posted
Why do people divide by bone structure? WHY is that so important especially in the face. What objective implication of superiority is made cause a persons got a thin nose or no prognathism? Why not divide people blood types, haplogroups, etc.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Why do people divide by bone structure? WHY is that so important especially in the face. What objective implication of superiority is made cause a persons got a thin nose or no prognathism? Why not divide people blood types, haplogroups, etc.
there is a simple way to answer your question, RACE DOES NOT EXIST
Posts: 1064 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bones aren't important. Especially when you don't understand what the hell you are seeing. All they are good for is playing the Albino game by their rules in a game you cannot possibly win. Blacks are trained to stay within the boundaries of these rules so they might be "taken seriously" by their white masters.
For example, if we already understand that on average Negro bones should be 30-40% more dense than those of whites, then it should be a simple exercise to deduce from which group the bones belong with a reasonable level of certainty. Guess what. That kind of comparison never happens, so Negro researchers end up spinning their wheels as they continue to play a losing hand. But they still receive a check, so the meaningless game goes on.
-------------------- Selenium gives real life and true reality Posts: 4693 | From: Saturn | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Why do people divide by bone structure? WHY is that so important especially in the face. What objective implication of superiority is made cause a persons got a thin nose or no prognathism? Why not divide people blood types, haplogroups, etc.
Genotype frequencies match morphological differences. The standard racial classification is backed up by blood group frequencies. For example only Caucasoids have a high frequency of Rh negative.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Why do people divide by bone structure? WHY is that so important especially in the face. What objective implication of superiority is made cause a persons got a thin nose or no prognathism? Why not divide people blood types, haplogroups, etc.
Because, ODummy, bones structure is fixed and much harder to change. It is a lot easier to change skin color by bleaching and hair can be changed chemically to look different.
Therefore, the best indicator of a particular group is usually Genetic Makeup and the genetic distance betweeen certain groups.
For example, Egyptians (Ancient & Modern) are genetically much closer to Europeans and Eurasians than West Africans. Bone structure, Dental structure, and other measures also confirm the same genetic distance.
East Africans, such as Ethiopians, Somalis, and Nubians are somewhat INTERMEDIATE between Europeans and West Africans, due to their greater contact with both groups.
Good post, although i would add that changing skin pigmentation can be done in only a few generations through natural microevolution. A population can change from brown to a 'white' very quick. This is why skin colour is not a valid criteria for race and never has been. Races are definable by their fixed morphological attributes, and of course other factors are useful (hair texture, finger prints etc).
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anglo_Pyramidologist, you should write a book (if you have not done so). You possess a wealth of knowledge that many, including Blacks, can benefit from.
Posts: 816 | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Thanks, I actually started a book on race a while back, but after a certain amount of time i can't go further without having to purchase a book for reference data. All i've done so far is nearly complete a segment of a single chapter on the Australid or Australian aborigine (race) of the Australoid subspecies.
I was in email communication with Akhil Bakshi, an Indian geographer and scientist who was meant to be publishing a book on his theory of a polygenic origin of the races. He maintains that races have been seperate from millions of years and evolved from different primates. I really plan to continue Bakshi's research, although i have seperate theories of my own.
Never heard anything from him again. The media got hold of his theory of racial origins and branded him a racist and started a smear campaign.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by white nubian wannabe: Because, Dummy, bones structure is fixed and much harder to change. It is a lot easier to change skin color by bleaching and hair can be changed chemically to look different.
Yet apparently it doesn't mean much to you that the skeletons of Egyptians and other northeast Africans are extra-tropical in adaptation which contrasts them greatly with the cold-adapted skeletons of Europeans and northern southwest Asians.
quote:Therefore, the best indicator of a particular group is usually Genetic Makeup and the genetic distance between certain groups.
For example, Egyptians (Ancient & Modern) are genetically much closer to Europeans and Eurasians than West Africans. Bone structure, Dental structure, and other measures also confirm the same genetic distance.
LOL Sources for this? Last time I checked, all the data you listed all show closer affinity to Africans including West Africans (hg B, E1b1a, and Benin HBS in the Nile Valley) than Eurasians. Quit lying!
quote:East Africans, such as Ethiopians, Somalis, and Nubians are somewhat INTERMEDIATE between Europeans and West Africans, due to their greater contact with both groups.
