posted
This clay sculpture portrays the face of the earliest known modern European - a man or woman who hunted deer and gathered fruit and herbs in ancient forests more than 35,000 years ago. It was created by Richard Neave; one of Britain's leading forensic scientists, using fossilized fragments of skull and jawbone found in a cave seven years ago. His recreation offers a tantalizing glimpse into life before the dawn of civilization. It also shows the close links between the first European settlers and their immediate African ancestors. It was made for the BBC2 series The Incredible Human Journey. This will follow the evolution of humans from the cradle of Africa to the waves of migrations that saw Homo sapiens colonize the globe.
quote:Originally posted by Amur:
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Below the face of the First European or Cro-Magnon Man
This reconstruction is not remotely accurate.
For starters look at the wide nose, but the actual skull is described as "fairly narrow" in the original report. Here's an actual photo:
Looks nothing like the reconstruction.
The skin colour is also wrong. Europeans were already light skinned in Upper Palaeolithic times, see Beleze et al. 2012.
quote: There have been numerous "Negroid skeletons" found in Europe. Marcellin Boule and Henri Vallois, in Fossil Man, provide an entire chapter on the Africans/Negroes of Europe Anta Diop also discussed the Negroes of Europe in Civilization or Barbarism, pp.25-68.
Horribly outdated. Boule also claimed the French Chancelade skeleton was an "Eskimoid". At that time there was a lot of strange stuff being written.
quote:Boule and Vallois, note that "To sum up, in the most ancient skeletons from the Grotte des Enfants we have a human type which is readily comparable to modern types and especially to the Negritic or Negroid type" (p.289).
The Grimaldi skulls were badly damaged. When reconstructed properly, they don't look "Negroid". No physical anthropologist today uses the distorted state of the skulls. It was in fact Eurocentrics who invented the "Grimaldi Negro" theory because men like Boule were arguing Homo sapiens originated in Europe and all the races branched off white people... [/QUOTE]
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
This fossil specimen is the earliest largely complete example of an early modern human skull known from Europe. Credit: Erik Trinkaus
40,000-year-old skull shows both modern human and Neandertal traits Jan 16, 2007
Humans continued to evolve significantly long after they were established in Europe, and interbred with Neandertals as they settled across the continent, according to new research published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) USA.
Professor Joao Zilhao of the University of Bristol, Professor Erik Trinkaus of Washington University and colleagues in Europe compared the features of an early modern human cranium found in the Peºtera cu Oase (the Cave with Bones) in southwestern Romania with other human samples from the period (the Late Pleistocene). Differences between the skulls suggest complex population dynamics as modern humans dispersed into Europe. The different fragments of the reconstructed cranium – named Oase 2 – were found in a Late Pleistocene bone bed principally containing the remains of cave bears. They were recovered during a systematic excavation project directed by Professor Trinkaus and Professor Zilhao between 2003 and 2005. Radiocarbon dating of the specimen produced only a minimum age (more than 35,000 years), but similarity in morphological traits with the Oase 1 human mandible – found in 2002 on the surface of the cave, adjacent to the excavation area, and dated to about 40,500 years ago – lead the team to conclude that the two fossils were the same age. These are the earliest modern human remains so far found in Europe and represent our best evidence of what the modern humans who first dispersed into Europe looked like. By comparing it with other skulls, Professor Zilhao and colleagues found that Oase 2 had the same proportions as modern human crania and shared a number of modern human and/or non-Neandertal features. However, there were some important differences: apparently independent features that are, at best, unusual for a modern human. These included frontal flattening, a fairly large juxtamastoid eminence and exceptionally large upper molars with unusual size progression which are found principally among the Neandertals. Professor Zilhao said: "Such differences raise important questions about the evolutionary history of modern humans. They could be the result of evolutionary reversal or reflect incomplete palaeontological sampling of Middle Paleolithic human diversity. "They could also reflect admixture with Neandertal populations as modern humans spread through western Eurasia. This mixture would have resulted in both archaic traits retained from the Neandertals and unique combinations of traits resulting from the blending of previously divergent gene pools. "The ultimate resolution of these issues must await considerations of larger samples of European early modern humans and chronologically intervening specimens. But this fossil is a major addition to the growing body of fossil, genetic and archaeological evidence indicating significant levels of biological and cultural interaction between modern humans and the anatomically archaic populations (including the Neandertals) they met along the way as they spread from Africa into Eurasia." It is apparent that the Oase 2 cranium indicates there was significant modern human morphological evolution since the early Upper Paleolithic, the researchers conclude. Oase 2 is 'modern' in its abundance of derived modern human features, but it remains 'nonmodern' in its complex constellation of archaic and modern features.
posted
Upper Paleolithic Europeans were "White", just like how UP Chinese were "Mongoloid". I don't see why this is even disputed. At that time there was a generalized "Black" or "Africoid" in Africa, but yes there was obviously gene flow going on.
Posts: 63 | From: Carlos coke is gay | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amur: Upper Paleolithic Europeans were "White", just like how UP Chinese were "Mongoloid". I don't see why this is even disputed. At that time there was a generalized "Black" or "Africoid" in Africa, but yes there was obviously gene flow going on.
When you say Upper Paleolithic, which part do you mean? The Upper, Middle or Lower of the UP?
Science 20 April 2007: Vol. 316 no. 5823 p. 364 DOI: 10.1126/science.316.5823.364a
NEWS FOCUS
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGISTS MEETING European Skin Turned Pale Only Recently, Gene Suggests Ann Gibbons
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA-- At the American Association of Physical Anthropologists meeting, held here from 28 to 31 March, a new report on the evolution of a gene for skin color suggested that Europeans acquired pale skin quite recently, perhaps only 6000 to 12,000 years ago. (Read more.)
