quote:Bitch, don't try to run from your exposure. SHe is from LA and she says her background is French. This does not at all mean that she has a white French ancestor. This is the 3rd time I ask you for proof of your bold claim as to these white ancestors bich. What's taking you so long? ANd "Native American" background is minor in African Americans. There is some, but it is minor overall- less than that 5- 10% according to credible geneticists like Rick Kittles. Her Native American ancestry may add up to little more than a distant grandmother who has a minor percentage (as shown by KIttles). http://www.africanancestry.com/blog/2012/07/proudly-african-and-native-american-really/
So someone who is 10% Native American is ''Black'' according to Zaharan. Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
So someone who is 10% Native American is ''Black'' according to Zaharan.
Sure they are Bich. You have no problem embracing Greeks who have 20% or more sub-Saharan African haplotypes as white. Nor do you have any problem calling African-Americans with 10% Indian ancestry "black" when you are bashing them as criminals or "ugly." How come now you want to quickly define them away as "non-black" when yo are exposed as a hypocrite?
You DIRECTLY claimed her parents and grandparents were white. What's taking you so long in providing proof wanker boy?
^^According to racist hypocrite Anglo Buffoon she is "black" when being bashed as a low iq criminal African American, but suddenly becomes "non-black" with white parents when used to illustrate Diop's observation on Eurocentric hypocrisy. The hypocrite says women like her are "black" as an illustration of "ugly black women." But when the punk ass bich's hypocrisy is exposed he quickly wants to redefine her as "non black." ------------------
^Racist hypocrite, you have no problem bashing African Americans like Bailey and calling her black if you can bash African-Americans as criminals and such, but now that her picture appears illustrating Diop's take on Eurocentric hypocrisy, all of a sudden you are calling her "non black". You had no problem in earlier posts in bashing women who looked quite similar to Bailey as "ugly negroids". Now all of a sudden you want to switch and say she ain't black no longer? Punk ass bich..
And you yourself in earlier posts had no problem stating that most black americans had a small portion of ancestry from non-Africans. Yet you still called them black. Now all of a sudden your hypocrisy is exposed, you quickly and conveniently switch to calling them non-black? lmao... Doofus! Don't you realize you have been set up -- a perfect illustration of the hypocrisy Diop was talking about.
--------------------------------------------
THE ANGLO-IDIOT EXPOSED- PART 18: He says there is no OOA but the very "supporting reference" he proffers directy contradicts his claim. ------------------------- [b]Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on 07 May, 2012 08:45 AM:
OOA never happened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans ----------------------------- The idiot gives a Wikipedia "reference" to back up his claim but the very same "supporting reference" he gives states that multi-regionalists acknowledge that hominid species came from Africa in the first place. Their argument is for continuity and distinct development in separate locations AFTER the initial OOA exit putting hominins in different places. This approach STILL recognizes and acknowledges hominin OOA.
Quote from Anglo-Idiot's "supporting" reference: This species arose in Africa two million years ago as H. erectus and then spread out over the world, developing adaptations to regional conditions. Some populations became isolated for periods of time, developing in different directions, but through continuous interbreeding, replacement, genetic drift and selection, adaptations that were an advantage anywhere on earth would spread, keeping the development of the species in the same overall direction while maintaining adaptations to regional factors. By these mechanisms, surviving local varieties of the species evolved into modern humans, retaining some regional adaptations but with many features common to all regions.[10]
^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus came from Africa. In short, the ANglo-idiot's own "supporting" reference contradicts his claim. What a pathetic fool.
THE ANGLO-IDIOT EXPOSED PART 17: - He says there is no sexual diomorphism in Africans or skeletal differences between men and women, when the very anthropologists he quotes say the opposite.
---------]Originally posted by Anglo- Buffoon: Anglo_Pyramidologist member # 18853 posted 03 June, 2012 05:47 PM
Anglo-Buffoon 17a- "Frost and other anthropologists have noted that sexual dimorphism in Negroids is completely lacking. Check Frost's online blog."
Anglo-Buffoon 17b- "Black females are not lighter or different to black males in craniofacial terms."
^^Stupid muthafucka. The very Frost quote you paste says this:
Men and women differ in complexion because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse, 1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and immediately before are actually darker than boys).." FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection? Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85–103u
------- Can't you read imbecile? ALL females differ from males and are lighter. ALL human humans have sexual dimorphism to one degree or another. SO how can blacks "completely lack" said dimorphism according to you, when your own boy Peter Frost says all human have it?
------- ANd in studies of crania men and women do show differences, and these differences can be detected with a battery of modern measurements, as already shown in previous threads where your idiocy was destroyed- example (zakrewski2004-Intra-population and temporal variation in ancient Egyptian crania)
your own peter frost debunks you: ---------------------------------------
"If this common selective force were sexual selection, it could have lightened European skin color by acting on an existing sexual dimorphism. Men and women differ in complexion because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse, 1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and immediately before are actually darker than boys). Investigators also try to exclude tanning by measuring under the arm, where there is less subcutaneous fat and probably less dimorphism in skin color, given that the lightness of a woman’s skin correlates with the thickness of her subcutaneous fat (Mazess, 1967). In any event, sexual selection may have targeted this sex difference, as suggested by a cross-cultural male preference for lighter complexioned women and, conversely, by some evidence of a female preference for darker complexioned men (Aoki, 2002; Feinman Feinman & Gill, 1978; Frost, 1988; Frost, 1994b; Frost, 2005; Van den Berghe & Frost, 1986)."
FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection? Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85–103
and:
"A different perspective on sexual dimorphism in skin pigmentation comes from the recognition that human females require significantly higher amounts of calcium during pregnancy and lactation and, thus, must have lighter skin than males in the same environment in order to maximize their cutaneous vitamin D3 production (Jablonski and Chaplin 2000)... Thus strong clinical evidence continues to support the hypothesis that lighter skin pigmentation in females evolved primarily as a means to enhance the the potential for cutaneous vitamin D production and maintain healthy long-term calcium status and skeletal health." -- Human Evolutionary Biology. 2010. By Michael P. Muehlenbein Damm you are one of the most pathetic idiots in existence.
Tell us -- were you born such a retarded shithead, or were you originally a slug who managed to rise to such prominence?
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: [QB] E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.” - Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
The foul faker doctored the quote not knowing the article has been much discussed at ES. Testifying even more to his incompetence, Cruciani actually does show E3b or E1b1b occuring in numerous places within "sub-Saharan" Africa. The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81, and E-M34) and the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously distributed on the African continent: E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa, E-M81 is restricted t o northern Africa, E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and E-M35* is shared by eastern and southern Africans (Cruciani et al. 2002)" --Cruciani
And there is no "page 74" in the Cruciani article. THE FAKER AND BUFFOON IS AGAIN BUSTED IN A LIE!
THE FAKER'S BOGUS CLAIM PART- 15 - QUOTE: [QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides: posted 14 January, 2012 11:41 AM If you are a white heterosexual male in Britain you have virtually zero chance of getting a job. All the jobs go to blacks or other immigrants.
^^LOL - Idiotic nonsense. As of 2001, 92.1% of the UK population identified themselves as White, leaving 7.9%[270] of the UK population identifying themselves as mixed race or of an ethnic minority. The population of the United Kingdom in the 2001 census was 58,789,194, UK Office for National Statistics- 2001.
That leaves approx 54 million white people. About 33% of that population were adult men. Let's take away 8% or so for minorities. So you are saying then that 25% of the approx 54 million white people in the UK are all unemployed? Damn you are dumb, but you only expose the bankruptcy of your racism.
The Fake C-Ass -Hole exposed PART 14 - BOGUS "NORDIC BLONDS FLITTING AROUND EGYPT
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides: posted 29 December, 2011 06:05 AM
Hetepheres II was a blonde
^^Hapless dullard, you are exposed in another lie. Your own reference was checked. It yielded detailed citations which revealed a quite different story. Scholars say in the mainstream Cambridge Ancient History:
"We must give up the idea that she was of Libyan origin, an attractive theory which was based on blond hair of Hetepheres II, who was then thought to be her daughter. It is now evident that the yellow wig is part of a costume worn b other great ladies." --I. Edwards, C. Gadd, N. Hammond. 1971. The Cambridge Ancient History. 3ed Volume 1, Part 2, Early History of the Middle East
Yet another history says: "The walls of this interior room are decorated with hunting and fishing scenes, including a charming image of Meresankh and her mother, Hetepheres II picking lotus flowers from the river.. The pillars have images of Meresankh wearing a blond wig." --P. Lacovara. 2004. The pyramids and the SPhinx: tombs and temples of GIza
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 13- HIS BOGUS CLAIM OF "NORDIC" EGYPTIAN ROYALTY
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: posted 28 December, 2011 05:40 PM Early dynastic & old kingdom royalty was Nordic (blonde and fair skinned)
^^^Ha hahahahah you stupid mass of camel vomit! Up above you reference scholar Frank Yurco, but here is what Yurco said about the 12th Dynasty, debunking your claim of "Nordic" Egyptian royalty. You dumbass.... You are again debunked, with your own "supporting" references... lmao...
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region.4 As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne... Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989)
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 12 HE says Egyptologists like Frank Yurco says the Egyptians were "Caucasoid" --- "Virtually every egyptologist believes the egyptians were Caucasoid" --
BUt Yurco says nothing of the sort.. Here for example, is what he says about the 12the Dynasty rulers aho were Nubian descent: They seem really "Caucasoid"... yeah, right.. - quote-
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region.4 As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne... Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989) -
Another dodge is to twist an old chat/forum discussion statement by conservative Egyptologist Frank Yurco out of context. Yurco rejected those who "a priori" claimed the Egyptians were "black", that is, a dogmatic claim without presenting empirical evidence. He never rejected reasonable argument with data showing the Egyptians were an indigenous African population -QUOTE: .. basically a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times.. (Yurco 1996- An Egyptological Review, in Black Athena Revisited)
The Faker exposed- part 11
quote: Originally posted by cassiterides: ^You claim Vanessa Williams is a black woman when her heritage is white welsh and native american
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: ^ Eurafrican is Caucasoid.
^^You are once again exposed. You said EurAfrican is Caucasoid, and cited Serti in support. But using your own citation any reader can see that Sergi considers EurAfricans to be an amalgamation or mixture of many types, directly contradicting your claim.
SErgi says: QUOTE: "This human species, with cranial and facial characters thus well determined, I call Eurafrican; and this because, having had its origin in Africa, where it is still represented by many peoples, it has been diffused from prehistoric times in Europe... The Eurafrican species thus falls into three races: the African, with red-brown and black pigmentation.. Thus the Mediterranean stock is a race or variety of the Eurafrican species." --G. Sergi
You have again failed and are once again exposed. ------------------------------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED PART 9- HE CLAIMS ALL THESE HIGGINS "DISTORTIONS" BUT WHEN ASKED TO NAME THE SPECIFIC WEBSITES OF THIS ALLEGED "AFROCENTRIC' HORROR, HE RUNS AWAY. WHY IS THAT FAKER?
In fact, Godfrey Higgins ALSO says this about "negroes"
quote: "I believe all the Blavk bambinos of Italy are negroes- not merely blacks; this admitted, it would prove they very early date of their entrance into Italy." pg 286 pg 434 "the ancient Eturians had the countenances of Negroes, the same as the images of Buddah in INdia." pg 166 pg 474- "They aere in fact, all one nation, with one religion, that of Buddah, and they were originally NEgroes" pg 59: "nor can it be reasonably doubted, that a race of Negroes formerly had power and pre-eminence in India" pg 59- AS TO ETHIOPIA: And it is probable that an Ethiopian, a negro, correctly speaking, may have been meant, not merely a black person; and it seems probable that the following may have ben the real fact, viz, that a race of NEgroes or Blacks, but probably of the former, came to India to the west."
cASSIRETEDES own source debunks him. Note the footnote by his own author- QUOTE: "may not have been Negroes, though Blacks, though it is probably they were so."
His own source says they may not have been Negroes then adds: THOUGH IT IS PROBABLY THEY WERE SO."
^The Faker once again, debunks himself. And he seems not to realize that Ethiopia is in "sub-Saharan" Africa.. lol.. pathetic incompetent..
And he never shows these massive number of websites "all over the internet". Like what? How many? If they are "all over" then he should at least be able to give direct links to 6 showing pages where the "Afrocentrics: are "distorting" Higgins work. LEt's say what the faker has besides hot air. Post DIRECT LINKS to 6 of the huge number of alleged "Afrocentric" websites where the Afrocentrics are "distorting" Higgins. SHow how they are distorting Higgins with specific quotes and specific context.
Watch the Faker duck and run when he is again called on a claim, or make up yet another lie to cover his exposure... -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- part 8:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes: "Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of Europe."
But then, in your own thread, by your own hand, you present a picture of an African albino that has pale skin, light brown or hazel eyes and fair hair. You said it was impossible, but then debunk yourself with your own posted picture.. This is like the 8-9th time you keep tripping over yourself with lies, contradictions, and bogus claims.
RECAP The Faker exposed- part 7 Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes: "Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of Europe."
^^Your claim is is completely bogus. Native diversity or albinism causes some tropical Africans to have light eyes and light hair. You fail againn..
bbvv
================================================
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6 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.
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6 Anglo-Pyr/CassiREDES 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.. -
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 5a [b]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. You made the claim.
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 4 ime 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.
------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED-PART 3- 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
--------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 2 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.
----------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 1C 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. "
Anglo-Pyr/Cassi-Fakdes: MULTIPLE TIMES AT BAT, MULTIPLE EXPOSURES AS A FAKE...
--fake claim that no Australian Abo over 20 is blonde
-- fake claim that NO tropical Africans 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
-- Fake claim that "studies" say "egyptians were dark are not like 'light-skinned Europeans". COnveniently, the alleged study is missing..
--Fake Higgins claims
--Fake claim that Guiseppe Sergi's EurAfrican race concept is negro-free
--Fake claim that Vanessa Williams has no black ancestry but is "white and Indian"
--Fake claim that Egyptologists like Yurco consider the Egyptians "Caucasoid"
--Fake claim of white Nordic Egyptian royalty
--Fake claim of "blond" Hetepheres
--Fake claim of white males in BRitain "unable to get jobs"
--fAKE Crucuiani "quote" with "citation"
--fake claim that blacks have no sexual diomorphism and no male-female cranial differences
--Fake CDC claim of AUgust 2006
--Hypocritical double standards- bashing African Americans as black when they can be demonized as criminals but when exposed for hypocritical double standards calling them non-black
--Bogus claim that OOA never happened backed by "supporting" references that say nothingof the sort and directly contradict him.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
True,only 5% or 2% of African Americans have some form of Native American ancestry,meaning most or 95 to 98% African Americans do not have Native American ancestry.
Posts: 2560 | From: Somewhere | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Genetic Admixture is not the Same as Appearance
About one-third of White Americans are of between two and twenty percent recent African genetic admixture, as measured by the ancestry-informative markers in their DNA.19 This comes to about 74 million Americans. And yet, day-to-day experience teaches that virtually all White Americans look, well, White. Some may look more Mediterranean and others may look more Nordic, but very few White Americans have a distinctively African appearance. How can one reconcile DNA measurements with common experience?An anecdote may help illustrate the problem. Look again at the chart of Skin Tone as Function of Afro-European Admixture. Consider one of the graph’s outlier points—a “European American” individual plotted as having 11 percent20 African genetic admixture. Dr. Shriver, the project team leader, became curious about this individual for two reasons. First, the person’s African genetic admixture was unusually high for someone who self-identified as a member of the U.S. White endogamous group. Second, the sample had been taken from State College, Pennsylvania, the site of Dr. Shriver’s own campus.21 According to Dr. Shriver:
I had the result for two or three years before I even looked up the ID number of the person whom we tested. I looked at who it was and it was me! I checked myself and the rest of my relatives and tracked it through my family. I never considered that there were any African people in my family. There’s no real variation in my family. The admixture must have been pretty far back. It just so happens that we can detect it with the markers we have. My mom especially stood out as being surprised, maybe because I told her it was coming through her father. She still doesn’t believe it about her family! The part of Pennsylvania where my mother’s father came from is where the Underground Railroad ended. There are several towns right here in Southern Pennsylvania where there are very light-skinned African-American communities that are the remnants of the Underground Railroad.22
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
''The Negroid type is not homogeneous.'' - Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994.
Hiernaux (1975) distinguishes the Pygmies to Negroids on the grounds the latter are a product of the former (a recent mutation) but that there was probable geneflow with Caucasoids as Coon (1967, 1982) maintains.
Also note that on page 123 of 'Living Races of Man', Coon also states that ''To this combination may have been added remnant Capoid genes''. So Negroids are basically a recent mutation from the Pygmies, but with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture.
^^Bitch please. Your own words contradict your punk ass. Up above you say that "NEgroids" are a recent mutation with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture. Look bich, look. You say blacks are defined as having that admixture, and quote your favorite racist, Carleton Coon to that effect. But when your hypocrisy is exposed, you all of a sudden deny that the black models posted are "really" black.
IN one thread "admixed" Negroes like the black girls are black, in another, they suddenly ain't black.
You stupid piece of shiit. You can't even keep your bogus claims straight. Let's go with your logic. You say that Negroids, like the models, are defined as people already having "Caucasoid" admixture. But then when your ass is getting kicked, you turn around and say the same "Negroids" can't be black BECAUSE they have the "Caucasoid" admixture. Your whole line of "logic" is total bullshiit bich. What a pathetic doofus you are.
^Haunted by his inadequacy, wanker boy huddled in his hideout, as he prepped for another round of "self assessment"..
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Well done, you finally realised Negroids are not a homogenous taxon. Negroids are Bambutid mutations, mixed with Capoid and Caucasoid genes.
''The Negroid type is not homogeneous.'' - Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994.
Negroids were static and largely confined to Western and Central Africa. Hence Caucasoids moving into those zones during the Post-Pleistocene easily took advantage of them. It was not vice-versa, which is why Caucasoids are homogenous.
Posts: 1575 | From: - | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: ''The Negroid type is not homogeneous.'' - Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994.
Negroids were static and largely confined to Western and Central Africa. Hence Caucasoids moving into those zones during the Post-Pleistocene easily took advantage of them. It was not vice-versa, which is why Caucasoids are homogenous.
Caucasian
1807, from Caucasus Mountains, between the Black and Caspian seas; applied to the "white" race 1795 (in German) by Ger. anthropologist Johann Blumenbach, because its supposed ancestral homeland lay there; since abandoned as a historical/anthropological term. Lit. meaning "resident or native of the Caucasus" is from 1843.
Pleistocene
Of or belonging to the geologic time, rock series, or sedimentary deposits of the earlier of the two epochs of the Quaternary Period, characterized by the alternate appearance and recession of northern glaciation, the appearance and worldwide spread of hominids, and the extinction of numerous land mammals, such as the mammoths, mastodons, and saber-toothed tigers.
To understand the delusion of the Albino, you must know the meaning and etymology of the terms they use.Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
LOL And like that the Anglo-Idiot's thread of a lie backfires thanks to Zarahan!
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_PrimeIdiot: ^ Well done, you finally realised Negroids are not a homogenous taxon. Negroids are Bambutid mutations, mixed with Capoid and Caucasoid genes.
''The Negroid type is not homogeneous.'' - Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994.
Negroids were static and largely confined to Western and Central Africa. Hence Caucasoids moving into those zones during the Post-Pleistocene easily took advantage of them. It was not vice-versa, which is why Caucasoids are homogenous.
LMAO I don't know what's funnier. How ridiculous your lies are or how much they contradict each other! In various other threads you claim "Negroids" as having no diversity and being very homogeneous NOW you say they are not homogeneous but heterogeneous and that such heterogeneity is due to admixture! LOL
Congratulations, you have proven to this forum once again how much a liar and idiot you are!
Here are more sources to debunk your absurd and hilarious claims.
...Blood-group evidence shows that the Khoisan group must be closely related to the Negroids, although at the present time they are very different in skin colour and appearance. Peoples living specialized environments, either from choice or as a result of pressure from other groups, become adapted physically in response to intensive selective pressures. Small stature, for instance, is an advantage in forests where there is a shortage of protein. Pygmies may well have had taller Negroid ancestors, and San, who have been forced to retreat into the Kalahari Desert, are evidently the remnants of a once widespread stock, probably physically much larger, but known only from their larger braincases. Negroids and Khoisan people may have shared a common ancestor as far back as the Lower Paleolithic... 'Phylogenetic Affinities of African Fossils to Modern Man', The New Encyclopaedia Britannica Macropaedia Vol. 13, 15th ed (1990)
According to the outdated Britannica source above it was the opposite-- Pygmies mutating from taller "negroid" ancestors and that Khoisan and "Negroids" share a common ancestor. Note this info comes before the time of population genetics.
Here is more from your own sources.
Both hypotheses are compatible with the hypothesis proposed by Brothwell (1963) of an East African proto-Khoisan Negro stock which migrated southwards and westwards at some time during the Upper Pleistocene, and replaced most of the local populations of South Africa. Under such circumstances, it is possible that the Nazlet Khater specimen is part of a relict population of this proto-Khoisan Negro stock which extended as far north as Nazlet Khater at least until the late part of the Late Pleistocene. --- The Position of the Nazlet Khater Specimen Among Prehistoric and Modern African and Levantine Populations, Ron Pinhasi, Departent of Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge, U.K., Patrick Semal, Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Belgium; Journal of Human Evolution (2000) vol. 39.
According to the above the common ancestor of both "Negroids" and "Khoisan" existed much more recently towards the end of the Late Pleistocene. This begs the question how are "Negroids" and "Capoids" two separate 'races' to begin with if they share recent common ancestry as shown in these crania? Also not only do "Negroids" and "Capoids" share similar blood grouping but recent genetics show they also share a number of clades both PN2 and older deeper clades!
And then we have this...
In the sum, the results obtained further strengthen the results from previous analyses. The affinities between Nazlet Khater, MSA, and Khoisan and Khoisan related groups re-emerges. In addition it is possible to detect a separation between North African and sub-saharan populations, with the Neolithic Saharan population from Hasi el Abiod and the Egyptian Badarian group being closely affiliated with modern Negroid groups. Similarly, the Epipaleolithic populations from Site 117 and Wadi Halfa are also affiliated with sub-Saharan LSA, Iron Age and modern Negroid groups rather than with contemporaneous North African populations such as Taforalt and the Ibero-maurusian. -- Pierre M. Vermeersch (Author & Editor), 'Palaeolithic quarrying sites in Upper and Middle Egypt', Egyptian Prehistory Monographs Vol. 4, Leuven University Press (2002).
And this...
Midnant Reynes describing a predynastic Fayumian female skeleton: "The body was that of a 40 year old woman with a height of 1.6 meters, who was of a more modern racial type than the classic 'Mechtoid' of the Fakhurian culture, being generally gracile, having large teeth and thick jaws bearing some resemblance to the modern 'Negroid' type."
Yet we are to believe "Negroids" were not only recent, mysteriously appearing only in 3 or 5 thousand b.c. but that they were "static" and confined to West and Central Africa only while everyone else including alleged 'caucasoids' were wandering around and expanding even as far south as Tanzania?! LMAO
Sure thing. Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
lol.. good data above. NEver seen that Britannica one. The idiot will repeat his idiotic claim without any credible argument, then slink away.
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Bitch, don't try to run from your exposure. SHe is from LA and she says her background is French. This does not at all mean that she has a white French ancestor. This is the 3rd time I ask you for proof of your bold claim as to these white ancestors bich. What's taking you so long? ANd "Native American" background is minor in African Americans. There is some, but it is minor overall- less than that 5- 10% according to credible geneticists like Rick Kittles. Her Native American ancestry may add up to little more than a distant grandmother who has a minor percentage (as shown by KIttles). http://www.africanancestry.com/blog/2012/07/proudly-african-and-native-american-really/
So someone who is 10% Native American is ''Black'' according to Zaharan.
You are a pathetic dork, who doesn't know a lot about the real world.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
It looks like the coward is still ducking and dodging. But don't think I will allow him to escape.
If there's one thing I hate in public discourse, it's dishonesty!
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: lol.. good data above. NEver seen that Britannica one. The idiot will repeat his idiotic claim without any credible argument, then slink away.
I tried to send you the Britannica article in its entirety but your mailbox is full. The article is obviously outdated, but like many old sources it is nonetheless revealing.
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:''Indo-European languages were, at one time, associated with a single, if composite, racial type, and that [...] racial type was an ancestral Nordic." (Coon, 1939)
You didn't answer the question ho': does the presence of blond hair in Northwest Africa, necessitate that that blonde person is ''Nordid''?
LOL. Angho's endless cycle of popping sh!t and running when faced with impending spanking continues.
On the web, extensive neo-Nazi spam and Wikipedia “stealth” inserts claim that Cro-Magnons are pure “Caucasian” ancestors of today’s Europeans. Hard data however debunks this on 6 counts, and shows a diverse Cro-Magnon population.
1-- Detailed modern cranial studies show Cro-magnon crania clustering AWAY from today’s Europeans. Brace 2005 testedthe “Cro-magnid” claim and found it “folklore.” QUOTE: "When canonical variates are plotted, neither sample ties in with Cro-Magnon as was once suggested. .. If this analysis shows nothing else, it demonstrates that the oft-repeated European feeling that the Cro-Magnons are “us” (46) is more a product of anthropological folklore than the result of the metric data available from the skeletal remains..." --CL. Brace 2005. The Questionable contribution of the Neolithic to European craniofacial form
2–Africans possessing the highest phenotypical diversity on earth, producing variants covering most features. Several Cro-Magnon specimens are described as ‘negroid.’ QUOTE:
“Both methods for estimating regional diversity show sub-Saharan Africato have the highest levels of phenotypic variation consistent with many genetic studies.“ [-- Relethford, John "Global Analysis of Regional Differences in Craniometric Diversity .” Hum Bio v73, n5, -629-636])
---------------------- Three scholars (Arthur Keith, M Boule and HV Valloid found ‘negroid’Cro-Magnon features: QUOTE: "The ancient Grimaldi woman and boy are of the mixed or negroid type." --(Arthur Keith. Ancient Types of Man. p. 60)
3- Several Upper Paleolithic European specimens show high cural indices in limb proportions- more akin to dark-skinned tropical Africans than today’s Europeans, who show lower cural indices. QUOTE: "As with all the other limb/trunk indices, the recent Europeans evince lower indices, reflective of shorter tibiae, and the recent sub-Saharan Africans have higher indices, reflective of their long tibiae... The Dolno Vestonice and Pavlov humans.. have body proportions similar to those of other Gravettian specimens. Specifically, they are characterized by high bracial and cural indices, indicative of distal limb segment elongation.." --Trinkaus and Svoboda. 2005. Early Modern Human Evolution in Central Europe]
– AND--
-Body proportions of early European H. sapiens fossils suggest a tropical adaptation and support an African origin (Holliday & Trinkaus, 1991; Ruff, 1994; Pearson, 1997, 2000; Holliday, 1997, 1998, 2000).” -–McBrearty and Brooks 2000. The Revolution that Wasn’t. Jrn Hu Evo 39, 453-563
4-- Traits like narrow noses occur naturally in African environments: ".. low mean nasal indices (high, narrow noses) tend to [also] be found in arid regions, such as the desert areas of east Africa.. -- Mays. S. (2010). The Archaeology of Human Bones. Pg 100-101
5-- Several Upper Paleolithic European types- Predmost (Czech), Combo Capelle (France) Grimaldi (Italy) and Teviec (France) show a variant of “African” affinities like prognathism. Some scholars hold this to be an ‘Eastern Cro-Magnon’ variant: QUOTE:
------ "others like Predomost and to a lesser degree Grimaldi and Teviec, are more prognathic like Skhul 5." --Marta Mirazón Lahr. 2005. The Evolution of Modern Human Diversity: A Study of Cranial Variation
and
---------- ".. on whose basis, many specialists define the eastern Cro-Magnon variant in the Upper Paleolithic population of western Europe." --S. De Laet (1994). History of Humanity, UNESCO
6– DNA provides clear evidence of tropical African types migrating to Paleolithic era Europe, contradicting claims of “Caucasoid” evolution in situ. Tropical limb evidence confirms DNA. The African tropical types may have interbred with local Neanderthals, but in any event would have adapted to the colder conditions of Europe over time. QUOTE:
"Early modern Europeans reflect both their predominant African early modern human ancestry and a substantial degree of admixture between those early modern humans and the indigenous Neandertals. Given the tens of millennia since then and the limitations inherent in ancient DNA, this process is largely invisible in the molecular record. It is readily apparent in the paleontological record.“ --E. Trinkhaus (2004) European early modern humans and the fate of the Neandertals. PNAS 2007 vol. 104 no. 18 7367-7372
and
"The so-called Old Man [Cro-Magnon 1] became the original model for what was once termed the Cro-Magnon or Upper Paleolithic "race" of Europe.. there's no such valid biological category, and Cro-Magnon 1 is not typical of Upper Paleolithic western Europeans- and not even all that similar to the other two make skulls found at the site. Most of the genetic evidence, as well as the newest fossil evidence from Africa argue against continuous local evolution producing modern groups directly from any Eurasian pre-modern population.. there's no longer much debate that a large genetic contribution from migrating early modern Africans infuenced other groups throughout the Old World.“ --B. Lewis et al. 2008. Understanding Humans: Introduction to Physical Anthropology and Archaeology. p 297 ------------------------------------
Scientists reveal face of the first European The face of the first European has been recreated from bone fragments by scientists.
By Urmee Khan, Digital and Media Correspondent
8:22PM BST 04 May 2009
The head was rebuilt in clay based on an incomplete skull and jawbone discovered in a cave in the south west of the Carpathian Mountains in Romania by potholers. The first modern European Forensic artist Richard Neave reconstructed the face based on skull fragments from 35000 years ago.
Using radiocarbon analysis scientists say the man or woman, it is still not possible to determine the sex, lived between 34,000 and 36,000 years ago.
Europe was then occupied by both Neanderthal man, who had been in the region for thousands of years, and anatomically-modern humans – Homo sapiens.
Modern humans first arrived in Europe from Africa.
The skull appears very like humans today, but it also displays more archaic traits, such as very large molar teeth, which led some scientists to speculate the skull may belong to a hybrid between Homo sapiens and Neanderthals – an idea discounted by other experts.
Erik Trinkaus, professor of anthropology at Washington University in Missouri, said the jaw was the oldest, directly-dated modern human fossil. "Taken together, the material is the first that securely documents what modern humans looked like when they spread into Europe," he said.
The model was created by Richard Neave, a forensic artist, for a BBC programme about the origins of the human race and evolution. ------------------------- "The remains from the Grottes des Enfants, Grimaldi, include two skeletons whose features have been regarded as negroid, and this may represent a distinct Upper Paleolithic race.. it is apparent that European Upper Paleolithic men exhibited a wide range of variation in skeletal form." --Michael H. Day (1986). Guide to fossil Man
Research by geneticists and archaeologists has allowed them to trace the origins of modern homo sapiens back to a single group of people who managed to cross from the Horn of Africa and into Arabia. From there they went on to colonise the rest of the world.
Genetic analysis of modern day human populations in Europe, Asia, Australia, North America and South America have revealed that they are all descended from these common ancestors.
It is thought that changes in the climate between 90,000 and 70,000 years ago caused sea levels to drop dramatically and allowed the crossing of the Red Sea to take place.
The findings are to be revealed in a new BBC Two documentary series, The Incredible Human Journey, that traces the prehistoric origins of the human species.
Dr Peter Forster, a senior lecturer in archaeogenetics at Anglia Ruskin University in Cambridge who carried out some of the genetic work, said: "The founder populations cannot have been very big. We are talking about just a few hundred individuals." Homo sapiens, known casually as "modern humans", are thought to have first evolved around 195,000 years ago in east Africa – the earliest remains from that time were uncovered near the Omo River in Ethiopia.
It is thought that by 150,000 years ago these early modern humans had managed to spread to other parts of Africa and fossilised remains have been found on the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa.
The earliest homo sapien remains found outside of Africa were discovered in Israel and are thought to be around 100,000 years old. They are remains of a group that left Africa through what is now the Sahara desert during a brief period when the climate grew wetter, turning the desert green with vegetation. This excursion, however, failed and the population died out when the climate started to dry out again.
While there are 14 ancestral populations in Africa itself, just one seems to have survived outside of the continent.
The latest genetic research has shown that it was not until around 70,000 years ago that humans were able to take advantage of falling sea levels to cross into Arabia at the mouth of the Red Sea, which is now known as the Gate of Grief.
At the time the 18 mile gap between the continents would have dropped to just 8 miles. It is not clear how they might have made such a journey but once a cross, the humans were able to spread along the Arabian coast where fresh water springs helped support them.
It has long been assumed that humans success in spreading around the world was due to their adaptability and hunting skills. The latest research, however, suggests that the very early human pioneers who ventured out of Africa owe far more of their success to luck and favourable changes in climate change than had previously been realised.
Dr Stephen Oppenheimer, a geneticist at the school of anthropology at Oxford University who has also led research on the genetic origins of humans outside Africa, said: "What you can see from the DNA of all non Africans is that they all belong to one tiny African branch that came across the Red Sea.
"If it was easy to get out of Africa we would have seen multiple African lineages in the DNA of non-Africans but that there was only one successful exit suggests it must have been very tough to get out. It was much drier and colder then."
Within around 5,000 years some of these early human pioneers had managed to spread along the edge of the Indian Ocean and down through south east Asia and arriving in Australia around 65,000 years ago.
Others made their way north through the Middle East and Pakistan to reach central Asia.
Around 50,000 years ago they also began spreading into Europe via the Bosporus at the Istanbul Strait. Again low sea levels allowed them to almost walk into Europe.
Once there they will have encountered Neanderthals, who, with bigger bodies were more adapted to the cold weather at the time, had been living in Europe for nearly a quarter of a million years but are thought to have died out due to changes in the climate.
By 25,000 years ago humans had spread into northern Europe and Siberia and then walked across the Bering land bridge into Alaska around 20,000 years ago.
The peak of the last ice age, which was reached around 19,000 years ago, saw human populations pushed south by the extreme cold and it was about 15,000 years ago that South America became the last continent on the planet to be colonised.
Britain and northern Scandinavia is thought to have been recolonised by modern humans after the last ice age between 10,000 and 8,000 years ago.
Dr Alice Roberts, an anatomist at Bristol University who presents The Incredible Human Journey, said: "There seems to have been a huge amount of luck involved as they were totally at the whim of the climate. The climate changed at just the right time to allow them to expand out of Africa and they were allowed to expand geographically as a result, but when the climate changed they shrank back again."
The idea that all non-African humans are descended from a single group of individuals contradicts previous theories that the different modern races evolved seperately from an earlier human ancestor known as Homo erectus in different parts of the world.
Archaeologists in China, for example, believe they have strong evidence that the Chinese evolved directly from a lineage of Homo erectus that arrived in China 2 million years ago and not from African Homo sapiens.
But recent genetic work at Fudan University in Shanghai tested the Y chromosomes of more than 12,000 men currently living in different parts of China and found that they all descended from the original African humans.
Professor Li Jin, a geneticist at Fudan University in Shanghai whose laboratory carried out the research, said: “We did not find a single individual that could be considered the decendants of homo erectus in China.
“I think we should all be happy with that, as afterall, it means that people from all over the world are not all that different from each other.”
Parents of "Eurasian Adam" and "Eurasian Eve" came from Africa modern DNA analysis shows
"The vast majority, perhaps all, men with European and Asian genetic backgrounds can trace their Y-chromosome lineage back to a particular male (named M168, after the marker that defines these chromosomes). M168 thus can be considered the Eurasian Adam. Although the Y-chromosome Adam and mitrochondrial Eve did not meet, it is quite possible that the Eurasian "Adam" M168 could have met his equivalent, the Eurasian Eve (known as L3). The estimates of their dates overlap (around five thousand years ago) and they both probably lived in northeast Africa. Africa? Yes, Africa. Although nearly all Eurasian mtDNA and Y chromosomes currently existing can be traced back to L3 and M168 respectively, M168 and L3 also had African descendants." ---Norman Johnson (2007) Darwinian Detectives: Revealing the Natural History of Genes and Genomes. p. 100. [Norman A. Johnson, an evolutionary geneticist, is the author of numerous research publications, mainly in the genetics and evolution of reproductive isolation between nascent species. Johnson has taught at the University of Chicago, University of Texas at Arlington, and the University of Massachusetts].
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Yes ALL humans are African biologically since our species originated in Africa and stayed there for the longest period before venturing out of the continent. That said, SOME of the populations who left Africa and evolved and adapted in Eurasian environments were further Africanized by mixing with more recent African immigrants such as Europeans and Southwest Asians during the Neolithic!
Anglo-Idiot where are ya??
Posts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Advanced cognitive, technological and behavioral patterns derive from Africa. Dubbed the "Human Revolution" by some researchers, the lead up to the expansion of humans from Africa to other parts of the world, circa 50-40kya. Other scholars argue for a more gradual continuum of advances deeply rooted in Africa that spread worldwide. In either scenario, whether relatively rapid advance or gradual accumulation, the cognitive, technological and behavioral advances took place within Africa.
QUOTE: "Recent research has provided increasing support for the origins of anatomically and genetically "modern" human populations in Africa between 150,000 and 200,000 years ago, followed by a major dispersal of these populations to both Asia and Europe sometime after ca. 65,000 before present (B.P.). However, the central question of why it took these populations {approx}100,000 years to disperse from Africa to other regions of the world has never been clearly resolved. It is suggested here that the answer may lie partly in the results of recent DNA studies of present-day African populations, combined with a spate of new archaeological discoveries in Africa. Studies of both the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mismatch patterns in modern African populations and related mtDNA lineage-analysis patterns point to a major demographic expansion centered broadly within the time range from 80,000 to 60,000 B.P., probably deriving from a small geographical region of Africa.
Recent archaeological discoveries in southern and eastern Africa suggest that, at approximately the same time, there was a major increase in the complexity of the technological, economic, social, and cognitive behavior of certain African groups, which could have led to a major demographic expansion of these groups in competition with other, adjacent groups. It is suggested that this complex of behavioral changes (possibly triggered by the rapid environmental changes around the transition from oxygen isotope stage 5 to stage 4) could have led not only to the expansion of the L2 and L3 mitochondrial lineages over the whole of Africa but also to the ensuing dispersal of these modern populations over most regions of Asia, Australasia, and Europe, and their replacement (with or without interbreeding) of the preceding "archaic" populations in these regions." ---Mellars, Paul (2006) Why did modern human populations disperse from Africa ca. 60,000 years ago? A new model. PNAS, 2006, 103(25), pp. 9381-9386
Advanced cognitive, artistic and behavioral patterns and technology like more refined tools are found in Africa long before similar patterns arose in Europe. The migration of tropical African types to Europe in the Cro-Magnon era brought these cognitive, cultural and behavioral advances to Neanderthal Europe.
"A more gradual "revolution" position is now held [by Paul Mellars].. a period of accelerated change in Africa between about 60,000 and 80,000 years ago, as shown by the following developments recorded in South African cave sites: new and better- techniques for producing long thin flakes of stone blades; specialized tools called end scrapers and burins, which were probably used for working skins and bones, the [production of tiny stone segments that must have mounted on handles of wood or bone to make composite tools, complexly shaped stone tools such as 'leaf points', relatively complex bone tools; marine shells perforated to make necklaces or bracelets, red ochre (natural iron oxide) engraved with geometric designs suggesting early artwork,; greater permanence and differentiated occupation areas in caves; new subsistence practices such as the exploitation of marine fish as well as shellfish; and perhaps intentional burning of undergrowth to encourage the growth of underground plant resources such as tubers. Mellars suggests that a neurological switch to modernity in the brain alongside rapid Climatic fluctuations, could have been the driving forces behind this period of heightened cultural innovations.."
"The most impressive site for early evidence of symbolism however, is Blombos Cave in South Africa, with a record stretching well beyond 70,000 years ago.. The stone tools in these levels include Still Bay points, beautifully shaped thin lanceolate spear points, flaked on both sides. They also show the earliest application of a refined stone tool-making technique known as pressure flaking, some 55,000 years before its best-known manifestation in the Soultrean industry of EUrope. Slabs of red ochre were excavated from various levels, including the deepest ones, with wavy, fan or mesh-shaped patterns carefully engraved on them.. Hundreds [beads made from seashells] have now been excavated from Blombos, and most show signs of piercing, with many holes also displaying signs of wear.. The shells have a natural shiny luster, but the color seems to have been modified by rubbing with hematite in some cases and by heating to darken the shells in other cases, so they may have been strung in different-colored patterns.. " --Chris Stringer (2012) Lone Survivors: How we came to be the only human on earth 150-155
Some archaeologists criticize notions of a "human revolution" suddenly occurring after humans exited Africa for Asia and Europe. Instead they argue, the supposed "revolutionary" changes in cognition, symbol manipulation, advanced technology, trade etc were ALREADY occurring WITHIN Africa, long before any migration out. There is no need for a 'eureka moment' of 'progress' upon leaving Africa. 'Progress' was already well underway and long in place within Africa. QUOTE:
"This is because by focusing on changes that occurred at the Middle Paleolithic/Upper Paleolithic or Middle Stone Age/Later Stone Age transitions (in Europe and Africa, respectively), there is a failure to appreciate the depth and breadth of the African Middle Stone Age record that preceded the time of the supposed revolution by at least 100,000 years. In their view, [McBrearty and Brooks 2000] 'modern' features such as advanced technologies, increased geographic range, specialized hunting, fishing and shell-fishing, long distance trade, and the symbolic use of pigments had already developed in a broad range of Middle Stone Age industries right across Africa, between 100,000 and 250,000 years ago. This suggested to them that an early assembly of the package of modern human behaviors occurred in Africa, followed by much later export to the rest of the world. Thus the origin of our species, both behaviorally and morphologically, was linked to early developments in Middle Stone Age technology, and not to changes that occurred much later.. 'this quest for this 'eureka moment' reveals a great deal about the needs, desired and aspirations of archaeologists, but obscures rather than illuminates events in the past.." --Chris Stringer (2012) Lone Survivors: How we came to be the only human on earth 128-29
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Yeah, but we aren't talking about the whole human species but certain populations of humans today. Europeans are Eurasian but they have more RECENT African ancestry than other Eurasians due to influx of African immigration during the Neolithic that led to a THIRD of Europeans having African ancestry.
The Anglo-Idiot claims such African lineages came from African "Caucasoids", but then we have crania of these Africans who spread their genes to Europeans.
Jebel Sahaba
Wadi Halfa
Both areas from which the skulls above were found are in Lower Nubia (northern Sudan).
"...one can identify Negroid traits of nose and prognathism appearing in Natufian latest hunters (McCown, 1939) and in Anatolian and Macedonian first farmers, probably from Nubia via the predecessors of the Badarians and Tasians...." -- Ange1, 1972, Biological Relations of Egyptians and Eastern Mediterranean Populations during pre-dynastic and Dynastic Times, courtesy of Journal of Human Evolution, pg 307-313.
But according to Anglo-Idiot these early Nubians were not "Negroid" but "Capoid", even though he often states that Negroids and Capoids differ in many facial characters, but then didn't he say "Caucasoids" spread hg E into Europe??! LOLPosts: 26239 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anglo_Pyramidologist has been shut down - his best option is to hope that this thread get archived so that none can see it so he's staying away from this thread hoping it drift out of site out of mind. Nope I'm putting this one in my favorites and will bump it ever so often.
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Strangely enough, on another thread it was stated that US whites are 2-21% "Black"... Based on this US Whites are not "pure" at all but are "mulattos"..
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=007120 Genetics and statistical research has revealed that one third of self-identified ''White Americans'' [sic] have Negroid ('Black') ancestry within the past four generations. This admixture ranges from approx 2.3 - 21%.
Sources:
Steve Sailer, “Analysis: Race Now Not Black and White,” UPI, May 8, 2002. Robert S. Stuckert, “The African Ancestry of the White American Population,” Ohio Journal of Science 55, no. May (1958): 155-160. Christen Brownlee, “Code of Many Colors,” Science News Online April 9, 2005. Frank W Sweet, “Afro-European Genetic Admixture in the United States,” Backintyme Publishing, 2004.
So around 75 million self-identified ''White Americans''[sic] are up to 21% Negroid ('Black').
This shows up in craniometric analyses, as many anthropometric traits of ''White Americans'' are actually Negroid through admixture. Beals et al 1984, and more recently the research of Gills (1995, 1998) has discussed this. Because many self-identified ''White Americans'' are racially admixed, it is harder for a forensic expert to label them as Caucasoid (Caucasian) from skeletal analysis.
---
It really is quite amusing. Most KKK, White Supremacist etc groups in America are themselves up to 21% Negro...
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova: [QB] Strangely enough, on another thread it was stated that US whites are 2-21% "Black"... Based on this US Whites are not "pure" at all but are "mulattos"..
I think Anglo_Pyrobiologist said something to the effect he considers the British to be superior Aryan stock compared to the tainted Americans
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
According to some critics the BNP is loosely affiliated with a British KKK, which now operates on those beclouded islands 24/7. I wonder what the differences are between the British KKK version and the American one? Tea and crumpets after cross burnings?
-------------------- Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began.. Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
British KKK website, doesn't seem to active, Events list only one 2006 item. This branch seems to be more religious, see Doctrinal Statement
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic