posted
The ancient Greeks and Italians were less prognathic than the modern equivalent of both people. Ancient greeks/Italians Mean [M40/M5(%)]= 93.0
Modern Italians= 94.3 Modern Greeks=94.4
Early Nubia and modern somalia are even less prognathic than modern scandinavians. Early Nubia=94.8 Somalia=94.0
Sweden=95.1 Norway=94.9
I always thought scandinavians were the least prognathic of all people but obviously not, they are even more prognathic than southern europeans.
Posts: 1420 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting that Egyptians show more prognathism than Somalis.
I think they should have included more East Sahelian, southern Sudanese, and Horn populations in their "Sub-Saharan" sample. As it stands, most of their samples come from areas far away from Egypt and Nubia.
What is responsible for differing degrees of prognathism anyway?
Posts: 7082 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Remarkable about this is that Somalis are less prognathic than some Europeans so if some Eurocentric minded hope to use prognathism as a measure of "blackness" they would have to admit that Nordics are more "Negro" than Somalis, lol.
Posts: 2595 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
The above posts show that people don't really know Africans or their diversity or even elongated Africans...that's something I noticed especially among elongated Africans and is obvious...it's surprising that some people are amazed by that...extreme features are always found among Black Africans compare to Asians or Europeans
Posts: 919 | From: AFRICA | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
I don't think it's so amazing that some are surprised by that, seeing as other groups are not as prognathus as africans.
You do have a point, though, they shouldn't be.
Too much exposure to eurocentric doctrines like the true negro and such.
quote:Originally posted by X-Ras: Remarkable about this is that Somalis are less prognathic than some Europeans so if some Eurocentric minded hope to use prognathism as a measure of "blackness" they would have to admit that Nordics are more "Negro" than Somalis, lol.
LOL something like that does not seem too far out of character..
Someone should go under-cover as a Eurocentric on the net and encourage this Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Remarkable about this is that Somalis are less prognathic than some Europeans so if some Eurocentric minded hope to use prognathism as a measure of "blackness" they would have to admit that Nordics are more "Negro" than Somalis, lol.
Again, one has to perceive that the system -negroid-cacusaoid-mongoloid- is biased bankrupt at its core.
It's sole function is to fabricate for European claims on that which is not European.
To understand the ideology function of the race system, you have to know it's origins. Most people who quote [like sheep] after this system, know nothing about how it came to be, but simply accept it.
Knowledge:
Caucasian race (sometimes called the Caucasoid race) is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as, "relating to a broad division of humankind covering peoples from Europe, the Middle East, South Asia and North Africa" or "white-skinned; of European origin" or "relating to the region of the Caucasus in SE Europe."[1] The concept's existence is based on the now discredited typological method of racial classification.[2]
Europe (especially in Russia and the surrounding area), Caucasian usually refers exclusively to people who are from the Caucasus region or speak the Caucasian languages.
The term Caucasian originated as one of the racial categories recognised by 19th century craniology and is derived from the region of the Caucasus mountains[3].It has various meanings.
Caucasoid race is a term used in physical anthropology to refer to people of a certain range of anthropometric measurements [4]. The concept of a "Caucasian race" or Varietas Caucasia was first proposed under those names by the German scientist and classical anthropologist, Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (1752-1840).[5] His studies based the classification of the Caucasian race primarily on skull features, which Blumenbach claimed were optimized by the Caucasian Peoples.[6]
Blumenbach writes:
Caucasian variety - I have taken the name of this variety from Mount Caucasus, both because its neighborhood, and especially its southern slope, produces the most beautiful race of men, I mean the Georgian; and because all physiological reasons converge to this, that in that region, if anywhere, it seems we ought with the greatest probability to place the autochthones (birth place) of mankind.[6
^ When the above was proven to be false, Causasian_race lost it's rationale in scholarship.
Today it functions as a propaganda.
By inventing a race definition, and giving it a faux European [caucasian] identity.... and then further expanding it's definition in the past, and constricting it's definition in the present, you have system where in a few people in the present can lay claim to most of the past.
This is what Diop noted when he stated that most of Carleton Coon's 'caucasoids' would be riding the back of the buses in the Southern United states.
Race typology howeve, is not simply a mistake, or a stupidity, from racists, it is a calculated tactic of pyschological warefare.
Africans who continue to repeat after this system - are losing this war.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I couldn't agree more. Thus the whole notion of prognathism being an aspect of "negroidness" or downright "primitiveness" while the lack thereof as the opposite-- as being somehow more "caucasoid" and "advanced" is MOOT.
This goes to white supremacists as well as those confused Africans who emulate them.
Mind you there are different degrees of prognathism, such as the alveolar prognathism that gives the so-called "buck-tooth" appearance among peoples like Somali to Japanese people. But apparently from these studies, Europeans are not excluded.
There goes another destructive blow to Eurocentric Doctrine#1-- PHYSICAL CALIBRATION DOCTRINE: In which white anthropologists treat people as racial specimens, measuring "cephalic indices" and attempting to prove superiority of the "white" brain. Ugly racist terminology: "prognathism," "platyrhiny," "steatopygous," "sub-Egyptian." Mug-shot lineups of "the Veddan female," "Arapaho male, "Negroid type," "Mongoloid specimen" chacterize this approach. Out of favor in the mid-20th-century, it has enjoyed a revisionist comeback with sociobiology and works claiming racial differentials in intelligence, such as "The Bell Curve."Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
^ I couldn't agree more. Thus the whole notion of prognathism being an aspect of "negroidness" or downright "primitiveness" while the lack thereof as the opposite-- as being somehow more "caucasoid" and "advanced" is MOOT.
I wouldn't characterize that as being moot; plain and simple, it is pseudo-scientific, unless one is prepared to concretely backup those associated ideologies in the biological sense.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by X-Ras: Remarkable about this is that Somalis are less prognathic than some Europeans so if some Eurocentric minded hope to use prognathism as a measure of "blackness" they would have to admit that Nordics are more "Negro" than Somalis, lol.
Well wait a minute. Isn't prognathism what is most needed to prove the Africaness of Egyptians?
This to me seems like a HUGE blow in the blackness of Egypt wouldn't you agree? If we don't have "prognathism" in Egyptian skulls then what the hell do we have?
Posts: 336 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Isn't prognathism what is most needed to prove the Africaness of Egyptians?
And again, a stupid remark pawned off as a question.
RamsesII and King Tut both have prognathism, therefore you accept based upon this that they are AFrican right?
When prognathism is found in Europeans - you accept that they are mixed race....right?
If you were sincere, instead of a troll-bag, you would target some of your fake question [rhetorical remarks] towards Europeans, and their *suspect* ancestry.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nice Vidadavida *sigh*:
quote:Originally posted by X-Ras: Remarkable about this is that Somalis are less prognathic than some Europeans so if some Eurocentric minded hope to use prognathism as a measure of "blackness" they would have to admit that Nordics are more "Negro" than Somalis, lol.
Well wait a minute. Isn't prognathism what is most needed to prove the Africaness of Egyptians?
Apparently the post you quoted flew straight over your head, let alone the rest of the info cited in this thread. If you were to actually comprehend what you read (if you even did read anything), you would know that 'prognathism' is perhaps the least needed because it is not a feature found among Africans only but other populations including Europeans!
quote:This to me seems like a HUGE blow in the blackness of Egypt wouldn't you agree? If we don't have "prognathism" in Egyptian skulls then what the hell do we have?
And your post (as usual) seems like a HUGE blow to your intelligence. LOLPosts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Isn't prognathism what is most needed to prove the Africaness of Egyptians?
And again, a stupid remark pawned off as a question.
RamsesII and King Tut both have prognathism, therefore you accept based upon this that they are AFrican right?
When prognathism is found in Europeans - you accept that they are mixed race....right?
If you were sincere, instead of a troll-bag, you would target some of your fake question [rhetorical remarks] towards Europeans, and their *suspect* ancestry.
read what I am saying. If TUT has prognathism than yes I "Thought" that meant he was AFrican, but these findings are saying that Europeans have actually more which now has me doubting. What part of that do you not understand?
posted
^ What are you doubting exactly? If you payed attention to what's being said, then you would know that prognathism is no more an African trait than is narrow noses a European trait.
Stop being an imbecilic rodent and read what is being said.
Posts: 26267 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:read what I am saying If TUT has prognathism than yes I "Thought" that meant he was AFrican
Read what I'm saying....that's simpleminded.
quote:these findings are saying that Europeans have actually more which now has me doubting. What part of that do you not understand?
The part where you failed to answer my question:
If you *really* beleive progathism is and African trait, then...when prognathism is found in Europeans - you would accept that those Europeans are mixed, right?
The point is, if you were sincere, instead of a slobbering-troll-bag, you would target some of your fake question [rhetorical remarks] towards Europeans, and their *suspect* ancestry.
But since you can't answer, I'll answer for you ->The answer is, you're just another pathetically stupid racist loser and troll who will be gone from this site very soon.
posted
Im a racist because I am asking about prognathism? What the hell are you talking about? You are the racist rasol and everyone knows this stop projecting.
Posts: 336 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Apparently the post you quoted flew straight over your head, let alone the rest of the info cited in this thread. If you were to actually comprehend what you read (if you even did read anything), you would know that 'prognathism' is perhaps the least needed because it is not a feature found among Africans only but other populations including Europeans!![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
What are you doubting exactly? If you payed attention to what's being said, then you would know that prognathism is no more an African trait than is narrow noses a European trait.
Printer-friendly view of this topic