quote:Originally posted by Swenet: However, Truthcentric and Djehuti recently posted information that suggests that Australian aboriginals lived mostly in wet and tropical areas, which would mean that their phenotype is not in violation of commonly accepted principles. [/QB]
yet Truthcentric in his last post seemingly hiding that used the Tasmanian's temperate latitude to take exception and suggest violation of commonly accepted principles
I haven't seen that info lately. It seems those areas were not tropical, just more forested than the inland arid regions. Austailian's wavy straight hair has been noted. I prefer my theory. Aboriginal Austrailans or Tasmanians who have more kinky hair are not the particular Austrailans or Tasmanians who lived longest in those areas. They are the ones who came relatively more recently from the Papua NG/Solomon areas. "recent' meaning within a couple thousand years or less Tasmania was inhabited by an indigenous population, the Evidence indicates Tasmanian Aborigines,presence in the territory, later to become an island, at least 35,000 years ago.The history of Tasmania begins at the end of the most recent ice age (approximately 10,000 years ago) when it is believed that the island was joined to the Australian mainland
Posts: 43094 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^Thanks for single handedly destroying yourself. Its not hard to imagine that hair type in more Northern regions (relative to Yemen) could easily produce more looser hair than what's visible on the head of that guy you've posted. Keep showing your mental retardation by proving my point.
LMAO. Get this: Modo-face calls common curly hair like this ''extremely curly'' and ''bordering frizzy'':
Is his hair anywhere near straight idiot? Show someone native with straight hair at that latitude. You are the one claiming "Blacks have straight hair" yet can't produce a single piece of evidence and in the process are denying peer-reviewed studies which have confirmed the link between UV index and hair texture.
Yes, 'looser' hair textures are found at that latitude. No one ever denied that. These hair types are though extremely curly or frizzy. This was even admitted by Snowden. And even other Afroloons on this site don't claim "Blacks have straight hair". Troll Patrol for example claimed African hair is only a loose as frizzy. You're basically in the extreme looney bin with Mike111.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: [QB] Here's something even more inconvenient for Farthead's hypothesis: Tasmanian aborigines
The Tasmanid phenotype is probably a cross between Murrayian and Negritic. This was the theory of Joseph Birdsell.
Birdsell JB (1949) The Racial Origin of the Extinct Tasmanians. Records of the Queen Victoria Museum 2:105-122.
Birdsell JB (1967) Preliminary data on the trihybrid origin of the Australian Aborigines. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 2:100-155
Further evidence is the fact the Tasmanian language has been proposed to be Indo-Pacific, which does not contain languages of the Australian aborigines (so this supports the idea Negritos moved in from the north around New Guinea bringing a new language with them).
quote:and yet they acknowledge the fact they have Caucasoid bone structure.
And when we return back to reality, this is where indians cluster:
In this analysis, Indians and Asians are equidistant to Europe. And you called whom a 'lumper'?
I don't lump, I classify as individuals. Those population-average studies prove nothing.
"Four morphological types — Australoids, Negritos, Mongoloids and Caucasoids — have been discerned in the contemporary Indian population. The Australoids appear to be the oldest and have evolved in India. The Caucasoids are physically heterogeneous and suggests incorporation of more than one physical type involving more than one migration. The within-type variance compared to between-type variance for characters studied is smaller. The paper further discusses the observed variability in terms of Indian social organization as well as in terms of endogamy, small numerical strength of the groups and varying ecological conditions prevalent in India." - K.C. Malhotra. (1978). "Morphological composition of the people of India". J. Hum. Evol. 7. pp. 45-53.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
According to the Farthead, these Sri-Lankan ladies above aren't 'black' because they have long loose hair. As if the label 'black' is based on hair type instead of skin color. Remember on another thread he dismissed the portraits of ancient Egyptians with mahogany complexions as being not black because their skin though very dark is not black enough. Now we have Indians above whose skin does match his examples of 'negroid' color. Note also the features of the Indians. This reminds me of Greco-Roman writers who called southern Indians 'Eastern Ethiopians' who were said to be the same in looks as the Western Ethiopians of Libya (Africa) except that they have long straight hair.
This all proves the point that Farthead relies totally on arbitrary classifications.
Posts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:As if the label 'black' is based on hair type instead of skin color.
Racial nomenclature is just a label, the label itself need not provide a valid description. This is basic biology. Even if you look at most subspecies names, you can find in cases something called "blacki"/"black" (as a suffix) and yet that geographical race may have not a single individual member who is very dark.
Quite obviously the females posted above are not "Black". They aren't Negroid.
And note the sheer hypocrisy in your views. You will label people with dark skin "black" solely on their skin, but why prioritise that feature? Why don't you base your classification on hair texture or nasal index? The obvious reason is because if you did that, they would always be seperated to Negroids and that wouldn't suite your Afrocentric agenda.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Quite obviously the females posted above are not "Black". They aren't Negroid. And note the sheer hypocrisy in your views. You will label people with dark skin "black" solely on their skin, but why prioritise that feature? Why don't you base your classification on hair texture or nasal index? The obvious reason is because if you did that, they would always be seperated to Negroids and that wouldn't suite your Afrocentric agenda.
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: peer-reviewed studies which have confirmed the link between UV index and hair texture.
the theory is that kinky hair is related to high humidity and that people of the savannas were formerly frorm jungle areas. Straight hair is believed to be an adaptation to cold temperatures rather than UV
Posts: 43094 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Across the web assorted "biodiversity" proponents, wage a 'racial war' using hair studies of ancient Egyptians to prove a "Caucasian Egypt". But in fact the hair of Africans is highly variable, debunking their simplistic claims.
The hair of Africans is highly variable, ranging from tight curls of South African Bantu, to the loose curls and straight hair of peoples of East and NE Africa, all indigenously evolved over millennia as part of Africa’s high genetic diversity. This diversity undermines and ultimately dismisses simplistic "racial" claims based on hair.
Inconsistencies of the skewed "true negro" model and definitions of African hair
Dubious assertions, double standards and outmoded racial hair claims: Czech anthropologist Strouhal's 1971 study touched on hair, and advanced the most extreme racial definitions, claiming Nubians to be white Europids overrun by later waves of Negroes, and that few Negroes appeared in Egypt until the New Kingdom. Indeed, Strouhal went so far as to argue that 'Negroes' failed to survive long in Egypt, because they were ill-adapted to its arid climate! Tell that to the Saharans, Sudanese and Nubians! Such dubious claims have been thoroughly debunked by modern scholarship, however they continue in various guises by those who attempt to use "hair" to assign race 'percents' and categories to the ancients. Attempts to define racial categories based on the ancient hair rely heavily on extreme definitions, with "Negroids" typically being defined as narrowly as possible. Everything not meeting the extreme "type" is then classified as something else, such as "Caucasian".
Kieta (1990, Studies of Crania from Northern Africa) notes that while many scholars in the field have used an extreme "true negro" definition for African peoples, few have attempted to apply the same model in reverse and define a "true white." Such racial double standards are typical of much scholarship on the ancient Nile Valley peoples. A consistent approach for example would define the straight hair in Strouhal's hair sample as an exclusive Caucasian marker (10 out of 49 or approximately 20%) and make the rest (wavy and curled) hybrid or negro, at >80%. Assorted writers who support the Aryan race percent model however, are careful to avoid such consistency and typically only run the comparison one way.
QUOTE: "Strouhal (1971) microscopically examined some hair which had been preserved on a Badarian skull. The analysis was interpreted as suggesting a stereotypical tropical African-European hybrid (mulatto). However this hair is grossly no different from that of Fulani, some Kanuri, or Somali and does not require a gene flow explanation any more than curly hair in Greece necessarily does. Extremely "wooly" hair is not the only kind native to tropical Africa.." (S. O. Y. Keita. (1993). "Studies and Comments on Ancient Egyptian Biological Relationships," History in Africa 20 (1993) 129-54)
Disturbing attempts to use hair to prove race theories:
Fletcher (2002) in Egyptian Hair and Wigs, gives an example of what she calls "disturbing attempts to use hair to prove assumptions of race and gender" involving 1800s European researcher F. Petrie, who sometimes sought to use excavation reports to prove his theories of Aegean settlers flowing into Egypt. Such disturbing attempts continue today in the use of hair for race category or percentage claims involving the ancient peoples, such as the "racial" analysis seen on several Internet blogs and websites, some thinly disguised fronts for neo-nazi groups or sympathizers.
Hair study applied a stereotyped "true negro" model and used late period samples of Egypt, after the coming of Greeks, Hyskos, etc as "representative" excluding the previous 2500 years of ancient civilization. A study of the hair of Egyptian mummies by Czech anthropologists Titlbachova and Titllbach (1977) (reported in Strouhal 1977) using only late period samples found a wide range of hair in mummies. Of the 14 samples, only 4 were from the south of Egypt, and none of the 14 samples were earlier than the 18th Dynasty. Essentially the previous 2,000 years + of Egyptain civilization and peopling are not represented. Only the narrowest definition is used to identify 'true negro' types'. All other intermediate types were deemed 'non-negroid.' If a similar procedure is used in reverse and designates only straight hair as a marker of a European, then only 4 out of 14 or 29% of the samples can be deemed "Caucasoid." Below is a breakdown of the Czech data:
Sample# 5- 18th-21st dynasties- Deir el medina- curly Sample# 8- 21st-25th dynasties- hair looks straight Sample# 11- Late to Greek Period- hair partly wavy Sample# 18- Late period Egypt- hair fine diameter Sample# 19- Greek period- wavy hair Sample# 29- 18-21st Dynasties- Deir El Medina- hair shape unascertainable - south Sample# 31- 18-21st dynasties- Deir El Median- wavy to curly - south Sample# 33- 21st-25th dynasties- appears straight Sample# 34- 21st-25th dynasties- shape difficult to determine Sample# 35- 21st-25th dynasties- wavy shape Sample# 40- 21-25th Dynasties- hair curly, Sample# 44- 21-25th Dynasties- appears straight Sample# 45- 21-25th Dynasties- appears wavy Sample# 46- Kharga Oasis- 4th-5th centuries AD
Using modern technology, the same Aryan Race models are undercut with the data actually showing that Egyptians group closer to Africans than vaunted white Nordics.
[1]"Nordic hair measurements"[/i]
Neo-Nazis and sympathizers tout the work of German researcher Pruner-Bey in the 1800s which derived racial indexes of hair including Negroes, Egyptians and Germans. Germanic hair is closer to that of the Egyptians they assert. But is it as they claim?
(Data of Bruner-Bey 1864- 'On human hair as a race character') - Negroid index: 57.40 - Egyptian index: 69.94 - White Germans: 66.33 Neo-Nazi conclusion: White German Nordics are 'closer' to Egyptians
Modern data using electron microscopes- Conti-Fuhrman & Massa (1972). Massa and Masali (1980)
Compare to Pruner Bey's 1864 data: - Negroid index: 57.40 - Egyptian index: 60.02 (modern electron microscope data)
White Germans: 66.33 ___________________________________________ ___________________________________ Conclusion using modern microscope data: Negroes much ‘closer’ to Egyptians than Nordics ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ _______________
Using hair for race identification as older research does can be shaky, but even when used, it undercuts ‘Aryan” clams as shown above.
Fletcher 2002 decries “"disturbing attempts to use hair to prove assumptions of race and gender..” Other credible scientists note:
"The reader must assume, as apparently do the authors, that the "coarseness" or "fineness" of hair can readily distinguish races and that hair is dichotomized into these categories. Problematically, however, virtually all who have studied hair morphology in relation to race since the 1920’s to the present have rejected such a characterization .. Hausman, as early as 1925, stated that it is "not possible to identify individuals from samples of their hair, basing identification upon histological similarities in the structure of scales and medullas, since these may differ in hairs from the same head or in different parts of the same hair". Rook (1975) pointed out nearly 50 years later out that "Negroid and Caucasoid hair" are "chemically indistinguishable". --Tom Mieczkowsk, T. (2000). The Further Mismeasure: The Curious Use of Racial Categorizations in the Interpretation of Hair Analyses. Intl J Drug Testing 2000;vol 2
Environmental factors can influence hair color, and the Egyptians routinely placed hair from different sources in mummy wrappings, making claims of "Nordic-haired" or "white" Egyptians dubious.
Mummification practices and dyeing of hair. Hair studies of mummies note that color is often influenced by environmental factors at burial sites. Brothwell and Spearman (1963) point out that reddish-brown ancient color hair is usually the result of partial oxidation of the melanin pigment. Other causes of hair color "blonding" involve bleaching, caused by the alkaline in the mummification process. Color also varies due to the Egyptian practice of dyeing hair with henna. Other samples show individuals lightening the hair using vegetable colorants. Thus variations in hair color among mummies do not necessarily suggest the presence of blond or red-haired Europeans or Near Easterners flitting about Egypt before being mummified, but the influence of environmental factors.
Egyptian practice of putting locks of hair in mummy wrappings. Racial analysis is also made problematic by the Egyptian practice of burying hair, in many "votive or funerary deposits buried separately from the body, a practice found from Predynastic to Roman times despite its frequent omission from excavation reports." (Fletcher 2002) In examining hair samples Fletcher (2004) notes that care is needed to determine what is natural scalp hair, versus hair from a wig, versus hair extensions to natural locks. Tracking the exact source of hair is also critical since the Egyptians were known to have placed locks of hair from different sources among mummy wrappings. (The Search for Nefertiti, By Joann Fletcher, HarperCollins, 2004, p. 93-94, 96)
Egyptians shaved much of their natural hair off and used wigs extensively as covering, obtaining much of the hair for wigs through trade. Discoveries" of "Aryan" or 'Nordic" hair are thus hardly 'proof' of incoming Caucasoids, but may be simply hair purchased from some source and made into a wig. This is much less dramatic than the exciting picture of inflowing 'Aryan' hordes.
The ancient Egyptians shaved off much of their own natural hair as a matter of personal hygiene and custom, and wore wigs in public. According to the Encyclopedia of body adornment (Margo DeMello, 2007, Greenwood Publishing Group, p. 101), "Boys and girls until puberty wore their hair shaved except for a side locl left on the side of their head. Many adults- both men and women- also shaved their hair as a way of coping with heat and lice. However, adults did not go about bald, and instead wore wigs in public and in private.. Wigs were initially worn by the elites, but later worn by women of all classes.."
The widespread use of wigs in ancient Egypt thus complicates and contradicts attempts at 'racial' analysis. Fletcher (2002) shows that many Egyptian wigs have been found with what is defined as straighter 'cynotrichous' hair. This however is hardly a marker of massive European or Near Eastern presence or admixture. Fletcher notes that the Egyptians often eschewed their own personal hair, shaving carefully and using wigs widely. The hair for these wigs was often obtained through trade. Indeed, "hair itself being a valuable commodity ranked alongside gold and incense in account lists from the town of Kahun." Image gallery | Articles | Google
Egyptian trading links with other regions is well known, and a commodity like straighter 'cynotrichous' hair could have been easily obtained via the Sahara, Levant, the Maghreb, Mediterranean contacts, or even the hair of Asiatic war captives or casualties from Egypt's numerous conflicts. There is little need to postulate mass influxes of European admixtures or populations to account for hair types in wigs. The limb proportion studies of the ancient Egyptians showing them to be much more related to tropical types than to Europids, is further demonstration of the fallacy of using hair as 'proof' of a 'Aryan' or predominantly European admixed Egypt.
Nubian wigs and wigs in Egypt
Such exchanges or use of hair appear elsewhere in the Nile valley. Tomb finds show Nubians themselves wearing wigs of straight hair. But one Nubian from the Royal valley, of the 12th century, named Maherpra, was found to be wearing a wig himself, made up of tightly curled 'negroid' hair, on top of his natural covering (Fletcher 2002). The so-called "Nubian wig" also appears in Egyptian art relief's depicting daily life, a stylistic arrangement thought to imitate those found in southern Egypt or Nubia. Such wigs appear to have been popular with both Egyptians and Nubians. Fletcher 2004 notes that the famous queen Nefertiti made frequent use of the Nubian wig: "Nefertiti and her daughter seem to have set a trend for wearing the Nubian wig.. a coiffure first worn by Nubian mercenaries and clearly associated with the military." A detail of a wall scene in Theban tomb TT.55 shows the queen wearing the Nubian wig. Infantrymen from the Nubia. Note both bow and battle-axe carried into combat.
Nubian infantrymen shown with distinctive Nubian wig. From Deir el-Bahri, Temple of Hatshepsut New Kingdom, Eighteenth Dynasty, 1480 B.C.
Hair studies of Nubians show built-in African genetic variability
Hair studies of Nubians have also been undertaken. One study at Semna, in Nubia (Daniel Hrdy 1978- Analysis of Hair Samples of Mummies from Semna South, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, (1978) 49: 277-262), found curling patterns intermediate between Northwest European and African samples. The X-group, especially males, showed more African elements than the Meroitic in the curling variables. Crimping and curvature data patterned in a northwest Europe direction. These data plots however do not necessarily indicate race admixture or percentages, or the presence of European migrants or colonists (see Keita 2005 below), but rather a data pattern of variation in how hair curls, and native African diversity which cases substantial overlap with non-African groups. This is a routine occurrence within human groups.
Africa has the highest phenotypic variation, just as it has the highest geentic variation- accommodating a wide range of features for its peoples without the need for any "race mix: Relethford (2001) shows that ".. methods for estimating regional diversity show sub-Saharan Africa to have the highest levels of phenotypic variation, consistent with many genetic studies." (Relethford, John "Global Analysis of Regional Differences in Craniometric Diversity and Population Substructure". Human Biology - Volume 73, Number 5, October 2001, pp. 629-636) Hanihara 2003 notes that [significant] "..intraregional diversity are present in Subsaharan Africans.." While ancient Egypt had gene flow in various eras, hair variations easily fall under this pattern of built-in, indigenous diversity, as well as the above noted cultural practice of using wigs with hair from different places obtained through trade.
Among Europeans for example, some people have curlier hair and some have straighter hair than others. Various peoples of East and West Africa also have narrow noses, which are different from other peoples elsewhere in Africa, nevertheless they still remain Africans. DNA studies also note greater variation within selected populations that without. Since Africa has the highest genetic diversity in the world, such routine variation in characteristics such as hair need not indicate any racial percentage or admixture, but simply part of the built-in genetic diversity of the ancient peoples on the continent. Indeed, the Semna study author notes that blondism, especially in young children, is common in many dark-haired populations (e.g., Australian, Melanesian), and is still found in some Nubian villages. As regards hair color variation, reddish type hair is associated with the presence of pheomelanin, which can also be found in persons with dark brown or even black hair as well. See "Rameses" below. Albinism is another source of red hair.
Dubious attempts at 'racial analysis' using Nubian hair and crania. Assorted supporters of the stereotypical Aryan 'race' model attempt to use hair to argue for a predominantly 'white' Nubia. But as noted above, such attempts are dubious given built-in African genetic diversity. Often 'racial' hair claims attempt to link on with cranial studies purporting to match ancient Nubians with Swedes, Frenchmen, etc. But such claims are also dubious. In a detailed analysis of the Fordisc computer program used to put forward such claims, Williams, Armelagos, et al. (2005) found that the program created ludicrous "matches" between the ancient Nubian crania and peoples from Hungary, Japan, Easter Island and a host of others in far-flung regions! Their conclusion was that the diversity of human populations in the databank explained such wide ranging matches. Such objective mainstream analyses debunk obsolete and improbable claims of 'racial' migrations of alleged Frenchman, Hungarians, or other whites into ancient Nubia, or equally improbable racial 'percentages' supposedly quantifying such claims. (Frank l'engle Williams, Robert L. Belcher, and George J . Armelagos, "Forensic Misclassification of Ancient Nubian Crania: Implications for Assumptions about Human Variation," Current Anthropology, volume 46 (2005), pages 340-346)
Alleged massive influx of Europeans and Middle Easterners to give the ancient peoples hair variation did not happen. Such variation was already in place as part of Africa' built in genetic and phenotypic diversity. As regards diameter, the average diameter of the Semna sample was close to both the Northwest European and East African samples. This again suggests a range of built-in African indigenous variability, and calls into questions various migration theories to the Nile Valley. One study for example (Keita 2005) tested the model of C. Loring Brace (1993) as to the notion of incoming European migrants replacing indigenous peoples of the Nile Valley. Brace's work had also suggested a relationship between northwest Europeans such as Scandanavians and African peoples of the Horn. Data analysis failed to support this model, instead clustering samples much closer to African series than to Europeans. Keita concluded that similarities between African data in his survey (skulls, etc) and non-Africans was not due to gene flow, but a subset of built-in African variability.
Ancient Egyptians cluster much closer to other Egyptians and Nubians. A later study by Brace, (Brace 2005- The questionable contribution..) groups ancient Egyptian populations like the Naqada closer to Nubians and Somalis than European, Mediterranean or Middle Eastern populations, and places various Nubians samples closer to Tanzanian, Dahomeian, and Congoid data points than to Europeans and Middle easterners. The limb proportion studies of Zakrzewski (2003) (Zakrzewski, S.R. (2003). "Variation in ancient Egyptian stature and body proportions". American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121 (3): 219-229.) showing the tropical body plan of the ancient Egyptians also undercuts theories of inflowing European or near Eastern colonists, or the 'native Europid' model of Strouhal (1971).
The yellowish-red-hair of Rameses: proof of a Nordic Egypt?
Red hair itself is within the range of African diversity or that of dark-skinned peoples. Native black Australoids for example routinely produce blonde hair:
Detailed microscopic analysis during the 1980s (Balout 1985) identified some of the hair of Egyptian Pharoah Rameses II as being a yellowish-red. Such a finding should not be surprising given the wide range of physical variability in Africa, the most genetically diverse region on earth, out of which flowed other population groups. Indeed, blondism and various other hair shades are not unknown in East Africa or Nubia, particularly in children, nor are such hair color variants uncommon in dark-haired or dark skinned populations like the Australians. (Hrdy 1978) Given the range of genetic variability in Africa, a red-haired Rameses is hardly unusual. Rameses' reign, in the 19th Dynasty, came over 1,500 years after the Egyptian state had been established, and after the Hyskos interlude. Such latecomers to Egypt, like the Hyskos, Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs etc would add their own genetic strands to the nation’s mix. Whatever the blend of genes that occurred with Rameses, his hair offers little supposed "proof" of a "white" or "Nordic" Egypt. If anything, X-rays of the royal mummies from earlier Dynasties by mainstream scientists show that the Egyptians pharaohs and other royals had varied 'Negroid' leanings. See X-Rays of the Royal mummies here, or here.
Pheomelanin and Rameses- found in light and dark-haired populations: The finding of Rameses “red” hair also deserves further scrutiny. The analysis found evidence of dyeing to make the hair yellowish-red, but some elements were untouched by the dye. These elements of yellowish-red hair in Balout’s study, were established on the basis of the presence of pheomelanin, a red-brown polymeric pigment in the skin and hair of humans. However, pheomelanin can also be found in persons with dark brown or even black hair as well, which gives it a reddish hue. Most natural melanins contain sulfur, which is typically associated with pheomelanin. In scientific tests of melanin, black hair contained as much as 5% sulfur, 3% lower than the 8.8% found in Irish red hair, but exceeding the 2.3% found in Scandinavian blond hair. (Jolles, et al. 1996) Thus the yellowish-red hair discovered on Rameses is well within the range of human variation for dark haired people, whatever the exact gene combination that led to the condition.
Rameses hair was not a typical European red, but yellowish-red, within African variation. It was also not ultra straight, further undermining claims of "Nordic" influence. Somalians and Ethiopians are SUB-SAHARANS and they routinely produce straight-haired people without the need for any "race mix" to explain why. The analysis on Rameses also did not show classic "European" red hair but hair of a light red to yellowish tinge. Black haired or dark-skinned populations are quite capable of producing such yellowish-red color variants on their own, as can be seen in today's east and northeast Africa (see child's photo above). Nor is such color variation unusual to Africa. Native dark-skinned populations in Australia, routinely produce people with blond or reddish hair. As noted above, ultra diverse Africa is the original source of such variation.
The analysis also found the hair to be cymotrich or wavy, again a characteristic quite within the range of overall African or Nile valley physical and genetic diversity. A "pure" Nordic type of straight hair was thus not established for Rameses. Hence the notion of white Europeans or red-headed Caucasoids from other areas flowing into ancient Egypt to add hair variation, particularly the early centuries of the dynastic state is unlikely. Such flows may have occurred most heavily in the Greek and Roman era but say nothing about the thousands of years preceding. The presence of pheomelanin conditions or other genetic combinations also explains how the different hair used in Egyptian wigs could vary in color, aside from environmental oxidation, bleaching and dyeing.
Red hair is rare worldwide, and history shows little evidence of Northern Europeans or "Nordics" sweeping into Egypt to give the natives a bit of hair coloring or variation. Most red hair is found in northern and western Europe, especially in the British Isles, and even then it appears in minor frequencies in Europe- some 4% of the population. It is unlikely such populations had any major contact or influence in the ancient Nile Valley. As noted above, red hair is comparatively rare in the world’s populations and pheomelanin conditions are found in dark-haired populations, and thus is well within the range of variation from the Sahara, East Africa and the Nile valley. “White Aryan” theories of Egypt are seen in the works of HFK Gunther (1927), Archibald Sayce (1925) and Raymond Dart (1939), and still find traction on a number of 'Aryan', neo-nazi and "race" websites and blogs which purport to show a "white Nordic Egypt" using Rameses' "red" hair as an example. Today's scientific research however, has debunked these dubious views, showing that red hair, while not common world wide, is a well known variant within human populations, even those with dark hair.
Straight or curly hair is also routine among sub-Saharans like Somalians, who are firmly part of the East African populations. As regards Somalians for example, Somali DNA overwhelmingly links much more heavily with other Africans including Kenyans & Ethiopians (85%), than with Europeans & Middle Easterners. (15%) On Y-chromosome markers (E3b1), Somalis (77%) and other African populations dwarf small European (5.1%) or Middle Eastern (6.3%) frequencies. “The data suggest that the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population..” (Sanchez et al., High frequencies of Y chromosome lineages.. in Somali males (2005)
As one mainstream researcher notes about the dubious value of "racial" hair analysis:
"The reader must assume, as apparently do the authors, that the "coarseness" or "fineness" of hair can readily distinguish races and that hair is dichotomized into these categories. Problematically, however, virtually all who have studied hair morphology in relation to race since the 1920’s to the present have rejected such a characterization .. Hausman, as early as 1925, stated that it is "not possible to identify individuals from samples of their hair, basing identification upon histological similarities in the structure of scales and medullas, since these may differ in hairs from the same head or in different parts of the same hair". Rook (1975) pointed out nearly 50 years later out that "Negroid and Caucasoid hair" are "chemically indistinguishable". --Tom Mieczkowsk, T. (2000). The Further Mismeasure: The Curious Use of Racial Categorizations in the Interpretation of Hair Analyses. Intl J Drug Testing 2000;vol 2
Posts: 5935 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why is Fletcher listed above as someone who opposes racial hair categorization?
Joann Fletcher, a consultant to the Bioanthropology Foundation in the UK, in what she calls an "absolute, thorough study of all ancient Egyptian hair samples" — relied on various techniques, such as electron microscopy and chromatography to analyze hair samples (Parks, 2000). She discovered that most of the natural hair types and those used for hairpieces were made of what she calls "Caucasian-type" hair, including even instances of blonde and red hair:
"The vast majority of hair samples discovered at the site were cynotrichous (Caucasian) in type as opposed to heliotrichous (Negroid), a feature which is standard through dynastic times." - Fletcher, Joann. (2002). "Ancient Egyptian Hair and Wigs", The Ostracon: The Journal of the Egyptian Study Society, xiii. 2.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:As if the label 'black' is based on hair type instead of skin color.
Racial nomenclature is just a label, the label itself need not provide a valid description. This is basic biology. Even if you look at most subspecies names, you can find in cases something called "blacki"/"black" (as a suffix) and yet that geographical race may have not a single individual member who is very dark.
Quite obviously the females posted above are not "Black". They aren't Negroid.
And note the sheer hypocrisy in your views. You will label people with dark skin "black" solely on their skin, but why prioritise that feature? Why don't you base your classification on hair texture or nasal index? The obvious reason is because if you did that, they would always be seperated to Negroids and that wouldn't suite your Afrocentric agenda.
WRONG again dummy! 'Racial nomenclature' is indeed a labeling system that is arbitrary. Though the label 'black' itself is NOT necessarily even a racial label so much as a descriptive one that describes color. 'Black' is used to label anyone with very dark coloring. Dark-skinned Indians especially the ones from the example I posted are often called 'kalu' by other Indians. Kalu means BLACK in Hindi language and other Sanskrit derived languages. That does not mean they are grouped with or classified with Africans as a racial group you moron! LOL Even the Greeks called southern Indians 'Ethiopians' as well, even though they did not claim any close genetic relation to the Ethiopians of Africa!
Pseudoscience often contradicts itself, even in its own terms.
Before the rise of racial categories and groupings, labels like 'black' were used to describe color only. Thus Black Indians, Black Africans, even Black Southeast Asians (aboriginals). But according to the Farthead idiot the label should be restricted to Sub-Saharan Africans meeting the criteria of 'true Negro' only even if other peoples are just as dark! LOL
You are a total retard and loser. It's a wonder how you were even able to get into a university. But then again the whole university systems even in Europe are overrated and academically degenerated. Posts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: WRONG again dummy! 'Racial nomenclature' is indeed a labeling system that is arbitrary. Though the label 'black' itself is NOT necessarily even a racial label so much as a descriptive one that describes color. 'Black' is used to label anyone with very dark coloring. Dark-skinned Indians especially the ones from the example I posted are often called 'kalu' by other Indians. Kalu means BLACK in Hindi language and other Sanskrit derived languages. That does not mean they are grouped with or classified with Africans as a racial group you moron! LOL Even the Greeks called southern Indians 'Ethiopians' as well, even though they did not claim any close genetic relation to the Ethiopians of Africa!
Pseudoscience often contradicts itself, even in its own terms.
Before the rise of racial categories and groupings, labels like 'black' were used to describe color only. Thus Black Indians, Black Africans, even Black Southeast Asians (aboriginals). But according to the Farthead idiot the label should be restricted to Sub-Saharan Africans meeting the criteria of 'true Negro' only even if other peoples are just as dark! LOL
You are a total retard and loser. It's a wonder how you were even able to get into a university. But then again the whole university systems even in Europe are overrated and academically degenerated. [/QB]
The term "dark skinned' or brown is not good enough for Djehutie. He insists on "black".
Of course he doesn't mean black in the modern sense. Djehutie is an ancient person who was teleported here in a time machine. He doesn't go by our modern ways. He speaks in the ancient tongues.
So whenever he uses words you have to look up it's definition from 2500 years ago. as he strokes his long gray beard
Posts: 43094 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: I like how lioness is learning and (seemingly) coming around. BTW, it might be useful to first tease out where these peoples' ancestors lived before we use them as examples that confirm or fly in the face of commonly accepted selective pressures. For example, looking at present day arid conditions in Australia might cause one to suspect that Australian are an exception to the dry ambient air explanation that is commonly accepted as a selective presure that selects for narrow(er) noses. However, Truthcentric and Djehuti recently posted information that suggests that Australian aboriginals lived mostly in wet and tropical areas, which would mean that their phenotype is not in violation of commonly accepted principles.
Keyword seemingly. I doubt lyinass will ever come around so long as her anti-black bias prevails. But getting back to Australia, I assume you are referring to the following data:
Climate Swings of the Pleistocene in Australia Over the last 2.6 million years the fluctuations of the climate have had a profound effect on the Australian continent, in particular on the surface water and the groundwater. The rivers of Australia, as well as the lakes and dunefields, have been greatly affected by the alternating nature of the climate over the last 300,000 years, swinging from dry periods to wet and back again. There were periods in the last 2 interglacials when fluvial conditions dominated that allowed large sand loads in rivers in the Simpson Desert, as well as southeast Australia. White describes the central Australian palaeochannels as 'highly competent sand-load rivers during the last interglacial'. 110,000 years ago was the peak of their fluvial activity, behind world temperature and sea level maxima by about 5,000-10,000 years.
Following this wet period, aridity spread towards the margins of the continent, the spread of aridity peaking at the last glacial maximum. Between about 55,000 and 35,000 BP a wet phase, that was less widespread, has been associated with high sea levels and activity of palaeochannels in southeastern Australia. The sedimentary record in rivers and lakes, and the time of dune formation, documents the spread of aridity from central Australia towards the coast across the continent...
Over the last 10,000 years, the Holocene, there have been variations of temperature and sea level. At about 9,000 BP the temperatures were higher than at the present in Australia, and there was increased rainfall. The highest the sea levels reached in the Holocene was from about 7,500-6,000 BP. Since then the sea levels have been approximately stable, though the fact that some low-lying islands are shrinking, with the sea encroaching on villages that have existed on the coast for many years suggests things might be changing.
'Ecosystem Collapse in Pleistocene Australia and a Human Role in Megafaunal Extinction' Gifford H. Miller
'Did central Australian megafaunal extinction coincide with abrupt ecosystem collapse or gradual climate change?' Murphy, BP and Williamson, GJ and Bowman
'Late pleistocene vegetation and environmental shifts in Australia and their bearing on faunal extinctions' J.R. Dodson
'Late Pleistocene and Holocene climate of SE Australia reconstructed from dust and river loads deposited offshore the River Murray Mouth' Franz Gingele, Patrick De Deckker, Marc Norman
Posts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Why is Fletcher listed above as someone who opposes racial hair categorization?"
^^Because she does exactly that. She notes that hair is variable, and that hair from OTHER people like war captives or trade is often found mixed with a person's normal hair in mummy wrappings, and that such hair was an item of trade- quote:
"hair for these wigs was often obtained through trade. Indeed, "hair itself being a valuable commodity ranked alongside gold and incense in account lists from the town of Kahun."
So yes, so called cyniotrich hair appearing is nothing surprising, either as an add-on from someplace else or built-in native variability.
Fletcher debunks notions of "incoming Caucasoids" as already shown above:
"Fletcher (2002) in Egyptian Hair and Wigs, gives an example of what she calls- quote: "disturbing attempts to use hair to prove assumptions of race and gender" involving 1800s European researcher F. Petrie, who sometimes sought to use excavation reports to prove his theories of Aegean settlers flowing into Egypt.
Posts: 5935 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Correct. Therefore Fletcher cannot be used or exploited for Euronut causes without being distorted.
quote:Originally posted by the desperate lyinass idiot ,: The term "dark skinned' or brown is not good enough for Djehutie. He insists on "black".
LOL Exactly how do I "insist" on a label that is already widely used by many peoples even outside of the West?? I don't see how the term "brown" could be used to describe the extremely dark folk like southern Sudanese or southern Indians.
quote:Of course he doesn't mean black in the modern sense. Djehutie is an ancient person who was teleported here in a time machine. He doesn't go by our modern ways. He speaks in the ancient tongues.
So whenever he uses words you have to look up it's definition from 2500 years ago. as he strokes his long gray beard
Of course your are writing crazy and stupid sh|t again as usual. You're just mad because you can't accept the REALITY that the descriptive label black is used by many peoples around the world.
Posts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Truthcentric: If we accept that wavier hair is an adaptation to drier climates as some people on this forums have submitted, then if AEs really did have wavy hair in significant numbers, that would give them ancient roots in the Sahara as Swenet has said. On the other hand, beyoku seems to be implying a recent sub-Saharan derivation for the AEs' ancestors.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Would have been a reasonable suspicion if it weren't for the fact that hair form is scientifically determined by measuring cross section width. Hair that is chemically treated for aesthetic reasons won’t change in cross section width (so presumably, hair that is altered by post-mortem chemical changes won't either).
I recall that the trichometer data showed cross-section widths within the "curlier" range for AE mummies, which doesn't exactly jive with your claim. Anyone remember this?
^Already adressed this:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:I take it you've probably read this article about Egyptian hair from Myra's site here. According to the authors, Strouhal's sample produced indices ranging from 35 to 65.
Reread my post. The writers of that article are being vague, and seem to be lacking in the math department. What the authors don't say, is that only 7/49=12% of the macroscopically analysed hairs were microscopically studied. The former analysis (macroscopic) is how Strouhal catagorized the strands in wavy, curly and straight catagories, the latter analysis (microscopic) is how he obtained his indices.
Of the total of 49 hair strands, only the so-called ''racially mixed'', strands were sent to be analysed. This means the straight hairs, and the numerically dominant wavy hairs, are not proportionally represented in that range.
Additionally, I have trouble understanding what type of math led the author to make an average out of a range that is described as ''35-65''.
Last time I checked, to produce an average, one needs to know all the individual scores, and that is precisely what Strouhal didn't report. With the Badarian average not bringing down the weight that is raised by 2 of the total 4 studies that report a wavy average (around 65%), but actually contributing to it, the overal average of 60% they report becomes questionable.
To calculate the average Egyptian index from those four papers, one cannot sloppily re-average the four averages. To produce an acceptable number, all indices of all four papers, must be added and divided by the total number of strands. Recalculation of the indices of the four papers is made impossible by the undisclosed indices, and unrepresentativeness of at least one paper (Strouhal's), but possibly others as well (not sure if the Italian paper they report is a different version than the one uploaded by Truthcentric, or a different paper altogether, so I'm restricting my comments to ''one''), so like I said, their work is questionable.
posted
^ Yes, up for the lyinass dummy who keeps insisting that all wavy hair is the same and that it is a cold adaptation. Posts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Reread my post. The writers of that article are being vague, and seem to be lacking in the math department. What the authors don't say, is that only 7/49=12% of the macroscopically analysed hairs were microscopically studied. The former analysis (macroscopic) is how Strouhal catagorized the strands in wavy, curly and straight catagories, the latter analysis (microscopic) is how he obtained his indices.
Of the total of 49 hair strands, only the so-called ''racially mixed'', strands were sent to be analysed. This means the straight hairs, and the numerically dominant wavy hairs, are not proportionally represented in that range.
Additionally, I have trouble understanding what type of math led the author to make an average out of a range that is described as ''35-65''.
Last time I checked, to produce an average, one needs to know all the individual scores, and that is precisely what Strouhal didn't report. With the Badarian average not bringing down the weight that is raised by 2 of the total 4 studies that report a wavy average (around 65%), but actually contributing to it, the overal average of 60% they report becomes questionable.
To calculate the average Egyptian index from those four papers, one cannot sloppily re-average the four averages. To produce an acceptable number, all indices of all four papers, must be added and divided by the total number of strands. Recalculation of the indices of the four papers is made impossible by the undisclosed indices, and unrepresentativeness of at least one paper (Strouhal's), but possibly others as well (not sure if the Italian paper they report is a different version than the one uploaded by Truthcentric, or a different paper altogether, so I'm restricting my comments to ''one''), so like I said, their work is questionable.
LOL.It is obvious that you don't understand how to evaluate research literature, or the varied quantitative methods researchers use to look at data.It is this ignorance of research methods that explains you objections to the study discussed above.
The research looking at four studies is not questionable. It appears that the author used a meta-analysis to conduct the study. Meta-analysis is a quantitative research technique that is used to integrate and describe a number of research studies.
A meta-analysis is used to summarize multiple quantitative studies of a phenomena, in this case hair. Although you see this study "lacking in the math department", meta-analysis are recognized as an objective way to look at data.
posted
^This is a perfect example of a non-response. Not a shred of connectivity to my post. But maybe Clyde can tell us how ''quantative methods'' allow one to make an average out of a range of seven cross section indices that is described as ''35-65''.
Posts: 8807 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Yes, up for the lyinass dummy who keeps insisting that all wavy hair is the same and that it is a cold adaptation.
Its an adaptation to low UV levels, hence northern latitudes.
Straight/wavy hair did not evolve in Africa.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ If wavy hair did not evolve in Africa or in any areas of the tropics where there is high UV, then why are there isolated (black) peoples in the Sahara, Sahel, and even Sub-Sahara who have wavy hair? How do you explain the wavy hair of southern Indians, some aboriginal populations in Southeast Asia and Australian aborigines who have tropical adaptations even to high UV i.e. black skin??
Posts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^Thanks for single handedly destroying yourself. Its not hard to imagine that hair type in more Northern regions (relative to Yemen) could easily produce more looser hair than what's visible on the head of that guy you've posted. Keep showing your mental retardation by proving my point.
LMAO. Get this: Modo-face calls common curly hair like this ''extremely curly'' and ''bordering frizzy'':
Is his hair anywhere near straight idiot? Show someone native with straight hair at that latitude. You are the one claiming "Blacks have straight hair" yet can't produce a single piece of evidence and in the process are denying peer-reviewed studies which have confirmed the link between UV index and hair texture.
Yes, 'looser' hair textures are found at that latitude. No one ever denied that. These hair types are though extremely curly or frizzy. This was even admitted by Snowden. And even other Afroloons on this site don't claim "Blacks have straight hair". Troll Patrol for example claimed African hair is only a loose as frizzy. You're basically in the extreme looney bin with Mike111.
Fail. Try again ape. This time, reply to my post, will ya? Reiteration:
Its not hard to imagine that hair type in more Northern regions (relative to Yemen) [e.g., the Eastern Sahara] could easily produce more looser hair than what's visible on the head of that guy you've posted.
quote:yet can't produce a single piece of evidence
Its because you're using circular arguments. Its no use posting evidence when it will only result in you using the circular argument that whatever wavy haired African I post is ''not negroid'', because only nappy hair is signature negroid trait. Don't make me re-post your circular argument flip flop when you said blacks can't have brow ridges, and I posted 50 cent as an example of a black with this morphology, only for your ape-face to claim his brow ridge makes him caucasoid admixed.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ If wavy hair did not evolve in Africa or in any areas of the tropics where there is high UV, then why are there isolated (black) peoples in the Sahara, Sahel, and even Sub-Sahara who have wavy hair?
"Only the last two categories ['curly', 'spiralled'] are frequent in the the populations of sub-Saharan Africa, and spiralled hair, which may be more or less tightly spiralled, occurs in many more populations than curly hair... let us make it clear that the diversity discussed here is that of 'native' Africans" (Hiernaux, 1975: 53-54)
Snowden came to the same conclusion.
No anthropologist has ever asserted "Blacks have wavy/straight hair". It is simply absurd, its just an online fantasy of some AA's who have come to despise their nappy hair texture.
quote:How do you explain the wavy hair of southern Indians, some aboriginal populations in Southeast Asia and Australian aborigines who have tropical adaptations even to high UV i.e. black skin?? [/qb]
The natives of Southern India, and surrounding regions had woolly hair, "All the four major morphological types — Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Australoid and Negrito are present in the Indian population" (Malhotra 1978).
Its not hard to imagine that hair type in more Northern regions (relative to Yemen) [e.g., the Eastern Sahara] could easily produce more looser hair than what's visible on the head of that guy you've posted.
It's in the same UV cluster -
The whole of Africa recieves high UV radiation, which is in the bands 8-11. Excluding Arabia, the Middle-East is 4-7. Southern Europe is 3-5 and Northern Europe, 2-3.
The link between hair texture and UV is obvious. Wavy-straight hair isn't seen in natives of the band 8-11 [Mongoloids crossed over into the Americas only recent].
quote:Its because you're using circular arguments. Its no use posting evidence when it will only result in you using the circular argument that whatever wavy haired African I post is ''not negroid'', because only nappy hair is signature negroid trait. Don't make me re-post your circular argument flip flop when you said blacks can't have brow ridges, and I posted 50 cent as an example of a black with this morphology, only for your ape-face to claim his brow ridge makes him caucasoid admixed.
There's no circular reasoning evolved dummy. Racial traits are geographically circumscribed in origin. Wooly hair for example didn't evolve in Europe. Likewise thin noses didn't evolve in Africa. Afroloons reject biology & adaptation, and instead cling to the idea of a single african 'parent' which had all physical variation.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fartheadbonkers: "Only the last two categories ['curly', 'spiralled'] are frequent in the the populations of sub-Saharan Africa, and spiralled hair, which may be more or less tightly spiralled, occurs in many more populations than curly hair... let us make it clear that the diversity discussed here is that of 'native' Africans" (Hiernaux, 1975: 53-54)
Okay, and how is spiral haired being the most frequent refute that wavy hair is still native. The vast majority of Sub-Saharans have broad noses and are prognathic as well even though narrow noses and orthognathy still occur among native Africans as Hiernaux also stated yet YOU disagree with Hiernaux in those premises that narrow noses and orthognathy are 'Caucasoid' traits found in Sub-Sahara do to admixture! LOL
quote:Snowden came to the same conclusion.
Yet Snowden is NOT a bio-anthropologists but a Classicist. And nowhere in your citation of Hiernaux did he say wavy hair is not native at all, liar.
quote:No anthropologist has ever asserted "Blacks have wavy/straight hair". It is simply absurd, its just an online fantasy of some AA's who have come to despise their nappy hair texture.
Another lie.
"Dark [black] skin may be associated with frizzy or kinky hair or curly or wavy or straight hair, all of which are found among different indigenous peoples in tropical regions. These facts render any attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations both arbitrary and subjective."---American Anthropological Association Statement on "Race"
quote:The natives of Southern India, and surrounding regions had woolly hair, "All the four major morphological types — Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Australoid and Negrito are present in the Indian population" (Malhotra 1978).
LOL Not surprisingly this is the best you can come up with-- a statement from the 1970s using debunked notions of race which is the very false premise of your argument! And I know what 'Negritos' are, but sorry the people below are neither 'Negrito' nor 'Caucasoid' which don't really exst.
And we are talking about Africa. Explain how wavy hair among southern Saharans, Sahelians, and even certain folk in Uganda have wavy hair. You say it's 'Caucasoid' admixture yet genetics disproves such a suggestion.
I agree with Swenet. There's no arguing with you because you only have circular reasoning which is a FAIL for true logic.
Posts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Okay, and how is spiral haired being the most frequent refute that wavy hair is still native.
Wavy hair isn't native, and Hiernaux never wrote it was. Yes, he opposed the 'true Negroid' classification. However he wasn't an Afroloon.
quote:The vast majority of Sub-Saharans have broad noses and are prognathic as well even though narrow noses and orthognathy still occur among native Africans as Hiernaux also stated yet YOU disagree with Hiernaux in those premises that narrow noses and orthognathy are 'Caucasoid' traits found in Sub-Sahara do to admixture! LOL
Name an Upper Palaeolithic African fossil specimen with a low nasal index.
quote: These facts render any attempt to establish lines of division among biological populations both arbitrary and subjective.[/i]"---American Anthropological Association Statement on "Race"
Says nothing about Africa.
quote:Not surprisingly this is the best you can come up with-- a statement from the 1970s using debunked notions of race which is the very false premise of your argument! And I know what 'Negritos' are, but sorry the people below are neither 'Negrito' nor 'Caucasoid' which don't really exst.
lol. That's from the Indian Genome Variation Consortium from 2005:
"All the four major morphological types—Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Australoid and Negrito are present in the Indian population (Malhotra 1978). The Caucasoid and Mongoloid populations are mainly concentrated in the north and northeastern parts of the country. The Australoids are mostly confined to the central, western and southern India, while the Negritos are restricted only to the Andaman Islands (Cavalli Sforza et al. 1994)." - Indian Genome Variation Consortium (2005). A Project Overview. Human Genetics 118 (1): 1–11.
This isn't "outdated". Most modern Indian scientists believe in race.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: It's in the same UV cluster
It’s also in the same cluster as indigenous South Asians and Southeast Asians, many of whom have straighter hair than Europeans. What is your point?
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: There's no circular reasoning evolved dummy.
There IS circular reasoning involved, fruity loop. There is no apriori evidence for the existence of an archetypical Negroid group with exclusively 'Negroid traits', which means there is no basis for your fairytale that any West/Central/Southern/Eastern African group that diverges from this imaginary group must therefore not descend from this Negroid group, and must therefore be admixed. WHERE IS THIS ARCHTYPICAL NEGROID GROUP, fruitbasket?
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Racial traits are geographically circumscribed in origin.
LMAO. You've just described hair as under selection of UV radiation. This means it cannot be a racial trait that bespeaks of admixture with Caucasians when it is encountered in non-Caucasians, because adaptation implies that such non-Caucasoid populations can adapt it on their own. Dumbass.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Afroloons reject biology & adaptation
Your psychosis prevents you from seeing that you're the only one who is doing this. YOURE the one who said ''Name an Upper Palaeolithic African fossil specimen with a low nasal index'' to deny the presence of indigenous narrow nose types in Africa. YOU say Africans can't adapt to hot-dry climates. YOU say Africans can't adapt to hair types seen in groups who reside on the same lattitude. You're so sick in your head, LMAO.
TO THIS DAY you still can't explain why Strouhal's Badarians, who had mostly wavy hair, had a nasal index of >54 (men 54.8, women 55.2). Idem ditto for some of the Nubians who belonged to the groups in which the wavy-straight hairs were found that I cited in the OP. This is unheard of in indigenous contemporary Levantine and European groups, whom you've gone at great lengths to pidgeon hole as having a nasal index of below 50. LMAO.
posted
^ Correct. That is why he responds to each paragraph I wrote with a strawman argument and didn't bother answering my last question about the Indian girls whose picture I posted.
The guy is a race-idiot who refuses to accept reality.
This is why he lives in his mother's basement blogging in race forums and arguing with the likes of people whom he deems as inferior negroes as if he needs to 'prove' his racial superiority! LOL
And you wonder why Britain is falling to the Pakistanis. Posts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It’s also in the same cluster as indigenous South Asians and Southeast Asians, many of whom have straighter hair than Europeans. What is your point?
The indigenous racial types of those regions have woolly hair.
quote:In any case Negrito seems to have been first inhabitants of South East Asia. The traces of the stock are still to be seen in some of the forest tribes of the higher hills of the extreme south of India and similar traces appear in the inaccessible areas of Assam and Bengal, Burma, where dwarf stature is combined with frizzly hair which appears to have resulted from recent admixture of pure Negrito stock of the Andamans with blood from the main land of India or Burma.
So many views on the Negrito problem in Indian ethnology have been reported in the literature. Guha (1928, 1929) observed the presence of Negrito racial strain from the solitary character of hair form (frizzly type) which he found among the Kadars who live in the interior of the chain of hills running from the Anamalais to Travancore. Guha (1961) wrote to Sharma (personal communication) that frizzly type of hair occurs not only among Kadars but among Irulas and the Pulayans also.
- Indian Genome Variation Consortium
And what of Strouhal's study?
Most (94/117 skulls) were a Caucasoid-Negroid hybrid type.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^You fail. Negritos aren't the only indigenous populations in the region. The South Asian Adivasi are indigenous as well. Their hair type is generally no different from the other non-kinky haired South Asians.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Most (94/117 skulls) were a Caucasoid-Negroid hybrid type.
Goes back to my earlier question (which you neglected to answer). Where is your evidence that there is such a thing as an archetypical Negroid population which is devoid of non-negroid traits, for you to just randomly slice African populations up according to their phenotypical distance from this imaginary negroid archetype? You mean to tell me that you haven't even identified this African population, but you're a so sure that only 6-8% of Strouhal's Badarian population descends from this archetype population?
quote: Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Correct. That is why he responds to each paragraph I wrote with a strawman argument and didn't bother answering my last question about the Indian girls whose picture I posted.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^You fail. Negritos aren't the only indigenous populations in the region. The South Asian Adivasi are indigenous as well. Their hair type is generally no different from the other non-kinky haired South Asians.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Most (94/117 skulls) were a Caucasoid-Negroid hybrid type.
Goes back to my earlier question (which you neglected to answer). Where is your evidence that there is such a thing as an archetypical Negroid population which is devoid of non-negroid traits, for you to just randomly slice African populations up according to their phenotypical distance from this imaginary negroid archetype? You mean to tell me that you haven't even identified this African population, but you're a so sure that only 6-8% of Strouhal's Badarian population descends from this archetype population?
How is it imaginary, when zero Upper Palaeolithic African fossils have Caucasoid features?
Show me the UP African fossils with low nasal indices, narrow interorbital areas, midfacial orthognathism, microdont teeth, sharp nasal spines, retreating zygomatics, pointed chins?
So where are they?
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
^You're such a pinhead. Aside from the fact that you've ignored my question two times in a row, it doesn't follow logically that Africans need to have had narrow noses since the Upper Palaeolithic to carry it today (not that I'm saying they didn't have it back then). Aside from that non-sequitor, I see you're just going to flip flop back and forth between believing in microevolution (variations emerge because of ecological and other reasons) and typology (variations are caused because of admixture with source populations who have a monopoly on those variations), aren't you?
If you want to lump Capoids in with Negroids, then fine by me. The point is, these three major racial types were only once predominantly restricted to those geographical areas [large scale migrations only occurred later] and were allopatric subspecies. So its not circular reasoning to identify racial trait complexes, since they are geographically circumscribed in origin.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
All African primates have straight hair. So too all of Africa's desert,forest, and savannah mammals. Even the camel having evolved in areas of intense UV rays still maintains straight brown hair.
The questions is why haven't the strong UV waves modified the hair of at least one of these mammals so that the hair curls up to protect the epidermis?
Back to an earlier analysis: in all geographic locations regarding humans populations separate according to the principle of genetic drift and population breeding usually takes place within those confines. Some traits get passed on and others not. The selection process seems to be based on arbitrary considerations in most cases. Thus straight hair can be selected for in an environment where curled hair could just as easily be selected for.
These population isolates would all seem to follow their own internal logic. It would seem that the only human trait that could be logically determined by environment is pigmentation. UV indexes, grosso modo, are correlated loosely with skin colour--i.e. with in limited range. Thus in the tropical environments skin colour can range from very dark(South Sudan, etc.) to yellow/medium brown( Khoisan, Sotho, some Ibo, etc.). Yet the tightly curled hair of the San goes along with their yellowish pigmentation. In India very dark pigmentation can go along with straight black hair, etc.
Same with height, and body structure. The Dinka and Nuers average over 6 feet while the Twa(males) barely reach 5 feet. But there are pockets of such short statured people in Asia and Europe. In fact among Europeans one occasionally sees individuals who are not dwarfs but very short.
When one looks at the non-human animal world the enormous variety of biological forms that evolve in the same environment is remarkable. Take the case of the Hammerhead Shark(genus Sphymidae). It evolved in the same environment of some other shark subspecies but evolved its peculiar head shape in a purely arbitrary way. The shape of head of the hammerhead and the positioning of its eyes confers no hunting advantage over other sharks.
So it is with human intra-islolate population mating patterns may in the long run produce physiological types that are purely arbitrary in derivation: tightly curled hair or straight hair confer no advantages in whatever geographical advantages. The same with epicanthic eye folds.
Pigmentation does seem to be affected within loose boundaries though. Yet, albinos do arise in areas where there are high UV concentrations. The recessive genes that produce them have not bee eliminated over millennia and are even found in all tropical flora and fauna.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^The third time in a row that you're running away from my question.
quote:Middle Paleolithic/UP Western Eurasians = Caucasoids
European Upper Palaeolithic Dolni Vestonice 13. Yes, very Caucasoid indeed! LMAO.
Is this meant to mean something?
I already answered your question. You've admitted you reject biology & adaptation and that you maintain physical features did not arise in different regions, and you cling to the Afroloon idea all physical diversity evolved in Africa. Yet when I ask for a single prehistoric skull with a low nasal index and is orthognathic you fail to list a single one. If those features evolved there, where are the fossils?
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: Is this meant to mean something?
Of course, that's why you're running away from addressing it (no prominent nasal spine, projecting face, no prominent nasal bone, prominent zygomatic arches), just like you ran away from addressing the fact that Strouhal's Badarians had a nasal index of >54. The Dolni Vestonice skull has a generalized morphology, with traits you've called non-caucasian throughout your stay here. Just playing dumb and saying ''is this meant to mean something?'' and ''what of Strouhal's study?'' is just code for your inability to address these points, stupid.
quote:Originally posted by Faheemdunkers: I already answered your question.
You're lying your ass off. You haven't identified your imaginary archetype Negroid group that is totally devoid of traits that are diagnostic of non-negroids. Even IF there were no Upper Palaeolithic African samples with the Caucasoid features you list (which isn't true), this is not the same as proving that there ever was such a thing as an ancestral African Negroid group with exclusively True Negroid typology. Caucasoid is not the only form of non-Negroid, stupid.
quote:Yet when I ask for a single prehistoric skull with a low nasal index and is orthognathic you fail to list a single one.
I've never committed myself in this thread page to expressing this view, so your random question makes no sense. You brought this up out of nowhere, trying to answer a question with a question, which was just a non-sequitor. Answer the question Modo-face:
Where is your evidence that there is such a thing as an archetypical Negroid population which is devoid of non-negroid traits, for you to just randomly slice African populations up according to their phenotypical distance from this imaginary negroid archetype? You mean to tell me that you haven't even identified this African population, but you're a so sure that only 6-8% of Strouhal's Badarian population descends from this archetype population?Posts: 8807 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Yeah, since you're too dumb to notice. The UP modern human European skull above does NOT conform to your 'caucasoid' type. "..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 [aboriginal] Australians or Africans, judged by objective anatomical observations."--Christopher Stringer, Robin McKie (1998). African Exodus. Macmillan, p. 162)
quote:I already answered your question. You've admitted you reject biology & adaptation and that you maintain physical features did not arise in different regions, and you cling to the Afroloon idea all physical diversity evolved in Africa.
LOL YOU are the loon as much as a liar? How does Swenet reject biology and adaptation when he clearly states that populations can change over time?! YOU on the other have this idiotic belief in static racial features. And of course not 'all' physical diversity evolved in Africa, but MOST did because that is where the human race originated. This is why for example the most diverse phenotypic traits of all-- craniofacial form is the most diverse in Africa as stated by Hiernaux whom YOU yourself cited, you dummy!
quote:Yet when I ask for a single prehistoric skull with a low nasal index and is orthognathic you fail to list a single one. If those features evolved there, where are the fossils?
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You yourself love to point out how there is no evidence of fossils exhibiting "modern negroid" types until Neolithic or Bronze Age times in West Africa even though there are material remains in the region dating back to the upper paleolithic. The funny thing is that humans in general are recent to Europe yet you hold paleolithic Europeans as example that 'Cacasoids' are an ancient 'race' even though the skulls aren't even that 'Caucasoid'! LOL
Again, your whole argument is circular and self-contradictory idiotic. Posts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Of course, that's why you're running away from addressing it (no prominent nasal spine, projecting face, no prominent nasal bone, prominent zygomatic arches)
It doesn't need adressing, its just an outlier, and shows your level of stupidity. You just ran to google images to find the most atypical skull you could find. Others exist: Grimaldi, Abri Pataud and Chancelade. These atypical skulls are the extreme minority (Coon [1962] for example in his most extensive study of UP European skulls, detected aveolar prognathism in only three specimens out of multiple hundreds). Nowhere did I deny they existed.
quote:just like you ran away from addressing the fact that Strouhal's Badarians had a nasal index of >54.
His study listed metrics for just over a hundred skulls. Numerous were platyrrhine. Its only you who cannot understand typological data properly, as you end up generalizing cherry picked data for an entire population.
quote:You haven't identified your imaginary archetype Negroid group that is totally devoid of traits that are diagnostic of non-negroids. Even IF there were no Upper Palaeolithic African samples with the Caucasoid features you list (which isn't true)
Then list them. You know they don't exist. The earliest dated African skulls falling in the leptorrhine range are two crania from Gambles Cave (II) dating 10,000-8,000 B.P (not UP, but Holocene). However the reliability of these skull measurements has been questioned:
quote: Deposits belonging to this "Gamble's Cave Shoreline" complex have now been dated to between 8000 and 10,000 B.P. Of the five Gamble's Cave skeletons, only two could be reconstructed, and this job was carried out in England after the material had been sent there from East Africa. Results were certainly far from perfect, owing to warping and crushing of the original bone, and further insult was to follow. The Royal College of Surgeons in London and the skeletal collections housed there received heavy bomb damage during World War II. So by the time that the skulls were transferred to the British Museum (Natural History) in 1948, they were scarcely in mint condition. Skull number 4 is the less well preserved of the two, and all of the base as well as a substantial portion of the facial skeleton are present only in plaster. Distortion renders this specimen quite unfit for measurement. Number 5 also lacks much of the skull base, and the missing parts have been heavily reconstructed. Although these skulls have been called non-Negro in morphology, the evidence is certainly far from clear cut, and any such diagnosis is questionable by virtue of the state of the material alone.
(Rightmire, 1975)
So not only does no Upper Palaeolithic leptorrhine skull exist in Africa, but you are going to struggle to find a skull from the early or mid-holocene. Low nasal indices only appear in some late Caspians crania of North Africa (Coon, 1965).
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Getting back to the topic of this thread...
quote:Originally posted by Fartheadbonkers:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Okay, and how is spiral haired being the most frequent refute that wavy hair is still native.
Wavy hair isn't native, and Hiernaux never wrote it was. Yes, he opposed the 'true Negroid' classification. However he wasn't an Afroloon.
Let's go over the Hiernaux passage you quoted again. Piece by piece.
Only the last two categories ['curly', 'spiralled'] are frequent in the the populations of sub-Saharan Africa,...
Notice he lists two categories of hair among sub-Saharans-- curly and spiral, and notice he says such hair forms are *frequent* in sub-Saharans, NOT that they are the ONLY types that occur.
and spiralled hair, which may be more or less tightly spiralled, occurs in many more populations than curly hair...
Here even says that spiraled hair occurs in variations of more or less. By the way, Khoisan or 'Capoid' types as you like to call them have the tightest most coiled forms of hair. 'Kinky' hair is actually less coiled and more loose.
He also says that spiraled hair in general is more common or predominant than curly hair which is looser. Again this shows variation. Hair even looser than curly is wavy hair which although rare in sub-Sahara still occurs. Again NOTHING in the Hiernaux's statements suggests that wavy hair does not occur at all in Sub-Sahara.
And mind you this disclaimer is for sub-Saharan populations in general but what about populations indigenous to the Sahara or supra-Sahara? We know wavy hair is much more frequent that it is dominant even though it occurs in populations where the people have black skin!
Posts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Chemical and Physical Behavior of Human Hair By Clarence R. Robbins 2012, pub: Springer Posts: 43094 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ You keep posting that same source which mentions NOTHING about the wavy more elliptical hair found in some Africans which is different from the less elliptical hair of Europeans.
What's the point in citing a source that mentions nothing of what we are referring to? LOLPosts: 26472 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ That source is actually good. It also references Iyengar's (1998) study. These findings are confirming wavy/straight hair is a northern latitude adaptation.
Posts: 873 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic