see your point.
The only Africans with epicanthic folds are the Capoids (Bushmen). Who are phenotypically and genetically non-Negroid. They are a seperate race.
quote:This guy didn't know the quote was Frost's until I pointed it out a few days ago. Now he's trying to play up Frost when he's justa a garden variety anthropologist with an internet blog. Big deal.
I've known it was posted by Frost ages back. I posted it on here months back.
Posts: 2408 | From: My mother's basement | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
You've been given the page reference. Cavalli-Sforza in the work cited claims Negroids sprung from an ancestral pygmy population.
Pathetic faker. Cavalli-Sforza said no such thing as negroes "mutating" from Pygmies. You are an out and out liar.
This has nothing to do with his earlier work. All this proves is that between 1986 and 1994 he changed his view on Negroid origins.
^Well then you should have no problem quoting from his earlier 1986 work, which you say supports your "mutation" claim. What's taking you so long? Could it be that you have been caught out in another lie and your multiple damage control fakeries only dig you deeper into the hole?
The quote is from Frost, its from an email dating back to 1999. As i said i never made that post hence i always posted it in brackets.
^Backtracking now that you have been exposed?
Frost's 1999 email uses Cavalli-Sforza as a reference. Do you understand how wrong and dumb your position is? You would have a better chance trying to claim the Earth is flat.
^Pathetic liar! I am not talking about a 1999 email, but what you posted as scientific fact. But even your attempted cover fails miserably. Sure Frost uses Cavalli-Sforza as a reference, but that reference has nothing to do with any negroes "mutating" from Pygmies. Every cover story you try to spin only exposes you more as a liar. Attempting a diversionary shift to some "email" only shows how bankrupt you are.
Tropical African is a bogus scientific term only used by Afrocentrics
^Complete nonsense. It is used by writer CLive Finlayson in his book on the NEanderthals, and it is used by Israeli scientist Bar Josef, and the tropical populations of Africa are specifically referred to by Erik Trinkhaus. In addition to direct use it is clearly indicated in dozens of scientific writings. You are full of shiit.
So still waiting for you to show a Negroid/Tropical African with straight red hair or white skin. Albinism doesn't count. You are the one repeatedly claiming blacks are physically diverse but cannot show one photo of such diversity.
^^But albinism does count. You want it not to count becaue it debunks your bullshiit claim that no Afrians have red hair, white skin or different eye colors. 1 in 3900 Africans are albinos, out of a continental population of 1 billion. They very much count, and you STILL stand debunked.
Tell me are you still going to deny Frost wrote that email?
^^Pathetic buffoon..
---------------------------- RECAP: Cassi-FAKER, Don't try to wriggle your way out. You first represented the "mutation" claim as that of Cavalli-Sforza hisself. But Cavalli-Sforza says no such thing in his book. In fact in another work he specifically debunks the notion:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
SO you are caught out in a lie. Then you try to cover your lie after it is exposed by now saying the quote is from Frost. Only thing is, Frost does not reference Cavalli- Sforza to support his so-called mutation claim. You fudged Frosts' initial quote to add Cavalli-Sforza- a lie, and thus also misrepresenting your own boy Frost.
On the tropical Africans, you denied that they had any variation of hair, eye or skin color. I am waiting for you to prove that they did not show said variation either natively or via albinism. You are debunked by credible scientists as shown below, and in your own multiple spammed threads over the weeks with Mike who shows light skin and red hair via African albinism, and further debunked by the native blondism shown in multiple "hair" threads, or by light-skinned San Bushmen shown by Djheuti, Troll Patrol etc in others. You keep denying that such things exist, but in your own threads they show up.
1-- ^^Faker! In your initial posts you claimed that it was Cavalli-Sforza talking 'bout negroes "mutating" from Pygmies. Now in your "corrected" post, YOU STILL APPEAR A FAKE. You now remove Cavalli- Sforza's name on the "mutant" claim, admitting that you were lying all along! Bwa ha aha a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah..
2-- Second point- Peter Frost is debunked by Cavalli-Sforza who says as to his so-called "mutation" theory: QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
Frost mentions Cavalli-Sforza in connection with sexual selection, and movement of some groups from Nigeria-Cameroon to other parts of Africa. He never says Cavalli Sforza talks bout any "negro mutation" and in fact any mutation claim is directly contradicted by Sforza. Sucka, you not only lied bout Cavalli-Sforza, you lied about your own white writer- Peter Frost, and misrepresented him.
EVEN IN YOUR CONTINUED ATTEMPTS AT DAMAGE CONTROL, YOU EXPOSE YOURSELF WITH YET MORE FAKERY
-------------------------
Sorry buffoon... you can;t escape.. I am still waiting on you to show that Africans don;t have this range of variation via native diversity or albinism.
--------------------- You conveniently leave out the FULL quote.. You arent fooling anyone.. -QUOTE - "Dolt.. you still lose. As shown even on your other multiple threads, which you desperately keep linking to, to get attention, light skin or multi-colored eyes occur in Africa as (a) part of built-in diversity or (b) as part of albinism. Africa has much more albinism than Europe, indeed than any other continent.
So the traits you claim to be missing in Africa do occur in Africa, the original source of anatomically modern humans, as part of built in variation or albinism."
Dont try to run away from your debunking with more strawmen.. and "replying" to yourself under another troll name won't save you..
Cassi-fakedes says: ''There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty''
^^LMAO! Totally fake! Credible up to date sources note that blondism is prevalent in early life BUT, contrary to your claim that: "There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty", the shade of color varies. In maturity the hair usually turns a darker brown color, but sometimes remains blond. See: "Gene Expression: Blonde Australian Aboriginals". Gnxp.com. http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2005/08/blonde-australian-aboriginals.php.
^^Here is one of your Australians over 20 years old who does have blonde hair. YOu are caught out spinning bogus claims AGAIN!. Bwa ha aha a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah.. -
So where are these tropical african peoples with pale white or fair skin? blonde red hair?
^^You fail again. African populations can readily produce blond or reddish blond hair as noted by hair study author Hrdy 1978 himself, and he references Nubia as an example. Albinism is another source of red or blond hair in Africa, and albinism is much more prevalent in African populations than among Europeans. Even African Americans produce more albinos than white Americans. (The pigmentary system: physiology and pathophysiology- By James J. Nordlund 2006: 603) (E. Roach and V. Miller 2004. Neurocutaneous disorders.) QUOTE: "In general, the prevalence of albinism in Africa is much higher, in the range of 1 in 1 100 to 1 in 3900."
So Africa can and does routinely produce red and blond hair. All non-Africans are MORE LIMITED subsets of ORIGINAL African diversity. THe originals have more built-in diversity than the limited sub-set populations. This is straight science as noted by the quote from TIshkoff 2000.
Nor are Africans the only tropical peoples who can produce reddish hair or blond hair. Among Australian Aborigines, some tropical groups produce 100% of individuals with blond hair. Melanesians can also produce blond or reddish hair, and do so routinely.
White people have no monopoly at all on that hair color. They merely show more of it, but even among whites, red hair for example is minor- occurring in less than 5% of the overall European populations, mostly in northern Europe.
So the claim that there are no tropical Africans with such variation is once again, proved fake.
Time and time again, you stand debunked and exposed for falsifying claims and references. Let's recap:
Originally posted by CASSIFAKedes::
quote: The source is Cavalli-Sforza's book on the Pygmies entitled 'African pygmies' (Academic Press, 1986).
This work shows that Negroids mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 9,000 BC in West Africa. So the 'true' Black African today is a recent mutation. Caucasoids and Mongoloids predate them. [Wink] Negroids only migrated into other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion or slightly earlier. Prior to them, Caucasoids inhabited North Africa and Bushmen (Capoids) to the south who were displaced by the Caucasoids from the Mediterranean around 12,000 BC.
^^A bogus reference. Why should anyone take your word for it given past bogus references? Quote where Cavalli-Sforza says these so-called "negroids" "mutated" from Pygmies. The burden of proof is on you, since you made the claim.
While you scurry to cover your tracks with yet more bogus claims, Cavali Sforza, in his well known The History and Geography of Human Genes, 1994 Cavalli-Sforza summarizes his 1986 work on Pygmies and specifically debunks the "Pygmy as ancestor" theory held by other older writings. QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
SO much for your lying claims of "mutations" from "Pygymy" ancestors. In short, you lied about Cavalli-Sforza, creating a falsified claim and a bogus "supporting" reference to a claim that is nowhere supported in his work. You are once again exposed as yet another racist faker You are not fooling anyone.
------------------------
YOu then tried to cover up your lie with even more bogus nformation and STILL fail
You "modified" your Cavalli Sforza claim by including page numbers, and then changing some wording to "adaptive radiation" hoping to divert attention from your exposure.. lmao..
However pages 361-362 of Cavalli Sforza's 1986 book says absolutely nothing about any Negroes "mutating" from pygmies, nor any "adaptive radiation." It merely discusses Pygmy history and geography. You picked out a page at random, not knowing it can be verified via Google Books. You were asked to provide a direct quote but are still running. Now why is that?
""It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
--------------------------------------
And Your pathetic "modification" STILL turned out to be bogus. You then said:
"True" Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population — a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996).
^^But in fact, Watson 1996 has nothing to do with osteological data and does not even mention it. It has to do with mtDNA.
----------------------------------------
YOU THEN PROFFERED ANOTHER FAKE CLAIM BELOW: He says:
quote: "Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships.."
^^Complete Nonsense. In the Old Testament, the tribe of Zebulun is mentioned as specifically associated with ships and maritime elements. QUOTE:
Genesis 49:13 "Zebulun will dwell at the shore of the seas; Yea, he will be at the shore of the ships, And his side toucheth upon Sidon. "
Cassi-Fakdes: MULTIPLE TIMES AT BAT, MULTIPLE EXPOSURES AS A FAKE...
--fake claim that no Australian Abo over 20 is blonde
-- fake claim that tropical Africans do not have any diversity in hair, skin or eye color
-- fake Cavalli-Sforza citation
-- 2nd fake Cavalli-Sforza reference
-- Faked Watson reference
-- Faked Biblical reference
-- Fake representation of Peter Frost's work
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are two types of diversity, quantitative and proportional.
If tribe "A" has a total of a hundred people and two of those people have four fingers on one hand and also have one person with six fingers tribe "A" is more diverse quantitativly than tribe "B"
Tribe "B" has five fingered people and four fingered people but no six fingered people.
But tribe "B" is more diverse proportionally, they have thirty people who are four fingered.
There is a more diverse range of people with a number of fingers on each hand other than five in tribe "A" but people who do have this type of hand are very rare.
Tribe "B" has less range, but the occurance is common, not an oddity, they have a higher proportion of this type of diversity.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: blah..blah..blah..
Peter frost is a well known Canadian anthropologist who specialises in the origin of skin colour. His essay on the origin of the Negroid (Black African) can be found below -
This is Peter Frost your so-called expert on origin of skin colour in his own words:
quote: Salut ! I graduated from Université Laval in 1995 with a Ph.D. in anthropology. Since then, my academic affiliation has been limited to contracts for an indigenous people research group, previously named Groupe d'études Inuit et circumpolaires (GÉTIC) and now Centre interuniversitaire d'études et de recherches autochtones (CIERA).
Most of my work is translation or revision of academic papers, although one contract required a literature review on Labrador Inuit genetics.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: U ain't know **** Backra please U had no idea 'till I skooled yr ass U stole it from some white shame site I dug up d real source
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: I've known it was posted by Frost ages back. I posted it on here months back.
U phony fake ass cut up
You don't want none with me maa'fa.
Posts: 525 | From: Terra | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: Science is progressive, not static. It is now known the
I agree
* Here, we report mitochondrial DNA analysis (HVRI sequences and RFLPs) of aborigine remains around 1000 years old.
* nor does either sample tie in with the Berbers of North Africa as has previously been claimed
^Ancient mtDNA analysis and the origin of the Guanches.
Nicole Maca-Meyer, Matilde Arnay, Juan Carlos Rando, Carlos Flores, Ana M González, Vicente M Cabrera and José M Larruga Eur J Hum Genet 12(2):155-62 (2004) PMID 14508507
The prehistoric colonisation of the Canary Islands by the Guanches (native Canarians) woke up great expectation about their origin, since the Europeans conquest of the Archipelago. Here, we report mitochondrial DNA analysis (HVRI sequences and RFLPs) of aborigine remains around 1000 years old. The sequences retrieved show that the Guanches possessed U6b1 lineages that are in the present day Canarian population, but not in Africans. In turn, U6b, the phylogenetically closest ancestor found in Africa, is not present in the Canary Islands.
Comparisons with other populations relate the Guanches with the actual inhabitants of the Archipelago and with Moroccan Berbers.
This shows that, despite the continuous changes suffered by the population (Spanish colonisation, slave trade), aboriginal mtDNA lineages constitute a considerable proportion of the Canarian gene pool.
Although the Berbers are the most probable ancestors of the Guanches, it is deduced that important human movements have reshaped Northwest Africa after the migratory wave to the Canary Islands.
"This shows that, despite the continuous changes suffered by the population (Spanish colonisation, slave trade)"
"Furthermore, after the Conquest, the need of labour led to the introduction of slaves from the Northwest African coast..With time, these slaves were freed and integrated into the island population"
C. Loring Brace et al. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, November 11, 2005
When the Basques are run with the other samples used in Fig. 1, they link with Germany and more remotely with the Canary Islands. They are clearly European, although the length of their twig indicates that they have a distinction all their own.
It is clear, however, that they do not represent a survival of the kind of craniofacial form indicated by Cro-Magnon any more than do the Canary Islanders, nor does either sample tie in with the Berbers of North Africa as has previously been claimed (37, 44-45)...
It all came from eugenic freaks like Alfred Rosenberg, Von Schlegel and Blavatsky with their Atlantic fantasies.
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: There was a black population on the Canary Islands prior to the slave trade and European Invasions...
Mathilda won't talk about this will she??
Pope Eugene IV Against the Enslaving of Black Natives from the Canary Islands January 13, 1435
Some six decades before Columbus set out for the new world, Pope Eugene IV condemned the enslavement of black natives from the Canary Islands. This 1435 papal command demanded the European slave-masters to release them within 15 days or face the weight of excommunication from the Church.
Juan de Bethencourt became the first European to settle in the Canary Islands and made slaves of several natives heralding the beginning of the black slave trade. At this time slavery had been practically eliminated in Europe, thanks to the influence of the Church. The Holy Roman Church later would not only condone and support slavery even of those baptized into the Roman Catholic Church but also would hold their own slaves. Europe, led by Spain, would begin over four centuries of slave trading that included some twenty million Africans alone, of which half died in transit. Jewish children deported from Portugal during the Inquisition settle Sao Tome e Principe, two islands 320 kilometers west of Gabon. It then became a transit point for the slave trade. Pope John Paul II (1978 - ) in 1992 deplored the Roman Catholic Church's condoning of that sad offense to human dignity.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: blah..blah..blah..
Peter frost is a well known Canadian anthropologist who specialises in the origin of skin colour. His essay on the origin of the Negroid (Black African) can be found below -
This is Peter Frost your so-called expert on origin of skin colour in his own words:
quote: Salut ! I graduated from Université Laval in 1995 with a Ph.D. in anthropology. Since then, my academic affiliation has been limited to contracts for an indigenous people research group, previously named Groupe d'études Inuit et circumpolaires (GÉTIC) and now Centre interuniversitaire d'études et de recherches autochtones (CIERA).
Most of my work is translation or revision of academic papers, although one contract required a literature review on Labrador Inuit genetics.
A "black moor" among rowers on a Moorish ship off the Portuguese coast.. Medieval Europeans had only sporadic encounters with Black Africans, usually via contacts with Muslims in Spain, North Africa, and the Middle East.
The literature of the Middle Ages does attest to an awareness of differences in skin color, but these differences were seen as existing largely between individuals rather than between races.
Descriptions of human complexion as "white," "brown" or "black" would correspond in modern usage to "fair," "tan" or "swarthy." Medieval Europeans had no awareness of belonging to a "white" race, if only for want of contact with other races.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic