quote:rasol writes: Nice try loser, but you were attempting to refute Brace's comments on the Equatorial skin color of East Africans, by pretending he wasn't referring to skin color. Idiot.
quote:EuroDummy's pathetic excuse: I didn't know what he was referring to
If you don't know, then SHUT UP, FOOL!
Don't try and distort.
That's the kind of idiot behavior that got you into this mess in the first place.
quote:because you hadn't posted the full citation
That citation has been posted on this forum several times - I simply cut and pasted it, again. Only a retarded child uses "i didn't know" as an excuse for not being able to understand something it's been told over and over again.
quote:Tony Soprano writes:
Just-
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 05 September 2005).]
quote:ginney pussy: Just like your little lap-dog Super coon has no answers for this:
A = maternal ancestry B = paternal ancestry
So, ginzo pansy, you are on record admitting that this nonesense doesn't actually address...
What "haplotypes" [not a map] are considered “Niger Congo” mtDNA in the Ethiopian gene pool, as per the Passarino study?
Where is the Borana sample that Passarino studied, and what "Niger Congo" mtDNA are they supposed to carry?
...but supposedly an off-point ginney gibber meant to be forwarded as a "question".
Bravo, little ginzo ape, for stripping yourself before all, as one truely pussified milksop; you couldn't have done a better a job.---a round of applause---
[This message has been edited by Super car (edited 05 September 2005).]
quote:Evil Euro: Of course, "African" doesn't equal "Negroid" or "Black", and Australoids are a modern race distinct from generalized pre-historic humans:
"[u]Of all 'major races', Australoids have evidently changed least from the generalised modern human pattern[/u], but the flat, receding forehead and angular skull vault that characterise many full-blooded Aboriginal people today are somewhat different to the Qafzeh/Skhul pattern. A 1999 study by Susan Antón and Karen Weinstein of the University of Florida, in the process of confirming that some of the Australian fossils (including most of the famous Kow Swamp series) had undergone artificial head deformation in infancy, found unexpectedly that most of the Pleistocene fossil Australian crania are rounder-skulled than modern ones. So racial features developed late in this part of the world, too." -- Colin Groves
I don't know if this is a relevant point in the debate but the bolded statement, in conjunction with the craniometric map, does not seem to lend credence to a caucasoid East African scenario.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Calypso: I don't know if this is a relevant point in the debate but the bolded statement, in conjunction with the craniometric map, does not seem to lend credence to a caucasoid East African scenario.
Good catch. And this one of dozens of Erroneous Euro contradictions was noted in an earlier conversation:
quote: He presented a skull chart from Brace showing the similarity of modern Sub saharan African crania to those of Melanesians and Australians - people whose ancestors migrated out of East Africa 50 thousand years ago.
This cranial [only] map by Brace makes so called Sub-saharans closer to Australio-Melanesians [also oddly lumped together], in terms of skull shape than NorthWest Europeans are to Swedes.
By defintion this would make the Blacks of Africa, Australia, and Melanesia the most like the orignal OOA population and the Europeans....the least like them.
Of course, we already know this to be the case....
quote:
J Hum Evol. 2005 Apr;48(4):403-14.
Neves WA, Hubbe M, Okumura MM, Gonzalez-Jose R, Figuti L, Eggers S, De Blasis PA.
Increasing skeletal evidence from the U.S.A., Mexico, Colombia, and Brazil strongly suggests that the first settlers in the Americas had a cranial morphology distinct from that displayed by most late and modern Native Americans. The Paleoamerican morphological pattern is more generalized and can be seen today among Africans, Australians, and Melanesians.
Here, we present the results of a comparative morphological assessment of a late Paleoindian from Capelinha Burial II, southern Brazil.
In both analyses performed (classical morphometrics and geometric morphometrics), the results show a clear association between Capelinha Burial II and the Paleoindians, as well as Australians, Melanesians, and Africans, confirming its Paleoamerican status.
....
quote: African Exodus Christopher Stringer and Robin McKie 1996
"Nor does the picture get any clearer when we move on to the Cro-Magnons, the presumed ancestors of modern Europeans. Some were more like present-day Australians or Africans, judged by objective anatomical observations..."
His chart spams contradict one another and they all contradict him. The red eyed blind albino monkey is the only one who can't see that.
And that's why he was forced to....
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 05 September 2005).]
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 05 September 2005).]
posted
Since we are discussing Brace, let's not forget the following....pertaining HertoMan of Ethiopia [150kya], Brace also found it to be most like modern East Africans, and least like Europeans.
So much so, that he speculates the European morphology may be the result of some admixture with Neanderthal:
That splendid Ethiopian specimen is a good candidate for being an ancestor of Ethiopians, but not Europeans. - C. Loring Brace
quote:Rasol: Since we are discussing Brace, let's not forget the following....pertaining HertoMan of Ethiopia [150kya], Brace also found it to be most like modern East Africans, and least like Europeans. So much so, that he speculates the European morphology may be the result of some admixture with Neanderthal:
That splendid Ethiopian specimen is a good candidate for being an ancestor of Ethiopians, but not Europeans. - C. Loring Brace
The evidence against a "caucasian" presence in pre-historic East Africa seems truly overwhelming. Keep on bringing the truth, which, as you pointed out at another time, is the important thing. The spectacle of seeing a Nazi zealot getting a merciless mind whipping, although enjoyable, is but a side-show.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
[QUOTE] African Exodus Christopher Stringer and Robin McKie 1996
"Nor does the picture get any clearer when we move on to the Cro-Magnons, the presumed ancestors of modern Europeans. Some were [b]more like present-day Australians or Africans, judged by objective anatomical observations..."
His chart spams contradict one another and they all contradict him. The red eyed blind albino monkey is the only one who can't see that.
And that's why he was forced to....
[/B][/QUOTE]
Thought Writes:
These are all great examples Rasol. The so-called **GENERALIZED** morphology is nothing more than a euphimism for the range of ancestral AND modern Black African phenotypic morphologies. In fact the term generalized means undifferentiated. Until recently the people of Australia were known as "Blacks". In the U.K. East Indians are still known as Blacks. The ancient Greeks recognized the eastern and the western Ethiopians. The mtDNA lineage M unites tropical African and Asian people from Guinea-Bissau to the Andaman Islands. The cranial remains of pre-mesolithic Egypt (the region that humans used to migrate out of Africa) have cranial and dental affinities with modern Sub-Saharan Africans, as do modern Andaman Islanders (the proto-Asian types). All of this is consistent with Black people being the first people to inhabit the earth. Relativism is being utilized to create a superficial disassociation between the **GENERALIZED** paleolithic remains found in Africa, Asia, the Americas and early Europe. Superficial variations are blown out of proportion in Africa or when it is related to Black people. But when we discover variation through time in Europe a call for continuity is made:
Thought Posts:
Ancient Germans weren't so fair Anna Salleh in Brisbane ABC Science Online Friday, 16 July 2004
This girl’s ancestors may have had darker skin that didn't burn so easily, ancient DNA suggests (Image: iStockphoto) Researchers may be able to make more accurate reconstructions of what ancient humans looked like with the first ever use of ancient DNA to determine hair and skin colour from skeletal remains.
The research was presented today at an international ancient DNA conference in Brisbane, Australia, by German anthropologist, Dr Diane Schmidt of the University of Göttingen.
She said her research may also help to identify modern day murderers and their victims.
"Three thousand years ago, nobody was doing painting and there was no photography. We do not know what people looked like," Schmidt told ABC Science Online.
She said most images in museums and books were derived from comparisons with living people from the same regions.
"For example, when we make a reconstruction of people from Africa we think that they had dark skin or dark hair," she said. "But there's no real scientific information. It's just a guess. It's mostly imagination."
She said this had meant, for example, that the reconstruction of Neanderthals had changed over time.
"In the 1920s, the Neanderthals were reconstructed as wild people with dark hair and dumb, not really clever," she said. "Today, with the same fossil record, with the same bones and no other information - just a change in ideology - you see reconstructions of people with blue eyes and quite light skin colour, looking intelligent and using tools.
"Most of the reconstructions you see in museums are a thing of the imagination of the reconstructor. Our goal is to make this reconstruction less subjective and give them an objective basis with scientific data."
Genetic markers for hair colour
In research for her recently completed PhD, Schmidt built on research from the fields of dermatology and skin cancer that have found genetic markers for traits such as skin and hair colour in modern humans.
In particular, Schmidt relied on the fact that different mutations (known as single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs) in the melanocortin receptor 1 gene are responsible for skin and hair colour.
DNA analysis showed this skull belonged to someone with red hair (Image: Sussane Hummel) "There is a set of SNPs that tells you that a person was a redhead and a different set of markers tell you they were fair skinned."
She extracted DNA from ancient human bones as old as 3000 years old from three different locations in Germany and looked for these SNPs.
Her findings suggest that red hair and fair skin was very uncommon among ancient Germans.
Out of a total of 26 people analysed, Schmidt found only one person with red hair and fair skin, a man from the Middle Ages. All the other people had more UV-tolerant skin that tans easily.
She said she was excited when she "coloured in" the faces that once covered the skulls, and had even developed "a kind of a personal relationship" with one of them.
"It's not so anonymous," she said. "I think this is the reason why people in museums can do reconstruction because our ancestors are not so anonymous any more; they have a face you can look into."
Unfortunately the genetic markers Schmidt used could not distinguish which of the ancient humans had blond versus black hair, and she could not determine eye colour.
But, she said she was confident that this will be possible in a few years.
Schmidt said that such research could also be used to help build up identikit pictures to help identify skeletons or criminals.
quote:Originally posted by Charlie_Bass: Talk about no answers and still using Brace's plot and misrepresenting his views, *YOU* have no answers to this:
I've already "answered" that by agreeing with it. Now where are your answers for this:
Well, if you don't like either explanation, then the onus is on you to provide an alternative theory to account for Brace's plot. If Somalis are neither mixed with Eurasians nor descended from Eurasian-like East Africans, then how do you explain their cranial alignment near Eurasian groups?
quote:Originally posted by Babbling Ape: Don't try and distort.
Don't post off-topic. Now quit stalling and get some answers, nig:
Well, if you don't like either explanation, then the onus is on you to provide an alternative theory to account for Brace's plot. If Somalis are neither mixed with Eurasians nor descended from Eurasian-like East Africans, then how do you explain their cranial alignment near Eurasian groups?
quote:pertaining HertoMan of Ethiopia [150kya]
"There are implications for the origins of modern races, too. Herto (and Jebel Irhoud) are H. sapiens, but with primitive features. They are not, racially speaking, Africans. The later Omo and Klasies remains are more modern, but they too are archaic, and certainly show no traces of the features that characterise any modern races. Only Qafzeh and Skhul seem to lack these primitive features, and rate as 'generalised modern humans'. Our species seems to have existed as an entity long, long before it began to spread outside Africa or the Middle East, let alone split into geographic races." (Colin Groves)
[This message has been edited by Evil Euro (edited 06 September 2005).]
quote:Originally posted by Calypso: The evidence against a "caucasian" presence in pre-historic East Africa seems truly overwhelming. Keep on bringing the truth, which, as you pointed out at another time, is the important thing. The spectacle of seeing a Nazi zealot getting a merciless mind whipping, although enjoyable, is but a side-show.
Exactly, the point is to share knowledge with the real people. SillyEuro is just someone to beat up on while we're learning.
quote:Well, if you don't like either explanation, then the onus is on you to provide an alternative theory to account for Brace's plot. If Somalis are neither mixed with Eurasians nor descended from Eurasian-like East Africans, then how do you explain their cranial alignment near Eurasian groups?
Try seeing what Brace wrote you stupid, stubborn trolling moron. I already answered this question with Brace's e-mail reply. Supply a source that says they're Eurasian like, who the hell are you that we should take your biased interpretation of anything?
quote:Originally posted by Charlie_Bass: Repeating spammer wrote:
Try seeing what Brace wrote you stupid, stubborn trolling moron. I already answered this question with Brace's e-mail reply. Supply a source that says they're Eurasian like, who the hell are you that we should take your biased interpretation of anything?
A "nobody" mook, who gets no attention elsewhere, but of course,...Egyptsearch!
quote:Originally posted by Charlie_Bass: I already answered this question with Brace's e-mail reply.
How is that possible when I asked the question after you posted the e-mail reply?
quote:Supply a source that says they're Eurasian like
The source is Brace himself, you blind ape:
So I repeat:
If Somalis are neither mixed with Eurasians nor descended from Eurasian-like East Africans, then how do you explain their cranial alignment near Eurasian groups?
[This message has been edited by Evil Euro (edited 07 September 2005).]
Correction....mindless repetition of question Brace has already answered.
quote:EuroDummy: If Somalis are neither mixed with Eurasians
Brace has already answered this: "As I see it, the appearances of the Upper Nile Valley and Horn people has little if anything to do with admixtures"
quote:EuroDummy: then how do you explain their cranial alignment near Eurasian groups
Brace has already answered this: I would expect people like the Fulani to fall into the same general category as the Somali and Nubians in a kind of Northeast African group. Hiernaux's Elongated East Africans is a fine observation by a first-rate student of the business."
In fact Brace does not 'align' them with Eurasian groups. Brace groups them with other elongated Africans including Nubians.
Brace has answered your questions very clearly, you are simply in denial because he rejected your view. You are behaving exactly as all rejected losers do.
If pretending that Brace has not answered your question is the best you can do, then you are truly a sick puppy.
Seek help!
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 07 September 2005).]
quote:Originally posted by Evil Euro: The source is Brace himself, you blind ape:
Look I'm posting my final words on this, either you're going to post a direct quote from Brace himself that states they're Eurasian like or shut up. You're making a fool out of yourself misrepresenting his views when he states exactly what he considers them to be. He agreed with the Elongated East African classification by Hiernaux so what the hell are you begging the question for? You're not an anthropologist and you look like a fool arguing against the words of the anthropologist himself and his study. Who are you to overrule him?
quote:Originally posted by Charlie_Bass: ...either you're going to post a **direct** quote from Brace himself that states they're Eurasian like or shut up.
That should be the only way to go with a ginzo crackpot; don't expect anything less or more than a "direct quote" from the author, along with the **full context** in which the "direct quote" was placed...all in the **exact words** of the author. Don't rely on 'inferences' made by the blind mimicking crackpot.
quote:Originally posted by Babbling Ape: Brace has already answered this: I would expect people like the Fulani to fall into the same general category as the Somali and Nubians in a kind of Northeast African group. Hiernaux's Elongated East Africans is a fine observation by a first-rate student of the business."
What he "would expect" is not what actually is. His hypothesis has yet to be tested. The Fulanis I've seen, like Bantu Tutsis, don't resemble E3b-carrying East Africans very much. Still, they're a nomadic Islamic tribe from the southern Sahara, so the possibility of Arab/Berber admixture can't be ruled out.
quote:In fact Brace does not 'align' them with Eurasian groups. Brace groups them with other elongated Africans including Nubians...
...who are also intermediate between Sub-Saharan Africans and Eurasians in Brace's plot.
quote:CL Brace wrote I would expect people like the Fulani to fall into the same general category as the Somali and Nubians in a kind of Northeast African group. Hiernaux's Elongated East Africans is a fine observation by a first-rate student of the business."
quote:Erroneous grovels: His hypothesis has yet to be tested.
Wrong. It has been tested by Jean Hiernaux, Philip Rightmire, Keita, Zakrezewski, Brace and others.
quote:Fulanis I've seen, like Bantu Tutsis, don't resemble E3b-carrying East Africans very much.
Your non scientific observations are worthless.
Intstead of whining to us because Brace has shattered your racist fantasies, write Brace yourself and dispute his observations - with your Erroneous antics, if you think you can.
In fact, we know you won't because you're afraid he will either reject you, again...or simply ignore you.
quote:rasol wrote: In fact Brace does not 'align' them with Eurasian groups. Brace groups them with other elongated Africans including Nubians...
quote:Erroneous writes: who are also intermediate between Sub-Saharan Africans
No, since Somali are sub-saharan Africans and group with others who are similar in morphology, per Brace and Hiernaux and Rightmire and Keita and Vogel.
The scholars agree and have debunked your racist-distortions.
So, back to sucking on fellow pseudo Dienekes Pontikos - your only source of "support".
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 08 September 2005).]
posted
Where's the craniometric map with Fulanis plotted on it? Where are the mtDNA and Y-chromosome studies about Fulanis? Until we have such data before us, every claim about that group's ancestral and morphological affinities is pure conjecture, as Brace himself is aware:
"I would expect people like the Fulani to fall into the same general category . . ."
quote:Originally posted by Evil Euro: Where's the craniometric map with Fulanis plotted on it? Where are the mtDNA and Y-chromosome studies about Fulanis?
Brace draws his conclusions based upon his cranial study of Somali and Nubians. which he states is concordant with Hiernaux's skeletal study of Somali and other elongated Africans, and concurs with the data from Dr. Shomarka Keita, Dr. Sonia Zakrezewski et. al..
Fulani DNA has been studied by Cruciani and others.
Not Brace's fault you're both stupid and unaware, of the basic facts necessary to engage in a serious conversation.
So Brace ignores you.
We continue to use you.
Take it....like the loser you are.
Skeletal data from Jean Hiernaux:
Tutsi of Rwanda:
[color=green]
Stature: 176 cm
Head length: 198 mm
Head breadth: 147 mm
Face height: 125 mm
Face breadth: 134 mm
Nose height: 56 mm
Nose breadth: 39 mm
Relative trunk length: 49.7
Cephalic Index: 74.5
Facial Index: 92.8
Nasal Index: 69.5[/color]
Masai:
[color=blue]
Stature: 173 cm
Head length: 194 mm
Head Breadth: 140 mm
Face Height: 121 mm
Face Breadth: 137 mm
Nose Height: 54 mm
Nose Breadth: 39 mm
Relative Trunk length: 47.7
Cephalic Index: 72.8
Facial Index: 89.0
Nasal Index: 72.0[/color]
Galla(Oromo):
[color=red]
Stature: 171 cm
Head length: 190 mm
Head Breadth: 147 mm
Face Height: 122 mm
Face Breadth: 133 mm
Nose Height: 53 mm
Nose Breadth: 37 mm
Relative Trunk length: 50.3
Cephalic Index: 77.6
Facial Index: 91.5
Nasal Index: 69.0[/color]
Sab Somali:
[color=gray]
Stature: 173 cm
Head length: 194 mm
Head Breadth: 145 mm
Face Height: 119 mm
Face Breadth: 134 mm
Nose Height: 49 mm
Nose Breadth: 36 mm
Relative Trunk length: 49.7
Cephalic Index: 74.7
Facial Index: 88.5
Nasal Index: 72.8[/color]
Warsingali Somali:
[color=navy]
Stature: 168 cm
Head length: 192 mm
Head Breadth: 143 mm
Face Height: 123 mm
Face Breadth: 131 mm
Nose Height: 52 mm
Nose Breadth: 34 mm
Relative Trunk length: 50.7
Cephalic Index: 74.5
Facial Index: 94.1
Nasal Index: 66.0[/color]
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 09 September 2005).]
quote:Originally posted by leba: Have you ever seen the president of Somalia? He looks like a white Nordic guy with brown skin..
This somali man also looks white/European but with dark skin.
<-- This guy is anything but Negroid
[This message has been edited by leba (edited 09 September 2005).]
It is rather interesting to see the variation of features in Africa. Far more variation than in Europe. However, if you have even been to China or paid any attention to the features of Orientals you will see that they too have this type of variation.
quote:Originally posted by Babbling Ape: Brace draws his conclusions based upon his cranial study of Somali and Nubians. which he states is concordant with Hiernaux's skeletal study of Somali and other elongated Africans, and concurs with the data from Dr. Shomarka Keita, Dr. Sonia Zakrezewski et. al..
Fulani DNA has been studied by Cruciani and others.
Not Brace's fault you're both stupid and unaware, of the basic facts necessary to engage in a serious conversation.
So Brace ignores you.
We continue to use you.
Take it....like the loser you are.
Translation: You can't produce any of the requested data. What a surprise.
quote:Originally posted by Charlie_Bass: ...either you're going to post a **direct** quote from Brace himself that states they're Eurasian like or shut up.
Back to the business of Brace's merciless rejection of the poor unconscious troll, forcing it to 'temporarily' retract from the futile attribution of indigenous sub-Sahara East African morphology to admixture! Is it any wonder then, that ginney hasn't delivered the requested direct Brace citation on "Eurasian like"?
quote:Originally posted by Super car: Back to the business of Brace's merciless rejection of the poor unconscious troll, forcing it to 'temporarily' retract from the futile attribution of indigenous sub-Sahara East African morphology to admixture! Is it any wonder then, that ginney hasn't delivered the requested direct Brace citation on "Eurasian like"?
but what's the point??
Stupid-Euro has been beaten and broken so many times, yet the idiot is too stupid to know it, or at least denies it!!
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
CB: Don't let RetardedEuro bait you into supplying him with ever more data. It's just another way of stalling, changing the subject and setting the basis for new monkeyshines from him.
Same with Dienekes by the way. Don't try and prove anything TO THEM. And NEVER accept their distorted terms of argument for the purpose of 'showing them', anything.
Propagandists only goal is to distort information. Sometimes you argue as if you're trying to change THEIR minds.
The objective is merely to prevent them from poluting the public water supply. ie - to shut them down.
You've done a great job of that, and the reply from Brace was very helpful. Thanks.
[This message has been edited by rasol (edited 11 September 2005).]
quote:Originally posted by Babbling Ape: CB: Don't let RetardedEuro bait you into supplying him with ever more data. It's just another way of stalling, changing the subject
Translation: CB: I know you don't have the data we need, and neither to I, so I'll try to stall and change the subject, and maybe Evil Euro won't notice.
quote:The objective is merely to prevent them from poluting the public water supply. ie - to shut them down.
Translation: The objective is to prevent the truth from reaching the public -- i.e. to shut down whoever exposes our Afrocentric agendas.
posted
What you see in rasol's picture is a dead American and about 20 people who have an average IQ of 60....literally.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Only a retarded child uses "i didn't know" as an excuse for not being able to understand something it's been told over and over again.
<-- This guy is anything but Negroid 
Printer-friendly view of this topic