quote:Body proportions in Late Pleistocene Europe and modern human origins*1 Trenton W. Holliday Department of Anthropology, The College of William and Mary, P.O. Box 8795, Williamsburg, Virginia 23187-8795, U.S.A. Abstract Body proportions covary with climate, apparently as the result of climatic selection. Ontogenetic research and migrant studies have demonstrated that body proportions are largely genetically controlled and are under low selective rates; thus studies of body form can provide evidence for evolutionarily short-term dispersals and/or gene flow. Following these observations, competing models of modern human origins yield different predictions concerning body proportion shifts in Late Pleistocene Europe. Replacement predicts that the earliest modern Europeans will possess “tropical” body proportions (assuming Africa is the center of origin), while Regional Continuity permits only minor shifts in body shape, due to climatic change and/or improved cultural buffering. This study tests these predictions via analyses of osteometric data reflective of trunk height and breadth, limb proportions and relative body mass for samples of Early Upper Paleolithic (EUP), Late Upper Paleolithic (LUP) and Mesolithic (MES) humans and 13 recent African and European populations. Results reveal a clear tendency for the EUP sample to cluster with recent Africans, while LUP and MES samples cluster with recent Europeans. These results refute the hypothesis of local continuity in Europe, and are consistent with an interpretation of elevated gene flow (and population dispersal?) from Africa, followed by subsequent climatic adaptation to colder conditions. These data do not, however, preclude the possibility of some (albeit small) contribution of genes from Neandertals to succeeding populations, as is postulated in Bräuer’s “Afro-European Sapiens” model.
--Trenton W. Holliday Body proportions in Late Pleistocene Europe and modern human origins*1
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amur: Upper Paleolithic Europeans were "White", just like how UP Chinese were "Mongoloid". I don't see why this is even disputed. At that time there was a generalized "Black" or "Africoid" in Africa, but yes there was obviously gene flow going on.
The first European: Created from fragments of fossil, the face of our forbears 35,000 years ago
quote: His recreation offers a tantalising glimpse into life before the dawn of civilisation. It also shows the close links between the first European settlers and their immediate African ancestors.
quote:"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
quote: If this analysis shows nothing else, it demonstrates that the oft-repeated European feeling that the Cro-Magnons are “us” (47) is more a product of anthropological folklore than the result of the metric data available from the skeletal remains.
--C. Loring Brace(2006) The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form
quote: It has been proposed that heat adapted, relatively long-legged Homo sapiens from Africa replaced the cold adapted, relatively short-legged Homo neandertalensis of the Levant and Europe
--J Hum Evol 32 (1997a) 423], Bogin B, Rios L. et al.
quote: The subsequent post-28,000-B.P. Gravettian human sample of Europe includes numerous associated skeletons (Table 2) (Zilhão & Trinkaus 2002). Most of these specimens are fully modern in their morphology, and there is a persistence in them of both linear (equatorial) limb proportions and more "African" nasal morphology (Trinkaus 1981, Holliday 1997, Franciscus 2003). However, one Iberian specimen (Lagar Velho 1) exhibits Neandertal limb segment proportions and a series of relatively archaic cranial and postcranial features (Trinkaus & Zilhão 2002). In addition, central incisor shoveling, ubiquitous among the Neandertals, absent in the Qafzeh-Skhul sample, and variably present in the earlier European sample, persists at modest frequencies. And scapular axillary border dorsal sulci, an apparently Neandertal feature also absent in the Qafzeh-Skhul sample, is present
--Trinkaus 2005
quote: "Nor does the picture get any clearer when we move on to the Cro-Magnons, the presumed ancestors of modern Europeans. Some looked more like present-day Australians or Africans, judged by OBJECTIVE anatomical categorizations, as is the case with some early modern skulls from the Upper Cave at Zhoukoudian in China."
-- Am J Phys Anthropol. 1975 May;42(3):351-69,
quote:In modern humans, this elongation is a pattern characteristic of warm-adapted populations, and this physique may be an early Cro-Magnon retention from African ancestors. Similar retentions may be observed in certain indices of facial shape [ ...]
--Encyclopedia of Human Evolution and Prehistory: Second Edition by Eric Delson
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:
quote:Originally posted by Amur: Upper Paleolithic Europeans were "White", just like how UP Chinese were "Mongoloid". I don't see why this is even disputed. At that time there was a generalized "Black" or "Africoid" in Africa, but yes there was obviously gene flow going on.
quote:At about 40,000 years ago, however, Homo sapiens, in the form of the Cro-Magnons, began trickling into Europe, probably from an initially African place of origin.
[...]
It was brought with them by the Cro-Magnons, whose new qualities had emerged elsewhere. Probably this was in Africa, for it is from this continent that we have not just the first suggestions of the emergence of modern anatomical structure, but of modern behaviors as well.
[...]
The most remarkable early evidence of symbolic activity in Africa comes in the form of the recent find of engraved ochre plaques, such as this one, from Blombos Cave on the southern coast of Africa (Fig. 10). This is an unequivocally symbolic object, even if we cannot directly discern the significance of the geometric design that the plaque bears; and it is dated to around 70,000 years ago, over 30,000 years before anything equivalent is found in Europe.
To evidence such as this can be added suggestions of a symbolic organization of space at the site of Klasies River Mouth (Fig. 11), also near the southern tip of Africa, at over 100,000 years ago. Pierced shells, with the strong implication of stringing for body ornamentation, are known from Porc-Epic Cave in Ethiopia at around 70,000 years ago. Bone tools of the kind introduced much later to Europe by the Cro-Magnons, are found at the Congolese site of Katanda, dated to perhaps 80,000 years ago. Blade tool industries, again formerly associated principally with the Cro-Magnons, are found at least sporadically at sites in Africa that date to as much as a quarter of a million years ago. Also in the economic/technological realm, such activities as flint-mining, pigment-processing and long-distance trade in useful materials are documented in Africa up to about 100,000 years ago. These and other early African innovations are reviewed by McBrearty and Brooks (2000).
quote:Originally posted by Amur: Upper Paleolithic Europeans were "White", just like how UP Chinese were "Mongoloid". I don't see why this is even disputed. At that time there was a generalized "Black" or "Africoid" in Africa, but yes there was obviously gene flow going on.
Either you're Anglo or you've familiarized yourself with his writings enough for it to be noticeable. Which one?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amur: R1b did not originate in Africa, but West Asia.
The "Africans have all features and everything" is a sort of deranged mentality found among some blacks with low self-esteem thesedays; some guy on ES-reloaded is now even arguing white skin and blue eyes (non-albino) originated in Africa.
I don't know where this mindset stems from. I guess its among blacks who think if blacks have all features that would kill racism or destroy group difference with whites. A completely flawed concept, however it is now entering most threads and kills any sensible discussion.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Amur: Upper Paleolithic Europeans were "White", just like how UP Chinese were "Mongoloid". I don't see why this is even disputed. At that time there was a generalized "Black" or "Africoid" in Africa, but yes there was obviously gene flow going on.
Either you're Anglo or you've familiarized yourself with his writings enough for it to be noticeable. Which one?
I have run a preliminary intelligence report on Amur and have determined the chance that he is Anglo_Pyamidologist is 41%. while the chance that he is argyle104 is 54%
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
My account is on Esreloaded which I joined months back. I am not "Anglo" or "mindovermatter". My ancestry is Kabyle/French.
Posts: 63 | From: Carlos coke is gay | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am always open to a lively discussion. But is Amur the new enetertainment? I wouldn't know where to begin to discuss on this statement.
Good Luck!
He is not Cass. Cass is more assertive with his belief and dogma.
This guy may be Herodotus from ESR. His tone is more submissive,...pure dogma and absolutely no methodology.
If he was logical or well read the discussion would be more challenging.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Amur: Upper Paleolithic Europeans were "White", just like how UP Chinese were "Mongoloid". I don't see why this is even disputed. At that time there was a generalized "Black" or "Africoid" in Africa, but yes there was obviously gene flow going on.
Either you're Anglo or you've familiarized yourself with his writings enough for it to be noticeable. Which one?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I am always open to a lively discussion. But is Amur the new enetertainment? I wouldn't know where to begin to discuss on this statement.
Good Luck!
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Amur: Upper Paleolithic Europeans were "White", just like how UP Chinese were "Mongoloid". I don't see why this is even disputed. At that time there was a generalized "Black" or "Africoid" in Africa, but yes there was obviously gene flow going on.
Either you're Anglo or you've familiarized yourself with his writings enough for it to be noticeable. Which one?
Dude you're the guy I already debunked at reloaded. You or another poster in that thread even suggested I came here. Both these sites are ruined by "hardcore" Afronazis like yourself who possess the low self-esteem "everything is African" mentality. You're the guy I mentioned in the other thread who was saying blue eyes and white skin originated in Africa. As al Takruri said:
quote:So cut the crap already. We don't have everything Euros have, nor do we need to have what Euros have. We are black and comely just the way we are.
But go ahead, carry on w/your knee-jerk reactionary "everything the whites have we have too" thread.
I come here and see this forum is just this same mentality as well, so I won't bother to post or waste much time.
Posts: 63 | From: Carlos coke is gay | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Amur there was the article from several years ago, what about this>
Science 20 April 2007: Vol. 316 no. 5823 p. 364 DOI: 10.1126/science.316.5823.364a NEWS FOCUS AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGISTS MEETING European Skin Turned Pale Only Recently, Gene Suggests Ann Gibbons PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA-- At the American Association of Physical Anthropologists meeting, held here from 28 to 31 March, a new report on the evolution of a gene for skin color suggested that Europeans acquired pale skin quite recently, perhaps only 6000 to 12,000 years ago
___________________________________________
Also you are saying the reconstruction doesn't look like it is based on the skull yet is was done by a respectable foresnic artist Richard Neave, it must have some relation to the skull. At least we can see that the eyes seem to be are wide apart. The nasal cavity looks different I don't understand it
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I thought...Herodotus. submissive dogmatic personality.
Yep, you debunked me with a 20year old paper. Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Users on this forum are also strangely paranoid and accuse new posters of being other people. The other guy who recently joined and is black is being called a "fake" and actually a white guy in another thread.
It wouldn't surprise me if "Abaza" "thegreatone", "cass" etc were all controlled by one of the Afronazis here just to generate more hits to their crazy threads. It seems like a right madhouse.
Posts: 63 | From: Carlos coke is gay | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Your posting style is not identical to Anglo's and his sock accounts, but your language and views like the semi multiregionalist suggestions in your post above, and almost all the comments you've made in the other thread, right down to your explanation of Kemp's dendrograms as supposedly suffering from a "limited amount of variables" are highly reminiscent of his posts.
If you came here for a healthy debate, I'm sorry to say that the forum is no longer the same in terms of membership. Things seem to shift more to cultural stuff nowadays with the newest members. I would love to dismantle each and every iota of your claims expressed here, but I'm not getting in the habit of posting anything of value here again. I might post something here and there, but that'll be on my own terms. If that's what you came here for (i.e. discussion), you're probably better off going elsewhere. With the exception of a few remaining members, there is not much familiarity with the bio-anthropology stuff any more.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amur: Users on this forum are also strangely paranoid and accuse new posters of being other people. The other guy who recently joined and is black is being called a "fake" and actually a white guy in another thread.
It wouldn't surprise me if "Abaza" "thegreatone", "cass" etc were all controlled by one of the Afronazis here just to generate more hits to their crazy threads. It seems like a right madhouse.
If you are new here how come you have so much knowledge of old posters?
also please answer my previous post, it is on topic
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Your posting style is not identical to Anglo's and his sock accounts, but your language and views like the semi multiregionalist suggestions in your post above, and almost all the comments you've made in the other thread, right down to your explanation of Kemp's dendrograms as supposedly suffering from a "limited amount of variables" are highly reminiscent of his posts.
If you came here for a healthy debate, I'm sorry to say that the forum is no longer the same in terms of membership. Things seem to shift more to cultural stuff nowadays with the newest members. I would love to dismantle each and every iota of your claims expressed here, but I'm not getting in the habit of posting anything of value here again, so you're better off going elsewhere. With the exception of a few remaining members, there is not much familiarity with the bio-anthropology stuff any more.
the bio-anthropology stuff is more racial than this cultural stuff of the new posters. The cultural stuff is only racial sometimes
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lioness, my first post on the forum was in a 'sticky' thread on someone called "Abaza". I read them all thinking they were rules for newcomers. It wasn't until after I realized they were years old. I looked up the domain expire as well. I presume all those accounts listed on the sticky are a single individual, so that interested me. From a search I found them all linking to "Nordic Egypt" and wanted to find out who was behind them.
Swenet, well i'm not a multiregionalist, but lean towards "assimilation", so that's why I argue for regional distinctions of some greater time depth. More and more evidence all the time leans towards this rather than Out of Africa:
"The assimilation model (AM) was first proposed in the late 1980s (Smith et al., 1989), although aspects of it were certainly discussed earlier (e.g. Smith, 1985; Trinkaus and Smith, 1985). Basically, this model posits that anatomically modern humans emerged in Africa and radiated from there into West Asia and later into the remainder of Eurasia. However, rather than totally replacing the archaic peoples they encountered in Eurasia, we believe that genetic exchange occurred between the expanding moderns and the indigenous archaics. This model differs from the recent African origin (RAO) model in that the AM holds that the genetic exchange was more than ‘‘incidental.’’" (Smith et al. 2005)
Assimilation is basically middle-ground between the multuregional and OOA extremes. While AMH originated and dispersed from Africa, I regard there to have been more than just "incidental" or minute gene flow between archaics. I would also push back the AMH exit as Fred Smith and other push this date back slightly. It probably occurred 200,000-100,000 BP than 100,000-50,000 BP. Certain finds in China, alo show modern traits earlier than the Out of Africa allows.
Posts: 63 | From: Carlos coke is gay | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amur: My ancestry is Kabyle/French.
what is the primary ancestral background of the Kabyle? where do they begin? [/QB]
That will make a good topic and I will make a thread some time maybe. Of course there's been population movements and mixture in the region, however the Kaybles trace back to the Capsian, a pre-neolithic culture. The Arabization among the Kabyles was mainly a religion process rather than biological, as opposed to other Berber groups. This has long been known, and the Kabyles have been considered some sort of "pure race" having resisted assimilation. IMO the "blonde kabyle" stuff you read on certain webforums is greatly exaggerated, however those sort of features do appear more frequently than in other North Africans. Still though they are rare. While some easily pass as southern European or "white", most in general, as in my family, look "3/4 white". However this is probably what the Capsians looked like and they weren't mixed, here's an example of a Kabyle girl:
I've seen on this forum this sort of phenotype called "mulatto", however it isn't with most Kabyles.
Posts: 63 | From: Carlos coke is gay | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^You said UP Europeans were "white". Just out of curiosity: how would an OOA AMH and archaic mix in the assimilation model make recent emigres into Europe 40kya, "white"?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Thanks for stating the obvious.
you're admitting that about your new facebook camp?
Of course. All we do is cite Coon and Seligman.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] ^You said UP Europeans were "white". Just out of curiosity: how would an OOA AMH and archaic mix in the assimilation model make recent emigres into Europe 40kya, "white"?
There was a paper a while back that explains this well.
"Dihybrid of "Two-Eve" theory in which racial characieristics of living non-Africans are derived from archaic ancestors while modern cranial form is derived from the migration of AMH from Africa. The dihybrid theory thus combines the major arguments of both multiregional and complete replacement theories."
So you have modern cranial form derived from African AMH while racial features from the archaics in each major region (e.g. Europe, the far-east) through interbreeding. Of course the status of race is controversial, so these could just be called phenetic-clade features (or whatever) for each zone.
Posts: 63 | From: Carlos coke is gay | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] ^You said UP Europeans were "white". Just out of curiosity: how would an OOA AMH and archaic mix in the assimilation model make recent emigres into Europe 40kya, "white"?
There was a paper a while back that explains this well.
"Dihybrid of "Two-Eve" theory in which racial characieristics of living non-Africans are derived from archaic ancestors while modern cranial form is derived from the migration of AMH from Africa. The dihybrid theory thus combines the major arguments of both multiregional and complete replacement theories."
So you have modern cranial form derived from African AMH while racial features from the archaics in each major region (e.g. Europe, the far-east) through interbreeding. Of course the status of race is controversial, so these could just be called phenetic-clade features (or whatever) for each zone.
and what about this:
Science 20 April 2007: Vol. 316 no. 5823 pp. 364
European Skin Turned Pale Only Recently, Gene Suggests
American Association of Physical Anthropologists meeting, held here from 28 to 31 March, a new report on the evolution of a gene for skin color suggested that Europeans acquired pale skin quite recently, perhaps only 6000 to 12,000 years ago
-but keeping in mind there's still a 6000 year margin and if their skin turned pale 6-12,000 year ago ay whatever point that was there are thosuands of years before that of stages leading up to that
^^^ I haven't checked those dates against this new article I posted a little while ago, related topic:
Light Skin Allele SLC24A5 in South Asians and Europeans Shares Identity by Descent
quote:Originally posted by Amur: My ancestry is Kabyle/French.
what is the primary ancestral background of the Kabyle? where do they begin?
That will make a good topic and I will make a thread some time maybe. Of course there's been population movements and mixture in the region, however the Kaybles trace back to the Capsian, a pre-neolithic culture. The Arabization among the Kabyles was mainly a religion process rather than biological, as opposed to other Berber groups. This has long been known, and the Kabyles have been considered some sort of "pure race" having resisted assimilation. IMO the "blonde kabyle" stuff you read on certain webforums is greatly exaggerated, however those sort of features do appear more frequently than in other North Africans. Still though they are rare. While some easily pass as southern European or "white", most in general, as in my family, look "3/4 white". However this is probably what the Capsians looked like and they weren't mixed, here's an example of a Kabyle girl:
I've seen on this forum this sort of phenotype called "mulatto", however it isn't with most Kabyles.
Yes, that girl is a Kabyle. And this is indeed how a ancient population could be imagined. And the "mulatto comment" was, when people asked what do Tamazight/ North Africans look like? This mulatto similarity has been made after the fact that some claimed that the Tamazight are caucasians. Therefore the answer was; people who are unaware of the looks will easily mistake them for mulatto/ biracial. I have seen this happen a lot.
Btw, the Kabyle is only a subset within the Tamazight. I even am not so sure if in phenotype the Kabyle from Morocco are the same as the Algerian, for example.
Further more:
Successes and failures of human dispersals from North Africa (2011)
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] ^You said UP Europeans were "white". Just out of curiosity: how would an OOA AMH and archaic mix in the assimilation model make recent emigres into Europe 40kya, "white"?
There was a paper a while back that explains this well.
"Dihybrid of "Two-Eve" theory in which racial characieristics of living non-Africans are derived from archaic ancestors while modern cranial form is derived from the migration of AMH from Africa. The dihybrid theory thus combines the major arguments of both multiregional and complete replacement theories."
So you have modern cranial form derived from African AMH while racial features from the archaics in each major region (e.g. Europe, the far-east) through interbreeding. Of course the status of race is controversial, so these could just be called phenetic-clade features (or whatever) for each zone.
Your theory has a few holes, we can stuff them for you if you are ok with it?
quote: Evidence from throughout the Sahara indicates that the region experienced a cool, dry and windy climate during the last glacial period, followed by a wetter climate with the onset of the current interglacial, with humid conditions being fully established by around 10,000 years BP, when we see the first evidence of a reoccupation of parts of the central Sahara by hunter gathers, most likely originating from sub-Saharan Africa (Cremaschi and Di Lernia, 1998; Goudie, 1992; Phillipson, 1993; Ritchie, 1994; Roberts, 1998).
[...]
Conical tumuli, platform burials and a V-type monument represent structures similar to those found in other Saharan regions and associated with human burials, appearing in sixth millennium BP onwards in northeast Niger and southwest Libya (Sivilli, 2002). In the latter area a shift in emphasis from faunal to human burials, complete by the early fifth millennium BP, has been interpreted by Di Lernia and Manzi (2002) as being associated with a changes in social organisation that occurred at a time of increasing aridity. While further research is required in order to place the funerary monuments of Western Sahara in their chronological context, we can postulate a similar process as a hypothesis to be tested, based on the high density of burial sites recorded in the 2002 survey. Fig. 2: Megaliths associated with tumulus burial (to right of frame), north of Tifariti (Fig. 1). A monument consisting of sixty five stelae was also of great interest; precise alignments north and east, a division of the area covered into separate units, and a deliberate scattering of quartzite inside the structure, are suggestive of an astronomical function associated with funerary rituals. Stelae are also associated with a number of burial sites, again suggesting dual funerary and astronomical functions (Figure 2). Further similarities with other Saharan regions are evident in the rock art recorded in the study area, although local stylistic developments are also apparent. Carvings of wild fauna at the site of Sluguilla resemble the Tazina style found in Algeria, Libya and Morocco (Pichler and Rodrigue, 2003), although examples of elephant and rhinoceros in a naturalistic style reminiscent of engravings from the central Sahara believed to date from the early Holocene are also present.
--Nick Brooks et al. (2005)
The prehistory of Western Sahara in a regional context: the archaeology of the "free zone"
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Saharan Studies Programme and School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK Coauthors: Di Lernia, Savino ((Department of Scienze Storiche, Archeologiche, e Antropologiche dell’Antichità, Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Via Palestro 63, 00185 – Rome, Italy) and Drake, Nick (Department of Geography, King’s College, Strand, London WC2R 2LS).
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: I am always open to a lively discussion. But is Amur the new enetertainment? I wouldn't know where to begin to discuss on this statement.
Good Luck!
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Amur: Upper Paleolithic Europeans were "White", just like how UP Chinese were "Mongoloid". I don't see why this is even disputed. At that time there was a generalized "Black" or "Africoid" in Africa, but yes there was obviously gene flow going on.
Either you're Anglo or you've familiarized yourself with his writings enough for it to be noticeable. Which one?
Dude you're the guy I already debunked at reloaded. You or another poster in that thread even suggested I came here. Both these sites are ruined by "hardcore" Afronazis like yourself who possess the low self-esteem "everything is African" mentality. You're the guy I mentioned in the other thread who was saying blue eyes and white skin originated in Africa. As al Takruri said:
quote:So cut the crap already. We don't have everything Euros have, nor do we need to have what Euros have. We are black and comely just the way we are.
But go ahead, carry on w/your knee-jerk reactionary "everything the whites have we have too" thread.
I come here and see this forum is just this same mentality as well, so I won't bother to post or waste much time.
Hmmmm, what is a Afronazi?
For your blue eye comment:
Blue-Eyed Humans Have A Single, Common Ancestor
What is the genetic mutation
“Originally, we all had brown eyes”, said Professor Eiberg from the Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine. “But a genetic mutation affecting the OCA2 gene in our chromosomes resulted in the creation of a “switch”, which literally “turned off” the ability to produce brown eyes”. The OCA2 gene codes for the so-called P protein, which is involved in the production of melanin, the pigment that gives colour to our hair, eyes and skin. The “switch”, which is located in the gene adjacent to OCA2 does not, however, turn off the gene entirely, but rather limits its action to reducing the production of melanin in the iris – effectively “diluting” brown eyes to blue. The switch’s effect on OCA2 is very specific therefore. If the OCA2 gene had been completely destroyed or turned off, human beings would be without melanin in their hair, eyes or skin colour – a condition known as albinism.
Limited genetic variation
Variation in the colour of the eyes from brown to green can all be explained by the amount of melanin in the iris, but blue-eyed individuals only have a small degree of variation in the amount of melanin in their eyes. “From this we can conclude that all blue-eyed individuals are linked to the same ancestor,” says Professor Eiberg. “They have all inherited the same switch at exactly the same spot in their DNA.” Brown-eyed individuals, by contrast, have considerable individual variation in the area of their DNA that controls melanin production.
Professor Eiberg and his team examined mitochondrial DNA and compared the eye colour of blue-eyed individuals in countries as diverse as Jordan, Denmark and Turkey. His findings are the latest in a decade of genetic research, which began in 1996, when Professor Eiberg first implicated the OCA2 gene as being responsible for eye colour.
Nature shuffles our genes
The mutation of brown eyes to blue represents neither a positive nor a negative mutation. It is one of several mutations such as hair colour, baldness, freckles and beauty spots, which neither increases nor reduces a human’s chance of survival. As Professor Eiberg says, “it simply shows that nature is constantly shuffling the human genome, creating a genetic cocktail of human chromosomes and trying out different changes as it does so.”
quote: Several systematic or case-based studies of MC1R diversity have been published. In African populations, low genetic diversity at MC1R suggests it is under functional constraint, whereas diversity is increased in European populations and, to a lesser degree, in Asian populations (Rana et al. 1999; Harding et al. 2000; Makova et al. 2001). Two interpretations of these findings have been considered. One is that there is selection for functionally significant variants in non-African populations (Rana et al. 1999; Makova et al. 2001). Others show that the diversity in the non-African populations is not beyond what might be expected under neutral theory (Harding et al. 2000).
--Jonathan L. Rees The Genetics of Sun Sensitivity in Humans
See, these alleles you while find in African and Asian populations as fix or unfixed.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Several systematic or case-based studies of MC1R diversity have been published. In African populations, low genetic diversity at MC1R suggests it is under functional constraint, whereas diversity is increased in European populations and, to a lesser degree, in Asian populations (Rana et al. 1999; Harding et al. 2000; Makova et al. 2001). Two interpretations of these findings have been considered. One is that there is selection for functionally significant variants in non-African populations (Rana et al. 1999; Makova et al. 2001). Others show that the diversity in the non-African populations is not beyond what might be expected under neutral theory (Harding et al. 2000). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See, these alleles you while find in African and Asian populations as fix or unfixed.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] ^You said UP Europeans were "white". Just out of curiosity: how would an OOA AMH and archaic mix in the assimilation model make recent emigres into Europe 40kya, "white"?
There was a paper a while back that explains this well.
"Dihybrid of "Two-Eve" theory in which racial characieristics of living non-Africans are derived from archaic ancestors while modern cranial form is derived from the migration of AMH from Africa. The dihybrid theory thus combines the major arguments of both multiregional and complete replacement theories."
So you have modern cranial form derived from African AMH while racial features from the archaics in each major region (e.g. Europe, the far-east) through interbreeding. Of course the status of race is controversial, so these could just be called phenetic-clade features (or whatever) for each zone.
But this is not an answer to my question; it answers a what question, not a how question. My question is how you get a white person from mixing an OOA African with archaics who have shitloads of plesiomorphic features. How do you get a modern looking person out of that? A mixed archaic and African AMH would look something like the skhul/Qafzeh homonins and the Dhar es Soltane skull. I'm not saying that any of them actually have Eurasian archaic ancestry, but that they morphometrically plot intermediatly between European archaics and European AMHs. Why would dual ancestry of early UP Europeans manifest itself only in a few "Caucasoid regional features" here and there, but not in intermediacy in limb proportions, uniparental profiles, cranio-facial analysis, etc?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^I'm not sure, but it seems that some are suggesting that these people are a race unto themselves, (you know, the Mediterranean race nonsense), rather than the simple Mutts (Mulattoes) of invading Central Asian Albinos and indigenous Africans.
posted
Oh,oh: I may have come up with the perfect way to decide their affiliation. We have various ethnic/race experts on the forum, lets ask them:
Doxie - are they White?
lamin - are they Black?
Djehuti - are they Mongol?
For human races, those are the only choices, so if they are neither of the above, then they must be Mutts!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
By comparing it with other skulls, Professor Zilhao and colleagues found that Oase 2 had the same proportions as modern human crania and shared a number of modern human and/or non-Neandertal features. However, there were some important differences: apparently independent features that are, at best, unusual for a modern human. These included frontal flattening, a fairly large juxtamastoid eminence and exceptionally large upper molars with unusual size progression which are found principally among the Neandertals.
__________________________________
the biggest mutt of them all, the early European ^^^^ mixed with another species
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the above post there is a minor problem with the European/ African assessment as you can see below.
Rwandese crania.
Dr Spencer Wells, Harvard evolutionary geneticist: There is more genetic diversity in any single African village than in the whole world outside Africa.
Geneticist Sarah Tishkoff: Non-Africans are recently descendant from a small population of East Africans.
quote:
Africa is the birthplace of modern humans, and is the source of the geographic expansion of ancestral populations into other regions of the world.
Indigenous Africans are characterized by high levels of genetic diversity within and between populations. The pattern of genetic variation in these populations has been shaped by demographic events occurring over the last 200,000 years.
The dramatic variation in climate, diet, and exposure to infectious disease across the continent has also resulted in novel genetic and phenotypic adaptations in extant Africans.
This review summarizes some recent advances in our understanding of the demographic history and selective pressures that have influenced levels and patterns of diversity in African populations.
Africa not only has the highest levels of human genetic variation in the world but also contains a considerable amount of linguistic, environmental and cultural diversity. For example, more than 2,000 distinct ethno-linguistic groups, representing nearly a third of the world’s languages, currently exist in Africa
The timing and duration of some of these demographic events were often correlated with known major environmental changes and/or cultural developments in Africa [6].
A number of novel genetic and phenotypic adaptations have also evolved in Africans in response to dramatic variation in environment, diet, and exposure to infectious disease across the continent.
In some cases, these adaptations have occurred in the last several thousand years, exemplifying the ongoing evolution of human populations.
Thus, present-day patterns of variation in African genomes are a product of both demographic and selective events.
--Sarah Tishkoff et al. (2010)
The Evolution of Human Genetic and Phenotypic Variation in AfricaPosts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Peştera cu Oase 2 and the cranial morphology of early modern Europeans
Abstract
Between 2003 and 2005, the Peştera cu Oase, Romania yielded a largely complete early modern human cranium, Oase 2, scattered on the surface of a Late Pleistocene hydraulically displaced bone bed containing principally the remains of Ursus spelaeus. Multiple lines of evidence indicate an age of ≈40.5 thousand calendar years before the present (≈35 ka 14C B.P.). Morphological comparison of the adolescent Oase 2 cranium to relevant Late Pleistocene human samples documents a suite of derived modern human and/or non-Neandertal features, including absence of a supraorbital torus, subrectangular orbits, prominent canine fossae, narrow nasal aperture, level nasal floor, angled and anteriorly oriented zygomatic bones, a high neurocranium with prominent parietal bosses and marked sagittal parietal curvature, superiorly positioned temporal zygomatic root, vertical auditory porous, laterally bulbous mastoid processes, superiorly positioned posterior semicircular canal, absence of a nuchal torus and a suprainiac fossa, and a small occipital bun. However, these features are associated with an exceptionally flat frontal arc, a moderately large juxtamastoid eminence, extremely large molars that become progressively larger distally, complex occlusal morphology of the upper third molar, and relatively anteriorly positioned zygomatic arches. Moreover, the featureless occipital region and small mastoid process are at variance with the large facial skeleton and dentition. This unusual mosaic in Oase 2, some of which is paralleled in the Oase 1 mandible, indicates both complex population dynamics as modern humans dispersed into Europe and significant ongoing human evolution once modern humans were established within Europe.
Was North Africa the Launch Pad for Modern Human Migrations?
Michael Balter
Until very recently, most researchers studying the origins of Homo sapiens focused on the fossils of East Africa and the sophisticated tools and ornaments of famed South African sites such as Blombos Cave. Few scientists thought that much of evolutionary significance had gone on in North Africa, or that the region's big-toothed, somewhat archaic-looking hominins might be closely related to the ancestors of many living people. Now, thanks to new excavations and more accurate dating, North Africa boasts unequivocal signs of modern human behavior as early as anywhere else in the world, including South Africa. Climate reconstructions and fossil studies now suggest that the region was more hospitable during key periods than once thought. The data suggest that the Sahara Desert was a land of lakes and rivers about 130,000 years ago, when moderns first left Africa for sites in what is today Israel. And new studies of hominin fossils suggest some strong resemblances—and possible evolutionary connections—between North African specimens and fossils representing migrations out of Africa between 130,000 and 40,000 years ago.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: [QB] In the above post there is a minor problem with the European/ African assessment as you can see below.
Rwandese crania.
therefore Richard Neave might have made the nose in the reconstruction too wide, therefore of all the various people with noses not as wide as the reconstruction, they are now included rather than excluded as possibilities for similarity
And if you find a narrower nose in Africa that is a crossover trait that doesn't mean Oase 2 is Rwandan
The skull was found in Romania and said to also have Neanderthal traits
The distance between Rwanda and Romania is over 3000 miles so showing pictures of Rwandans as a comparison to this skull is a rhetorical distraction, silliness
If George Washinton's skull was dug up and somebody posted a photo of it on a webiste but didn't tell you who it was you would go into your African file and start pulling out pictures, that is what you do in every instance
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
However this is probably what the Capsians looked like and they weren't mixed, here's an example of a Kabyle girl:
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Oh,oh: I may have come up with the perfect way to decide their affiliation. We have various ethnic/race experts on the forum, lets ask them:
Doxie - are they White?
lamin - are they Black?
Djehuti - are they Mongol?
For human races, those are the only choices, so if they are neither of the above, then they must be Mutts!
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: [QB] In the above post there is a minor problem with the European/ African assessment as you can see below.
Rwandese crania.
therefore Richard Neave might have made the nose in the reconstruction too wide, therefore of all the various people with noses not as wide as the reconstruction, they are now included rather than excluded as possibilities for similarity
And if you find a narrower nose in Africa that is a crossover trait that doesn't mean Oase 2 is Rwandan
The skull was found in Romania and said to also have Neanderthal traits
The distance between Rwanda and Romania is over 3000 miles so showing pictures of Rwandans as a comparison to this skull is a rhetorical distraction, silliness
If George Washinton's skull was dug up and somebody posted a photo of it on a webiste but didn't tell you who it was you would go into your African file and start pulling out pictures, that is what you do in every instance
^ not necessary, it can be that the woman has a even smaller Ala and apex. Nor did I ever write down that Oase 2 is Rwandan.
I wrote down that there is a minor flaunt, a mistake in your prejudice skull formation theory. A self entitled opinion by you if I might add.
Your ifs don't count here, I speak fact not fiction.
quote:At about 40,000 years ago, however, Homo sapiens, in the form of the Cro-Magnons, began trickling into Europe, probably from an initially African place of origin.
[...]
It was brought with them by the Cro-Magnons, whose new qualities had emerged elsewhere. Probably this was in Africa, for it is from this continent that we have not just the first suggestions of the emergence of modern anatomical structure, but of modern behaviors as well.
[...]
The most remarkable early evidence of symbolic activity in Africa comes in the form of the recent find of engraved ochre plaques, such as this one, from Blombos Cave on the southern coast of Africa (Fig. 10). This is an unequivocally symbolic object, even if we cannot directly discern the significance of the geometric design that the plaque bears; and it is dated to around 70,000 years ago, over 30,000 years before anything equivalent is found in Europe.
To evidence such as this can be added suggestions of a symbolic organization of space at the site of Klasies River Mouth (Fig. 11), also near the southern tip of Africa, at over 100,000 years ago. Pierced shells, with the strong implication of stringing for body ornamentation, are known from Porc-Epic Cave in Ethiopia at around 70,000 years ago. Bone tools of the kind introduced much later to Europe by the Cro-Magnons, are found at the Congolese site of Katanda, dated to perhaps 80,000 years ago. Blade tool industries, again formerly associated principally with the Cro-Magnons, are found at least sporadically at sites in Africa that date to as much as a quarter of a million years ago. Also in the economic/technological realm, such activities as flint-mining, pigment-processing and long-distance trade in useful materials are documented in Africa up to about 100,000 years ago. These and other early African innovations are reviewed by McBrearty and Brooks (2000).
posted
^^^ similarity of tool kit does not mean biological similarity of people 30,000 later, that is very weak argument and you keep posting the same stuff over and over
also learn to reply without copying every single thing ffrom the last reply, you are just making the thraed unpleasant to look at for everybody
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^ similarity of tool kit does not mean biological similarity of people 30,000 later, that is very weak argument and you keep posting the same stuff over and over
also learn to reply without copying every single thing ffrom the last reply, you are just making the thraed unpleasant to look at for everybody
I keep posting this over and over until you understand. Learn how to understand peer reviewed scholarship vs your pseudo sources.
And since you are slow minded...I'll post it again.
quote:At about 40,000 years ago, however, Homo sapiens, in the form of the Cro-Magnons, began trickling into Europe, probably from an initially African place of origin.
quote:"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
quote: If this analysis shows nothing else, it demonstrates that the oft-repeated European feeling that the Cro-Magnons are “us” (47) is more a product of anthropological folklore than the result of the metric data available from the skeletal remains.
--C. Loring Brace(2006) The questionable contribution of the Neolithic and the Bronze Age to European craniofacial form
quote: It has been proposed that heat adapted, relatively long-legged Homo sapiens from Africa replaced the cold adapted, relatively short-legged Homo neandertalensis of the Levant and Europe
--J Hum Evol 32 (1997a) 423], Bogin B, Rios L. et al.
quote: The subsequent post-28,000-B.P. Gravettian human sample of Europe includes numerous associated skeletons (Table 2) (Zilhão & Trinkaus 2002). Most of these specimens are fully modern in their morphology, and there is a persistence in them of both linear (equatorial) limb proportions and more "African" nasal morphology (Trinkaus 1981, Holliday 1997, Franciscus 2003). However, one Iberian specimen (Lagar Velho 1) exhibits Neandertal limb segment proportions and a series of relatively archaic cranial and postcranial features (Trinkaus & Zilhão 2002). In addition, central incisor shoveling, ubiquitous among the Neandertals, absent in the Qafzeh-Skhul sample, and variably present in the earlier European sample, persists at modest frequencies. And scapular axillary border dorsal sulci, an apparently Neandertal feature also absent in the Qafzeh-Skhul sample, is present
--Trinkaus 2005
quote: "Nor does the picture get any clearer when we move on to the Cro-Magnons, the presumed ancestors of modern Europeans. Some looked more like present-day Australians or Africans, judged by OBJECTIVE anatomical categorizations, as is the case with some early modern skulls from the Upper Cave at Zhoukoudian in China."
-- Am J Phys Anthropol. 1975 May;42(3):351-69,
quote:In modern humans, this elongation is a pattern characteristic of warm-adapted populations, and this physique may be an early Cro-Magnon retention from African ancestors. Similar retentions may be observed in certain indices of facial shape [ ...]
--Encyclopedia of Human Evolution and Prehistory: Second Edition by Eric Delson
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:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: I keep posting this over and over until you understand.
And since you are slow minded...
that is your brutish attempt to try to force people to believe what you want then to believe. People don't change their minds over repetition, example vansertimvindicated. People see the same thing and just skip over it, it's a waste.
Look at Swenet he writes a paragrah of argument and then might quote and article
you write a couple of sentences with remarks like
"Learn how to understand peer reviewed scholarship vs your pseudo sources. And since you are slow minded...I'll post it again"
that's not argumentation, it's useless,
then you have ten times more quotes in place of being able to articulate an argument
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: I keep posting this over and over until you understand.
And since you are slow minded...
that is your brutish attempt to try to force people to believe what you want then to believe. People don't change their minds over repetition, example vansertimvindicated. People see the same thing and just skip over it, it's a waste
Is not what I believe, it what peer reviewed scholarship shows. If that's what you call brutish, well I can't help it.
See you keep contradicting yourself.
quote: At about 40,000 years ago, however, Homo sapiens, in the form of the Cro-Magnons, began trickling into Europe, probably from an initially African place of origin.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: Is not what I believe, it what peer reviewed scholarship shows. If that's what you call brutish, well I can't help it.
you dont know how to debate. You write one sentence
" Your theory has a few holes, we can stuff them for you if you are ok with it?"
^^^useless
then you go on to quotes and people are supposed to try to figure out what your exact point is. Then we see that same charts and text over and over again and seeing that it;s what we had seen before just skip past it. But it makes threads look bad, xyyman told you about "overload" and Calabooz did too. When you repeat the same info over and over again it just becomes spam
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor: Is not what I believe, it what peer reviewed scholarship shows. If that's what you call brutish, well I can't help it.
you dont know how to debate. You write one sentence
" Your theory has a few holes, we can stuff them for you if you are ok with it?"
^^^useless
then you go on to quotes and people are supposed to try to figure out what your exact point is. Then we see that same charts and text over and over again and seeing that it;s what we had seen before just skip past it. But it makes threads look bad, xyyman told you about "overload" and Calabooz did too. When you repeat the same info over and over again it just becomes spam
You are a sorry excuse of a person. And you wonder why people call you a liar and a fake, a black woman impostor.
Remember, this was long before I posted here. And at first I gave you the benefit of the doubt. Sadly you didn't grab this chance. This is why you are the laughing stock of ES. And since you are lost in the arguments and peer reviewed scholarship, you again start to hide behind other posters name. But these poster say the same about you what I just wrote, a few sentences ago.
And of course I could give my own interpretation on the studies I am posting myself. But I rather cite, so you can't say I made it up. Like you just did with the flaunts on crania formation, a few posts ago.
Xyyman and Calabooz complained about you not posting sources. You must not have understood them correctly. I post to contradict you. If you don't like it, then that's your problem.
quote:Recent investigations into the origins of symbolism indicate that personal ornaments in the form of perforated marine shell beads were used in the Near East, North Africa, and SubSaharan Africa at least 35 ka earlier than any personal ornaments in Europe.
quote:The first argues that modern cognition is unique to our species and the consequence of a genetic mutation that took place 50 ka in Africa among anatomically modern humans (AMH) (1).
--Francesco d’Erricoa et al. (2009)
Additional evidence on the use of personal ornaments in the Middle Paleolithic of North Africa
I understand how you will try to look up contra-arguments here. But I have already more to expel and expose, so it's really an effortless attempt if any.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol aka Ish Gebor:
And of course I could give my own interpretation on the studies I am posting myself. But I rather cite, so you can't say I made it up. Like you just did with the crania formation.
You are supposed to do both, make an argument and then post info supporting the argument. You have trouble with that so rely too heavily on just the citation.
So intitally somebody might be impressed by several citations. Then we go to read some and realize they are not always strong arguments relating to the converstation or are half off the topic. They might be strong arguments in another converstaion but they could be weak in a differnt context trying to make a differnt point (and we are always supposed to guess what it is) But that is only the beginning. Ten posts later you have the same quotes up, at that point it is spam
I need to stop posting so much, I am simply on this webiste too much
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic