...
EgyptSearch Forums Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» EgyptSearch Forums » Egyptology » Coon Exposed (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Coon Exposed
Topdog
Member
Member # 6753

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Topdog     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Carleton Coon, Evil E's prime source of data for debates has been finally laid to rest with this post. May Evil E's constant spamming of Coon's outdated data cease and rest in peace...

The Story of Man

Carleton Coon

p 196-197

Borzoi Books, 1965

Few skeletons have been found in the Sahara, and these are hard to date because of soil erosion. In Arabia prehistoric archaeology has barely been started. Yet we can be reasonably confident, until other evidence upsets the theory, that these deserts were the home of the slender variety of Caucasoid man. In East Africa this type has survived among the slender, narrow-faced Watusi and other cattle people.


Tutsis have ~80% E3a accoding to published data, which ironically, was pointed out by Evil E to debunk Hiernaux, which Evil E failed to do. The PN2 clade subsequently proved Hiernaux right and Evil E wrong.

Now back to Coon, according to the late Coon, Neanderthal hybrids and now Tutsis are Caucasoids[both theories are debunked by modern genetics and anthropology], yet Evil E and his cohort Dienekes, stubbornly refuse to let go of outdated anthropological sources. Continued use of Coon will only lead both Dienekes and Evil E to a ....

.....when engaged in debates.


[This message has been edited by Topdog (edited 04 April 2005).]


Posts: 328 | From: Vicksburg, Mississippi | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Thought2
Member
Member # 4256

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Thought2     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Topdog:
Carleton Coon, Evil E's prime source of data for debates has been finally laid to rest with this post. May Evil E's constant spamming of Coon's outdated data cease and rest in peace...

The Story of Man

Carleton Coon

p 196-197

Borzoi Books, 1965

Few skeletons have been found in the Sahara, and these are hard to date because of soil erosion. In Arabia prehistoric archaeology has barely been started. [b]Yet we can be reasonably confident, until other evidence upsets the theory, that these deserts were the home of the slender variety of Caucasoid man. In East Africa this type has survived among the slender, narrow-faced Watusi and other cattle people.


Tutsis have ~80% E3a accoding to published data, which ironically, was pointed out by Evil E to debunk Hiernaux, which Evil E failed to do. The PN2 clade subsequently proved Hiernaux right and Evil E wrong.

Now back to Coon, according to the late Coon, Neanderthal hybrids and now Tutsis are Caucasoids[both theories are debunked by modern genetics and anthropology], yet Evil e and his cohort Dienekes, stubbornly refuse to let go outdated anthropological sources. Continued use of Coon will only lead both Dienekes and Evil E to a ....

.....when engaged in debates.


[This message has been edited by Topdog (edited 04 April 2005).]

[This message has been edited by Topdog (edited 04 April 2005).]

[This message has been edited by Topdog (edited 04 April 2005).][/B]



Thought Writes:

Great find!


Posts: 2720 | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

Carleton Coon

p 196-197

Borzoi Books, 1965

Yet we can be reasonably confident, until other evidence upsets the theory, that these deserts were the home of the slender variety of Caucasoid man. In East Africa this type has survived among the slender, narrow-faced Watusi and other cattle people.


And this is why it was critical for Coon's ideology to locate human origins in Eurasia, thus allowing free speculation for 'caucasian' diffusion. This also accounts for his pleadingly wishful thinking regarding the 'Arabian' origins of the Tutsi. Coon also classed Southern Sudanese like the Shilluk as "Mediterreanian-caucazoids"....

Out of Africa was really the shattering deathblow for 'caucazoid' anthropology.

Cooon's followers are just pathetically scrounging around trying to put Humpety'Dumpty back together again.


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Horemheb
Member
Member # 3361

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Horemheb     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
'Out of Africa' was gibberish. Reading crap like that is why you are a grown man and still do not undersatnd the basic structure of history. The problem is rasol...nobody cares that you are black.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Thought2
Member
Member # 4256

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Thought2     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:

Cooon's followers are just pathetically scrounging around trying to put Humpety'Dumpty back together again.


Thought Writes:

Perfect analogy for Evil E. The fact that these sorts of issues are gradually making there way into the mainstream have put the Medicentrics on edge. They are fearful that they may lose their honorary 'whiteness'. The struggle of Mussolini has come to naught.


Posts: 2720 | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
'Out of Africa' was gibberish. Reading crap like that is why you are a

Anyone but you, and I'd assume they were joking, but knowing you, you really have no clue as to what Out of Africa refers to do you?

I don't know who has the bigger tendency to humiliate themselves...you, Abaza, or Erroneous E.

Out of Africa does not refer to some cheesy novel....it refers to a revolution in the field of anthropology.


You really do need DOTS connected for you don't you? ROTFL!


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Horemheb
Member
Member # 3361

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Horemheb     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Its pure crap rasol and is a revolution of absolutely nothing. People laugh at this stuff. as long as you hang onto these insane ideas about the Greeks nobody is going to consider the other information you put out.. They hear that and simply dismiss you as a kook. You guys have spent way too much time talking to each other.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
People laugh at this stuff.

We are laughing at you because of how stupid you are. You have no idea of what we are referring to, as usual.

So, I will humor your stupidity....explain 'Out of Africa' Professor. What is it exactly?


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As expected, no answer.

I should cut your head off [might clear things up for you], but I'm feeling merciful today professor....

In 1987, Allan Wilson, Rebecca Cann, and Mark Stoneking, researchers at the University of California-Berkeley, catapulted mitochondrial DNA into the headlines worldwide when they announced that they had traced it back 200,000 years to the oldest female ancestor of living humans–an African woman quickly dubbed Eve. Eve's debut rocked the archaeological community, which had been arguing for decades over whether modern humans evolved on more than one continent or instead swept out of Africa to replace more archaic hominids around the world. Wilson's group was attacked for sloppy science, and in fact there were problems with the original calculations. But genetic data from dozens of researchers have since almost universally supported the "Out of Africa" theory. "History has made a pretty consistent stamp on populations," says Lynn Jorde, a geneticist at the University of Utah, who has found African roots in nuclear DNA as well as in mitochondria and the Y. "Looking at more and more of the nuclear DNA is going to clarify the picture."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-origin_hypothesis.html

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 04 April 2005).]


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kem-Au
Member
Member # 1820

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Kem-Au     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Maybe one of you guys can help me out. I'm not to big on the genetics things so forgive me if this is a stupid question. I watched a program on the biological Eve, and from what I understand, she was supposed to be the mother of all men outside of Africa. The point was that every non black human being is the result of a single migration out of Africa. Are they suggesting that everyone, including all Africans, can trace their lineage back to a single woman some 200,000 years ago?

Forgive me if you've already been over this but I usually back away from a topic once the trolls get on it.


Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Maybe one of you guys can help me out. I'm not to big on the genetics things so forgive me if this is a stupid question. I watched a program on the biological Eve, and from what I understand, she was supposed to be the mother of all men outside of Africa. The point was that every non black human being is the result of a single migration out of Africa. Are they suggesting that everyone, including all Africans, can trace their lineage back to a single woman some 200,000 years ago?

Forgive me if you've already been over this but I usually back away from a topic once the trolls get on it.


We need intelligent posters like you to help keep things on topic.

The idea is that she is a common ancestor of all human beings - not the only ancestor.

For example, you share two ancestors with your first cousin - two grandparents. But you also have two other grandparents that you do not share.


What is also of interest is that all people outside of Africa [black, non black, is irrelevant to the genetics of it] are descendant from a small group of people living in East Africa at the time.

We know that because the entire non-African maternal [female] DNA pool is derived from just L3 [on the map shown above].

The overwhelming majority of the human races genetic material is actually found in and among africans.

All the rest of the world [regardless of physical appearance] contains only a fraction of the genetic diversity found in Africa.

This is also why maps sometimes foisted on the unknowing with the intent of showing the great distance that exist between different parts of Africa or African peoples are misleading. Of course genetic distances in Africa can be contrived as 'great' because most of the genome is African to begin with.


For example, this map was used be Erroneous E to try to prove a point about the Lemba:

According to Erroneous E's BOTTOM LINE:
accompanying maps group Lemba with or near "Caucasoid" populations, away from "Negroids."

Until he was made to confront the reality of what the Lemba actually look like:

...at which point he was forced to reverse himself and claimed the Lemba were "negligibly" caucazoid. Whatever Euro-fool!
Same with the San, above grouped with the Zulu and not the Lemba. You could just as easily circle the Lemba, Ethiopians and Zulu and exclude the San. Or acknolwedge the reality of African diversity by circling them all.

Carleton Coon's caucazoid propaganda anthropology is dead. His 'followers' are intellectual zombies...brain dead, but just can't admit it.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 04 April 2005).]


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Supercar
Member
Member # 6477

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Supercar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:


The overwhelming majority of the human races genetic material is actually found in and among africans.

All the rest of the world [regardless of physical appearance] contains only a fraction of the genetic diversity found in Africa.


Indeed. The deepest of E3b group is found in the Horn of Africa, which is why I eagerly await the explanation of a Eurasian origin of this haplotype.


Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Super car:
Indeed. The deepest of E3b group is found in the Horn of Africa, which is why I eagerly await the explanation of a Eurasian origin of this haplotype.

Considering that he posts pictures of Eurasian mail order brides and actually refers to them as "100% carriers of E3b" [male only chromosome]....I'd say, prepare for more comedy!


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Carleton Coon, Evil E's prime source of data for debates has been finally laid to rest with this post

Nicely done TopDog.

You've shown that Coon's Arabian caucasoid theory about the Tutsi was wrong; and also that Erroneous Euro - who stated Coon was right with regards to the Tutsi was actually unfamiliar with Coon's views.

Two birds with one stone....speaking of which:


Continue to Dienekes pseudo anthropology blog, Evil Euro. - S. Mohammad.


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Horemheb
Member
Member # 3361

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Horemheb     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Obviously, northeast Africans have a strong caucasian componet. Even Dr. Hawass alluded to that awhile back. The only study you need is your two eyes.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Keins
Member
Member # 6476

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Keins     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Its pure crap rasol and is a revolution of absolutely nothing. People laugh at this stuff. as long as you hang onto these insane ideas about the Greeks nobody is going to consider the other information you put out.. They hear that and simply dismiss you as a kook. You guys have spent way too much time talking to each other.

I had to respond to this clown. The out of Africa theory is pretty much a fact that human beings first evolved in Africa (east) and then a small portion of them left and populated the world later evolving to become non-black or other genetic and phenotypic sub groups. Get a clue professor! People would laugh at you if you label this theory/fact as rubbish. It is the racist whites (not all but the old school sceintist train of thought) that try to establish themself as the center of the human family by making up pseudo-nomenclature that has Europeans as a starting point "caucasians" and then applying that faux term so generously to everone and their dogs. It sceintifically makes ZERO sense and is sceintifically flawed and bankrupt.


Posts: 318 | From: PA. USA | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Keins
Member
Member # 6476

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Keins     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Obviously, northeast Africans have a strong caucasian componet. Even Dr. Hawass alluded to that awhile back. The only study you need is your two eyes.

use the right term European.. Caucasians are only from caucasia. Where the non-African elements that back tracked to some parts of north Africa from Caucasia?


Posts: 318 | From: PA. USA | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Horemheb
Member
Member # 3361

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Horemheb     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Keins, the only one laughing is me...at you. First you talk about man originating in Africa.....as far back as 3.5 million years ago and then try to connect that to the classical Greeks in 300 BC. Are you some kind of nut? This is the problem we have, uneducated people trying to tackle complicted problems and going all over the road. Go back and read your post Keins and think about what you just said.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
First you talk about man originating in Africa.....as far back as 3.5 million years ago and then try to connect that to the classical Greeks

bzzt. Greeks have nothing to do with this thread.

The Professor's latest blunder came about because he confused OOA anthropological theory with the novel "Out of Africa".


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Even Dr. Hawass alluded to that awhile back

Hawass is not a bioanthropologist. Go back to reading romance novels Professor.


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Horemheb
Member
Member # 3361

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Horemheb     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thats not what I did at all. I simply said that with the bizarre views displayed here about the Greeks nobody is going to believe anything else you said....which is true. that applies to this thread.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Horemheb
Member
Member # 3361

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Horemheb     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thats right rasol and Bernal is not a historian etc etc.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You confused an anthropological theory with a romance novel, and then went off on a typically brain-dead tangent:

Out of Africa' was gibberish. Reading crap like that is why you are a grown man and still do not undersatnd the basic structure of history. - Professor Horemheb.

Imagine a Professor who thinks OOA refers to a romance novel.

Go back to reading your 'gibberish' novels Professor.


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Horemheb
Member
Member # 3361

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Horemheb     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Read the threads rasol...your incoherent thinking is in line with the lies you spew on this board. Polish up that GED and learn to think past your nose.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kem-Au
Member
Member # 1820

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Kem-Au     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
[B][/B]

Thank you for the breakdown.


Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Thank you for the breakdown.

You're welcome. I learned a long time back that the "Professor" really is completely clueless. He can't be underestimated in this regard. He just doesn't know. Moreover he does not want to.

My only reason ever for response to him is to bring his ignorant trolling to a stop, otherwise we will end up discussing 'Newt Gingrich' here instead of Carelton Coon - I've seen this happen too many times before.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 05 April 2005).]


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Keins
Member
Member # 6476

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Keins     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Horemheb:
Keins, the only one laughing is me...at you. First you talk about man originating in Africa.....as far back as 3.5 million years ago and then try to connect that to the classical Greeks in 300 BC. Are you some kind of nut? This is the problem we have, uneducated people trying to tackle complicted problems and going all over the road. Go back and read your post Keins and think about what you just said.

Non Sequitor
Nothing about man evolving in Africa was directly connected to Greece. Stop with your out right lies and diversion tatics. You are the one who is undeucated especially when it comes to Africa, Arabs countries and yes even ancient Greece. You read preschool, feel good, surface dept topics on Ancient Greece and feel you are equipped to argu with Ausar, Rasol, Super Car and thought2 but time and time again you have NOTHING substantial to offer. All you have is emotionally charged, political and hateful rhetoric. 99% of the time your response is totally disconnected and devisive.

Now you are supporting coon when he is discredited worldwide for his flawed and biased scholarship. You have not even read his works nor have you read other scholars whom you try to discredit! So how can you be objective much less informed? Your problem lies in that you are willing to deny and ignore facts, suppress truth in order to make yourself feel good and to support a scientific and especially political dogma no matter how erroneous, hateful and wrong it is.


Posts: 318 | From: PA. USA | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Horemheb
Member
Member # 3361

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Horemheb     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Keins, "The out of Africa theory is pretty much a fact that human beings first evolved in Africa (east) and then a small portion of them left and populated the world..."

Now keins...there is your quote....That refers to events that happened in the last 3 million years, NOT in classical Greece. Where humans originated has squat to do with classical Greece. Anybody who tells you that ancient Egypt was foundational for classical Greece is a 100% pure goofball. If you want to live in wonderland thats up to you but if you ever sign up for a classical Greek class and write crap like that in an essay you'll flunk, as you should.


Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
HERU
Member
Member # 6085

Rate Member
Icon 14 posted      Profile for HERU     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Keins:
Non Sequitor
Nothing about man evolving in Africa was directly connected to Greece. Stop with your out right lies and diversion tatics. You are the one who is undeucated especially when it comes to Africa, Arabs countries and yes even ancient Greece. You read preschool, feel good, surface dept topics on Ancient Greece and feel you are equipped to argu with Ausar, Rasol, Super Car and thought2 but time and time again you have NOTHING substantial to offer. All you have is emotionally charged, political and hateful rhetoric. 99% of the time your response is totally disconnected and devisive.

Now you are supporting coon when he is discredited worldwide for his flawed and biased scholarship. You have not even read his works nor have you read other scholars whom you try to discredit! So how can you be objective much less informed? Your problem lies in that you are willing to deny and ignore facts, suppress truth in order to make yourself feel good and to support a scientific and especially political dogma no matter how erroneous, hateful and wrong it is.


I agree 100%

Horemheb, you're the only person in this thread talking about Greece.


Posts: 318 | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Horemheb
Member
Member # 3361

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Horemheb     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Heru...Go back and read what i said....we have some real mental yo yo's on this board. I mentioned Greece to make a point......in other words...if you say stupid things about Greece how can we believe you what you say about other subjects (such as the topic of the thread.)
We need to spend about a week here on basic reading comprehension.

Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 

Tutsi DNA - E3a, E*, B

http://www.familytreedna.com/images/2005%20TreeFTDNA.jpg

Haplogroup B is one of the oldest lineages in the world, and found found only in Africa.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 05 April 2005).]


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BigMix
Member
Member # 6969

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for BigMix     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Keins:
Non Sequitor
Nothing about man evolving in Africa was directly connected to Greece. Stop with your out right lies and diversion tatics. You are the one who is undeucated especially when it comes to Africa, Arabs countries and yes even ancient Greece. You read preschool, feel good, surface dept topics on Ancient Greece and feel you are equipped to argu with Ausar, Rasol, Super Car and thought2 but time and time again you have NOTHING substantial to offer. All you have is emotionally charged, political and hateful rhetoric. 99% of the time your response is totally disconnected and devisive.

Now you are supporting coon when he is discredited worldwide for his flawed and biased scholarship. You have not even read his works nor have you read other scholars whom you try to discredit! So how can you be objective much less informed? Your problem lies in that you are willing to deny and ignore facts, suppress truth in order to make yourself feel good and to support a scientific and especially political dogma no matter how erroneous, hateful and wrong it is.



well put. I never saw Horemheb post anything more than 3 lines of baseless biased political assumptions he expects readers to explicitly and implicitly place faith in.


But when a guy believes that Colonialism was good because of its educative benefits, alarm bells should go off that he should not be taken seriously.


Posts: 134 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Supercar
Member
Member # 6477

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Supercar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by BigMix:

But when a guy believes that Colonialism was good because of its educative benefits, alarm bells should go off that he should not be taken seriously.

..which needless to say, dismisses pre-existing educative systems that are not in "English", or "French, and the like. But this is a whole another topic; we are only concerned with the need for disposal of antiquated 19th century thinking in bio-anthropology.


Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Horemheb
Member
Member # 3361

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Horemheb     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Big Mix would support Edi Amin in Uganda as a replacement for the British. As far as I know the Brits did not eat anyone. You guys need to rethink this issue at a deeper level.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
As far as I know the Brits did not eat anyone.

As far as you know, does not take you very far Professor, but we don't want to discuss medievil Europe's fetish for eating mummy here and now thank you.

We must ask you once more as a matter of common courtesy to either address the subject - Carleton Coon - or move along. Thank you.


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
lamin
Member
Member # 5777

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for lamin     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
To Horemheb

And don't forget you share those German(Vandal) genes with master cannibals like Jeff "I am a sauteed thigh and buttocks man" Dahmer and Armin Miewes. Armin as we know liked his sausages "fresh off the man" style.

On the other hand we have no proof of Idi Amin's culinary tastes. And by the way Idi was Nubian--which is kinda close to Egypt--right?


Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roy_2k5
Member
Member # 6397

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Roy_2k5     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wait a second, weren't the Europeans the ones eating the Native Indians?

Horemheb, I would not bring up cannibal if I were you. Caucasians were commiting cannibalism in the past and this is because of the harsh environment.

Those that constantly claim that others commit an act without evidence has likely committed such an act. Cannibalism is linked with Africans and Native Indians, because Europeans do not want to admit their history of cannibalism.

[This message has been edited by Roy_2k5 (edited 05 April 2005).]


Posts: 212 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kem-Au
Member
Member # 1820

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Kem-Au     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
You're welcome. I learned a long time back that the "Professor" really is completely clueless. He can't be underestimated in this regard. He just doesn't know. Moreover he does not want to.

My only reason ever for response to him is to bring his ignorant trolling to a stop, otherwise we will end up discussing 'Newt Gingrich' here instead of Carelton Coon - I've seen this happen too many times before.


Don't get me wrong. I completely understand the reason for responding to the trollers. I would hate to see someone new to the game read their posts and think they represented modern scholarship. They're just annoying as all hell because the keep posting the same ish. Is there anyone else out there other than Coon?


Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Supercar
Member
Member # 6477

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Supercar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Don't get me wrong. I completely understand the reason for responding to the trollers. I would hate to see someone new to the game read their posts and think they represented modern scholarship. They're just annoying as all hell because the keep posting the same ish. Is there anyone else out there other than Coon?

In this day and age, other than the backward-minded stormfront buffoons, the only other two people I am aware of who share Coon's pre-historic hogwash, is Dienekes and Evil.

[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 05 April 2005).]


Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Coon is dead.
Read:
The Mismeasure of Man. - Stephen Gould
Egypt in Africa - Theodore Celenko
Egypt Child of Africa. - Van Sertima
The people of Africa. - Jean Hiernaux

Read anything you can get your hands on from SOY Keita.

Read the essay: Finally in Africa? Egypt, from Diop to Celenko.

I linked to the above essay from this cite quite awhile back. If I can find another link, I'll post it.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 06 April 2005).]


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Evil Euro
Member
Member # 6383

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Evil Euro     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes, Coon was wrong to call the Tutsi "Caucasoid", just as Hiernaux was wrong to call them "Hamitic". As I proved, they carry only E3a, not E3b, and accordingly show no clear evidence of Caucasoid admixture (unusual-looking Paul Kagame notwithstanding):








Posts: 906 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Yes, Coon was wrong to call the Tutsi "Caucasoid",

Of course he was. So much for your "Mediterranian" race.

quote:
just as Hiernaux was wrong to call them "Hamitic".

Incorrect. Hiernaux's whole point was that the Tutsi were NOT related to caucazoids but rather to other Africans. He was correct. The term 'Hamitic' is thus used with irony which, being lost in a fog of racism has apparently gone right over your head. There is no Hamitic race in bioanthropology, and Coon's racist screw-ups explain why the concept has been discarded.


quote:
S. Mohammad writes:

Stupid Euro once again puts his foot in his mouth:


The Tutsi and Hutu have intermixed to some degree but, as groups, they remain strikingly different. The Tutsi exhibit 'Hamitic' features to a marked degree. Do they systematically differ from the Hutu in the direction of Caucasoids?

In detailed study, relative growth in the two groups and in Europeans has been compared. In the development of a number of body proportions with age, which appears to be largely determined by heredity, the Tutsi are more different from Europeans than the Hutu[96]. In cephalic index, the Hutu are nearer to Yemenites than the Tutsi, whose long, narrow head makes their index lower than that of the other two groups..............

The Tutsi are taller than the Hutu by nearly ten centimetres; the average male stature is 176 cm. such tallness is by no means characteristic of North Africa or Western Asia: for example, the inhabitants of the central plateau of Yemen have an average stature of 164 cm. In skin colour, the Tutsi are darker than the Hutu, in the reverse direction to that leading to the caucasoids. Lip thickness provides a similar case: on an average the lips of the Tutsi are thicker than those of the Hutu. In most cases, however, they are not everted as in many West Africans. Like that of the Hutu, the hair of the Tutsi is spiralled(perhaps less tightly so, but this has not been quantified).


Apparently, either 'Hamitic' features developed in the Tutsi's ancestral line independently of any exotic source or, if an exotic element was introduced, it was such a long time ago that selection has thoroughly remodelled the resulting gene pool. Even if the second hypothesis was correct, the physical appearance of the Tutsi would result from evolution which took place in sub-Saharan Africa.

Jean Hiernaux
The People of Africa
pg 61


Hiernaux correctly debunked Coon, and you have contradicted YOURSELF yet again by 1st insisting that he was right, and now saying he was wrong.

Fact is, Coon was wrong, and you STILL ARE wrong. Having settled that matter let's have a look at some more of Carleton Coon's "Mediterreanian" caucasoids .....


....in this case they have E3b and little to no E3a.

Would you like to recant further?

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 07 April 2005).]


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Supercar
Member
Member # 6477

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Supercar         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil Euro:
Yes, Coon was wrong to call the Tutsi "Caucasoid", just as Hiernaux was wrong to call them "Hamitic". As I proved, they carry only E3a, not E3b, and accordingly show no clear evidence of Caucasoid admixture (unusual-looking Paul Kagame notwithstanding)

Actually, not surprisingly this is an outright LIE.

This was a point that was proven to you, by others. And yes, at times even your own sources were used against you, because you misinterpret them; that is no cause for taking credit for the 'correction' of what ****you did in your best to distort***.

You have been claiming that they exhibited their traits because they must have come from east Africa, and then got their negroid traits from Bantus that over-run them. That you constantly reshape your position is no doubt a clear sign of bankruptcy in your entire outlook of geneology.

Geneology is best left in the hands of those who can understand them, and therefore correctly interpret them, even when they are outdated. You've done a good job of proving that you don't have what it takes to do such a thing.

[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 06 April 2005).]


Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dr. Keita in his 1993 piece in History in Africa points out
that modern serious physical anthropologists and geneticist work from an
inductive approach and from the perspective of establishing biological
affinity, not racial identity. Dr. Keita's work in the AJPA (1990 and
1992) pays careful attention to statistical concerns such as the number
of variables used in relation to the sample size. His exposition of the
history of ideas is also important.
-Ricky A Kittles

Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Evil Euro
Member
Member # 6383

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Evil Euro     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by rasol:
Hiernaux's whole point was that the Tutsi were NOT related to caucazoids but rather to other Africans.

But he still likened their features to those of Hamitic North Africans. He was wrong. It turns out they simply look Negroid (as they should given that they're E3a and not E3b).

quote:
Fact is, Coon was wrong, and you STILL ARE wrong. Having settled that matter let's have a look at some more of Carleton Coon's "Mediterreanian" caucasoids

Of course, Coon never called East Africans "Mediterranean Caucasoids". He stated that they were a Mediterranean-Negroid hybrid, and he was absolutely correct. (Btw, do you ever plan on learning how to spell "Mediterranean"?)

quote:
....in this case they have E3b and little to no E3a.

Yeah, plus some A and B, and almost all L mtDNA.

[This message has been edited by Evil Euro (edited 07 April 2005).]


Posts: 906 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
But he still likened their features to those of Hamitic North Africans. He was wrong. It turns out they simply look Negroid

Of course Carleton Coon knew what the Tutsi looked like silly.

Coon uses the EXACT same racist criterion on the Tutsi and other so called "Mediteranian caucazoids".

Carleton S. Coon makes an even more grandoise claim of these Mediterranean types. "Coon reported that excavations in Kenya and Tanganyika had uncovered the remains of a tall, extremely long-headed "Mediterranean" type with a tendency to great elongation and narrowness of face." - Dana Reynolds

For Coon, the Tutsi, the Masai, the Somali, the Shilluk, the Borana and others are the living proof.

But he was wrong of course, and so are you.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 07 April 2005).]


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rasol
Member
Member # 4592

Icon 1 posted      Profile for rasol     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
re E3B:
quote:
Yeah, plus some A and B, and almost all L mtDNA
...and M1 actually.

Pretty much defines East African genetically.

Accordingly indigenous East Africans are Black.

Prehistoric East African whites do not exist.

[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 07 April 2005).]


Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ausar
Member
Member # 1797

Rate Member
Icon 3 posted      Profile for ausar   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The whole Eastern African Mediterranean theory really goes back to Guliselpi Sergi. Sergi was the father of this theory that Coon later tried to apply to a scientific basis. Yes, Coon believed Somalis were the extreme of the Mediterranean type. Coon also through groups like the Shilluk,Dinka,Massai,and other Niloites were hybrids. You think I am making this up then read some of Coon's very own work in his '"Race of Africa''

The whole reason why many are able to get away with these extreme caucasoid racial classifications is much to do with sub-racial categories. Nobody in the field of physical/biological anthropology uses sub-races anymore,and people who do are fringe types.



Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Evil-Euro has always told lies, but he has gone too far with the asian mail-ordered brides!!!

The worst lies are ones that are partially true, and those are exactly the kinds of lies Evil-Euro tells!

He claims that caucasoids were indigenous to East Africa, yet the only so-called ‘proof’ he has is a measly few pictures of ‘East African’ people and that they carry E3b. He uses Ethiopians and Somalians as examples. I already knew about the E3 lineages being African in origin, and you guys have already explained this all so many times. What I find more ridiculous are his pictures!

LOL I find it funny that out of all the pics of Somalis out there, Evil-E only has maybe a couple. It’s true that Somalis have narrow features like narrow faces and noses, but isn’t it convenient that Evil’s two pics show men whose features are not narrow, but really thin and aquiline!

I’ve seen plenty of Somalis both in real life and elsewhere but I’ve never seen any with features exactly like that, not that there aren’t any Somalis like that, but you guys already know the game he plays.

Are Somalis mixed? The answer is only a very small percentage of them and these are mostly confined to the cities around the coast. As some of you may already know, many of these cities grew from settlements of Arab traders, so it’s not surprising. I believe these Somalis of Arab ancestry are known as Benadir and they seem to have a more privileged status because of their ancestry are seen as ‘closer’ to the Prophet Muhammad. I personally know a few Somalis and they tell me all this themselves.

Here is are more pictures of what most Somalis look like:



Posts: 26246 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Djehuti
Member
Member # 6698

Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Djehuti     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Are Ethiopians mixed? The fact is that the admixture is greater in Ethiopians than in Somalians but still, by an large, the vast majority of Ethiopians are unmixed Africans. During the 2nd millennium B.C., when Semitic peoples of Arabia were migrating and expanding, some Semitic tribes spread south in to southern Arabia, in what is now Yemen and from there, crossed the Red Sea into what is now Eritrea and northern Ethiopia. These settlers were the Sabaean people, and they mixed and intermarried with the native Cushitic peoples. Their modern-day descendants are the Amhara and Tigre people whose languages are directly descended from Sabaean. I also know some Amhara people, these people are fairer with more pronounced so-called ‘caucasoid’ features and I have no doubt these are the people Evil-E claims to what all Ethiopians are like.

However, the Amhara and Tigre are a minorities who live mainly in the northeast. The vast majority of Ethiopians have nil admixture. The largest group in Ethiopia are the Oromo but there are others like the Borana, Kotu, Sidama, and even in the north there still remain unmixed groups like the Agau, Saho, and Afar.


Posts: 26246 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | EgyptSearch!

(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3