posted
Go easy on my man Mike.. . . .but seriously Mike.. I have no problem with used. There are about ½ dozen pages showing photographs of skulls. Some pages have as many as 30 skulls.
quote:Originally posted by TruthAndRights:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Google Books had a good thing going until they got sued for scanning and publishing these books. So unfortunately I am doing this the old fashioned way. Reading a hard copy, and not e-books, pdf etc on a tablet or computer. But I will reference the sections, pages etc.
L. Angel more or less concluded like G. Sergi and many others that modern Europeans are invaders. Who either wiped out or admixed with the “negroid” people of Europe. He came to this conclusion through really simple science. Like, examining the skeletal remains of the inhabitants from pre-Neolithic thru Roman period.
Modern geneticist are now coming to the same conclusion by performing genetic analysis of skeletal remains from the same period. Pre-Neolithic thru Roman. Barbujani(?) is leader in this field. Malstrom is another.
What better way to tell who the people of historical Europe were. . . .simple . .. test the remains from the different period.. And for those who are not keeping up in the field. The Refugium Theory has now been debunked. See ISOGG. Modern Europeans did NOT spread out from Iberia(Basque) after the LGM.
xyyman - It's an expensive book - $156.00 new on Amazon. So we all look forward to you excerpts.
If one really wants the book, one doesn't have to buy it new:
1 new from $156.00 24 used from $3.71 2 collectible from $24.00
Hope this helps folks who are interested in buying the book....I've never had a problem with any used book I've ordered via Amazon...matter of fact, I bought my used author-signed hardback copy of Black Britannia A History of Blacks in Britain by Edward Scobie via Amazon...yea, it's nice to buy new and all, but buying used in many instances is not a bad thing atall...
boy what an impulsive non-thinking act-first negro I am
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
xyyman - Actually it's a little more complicated than that. My encouragement to you really had little to do with the actual price of the book, rather it was about the practice of disseminating knowledge to everyone.
For many years now, you have benefited from the work and research of others. I'm sure, never giving any thought to time and effort spent by them, in order to bring that knowledge to you. I was trying to encourage you, to now do your part, in the effort to educate a mis-educated world.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike. I got your point on the onset. I was just stoking TnR. You two had something going on there. Lovers quarrel....?
and yes I have benefited and yes I have provided informative post to others.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
The word ''Negroid'' only appears three times in Angel's 'The people of Lerna' (1971), p. 100 and p. 102. No discussion whatsoever of indigenous Europeans being ''Negroid''...
quote:L. Angel more or less concluded like G. Sergi and many others that modern Europeans are invaders. Who either wiped out or admixed with the “negroid” people of Europe.
Niether of these authors wrote anything along these lines.
And yea, you will backout from posting excerpts as they say no such thing. Such a troll.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here you go. Ignoring the 18th century classification used by Angel. Angels concluded Eurafricans(negroids) were found throughout the Mediterranean as far north as Turkey right up to the 2000BC. Note he is classifying Eurafricans as Basic White although they originated in the Sudan(Sergi).
Notice ALL of the different “types” have an African base. It wasn’t until about 2000bc the Aryan/Nordic type appears. Now DNA is proving this out.
Fortunately I don’t allow the convoluted and false logic of people like you influence me.
=======
Tried using OCR on the image file so the conversion is not clean…. See ESR for both image
=======
Quote:
more rugged than A3, the central Basic White, which approximates the Eurafrican of the literature and is a smaller version of Cro-Magnon. A4, a squat-faced and low-headed version o 1 ,being more Eastern than African; and A5 is a fuller, more massive version. The Classic Mediterranean type Bl is a generalized Mediterranean, whereas B2 is the more angular form, as often found in Egypt. Types BB, more linear and "Classic" in Sergi's sense, and B4, with the long face, approximate the desert-belt Mediterranean vel' ions in the range from North Africa and Siwah to Hissar and Kazakhstan. The 1-,Nordic-lranian type Dl lies between Anglo-Saxon and Keltic area norms, and D2 is the earlier pre-Bronze Age Corded form which Coon identifies. Type DB, lighter and more hawk-nosed, is tran itional to the Mediterranean type B4 and to type D4 (Iranian), which is the Proto-Iranian of Vallois, Irano Afghan of others, and Proto- Nordic of Krogman, and which is more linear and more rugged than DB and has a more tilted chewing plane, more na, al convexity, and deeper occiput. Type D5 approximates Coon's Danubian-Hallstatt and successor Central European forms. [n]The Dinaric-Mediterranean[/b] type Fl is the lighter more Mediterranean version found in Lower Egypt or Anatolia; F2 is the broader bigger-faced more Dinaroid version, rarely with less curve occiput; and FB is the low-headed East Balkan version with some Iranian face features. Type F4, with its more Iranian face and short vault and with little occipital bulge,
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is what he found. . .Eurafricans(negroids). Look at the hundreds of skulls yourself. Many have features that he calls prognathism. What he calls them is up for debate. He calls them basic White…Sergi calls them Eurafricans. All agree they originated from the Sudan. YOU use the word Caucasoid as a means of stealing African history and claim it as your own. It was only later on people from the Asian Steppes appeared. Now . . . shhhh!!!! .please keep quiet.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Further more. . . .When examining the skeletons he noticed the prevalence of sickle traits(pitting of the skeleton). As you many of us know close to 30% Greeks carry the African PN2 clade and the African version of sickle genes. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to deduce what the anthropological base(Sudan) of the pre-Greeks were.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
xyyman - I wondered why I had never heard of "The people of Lerna" considering that it is such an old book. These are some terms that you quoted from the book.
central Basic White Eurafrican of the literature Classic Mediterranean type Nordic-lranian Proto- Nordic of Krogman Mediterranean version found in Lower Egypt or Anatolia low-headed East Balkan version with some Iranian face features.
Clearly , the reason that I had never heard of the book, is because Angel, who was head of the Smithsonian btw, was just as big a bullsh1tting double-talking Albino piece of sh1t as Kemp. (The terms he uses have no meaning - except the meaning that you, the reader gives to them).
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
xyyman - I forgot to ask; Why did you post the images on ESR, is that function not working here?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Here you go. Ignoring the 18th century classification used by Angel. Angels concluded Eurafricans(negroids) were found throughout the Mediterranean as far north as Turkey right up to the 2000BC. Note he is classifying Eurafricans as Basic White although they originated in the Sudan(Sergi).
Diop also claimed that the first European skeletons do not appear until 2000.
posted
No dis-respect Mike. But many sometimes we miss the point and get caught up in the minutia. Not hearing the "name" of the book is unimportant.
What is important is factual evidence in the book not who is presenting the evidence.
The internet makes it so easy to catch Europeans in their lies and BS. I wouldn't be suprised if they try to shut it down.
I usually ignore the village idiot. He has one word . . .CACAUSOID...he uses that word to derail threads and steal African history.
He cannot prove ANY relationship between AEians and Europeans. Because there aren't any. . .
I see through all their tricks and games. They are an easy fugk. He! He! He!
My reserach is very simple and logical. If you want to know what and who the ancient and pre-Greeks were, simply dig up the bones and analyze it. The phenotype of the modern population of a country may have no commonality with the ancient population. Case in point. Here in the USA and the extinct natives.
L. Angel and many others did that. Dug up skeletons(late 1800s and early 1900s) in the Greek Isles and recorded what they saw.
Weeding out their BS....
There is common theme. . . .ALL the different "clans" he dug up had what he calls African admixture. The so called Nordics appeared circa 2000BC. He, Angel, discribes them as barbarians.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: xyyman - I wondered why I had never heard of "The people of Lerna" considering that it is such an old book. These are some terms that you quoted from the book.
central Basic White Eurafrican of the literature Classic Mediterranean type Nordic-lranian Proto- Nordic of Krogman Mediterranean version found in Lower Egypt or Anatolia low-headed East Balkan version with some Iranian face features.
Clearly , the reason that I had never heard of the book, is because Angel, who was head of the Smithsonian btw, was just as big a bullsh1tting double-talking Albino piece of sh1t as Kemp. (The terms he uses have no meaning - except the meaning that you, the reader gives to them).
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:This is what he found. . .Eurafricans(negroids). Look at the hundreds of skulls yourself. Many have features that he calls prognathism. What he calls them is up for debate. He calls them basic White…Sergi calls them Eurafricans. All agree they originated from the Sudan. YOU use the word Caucasoid as a means of stealing African history and claim it as your own. It was only later on people from the Asian Steppes appeared. Now . . . shhhh!!!! .please keep quiet.
Eurafricans are Caucasoid not Negroid. And Angel used the term ''Basic WHITE'' - a general ancestral Caucasoid ('white') morphology.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ^ Xyyman you claimed Angel in his work describes indigenous Europeans as Negroids/Blacks yet have failed to show where.
You are a fraud, a liar and a troll.
Put up or shut up.
Cass - I'm sure that you are wrong.
Be patient, I'm sure xyyman will produce the goods.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
I know you are caught up in your own little world and a little thick BUT!!! The debate is really are Eurafricans, Europeans, or, European negroids.
I does matter what Angel calls them. But what is their morphology and where they orginated.
I have to inform you. Basic White makes absolutely no sense when describing skeleton. And he did not use Caucasoids. An alternative term he uses is Eurafrican. Therefore for those who are slow. . .the debate is who and what are the Eurafricans. Since their skeleton littered the landscape of Southern Europe per Angel.
White people can no longer get in my head. They don't tell me what to think and infact I am the one who get in their head.
So - who are the Eurafricans?
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:. All(Sergi, Angel etc) agree the Eurafricans originated from the Sudan.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Mike - the goods is on the table
I guess I'm pretty thick too.
central Basic White Eurafrican of the literature Classic Mediterranean type Nordic-lranian Proto- Nordic of Krogman Mediterranean version found in Lower Egypt or Anatolia low-headed East Balkan version with some Iranian face features. Eurafricans, Europeans, or, European negroids.
What Goods???
How is this a capsule of a scientific study?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sigh! see below. All the different clans or group are African-type except the Nordic Iranians who arrivd later.
""""the central Basic White, which approximates the Eurafrican of the literature """"
Some are simiar to the skeleton of lower Egypt.
tic! toc!
You know the cliche. . .focus on the message
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
=======
Quote:
more rugged than A3, the central Basic White, which approximates the Eurafrican of the literature and is a smaller version of Cro-Magnon. A4, a squat-faced and low-headed version o 1 ,being more Eastern than African; and A5 is a fuller, more massive version. The Classic Mediterranean type Bl is a generalized Mediterranean, whereas B2 is the more angular form, as often found in Egypt. Types BB, more linear and "Classic" in Sergi's sense, and B4, with the long face, approximate the desert-belt Mediterranean vel' ions in the range from North Africa and Siwah to Hissar and Kazakhstan. The 1-,Nordic-lranian type Dl lies between Anglo-Saxon and Keltic area norms, and D2 is the earlier pre-Bronze Age Corded form which Coon identifies. Type DB, lighter and more hawk-nosed, is tran itional to the Mediterranean type B4 and to type D4 (Iranian), which is the Proto-Iranian of Vallois, Irano Afghan of others, and Proto- Nordic of Krogman, and which is more linear and more rugged than DB and has a more tilted chewing plane, more na, al convexity, and deeper occiput. Type D5 approximates Coon's Danubian-Hallstatt and successor Central European forms. [n]The Dinaric-Mediterranean[/b] type Fl is the lighter more Mediterranean version found in Lower Egypt or Anatolia; F2 is the broader bigger-faced more Dinaroid version, rarely with less curve occiput; and FB is the low-headed East Balkan version with some Iranian face features. Type F4, with its more Iranian face and short vault and with little occipital bulge,
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Mike - the goods is on the table
I guess I'm pretty thick too.
central Basic White Eurafrican of the literature Classic Mediterranean type Nordic-lranian Proto- Nordic of Krogman Mediterranean version found in Lower Egypt or Anatolia low-headed East Balkan version with some Iranian face features. Eurafricans, Europeans, or, European negroids.
What Goods???
How is this a capsule of a scientific study?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let me translate... the dominant/base of the pre-Greeks are Eurafricans. All the different types are either.
1. which approximates the Eurafrican of the literature (base)
2. being more Eastern than African
3. as often found in Egypt North Africa and Siwah to Hissar
4. Mediterranean version found in Lower Egypt or
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Eurafrican is synonymous with Caucasoid, and obviously excludes Negroids.
''The Caucasian, Eurafrican, or white division, includes the two groups called by Professor Huxley Xanthochroi and Melanochroi, which, though differing in colour of eyes and hair, agree so closely in all other anatomical characters'' (Flower, 1891)
''CAUCASIAN, CAUCASIC, EUROPEAN, EURAFRICAN, or WHITE race. (See xanthochroi and melanochroi races, p. 31.)'' - Dictionary of races or peoples, United States. Immigration Commission (1907-1910).
''Eurafrican; they form three varieties, which he names the African (exclusive of the negroes), the mediterranean, which occupied the basin of that sea, and the third, the Nordic, which reached the North of Europe'' (Palmer, 1928)
''These three human varieties have nothing in common with the so-called Aryan races ; it is an error to maintain that the Germans and the Scandinavians, blond dolichocephals or long-heads (of the Rcihcngraber and Viking types)'' (Sergi, 1901)
So note that Sergi who coined the term ''Eurafrican'' included the Nordids (blondes) in that category.
How the heck are milky white skinned blonde Scandinavians Negroid?
You retard Afrocentrics fail. You get hold of old texts and do nothing but pervert them. Eurafrican has nothing to do with Negroids, it is synonymous with Caucasoid including Nordids. There is no way you can distort this. As i said, are pale blonde Scandinavians now ''Black''? You are lame trolls...
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
As you have figured out, this entire board consists of ONE sick degenerate that has created ficticious names to talk to itself in. There is NOONE on this site that can be trusted but me. The only links on this site that can be trusted are the ones that I provide for you! Here is a link that you can use as a resource and can be trusted! http://www.raceandhistory.com/
When you have finished reading this post check out this site to learn the truth about history and ALL civilzations. Do NOT be fooled by the real history link that the filthy monkey created using the race and history link as a guide. This is the ONLY site that can be trusted http://www.raceandhistory.com/
Isnt it funny how this one little link destroys all of the charts, graphs and pics that the filthy monkey lies to us with? You now understand why the filthy monkey continues to spam the board with photos of modern day populations that had absolutely NOTHING to do with ancient Egypt
The next time one of these degenerates tries to tell you a lie just refer the moonkey to the latest DNA analysis on the ancient Egyptians, and then tell the faggot to crawl back in its cave!
The pig just keeps showing us why these crackers should not exist! They have genetically recessive genes and ion 50 years they will be the minority in BRITAIN!! THAT ALONE SHOULD TELL YOU THAT THEY WILL EVENTUALLY DIE OUT LIKE THE UNATURAL ABOMINATIONS THAT THEY ARE!
Look at the low IQ monkey with its charts and pictures LOL tHE dna analysis does not matter to this monkey, because it lives in a world of fantasy! lol
Folks, the monkey performs at my commend. I am this monkeys master!But then again all one needs to do is take a cursury look at this monkeys youtube page to understand the tenuous grip on reality that this monkey has! LOL http://www.youtube.com/user/phoenician7
When the DNA analysis irrefutably shows that the modern day populations of South Africa, West Africa anmd central Africa are the ancestors of the ancient Egyptians what does a low IQ monkey do???
The low IQ monkey shows pictures and charts and munbles on and on about haplogroups while completely ignoring what the DNA analysis of the ancient Egyptians actually says LOL
the DNA analysis irrefutably shows that the modern day populations of South Africa, West Africa anmd central Africa are the ancestors of the ancient Egyptians. Thats what the DNA says, thats what the science says. This monkey in all of its fake names is very pathetic isnt it?
THE dififerentiation of the species Man into various races, with permanent traits and inhabiting defi- nite areas, took place early in the present geologic epoch. Of these races there are four which are well- marked, each developed in one of the continental areas as they existed at the time referred to. They are the Eurafrican or white, the Austafrican or black, the Asian or yellow, and the American or red race. The color-names given them are merely approximations, and are retained for the sake of convenience, and as expressing a general and obvious characteristic. ---DG Brinton, The American Race 1891 __________________________________________________________ full text: http://www.archive.org/stream/americanraceling00brinrich/americanraceling00brinrich_djvu.txt
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ^ The troll has no reply after getting owned. lol.
quote:Eurafrican or white
Eurafricans are Caucasoid.
Alistair Moffat, the historian and rector of St Andrews University, who was involved in setting up the DNA project, said: “It is an astonishing result and means he could have been in the 'Garden of Eden’.
“It is further proof that even [albino]white Anglo-Saxon Protestants are descended from a black Eve.”
Giuseppe Sergi (1841–1936) was an influential Italian anthropologist of the early twentieth century, best known for his opposition to Nordicism in his books on the racial identity of ancient Mediterranean peoples. His concept of the Mediterranean race, became important to the modelling of racial difference in the early twentieth century.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Let me translate... the dominant/base of the pre-Greeks are Eurafricans. All the different types are either.
1. which approximates the Eurafrican of the literature (base)
2. being more Eastern than African
3. as often found in Egypt North Africa and Siwah to Hissar
4. Mediterranean version found in Lower Egypt or
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sergi's initial contribution was to oppose the use of the cephalic index to model population ancestry, arguing that over all cranial morphology was more useful.[3] However, Sergi's major theoretical achievement was his model of human ancestry, fully articulated in his books Human Variation (Varietà umane. Principio e metodo di classificazione) and The Mediterranean Race (1901), in which he argued that the earliest European peoples arose from original populations in the Horn of Africa,
Anti-Nordicism
These theories were developed in opposition to Nordicism, the claim that the Nordic race was of pure Aryan stock and naturally superior to other Europeans. Sergi ridiculed Nordicists who claimed that the leaders of ancient Greek and Roman civilization were Germanic in origin and argued that the Germanic invasions at the end of the Roman empire had produced "delinquency, vagabondage and ferocity". Sergi believed that the Aryans were originally "Eurasiatic" barbarians who migrated from the Hindu Kush into Europe. He argued that the Italians had originally spoken a Hamitic language before the Aryan (Indo-European) Italic language spread across the country. Some Aryan influence was detectable in Northern Italy, but, racially speaking, southern Italians were unaffected by Aryan migrants.[3]
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
boy what an impulsive non-thinking act-first negro I am 
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic