quote:Originally posted by lamin: Mike your fantasies are just so charmingly amusing. Mike, African America's most prominent scholar is W.E.B. Dubois. Du Bois wrote on the social sciences, history included. Nowhere in his writings does he ever claim that AAs derived from Europe. The same with the AA doyen of history, John Hope Franklin. He has never ever wrote that U.S. blacks derive from any part or section of Europe's population.
The very respected AA historian, the late John Henrik Clarke has never written or found any historical evidence the U.S. blacks--even a minority have any direct connection in Europe. The same with with Chancellor Williams, David Leavering Lewis(biographer of Dubois), Nell Painter, Molefi Asante, and others have never written that U.S. blacks have any connection except by way of white European settler forbears whose genetic imprints may be found among some 10-13% of the U.S. black population.
Even sympathetic white historians such as Eric Foner, David Brion Davis and Eugene Genovese have never wrote that AAs derive from Europe. They have scoured the migration records of European settlement in the U.S. and have never noted anything pointing to blacks entering America from Europe proper.
Mike, all sound theories rest on empirical evidence and your theories--if they are to gain currency in the sense of convincing others--must provide adequate evidence. Otherwise, the consensus would be that your theories are the concoctions of a cranky crackpot. Chew on that Mike, and eat it too.
lamin - is the full magnitude of your stupidity dawning on you yet?
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks Mike, I added these pictures to my blog so we can have a resource on Black Native Americans, to combat the racism expressed against us by some Mongoloid Native Americans and Euronuts.
.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
.
EVER WONDER WHY THE "BLACKFOOT" were called the Blackfoot?
Blackfoot warrior, (Karl Bodmer, between 1840 and 1843)
A Moorish military musician in Berlin by Peter Schenk (c. 1690)
(He,he,he: anyone see anything "Moorish" about him?). Albinos just can't stop lying - just look at lioness!
P.S. the last of the Moors were driven out of Spain in 1492.
Peter Schenk Dutch Painting of the Yamassee War
A Dutch view of the Yamasee War. The full title, translated from the Dutch, reads "The gruesome attack of the Indians on the English, in Carolina, West Indies, on 19 April 1715
"In 1736, Philip Georg Friedrich von Reck, then only twentyfive years old, sailed with other colonists from Germany to Georgia. One of his intentions, expressed in a letter before he left Europe, was to bring back from America "ocular proof" of what he called "this strange new world." Idealistic nad enthusiastic, welleducated and blessed with an amazing artistic gift, von Reck kept a travel diary, wrote separate descriptions of the plants, animals and Indians he discovered in Georgia and drew some fifty watercolor and pencil sketches of what he saw. [...]
These drawings, accompanied by von Reck's writings, are important as history, science and art. As history, they give us a new and absolutely unique glimpse of Georgia as it looked when the first Europeans settled there. [...] As science, von Reck's natural history drawings represent the earliest records of several plants and animals. [...] Von Reck's drawings and writings are especially important for the light they shed on Indian life. The drawings show in detail their costumes and equipment, houses and activities. [...] As art, von Reck's drawings are as fresh, intimate and alive on the paper as the day they were drawn."
(Extract from 'Introduction' to VON RECK'S VOYAGE. Drawings and Journal of Philip Georg Friedrich von Reck. Edited by Kristian Hvidt. With the Assistance of Joseph Ewan, George F. Jones and William C. Sturtevant. The Beehive Press, Savannah 1980.)
In this net edition all the aquarelles and drawings in von Reck's sketch book (36,5 x 28,8 cm) and all other drawings in the collection NKS 565 4º have been reproduced. For further information on and description of the drawings and their background the book mentioned above is recommended.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Thanks Mike, I added these pictures to my blog so we can have a resource on Black Native Americans, to combat the racism expressed against us by some Mongoloid Native Americans and Euronuts.
That's the idea, we share knowledge.
As I recall, you once theorized that Africa was left behind because they secreted knowledge in secret societies.
Check out this next post.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Examiner: British researchers probe mystery of lost Native American artifact.
It is the Rosetta Stone of North America. The English translation of this hand-painted vellum containing a lost Native American writing system, requires eight printed pages. With the encouragement of His Royal Highness, Charles, Prince of Wales, a search has begun on both sides of the Atlantic to find the original artifact, or at least a copy of the writing system. It has been misplaced for over 230 years.
The year is 1733. Growing increasingly fearful of a combined Spanish, French and Indian attack on its vulnerable white population, the Province of South Carolina agreed to renounce claims on territory southwest of the Savannah River so that a new colony of yeoman farmers could be established on its frontier. Roughly sixty percent of South Carolina’s population was either African or Native American slaves. These suppressed peoples would be highly inclined to assist the French and Spanish.
In 1715, without the direct assistance of European powers, the Yamasee Indians had almost succeeded in wiping the southern part Carolina off the face of the earth. Back then there was no North or South Carolina. A new alliance of tribes in the Carolina Mountains switched sides and attacked the Yamasee just at the moment when Charleston faced annihilation. This alliance was now called the Cherokees.
The new colony, called Georgia in honor of King George I, would have no slaves. Its first town, Savannah, had been designed in advance as a military bastion. Its unique plan maximized the defensive effectiveness of artillery. All males in the colony agreed to be members of the militia in return for being given free land. The colony’s Board of Trustees planned to recruit the thousands of Englishmen in debtor’s prisons, plus German Protestants, being persecuted in Catholic regions, to settle the countryside. Unlike Maryland, Virginia, South and North Carolina, there would be no plantation aristocracy. At least, that was the plan.
The key to this colony’s success would be good relations with the Muskogean peoples of the interior. Prior to the Yamasee War, they had been divided up into provinces of various sizes. The strongest province was itself an alliance known to the British as the Ochese Creek Indians. At about the same time in 1718 that the Mountain Alliance was given the name Cherokees, the Muskogeans formed their own regional confederacy from provinces speaking several languages and dialects.
The Muskogean Confederacy was not a tribe at this time, but would eventually evolve into the Creek Indians. Nevertheless, in 1733, this alliance contained the largest and most culturally advanced indigenous population in North America. It claimed all the former lands of its members, between the Smoky Mountains in North Carolina southward to St. Augustine, FL. Expansion of the Cherokee Alliance into western North Carolina had forced many Muskogean provinces to relocate to Alabama and Georgia. Its members would not be called “the Creek Indians” until the 1740s.
The founding of the Province of Georgia
Savannah was settled in February of 1733 on land given to British Crown by a small Muskogean tribe, known as the Yamacraw. Its leader, Tamachichi (Tomochichi in English) had been banished from Muskogean Confederacy for some unknown incedent. About 1728 Tomochichi created the Yamacraws from an assortment of Muskogean and Yamasee Indians after the two alliances disagreed over future relations with Great Britain and Spain. This Yamacraw village would remain adjacent to Savannah until the American Revolution. Immediately, Tamachichi and Governor James Edward Oglethorpe became close friends.
In November of 1733, Tamachichi invited the highest leaders of the Muskogean Confederacy to Savannah to meet his friend, James Oglethorpe. Tamachichi’s prestigious new status as a close ally of Great Britain brought him reinstatement into the confederacy. British officials were shocked to learn that the Indians in the interior were not one ethnic group, but many peoples with separate histories reaching back over 2,000 years. They were the vestiges of the mound-building era. The leaders agreed to be steadfast allies of Great Britain. The Okonee Province (Ocute in the de Soto Chronicles) agreed to give Oglethorpe all their land that he needed along the Atlantic Coast to establish a healthy colony.
Governor Oglethorpe immediately sent a long letter back to British government that described their new allies, who seemed very different from any Indians that the British had dealt with before. He was astonished that they were skilled in writing, math, astronomy and land surveying without being taught these skills by Europeans. He told the prime minister that he was convinced that these new allies were the descendants an ancient civilization.
The Migration Legend of the Kashita People
Early in 1734 a delegation of Muskogean Confederacy leaders returned to Savannah to confirm their alliance with Oglethorpe. This delegation was lead by Chikili, the war chief of the Palache (Apalache) who formerly lived in the gold fields of the Georgia Mountains, but now lived in the region northwest of Savannah. The highlight of a friendship ceremony was the presentation of a vellum made from a bison calf skin. On this vellum was painted in the Muskogean writing system, the history of the Kas’hita People. They were late arrivals to the Southeast. As Chikili read the vellum, Indian trader, John Musgrove and his beautiful Indian wife, Kusaponakeesa, translated the legend into English, while a notary wrote down the information. The Creek Indian writing system was capable of transmitting all verb tenses and complete thoughts.
The Kashita People called themselves, the Kauche-te, in their Itsate Creek language. They were originally vassals of Kusa, the great town visited by Hernando de Soto in the summer of 1540. At some time in the past, they moved northward to live among the Talasee Creeks in the Smoky Mountains of Tennessee, then moved to an abandoned town site on the Hiwassee River near present-day Murphy, NC. Juan Pardo visited them in the fall of 1567. He called them the Cauche. In their migration legend, the Kashita claim to have sacked a great capital on the side of Georgia’s highest mountain, Brasstown Bald. The Kashita’s description of this town seems to match the Track Rock terrace complex site.
Governor Oglethorpe immediately realized the scientific importance of the Kashita vellum. He dispatched it to England for safe-keeping. It created quite a stir in England. The American Gazetteer newspaper published a full translation and described as written with peculiar red and black characters, not pictures as normally seen on American Indian skin paintings. It reportedly was mounted in a frame on the wall of the Georgia Office in Westminster Palace as long as Georgia was a colony then misplaced. See the following URL for more complete discussions of the Creek Indians’ migration legends: http://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/the-migration-legend-of-the-kashita-people.htm
The on-going research into the cultural connections between the Southeast and Mesoamerica has sparked a renewed interest in the long forgotten bison calf vellum. Tamachichi’s name was Itza Maya. It means “Merchant Dog.” Of particular interest is the statement in contemporary London papers that the Creek Indian’s writing system consisted of “peculiar red and black characters.” During the Terminal Classic and Post-Classic Periods, the Itza Mayas used a simplified Maya writing system consisting of red and black characters. A mineral mined in Georgia was found on the buildings at Palenque, the Classic Period capital of the Itza Mayas in Chiapas.
Clarence House picks up the rugby ball
The premier of American Unearthed on December 21, 2012, about the Creek Indian-Maya connection, had the highest viewership of any program ever watched on History Channel H2. It is now being viewed by people around the world. Intrigued by the research, His Royal Highness, Charles, Prince of Wales, directed one of his personal secretaries at Clarence House to assist in the search for the lost buffalo calf vellum. Clarence House is the official residence of the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall.
The staff at Clarence House reported on January 28, 2013 has already turned up some previously unknown details about the lost vellum. Tamachichi and several family members were guests of the Archbishop of Canterbury when they visited England in 1734. His barge was at their disposal. In a ceremony on August 18, 1734 Tamachichi and Governor Oglethorpe formally presented the vellum to Archbishop William Wake at Lambeth Palace. The vellum has been the official property of the Church of England since then. It may be in the church archives rather than in the British Museum.
In a recent conversation with the Friends of Oglethorpe Society, Clarence House official, Grahame Davies, has learned that a Lutheran minister, the Rev. Martin Boltzius, copied portions of the Creek writing system then included them in personal correspondence to Lord Edgemont in England. Boltizius was the leader of the Saltzburger Colony at New Ebenezer, GA. The next step in the research process will require the laborious study of archives held by the Church of England, British Museum, British Government and the James Oglethorpe Room at the Godalming Museum in Surrey, UK. See http://www.exploringsurreyspast.org.uk/themes/places/surrey/waverley/godalming/godalming_westbrook_manor/.
The results of this research could again turn the world of archaeology upside down. American anthropologists have traditionally refused to label the Southeastern Indians as “civilized” because "they did not have a writing system until the early 1800s, when Sequoyah created the Cherokee Syllabary.” There will not be a whole lot that the anthropologists can say, when an official at Clarence House presents the Creek writing system to the world.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry Xyyboy, I don't need a GED, I have my diploma thanks. No Whites are NOT a subset of Africans and we are NOT Albinos either (Lioness is right I don't believe the OOA THEORY). White people hating Black racist, Black supremacists such as yourself only use that term to demean, degrade, denigrate, & dehumanize Whites due to your intolerable hatred for us. Especially Whitey haters like you who even state that there is no place on earth that White people belong. You, Clyde, Mike, Narmer, Troll Patrol,Tukuler, etc, are all of the same White people hating, Whites have no right to exist, no place on earth they belong, are inferior,aren't human Black racist, Black supremacist ilk.
Posts: 3257 | From: Madisonville, KY USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Black Native Americans were not illiterate. Many of these Blacks continued to use the Vai script to write. The Vai script taken to America by the the Malian explorers led by Abubakari in 1310. They left inscriptions across the United States.
There is constant talk about the Cherokee script.
Although a great deal is made of the invention of the script, in reality it is just a modification of the Vai writing that had been used as a written language in America at least since 1310. You can tell the influence of the Malians on Sequoyah or George Guess. You can look at the African influence on Sequoyah by his head dress which is a Turban.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike, your reply is a blatant non-sequitur. I referenced America's most important and prominent historians of the "black experience" in the U.S. and some of the well-regarded white historians of the same black experience and none of both groups would find any validity in your claims.
Unless you want to call the whole black and white set stupid. Do you think that all those prominent black historians were "stupid". After all, I was just expressing their views vis a vis your very outlandish theories.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
DuBois knew there were Black Europeans and Blacks in America before Europeans.
]
.
. Another great Afro-American historian was Lerone Bennett. In Before the Mayflower, lerone bennett jr describes these first Blacks in America as being kidnapped off the Streets of London and other European cities if I remember correctly.
[/URL]
Portugal and Spain had numerous Blacks rich and poor.
posted
LOL Clyde Mr. White people aren't human, you expect anyone except well your own Whitey hating, Black racist, Black supremacist ilk (Xyyboy, Mike, Narmer, Kdolo, Habsburg,Mena7, Marc, Troll Patrol, etc) to believe what other White people hating, Black racist, Black Supremacists like Dubois, Bennett, Rogers, etc have to say LOL. Only White people hating Black supremacists believe a word you or they say.
Posts: 3257 | From: Madisonville, KY USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Mike your fantasies are just so charmingly amusing. Mike, African America's most prominent scholar is W.E.B. Dubois. Du Bois wrote on the social sciences, history included. Nowhere in his writings does he ever claim that AAs derived from Europe. The same with the AA doyen of history, John Hope Franklin. He has never ever wrote that U.S. blacks derive from any part or section of Europe's population.
The very respected AA historian, the late John Henrik Clarke has never written or found any historical evidence the U.S. blacks--even a minority have any direct connection in Europe. The same with with Chancellor Williams, David Leavering Lewis(biographer of Dubois), Nell Painter, Molefi Asante, and others have never written that U.S. blacks have any connection except by way of white European settler forbears whose genetic imprints may be found among some 10-13% of the U.S. black population.
Even sympathetic white historians such as Eric Foner, David Brion Davis and Eugene Genovese have never wrote that AAs derive from Europe. They have scoured the migration records of European settlement in the U.S. and have never noted anything pointing to blacks entering America from Europe proper.
Mike, all sound theories rest on empirical evidence and your theories--if they are to gain currency in the sense of convincing others--must provide adequate evidence. Otherwise, the consensus would be that your theories are the concoctions of a cranky crackpot. Chew on that Mike, and eat it too.
lamin - is the full magnitude of your stupidity dawning on you yet?
lamin, I'd like you to look at a map of the Hawaii and note where it is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.
Then I would like you to ask yourself this question? If Black people could make to that remote location, then whatever stopped them entering Europe, considering that compared with Hawaii, Europe is basically a walk across the park? Note that the Suez Canal which seemingly separates Africa from Europe is an artificial creation and that it is located entirely in Egyptian territory. Elsewhere crossing over by sea is not such a big deal.
Can you think of a reason why the bold and brave ancestors of this attractive young lady managed to migrate to Hawaii, yet never managed to set foot in Europe?
Queen Liliuokalani
The issue is not whether Black people have ever been settled in Europe, but when the population diminished to the point where the notion of Black people ever having been in Europe is met with disbelief. Perhaps it is time to start doing some serious research.
PS. On a side note the people in charge of the trust she left behind don't resemble her, or have names like her. Not unexpected, just noting it.
Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Now you see my dilemma in determining whether lamin is an Albino fronting Black, in order to disperse false information, or just a really, really stupid African. I use the umbrella term African, because there are a few young Africans like Ra (they say they're Africans) whose thinking is just as laughably stupid. Plus I envision that millions of lamins is why Africa, in general, is so backward.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Habsburg, Looks like you have fallen for the Mike syndrome disease of the mind.
Let me give you a simple lesson on how the world was peopled over the millenia.
I accept the OOA hypothesis which means that humankind began somewhere in East-Southern Africa some 180-200,000 years ago. The climate was tropical/sub-tropical which produced humans who were adaptive to that African ecology and climate. First, there was migration to all parts of Africa then after 120,000 years or so in Africa some of the groups migrated--of course, they did not know where they were going--out of what is now called Africa.
Some groups traveled due East into Asia then some split off and migrated Northwards into the temperate zones. Other groups migrated northwards in places like Spain, Southern France and Italy. Archeological findings in the Grimaldi area in Italy created much discussion because the "Grimaldi negroids" had phenotypical traits that were characterised as "Negroid"--traits that were seen as distinct from the Neanderthals and the Cro-Magnons.
At that time there was no naming of continents and the very extensive land mass stretching from extreme East Asia to the peninsula now called Europe was the land to which larger groups from Asia settled some 40,000-50,000 years ago. For whatever reasons the Grimaldi types became marginalised and the groups that settled East Asia, Central Asia and Europe multiplied and grew in numbers. More groups migrated into Europe from the Levant and other proximate areas.
These settlements began some 40,000 years ago and lasted till some 15-20,000 years ago. DNA analysis traces these population movements in time.
A crucial point to note is that the flora and fauna of nature are never static. There are always adaptive pressures at work--all within a mix of genetic drift, bottle-necking, selective mating, and the adapting of certain traits to the environment.
It is for this reason that East Asians from North East Asia are genotypically and phenotypically distinct from those populations that adapted to the colder and more variable climates of Europe stretching from 0 degrees GMT to some 90 degrees East.
This is how nature operates: adaptations and mutations all subject to the demands of the environment. It is for this reason that the sabre-tooth tiger eventually gave way to the modern tiger of Asia.
Darwin observed the same natural processes in the Galapagos Islands. The finches there all descended originally from a single type but then over time they differentiated into distinct types. Some species had thin beaks while others had heavier and more robust beaks--all for feeding on different kinds of vegetation. And humans have done the same thing with dogs--all descended from the domesticated wolf.
My point is that over 40,000 years environmental pressures transformed the original African migrants into Eurasia and Europe into populations that are phenotypically and genotypically distinct from those who remained in the tropical and subtropical environments of Africa. It is on this basis that the short-statured Twa from the tall Dinka and Masai. Same for the yellow-coloured Khosian and the very dark Dinka.
In Asia one finds the process at work: A South Asian(Indian) is usually easily distinguishable from a South-East Asian(Thailand, Burma, Laos, etc.)
The Paleo-Asians that crossed the Bering Straits to settle all of North America some 10-15,000 years ago are phenotypically distinct from those that might have migrated in boats from South East Asia.
Have Africans traveled great distances while retaining their original traits notwithstanding evident mutational experiences at the haplogroup level? Yes. Examples are the peoples of the Pacific such as Fijians, Solomon Islanders, New Guineans, and some Polynesians. There are also some marginalised groups in Asia such as the Andaman Islanders and the so-called "Negrito" populations of the Philippines and further South such as Java and parts of Indonesia.
Hope the above brief statement answers your questions.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike in his usual myopic and simple-minded fashion fails to see that if we take a time-slice of the last 5,000 years Africa civilisations were the most technically advanced 60% of that time. The Egypto-Nubian complex was at the vanguard of world civilisation from 3,000 BC to the dawn of the AD time span.
And if one take the whole span of human existence which is some 180,000 years, all human civilisation was in Africa until some 50,000 years ago. That's about 70% of the time.
Of course, Africa is now experiencing some serious problems but they will be solved sooner or later with right-thinking minds condemning and seeking to change the ongoing degradation.
It happens too with sports teams, to take a prosaic example. Some teams that are now lowly had their moments of greatness in the past. The successful ones were not always so. That's how time and the material world operates.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Habsburg, Looks like you have fallen for the Mike syndrome disease of the mind.
Let me give you a simple lesson on how the world was peopled over the millenia.
I accept the OOA hypothesis which means that humankind began somewhere in East-Southern Africa some 180-200,000 years ago. The climate was tropical/sub-tropical which produced humans who were adaptive to that African ecology and climate. First, there was migration to all parts of Africa then after 120,000 years or so in Africa some of the groups migrated--of course, they did not know where they were going--out of what is now called Africa. .
The question I asked is when the population of Blacks ie, dark complexioned people, diminished to the extent where any statement that the were blacks living in Europe is met with disbelief.
I am not knowledgeable about genetic related theories, and as such I don't keep notes relating to genetic studies, but an article I read makes it clear that most of the present day European population are descended from Africans who left Africa 6000 years ago.
If genetic tests of African Americans indicate European ancestry it doesn't mean that those Europeans were not black or dark complexioned.
Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Habsburg, Looks like you have fallen for the Mike syndrome disease of the mind.
Let me give you a simple lesson on how the world was peopled over the millenia.
I accept the OOA hypothesis which means that humankind began somewhere in East-Southern Africa some 180-200,000 years ago. The climate was tropical/sub-tropical which produced humans who were adaptive to that African ecology and climate. First, there was migration to all parts of Africa then after 120,000 years or so in Africa some of the groups migrated--of course, they did not know where they were going--out of what is now called Africa.
Some groups traveled due East into Asia then some split off and migrated Northwards into the temperate zones. Other groups migrated northwards in places like Spain, Southern France and Italy. Archeological findings in the Grimaldi area in Italy created much discussion because the "Grimaldi negroids" had phenotypical traits that were characterised as "Negroid"--traits that were seen as distinct from the Neanderthals and the Cro-Magnons.
At that time there was no naming of continents and the very extensive land mass stretching from extreme East Asia to the peninsula now called Europe was the land to which larger groups from Asia settled some 40,000-50,000 years ago. For whatever reasons the Grimaldi types became marginalised and the groups that settled East Asia, Central Asia and Europe multiplied and grew in numbers. More groups migrated into Europe from the Levant and other proximate areas.
These settlements began some 40,000 years ago and lasted till some 15-20,000 years ago. DNA analysis traces these population movements in time.
A crucial point to note is that the flora and fauna of nature are never static. There are always adaptive pressures at work--all within a mix of genetic drift, bottle-necking, selective mating, and the adapting of certain traits to the environment.
It is for this reason that East Asians from North East Asia are genotypically and phenotypically distinct from those populations that adapted to the colder and more variable climates of Europe stretching from 0 degrees GMT to some 90 degrees East.
This is how nature operates: adaptations and mutations all subject to the demands of the environment. It is for this reason that the sabre-tooth tiger eventually gave way to the modern tiger of Asia.
Darwin observed the same natural processes in the Galapagos Islands. The finches there all descended originally from a single type but then over time they differentiated into distinct types. Some species had thin beaks while others had heavier and more robust beaks--all for feeding on different kinds of vegetation. And humans have done the same thing with dogs--all descended from the domesticated wolf.
My point is that over 40,000 years environmental pressures transformed the original African migrants into Eurasia and Europe into populations that are phenotypically and genotypically distinct from those who remained in the tropical and subtropical environments of Africa. It is on this basis that the short-statured Twa from the tall Dinka and Masai. Same for the yellow-coloured Khosian and the very dark Dinka.
In Asia one finds the process at work: A South Asian(Indian) is usually easily distinguishable from a South-East Asian(Thailand, Burma, Laos, etc.)
The Paleo-Asians that crossed the Bering Straits to settle all of North America some 10-15,000 years ago are phenotypically distinct from those that might have migrated in boats from South East Asia.
Have Africans traveled great distances while retaining their original traits notwithstanding evident mutational experiences at the haplogroup level? Yes. Examples are the peoples of the Pacific such as Fijians, Solomon Islanders, New Guineans, and some Polynesians. There are also some marginalised groups in Asia such as the Andaman Islanders and the so-called "Negrito" populations of the Philippines and further South such as Java and parts of Indonesia.
Hope the above brief statement answers your questions.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
It's always painful to watch an idiot attempt to bamboozle with Bullsh1t. Really? Blacks - the strongest, most resilient Humans, just kind of "Faded Away". Now you see my dilemma in determining whether lamin is an Albino fronting Black, in order to disperse false information, or just a really, really stupid African. Who of you can say they know with certainty?
quote:Originally posted by Habsburg: an article I read makes it clear that most of the present day European population are descended from Africans who left Africa 6000 years ago.
Mike and xyyman is this true?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
EVER WONDER WHY THE "BLACKFOOT" were called the Blackfoot?
Blackfoot warrior, (Karl Bodmer, between 1840 and 1843)
.
Clyde what is your best guess as to the ancestry of this straight haired person?
.
Sigh: Surely all of you know that this degenerate Albino bitch knows that Blacks have every kind of hair including straight hair. She is just trolling trying to get a rise. I answer only because some of you may not have seen these pictures.
(Is it just me, or does the look on the eldest daughters face, say that she knows bad things are on the way for them.)
posted
Habsblackracist, That **** is fake, you can see the nap underneath it & it looks like dang straw LOL.
Mike stop the crap Whitey hater boy, those people are NOT Black. Dark skinned as most Amerindians are but NOT Black.
Posts: 3257 | From: Madisonville, KY USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Habsburg: Lioness perhaps you could advise this deluded Sudanese girl who considers herself black that she is not.
Are you suggesting this is an African migrant to the Americas like the Olmecs or a Native American?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
P.S. the last of the Moors were driven out of Spain in 1492.
^Mike this statement is wrong, please correct it
On 2 January, 1492, Granada was surrendered.
Sigh - dealing with the ignorant is Sooo taxing!
You must mean dealing with your own self. You were ignorant to the fact that that the Moors were NOT driven out of Spain in 1492, they only lost power at that time
I am due an apology, that is if you are man enough to admit a mistake
The Expulsion of The Moors 1609-1614
This is why I'm needed here, to check these lies
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
A Moorish military musician in Berlin by Peter Schenk (c. 1690)
Around the time of Moorish occupation if Spain Europeans referred to any Muslim living in Africa as a Moor
After the Moors were driven from Spain Europeans often called any African a "Moor" regardless of the fact that they might not have been North African
The "Moors" never called themselves Moors It was a European imposed term that came to be used loosely and change meaning in different times and places, other varients terms "Blackamoor" and "Tawny Moor" were also used
The fair skinned Germans had a fetish for "exotic" black Africans i.e. "Moors" and used generic "Moors: as mascot emblems in their heraldry and later blackamoor baubles
1. Gröbenufer A slave trader’s street Start out on the Kreuzberg side of the Oberbaum Bridge. Opposite from Watergate, you’ll find a small street that runs along the Spree. This street was once named after Otto Friedrich von der Gröben. While other Prussians were focused on the army, this 25-year-old aristocrat braved the oceans to reach the Gold Coast (in current-day Ghana) and establish the fort Groß-Friedrichsburg. On January 1, 1683, the screaming red eagle of Brandenburg was raised over African soil. The Prussians used the fort primarily for slave trading, kidnapping over 20,000 Africans and sending them across the Atlantic. After 35 years, however, Prussia’s soldier king lost interest in colonies and sold the fort to the Dutch West India Company. Gröben might have remained a footnote in German history had his name not been dredged up during the fevered colonial excitement of 1895 when the government honoured him as the founder of Germany’s colonial empire. 2. Mohrenstraße “’Moor’ isn’t an offensive word!” Long before Hollywood actresses started adopting African babies, 18th-century European royals were enthralled with “court moors”: Africans forced to work as servants. When the Dutch bought Groß-Friedrichsburg, their payment included 12 Gold Coast natives, whom old King Fritz put to work as army musicians. Their barracks in the centre of Berlin inspired the name “Moor Street”. Many years later, German-African activists are still campaigning to change the outdated racial slur to something less offensive (“Nelson Mandela Street” was one suggestion). Longtime Berliner Yonas Endrias, originally from Eritrea, has spent the past seven years campaigning with the group Berlin Postkolonial, listening as local (white) politicians explain that “moor” is not really a deprecatory word. In February 2009, an unknown individual in a pink bunny suit added two dots to the street signs, thus transforming Racial Epithet Street (Mohrenstraße) into Carrot Street (Möhrenstraße). Clever, right?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
lamin you are wrong. For thousands of years African/Black sailors were the dominant people on the planet earth.
Researchers have found evidence that Solutrean artifacts have been found on North American sites where Paleo-Native Americans have been found. This has led some researchers to create the so-called Solutrean hypothesis that proposes that ancient America was settled by ancient Europeans.
The proposed Solutrean migration route seems highly unlikely because these early men would have had to brave glaziers and Ice Age tempertures which would have made it impossible to reach North America.
Although a migration from Europe seems highly unlikely 20-30kya because of the Ice Age. Ancient man could have made their way to the Americas directly from Africa which is a shorter distance to the Americas than Europe, and also ancient sailors could have made their way to the Americas on Currents, especially the Gulf Stream, that regularly flow from Africa, to the Americas.
The first Americans Naia, and Luzia dating to 12,000 BC were Negroes
NAIA of Mexico
LUZIA of Brazil
Archaeologist have reconstructed the faces of ancient Americans from Brazil and Mexico. These faces are based on the skeletal remains dating back to 12,000BC.
Researchers agree that the first Americans, Naia of Mexico, Luzia of Brazil and Kennewick Man, found near the Columbia River in Washington, were all Negroes. This finding is not so significant because the first Europeans were also Blacks.
It appears that the first Europeans entered Western Europe across the Straits of Gibraltar. These people were Khoisan. The Khoisan took their art and culture to Europe 40kya. Here they contructed the Aurignacian, Grimaldi and Solutrean cultures. Since the first Europeans had come from North Africa, we also find a Solutrean culture in Africa.
Africa is closer to the Americas than Europe. As you can notice from the map above the Currents could have easily carried the Khoisan from Africa to the Americas. This view is supported by the face that most ancient archaeological sites of paleo-Indian habitation are nearer to the Atlantic Ocean, than the Pacific.
In addition in Africa we find the Dafuna boat. The Dafuna boat has been dated to 8000 B.C., the culture associated with the people who built the Dafuna boat date back to 12,000 BC. This would indicate that around the time Kennewick man, Naia and Luzia inhabited the Americas, Khoisan in Africa had the naval technology to have sailed to the Americas.
In summary , the Solutrean artifacts in the Americas probably relate to Khoisan from Africa sailing to America. The fact that these ancient people in Europe, Africa and the Americas indicate that for a considerable period of time the world was dominated by Black or Negro people.
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am not knowledgeable about genetic related theories, and as such I don't keep notes relating to genetic studies, but an article I read makes it clear that most of the present day European population are descended from Africans who left Africa 6000 years ago.
1) What is the reference of this article?
2) 6000 years ago would be 4000BC. At that time the Egypto-Nubian complex would have started already and Eurasia would have already been settled.
3) Archaeological and DNA evidence show that the latest pre-written history migration into Europe was some 15-20,000 years ago. That migration came from the region of Asia Minor and the Levant. See "The Daughters of Eve"(Bryan Sykes).
4) The settlement of Eurasia dates from 50,000 BC to 40,000 BC. The Neanderthals were being reduced in numbers around 28,000 BC for whatever reasons but during their time with interactions with Homo Sapiens some of their DNA got passed on to modern Europeans. This is assumed to explain the 4% Neanderthal DNA that some Europeans are assumed to carry.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde, When you do research in the natural and social sciences one is free to develop whatever theories one thinks fit. But the ultimate test is the robustness and evidence of the theories. Hypotheses remain just hypotheses unless they can be show to be empirically valid.
You see to go on the assumption that nature is static and that floral and faunal biological nature--of which humans are a part--are not subject to the principles of biological evolution. Genotypical and phenotypical mutations are what explain the rich variety found in any number of species.
I have seen Asian Indians, Chinese, Europeans, West Asian Arabs in Africa and have carefully noted their phenotypes. They look that way because the original African type had to adapt to new environments plus factors such as genetic drift, assorted mating, expressing their influence. Asian Indians no matter how dark--I have seen some in Africa--are never mistaken for Africans--even in North Africa. The same for East Asians and Lebanese--who may be migrants to North Africa over the last centuries but are distinct in phenotype from indigenous North Africans.
I have also seen Native Americans up close in visits to the U.S. and they do seem to have affinity with East Asians especially by the hair and other features. Except in cases of admixtures they are easily distinguishable from the generic black and white person. This is empirical observation, Clyde.
It is a fact that skulls and crania distinct from the the larger populations have been found in the Americas--Luzia and Kennewick man, for example--the general and larger indigenous populations are claimed to be phnotypically distinct, hence the very noted interest in the origins of these 2 crania.
It is claimed that mutations take place every 10,000 years but they are manifest only at the DNA level. The importance of DNA analysis is that it shows up things like "most recent common ancestor" and the separation time between peoples. But it is the environment and climate that determine the phenotype of populations. Thus while Fijians, New Guineans(hence the name imposed on them by Europeans when they first saw them), Andaman Islanders, etc. strongly resemble Africans, their separation time from Africa may be longer than for peoples who who do not share the African phenotype--North East Asians, Europeans, etc.
Clyde, the point is that humans began as Africans but have changed over the millenia due to the genetic and environmental reasons given above. The time it too to effect such changes are some 40 tom 50,000 years ago--especially when climatic change is factored in.
Humans have proven that point when they artificially bred to wolf to produce totally un-wolf like looking dogs like the Chow and the Poodle.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am not knowledgeable about genetic related theories, and as such I don't keep notes relating to genetic studies, but an article I read makes it clear that most of the present day European population are descended from Africans who left Africa 6000 years ago.
1) What is the reference of this article?
2) 6000 years ago would be 4000BC. At that time the Egypto-Nubian complex would have started already and Eurasia would have already been settled.
3) Archaeological and DNA evidence show that the latest pre-written history migration into Europe was some 15-20,000 years ago. That migration came from the region of Asia Minor and the Levant. See "The Daughters of Eve"(Bryan Sykes).
4) The settlement of Eurasia dates from 50,000 BC to 40,000 BC. The Neanderthals were being reduced in numbers around 28,000 BC for whatever reasons but during their time with interactions with Homo Sapiens some of their DNA got passed on to modern Europeans. This is assumed to explain the 4% Neanderthal DNA that some Europeans are assumed to carry.
What an Ass, been here since 2004 and is still quoting "The Daughters of Eve" (Bryan Sykes). The Seven Daughters of Eve is a 2001 book by Bryan Sykes that presents the theory of human mitochondrial genetics.
The seven "clan mothers" mentioned by Sykes each correspond to one (or more) human mitochondrial haplogroups.
Ursula: corresponds to Haplogroup U (specifically U5, and excluding its subgroup K) Xenia: corresponds to Haplogroup X Helena: corresponds to Haplogroup H Velda: corresponds to Haplogroup V Tara: corresponds to Haplogroup T Katrine: corresponds to Haplogroup K Jasmine: corresponds to Haplogroup J
Not to mention to the fool that Blacks also carry Neanderthal DNA from wherever Neanderthals existed. He is such a total idiot that he forgets that the statement is that "All non-Africans" have Neanderthal DNA. The Ass forgets Levant Blacks, Asian Blacks, European Blacks, Pacifican Blacks, and American Blacks.
Now some of you might say: well only an Albino would push nonsense like that - which SHOULD be true. But damn if there aren't Africans stupid enough to believe it, and push it also.
posted
^I am often taken to task for my denigration of Africans. And every time that I start thinking that they may be right - that I am too hard on Africans - they do something else that is totally STUPID!
From my former Hero:
Mugabe Dismisses Male-Female Equality
Anita Powell
January 30, 2015 5:49 AM JOHANNESBURG—
"It’s not possible that women can be at par with men," said the incoming chairman of the African Union, Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe. He made the controversial comment in Addis Ababa on the eve the African Union summit, which begins Friday. Many are debating what the 90-year-old leader meant to convey by this statement.
Mugabe's remarks on women not being on par with men, fittingly, come as African Union leaders tackle this year’s summit topic: women’s empowerment.
quote:I am not knowledgeable about genetic related theories, and as such I don't keep notes relating to genetic studies, but an article I read makes it clear that most of the present day European population are descended from Africans who left Africa 6000 years ago.
1) What is the reference of this article?
2) 6000 years ago would be 4000BC. At that time the Egypto-Nubian complex would have started already and Eurasia would have already been settled.
3) Archaeological and DNA evidence show that the latest pre-written history migration into Europe was some 15-20,000 years ago. That migration came from the region of Asia Minor and the Levant. See "The Daughters of Eve"(Bryan Sykes).
4) The settlement of Eurasia dates from 50,000 BC to 40,000 BC. The Neanderthals were being reduced in numbers around 28,000 BC for whatever reasons but during their time with interactions with Homo Sapiens some of their DNA got passed on to modern Europeans. This is assumed to explain the 4% Neanderthal DNA that some Europeans are assumed to carry.
Western European culture entered the area across the Straits of Gibraltar, not the Levant. First they talk about the possibility of carriers of L3(M,N) migrating back into Africa around 40kya via the Levant. This dating has to be wrong because 40kya the Levant was still occupied by Neanderthal.
The next great speculation is that the Aurignacian culture originated in Central Asia and expanded from their into the Levant. The present archaeological dates for the Aurignacian culture find the earliest dates for this culture in Iberia, and the latest dates in the Levant and Eastern Europe.
The first Aurignacians in the Levant date back to 36-34kya from Ksar Akil
The oldest Aurignacian remains come from Iberia/Spain. These sites vary in age from 41kya for the l'Arbreda Cave, and 43kya for Abric Romani, located in Catalonia, Spain.
The dates for the Aurignacian in Europe make it clear this culture spread from west to east. You can also recognize that Aurignacian appears not to have reached the Levant, until 11ky after it was established in Spain.
These dates for sites where amh were found in Western Europe make it impossible for claims of U6, M1 and etc., originating prior to 32kya in the Levant and entering Africa via a back migration 40kya.
Boule and Vallois (1957), was able to chart the migration of civilization from South Africa to the Aurignacian culture of Europe. The earliest Aurignacian sites date back to 44kya. These anthropologist reported that the Khoisan shared the same style stone implements and burials “associated with the Aurignacian or Solutrean type industry...” (Boule & Vallois, 1957: pp. 318-319). They add, that in relation to Bushman [Khoisan] art “This almost uninterrupted series leads us to regard the African continent as a centre of important migrations which at certain times may have played a great part in the stocking of Southern Europe. Finally, we must not forget that the Grimaldi Negroid skeletons show many points of resemblance with the Bushman [Khoisan] skeletons” (Boule & Vallois, 1957).
See: the following: The first Europeans were dark skinned. See: file:///C:/Users/cwinters1/Downloads/AA_2014081417215651.pdf
quote: [T]he ‘Classic Aurignacian’ culture probably began in Africa, crossed the Straits of Gibraltar into Iberia, and expanded eastward across Europe. The archaeological record informs us that CroMagnon people carried hg N and replaced the Neanderthal population of the Levant, at Ksar Akil around 32, 000 years ago, not the Natufians who entered the Levant almost 20,000 years later. Moreover, by 7000 BC the dominant haplogroup of Western Eurasians remained hg N1.
The appearance of phylogenetically related sequences of hg L3 present in many ancient Iberian skeletons suggest that this haplogroup may have a long history in Iberia. The fact that hg N came to Iberia with the Cro-Magnon people in Aurignacian times suggest that carries of L3 may have also been part of this population movement.
The mtDNA, skeletal and archaeological record generally, support a third migration event out of Africa before the expansion of the Natufians into the Levant 10,000-20,000 ybp. This third out of Africa event took place between 40-35kya, when modern man crossed from Africa into Iberia carrying haplogroups N and L3, and began to replace Neanderthal as the dominant population in western Eurasia
posted
The reality of competent female leaders is very ancient. Was Kug-Bau the first ruling Queen?
The Sumerian King List
In Kic, Kug-Bau, the woman tavern-keeper, who made firm the foundations of Kic, became king; she ruled for 100 years. 1 king; she ruled for 100 years. Then Kic was defeated (ms. TL has instead: destroyed) and the kingship was taken to Akcak.
quote:Originally posted by lamin: Clyde, When you do research in the natural and social sciences one is free to develop whatever theories one thinks fit. But the ultimate test is the robustness and evidence of the theories. Hypotheses remain just hypotheses unless they can be show to be empirically valid.
You see to go on the assumption that nature is static and that floral and faunal biological nature--of which humans are a part--are not subject to the principles of biological evolution. Genotypical and phenotypical mutations are what explain the rich variety found in any number of species.
I have seen Asian Indians, Chinese, Europeans, West Asian Arabs in Africa and have carefully noted their phenotypes. They look that way because the original African type had to adapt to new environments plus factors such as genetic drift, assorted mating, expressing their influence. Asian Indians no matter how dark--I have seen some in Africa--are never mistaken for Africans--even in North Africa. The same for East Asians and Lebanese--who may be migrants to North Africa over the last centuries but are distinct in phenotype from indigenous North Africans.
I have also seen Native Americans up close in visits to the U.S. and they do seem to have affinity with East Asians especially by the hair and other features. Except in cases of admixtures they are easily distinguishable from the generic black and white person. This is empirical observation, Clyde.
It is a fact that skulls and crania distinct from the the larger populations have been found in the Americas--Luzia and Kennewick man, for example--the general and larger indigenous populations are claimed to be phnotypically distinct, hence the very noted interest in the origins of these 2 crania.
It is claimed that mutations take place every 10,000 years but they are manifest only at the DNA level. The importance of DNA analysis is that it shows up things like "most recent common ancestor" and the separation time between peoples. But it is the environment and climate that determine the phenotype of populations. Thus while Fijians, New Guineans(hence the name imposed on them by Europeans when they first saw them), Andaman Islanders, etc. strongly resemble Africans, their separation time from Africa may be longer than for peoples who who do not share the African phenotype--North East Asians, Europeans, etc.
Clyde, the point is that humans began as Africans but have changed over the millenia due to the genetic and environmental reasons given above. The time it too to effect such changes are some 40 tom 50,000 years ago--especially when climatic change is factored in.
Humans have proven that point when they artificially bred to wolf to produce totally un-wolf like looking dogs like the Chow and the Poodle.
lamin: humans have not changed that much. The division today between Blacks in Asia and Africans is an artificial division made be Europeans to confuse and mislead. Granted the Andamanese are ancient migrants to Asia--but the Melanesians only recently came on the scene. In fact the languages they speak and placenames are identical to contemporary placenames in West Africa. See article below:
quote:I am not knowledgeable about genetic related theories, and as such I don't keep notes relating to genetic studies, but an article I read makes it clear that most of the present day European population are descended from Africans who left Africa 6000 years ago.
1) What is the reference of this article?
2) 6000 years ago would be 4000BC. At that time the Egypto-Nubian complex would have started already and Eurasia would have already been settled.
3) Archaeological and DNA evidence show that the latest pre-written history migration into Europe was some 15-20,000 years ago. That migration came from the region of Asia Minor and the Levant. See "The Daughters of Eve"(Bryan Sykes).
4) The settlement of Eurasia dates from 50,000 BC to 40,000 BC. The Neanderthals were being reduced in numbers around 28,000 BC for whatever reasons but during their time with interactions with Homo Sapiens some of their DNA got passed on to modern Europeans. This is assumed to explain the 4% Neanderthal DNA that some Europeans are assumed to carry.
Mike referenced something similar in a previous reply. I don't know if it is the same one I read, but it mentions something similar.
quote:What an Ass, been here since 2004 and is still quoting "The Daughters of Eve" (Bryan Sykes). The Seven Daughters of Eve is a 2001 book by Bryan Sykes that presents the theory of human mitochondrial genetics.
LOL, all Mike can do when his dumb and asinine BS theories get holes punched in them is to resort to childish tantrums. Mike you are not only dumb, you are also deluded and very frustrated because no sensible people take your stupid theories seriously.
Mike, if you believe that Sykes's work is problematic then show some contrary evidence. Shouting and screaming will only elicit laughter and scorn. I mentioned Sykes because Habsburg claimed not to be familiar with genetic theories. Sykes's "The Seven Daughters of Eve" breaks things down for those who are not familiar with modern genetic theory.
Frankly, I am puzzled as to how Mugabe fits into the discussion. Another proof of your crazy mind Mike.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"It’s not possible that women can be at par with men" - Mugabe
"Yes of course, women have built-in impediments to parity...." - Mike
Mike,
you are in essential agreement with Mugabe.
what he likely means is that he is not in agreement with Western style feminism which is being used as a tool for destabilization both domestically and abroad......
Posts: 2818 | From: new york | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
Sorry folks, if you give idiot trolls respect, they see it as a reason to do more of same.
As you can all see, Trolls don't read your proofs. They couldn't care less about your proofs, or the truth. Their job is to stop the truth from seeing the light of day. So whatever proof you offer will be ignored, hell, you could get Jesus to say it's so, and the trolls would still ignore it, and just go right to the next question or denial.
I am not kidding when I call them degenerates, they are amoral and dangerous to truth and learning what is truth. Though insults don't stop them, they do cause the innocent to pause and wonder what is going on. From there, they have to figure it out for themselves.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Sorry folks, if you give idiot trolls respect, they see it as a reason to do more of same.
.
. The article at the above links says
quote:
DNA recovered from ancient skeletons reveals that the genetic makeup of modern Europe was established around 4,500 B.C. in the mid-Neolithic—or 6,500 years ago—and not by the first farmers who arrived in the area around 7,500 years ago or by earlier hunter-gatherer groups...
Archeologists call these first Central European farmers the linear pottery culture (LBK)
The details of this "genetic turnover" event are murky. Scientists don't know what prompted it, or even where the new colonizers came from. "The extent or nature of this genetic turnover are not clear, and we don't know how widespread it is," Cooper said. If this turnover were widespread, it could have been prompted by climate change or disease, he said. "All we know is that the descendants of the LBK farmers disappeared from Central Europe about 4,500 [B.C.], clearing the way for the rise of populations from elsewhere, with their own unique H signatures."
Peter Bogucki, an archeologist at Princeton University who has studied early farming societies in Europe, called the finding "really interesting" and noted the timing of the genetic turnover is curious. "At the end of the fifth millennium—[about] 4,000 B.C.—there are a lot of changes in the archeological record,"
Another quote
quote: About 7,500 years ago during the early Neolithic period, another wave of humans expanded into Europe, this time from the Middle East. They carried in their genes a variant of the H haplogroup, and in their minds knowledge of how to grow and raise crops.
Now if we go prior to this it's a long prehistoric period
the article:
quote: The first modern humans to reach Europe arrived from Africa 35,000 to 40,000 years ago. By about 30,000 years ago, they were widespread throughout the area while their close cousins, the Neanderthals, disappeared. Hardly any of these early hunter-gatherers carried the H haplogroup in their DNA.
In other words
----the period at which Europe was inhabited by Africans 40,000 years ago - 7,500 years ago they were hunter gathers
---7,500 years ago - 6,500 years ago,the the African hunter gatherers were replaced by farmers from the Middle East whose DNA was Haplogroup H
---6,500 years ago, to the present (aka 4,500 B.C. - present) the Middle East farmers were replaced by people whowere also of Haplogroup H DNA but different sub-clades of of it. These people adopted farming from the farmers but also went on to develop cities, cathedrals, the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution and the present electronic age of today
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you a white male? "Lioness" the modern European MALE line were NOT, NOT, NOT farmers! Can you stop it. They are Medieval Age immigrants. Not even Richard 111 (15century CE), a Royal, was R1b-M269. But yes, they are in position of power now in the electronic age.
Please stop the BS.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [Q] [QUOTE]---6,500 years ago, to the present (aka 4,500 B.C. - present) the Middle East farmers were replaced by people whowere also of Haplogroup H DNA but different sub-clades of of it. These people adopted farming from the farmers but also went on to develop cities, cathedrals, the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution and the present electronic age of today [/QB]
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just to be clear none of the Neolithic Farmers carried R-M269 none. Meaning mtDNA H is NOT NOT the immigrant mate to the modern European male. mtDNA H entered Europe with yDNA G and E1b1b, J.
R-M269 replaced the farming males during Iron/Medieval age.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Don't think so. More likely from the Latin "Mauri" which referred to the indigenous people of most Western part of the Roman Empire in North Africa.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
[/URL] 
Printer-friendly view of this topic