The intermediate positioning is due to the FACT that **ALL EURASIANS** are DESCENDED from East Africans!! East Africans are still closer to other Africans for the fact that East Africans have shared greater gene-flow with other Africans while gene-flow with Eurasians has largely been restricted. This is why the predominant Y hg in East Africa is PN2 derived just like everywhere else in Africa!
Quit distorting! LOLPosts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
"An attempt has been made to estimate male and female Egyptian stature from long bone length using Trotter & Gleser negro stature formulae, previous work by the authors having shown that these rather than white formulae give more consistent results with male dynastic material... When consistency has been achieved in this way, predynastic proportions are founded to be such that distal segments of the limbs are even longer in relation to the proximal segments than they are in modern negroes. Such proportions are termed 'super-negroid'..." Robins & Shute (1983)
"In this regard it is interesting to note that limb proportions of Predynastic Naqada people in Upper Egypt are reported to be "Super-Negroid," meaning that the distal segments are elongated in the fashion of tropical Africans.....skin color intensification and distal limb elongation are apparent wherever people have been long-term residents of the tropics." (C.L. Brace, 1993. Clines and clusters..")
"The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the "super-Negroid" body plan described by Robins (1983).. This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicates that the Egyptians generally have tropical body plans. Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clustered together as compared to the other populations.[/i]" (Zakrzewski, S.R. (2003). "Variation in ancient Egyptian stature and body proportions". American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121 (3): 219-229.
"...sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. [b]The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans." Barry Kemp, Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation. (2005)
"Intralimb (crural and brachial) indices are significantly higher in ancient Egyptians than in American Whites (except crural index among females), i.e., Egyptians have relatively longer distal segments (Table 4). Intralimb indices are not significantly different between Egyptians and American Blacks... Many of those who have studied ancient Egyptians have commented on their characteristically ''tropical'' or ''African'' body plan (Warren, 1897; Masali, 1972; Robins, 1983; Robins and Shute, 1983, 1984, 1986; Zakrzewski, 2003). Egyptians also fall within the range of modern African populations (Ruff and Walker, 1993), but close to the upper limit of modern Europeans as well, at least for the crural index (brachial indices are definitely more ''African'').. In terms of femoral and tibial length to total skeletal height proportions, we found that ancient Egyptians are significantly different from US Blacks, although still closer to Blacks than to Whites."
Comparisons of linear body proportions of Old Kingdom and non-Old Kingdom period individuals, and workers and high officials in our sample found no statistically significant differences among them. Zakrzewski (2003) also found little evidence for differences in linear body proportions of Egyptians over a wider temporal range. In general, recent studies of skeletal variation among ancient Egyptians support scenarios of biological continuity through time. Irish (2006) analyzed quantitative and qualitative dental traits of 996 Egyptians from Neolithic through Roman periods, reporting the presence of a few outliers but concluding that the dental samples appear to be largely homogeneous and that the affinities observed indicate overall biological uniformity and continuity from Predynastic through Dynastic and Postdynastic periods.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
To Oshun, there is no such thing as 'race'! This is why describing tropically adapted skeletons as "negroid" skeletons is erroneous because other tropically adapted (black) populations in Eurasia also have similar skeletons yet they are not of recent African extraction. Also, while Europeans and those of the Caucasus have cold-adapted skeletons, it would be wrong to call these "caucasoid" skeletons because even more cold adapted skeletons are found in northern Asia and Siberia!
The same can be said about skulls. Skulls among aboriginal groups in southeast Asia could be called "Negroid" yet they obviously are not African but Eurasian! At the same time many skulls in North and East Africa are called "Caucasoid" due to certain features yet genetically and otherwise they are African NOT Eurasian!
The most accurate way to assess populations is through genetics but even this is not proof of 'race' because genetic lineage does NOT match with phenotype or appearance. For example there are people in Europe who look completely white but may in fact have recent black African ancestry from several generations ago and vice-versa-- blacks in America who look totally black but have European ancestry.
You cannot divide humans into racial groups no matter what their differences are.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Skeletal analyses might hint at ancestry or population affinity if quality DNA for some reason cannot be extracted from the remains in question, but they're more useful for determining certain aspects of phenotype. Even then, they have limited utility for finding out what skin color or other soft tissue traits the individuals had.
Since modern Homo sapiens as a whole has a relatively limited genetic repertoire due to our youth as a species, we may have a particularly high propensity for convergent evolution. That's why craniometry can lead to bizarre and misleading results when applied to our species.
Posts: 7080 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: [qb] Why do people divide by bone structure? WHY is that so important especially in the face. What objective implication of superiority is made cause a persons got a thin nose or no prognathism? Why not divide people blood types, haplogroups, etc.
Because, ODummy, bones structure is fixed and much harder to change.
Ok if your gonna give me a biting nickname try playin off the name. "Odummy" is tryin too hard nor did I even make a personal attack. Its just a question Cassi sockpuppet. Why focus on the face? Why not consider the other 7/8ths of the body like limbs, etc. Most ppl dividing by race focus on the face or certain parts of it. Why? And lets say there was a Caucasoid race. How do you go from thin noses and no prognathism to 'intelligent race'? I mean what do these features have anything to do with what yall are sayin makes a superior human being?
quote: Therefore, the best indicator of a particular group is usually Genetic Makeup and the genetic distance betweeen certain groups.
Ok well why dont you just focus on genetic studies? Why you gotta focus on facial features?
quote:For example, Egyptians (Ancient & Modern) are genetically much closer to Europeans and Eurasians than West Africans. Bone structure, Dental structure, and other measures also confirm the same genetic distance.
What kinda studies do you got. Heres a tip sock puppet, dont use the exact ones your master uses or itll be too obvious. Anyway so if the genetic studies say that Ancient Egyptians (especially Upper Egyptians) are closer to West Africans than you'd admit that bone structure isnt a good way to divide people into races?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: Skeletal analyses might hint at ancestry or population affinity if quality DNA for some reason cannot be extracted from the remains in question, but they're more useful for determining certain aspects of phenotype. Even then, they have limited utility for finding out what skin color or other soft tissue traits the individuals had.
Since modern Homo sapiens as a whole has a relatively limited genetic repertoire due to our youth as a species, we may have a particularly high propensity for convergent evolution. That's why craniometry can lead to bizarre and misleading results when applied to our species.
Multivariate craniometric analyses do not merely hint at ancestry, they have a near perfect accuracy at pinpointing geographical ancestry and identifing someones race.
''A study thatcovered 17 populations over the world and that relied on 34 different measurementsmanaged to assign 98% of the specimens to their correct major racial group (Brues, 1990). Another more recent study had a success rate of 80% in distinguishing between American Whites and Blacks, although it used just two variables. With seven variables, however, it reached the reliability of 95%, and with 19 variables theprobability of correct classification rose to 97% (Ousley et al. 2009). Also, estimating generally the reliability of attributing a given data point to one of the five racial categories, another team of experts calculated that under some realistic conditions itis sufficient to use as few as 13 characteristics to have the posterior probability of thecorrect classification attain the value of 99% (Konigsberg et al. 2009).'' - Race: a social destruction of a biological concept, Neven Sesardic, Biol Philos (2010) 25: 143–162
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Why do people divide by bone structure? WHY is that so important especially in the face. What objective implication of superiority is made cause a persons got a thin nose or no prognathism? Why not divide people blood types, haplogroups, etc.
Good question.
Stronger DNA evidence is only now starting to be pursued. We have seen th STRs run for the Amarna but in the future SNPs which are considered more accurate may be applied to these or other mummies. However DNA is delicate, easily contaminated and there is some question as to it's reliabilty when this old. Further the DNATribes report is from a private company and not subject to peer review.
Djehuti, zarahan, others on ES prefer to divide people by limb ratios rather than facial features and Craniometry because they feel limb proportions (indices) are a more reliable indicator to distinguish people in relation to geography/climate. The purpose of this distinction is to suggest that any people North of Egypt have limb proportions that, due to colder temperatures, have limb ratios that are shorter than ancient Egyptians and therefore the ancient Egyptians were exclusively African. The motive is to show that black people can be world class in technology, culture, the arts without outside collaboration or direction form non-Africans. The theory which is well accepted is called "Allen's Rule" which states that in cold environments limbs of mamals are shorter and thicker in proportion to the rest of their bodies to reduce surface area exposed to cold.
But there are two problems with applying this strategy.
1) the amount of limb ratios that have been recorded from ancient Egyptian remains is not great enough to make a definitive assessment of them and statements to this effect have been made by the scientists who conducted these studies
2) The amount of limb ratios that have been recorded for a broad range of Middle Easterners or Southern Europeans is even smaller. Sometimes you may see comparison between a give set of ancient Egyptain remains to "U.S. whites". However U.S. Whites (the Terry study) are primarily North Western European and not primarily from the regions which are much nearer to Egypt's Northern border, Example, Spain, Israel, Sicily, Arabia, Crete, etc -regions which may or may not be cold enough to produce limb ratios statistically distinguishable from some or all ancient Egyptians
I for one am prepared to accept any conclusion as per more extensive limb ratios studies for ancient and modern Egypt, the Middle East and Southern Europe as well as future DNA reports verified by peer reviewed academic jounals. The available mummified remains have been imited. However I recall recent discoveries of a set of new mummies last year or the year before
quote:Originally posted by white wacko nubian-wannabe: Again the Filipeeeno Dummy contradicts himself, but never fails to describe the Ancient Egyptians as Black Africans, yet all their stats and measures indicate a North African Caucasoid People with a little Subsaharan Admixture.
How did I contradict myself, dummy? Also, read the actual studies on the skeletal stats and measurments. What do they say, Circassian?
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are no human races, why were they invented, to what purpose? They wanted to hide that the kings and nobles were Blacks. These Blacks civilized Europe but their rule was harsh. The Europeans, with Enlightened Blacks in the lead, overcame a caste system, worse than that of India today, as its also mixed with apartheid like Black supremacy. We are dealing with the fallout; whites never want to be ruled by Blacks again. All this clamouring about bones and DNA is fake science, to hide the truth. Whites have strange observation powers, they do not see the world as any person of colour does, their mind distorted by fear and hatred of Blacks. Racism is just a liberation ideology, not to aid your enemy with giving him positions above you. Jane Austen wrote about this in Emma (1816) and Mansfield Park. The Blacks should not dilute their blood nor give positions and educate whites. A great folly and the real cause of the downfall of Blacks. As was disunity and colorism among Blacks. Thinking about this, in regard to my unique research of Jane Austen: she also showed Blacks to learn and develop themselves and deplored their not wanting to change, to safe themselves. Apparently nothing has changed, y'all still sound and act like ignorant tribal trash. This also goes for the whites. Nothing as pitiful as the sight of dump, ignorant whites and the Blacks that follow them.
In The Hague I observe part of the Polish invation, not all, walking or rather rambling, hulking in heards, with bags full of beer, darkenend by the sun, no expression on the purple faces. Scary sight, a horde of poor, uneducated whites. Some are kept like slaves by their white Dutch brethren.
quote:Originally posted by Egmond Codfried: [QB] There are no human races.....
We are dealing with the fallout; whites never want to be ruled by Blacks again.
If there are no human races why are you talking about blacks and whites? I thought such racial categories don't exist
Posts: 42930 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
To deconstruct the present mess we need to go back and use some of the hated terminology. Humans were always aware of differences in looks of different nations, but were wise enough to not see colour in terms of merit.
Blacks in Europe regarded themselves as the first and true Europeans, were overwhelmed by hordes coming out of Central Asia. Blacks were going to melt in a see of milky faces. And they had scientific knowledge and military prowess that needed to be saved.
So it was the civilised that protected themselves against the uncivilized hordes.
Interestingly with a so-called Black American president, whites are not disenfranchised or persecuted, or murdered wholesale in the streets or in their beds by Blacks.
Posts: 5454 | From: Holland | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
As many of you have already figured out, this entire board consists of ONE sick degenerate that has created ficticious names to talk to itself in. Just a few of these fake names include CLYDE WINTERS, MIKE111 and THE LIONESS. However the entire board of posters on this site are this same sick degenerate, EXCEPT for myself! 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?
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic