posted
It is not even worth arguing this anymore. ……. Continue picture spamming Albino Dravidians. This is science
Modern Europeans are a sub-set of modern Africans. incredulously as it may seem. Modern Europeans are a subset of Africans, Australians and other Asians are a sub-set of older Africans.
As shown by the recent paper on Bantus. It seems like the Luyha played a key role in the dispersal of all Eurasians. Yes, Swenet…my Luhya. Keep in mind the Luyha is the “closest” and not the best represented population in the HAPMAP database. The best representation may not been indentified as yet.
Pay up!!!!
Quote: Early modern human dispersal from Africa: genomic evidence for multiple waves of migration – 2015 Francesca Tassi and Guido Barbujani
Background: Anthropological and genetic data agree in indicating the African continent as the main place of origin for anatomically modern humans. However, it is unclear whether early modern humans left Africa through a single, major process, dispersing simultaneously over Asia and Europe, or in two main waves, first through the Arab Peninsula into southern Asia and Oceania, and later through a northern route crossing the Levant.
Results: Here, we show that accurate genomic estimates of the divergence times between European and African populations are more recent than those between Australo-Melanesia and Africa and incompatible with the effects of a single dispersal. This difference cannot possibly be accounted for by the effects of either hybridization with archaic human forms in Australo-Melanesia or back migration from Europe into Africa. Furthermore, in several populations of Asia we found evidence for relatively recent genetic admixture events, which could have obscured the signatures of the earliest processes.
------
My boy Guido is rolling the dice. See thread on him on ESR
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
From that recent Busby/Santos paper on Bantus. The Luyha has almost equal proportion of AIM/clusters of East Bantus, West Bantu, Pygmy , Nilo-Saharan, “Eurasian” genetic material. There are two explanation for this. Either the Luyha is a melting pot of all population within and outside Africa. You know, Europeans, Asians, Bantus and Pygmies had a “lovefest” in the Great Lakes Region, creating the Luyha population or humanity dispersed from that region each separating/purifying into their unique population inside and outside Africa. You know what I think…and Rosenberg.
This is a no brainer.
Keep on believing in ……the other nonsense.
-------------------- 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 |
Remarkably, some populations show more than 99 % contribution from the SAME ANCESTRAL POPULATION along different k values (e.g., West Africa, Europe,….
-------------------- 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 |
Yes Europeans are a subset of Africans, but Europeans are also mixed with waves of people who came from the East.
Those people from the East would have been the Albino type....although as you have demonstrated, Euros were already depigmenting on the way to Europe.
Posts: 2818 | From: new york | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dr Winters may find this quote interesting. There is growing evidence that there seems that there may be a strong population link between African and peoples across the Indian Ocean NOT involving the Arabians Peninsular and the proposed Southern Route. It is if a land mass/masses existed IN the Indian Ocean connecting South Asia Islands. Remember that one paper suggested the mtDNA M in south Asian Islands are MORE related to African M than Indian M. many TreeMix studies have shown Cambodians carry distinct African component. I see us rethink what we were thought in the last 40years. It was all BS by neurotic Europeans..
Quote:
set of divergence times from East Africa, from 66K to 107K years ago (Table 1). This result is CONSISTENT with both a CONTINUOUS MIGRATION process FROM Africa ACROSS some 40K years (WHICH SO FAR HAS NEVER BEEN PROPOSED, to the best of our knowledge) and an early exit, followed by genetic exchanges with later-dispersing groups, which has diluted or erased altogether the genetic evidence of the earliest migration.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
We all know it is Albinism but we don’t need to rub their faces in it. Sic That is the hand they were dealt. But they are not Asians but Asian Dravidian Albinos sounds funny.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Continuing …even the progressive Europeans are hiding stuff.
So Europeans had a longer co-existence with Neanderthal but they carry less “ancestry” lol! I never thought of that. Good going Guido! Now they are desperate to “explain” Neanderthal ancestry in Africans.
--------------------- Quote:
Removal of the SNPs identified as a potential Denisovan contribution to the modern genomes caused no substantial change in the results, and the analysis of f3 statistics did not show any detectable impact of back migration to Africa upon the SET OF MARKERS WE CONSIDERED. To exclude the possibility that a higher level of African ancestry in the European samples we considered (perhaps due to back migration into Africa from Southern Europe) is responsible for the observed pattern, we ran additional comparisons of divergence time distributions between sub-Saharan Africans and Europeans with different geographic origins. To do this, we analyzed Basque and English populations from the POPRES dataset [70] and the Finns from the 1000 Genomes Project [71]. The divergence times estimated for these populations are very close to those previously estimated for Europeans (DATA NOT SHOWN); therefore, it does not seem that the presumably higher level of African admixture in southern than Northern Europeans may possibly account for our results. These findings show that our estimates reflect to a minimal extent, if any, the effects of potentially confounding factors related with interbreeding with Denisovans [60] or gene flow with other modern humans, after the African expansions
Quite to the contrary, here, the Europeans appeared significantly closer to Africans than Australo-Melanesians, a result which therefore cannot be due to that kind of ascertainment bias. Moreover, our FST estimates are comparable with those obtained by the last survey of the 1000 Genomes Project; when rare variants are excluded (MAF > 0.05).
The estimated contribution of Neandertals is less in the European than in the Asian/Melanesian genomes, despite the long coexistence between Neandertals and Europeans [82]. At present, the standard way to explain this finding is to assume one single, major episode of hybridization in Palestine (or perhaps further north and east [83]) 47K to 6
Thus, this study raises the possibility that the current patterns of human diversity need more complex models to be fully explained. One possibility is that admixture with Neandertals might have occurred BEFORE AMH left Africa [86]. Another is that common ancestry, rather than hybridization, may account for the excess similarity of Eurasians with Neandertals, in the presence of an ancient structuring of populations [74, 87]. A third possibility is that the apparent traces of Neandertal hybridization in Papua New Guinea may in fact be due to Denisovan admixture. We are not in a position to actually test for these possibilities, but exploring these hypotheses may contribute to a better understanding of the main human dispersal processes and of the relationships between archaic and modern human forms..
----------
But within their lies the truth comes out.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
For the record. European women carry the lineage hg-H and many other African lineage. The lineage entered Europe from Africa in the early Neolithic. Dravidian do NOT carry the lineage. European women are a subset of Africans.
The Euronuts have given up on the females. They lost that battle. Now they are trying to put their male line(R1b) originating in the Asian Steppes. That is their new ploy. They have thrown their women to the Africans. The women are on their own. Lol! The men are from the Steppes….not!. Sorry. As Busby has shown R1b found in Eastern Eurasian is NOT related to Western European males. In other words he concluded based upon data that there is no longitudinal cline. He stated there is no latitudinal cline but never showed the data. You do know why? He is lying. Any place else BUT Africa, lol! They are in for a shocking eye opener. More to come. This is a done deal.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: For the record. European women carry the lineage hg-H and many other African lineage. The lineage entered Europe from Africa in the early Neolithic. Dravidian do NOT carry the lineage. European women are a subset of Africans.
The Euronuts have given up on the females. They lost that battle. Now they are trying to put their male line(R1b) originating in the Asian Steppes. That is their new ploy. They have thrown their women to the Africans. The women are on their own. Lol! The men are from the Steppes….not!. Sorry. As Busby has shown R1b found in Eastern Eurasian is NOT related to Western European males. In other words he concluded based upon data that there is no longitudinal cline. He stated there is no latitudinal cline but never showed the data. You do know why? He is lying. Any place else BUT Africa, lol! They are in for a shocking eye opener. More to come. This is a done deal.
xyman, my theory has to be right then. The only explanation for R1b in Western Europe and for the African linage of many White Europeans has to be this:
Europe was first settled by blacks, the blacks had their own albino versions of themselves and their own albino colonies just like in Africa or India.
Europe was the perfect climate for albino's to breed in masse and not suffer from the climate. So there were large populations of them.
The european Africans oppressed and brutalized the European black albino's, and they were forced to go live in caves.
The steppe Dravidian albino's came in, overwhelmed Europe's black population, and launched several wars to get rid of Europe's black populations.
The Steppe Eurasian albino's bred with the native Black European albino's resulting in modern White europeans today with all their African DNA, but yet they still look lily white.
They did not mix with the native Black Europeans of Europe. Hence the whiteness of many R1b carriers and many whites with African DNA.
What do you think?
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a follow up. Aside from Busby’s argument about no longitudinal cline for R1b. Why I am so convinced. It is simple. R1b has high frequency in Western Europe, the paragroup or sibling, R1a, has high frequency in Eastern Europe. Obviously the geographical central point(parental haplogroup) is either in Central Europe or….South, maybe Sahara Africa. Since nothing came from the North. Recent evidence has shown that the sibling to macro-haplogroup R, is found in Italy, and even more recently …..the Berbers of Africa carry yDNA haplogroup Q!!!!!! I almost fell out my chair when I saw that study. Anyone with any knowledge of the male haploTree will understand the huge significance of Q being discovered in Africans.
This is a done deal. They can spin it every which way….Europeans are primarily depigmented Africans. Astonishingly the OOA populations that “look” more Africans(Melenesians etc) are furthest genetically from Africans. Who would of thought!
-------------------- 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 |
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
X: " The Luyha has almost equal proportion of AIM/clusters of East Bantus, West Bantu, Pygmy , Nilo-Saharan, “Eurasian” genetic material. There are two explanation for this. Either the Luyha is a melting pot of all population within and outside Africa. You know, Europeans, Asians, Bantus and Pygmies had a “lovefest” in the Great Lakes Region, creating the Luyha population or humanity dispersed from that region each separating/purifying into their unique population inside and outside Africa."
Just by analyzing the word Luhya, I see it as East African Rift & Nile Valleys, Nubia-Luba-Lupa, Llubjana (Slovenia), Danube R., Biblical EdEn (4 rivers), also links to Arabic (bean and heart) and Lebanon (Libani valley), and to the English word alluvial.
---
X: " Astonishingly the OOA populations that “look” more Africans(Melenesians etc) are furthest genetically from Africans. Who would of thought!"
I did. I've been trying to tell others. Pygmies were the founding populations. Those that went to (cold/dry/windy) areas disparate from the tropical rainforest changed the most morphologically, but the least genetically.
X is right here, but wrong on the Bantu Expansion, since their own oral histories say that Pygmies resided around Lake Malawi before Bantus came.
Posts: 2021 | From: Miami | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Mike. Can you take care of this……?
Xyman, why is my theory so hard to accept?
I'm using climatology, fossil evidence, genetics, recorded history, and clues to come to my theory. Many will not agree with me that's fine, but at least argue and analyze this theory because I've thought a lot about it.
I would appreciate you guys feedback....
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: xyyman - We are all really happy that you have mastered this, but it is obvious that the rest of us are just too slow to understand it.
So it's probably best if you hold court on ESR where you have the time to bring people up to date.
As an example of how backward I am, I'm reading this Genetic Distance Map from The History and Geography of Human Genes by Cavalli-Sforza.
And I'm thinking that it shows that the nearest people to Europeans are Iranians and the Indians and Dravidians of India, with no Africans even close.
Silly me, I'm thinking that's just further proof that Europeans are Dravidian Albinos.
Clearly you need to go back to ESR and find a way to straighten me out - thanks.
Btw - take DD'eDeN with you, I'm sure he'll be a big help.
Mike I see you're being sarcastic here but we get the drift.
xyyman has saying that Europeans are depigmented Africans for a long time now and he even has said that they came from Africa udner 5,000 years ago.
But you say he's wrong and use the above chart showing how the Europeans are not at a close distance to the Africans, they are relatively far away.
O.k. fine
The Berber position is also interesting. xyyman says those are Africans and we can see they are quite a bit closer to the Europeans but still not all that close.
If you look at the Europeans they are in close proximity to the Iranians as you said and somewhat close to the Near Easterners
So why is it that you don't have a theory that Europeans are say "albinos Near Easterners" The Near East is much closer to Europe than India and there are many phenotypes there, surely there must be a dark skinned ancient narrow featured Near Easters and Euroepans coul be the "albinos" of them
Also notable that the Europeans are pretty far away form the Turkic peoples, Mike what about that? That's Central Asia, what gives? Or why don't you say the modern Greeks are the albinos of the old Greeks and the albino Greeks moved into the rest of Europe? Or why don't you say Europeans are albino Iranians? See, maybe Mindovermatter does have a point. You just pick a group of particular albinos because there happens to be nice photos available of them. Yet there is no historical record of a mass of Indian people moving into Europe ( with the exception of Gypsies perhaps, a minority population)
O.k. well what about the Indians/Dravidian position on the chart ??
Yes they are somewhat close to the European/Iranian cluster
But the problem is that they are not close enough to say the Europeans are them. So your theory is not that tight. They are about the same distance away from the Europeans as are the Near Easterners so it's a no brainer if you are to apply this albino theory that the Near Easterners are closer to Europe and are better candidates than some Dravidians doubling back. And the ancient Near East had plenty of phenotypes to choose from.
Anyway another interesting thing is the proximity on this chart of Africans to North and South American Indians.
You are using this chart to show how far apart Europeans are from Africans and the North and South Americans are similalry distant from Africans.
So maybe why you are not ackowledging Mindovermatters theory is that it is a problem for you
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike there is no need to be hostile, we are trying to get to the truth after all, so we must all collaborate anyway.
Remember, IRAN was invaded by the ARABS, and the Arabs ruled parts of Iran for quite some time, as did also the original blacks of the area.
There is a high probability that the Arabs carried haplo R1b into Iran increasing their genetic proximity to Europe as a result.
Now if you take into account my theory, about White Europeans being the combination albino's of Black European albino's and Indian Dravidian albino's from Central Asia, then it makes sense why Europeans are neither that close to Indians or Iranians but still close enough.
The point being is that Europeans are a hybrid albino population of the albino population of African albino's in Europe AND the Dravidian albino's who came from India. Thus you have a half-way mixture between R1b and R1a, hence WHY EUROPEANS ARE IN-BETWEEN IRANIANS AND INDIANS!
If you look at the genetic chart, ALL WHITE EUROPEANS ARE THE RESULT OF THE MELDING OF HAPLOGROUPS R1a AND R1b! THIS IS A FACT IF YOU LOOK AT THE EUROPEAN GENETIC CHART!
So how could White Europeans be so white even with apparent african genes?
Well then you have my theory to explain that namely:
quote: he only explanation for R1b in Western Europe and for the African linage of many White Europeans has to be this:
Europe was first settled by blacks, the blacks had their own albino versions of themselves and their own albino colonies just like in Africa or India.
Europe was the perfect climate for albino's to breed in masse and not suffer from the climate. So there were large populations of them.
The european Africans oppressed and brutalized the European black albino's, and they were forced to go live in caves.
The steppe Dravidian albino's came in, overwhelmed Europe's black population, and launched several wars to get rid of Europe's black populations.
The Steppe Eurasian albino's bred with the native Black European albino's resulting in modern White europeans today with all their African DNA, but yet they still look lily white.
They did not mix with the native Black Europeans of Europe. Hence the whiteness of many R1b carriers and many whites with African DNA.
Hence why modern White Europeans are so white today despite sprinkling of African genes.
HOWEVER MANY IRANIANS ARE NOT SO WHITE TODAY, BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT THE MIXTURE OF ALBINO BLACK R1B CARRIERS AND ALBINO DRAVIDIAN CARRIERS, INSTEAD IRANIANS ARE HALF-ALBINO AND HALF-NON ALBINO HENCE HOW YOU HAVE MODERN OFF-WHITE BROWN IRANIANS TODAY!
Lioness doesn't my theory sort of make sense even though you don't agree with my position?
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
Virgin ground for Albino misdirection and muddlement by Red Herrings isn't it lioness?
I don't even know what a North Turk is (N. Turkic), nor do I know what a South Chinese is (S. China) who is closer to Solomon Islanders.
These are definitions created by the author, which I have no interest in pursuing. xyyman kept harping on this distance nonsense, so I had no choice but to use it.
So hate to disappoint you, but that was brought out exclusively for xyyman, hopefully he has gotten the message, now it's back to oblivion for this nonsense.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mindovermatter - I have not responded to you because it would take too long to explain.
Firstly - stop falling for FAKE Albino terminology!
What is an Iranian????????
Well, the word didn't exist until In 1935 the Iranian government requested those countries with which it had diplomatic relations, to call Persia "Iran" (land of the Arians/Aryans). The suggestion for the change is said to have come from the Iranian ambassador to Germany, who came under the influence of the Nazis. At the time Germany was in the grip of racial fever and cultivated good relations with nations of "Arian/Aryan" blood. It is said that some German friends of the ambassador persuaded him that, as with the advent of Reza Shah, Persia had turned a new leaf in its history. It was only fitting that the country be called "Iran." This would not only signal a new beginning, and bring home to the world, the new era in history, but would also signify the NOW Arian race of its population, as "Iran" is a cognate of "Arian" and derived from it.
But the original people were the Black Elamites. The next people were the Black Persians. Next to rule were the idiot Black Arabs, who were quickly usurped by the Albino tribes of the Persian Empire.
THAT IS WHO THE ALBINOS CALL IRANIANS!!!!
This is what the Albinos of the Persian Empire looked like:
Sorry Mindovermatter, you have to get the history down pat, before you can start theorizing about population movements and mixtures.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: xyyman - We are all really happy that you have mastered this, but it is obvious that the rest of us are just too slow to understand it.
So it's probably best if you hold court on ESR where you have the time to bring people up to date.
As an example of how backward I am, I'm reading this Genetic Distance Map from The History and Geography of Human Genes by Cavalli-Sforza.
And I'm thinking that it shows that the nearest people to Europeans are Iranians and the Indians and Dravidians of India, with no Africans even close.
Silly me, I'm thinking that's just further proof that Europeans are Dravidian Albinos.
Clearly you need to go back to ESR and find a way to straighten me out - thanks.
Btw - take DD'eDeN with you, I'm sure he'll be a big help.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Mike. Nevertheless. Excellent research and information on Iran. Never knew the Nazi had a part to play in naming Persia, Iran.
But on the other hand come into the 21st century. Sforza is outdated. IIRC he used essentially blood proteins to draw his conclusions. Always understand the context and the methodology. That is where the games are played.
There is no getting around haplogroups and haplotypes. They have been transferred from father to son and mothers to daughter and sons since the beginning of time. They can’t fake that. They cannot change that. Supplement that with AIM/GWAS and they cannot fool you.
Get on board …bro
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike. I know you are smarter than appearance. I just posted something MORE recent...2015. OP. I have been posting recent stuff over the last couple of years.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
When- how old. Is it dated . Who -author and his bias or political views What - what is the premise, what are they trying to prove, anything more recent out there. Where - where did they sample. Did they sample the relevant populations
It is very simple . ...
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Mike. I know you are smarter than appearance. I just posted something MORE recent...2015. OP. I have been posting recent stuff over the last couple of years.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: Mike. I know you are smarter than appearance. I just posted something MORE recent...2015. OP. I have been posting recent stuff over the last couple of years.
SHOW THE GRAPH!!!!
Other genetic distance charts similar to the above Cavalli-Sforza below (but in different formats)
Proper reading of the abovechart: measure the distance from one name to another. The colored line and the black included together on the path (note this chart does not indicate origin only distance from one to the other)
Proper reading of the lower chart, measure from one name to another following the line path, vertical movement is measured. Horizontal movement is not counted
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Doxie darling, as the charts clearly show, Indians and Europeans are like two peas in a pod, the two are alone by themselves in the human family.
Clearly you Europeans are indeed Dravidian Albinos.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: [QB] ^Doxie darling, as the charts clearly show, Indians and Europeans are like two peas in a pod, the two are alone by themselves in the human family.
Europeans are no more similar to East Indians then they are to Middle Eastern people, as shown
As I stated Indians have high frequencies of mtDNA Haplogroup M, Europeans do not.
Clyde would argue the overlap in the rest of their DNA is due to an invasion or migration of foreign people North of India into India which was already populated to an extent and now since they have been there a long time and mixed in, are regarded as Indian
Again the DNA makeup of people is not only determined by paternal DNA the other half os maternal mtDNA, so your theory doesn't work, although there is some overlap.
Again the situation is similar with Near Easterners and Europeans but you have blinders to that, for politcally biased reasons
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Continuing…this paper is the latest which concludes there were at least TWO major migration OOA. Of course the famous Lazaridis paper is the most popular paper one. With 3 ancestral populations to Europeans. The African Neolithics being the latest bringing in “white skin”. Other studies concluded there were later migrations notably during the Bronze age.
But I am convinced even the Medieval Age the current population structure of Europeans was still in transition.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike111: "Btw - take DD'eDeN with you, I'm sure he'll be a big help."
haha. Check this out: Ever ski down mogels?
mogel(Bavarian) little mound (= dome)
bogel(Malay) naked (under the shield/shelld.ome)
magal(Basque) = mogen(Hebrew) = pacal(Maya) = machan(Malay) = sky-round-shield all derived from
Monguolu(Mbuti) from mbuangualua...mom's mounds.
- - -
That map/chart you posted is great, it shows Malay is closer to Pygmies and KhoiSan than (Open-Sky) Berbers, Papuans and Australians.
apa(Mbuti) fire ape(Ainu) fire api(Malay) fire aphyre(OEnglish) fire ~ pyre/spire/inspire buni(Austral) fire piloa(Aztec) pyre
Note that the Mbuti are southern Pygmies, while the Efe are northern Pygmies. The agro-villager Lese are neighbors to the Efe, significantly the Lese grow Asian Yams and bananas (from Malaysia/Papua) that the Efe prefer since the Congo rainforest yams are more bitter and must be well prepared.
Posts: 2021 | From: Miami | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
My dear neice Doxie: Please stop ignoring me: there is no longer any reason for you to consider me your enemy. Everything that I told you has been proven true by your very own Albino scientists. Now I ask you to call me Uncle instead of Father or Brother, because you belong to the line of my Caucasian featured Black Dravidian Brothers. Not to my line of Negroid featured Blacks. So please, take your place in our family, at last now you know where you truly belong.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As to you Chinese and other Mongloid people out there: As clearly shown by the Himba and San: you ARE the Albino/Mulatto children of the Negroid family of Blacks. You may call me Father or Brother!
LOL at this fool, he posts a Himba woman and some Khosians, when that fails he posts the Nigerians, the charlatan is scrambling like a roach when the light is turned on
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Mindovermatter - I have not responded to you because it would take too long to explain.
Firstly - stop falling for FAKE Albino terminology!
What is an Iranian????????
Well, the word didn't exist until In 1935 the Iranian government requested those countries with which it had diplomatic relations, to call Persia "Iran" (land of the Arians/Aryans). The suggestion for the change is said to have come from the Iranian ambassador to Germany, who came under the influence of the Nazis. At the time Germany was in the grip of racial fever and cultivated good relations with nations of "Arian/Aryan" blood. It is said that some German friends of the ambassador persuaded him that, as with the advent of Reza Shah, Persia had turned a new leaf in its history. It was only fitting that the country be called "Iran." This would not only signal a new beginning, and bring home to the world, the new era in history, but would also signify the NOW Arian race of its population, as "Iran" is a cognate of "Arian" and derived from it.
But the original people were the Black Elamites. The next people were the Black Persians. Next to rule were the idiot Black Arabs, who were quickly usurped by the Albino tribes of the Persian Empire.
THAT IS WHO THE ALBINOS CALL IRANIANS!!!!
This is what the Albinos of the Persian Empire looked like:
Sorry Mindovermatter, you have to get the history down pat, before you can start theorizing about population movements and mixtures.
Mike, thank you for finally responding to me! I appreciate if you would give me more feedback and critique me more in a friendly and analytical way instead of mostly remaining silent.
When I refer to Iran, I refer to the geographical regions and area and not the specific country itself. I understand that Iran itself is very diverse, you got albino types like this:
but most of the population looks like this:
Basically a highly mixed bunch of people, and yes I do believe that they are mixed with black skinned people. However when I state my theory, I mean in terms of genetics.
You, clyde, namerthoth, all agreed that in the past that Africa had numbers of albino colonies hence the leprosy thing in the bible in the past.
So my claim is that there has to have been more of these albino colonies of the BLACK EUROPEAN's who principally carried haplogroup R1b, because of the CLIMATE and geographical location of Europe. Europe is a favorable place for albino's as you can tell from the number of White people there TODAY!
When you look at the genetics of Iranians, various numbers of them chart close to Europeans as close to them as Indians if not closer. However INDIANS have higher % of R1a THEN IRANIANS! Iranians SEEMS TO HAVE HIGHER % of R1b THEN INDIANS. Iranians seem to be a half-way population between Indians and Europeans. which makes sense if you consider the location of Iran as a meeting point/cross-roads between Central/South/West Asia.
However WHAT doesn't make sense is why Europeans are closer to Iranians then Indians despite as high a % of R1a as Indians and higher then IRANIANS!
Haplogroup R1b is also a very predominant genetic marker in WESTERN EUROPE, yet Europeans look nothing like Iranians and are somewhat genetically apart from Iranians but are truly albino in how many albino's there are there.
Europe seems to be half-way divided between Haplogroup R1a and R1b:
However ALL EUROPEANS AT LEAST HAVE BOTH R1A and R1B!And all Europeans have genes that are NON-EXISTENT BETWEEN THEM!:
Excluding Southern Europe, Western Europeans despite carrying haplogroup R1b an african gene and OTHER african genes, look NOTHING LIKE IRANIANS when it comes to darkness and swarthiness. And Europeans ARE HALFWAY between Indians, Iranians, and Near Easterners on genetic charts like the one you posted.
In that case, Europeans should be as dark as Iranians too, which it sort of applies to Southern Europe but not elsewhere there. Given the genetic evidence OFFERED of OBVIOUS mixing and inter-change of African and Eurasian genes IN EUROPE, ALL OVER EUROPE!
But yet Europeans are supposedly still the whitest people on Earth despite everything that I've described above. But what is obvious is that EUROPEANS ARE A MIDWAY population between Dravidians and Near-easterners AND AFRICANS which is further explained by the R1b and R1a division in Europe.
So MY THEORY is that the reason why Europe is so lily albino today and why the darkies are mainly held and concentrated in the south with high sunlight there, is because of obvious albino mixing.
Since there were albino populations of BLACK EUROPEANS in Europe, which is a highly likely chance given EUROPE'S CLIMATE AND MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN AND CAVE SYSTEMS, and probably LARGER NUMBERS OF THEM THAN IN AFRICA!
That means that the present and primary carriers of the haplogroup R1b IN EUROPE, are the DESCENDANTS OF THESE ALBINO BLACK EUROPEANS WHO EXISTED IN EUROPE IN THE PAST!
However when you look at the genetic chart, you see that ALL EUROPEANS AT LEAST have BOTH haplogroups R1a and R1b! EASTERN EUROPE seems to be a gigantic island of R1a but yet THERE IS NO EQUIVALENT HIGH PERCENTAGE OF R1a IN IRAN OR IN CENTRAL ASIA! THAT EQUIVALENT PERCENTAGE IS ONLY FOUND IN SOUTH ASIA IN COUNTRIES LIKE INDIA!
This puzzles and muddles up things more, so there HAS TO BE A THEORY that explains why this is and that there is NO straight cline of equivalent percentages of R1a and R1b in the areas surrounding and LEADING TO Europe. And why Europe is SO WHITE TODAY DESPITE CARRYING GENES FOUND IN BOTH IRAN AND INDIA AND NOT BEING AS DARK AS THEM DESPITE CONTAINING AND MIXING BOTH NEAR EASTERN AND SOUTH ASIAN HAPLOGROUPS!
Take notice that whenever you find albino white EUROPID populations OUTSIDE OF EUROPE, YOU ALWAYS FIND THEM IN MOUNTAINOUS REGIONS OR COLD WINTER REGIONS! There is a reason for that! In these regions, the temperatures are COOLER and COLDER, and there LESS HEAT AND LESS SUNLIGHT, ENOUGH THAT A PERSON WITH ALBINISM CAN TOLERATE!
We saw this with the Kalash and Nuristani who are OBVIOUS ALBINO'S! The Kalash and Nuristani are an EXTREMELY INBRED GROUP WHO ARE ANCIENT AND HAVE ANCIENT GENES FROM SIBERIA AND SOUTH ASIA BUT NOT FROM EUROPE AND THEY ARE DISTANT FROM EUROPEANS GENETICALLY!
The same applies to the YEZIDI PEOPLE, WHO ARE ALSO FROM INDIA/SOUTH ASIA, AND ARE ALBINO, AND ARE EXTREMELY INBRED RESULTING IN LIGHT HAIRED AND LIGHT EYED PEOPLE WITH BLOND/RED/BROWN HAIR AND LIGHT EYES! THE YEZIDI TOO LIVE IN MOUNTAIN/ELEVATED DIFFICULT TO ACCESS REGIONS JUST LIKE THE KALASH AND NURISTANI PEOPLE! THEY TOO ARE DISTANT ENOUGH FROM WHITE EUROPEANS TO BE THEIR OWN GROUP! So Europe, with all kinds of mountainous terrains and forests that existed in early European history along with cool and cold/temperate climates is PERFECT FOR ALBINO POPULATIONS TO BREED AND REMAIN ISOLATED ALONG WITH THE CAVE SYSTEMS THAT COULD AID IN THAT!
It's perfect for isolated inbred albino groups like the Kalash, Yezidi, Nuristani etc to breed and multiply given Europe's GEOGRAPHICAL CHARACTERISTICS! Now think about how large Africa is and how genetically distant one black tribe is to a fellow black tribe in a neighboring village! A fellow African tribe is more distant to another African tribes miles away then a European is to a chinaman! Now think about how large Africa is and how many DNA tribes have been untested there: http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/true-size-of-africa.jpg
So the chances of Black Europeans carrying the R1b types found in Western Europe is very high given they would just be one individual tribe of Black Africans who settled there! There would have been higher populations of Black European ALBINO'S because the climate and environment of Europe very supportive to the breeding of albino's! Notice that SOUTH AFRICA was settled primarily by Europeans and became an early European settlement stronghold BECAUSE THE CLIMATE, AND TEMPERATURES MATCHED THE NEEDS AND REQUIREMENTS OF WHITE EUROPEANS! SOUTH AFRICA WAS CHOSEN FOR EUROPEAN SETTLEMENT BECAUSE IT HAD A NEARLY IDENTICAL CLIMATE TO THAT OF EUROPE! Thus you have a large population of albino Europeans in South Africa when it was first settled!
So with all this in mind, there HAS TO HAVE BEEN HIGHER populations OF ALBINO'S BLACK EUROPEAN R1b carriers, IN EUROPE, IN EARLY EUROPEAN HISTORY, that EXPLAINS THE HIGH % of R1b IN EUROPE! AS LARGE AS THAT FOUND IN AFRICA! EUROPE IN TERMS OF GENETICS SEEMS TO BE AN ISLAND ONTO ITSELF! Europe itself has MANY mountain ranges, cave systems, cool weather, low temperature regions; now with this in mind, look at these links illustrating the behavior of these albino's in South America and Asia: http://nypost.com/2015/06/11/for-panamas-island-albinos-the-sun-is-a-mother-a-curse/
quote: Because of their SENSITIVE SKIN, young Guna albinos must be shuttled to and from school, avoiding the baking heat, while they watch their friends play in the streets.
VIOLENT PAST
Albinos were not always treated well by their fellow Guna.
After Spain colonized the region, until the end of the 19th century, the Guna slaughtered their albinos in the misguided belief they were related to their European rulers, saidLOCAL albino spiritual leader Maximiliano Ferrer.
Taliban threat closes in on isolated Kalash tribe | World ... www.theguardian.com
quote:For a decade the Kalash, a mountain tribe nestled in a stunning valley deep in the Hindu Kush, managed to avoid the Taliban scourge ravaging the rest of north ...
or a decade the Kalash, a MOUNTAIN tribe nestled in a stunning valley deep in the Hindu Kush, managed to AVOID the Taliban scourge ravaging the rest of north-western Pakistan. Visitors streamed into the valley to experience a unique non-Muslim culture in which the women eschew veils, the men make wine, and everyone worships a complex array of gods. Pictures of Kalash women adorned in an explosion of colourful beads became an icon of Pakistan's (admittedly struggling) tourist industry, and a hint at the country's tolerant vision of itself.
Clearly as we can see from these albino groups, THEY have to either reside in mountain habitats where the climate and temperatures are formidable, and THEY ARE ISOLATED or they have to have OTHER people take CARE OF THEM in order to survive in NORMAL ENVIRONMENTS! Now White Europeans don't nearly suffer from nearly as much problems as with people with extreme albinism which SIGNIFIES ADMIXTURE WITH NORMAL HUMANS! There are MANY mountain ranges and forests in early European history, such that the chances of albino tribes of R1b Black European settlers is extremely high given that these particular tribes of albino R1b black Europeans could REMAIN ISOLATED in CAVES/MOUNTAINS/FORESTS IN EUROPE, could find regions where temperatures are FAVORABLE TO THEM IN EUROPE, Could MULTIPLY and BREED with EACH OTHER AND TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES BECAUSE OF THE ENVIRONMENT IN EUROPE, WHERE THE CLIMATE AND GEOGRAPHY IS FAVORABLE TO THEM AND TO CREATE ISOLATED ALBINO TRIBES! THEY COULD RESIDE IN MOUNTAINS AND CAVE SYSTEMS SO THAT THEY COULD AVOID BEING PERSECUTED BY NORMAL HUMAN BEINGS IN THE MOUNTAIN AND CAVE SYSTEMS OF EUROPE AND STILL SURVIVE WITH FAMILIES! So you have a high probability chance of there being MANY ALBINO BLACK EUROPEAN TRIBES IN EUROPE, WHO CARRIED HAPLOGROUP R1b AND MANAGED TO SURVIVE AND REPRODUCE, GIVEN THESE CHARACTERISTICS OF EUROPE!
However the R1a Eurasian Indian Albino horse nomads came in and were the primary carriers of R1a into EUROPE, aka the Kurgan/battle-axe/corded ware people.group. The Eurasian Indian Albino's practiced a WARLIKE culture as evidenced by weapons and axes that they had carried. They domesticated the horse, they amassed a large population of themselves in the area of Sibera, Central Asia and Russia; eventually population pressures and competition forced them to head towards Europe, South Asia, the Middle East, North Africa and Western China! There is documented evidence of these people trying to invade China in the past and trying take over it's northern provinces like the Avars, Tocharians, Scythians, Yeuzhi, Turks etc etc etc. They took drugs and venerated the cow because of the value it had on the steppes of Eurasia!
Now take a look at the size of Siberia, Central Asia and Russia, the origin place of many so called INDO-EUROPEAN TRIBES: http://i.imgur.com/YjZK8ui.jpg?1
Now think about that for a second! You have entire towns in the U.S that are isolated, you have ENTIRE movies made in the U.S about isolated towns in the U.S with scary people that the rest of the world knows nothing about! You have isolated towns in the U.S that have completely different or unique social dynamics then the rest of the United states! Now look at the gigantic territory illustrated here in the above links! This is a region that could fit all of Europe and SEVERAL AMERICA's into it's landmass and area size! So IT MAKE SENSE, that the R1a Dravidian albino's and horse nomads, and many OTHER INDO-EUROPEAN TRIBES, like the Goths, Scythians, Avars, Alans, Cimmerians, Aryans, Germanics, the pot-pourri of basically all white Indo-European tribes had ORIGINS IN THIS HUGE GIGANTIC REGION! It makes sense that the Dravidian albino's of India, who carried haplogroup R1a, would go here and a-mass a large population of themselves in this vast region, given that it's HUGE AND FLAT, perfect for HORSES, HAS TEMPERATE TO COLD TEMPERATURES, AND ACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF SUNLIGHT FOR PEOPLE WITH ALBINISM! The vastness of the region MEANS THAT YOU HAVE SPACE TO REMAIN ISOLATED AND BREED A LARGE POPULATION OF DRAVIDIAN ALBINO'S!
The harshness of the steppe environment of this vast region bred a very warlike and combative people that would give birth to many of the warlike tribes of white origin, like the Scythians, Goths, Alans, Avars etc etc in antiquity as described BY HERODOTUS/Ancient Greeks! This harshness and warlike nature of the people of the steppe environment would be replicated by THE MONGOLS AND THE HUNS! THEY SIMPLY FOLLOWED IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF THE WHITE TRIBES OF CENTRAL ASIA BEFORE THEM! Thus it makes sense that this vast region would breed a people called the CORDED-WARE/BATTLE-AXE PEOPLE, BECAUSE THE BATTLE-AXE SIGNIFIES THE WARLIKE NATURE OF THE R1a DRAVIDIAN ALBINO'S WHO CAME IN FROM THE STEPPES OF CENTRAL ASIA!
However later on, the albino's of the CENTRAL ASIAN STEPPES WOULD COME AND BE FORCED TO COME TO EUROPE, IN MEXICAN-LIKE IMMIGRATION PATTERNS AND WAVE-LIKE MIGRATIONS DUE TO COMPETITION WITH THE MONGOLOIDS IN EURASIA AND THE GENERAL ENVIRONMENT! THEY WOULD DEMOGRAPHICALLY SWAMP EUROPE'S BLACK EUROPEAN POPULATIONS! THIS DEMOGRAPHIC SHIFT FROM BLACK TO WHITE IN EUROPE RESULTS IN MULTIPLE WARS AND CONFLICT IN EUROPE WHERE BLACK EUROPEANS WERE KILLED OR SENT INTO THE NEW WORLD!
However, the R1a Dravidian albino's DID NOT DISTINGUISH THEMSELVES WITH THE ALBINO'S OF EUROPE'S ORIGINAL BLACK EUROPEAN POPULATIONS BECAUSE THEY TOO WERE ALBINO'S, LIKE THE BATTLE-AXE KURGAN PEOPLE OF CENTRAL ASIA AND THE STEPPES! THEY SAW THEM AS ALLIES AGAINST THE BLACK EUROPEANS OF ANTIQUITY! So once all the wars in Europe between the Black Europeans and their albino's AND ALSO THE ALBINO'S FROM THE CENTRAL ASIAN STEPPES HAD FINISHED, EUROPE'S POPULATION REMAINING WAS MAINLY WHITE! THE ALBINO'S OF THE CENTRAL ASIAN STEPPES HAD BRED WITH THE NATIVE BLACK EUROPEAN ALBINO'S OF EUROPE, HENCE WHY EVERY SINGLE WHITE EUROPEAN GROUP HAS R1A AND R1b! HOWEVER ALL THE BLACK EUROPEANS WERE EXTERMINATED OR SENT TO THE NEW WORLD AS SLAVES, HENCE WHY THE R1b CARRIERS OF EUROPE ARE SO WHITE TODAY AND WHY THEY ALL HAVE HAPLOGROUP R1A! THIS IS THE SAME REASON WHY EUROPE IS SO WHITE TODAY AND WHY MANY EUROPEANS ARE WHITE TODAY DESPITE CARRYING NEAR-EASTERN, AFRICAN, AND SOUTH ASIAN DRAVIDIAN GENES!
The reason why all White Europeans ALSO HAVE DIFFERENT GENES, is because they are the result of MIXTURE between THE DRAVIDIAN ALBINO'S OF CENTRAL ASIA AND THE BLACK EUROPEAN ALBINO'S! THE BLACK EUROPEAN ALBINO'S ALL HAD DIFFERENT GENES BECAUSE OF THE NATURAL GENETIC DIVERSITY OF BLACK AFRICAN PEOPLE! THUS THIS MIXTURE RESULTS IN MANY WHITE EUROPEAN GROUPS HAVING DIFFERENT GENES BUT ALSO SHARING BOTH HAPLOGROUPS OF R1a AND R1b! BECAUSE WHITE EUROPEANS AGAIN ARE THE PRODUCT OF MIXING BETWEEN BLACK EUROPEAN ALBINO'S AND DRAVIDIAN ALBINO'S FROM CENTRAL ASIA! These albino groups did not have any trouble breeding with each other BECAUSE THEY ALL SAW THEMSELVES AS WHITE! HENCE WHY WHITE EUROPEANS ARE SO WHITE AS THEY ARE TODAY AND WHY THEY CLUSTER INBETWEEN INDIANS AND IRANIANS AND MIDDLE EASTERN PEOPLE WHO ARE MUCH MORE DARKER THAN THEM! It is because of the scenario that I had described above!
Now does that explain everything about Europeans on a genetic level and all the haplogroup confusion?Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Xyman, Mike111, Lioness, etc etc etc and all others. Could you please read my entire post and critique my interpretation and my theory please?
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
And Remember Whites were always the Majority of Europe, Africans During the Neolithic started emigrating to europe many of them......They brought Hap E and J with them possibly others. There were Blacks There from before also, You could call those Blacks looking like The Puerto Rock People(Puerto Ricans) and Mixed Brazilians so When These Africans from Africa came to Europe.... Tings were gwaning!!! sexually, meaning Man Loves Woman, and People were coming and going as they like. Remember People Love each other...... They not into goof battybwoy(homosexual) tings BURN FIRE BURN HOMOSEXUALS!!!Repent homosexuals you can Be Saved!!!
You can see this Into How the Vikings when They Traveled to the Americas(1st Whites to Americas NOT COLUMBUS) THERE WAS NO BONES OF WAR matter of fact europeans refused to believe the Vikings traveled to Americas because There was NO VIOLENCE,
People Recognize Each Other(Hint).....
Euros think that White People are like Them, racist, heartless, demonized etc...So they denied THE VIKINGS were Inside America CHILLING WIT DA NATIVE AMERICANS cause they can't Really find violent encounters!!!WOW!!!
Another Reason is how The Vikings were massacering EUROS inside Europe...How could These Vikings Violent devil killers oops er um White People attacked and ran rough shod over all of europe and destroyed many of europes gehazi(Problem) controlled euros ooops I mean were attacking euros yet they chilled inside America, that bothers the euros. The thing though is that Vikings are WHITE PEOPLE!!! euros don't understand that!!! euros! YOU ARE NOT WHITE!, euros are an embarassement to White People! because of your homosexual! goofy!, racist! molesting! ways!!! ALL People are Born from God and are not racists, they hate evil!!!
Read Up On these Things Mindovermatter.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mindovermatter,points to account> haplogroup R is a descendant of Haplogroup P-45
The oldest Haplogroup R DNA ever found were in the remains of a boy in Siberia dating to 24,000 years ago.
However, people are carry their mother's DNA as well as their fathers DNA. That is the other half of the picture If many Europeans have haplogroup R on their father's side, on their mother's side their most common haplogroup is haplogroup H. The second most common maternal DNA in Europeans is haplogroup U and it has an older history in Europe than does haplogroup H.
_________________________
Here's a soccer team of Iran, don't jump to conclusions based on skin tone. Admixture only explains the lesser portion of the variation in skin tone, it's mainly to to environment. Don't put the cart before the horse. There aren't these large groups of people with birth defecst who then gather toegther and migrate somewhere else for better conditions. What happens if that people go into new areas and te new environment changes their furture generations - adaptatation.
Th maternal mtDNA is mainly Hap U3
The Iranian's paternal Y-DNA is J2 24% R1a 18% and R1b about 7%
Keep in mind Iran is at parallel latitude with Southern Europe. Similarly you find darker skin tones there. Southern Europeans have a very small amount of African DNA, while the Iranians lower than that
Also keep in mind when you relax an environmental restraint the adaptation to it often becomes less pronounced. Note that Khosians are not as dark as Nigerians, they live further away from the equator so they don't need as much melanin protection.
Likewise Central and Northern Europeans live at a higher latitude than Iranians.
Gradually over thousands of years if humans have less exposure to high sunlight, less melanin is required to protect them and they will begin very very slowly over many generations to lighten. Also keep in mind in the colder regions people need clothing to survive even if crude animal skins with fur. The sun can't even penetrate those areas. Also keep in mind trees in a forest provide shade. Some Northern populations have tanned faces because they live in areas with less tree cover and while the UV is less intense people who hunt outdoors may get more exposure. The situation is complex. Some people in a Northern region could be considered indigenous and have migrated to that region 10,000 years ago. Another group in the same region could have migrated there 25,000 and also be considered indigenous, then they will be more adapted to the region because they have been there over twice as long.
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Mindovermatter,points to account> haplogroup R is a descendant of Haplogroup P-45
The oldest Haplogroup R DNA ever found were in the remains of a boy in Siberia dating to 24,000 years ago.
However, people are carry their mother's DNA as well as their fathers DNA. That is the other half of the picture If many Europeans have haplogroup R on their father's side, on their mother's side their most common haplogroup is haplogroup H. The second most common maternal DNA in Europeans is haplogroup U and it has an older history in Europe than does haplogroup H.
_________________________
Here's a soccer team of Iran, don't jump to conclusions based on skin tone. Admixture only explains the lesser portion of the variation in skin tone, it's mainly to to environment. Don't put the cart before the horse. There aren't these large groups of people with birth defecst who then gather toegther and migrate somewhere else for better conditions. What happens if that people go into new areas and te new environment changes their furture generations - adaptatation.
Th maternal mtDNA is mainly Hap U3
The Iranian's paternal Y-DNA is J2 24% R1a 18% and R1b about 7%
Keep in mind Iran is at parallel latitude with Southern Europe. Similarly you find darker skin tones there. Southern Europeans have a very small amount of African DNA, while the Iranians lower than that
Also keep in mind when you relax an environmental restraint the adaptation to it often becomes less pronounced. Note that Khosians are not as dark as Nigerians, they live further away from the equator so they don't need as much melanin protection.
Likewise Central and Northern Europeans live at a higher latitude than Iranians.
Gradually over thousands of years if humans have less exposure to high sunlight, less melanin is required to protect them and they will begin very very slowly over many generations to lighten. Also keep in mind in the colder regions people need clothing to survive even if crude animal skins with fur. The sun can't even penetrate those areas. Also keep in mind trees in a forest provide shade. Some Northern populations have tanned faces because they live in areas with less tree cover and while the UV is less intense people who hunt outdoors may get more exposure. The situation is complex. Some people in a Northern region could be considered indigenous and have migrated to that region 10,000 years ago. Another group in the same region could have migrated there 25,000 and also be considered indigenous, then they will be more adapted to the region because they have been there over twice as long.
Lioness please! The whites being the result of adaptation to low sunlight environments is a big lie and has been debunked many many times already, since evidently they aren't! The people of low sunlight environments are mainly brown and dark skinned.
The White people of Europe moved into the northern regions of Europe because THEY WERE ALREADY WHITE BEFORE THEY WENT THERE! And even in these northern regions Whites still suffer from various ailments or two.
Plus all White Europeans carry genes that are candidates for albinism (SLC24A2, TYR, OCA2,TYRP1 etc) so they have to be albino's! But the question remains is, why are White Europeans so white today, despite containing African, Indian, Iranian and Middle Eastern genes? And still not being as dark as them?
White Europeans seem to be a half-way population between African, Near-Easterners, Asian-Indians, and Iranians and contain high frequencies of genes from all four groups,and yet are some of the most whitest people in the world!
Also Northern Italy has a various populations of Northern European type populations and does NORTH AFRICA and SYRIA, and the Middle East but yet they live in more southern latitudes or in similar latitudes to Southern Europe. Plus how do you explain how these people live in more southern latitudes then Southern Europe? http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=010715
So my explanation has to be one of the logical ones there is to explain why this is and why they are like they are today. It's one of few that ties things together and makes sense.
I'm using Mike's, Clyde's, Egmond Codfried's, Namerthoth's research to come to my theory.
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
And Remember Whites were always the Majority of Europe, Africans During the Neolithic started emigrating to europe many of them......They brought Hap E and J with them possibly others. There were Blacks There from before also, You could call those Blacks looking like The Puerto Rock People(Puerto Ricans) and Mixed Brazilians so When These Africans from Africa came to Europe.... Tings were gwaning!!! sexually, meaning Man Loves Woman, and People were coming and going as they like. Remember People Love each other...... They not into goof battybwoy(homosexual) tings BURN FIRE BURN HOMOSEXUALS!!!Repent homosexuals you can Be Saved!!!
You can see this Into How the Vikings when They Traveled to the Americas(1st Whites to Americas NOT COLUMBUS) THERE WAS NO BONES OF WAR matter of fact europeans refused to believe the Vikings traveled to Americas because There was NO VIOLENCE,
People Recognize Each Other(Hint).....
Euros think that White People are like Them, racist, heartless, demonized etc...So they denied THE VIKINGS were Inside America CHILLING WIT DA NATIVE AMERICANS cause they can't Really find violent encounters!!!WOW!!!
Another Reason is how The Vikings were massacering EUROS inside Europe...How could These Vikings Violent devil killers oops er um White People attacked and ran rough shod over all of europe and destroyed many of europes gehazi(Problem) controlled euros ooops I mean were attacking euros yet they chilled inside America, that bothers the euros. The thing though is that Vikings are WHITE PEOPLE!!! euros don't understand that!!! euros! YOU ARE NOT WHITE!, euros are an embarassement to White People! because of your homosexual! goofy!, racist! molesting! ways!!! ALL People are Born from God and are not racists, they hate evil!!!
Read Up On these Things Mindovermatter.
No they were not, Whites were never the majority in Europe until recently, look at the Benjamin Franklin quote. Mike and various others have proved that Europe was brown/black to mixed in the 1800's to mainly white today because of wars between whites and the native europeans.
And yes they were wars as we can see in the migration of the sea peoples and all the wars in Europe that has been listed. The mixed and swarthy people of Europe were kicked out or exterminated from Europe except for maybe parts of Southern Europe.
Also the Vikings were a mixed bunch of people, who were not just white but also black/brown. The Vikings also fought wars between each other a lot as much as they supposedly raided and took over.
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
Stupid White people hating, Black racist, Black supremacist. Whites ARE the Native Europeans & your Black supremacist ilk have proven nothing. The Vikings were in fact White NO Blacks amongst them. As I've told Mike & your ilk several times, go find your own dang history IN AFRICA and stop trying to steal other people's. White children have a right to what is theirs. They have a right to their history, their heritage, their identity, their homeland without you trying to rob them of it. BTW Whites are NOT albinos either you moron.
Posts: 3257 | From: Madisonville, KY USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
There was no blood thirsty war Mind, There was lots of fornicating....Credit Mike and Ironlion for de Pictures
Whites were never the majority in Europe until recently, look at the Benjamin Franklin quote. Mike and various others have proved that Europe was brown/black to mixed in the 1800's to mainly white today because of wars between whites and the native europeans.
Stop being ridiculous The above are merely tanned males of the same ethnic group as the females. That is all Benjamin Franklin was referring to when talking about southern Europeans as not "white" .
It's the same thing with Southern Euroepan people today. Some have a brown tint. That is not black people with afros, LOL
So Benajmin Franklin, talking about Europe was talking about this: ^^and also people even lighter brown
Not this:
When Benjamin Franklin said "white" in the context of his times, he did not mean George Bush or Mitt Romney. He meant Donald Trump
And you are misquoting Mike
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
if Blacks were the original settlers of Europe - and they were, then how could they be out-numbered and defeated by the Central Asian Albino immigrants?
1) Europe was never densely populated by Blacks.
Obviously Europe has been densely populated for a couple thousand years before Benjamin Franklin. Therefore the majority could not have been black, as noted here by Mike
Posts: 42922 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
There was no blood thirsty war Mind, There was lots of fornicating....Credit Mike and Ironlion for de Pictures
Whites were never the majority in Europe until recently, look at the Benjamin Franklin quote. Mike and various others have proved that Europe was brown/black to mixed in the 1800's to mainly white today because of wars between whites and the native europeans.
Stop being ridiculous The above are merely tanned males of the same ethnic group as the females. That is all Benjamin Franklin was referring to when talking about southern Europeans as not "white" .
It's the same thing with Southern Euroepan people today. Some have a brown tint. That is not black people with afros, LOL
So Benajmin Franklin, talking about Europe was talking about this: ^^and also people even lighter brown
Not this:
When Benjamin Franklin said "white" in the context of his times, he did not mean George Bush or Mitt Romney. He meant Donald Trump
And you are misquoting Mike
quote:Originally posted by Mike111:
if Blacks were the original settlers of Europe - and they were, then how could they be out-numbered and defeated by the Central Asian Albino immigrants?
1) Europe was never densely populated by Blacks.
Obviously Europe has been densely populated for a couple thousand years before Benjamin Franklin. Therefore the majority could not have been black, as noted here by Mike
Lioness, every white nationalist agrees that Southern Europe is highly mixed and is the result of admixture between black/browns and whites. When you mix a black person with multiple whites, you get the skin tone described in the picture.
Also if Benjamin Franklin were referring to these people as the swarthy ones, why would he be being saying that GERMANS,SWEDES,RUSSIANS,FRENCH etc are swarthy, whom are all VERY WHITE to primarily WHITE groups today?
What you are saying doesn't make any sense, and there are murals and pictures in Italy and elsewhere that show that there were high populations of black/browns in Europe predating Benjamin Franklin!
Posts: 1558 | From: US | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Oh, oh, lioness is about to bury the thread in nonsense Red Herring posts to hide it's importance. Abandon Thread!Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic