posted
Six ending points (they warned me you were a troll but would I listen?)
1 You obviously have no idea who Abu Uthman Amr ibn Bahr al-Jahiz was, and yes it matters who he was and why he wrote that essay and why it's in a certain specific dialect
2 The Kmtyw left the first record of loosely labeling anyone black
3 Genetics does not show colour
4 It's unproven Luiza's folk came through Beringia, her skull indicates the Oceania route
5 The "Australians" are sho nuff black as are the Papuans and Melanesians, they don't make cover for it nor are they ashamed of it
6 Too bad you have a hang up about black. Mosts blacks love the skin they're in ala the blacker the berrie the sweeter the juice
BTW - a rough 10,000 years seperates Lady Peñon and Luiza from the Xi (Olmec)
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom: Arabs were no different than Europeans in their loose labeling of people. Still doesn't make a person a label. What they saw themselves as, and what genetics shows, that I will buy.
I highly doubt the Polynesian claim for Olmecs, Luzia, Peñon, etc. More like Polynesians are decended from the same people Australians and Amerinds are. Luzia and them did not migrate straight to the South. They followed the coast line from Asia to America. The problem with finding remains is the sea line is much higher now.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom: Arabs were no different than Europeans in their loose labeling of people. Still doesn't make a person a label. What they saw themselves as, and what genetics shows, that I will buy.
I highly doubt the Polynesian claim for Olmecs, Luzia, Peñon, etc. More like Polynesians are decended from the same people Australians and Amerinds are. Luzia and them did not migrate straight to the South. They followed the coast line from Asia to America. The problem with finding remains is the sea line is much higher now.
The evidence speaks of people having tropical adaptation in such a way that it is difficult to follow the beach combing land bridge theory. The argument is that they would have lost their tropical adaptation if they had followed such a arduous route. There is also evidence that counters the existence of tropical adaptation in people of the Nothern parts of the North American continent (Kennewick man).
What evidence are you basing your opinion on?
Not at all. The Beach combing rudimentary boat trip would have not been a multigenerational expansion of the northern regions. Tropical adaptation would not have been lost in the same way land treckers going through cold regions would have.
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: 1 You obviously have no idea who Abu Uthman Amr ibn Bahr al-Jahiz was, and yes it matters who he was and why he wrote that essay and why it's in a certain specific dialect
Feel free to enlighten me.
quote:2 The Kmtyw left the first record of loosely labeling anyone black
Like Kemsit. But that does not mean a race called black
quote:4 It's unproven Luiza's folk came through Beringia, her skull indicates the Oceania route
How so?
quote:5 The "Australians" are sho nuff black as are the Papuans and Melanesians, they don't make cover for it nor are they ashamed of it
Being called something by colonialist powers for centuries tends to do that.
quote:6 Too bad you have a hang up about black. Mosts blacks love the skin they're in ala the blacker the berrie the sweeter the juice
LOL. I've dated girls as dark as Dinka. You speak out the wrong orifice. They still did not have Black skin, it was dark brown. Black is just a relative term. And it doesn't apply to all dark peoples.
quote:BTW - a rough 10,000 years seperates Lady Peñon and Luiza from the Xi (Olmec)
Yep. Your point?
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Altakruri The Kmtyw left the first record of labeling anyone black
Correct, and on point.
quote:Sidirom: But that does not mean a race called black
Unless you can prove the existence of races - including mixed races - that is just a red herring.
That you resent the fact that Kmtyw were black, really is your -singular obsessive- problem, and not theirs, nor ours.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Unless you can prove the existence of races - including mixed races - that is just a red herring.
Unless you can show that they had a perception of races or peoples all with one color trait, it is your claim that is a red hering. Egyptians came in various hues. None 'white', so don't throw in that strawman. Even if the shades varied from yellowish brown of say th khoiSan, to real dark brown of the Dinka, to people raised in that population those variations would be significant. Only to an outsider with significantly lighter skin would they all be "burnt faces" But to themselves, that variation was noticeable enough to put it in their artwork.
quote:That you resent the fact that Kmtyw were black, really is your -singular obsessive- problem, and not theirs, nor ours.
That you want to prove your interpratation that Rmt n Kmt were all 'Black' is yours.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: 1 You obviously have no idea who Abu Uthman Amr ibn Bahr al-Jahiz was, and yes it matters who he was and why he wrote that essay and why it's in a certain specific dialect
Feel free to enlighten me.
You need to do your own homework before shooting off your mouth with booshish disinforming those who know even less than you do about Africana.
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: 2 The Kmtyw left the first record of loosely labeling anyone black
Like Kemsit. But that does not mean a race called black
Simply refer to the recently discussed BG4:5. Just as in Africa today the Kmtyw had two broad colour (not race -- that's your stupid terminology) designations black and red. So stew about it in frustration to your heart's delight.
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: 4 It's unproven Luiza's folk came through Beringia, her skull indicates the Oceania route
How so?
Where are the Oceanic skulls along the proposed Beringia route? What evidence is there for Oceanics making and wearing clothes that resist subarctic cold? Oh! I see in one generation droves of Oceanics paddled north along the Asian coast invented coats and boots continued paddling along the coast of Beringia and then south along the coast of North America loosing cobbler schools to finally arrive in South America; like as if they knew it were there right from the start.
Yeah, rrrright. Snap goes Occam's Razor. The simplest scenario is Oceanics making the direct hop from Oceania to South America dribble by dribble. Only obsessive Beringia enthusiasms even allows for any other consideration.
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: 5 The "Australians" are sho nuff black as are the Papuans and Melanesians, they don't make cover for it nor are they ashamed of it
Being called something by colonialist powers for centuries tends to do that.
More ignorance on your part. You obviously don't know these people's self-identifier. You just love giving the whiteman a god complex don't you? People just couldn't have known they were black before Euro colonialists told them so because they were too blank minded to look see and know their own skin colour.
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: 6 Too bad you have a hang up about black. Mosts blacks love the skin they're in ala the blacker the berrie the sweeter the juice
LOL. I've dated girls as dark as Dinka. You speak out the wrong orifice. They still did not have Black skin, it was dark brown. Black is just a relative term. And it doesn't apply to all dark peoples.
The blacker the berrie is a kind of old AA/BA expression having nothing to do with whatever orifices you choose to drink from.
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: BTW - a rough 10,000 years seperates Lady Peñon and Luiza from the Xi (Olmec)
Yep. Your point?
You figure it out.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: You need to do your own homework before shooting off your mouth with booshish disinforming those who know even less than you do about Africana.
Don't think so. You still have not shown the relevance.
quote:BG4:5. Just as in Africa today the Kmtyw had two broad colour (not race -- that's your stupid terminology) designations black and red. So stew about it in frustration to your heart's delight.
And white and yellow. But no current Egyptologist attributes it to usage of a people.
quote:Where are the Oceanic skulls along the proposed Beringia route? What evidence is there for Oceanics making and wearing clothes that resist subarctic cold? Oh! I see in one generation droves of Oceanics paddled north along the Asian coast invented coats and boots continued paddling along the coast of Beringia and then south along the coast of North America loosing cobbler schools to finally arrive in South America; like as if they knew it were there right from the start.
About as many droves as would paddle from Oceania only more land to stop at. At please show that they couldn't have survived in those areas, much like the Yamana do in Tierra del Fuego.
quote:Yeah, rrrright. Snap goes Occam's Razor. The simplest scenario is Oceanics making the direct hop from Oceania to South America dribble by dribble. Only obsessive Beringia enthusiasms even allows for any other consideration.
Snap, first show that Oceanics were in those islands earlier than Penon Woman.
quote:More ignorance on your part. You obviously don't know these people's self-identifier. You just love giving the whiteman a god complex don't you? People just couldn't have known they were black before Euro colonialists told them so because they were too blank minded to look see and know their own skin colour.
Feel free to quote from their legends how they described themselves as such. Considering they aren't Black colored, then it is only myopic people like you who would buy into the Black identity.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: You have it backwards, as usual. [quote] Speak for yourself. [quote]I don't claim the Km.t had a perception of 'races'. I don't have a perception of 'races.' On the other hand: Cearly - YOU DO have a racial ideology, and like all who do.....you can't make any sense out of it. Don't blame us because you can't make sense out of your race rhetoric. And don't try to reverse the issue, by asking us to make sense...of your nonsense.
Nice try. When you try to categorize a ton of people under some moniquer such as Black you are assigning some type of commonality. Call it what you want, you are still colorist, racist, obsessed.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
* doesn't do the assigned research on alJahiz thus will never understand but always roorag about his relevancy
* doesn't do the assigned reading and so is clueless as to how BG 4:5 reads and in its place raises the irrelevancy of colours not written in the text
* doesn't use a map and so simply ignores the devastating logic of direct Oceania to South America voyaging all within tropical latitudes; assumes north Pacific routers survived subarctic cold virtually naked day and night
* doesn't do the homework assignment on what the indigenous Australians call themselves -- nor does he really care -- but shunts this failure off by introducing an off topic, legends
Course grade F- write any comment you want on the report card this session is through
your miserable display deserves no further comeback however you goad one because you are either ashamed of black resentful of black pre-Euro self-identity all down the ages since ancient Egypt to modern USA and from Egypt/Africa to Mesopotamia to greater India and associated islands to Australasia to Fiji; all peoples who couldn't give a rat's rear end for your embarassment and resentful hatred about black and have no problem with using black as a self-identifying label of their varying shades of brown skin tones before they knew any white Euros like you [no offense meant to the white or European descent members of this forum who are not race baiters]
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: You need to do your own homework before shooting off your mouth with booshish disinforming those who know even less than you do about Africana.
Don't think so. You still have not shown the relevance.
doesn't do the homework assignment on what the indigenous Australians call themselves but shunts this failure by introducing the off topic of legends
Course grade F- write any comment you want on the report card this session is through your miserable display deserves no further comeback however you goad one
quote:BG4:5. Just as in Africa today the Kmtyw had two broad colour (not race -- that's your stupid terminology) designations black and red. So stew about it in frustration to your heart's delight.
And white and yellow. But no current Egyptologist attributes it to usage of a people.
quote:Where are the Oceanic skulls along the proposed Beringia route? What evidence is there for Oceanics making and wearing clothes that resist subarctic cold? Oh! I see in one generation droves of Oceanics paddled north along the Asian coast invented coats and boots continued paddling along the coast of Beringia and then south along the coast of North America loosing cobbler schools to finally arrive in South America; like as if they knew it were there right from the start.
About as many droves as would paddle from Oceania only more land to stop at. At please show that they couldn't have survived in those areas, much like the Yamana do in Tierra del Fuego.
quote:Yeah, rrrright. Snap goes Occam's Razor. The simplest scenario is Oceanics making the direct hop from Oceania to South America dribble by dribble. Only obsessive Beringia enthusiasms even allows for any other consideration.
Snap, first show that Oceanics were in those islands earlier than Penon Woman.
quote:More ignorance on your part. You obviously don't know these people's self-identifier. You just love giving the whiteman a god complex don't you? People just couldn't have known they were black before Euro colonialists told them so because they were too blank minded to look see and know their own skin colour.
Feel free to quote from their legends how they described themselves as such. Considering they aren't Black colored, then it is only myopic people like you who would buy into the Black identity.
quote:You figure it out.
None worth mentioning.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: doesn't do the assigned research on alJahiz thus will never understand bt always roorag about his relevancy
Doesn't show any reason why an Arab text would be relevant to the discussion.
quote:doesn't do the assigned reading and so is clueless as to what BG:45 reads and in its place raises the irrelevancy of colours not written in the text
DOesn't quote correctly for there to be any reason to look up "BG:45"
quote:simply ignores the devastating logic of Oceania to South America voyaging all within tropical latitudes; assumes north Pacific routers survived subarctic cold virtually naked day and night
Simply ignores the devastating logic that the coastal travel makes more sense than long distances at sea. And that anyone who can construct boats has the capacity to make clothes.
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom:
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: You need to do your own homework before shooting off your mouth with booshish disinforming those who know even less than you do about Africana.
Don't think so. You still have not shown the relevance.
doesn't do the homework assignment on what the indigenous Australians call themselves but shunts this failure by introducing the off topic of legends
Course grade F- write any comment you want on the report card this session is through your miserable display deserves no further comeback however you goad one
quote:BG4:5. Just as in Africa today the Kmtyw had two broad colour (not race -- that's your stupid terminology) designations black and red. So stew about it in frustration to your heart's delight.
And white and yellow. But no current Egyptologist attributes it to usage of a people.
quote:Where are the Oceanic skulls along the proposed Beringia route? What evidence is there for Oceanics making and wearing clothes that resist subarctic cold? Oh! I see in one generation droves of Oceanics paddled north along the Asian coast invented coats and boots continued paddling along the coast of Beringia and then south along the coast of North America loosing cobbler schools to finally arrive in South America; like as if they knew it were there right from the start.
About as many droves as would paddle from Oceania only more land to stop at. At please show that they couldn't have survived in those areas, much like the Yamana do in Tierra del Fuego.
quote:Yeah, rrrright. Snap goes Occam's Razor. The simplest scenario is Oceanics making the direct hop from Oceania to South America dribble by dribble. Only obsessive Beringia enthusiasms even allows for any other consideration.
Snap, first show that Oceanics were in those islands earlier than Penon Woman.
quote:More ignorance on your part. You obviously don't know these people's self-identifier. You just love giving the whiteman a god complex don't you? People just couldn't have known they were black before Euro colonialists told them so because they were too blank minded to look see and know their own skin colour.
Feel free to quote from their legends how they described themselves as such. Considering they aren't Black colored, then it is only myopic people like you who would buy into the Black identity.
quote:Salassin the banned anti-Kemetic troll writes: when you try to categorize a ton of people under some moniquer such as Black
translation: It eats you alive that Nile Valley Africans referred themselves as Blacks [Km.t]. Unable to refute the message you cry about the messengers.
Too bad. Keep crying.....
quote:Altakruri: Why its worthless to chase a troll - doesn't do the assigned research on alJahiz thus will never understand but always roorag about his relevancy doesn't do the assigned reading and so is clueless as to what BG:45reads and in its place raises the irrelevancy of colours not written in the text simply ignores the devastating logic of Oceania to South America voyaging all within tropical latitudes; assumes north Pacific routers survivedsubarctic cold virtually naked day and night
You're quite right, which is why i'm placing Salassin - back on ignore. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, now I see. There's a setting that I can activate to let this Eurocentric poser talk to the hand all day long without knowing that he's even barking.
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Altakruri: Why its worthless to chase a troll - . . . .
You're quite right, which is why i'm placing Salassin, who was actually banned from this forum anyway - back on ignore.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Altakruri writes: * doesn't use a map and so simply ignores the devastating logic of direct Oceania to South America voyaging all within tropical latitudes;
The skulls belonging to the earliest known South Americans—or Paleo-Indians—had long, narrow crania, projecting jaws, and low, broad eye sockets and noses. Drastically different from American Indians, these skulls appear more similar to modern Australians, Melanesians, and Sub-Saharan Africans.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
The skulls belonging to the earliest known South Americans—or Paleo-Indians—had long, narrow crania, projecting jaws, and low, broad eye sockets and noses. Drastically different from American Indians, these skulls appear more similar to modern Australians, Melanesians, and Sub-Saharan Africans.
More like Australians and Melanesians
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Altakruri writes: * doesn't use a map and so simply ignores the devastating logic of direct Oceania to South America voyaging all within tropical latitudes;
From that link: Then some 6,000 to 12,000 years ago these ancient mariners made it to the Americas. "I don't know how they came," Dr. Wallace says. "They either came across the Pacific to Central and South America or they went up the east coast of Asia and across the northern Pacific to Alaska and Canada," he says. He already is examining mtDNA samples from natives of the Kamchatka Peninsula north of Japan to see if there is any mtDNA trace of these ancient sailors.
Allthose links say is that they have the same ancestors. And mariners going the coastal way would not have left remains in siberian populations as their coastal landings are under water.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
A=the "only via Beringia" model; ____ B=the "South Pacific Rim first" model
quote:from:Tom D. Dillehay Palaeoanthropology: Tracking the first Americans Nature 425, 23-24 (4 September 2003)
The archaeological and skeletal data have led to a new model, in which the Palaeoamericans — the proposed first arrivals in the New World — were not northeast Asians. They came instead from south Asia and the southern Pacific Rim, and they probably shared ancestry with ancient Australians and other southern populations [3, 9]. A second group of humans then arrived from northeast Asia or Mongolia, and it was this second population that adapted to the warming climate after the Ice Age and gave rise to the modern Amerindians (an ancient population of Americans whose skeletal remains make up most of the human material found in the New World) and the present-day Native Americans.
3 - Neves, W. A. & Pucciarelli, H. M. J. Hum. Evol. 21, 261−273 (1991). 9 - Neves, W. A. et al. Homo 50, 258−263 (1999).
George Gill, a forensic anthropologist at the University of Wyoming and one of the plaintiffs in the Kennewick Man case, said evidence indicated that seafaring people from southeast Asia or Polynesia could have reached the Americas by traveling along the Pacific Rim, landing somewhere in what is now South America.
quote:from an article covering the October 1999, Clovis and Beyond Conference on early Americans
Various models on the continental scale attempt to explain, using the evidence, ways the first people entered the American continent. One theory has been proposed by CSFA director Rob Bonnichsen, another by Ruth Gruhn and Alan Bryan of the University of Alberta.
Dr. Bryan's Circum-Pacific model for the colonization of the Americas, formulated in the '70s and for many years largely ignored by other authorities, was the first theory that took into account archaeological information from South America. Now his ideas, bolstered by new data coming from South America in recent years, truly challenge the Clovis-First model.
Speaking for himself and absent coauthor Gentry Steele, Dr. Bonnichsen discussed alternative routes and means that may have been used by people. "Using small boats along the Pacific Rim of Asia," he argues, the first people could have come to the Americas at the end of the last Ice Age.
.
.
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Altakruri writes: * doesn't use a map and so simply ignores the devastating logic of direct Oceania to South America voyaging all within tropical latitudes;
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: A=the "only via Beringia" model; B=the "also the South Pacific Rim" model
quote:from:Tom D. Dillehay Palaeoanthropology: Tracking the first Americans Nature 425, 23-24 (4 September 2003)
The archaeological and skeletal data have led to a new model, in which the Palaeoamericans — the proposed first arrivals in the New World — were not northeast Asians. They came instead from south Asia and the southern Pacific Rim, and they probably shared ancestry with ancient Australians and other southern populations [3, 9]. A second group of humans then arrived from northeast Asia or Mongolia, and it was this second population that adapted to the warming climate after the Ice Age and gave rise to the modern Amerindians (an ancient population of Americans whose skeletal remains make up most of the human material found in the New World) and the present-day Native Americans.
3 - Neves, W. A. & Pucciarelli, H. M. J. Hum. Evol. 21, 261−273 (1991). 9 - Neves, W. A. et al. Homo 50, 258−263 (1999).
George Gill, a forensic anthropologist at the University of Wyoming and one of the plaintiffs in the Kennewick Man case, said evidence indicated that seafaring people from southeast Asia or Polynesia could have reached the Americas by traveling along the Pacific Rim, landing somewhere in what is now South America.
quote:from an article covering the October 1999, Clovis and Beyond Conference on early Americans
Various models on the continental scale attempt to explain, using the evidence, ways the first people entered the American continent. One theory has been proposed by CSFA director Rob Bonnichsen, another by Ruth Gruhn and Alan Bryan of the University of Alberta.
Dr. Bryan's Circum-Pacific model for the colonization of the Americas, formulated in the '70s and for many years largely ignored by other authorities, was the first theory that took into account archaeological information from South America. Now his ideas, bolstered by new data coming from South America in recent years, truly challenge the Clovis-First model.
Speaking for himself and absent coauthor Gentry Steele, Dr. Bonnichsen discussed alternative routes and means that may have been used by people. "Using small boats along the Pacific Rim of Asia," he argues, the first people could have come to the Americas at the end of the last Ice Age.
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Altakruri writes: * doesn't use a map and so simply ignores the devastating logic of direct Oceania to South America voyaging all within tropical latitudes;
"The earliest Americans are very different from nowadays Indians or later archaeological material," "We are proposing that the Americas were populated by waves of humans.
"The lineage picture is further obscured by the decimation of the native population upon the arrival of Europeans beginning in the 15th century.
"I bet that if [molecular biologists] come to use the genes responsible for cranial morphology, our results will certainly agree," "When the earliest Native Americans are taken into account, it becomes clear that the two most different and opposite architectural plans in terms of human cranial morphology existing today on the planet were represented in the New World." - Walter Neves
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Occam's Razor renders tortuous contortionist convolution unnecessary when direct simplicity is present. Thus we have Austro-Melanesian phenotype known mariners of tropical plant and seafood diet and minimal clothing island hopping across the Pacific in the epipaleolithic holocene to South America without highly hypothesized mastodon fur wearing, big game hunting pre or proto Austro-Melanesian beachcombing convulsions where there are no osteo- remains of Austro-Melanesian phenotypes past or present.
quote:Originally posted by rasol:
quote:Sidirom [aka Sallassin the banned troll] writes: All those links say is that they have the same ancestors
Altakruri is right, your reading comprehension really stinks.
quote:The scene depicts groups of prehistoric, intrepid mariners moving, *not* out of Siberia as anthropologists have long assumed, but out of Southeast Asia across the Pacific into the Americas 6,000 to 12,000 years ago. If this picture is accurate, it makes many American Indians distant cousins of the Polynesian.
These scientists are specifically suggesting possible Pacific Ocean to America migration routes.
As usual, you find a way not to hear anything you don't like, which is why we just ignore your inane trolling.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Inasmuch as the Paleo Americans resemble tropical Africans -and even moreso tropical Melanesian and Black Australian populations.
And according to Neves - they are radically unlike native Siberians - therefore the problems of a purely arctic ancestry, that coincidentally converages on a not merely tropical, but specifically Melanesio-Australian phenotype are difficult to surmount.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
A coastal route around the North Pacific could have led early explorers to lands later submerged when melting glaciers raised sea levels. The possibility of an Ice Age migration directly across the Pacific is widely discounted, but Polynesians certainly had that capability by 500 A.D., when Hawaii and Easter Island were inhabited.
Peñon Woman was found in Baja California as were the last Pericu lived in Columbus'time as well.
When measuring up and comparing the Pericu skulls, the authors discovered that their owners were not a group of Amerinds like most of the Mexican population since prehistoric times. Instead they had distinct and clear affinities to Southeast Asia and the Pacific rim populations. As such, they would seem to represent another Palaeoamerican population that had lived in isolation for a long time and, moreover, one that had managed to survive until very recently.
The chart below shows that the population most closely related to the Pericu (BCS) by skull measurements are the Lagoa Santa people (PAL) - also known as Lapa Vermelha IV or "Luzia's" people - who lived in Minas Gerais near Belo Horizonte in Brazil around 12,500 years ago.
Results of multivariate analysis of Pericu skulls 1: The principal coordinates represent minimum genetic distances (chart adapted from Gonzalez-Jose, R. Gonzalez-Martin A., Hernandez M., Pucciarelli H.M., Sardi M., Rosales A. and Van der Molen S. 2003. "Craniometric Evidence for Palaeoamerican survival in Baja California", Nature, 425:62-65; and Th. D. Dillehay. 2003. "Tracking the first Americans", Nature, 425:23-24. PERICU GROUP (Baja California Sur, Mexico) BCS Fuegians (Tierra del Fuego, Argenina/Chile) FUEG Patagonians (Argentina) PATA Andean Patagonians (Argentina/Chile) APAT Pampas (Buenos Aires, Argenina) PAM Delta of Parana (eastern Argentina) DPAR Aztecs (Mexico) TLAT Bolivians (Bolivia) BOL Toba (northeastern Argentina) TOBA Calchaqui (northwestern Argentina) CAL Palaeoamericans of Brazil ("Luzia" etc.) PAL Teita (Kenya, Africa) TEITA Dogon (Mali, Africa) DOGON Zulu (South Africa) ZULU Bushmen (South Africa) BUSH Australian aborigines (Australia) AUST Tasmanian aborigines (Tasmania, Australia) TASM Tolai (Melanesia) TOLAI Buriats (East Asia) BURIAT Inuit (Eskimo) (Greenland) ESKI Yauyos (Peru) PERU Arikara (USA) ARIK Ainu (Japan) AINU North Japanese (Japan) NJAP South Japanese (Japan) SJAP Hainan (southern China) HAIN Anyang (Taiwan) ANYA Atayal (eastern China) ATAY Santa Cruz (California, USA) SANT
"Early people might have moved south from the Bering Strait by following a chain of small ice-free areas that existed along the outer Pacific coast," Knut Fladmark, a professor of archaeology at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, told me by e-mail. "Many of those areas would now be underwater."
In 1997, Daryl Fedje, an archaeologist with the Canadian parks system, found a stone tool at a site now 160 feet under water off the coast of British Columbia. The artifact, 10,200 years old, shows that people once lived on that submerged land, Fedje says. Note the northern Jomon. Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Inasmuch as the Paleo Americans resemble tropical Africans -and even moreso tropical Melanesian and Black Australian populations.
And according to Neves - they are radically unlike native Siberians - therefore the problems of a purely arctic ancestry, that coincidentally converages on a not merely tropical, but specifically Melanesio-Australian phenotype are difficult to surmount.
Forensic reconstructions of Black PaleoIndians, based on findings of Anthropologist WAlter Neves:
quote:originallly posted by rasol, translation: It eats you alive that Nile Valley Africans referred themselves as Blacks [Km.t]. Unable to refute the message you cry about the messengers
Too bad. Keep crying..........
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Inasmuch as the Paleo Americans resemble tropical Africans -and even moreso tropical Melanesian and Black Australian populations.
And according to Neves - they are radically unlike native Siberians - therefore the problems of a purely arctic ancestry, that coincidentally converages on a not merely tropical, but specifically Melanesio-Australian phenotype are difficult to surmount.
Forensic reconstructions of Black PaleoIndians, based on findings of Anthropologist WAlter Neves:
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Without adding soft-tissue features that cannot be determined from the skull alone, you do not have useful reconstruction - the most recent Tut reconstruction was based on European templates for facial thickness and contrived averagings of modern Egyptians for skin color. Such and approach flies in the face of logic and is intrinsically biased.
I guess the same applies to Neves' reconstructions.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Without adding soft-tissue features that cannot be determined from the skull alone, you do not have useful reconstruction
The Manchester Technique, of forenic reconstruction
It is frequently argued that detailed anatomical structures in the substructure of a reconstruction is unnecessary. We would argue that *such substructures are essential* particularly when dealing with cases with congenital deformities or where evidence of trauma is manifest. RN-DS Partnership - Medical and Forensic Practitioners, Richard Neves:
posted
^ If the point here, is that reconstructions don't necessarily resemble the visual interpretations of the depicted individuals, then point is taken...particularly for the man, whose nose tip appears more rounded [contrasting the pointed tip of the reconstruction] in the painting, not to mention a somewhat more rounded face. The reconstruction of the woman, isn't as far off, as that of the man. Just goes to show, soft parts, especially the nose, can be quite distinct from the actual thing.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom: That said. I do not consider people Black just because they are dark skinned and curly haired or broad faced. Thge term was thrown loosely by European colonizers. But not all groups adopted the term. But if basically you are saying you buy into Eurocentric racialism, many of those groups would fall into the racial label. I don't
Then what do you consider black then?? 'Black' referred solely to color and complexion and there are a great many populations outside of Africa who share the same complexion as black Africans. Which is why they were called black in the first place.
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The main point here, is that the remains of these early Paleo-Americans are tropical!
And isn't it possible for tropically adapted people like Melanesians or Australasians to somehow reach the Americas?
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
One thing is very clear in regards to the topic of this thread and that tropical features do NOT necessarily indicate recent African ancestry despite what some on this board may say!
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Then what do you consider black then?? 'Black' referred solely to color and complexion and there are a great many populations outside of Africa who share the same complexion as black Africans. Which is why they were called black in the first place.
Where they? English have called many people around the world Black with various complexions. Just darker than them. Negro, which predates Black was not the same. It was not thrown to all people. It began with a region. the region around the Gher-n-gher. The Nigritae were not all Dark skinned Africans. And even when Romans slowly evolved the word to replace their word for black, when applied to people, there still were stereotypical looks that were visualized. You still had to look like those west africans somehow. Negritos, new guineans, etc were called negros, but Dravidians and Australians were not. The English on the other hand seemed to focus on color more as they differentiated the Bushman for the Black. Its not as simple as saying someone is dark equals Black. And to me, perpetuating either concept which was racist, is stupid. Those that have self-empowered themselves with the name, I am all for them as black people. It is another ethnic group. But to call those who do not see themselves as black, i think it is disrespecful. Perpetuating the racism that Eurocentrists began.
quote:The main point here, is that the remains of these early Paleo-Americans are tropical!
Fully agree.
quote:And isn't it possible for tropically adapted people like Melanesians or Australasians to somehow reach the Americas? One thing is very clear in regards to the topic of this thread and that tropical features do NOT necessarily indicate recent African ancestry despite what some on this board may say!
Fully agree again
Posts: 20 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
First I am still disappointed with the negative name calling and overall antagonism found in this forum. We are dealing with very controversial issues and we shouldn't need to lash out at people of having a differing perspective.
As for the discussion of the Olmecs, this reconstruction clearly indicates a socially Black presence in the Americas that is also indicated by archaelogical evidence.
I find it amazing that Kennewick man got so much media attention for being quote "Caucasoid" but Luiza is almost completely ignored! Even though there have been questions surrounding the possible "Blackness" of the Olmecs for decades, now that fossil records support this it is almost completely ignored.
I see Kennewick man on the front page of Time magazine! Where is Luiza?
Should be:
Negritoes found in South America, apparently led to the Olmec Civilization. Front Page story of Time Magazine.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: One thing is very clear in regards to the topic of this thread and that tropical features do NOT necessarily indicate recent African ancestry despite what some on this board may say!
Doesn't need to be of recent African ancestry to be considered socially Black.
posted
Fuhgeddaboudit. You'll never convince somebody who comes from a casta society with more than 32 designations covering every possible outcome of miscegenation between Africans, Indios, and Europeans that anyone except the stereotypical "true negro" is black. In casta society to be called black is an insult even if you really are a bozalo. And the "true negro" will not even be called black if such a one has money or influence, that one will be a pardo. (But even worse than that is to be an unmiscegenated Indio still practicing indigenous culture or adhering to such norms when residing among the "civilized.")
But all over the world the black American has fostered pride of blackness amongst both the "black" skinned and the social black via the symbol of the P A N T H E R. Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: First I am still disappointed with the negative name calling and overall antagonism found in this forum. We are dealing with very controversial issues and we shouldn't need to lash out at people of having a differing perspective.
But they can't help themselves and complain when i respond.
quote:As for the discussion of the Olmecs, this reconstruction clearly indicates a socially Black presence in the Americas that is also indicated by archaelogical evidence.
Socially Black? What is that? That someone will misqualify you? Which social group?
This picture assumes skin color and even lip thick ness.
But even then, those features exist in Native populations.
quote:I find it amazing that Kennewick man got so much media attention for being quote "Caucasoid" but Luiza is almost completely ignored! Even though there have been questions surrounding the possible "Blackness" of the Olmecs for decades, now that fossil records support this it is almost completely ignored.[/quotes]
Doesn't support it at all. It supports Native Americans that are still there.
[quote]I see Kennewick man on the front page of Time magazine! Where is Luiza?
It's not in the USA, and it isn't on Native grounds.
quote:Negritoes found in South America, apparently led to the Olmec Civilization. Front Page story of Time Magazine.
More like Paleo-Asians show their links to Ancient Americans.
Posts: 20 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Doesn't need to be of recent African ancestry to be considered socially Black. Is Cathy Feeman not socially Black in America? [/QB]
In the US? Depends on the group. Some would assume her Black others mixed, etc.But that is because here mixed people are classified as Black. That is not the same everywhere. And she looks ambiguous enough to look like a afropean mixture. But a pure aborigine is not always confused as Afro-American Black (Some are). They are different people.
Posts: 20 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Al Jahiz is too controversial to be translated! They translated the Perfumed Garden! The power of Al-Jahiz's words are so strong that the refusal (to touch it) speaks for itself.
Hammertime! haha
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: Doesn't need to be of recent African ancestry to be considered socially Black. Is Cathy Feeman not socially Black in America?
In the US? Depends on the group. Some would assume her Black others mixed, etc.But that is because here mixed people are classified as Black. That is not the same everywhere. And she looks ambiguous enough to look like a afropean mixture. But a pure aborigine is not always confused as Afro-American Black (Some are). They are different people. [/QB]
Why do you keep changing names???
In discussions about race we cannot use a scientific qualifier so socially Black is a term only relevant to some social entities. If we went by phenotype classifications that ignored hair texture then certainly Negroid would be the classification of Negritoes, Melanesians, many Australians, the Great Andamans and the first Americans. Basically Negroid really just means tropically adapted and really makes this whole debate we are enjoying rather silly and boring.
These people look similar to some type of Africans because the environments are similar. If we judge people based on the way they look then what is the issue?
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Much argumentative stasis would be releived if we would understand modern anthropology and come to grips with the following.
1) All people originate in africa within the last 50-80 thousand years.
2) This also means that all language, all culture - everything definitively human is African in origin.
This begs the following questions -
quote:Question 1) what does it mean to be 'non-african'?
OOA - out of africa, demarcates the zero point, or birth date of things non african. Conversely - it does *not* mark the birth date of things African.
What is accurate to say is that before OOA, all human beings are African, and Africans have a history that goes back to Herto Man 150kya at least.
Non Africans *share* this history - but before out of Africa, this history is - - African.
There are some Europeans who don't like this fact, and engage in nonsensical special pleading for a teleological history that anticipates the coming of Europeans.
Prior to OOA nothing can be said of non Africans, including "Europeans" at all. They simply do not exist.
quote:Question 2) What does it mean to be asian, european, native american, australian and so forth?
The indigenous populations of the above are the 1st human settlers to those lands and their descendants. Ancient African ancestry does *not* qualify this in any way, because it is universally true of all humans.
Thus the Andaman Islanders are natives to Asia in the same sense as the Japanese.
The epicanthic folds of the Japanese is native to Japan,- the Black skin of the Andamans - is native to the Andaman Islands.
Malaria is native to both Japan and the Andamans...because all of the above are characterestics of the native peoples in question.
quote:Question 3) What does it mean to be African?
It means you are a native of Africa.
quote:Question 4) What does it mean to be Black, in and anthropological sense?
It means dark skinned.
In anthropology, it is only a reference to melanated [means blackened] skin tones.
It is not a race [ie - denoting common ancestry].
quote:Question 5) Does anthropology have any value if there are no races?
Of course it does. The function of bioanthropology is the scientific study of human beings - it is not to affirm a specific hypothesis, such as race.
Race is the hypothesis that humans are biologically divisible into sub-species in which phenotype accords with lineage.
Most bioanthropologists concur that this hypothesis is either flawed, or has been falsified outright.
quote:6) Does 'Black' have value - if Black is not a race?
If it has social value to Blacks - then it has value.
Anti-Kemetic hatred or jealousy is irrelevant to this, except in the self defeating manner in which hatred and bias re-emphasises the social significance of Blackness - just as anti-semites simply reaffirm to Jews the signficance of being Jewish.
quote:7) How is Black defined as a social catagory
Black is a social catagory wherein dark skin is typically a common denominator.
In summation:
Black need not be validated as a sub-species or race, any more than Jew, or Buddist, or Peul, or any other social-ethnic term.
Nor do social catagories need be consistent, universal, objective or generally agreed upon.
Indeed, most typically....they are not.
That's another reason why social ethnic groups are *not* scientific to begin with.
The error lies in attempting to make social terms into science, or contradict scientific fact with socio-political conception.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: [QB] Fuhgeddaboudit. You'll never convince somebody who comes from a casta society with more than 32 designations covering every possible outcome of miscegenation between Africans, Indios, and Europeans that anyone except the stereotypical "true negro" is black. In casta society to be called black is an insult even if you really are a bozalo. And the "true negro" will not even be called black if such a one has money or influence, that one will be a pardo. (But even worse than that is to be an unmiscegenated Indio still practicing indigenous culture or adhering to such norms when residing among the "civilized.")
Typical Afrocentric BS. Castas have been long dead in most places. Most people use the terms interchangeably. It has to do more with how you are raised. Two people with the same phenotypes might identify as different things. But to be considered Black on average as for looks, not group, you have to look more African or darker. Many people with no African ancestry wil be called negro if they are the darkest in the groups.
And it depends on the region as well. For example, in Peru, she is Black because she was raised in the Black community But she could as well have been raised mulata. Another peruvian with similar African Ancestry was just not seen as Black.
quote:But all over the world the black American has fostered pride of blackness amongst both the "black" skinned and the social black via the symbol of the P A N T H E R.
Small groups within a large population. Most Berbers do not see themselves as Black and all berbers are not dark skinned. Most Dalits do not consider themselves Black and are not all dark skinned. And Among the Australians who do consider themselves Black the Panther party isn't that big either. But yes, so long as it empowers them I could care less if there is an Inuit Panther party.
Posts: 20 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
That women looks black she does not looked mixed. As for that man he does not look black. Latin America is really more messed up than the U.S.A. I don't see how that women can be anything other than black.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KING: That women looks black she does not looked mixed. As for that man he does not look black. Latin America is really more messed up than the U.S.A. I don't see how that women can be anything other than black.
She is Black to you because you were raised in the one drop rule culture. But a few generations back and they would not have seen her as Black here.
Posts: 20 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: [QB] Fuhgeddaboudit. You'll never convince somebody who comes from a casta society with more than 32 designations covering every possible outcome of miscegenation between Africans, Indios, and Europeans that anyone except the stereotypical "true negro" is black. In casta society to be called black is an insult even if you really are a bozalo. And the "true negro" will not even be called black if such a one has money or influence, that one will be a pardo. (But even worse than that is to be an unmiscegenated Indio still practicing indigenous culture or adhering to such norms when residing among the "civilized.")
Typical Afrocentric BS. Castas have been long dead in most places. Most people use the terms interchangeably. It has to do more with how you are raised. Two people with the same phenotypes might identify as different things. But to be considered Black on average as for looks, not group, you have to look more African or darker. Many people with no African ancestry wil be called negro if they are the darkest in the groups.
And it depends on the region as well. For example, in Peru, she is Black because she was raised in the Black community But she could as well have been raised mulata. Another peruvian with similar African Ancestry was just not seen as Black.
quote:But all over the world the black American has fostered pride of blackness amongst both the "black" skinned and the social black via the symbol of the P A N T H E R.
Small groups within a large population. Most Berbers do not see themselves as Black and all berbers are not dark skinned. Most Dalits do not consider themselves Black and are not all dark skinned. And Among the Australians who do consider themselves Black the Panther party isn't that big either. But yes, so long as it empowers them I could care less if there is an Inuit Panther party.
So you are Middle Eastern correct? You are uncomfortable with the social concept of Black. You fear the taint of being considered Black? Such a loose term istn't it. Keep in mind that both sides of the discussion are right and the term is relative to your social perspective.
The point that should be clear is not many are arguing that the Olmecs are of recent African ancestry. Thought if you are a young Earth religious person then certainly they are.
Fundamentalist Christians believe the earth is only 8000 years old and that people were scattered about the Earth after the fall of the tower of Babel. If this was your belief then you would also likely believe that the continents were closer together than they are now and that Africans did not have far to go to get to South America. This is actually not so unreasonable of an argument when we consider Luiza and the Olmecs. It is only unreasonable when we consider scientific analysis of fossil dating.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
No this troller -- who has been banned 3 times in the last week like a rapist forces his intrusion where he's not wanted by taking on new IDs because his former IDs instead of his IP address is disabled -- is not Middle Eastern. He's a product of a Latin American casta society where everyone who can escapes the Negro or Indio label except where they've been touched by the Say It Loud I'm Black And I'm Proud cultural revolution of Black America where colourocracy also reigned just 50 years ago but is now nearly dead.
In his native Peru the idea was to marry white and move your ensuing generations up the social hierarchy:
code:
PERUVIAN SCALE FOR CASTA IMPROVEMENT
MAN WOMAN OFFSPRING & DEGREE OF "MIXTURE" ----- ---------- ------------------------------- White Negra Mulato 50% white 50% black White Mulata Cuarteron 75% white 25% black White Cuarterona Quinteron 88% white 12% black White Quinterona White 94% white 6% black
PERUVIAN SCALE FOR CASTA RETROGRSSION
MAN WOMAN OFFSPRING & DEGREE OF "MIXTURE" ----- ---------- --------------------------------- Negro Mulata Zambo 75% black 25% white Negro Zamba Zambo prieto 88% black 12% white Negro Zamba prieta Negro 94% black 6% white
Notice that in this scheme a white man may take a negra woman but it's inconceivable that a negro man could take a white woman. Zambo usually denotes Indio Negro parentage and is used as an euphemism to play down negroness which only applies to the bottom rung of proper society.
Thank G-d the contest winner in the photo rose above this silliness that still infects many many of African descent all over the Americas who while looking African want to be known for their mixture with a people whom they in no wise resemble as found in their European homeland.
So yes, you hit the mark about his source in shame and denial that anyone dare be black which he wrongfully equates as African "true negro".
quote: My name is Jaime Andres, and I am a Peruvian-American. I am a mix of Spanish (and the mix of Moors, Rom, Sephardi, Basque and Catalan that entails that), Quechua, Italian and Bantu/Yoruba from my father's side and English/Gaelic, Australian and Cherokee from my mother's side. So I guess I am just like salsa, a good mix. De que raza soy? La Raza Humana.
Hair Color: Dirty Blonde Eye Color: Blue
Hobby: Activism/Community Service
Groups or Organizations: Multi-Ethnic Law Student's Association Latino Law Student's Association Black Law Student's Association Asian Pacific Law Student's Association International Law Society Alpha Psi Lambda Mixedfolks.com
quote:Originally posted by osirion: So you are Middle Eastern correct? You are uncomfortable with the social concept of Black. You fear the taint of being considered Black? Such a loose term istn't it. Keep in mind that both sides of the discussion are right and the term is relative to your social perspective.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
So the mulatto rejects his history because he is ashamed and fights against those that would bring honor to such history. Sounds rather self-defeating. Actually sounds rather insane.
If you are part Black, like I am, then researching the historical facts about people that are also labeled socially as Black, as some of my Ethiopian heritage is, should bring a sense of honor. Clearly the history of Black people has been muddled by politics, prejudice and ignorance. It is for this reason that many on this forum strive to uncover the truth about people that are Black or "Tropically Adapted".
Clearly in terms of phenotype, the Olmecs were a Black people just like many Australians and many of the Polynesian/Melanesian people are today.
What clearly needs to be discussed is the classification system used by people to describe affiliations to a particular group.
The concept of Black is very controversial but need not be.
Basically to some people to be Black you have to be a "True Negro" specifically from Sub-Saharan Africa. However, to be Caucasian you can be from Northern Japan or anywhere in the world just as long as you have thin lips and a narrow nasal passage. If you have stereotypical Black features but you are not from Sub-Saharan Africa then you are not Black by such a social concept. If you simply have straight hair and stereotypical Black features you are still not Black. Even if you are from Sub-Saharan Africa but do not have stereotypical Black features then you are not Black.
Such a system is defined to limit Blackness to a very specific group of people as if its a curse to be Black.
Such a system is inconsistent to the point of being insane.
If we stuck strictly to phenotype then the Olmecs are Black people and so are many of the Paleo-Asians. If we you have to be African in order to be Black then find, Egyptians, Ethiopians, North East Africans and those that have HLA that are not part of the OOA are Black. Essentially if you have genes that are indigenous to Africa then you are Black regardless of phenotype.
The question really comes down to this. Of the two pictures below, who is actually Black?
Until we can agree on what constitutes Black then we cannot have a discussion about it.
In my opinion both individuals are Black.
Posts: 4028 | From: NW USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
There is some truth but as usual, there are those who will deny their grandmother (usually indigena or African).
More Latinos are becoming more accepting of their African origins. Countries like Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay, through the music of reggaeton are beginning to be more 'militant' through music. Even Arabs of African ethnicity are beginning to see the truth, and moreso if they end up in European society. In USA people can escape their roots by the liberal phenotypic facade of being 'less black?' while European value see the browns as wogs (golliwogs). Recent cultural exchanges of 'African presence in Mexico" are a sight to behold in the face of denial from the official authorites.
AL Jahiz was right.
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Like I said before latin america is a messed up place. I never hear about the black population in Argentina. All I know about the black people in Argentina is that they created the Tango.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTaClueless: He's a product of a Latin American casta society where everyone who can escapes the Negro or Indio label except where they've been touched by the Say It Loud I'm Black And I'm Proud cultural evolution of Black America where colourocracy also reigned just 50 years ago but is now nearly dead.[quote] What a load of crap. Anyone who actually has a clue of Latin America would know that castas have been long dead and the names are used very ambiguously. Kinda like high-yellow, or other terms. A person might call themselves mulato, negro and zambo. alClueless must be confusing his native Brazil with the rest of Latin America, and even there, the terms are very interchangeable. They descibe basic looks more than anything.
[quote]In his native Peru the idea was to marry white and move your ensuing generations up the social hierarchy: Notice that in this scheme a white man may take a negra woman but it's inconceivable that a negro man could take a white woman.
Another of alTaClueless claims.
quote:Pronto su presencia se hizo evidente y la cultura o las culturas africanas formaron parte del proceso del mestizaje americano. Surgieron el mulato, por la mezcla de negro y blanca o a la inversa, y el zambo, que es el híbrido de sangre negra e india.
quote:Zambo usually denotes Indio Negro parentage and is used as an euphemism to play down negroness which only applies to the bottom rung of proper society.
What hogwash. Many proud Peruvian Blacks also claim Zamboness.
quote:Thank G-d the contest winner in the photo rose above this silliness that still infects many many of African descent all over the Americas who while looking African want to be known for their mixture with a people whom they in no wise resemble as found in their European homeland.
What a load of Afrocentric hogwash. No one in Africa that is not mixed looks like her either. Nor Vanessa Williams. She claims Black because of the town she was raised.
quote:So yes, you hit the mark about his source in shame and denial that anyone dare be black which he wrongfully equates as African "true negro".
Nice try. I have never claimed an African True negro. But i do know the roots of the word. And contrary to you, I am not ashamed of ANY of my ancestry. I belonged to The Black law Students Association, Latino Law Students Association and even Gaelic.
And it's cute to see you trying to stalk me. Sorry, I'm heterosexual. Posts: 24 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirion: [QB] So the mulatto rejects his history because he is ashamed and fights against those that would bring honor to such history.[quote] A mulato does not reject his history as the very definition of mulato is part Black. If someone calls themselves Indio, it could be (unless they are raised in an indio community. (Just like light skinned Blacks)
[quote]Sounds rather self-defeating. Actually sounds rather insane.
Latinos think some AfroAmericans who call themselves black are insane too. I respect them for where they were raised. A Black community.
quote:If you are part Black, like I am, then researching the historical facts about people that are also labeled socially as Black, as some of my Ethiopian heritage is, should bring a sense of honor.
It should if they identified as Black. Some Ethiopians do and some don't.
quote:Clearly the history of Black people has been muddled by politics, prejudice and ignorance. It is for this reason that many on this forum strive to uncover the truth about people that are Black or "Tropically Adapted".
Tropically Adapted does not mean Black though. Some populations adopted to Tropical rainforests and did not get as dark. Again, it varies by region.
quote:Clearly in terms of phenotype, the Olmecs were a Black people just like many Australians and many of the Polynesian/Melanesian people are today.
Only Black to certain people. To others they are not. Depends on what social construct they have grown with.
quote:What clearly needs to be discussed is the classification system used by people to describe affiliations to a particular group.
Fully agree. My personal choice is to use terms that are more precise. And ethnic labels that the groups use themselves.
quote:Basically to some people to be Black you have to be a "True Negro" specifically from Sub-Saharan Africa. However, to be Caucasian you can be from Northern Japan or anywhere in the world just as long as you have thin lips and a narrow nasal passage.
Both bogus concepts. As far as I am concerned, if it isn't a personal label that a group calls themselves, Negros come from the Gher-n-Gher area and Caucasians come from the Caucasus mountains.
quote:If you have stereotypical Black features but you are not from Sub-Saharan Africa then you are not Black by such a social concept. If you simply have straight hair and stereotypical Black features you are still not Black. Even if you are from Sub-Saharan Africa but do not have stereotypical Black features then you are not Black.
Yeah, some work with that concept. I still think its BS.
quote:Such a system is defined to limit Blackness to a very specific group of people as if its a curse to be Black. Such a system is inconsistent to the point of being insane.
Not any more insane than some of the definitions being thrown on this board.
quote:If we stuck strictly to phenotype then the Olmecs are Black people and so are many of the Paleo-Asians. If we you have to be African in order to be Black then find, Egyptians, Ethiopians, North East Africans and those that have HLA that are not part of the OOA are Black. Essentially if you have genes that are indigenous to Africa then you are Black regardless of phenotype.
Which is equally absurd.
quote:The question really comes down to this. Of the two pictures below, who is actually Black? Until we can agree on what constitutes Black then we cannot have a discussion about it. In my opinion both individuals are Black.
In my opinion it depends on what group they come from and what they identify with. The first might not identify as Black. The second identifies as an Australian Black by culture. (She is of mixed ancestry)] Sadly many mixed ancestry children have basically been abducted and raised as White in Australia. Which is another form of one-droppism. Australian Aborigines refer them as the "Stolen Generation."
Posts: 24 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic