quote:My claim is supported by the latitude (luscan-scale distribution) and ancient artwork.
You didn't answer my questions on the Lushcan scale:
quote: 6) Regarding the Luschan scale, how long would a literally black skinned person have to be resident in those various zones to depigment to the colours predicted? What I'm asking is whether populations have been sufficiently static in some of those narrow zones for that map to work.
Nor the question the colour used for Tut on his own throne:
quote: 8) What did you make of the skin color used for Tut on his throne?
quote: And the geneticist didn't respond because they're too 'sensible' to answer whether, in they're view, Tut, an indigenous African, was more likely to have skin tone that fell within an African or European range?
North Africans are predominantly a lighter brown skin colour than Sub-Saharan Africans.
Seems clear that you're not properly engaging with this because your points are have been dismantled - what a glib, nonsensical answer. They were asked whether they thought Tut would be more likely to have had a range of skin tone found in Europeans or Africans, and they clammed up.
quote:You should remember that you said: " There may indeed be biased ethnocentric European scientists"... Yes, and there are also biased scientists who are not from Europe, including Afrocentrists. Clyde Winters has a PhD and calls himself a "Dr", but about everything he posts on this forum is his own dogma, lies and propaganda, not factual.
Relevance? Oh, yeah, there isn't any. Now you're back into ES troll mode.
quote: 1) Can you provide evidence that I'm doing this and that I'm a pan-Africanist?
You jumped on the "tropical" bandwagon, and like Zaharan you also refuse to accept there is no African phenotype/genotype cluster. And are you claiming you physically resemble (in your opinion) the modal phenotype of the ancient Egyptians?
So anyone who accepts the idea of a tropical body plan in ancient Egyptians is a pan-Africanist? That would apparently make you one...Never said I resemble the modal phenotype of the ancient Egyptians. Go back and read the post.
[QUOTE] Anton pointed out she thought the nose was more North African, but still said that the skull overall spoke fairly strongly of African origins.
Yea, but there's very little data to go on.
More evasion. Someone qualified who's been up close with the skull and gives an analysis you, someone with a documented history of sick racist internet activity, don't like and you say that there's "very little data to go on."
quote: Yes, which gives indication of Tut’s/overall ancient Egyptian sub-Saharan/Horn of Africa affinities and therefore the range of skin tone we can reasonably infer - which wouldn’t include the complexion of the Hawass reconstruction. No, not skin tone though. And Horner's do not cluster with "broad Africans"/Negroids anyway. This is my simple point - there is no African cluster, nor Sub-Saharan African, and so on.
More crap. So Horner's don't have dark skin more readily seen in African populations? More cynical expedient rubbish.
quote: ) Is it not the case that most depictions of Egyptians are darker than the Hawass reconstruction?
What was the Hawass reconstruction? The Science Museum source you posted? If so, obviously no.
The question again: Is it not the case that most depictions of Egyptians are darker than the Hawass reconstruction?
quote: Do you know of any ancient depictions of Tut that are as light as the 2005 model? No, but the depictions show him to be coppery or reddish brown, not dark-brown like chocolate.
Relevance? We're talking about the skin tone of the Hawass reconstruction (and the one which have rise to this thread.)
quote: 7) If you asked a white person to choose a colour for a facial reconstruction of a black person/ African (and told them that they’d win £1000 if they got the correct shade!) do you think they would choose that complexion? What is your point here?
Let me spell it out for you. You'd said:
quote:I guess what someone considers dark or light is to some degree relative to their own skin tone. I don't personally see this reconstruction as a 'White Tut', he's basically a bronze colour, but someone who has darker brown skin probably considers this to be light in comparison.
Most white people would consider Tut to be dark, even that image.
Again, my question: If you asked a white person to choose a colour for a facial reconstruction of a black person/ African (and told them that they’d win £1000 if they got the correct shade!) do you think they would choose that complexion? (The one shown on the National Geographic reconstruction.)
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gor: My claim is supported by the latitude (luscan-scale distribution) and ancient artwork.
I don't think that Luschan-scale map necessarily shows what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be. It merely shows what the modal skin colors of people currently inhabiting a region are. Notice that the tropical Americas on your map don't have the same skin tone range as Africa, which reflects the Native American inhabitants' ultimate origin in northeastern Asia. Ergo, your map is not taking recent migrations and admixture into account.
This map on the other hand was devised by Nina Jablonksi as a prediction of what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be, absent all those migrations. The map does predict that indigenous Eastern Saharans might not be as dark as Sudanics living just north of the the Equator, but on the other hand the values for most of Egypt don't seem to be much lighter than those of the Congo Basin (where Pygmy people live) or southernmost Africa (home to Khoisan).
(Pity I could not find a larger, higher-quality version of this particular map)
Posts: 7073 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I don't think that Luschan-scale map necessarily shows what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be. It merely shows what the modal skin colors of people currently inhabiting a region are. Notice that the tropical Americas on your map don't have the same skin tone range as Africa, which reflects the Native American inhabitants' ultimate origin in northeastern Asia. Ergo, your map is not taking recent migrations and admixture into account.
This map on the other hand was devised by Nina Jablonksi as a prediction of what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be, absent all those migrations.
Again, I would ask how long people would need to be resident for in those zones to gain those skin colours, and to take into account the South-North movement of populations from tropical Africa into Egypt.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Gor
Bring me something from PNAS some damn where or whatever peer reviewed publisher that uses cephalic/cranial index.
When you can't just go back and review my post with the biblio for the reason why.
Please, no ratios, indexes, or other combining of variables.
Dixon's work on indices made Britain ⅓ D-H-P "proto-negroid" (iirc, no longer owning the book).
Indices are just not racially applicable. Why? There's too much intra-racial variety.
... cephalic/cranial indices are not used in 21st century physical anthropology to discriminate continental origin.
Even Sergi used the skull form in outline not index when declaring Nordics as bleached Africans.
Do not confuse * craniometric and * cranial non-metric traits for cranial/cephalic index.
The former are singular variables the later is a ratio that modern physical anthropology deems useless to distinguish continental origins.
No manipulation of raw data, no ratios, no indexes, no other combining of variables has been de rigueur since
Corrucini 1975, Multivariate analysis in biological anthropology: Some considerations. J. Hum. Evol. 4:1–19 .
Atchley et al. 1976; Statistical properties of ratios. I. Empirical results. Syst. Zool. 25:137–148. .
Van Vark 1976; A critical evaluation of multivariate statistical methods in the study of human populations from their skeletal remains. Homo 27:94–114 .
Campbell 1978; Multivariate analysis in biological anthropology: Some further considerations. J. Hum. Evol. 7:197–203 .
Albrecht 1980; Multivariate analysis and the study of form, with special reference to canonical variate analysis. Am. Zool. 20:679–693 .
Van Vark 1984; On the determination of hominid affinities. In Multivariate Statistical Methods in Physical Anthropology, W. W. Howells and G. N. Van Vark, eds. Boston: Reidel, 323–349 .
Jungers et al. 1995; Shape, size, and size adjustments in morphometrics. Yrbk. Phys. Anthropol. 38(suppl. 21):137–161 .
wherefrom are derived the techniques and suggested best practices for primary analysis in light of methodological concerns.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Come to think of it, assuming that increased vitamin D intake at higher latitudes was the main selective pressure for lighter skin throughout the world, the late Pleistocene ancestors of ancient Egyptians and Nubians might still have been quite dark if you consider their diet. Before plant cultivation and the Sahara's Holocene greening, they probably would have huddled close to the Nile or other sources of water where they could have found fish. Fish are well known for their high vitamin D content. I'll have to review the archaeological data on late Pleistocene food procurement in the eastern Sahara region to confirm whether they regularly exploited aquatic food sources, but common sense would suggest they did.
In addition, milk is also relatively rich in vitamin D. Once the Neolithic Egyptians started herding cattle and other livestock, then assuming they had lactose persistence like other African pastoralists, they might have consumed enough milk to suit their vitamin D need without losing too much skin pigment.
That^ skin tone is obviously very different to this:
Yes they are, but to someone with pale/white skin, both are dark. It seems strange that you think there is a 'white' Tut reconstruction. If there was - Nordicists certainly would have used it by now. But its obviously too dark for them.
quote: 6) Regarding the Luschan scale, how long would a literally black skinned person have to be resident in those various zones to depigment to the colours predicted? What I'm asking is whether populations have been sufficiently static in some of those narrow zones for that map to work.
"From known cases of population expansion, it can be seen that the processes of natural selection that cause skin pigmentation to vary work at very slow rates. For instance, the tropical American Indians are not reported to be noticeably darker than other Native Americans after a settlement periods of perhaps 15,000 years, and yet it is clear from Old world observations that tropical latitudes have certainly selected for darker skins over much longer time spans." (Bellwood, 2007)
quote:Nor the question the colour used for Tut on his own throne
That falls within the "coppery" (reddish-brown) range I was talking about, probably at the darker end of the spectrum though. But its still far lighter than this.
quote:Seems clear that you're not properly engaging with this because your points are have been dismantled - what a glib, nonsensical answer. They were asked whether they thought Tut would be more likely to have had a range of skin tone found in Europeans or Africans, and they clammed up.
My point is that you should have asked North vs. Sub-Saharan African, not European vs. African.
quote:Relevance? Oh, yeah, there isn't any. Now you're back into ES troll mode.
Relevance: you only think white people are racist or ethnocentric. DHDoxy and other posters on this forum have challenged you before on this: extreme racist material posted by black posters, you don't report or consider offensive. Yet you are known to go berserk if a white person merely posts a mild racial comment in comparison.
quote: So anyone who accepts the idea of a tropical body plan in ancient Egyptians is a pan-Africanist? That would apparently make you one...Never said I resemble the modal phenotype of the ancient Egyptians. Go back and read the post.
There are non-Africans with 'tropically adapted' limbs, I never made a big thing about it. The tropics is not confined to Africa. Zaharan however uses this "tropical African" nonsense, and you seem to have adopted it (look at name).
quote:More evasion. Someone qualified who's been up close with the skull and gives an analysis you, someone with a documented history of sick racist internet activity, don't like and you say that there's "very little data to go on."
There are very few measurements, which means precisely what I stated. All you have done is appeal to authority. And lol @ "sick racist internet activity". This is coming from you: a pervert who wrote on his 18th birthday he had ordered white female strippers, creates filthy threads across the internet "why do white women pay for sex in Jamaica", and how you once arrived at a holiday-cottage in rural England to find a blonde Barbie doll which you had a family racial debate over because it wasn't black with an afro. Yes, you're really 'normal' on race dude. There's no dirt like yours logged on my internet-history, I just changed my position on typology and so forth after reading more literature.
quote:More crap. So Horner's don't have dark skin more readily seen in African populations? More cynical expedient rubbish.
I meant craniometrics.
quote:Again, my question: If you asked a white person to choose a colour for a facial reconstruction of a black person/ African (and told them that they’d win £1000 if they got the correct shade!) do you think they would choose that complexion? (The one shown on the National Geographic reconstruction.)
If you meant Tut, probably yes. black person/African - no.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
So the debate becomes silly and the evidence/conclusions we have become irrelevant now that your arguments have unraveled?
You posted you think the modal skin hue in ancient Egypt was dark brown, I claim it was bronze/copper-brown. What is the big deal here?
My claim is supported by the latitude (luscan-scale distribution) and ancient artwork.
The big deal here is that ancient Egyptians eventually originated at the South, as they gradually moved up the Nile. Chronologically, Kerma, Naqada I, II, III, at the latter KMT.
Wadi Kubbaniya (ca. 17,000–15,000 B.C.)
In Egypt, the earliest evidence of humans can be recognized only from tools found scattered over an ancient surface, sometimes with hearths nearby. In Wadi Kubbaniya, a dried-up streambed cutting through the Western Desert to the floodplain northwest of Aswan in Upper Egypt, some interesting sites of the kind described above have been recorded. A cluster of Late Paleolithic camps was located in two different topographic zones: on the tops of dunes and the floor of the wadi (streambed) where it enters the valley. Although no signs of houses were found, diverse and sophisticated stone implements for hunting, fishing, and collecting and processing plants were discovered around hearths. Most tools were bladelets made from a local stone called chert that is widely used in tool fabrication. The bones of wild cattle, hartebeest, many types of fish and birds, as well as the occasional hippopotamus have been identified in the occupation layers. Charred remains of plants that the inhabitants consumed, especially tubers, have also been found.
It appears from the zoological and botanical remains at the various sites in this wadi that the two environmental zones were exploited at different times. We know that the dune sites were occupied when the Nile River flooded the wadi because large numbers of fish and migratory bird bones were found at this location. When the water receded, people then moved down onto the silt left behind on the wadi floor and the floodplain, probably following large animals that looked for water there in the dry season. Paleolithic peoples lived at Wadi Kubbaniya for about 2,000 years, exploiting the different environments as the seasons changed. Other ancient camps have been discovered along the Nile from Sudan to the Mediterranean, yielding similar tools and food remains. These sites demonstrate that the early inhabitants of the Nile valley and its nearby deserts had learned how to exploit local environments, developing economic strategies that were maintained in later cultural traditions of pharaonic Egypt.
The Khormusan: Evidence for an MSA East African industry in Nubia
quote:
There is clear evidence of lithic technological variability in Middle Paleolithic (MP) assemblages along the Nile valley and in adjacent desert areas. One of the identified variants is the Khormusan, the type-site of which, Site 1017, is located north of the Nile's Second Cataract. The industry has two distinctive characteristics that set it apart from other MP industries within its vicinity. One is the use of a wide variety of raw materials; the second is an apparent correlation between raw material and technology used, suggesting a cultural aspect to raw material management. Stratigraphically, site 1017 is situated within the Dibeira-Jer formation which represents an aggradation stage of the Nile and contains sediments originating from the Ethiopian Highlands. While it has previously been suggested that the site dates to sometime before 42.5 ka, the Dibeira-Jer formation can plausibly be correlated with Nile alluvial sediments in northern Sudan recently dated to 83 ± 24 ka (MIS 5a). This stage coincides with the 81 ka age of sapropel S3, indicating higher Nile flow and stronger monsoon rainfall at these times.
Other sites which reflect similar raw material variability and technological traditions are the BNS and KHS sites in the Omo Kibish Formation (Ethiopia) dated to ∼100 ka and ∼190 ka respectively. Based on a lithic comparative study conducted, it is suggested that site 1017 can be seen as representing behavioral patterns which are indicative of East African Middle Stone Age (MSA) technology, adding support to the hypothesis that the Nile Valley was an important dispersal route used by modern humans prior to the long cooling and dry trend beginning with the onset of MIS 4. Techo-typological comparison of the assemblages from the Khormusan sites with other Middle Paleolithic sites from Nubia and East Africa is used to assess the possibility of tracing the dispersal of technological traits across the landscape and through time.
--Mae Goder-Goldberger
Quaternary International 25 June 2013, Vol.300:182–194, doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2012.11.031 The Middle Palaeolithic in the Desert
quote:Evidence for a hunter-gatherer range-expansion is indicated by the site of Station One in the northern Sudan, a surface scatter of chipped stone debris systematically collected almost 40 years ago, though not studied until present. Based on technological and typological correlates in East Africa, the predominant use of quartz pebbles for raw material, and the production of small bifacial tools, the site can be classified as Middle Stone Age. While often appearing in East African assemblages, quartz was rarely used in Nubia, where ferrocrete sandstone and Nile pebble were predominantly used by all other Middle Palaeolithic/Middle Stone Age populations. Additionally, façonnage reduction is characteristic of lithic technology in East Africa in the late Middle Stone Age, while Middle Palaeolithic industries in the Nile Valley display only core reduction. It is proposed this assemblage represents a range-expansion of Middle Stone Age hunter-gatherers from East Africa during an Upper Pleistocene pluvial.
[...]
Studies of mitochondrial DNA suggest that all mod- ern humans are derived from a common ancestral group that was living in sub-Saharan Africa between 200,000 and 100,000 years ago (Cann et al. 1987; Vigi- lant et al. 1991; Horai et al. 1995; Quintana-Murci et al. 1999; Ingman et al. 2000). This ‘Out of Africa’ model posits multiple dispersals via the Arabian (Tchernov 1992; Ronen & Weinstein-Evron 2000; Rose 2000; Stringer 2000; Rose 2004) and/or Levantine corridors (Bar-Yosef 1987; 1994; 2000; Van Peer 1998) between 110,000 and 50,000 BP, which places these events in the latter half of the Middle Palaeolithic (henceforth MP)/Middle Stone Age (henceforth MSA).
It is reasonable to assume if any population expanded from East Africa to Northeast Africa, and subsequently into the Levant, they would have brought with them the lithic technology from whence they came. There are scattered assemblages from the Sudan that are characteristic of the Sangoan (e.g. Arkell 1949; Guichard & Guichard 1965), indicating some degree of technological continuity between Central and Northeast Africa during the late Early Stone Age (henceforth ESA).
To date, however, there has been no convincing archaeological evidence to suggest inter-regional af- finities during the MSA between East Africa and Northeast Africa. On the contrary, MP industries of Sudan (e.g. Marks 1968a,b) are technologically and typologically distinct from those found in Kenya and Ethiopia (e.g. Breuil et al. 1951; Merrick 1975). Furthermore, comparative analyses of Egyptian and Levantine MP assemblages suggest that no compel- ling technological connections existed between these two regions at this time (Marks 1990; Van Peer 1998). So, while there is a plethora of genetic evidence sup- porting the ‘Out of Africa’ model, archaeological data along one of the primary corridors of human migration have been absent until now. Station One, an MSA site from northern Sudan, represents the only example of a techno-typological connection be- tween the source area of anatomically modern hu- mans and Northeast Africa.
[...]
-- Jeffrey Rose
New Evidence for the Expansion of an Upper Pleistocene Population out of East Africa, from the Site of Station One, Northern Sudanmore
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted: @cass How do you reconcile this:
quote: Tut had a CI of 83.9 (Hawass et al. 2010). We also know this bachycephaly was not pathological.
And this:
quote: If a skull is brachycephalic it is highly unlikely (unless it is pathological) to infer Sub-Saharan African ancestry.
With this?:
quote: the skull overall, including aspects of the face spoke fairly strongly of his African origins
Hawass et al. 2010 claim it is not pathological, a 2012 study i posted claims it is. Having reviewed the evidence, I would say it is. Tut's head looks deformed with pathologies.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gor: My claim is supported by the latitude (luscan-scale distribution) and ancient artwork.
I don't think that Luschan-scale map necessarily shows what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be. It merely shows what the modal skin colors of people currently inhabiting a region are. Notice that the tropical Americas on your map don't have the same skin tone range as Africa, which reflects the Native American inhabitants' ultimate origin in northeastern Asia. Ergo, your map is not taking recent migrations and admixture into account.
This map on the other hand was devised by Nina Jablonksi as a prediction of what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be, absent all those migrations. The map does predict that indigenous Eastern Saharans might not be as dark as Sudanics living just north of the the Equator, but on the other hand the values for most of Egypt don't seem to be much lighter than those of the Congo Basin (where Pygmy people live) or southernmost Africa (home to Khoisan).
quote:Originally posted by Gor: My claim is supported by the latitude (luscan-scale distribution) and ancient artwork.
I don't think that Luschan-scale map necessarily shows what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be. It merely shows what the modal skin colors of people currently inhabiting a region are. Notice that the tropical Americas on your map don't have the same skin tone range as Africa, which reflects the Native American inhabitants' ultimate origin in northeastern Asia. Ergo, your map is not taking recent migrations and admixture into account.
This map on the other hand was devised by Nina Jablonksi as a prediction of what the optimal skin color for each latitude would be, absent all those migrations. The map does predict that indigenous Eastern Saharans might not be as dark as Sudanics living just north of the the Equator, but on the other hand the values for most of Egypt don't seem to be much lighter than those of the Congo Basin (where Pygmy people live) or southernmost Africa (home to Khoisan).
There was a question earlier in this thread on the width of Tut's nasal aperture - between 15mins 56 secs to 16:04, and also at 55:26, there are CT images which might help.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote: Hawass et al. 2010 claim it is not pathological, a 2012 study i posted claims it is. Having reviewed the evidence, I would say it is. Tut's head looks deformed with pathologies.
"Having reviewed the evidence", how convenient. Please.
quote:It seems strange that you think there is a 'white' Tut reconstruction.
Maybe you should speak to Lioness about the title of the OP.
quote:"From known cases of population expansion, it can be seen that the processes of natural selection that cause skin pigmentation to vary work at very slow rates.
Oh dear. Given the proximity of Egypt to tropical Africa, which of course is where the bulk of the population migrated from, your quote informs us of the impact of gene flow/migration from the Near East and southern Europe into Egypt. Thanks. Very useful.
quote: That falls within the "coppery" (reddish-brown) range I was talking about, probably at the darker end of the spectrum though. But its still far lighter than this.
Relevance of "this"?
quote: My point is that you should have asked North vs. Sub-Saharan African, not European vs. African.
You don't have a point. The geneticist in question was talking about skin colour within the context of Tut's sub-Saharan population affiliates.
quote: Relevance: you only think white people are racist or ethnocentric. DHDoxy and other posters on this forum have challenged you before on this: extreme racist material posted by black posters, you don't report or consider offensive. Yet you are known to go berserk if a white person merely posts a mild racial comment in comparison.
What you've posted here and elsewhere is among the most virulent, dedicated racism I've ever seen on the net. Let's not forget your suggestion that the media were overly sympathetic to the murdered Black teenager Stephen Lawrence because in their photos of him, they didn't show what you call his black power fist. Let's not forget your sick connections with far-right groups. Let's not forget your Black Men with Energy thread. Nothing anyone else has posted here on ES comes close.
quote: There are non-Africans with 'tropically adapted' limbs, I never made a big thing about it. The tropics is not confined to Africa. Zaharan however uses this "tropical African" nonsense, and you seem to have adopted it (look at name).
Get's worse.
quote: There are very few measurements, which means precisely what I stated. All you have done is appeal to authority.
Someone more qualified than a former BNP member with a BTEC in forensic anthropology.
quote: And lol @ "sick racist internet activity". This is coming from you: a pervert who wrote on his 18th birthday he had ordered white female strippers
Filthy lie.
Quote the post and put it in this thread. When you can't find it, you ask Tukuler to delete your crap and you apologise. If you don't by 9pm tomorrow evening (30th October), I'm taking things further.
quote: creates filthy threads across the internet "why do white women pay for sex in Jamaica",
Also, find the quote of me saying "why do white women pay for sex in Jamaica".
quote: and how you once arrived at a holiday-cottage in rural England to find a blonde Barbie doll which you had a family racial debate over because it wasn't black with an afro. Yes, you're really 'normal' on race dude.
Revisit the post and find where my family had a racial debate because there was a blonde Barbie doll.
quote: If you meant Tut, probably yes. black person/African - no.
Deranged, mendacious racist.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gor: View the maps in Brace. He has a pre-1492 map.
Click Old World distribution of human skin colour, c. 1492 AD. From Brace (1973).
Egypt is medium brown with light brown at the northern coast.
This is no more useful for your purposes than that Luschan map you posted earlier. I'm not interested in (speculative) reconstructions of Old World skin tones circa 1492 AD, which is helluva later than the period we're all interested in anyway. Really, the 1492 date is only useful for factoring out historical European and African movements to the Americas. We are talking about the optimal skin tone for each latitude and environment, which wouldn't necessarily correspond to how the current inhabitants of a region might look.
Oh, and your slanderous attacks on claus's character have made me lose a lot of the respect for you I thought I had developed. And here was I thinking you were close to redeeming yourself.
Posts: 7073 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
60% or more of comments you posted were deleted on your first account for breaking rules. The message I got from Sammy who reviewed your doxx threads (he removed) is that you are 'horrible'. Why do you think you lost access to your account? Work it out.
Your "women who-travel for sex" thread appears to have also been deleted (so of course I cannot quote what you posted). In contrast, I have never had a thread deleted for rule-breaking. Your history on this forum is very toxic to say the least, not mine. I never resorted to doxxing, and when I spoke to Sammy he seemed to have no problem with me. He thanked me for flagging most your posts - which he agreed were illegal.
The threads I created on Truthcentric and Swenet I got deleted fairly quickly, and I apologized. However I did not doxx anything, or even use names. It was a couple of linked photos through facebook. In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
So what exactly did you ever contribute on your first account? 20+ doxxing threads where you were posting my personal details, and a couple of troll threads about your sexual perversions. I really don't need a lecture from you about morality or having a "good internet history".
And the libel about me being a BNP member is mostly psychological projection on your behalf. Yes, I know who you are. You are member of a political party and have even contested council elections. I am not a member of a political party, and never have been.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
Quote the post and put it in this thread. When you can't find it, you ask Tukuler to delete your crap and you apologise. If you don't by 9pm tomorrow evening (30th October), I'm taking things further.
Lol, no it isn't. I can only presume since you've recently become far more racialized in ideology or ethnocentric you want to distance yourself from those posts which might embarrass your position. While it is convenient for you the thread was deleted, your comments I remember.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
^ That's the real Zaharan/son of ra there, but these same individuals then come on this forum claiming to be totally neutral or objective regarding race.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
60% or more of comments you posted were deleted on your first account for breaking rules. The message I got from Sammy who reviewed your doxx threads (he removed) is that you are 'horrible'. Why do you think you lost access to your account? Work it out.
Your "women who-travel for sex" thread appears to have also been deleted (so of course I cannot quote what you posted). In contrast, I have never had a thread deleted for rule-breaking. Your history on this forum is very toxic to say the least, not mine. I never resorted to doxxing, and when I spoke to Sammy he seemed to have no problem with me. He thanked me for flagging most your posts - which he agreed were illegal.
The threads I created on Truthcentric and Swenet I got deleted fairly quickly, and I apologized. However I did not doxx anything, or even use names. It was a couple of linked photos through facebook. In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
So what exactly did you ever contribute on your first account? 20+ doxxing threads where you were posting my personal details, and a couple of troll threads about your sexual perversions. I really don't need a lecture from you about morality or having a "good internet history".
And the libel about me being a BNP member is mostly psychological projection on your behalf. Yes, I know who you are. You are member of a political party and have even contested council elections. I am not a member of a political party, and never have been.
You are contradicting yourself here.
1) you've stated that you've contacted Sam, to delete threads made by Clause. You also demanded for Sarahan to get banned.
2) some wanted you to get banned, or your threads deleted. While others, me included were like no, you have the right to express your feelings as well, even thou it's rubbish and rasict dated material.
3) the thread you've mentioned by Saharan, was a response to your thread on African American women. But in many occasions you've crossed the line. Just so you know.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gor: The BNP character assassination came from ES member "son of ra" aka big mike m of Zaharans "base", after I posted this:
^ That's the real Zaharan/son of ra there, but these same individuals then come on this forum claiming to be totally neutral or objective regarding race.
A few things here, as well.
I'm not sure if these to posters are on and the same person. I think not.
I don't see how anyone can be pride because I skin collor solely.
Second: he addresses a social issue here and it's real.
My question to you is, do you actually understand what he is addressing here? It virtually can be connected to this very same thread.
"This thread is basically to counter the white pride thread and a safe haven for us blacks of any nationality.
How come us blacks must always be suppressed and can't have anything to ourselves? Like our stolen history. If we do speak the truth we will be labeled afrocentric.
How come the media must always make us blacks look bad whether it be movies, news, music,etc. Then other races think badly of us. How come us blacks can never rise and become powerful. Whether your an AA, African, west Indian ,etc. How come other races copy our style and are still racist towards us? Why non blacks always talking badly about African, yet they take Africa's resources."
Lastly, why you've always posted about white pride? Then attack someone when else when they decided to express the same nature.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by Gor: Claus,
60% or more of comments you posted were deleted on your first account for breaking rules. The message I got from Sammy who reviewed your doxx threads (he removed) is that you are 'horrible'. Why do you think you lost access to your account? Work it out.
Your "women who-travel for sex" thread appears to have also been deleted (so of course I cannot quote what you posted). In contrast, I have never had a thread deleted for rule-breaking. Your history on this forum is very toxic to say the least, not mine. I never resorted to doxxing, and when I spoke to Sammy he seemed to have no problem with me. He thanked me for flagging most your posts - which he agreed were illegal.
The threads I created on Truthcentric and Swenet I got deleted fairly quickly, and I apologized. However I did not doxx anything, or even use names. It was a couple of linked photos through facebook. In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
So what exactly did you ever contribute on your first account? 20+ doxxing threads where you were posting my personal details, and a couple of troll threads about your sexual perversions. I really don't need a lecture from you about morality or having a "good internet history".
And the libel about me being a BNP member is mostly psychological projection on your behalf. Yes, I know who you are. You are member of a political party and have even contested council elections. I am not a member of a political party, and never have been.
You are contradicting yourself here.
1) you've stated that you've contacted Sam, to delete threads made by Clause. You also demanded for Sarahan to get banned.
2) some wanted you to get banned, or your threads deleted. While others, me included were like no, you have the right to express your feelings as well, even thou it's rubbish and rasict dated material.
3) the thread you've mentioned by Saharan, was a response to your thread on African American women. But in many occasions you've crossed the line. Just so you know.
No, i wished no one to get banned. I maintain freedom of speech (within the law) and never started to post anyone's personal details, or break other forum rules. Claus is very different: he doxxes people and then starts blackmailing through PM, i.e. the sort of comments he sent me were that I had to give up my views, or my home address would be put all over the forum, or he would start meddling with my university. This is the most immoral activity I have ever encountered on a forum, which is why most his posts ended up deleted by the admin, and why I suspect his first account ended up blocked, yet here he is above trying to imply he has a 'good internet history'.
Look above, and you will also see he started all the usual character assassinations again, as well as bringing my credentials into the thread (why?) and repeatedly posting i'm "racist". I do not see anything racist I have posted in this thread. Claus just uses it to smear innocent people.
For the record: Claus is a member of a far-left political party and has contested elections for them. I have all his personal details. I can easily use his political involvement and beliefs to make an argument against his neutrality on these subjects, but I have never (unlike him) resorted to this. I would also never (unlike him) doxx, or threaten/blackmail to post his details.
He posts libel that I am a BNP member, and then tries to use that against me (when I never have been) by inferring I am biased/not objective or whatever (as if anyone cares over the internet). That lie is very bizarre considering I used to administrate Metapedia and several other Neo-Nazi wiki-projects or web-portals. If he did detective work he would also find I am the basis of Karl Earlson's articles. I never have tried to hide my former views, or links to extremist sites or literature. The BNP-smear though just shows Claus desperately went through my internet history to find something, anything, to attack me.
If you look you will see I responded to his comments with data and sources, but all he could resort to is the usual "you are racist". So i'm not sure exactly how I could respond without derailing the thread (what he started). I only rejoined here to post about the cranial index. Areas I know little to nothing about (e.g. genetics) I do not touch. Anyway if the current Mod wants to remove this, my other reply above, and Claus' offtopic comments - that is fine by me. I certainly don't intent to hang around here.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to say, Gor, that your allegations about claus's ordering white female strippers on his birthday and making threads across the Internet about white women having sex with black men are especially ridiculous and revealing at the same time. They smack of the old white supremacist fixation on black men lusting after white women, which also lies at the root at the accusation that Martin Luther King had a penchant for white prostitutes. This is why I have a very difficult time taking anything you say about claus seriously.
I guess what someone considers dark or light is to some degree relative to their own skin tone. I don't personally see this reconstruction as a 'White Tut', he's basically a bronze colour, but someone who has darker brown skin probably considers this to be light in comparison.
you have to look inside the magazine
Forensic sculptor Elisabeth Daynhs used tissue-depth information to lay clay over plastic skull models. She then added layers of "fleshlike" silicone
^^^ I ask you is this fair ?
.
BBC 2014
^^^ look at his thighs, out of the shadow, pale, wtf ?
obviously these reconstructionists are conspicuously lightening the skin tone to make white people, incl themselves, feel more comfortable, admit it so we can move on
Posts: 42924 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: 60% or more of comments you posted were deleted on your first account for breaking rules.
Utter crap.
quote: The message I got from Sammy who reviewed your doxx threads (he removed) is that you are 'horrible'.
So Sammy thought me 'horrible' because I was onto you, a committed racist? Glad we now have an idea of this guy Sammy's values.
quote: Why do you think you lost access to your account? Work it out.
So Sammy hacked my account?
And who impersonated me in correspondence with ES members, stopping the message alerts function to my Hotmail account? Was it Sammy? I'd really like an answer to this? And you knew all along.
You do know that taking over someone's account and impersonating them is illegal, don't you?
quote: Your "women who-travel for sex" thread appears to have also been deleted (so of course I cannot quote what you posted).
Bullshitting liar.
quote: In contrast, I have never had a thread deleted for rule-breaking.
Had there been proper moderation here under Ausar, you would have been banned from the outset.
quote: Your history on this forum is very toxic to say the least, not mine.
Is this some sort of a joke? You're delusional.
quote: I never resorted to doxxing, and when I spoke to Sammy he seemed to have no problem with me. He thanked me for flagging most your posts - which he agreed were illegal.
But then -
quote: The threads I created on Truthcentric and Swenet...
He thanked you for that? So now we really do know what sort of man Sammy is - someone who aligns himself with racists. And illegal? Someone hacked my account and impersonated me - also the content you've posted here is hate speech. But that was OK, since Ausar refused to anything about it, and Sammy backed you, right?
quote: I got deleted fairly quickly, and I apologized. However I did not doxx anything, or even use names. It was a couple of linked photos through facebook. In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
You deleted them quickly because we found out who you were. You didn't 'doxx' or use names because you didn't have any pertinent information on Truthcentric or Swenet. Oh yeah, you only deleted that shitty OP on Charlie Bass, where you showed his wife and kid, because I asked you to in e-mail communication:
Dec 7th 2013:
"In addition, there are still threads you posted with the personal information/images of Brandon Pilcher and Charlie Bass. I haven't checked those threads on Swenet or Clyde Winters, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were still there. I'd like you to ask Ausar to delete those."
quote: In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
So what exactly did you ever contribute on your first account? 20+ doxxing threads where you were posting my personal details,
Believe me when I say I am unrepentant. I.would.do.it.again.
You think I'd apologise for having harried and outed a hardcore racist? Please, take that to someone who gives a sh1t.
quote:and a couple of troll threads about your sexual perversions.
Provide quotes/links, please. Why do you keep coming up with this stuff about what you see as my sexual perversions?
quote:I really don't need a lecture from you about morality or having a "good internet history".
Is that why after you were named, you scurried around the internet deleting your posts and changing your usernames?
Listen, if my internet history is so appalling, print off the offending material, compile a dossier and send it to whoever you think might care.
quote:And the libel about me being a BNP member is mostly psychological projection on your behalf.
And
quote: I am not a member of a political party, and never have been.
Could you therefore clarify whether you've ever had any links or affiliation with the far-right British National Party, voluntary or otherwise?
Could you also clarify whether you've stated on this forum and elsewhere, that the British media have shown bias in their coverage of the murdered Black teenager, Stephen Lawrence, because they don't show pictures of him with what you see as a black power salute?
quote: Yes, I know who you are.
No sh1t Sherlock, we've been in e-mail correspondence.
quote: You are member of a political party and have even contested council elections.
Which political party? Which elections?
quote: Lol, no it isn't. I can only presume since you've recently become far more racialized in ideology or ethnocentric you want to distance yourself from those posts which might embarrass your position. While it is convenient for you the thread was deleted, your comments I remember.
Yes, it is a lie and you're lying. Again, if anything's been deleted it's got jack to do with me.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote: No, i wished no one to get banned. I maintain freedom of speech (within the law) and never started to post anyone's personal details, or break other forum rules.
Freedom to push your hateful agenda.
quote: Claus is very different: he doxxes people and then starts blackmailing through PM, i.e. the sort of comments he sent me were that I had to give up my views, or my home address would be put all over the forum, or he would start meddling with my university.
I really don't care about whether you give up your views, I just don't want to see them here. So when you didn't desist from posting your racist crap then life becomes a bitch, eh?
quote: This is the most immoral activity I have ever encountered on a forum,
Cry me a fvcking river.
quote: which is why most his posts ended up deleted by the admin, and why I suspect his first account ended up blocked,
What sort of site owner gives sanctuary to a racist, and then not only blocks the account of someone trying to get them to stop their filth, but also impersonates them?
quote: yet here he is above trying to imply he has a 'good internet history'.
Again, collate a dossier. Oh, could you also put one together of your handiwork? I should have a hard copy somewhere if you need to borrow. I can post it to you.
quote: Look above, and you will also see he started all the usual character assassinations again, as well as bringing my credentials into the thread (why?) and repeatedly posting i'm "racist". I do not see anything racist I have posted in this thread. Claus just uses it to smear innocent people.
I smirked when you saw 'innocent'! Look, saying "I'm not going to convert though to the "Negroid = Egypt" theory" betrays your underlying hate for black people. Whether this hatred has caused your psychological disorder, or is the result of it, I neither know nor care.
quote: For the record: Claus is a member of a far-left political party and has contested elections for them.
Which far-left political party would that be? Better make it good.
quote: I have all his personal details. I can easily use his political involvement and beliefs to make an argument against his neutrality on these subjects, but I have never (unlike him) resorted to this. I would also never (unlike him) doxx, or threaten/blackmail to post his details.
Post whatever information you have on me.
quote:He posts libel that I am a BNP member, and then tries to use that against me (when I never have been)
Did you have links with the BNP in your teens?
quote: by inferring I am biased/not objective or whatever (as if anyone cares over the internet).
Please.
quote:That lie is very bizarre considering I used to administrate Metapedia and several other Neo-Nazi wiki-projects or web-portals. If he did detective work he would also find I am the basis of Karl Earlson's articles. I never have tried to hide my former views, or links to extremist sites or literature.The BNP-smear though just shows Claus desperately went through my internet history to find something, anything, to attack me.
This is the same individual who keeps coming back under different usernames. Wait, didn't you pretend to be Amur from the Kabyle at one stage?
quote: If you look you will see I responded to his comments with data and sources, but all he could resort to is the usual "you are racist".
Go back and read your slimy, loaded "I'm not going to convert though to the "Negroid = Egypt" theory" and irrelevant swipes at Keita, ES and ESR members.
quote: So i'm not sure exactly how I could respond without derailing the thread (what he started).
Lioness started it actually.
quote: I only rejoined here to post about the cranial index.
How many times have you rejoined now. To be honest, despite your evasiveness with the questions and clinging to CI as an arbiter of SSA ancestry, I thought you were doing well - until you messed up with your whataboutery digs at various ES members, the "ESR crowd" and Keita; and that stupidly unnecessary "I'm not going to convert though to the "Negroid = Egypt" theory".
quote: I certainly don't intent to hang around here.
Good riddance, but where have I heard that before?
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Claus, I left here in May 2013, only returning very briefly when I posted I abandoned Hamiticism and typology. I did the same at Forumbiodiversity several months later, and in November abandoned or renounced race classification entirely, having read C. Loring Brace's literature. My Metapedia administration was then closed later that month: "requested own blocking due to becoming liberal". I'm not sure why you think I was trying to delete or hide anything (I have been open about my change in views on multiple websites and have even received abuse from former far-right contacts I used to have).
I disown all my posts made before this year, yet you are citing posts I made several years back. However some of the comments I am alleged to have written I never did (i.e. the Energy thread was just a link to another forum post, I never made it). But i'm not going to sit here disputing comments published in cyberspace years ago.
Bringing up my former views on race is by no means a discrediting method. My past contains many other radical or extremist ideologies you could choose, and also religious fundamentalism e.g. British Israelism, Mormonism. All of this I abandoned or moved on from as well. I have not been religious now for around 2 years.
I do not know why you fixate with former extremist beliefs people held, or posted online, but renounced, or distanced themselves from. Look at someone like David Myatt who I have been compared.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:I really don't care about whether you give up your views, I just don't want to see them here. So when you didn't desist from posting your racist crap then life becomes a bitch, eh?
This forum isn't about 'what you want'. People are entitled to freedom of speech and their opinions. You however find it hard to accept people hold different viewpoints. No-one else on this forum claimed I posted "hate propaganda".
I don't deny posting some insensitive material years back when I was posting typological stuff, but claims I was posting "hate propaganda" are just your smears, especially when you compare my posts to someone like Mike111 or Narmerthoth (who as we speak are calling whites inferior albino mutants and people with black skin as the highest evolution attained). And you are always silent on this. This is why I don't take you as an "anti-racist" seriously whatsoever.
Thread has already been derailed enough, and I'm not wasting any further time responding to you.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
In partial reply to PMs sent me that should've been posted in one of the !stickies.
Actually the broacher of a thread can demand a return to the topic when the thread's gone off topic too long and especially so when infested with soap opera personal posts of no interest to anybody who comes here to learn Egyptology, African Studies, etc.
If the opening poster has no complaints then neither do I as long as within the !ES Constitution.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do have a complaint I would rather no more posts on old Cassiterides/Claus politics' that don't pertain to Tutankhamun
Ideally if possible the last few posts from tropicals and Gor on Sammy and the BNP could be moved to a separate thread in Egyptology or AE, perhaps titled Gor vs. tropicals redacted. the rematch
Posts: 42924 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
edit/delete a post (i will not edit) delete/move/sticky entire threads.
It's your thread thus your call do I 1 - move thread 2 - delete thread 3 - leave thread as is
I don't have time to read through beef posts that either or both parties could have avoided to begin with, it's time consuming to delete posts so unless the ES Constitution is violated I won't do that.
I want to be as hands-off as possible.
I'm soliciting comments from all involved but I will not read a bunch of whining.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I request the posts by tropicals and Gor on this page that come after my post with the Tut photos up to your "In partial reply to PMs " post deleted tomorrow but I say tomorrow so they can be allowed time to copy those posts into a new thread if they want to. If this can't be done than I request new posts on this very personal old gossip unrelated to Tut remarks be deleted -but allowed in separate threads unless it crosses the privacy line again
note: to readers I have not made any PMs to Ardo on this topic. I'm just responding here to what he's posted Others apprently have PM'd him about it
Posts: 42924 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gor: The BNP character assassination came from ES member "son of ra" aka big mike m of Zaharans "base", after I posted this:
^ That's the real Zaharan/son of ra there, but these same individuals then come on this forum claiming to be totally neutral or objective regarding race.
lol.. never said I was "neutral" concerning race, for I question the notion of biological "race" altogether. Ranges of diverse populations, yes- biological race, where Africans are "sub-species" and such, no. How could I claim to be "neutral"? And when did you become a paragon of objectivity and neutrality? You are among the most biased here. And I have turned around racist arguments and used them against assorted racists, who get quite upset when I do- they think its all one way, and become the biggest crybabies when their own race models and arguments are flipped around and applied in reverse. And I am not "Big Mike." "Big Mike" is one of a number of people, including myself, who use that solid base of data to hit hard at all comers- assorted racists, "HBDers" and sundry distorters on a variety of web forums & blogs. If "Big Mike" is running his own "pride" threads, good for him, but that's his baby, not mine.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
I guess what someone considers dark or light is to some degree relative to their own skin tone. I don't personally see this reconstruction as a 'White Tut', he's basically a bronze colour, but someone who has darker brown skin probably considers this to be light in comparison.
you have to look inside the magazine
Forensic sculptor Elisabeth Daynhs used tissue-depth information to lay clay over plastic skull models. She then added layers of "fleshlike" silicone
^^^ I ask you is this fair ?
.
BBC 2014
^^^ look at his thighs, out of the shadow, pale, wtf ?
obviously these reconstructionists are conspicuously lightening the skin tone to make white people, incl themselves, feel more comfortable, admit it so we can move on
Elisabeth Daynhs is not a forensic or paleolitropist. What she is, is a scam artist, who can make sculptures appear realistically.
All of her art has the same "white" appearance. Or at least 95% of her so called paleo work is.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by Gor: Claus,
60% or more of comments you posted were deleted on your first account for breaking rules. The message I got from Sammy who reviewed your doxx threads (he removed) is that you are 'horrible'. Why do you think you lost access to your account? Work it out.
Your "women who-travel for sex" thread appears to have also been deleted (so of course I cannot quote what you posted). In contrast, I have never had a thread deleted for rule-breaking. Your history on this forum is very toxic to say the least, not mine. I never resorted to doxxing, and when I spoke to Sammy he seemed to have no problem with me. He thanked me for flagging most your posts - which he agreed were illegal.
The threads I created on Truthcentric and Swenet I got deleted fairly quickly, and I apologized. However I did not doxx anything, or even use names. It was a couple of linked photos through facebook. In contrast you were doxxing, and doing other rule-breaking, but never even apologized.
So what exactly did you ever contribute on your first account? 20+ doxxing threads where you were posting my personal details, and a couple of troll threads about your sexual perversions. I really don't need a lecture from you about morality or having a "good internet history".
And the libel about me being a BNP member is mostly psychological projection on your behalf. Yes, I know who you are. You are member of a political party and have even contested council elections. I am not a member of a political party, and never have been.
You are contradicting yourself here.
1) you've stated that you've contacted Sam, to delete threads made by Clause. You also demanded for Sarahan to get banned.
2) some wanted you to get banned, or your threads deleted. While others, me included were like no, you have the right to express your feelings as well, even thou it's rubbish and rasict dated material.
3) the thread you've mentioned by Saharan, was a response to your thread on African American women. But in many occasions you've crossed the line. Just so you know.
No, i wished no one to get banned. I maintain freedom of speech (within the law) and never started to post anyone's personal details, or break other forum rules. Claus is very different: he doxxes people and then starts blackmailing through PM, i.e. the sort of comments he sent me were that I had to give up my views, or my home address would be put all over the forum, or he would start meddling with my university. This is the most immoral activity I have ever encountered on a forum, which is why most his posts ended up deleted by the admin, and why I suspect his first account ended up blocked, yet here he is above trying to imply he has a 'good internet history'.
Look above, and you will also see he started all the usual character assassinations again, as well as bringing my credentials into the thread (why?) and repeatedly posting i'm "racist". I do not see anything racist I have posted in this thread. Claus just uses it to smear innocent people.
For the record: Claus is a member of a far-left political party and has contested elections for them. I have all his personal details. I can easily use his political involvement and beliefs to make an argument against his neutrality on these subjects, but I have never (unlike him) resorted to this. I would also never (unlike him) doxx, or threaten/blackmail to post his details.
He posts libel that I am a BNP member, and then tries to use that against me (when I never have been) by inferring I am biased/not objective or whatever (as if anyone cares over the internet). That lie is very bizarre considering I used to administrate Metapedia and several other Neo-Nazi wiki-projects or web-portals. If he did detective work he would also find I am the basis of Karl Earlson's articles. I never have tried to hide my former views, or links to extremist sites or literature. The BNP-smear though just shows Claus desperately went through my internet history to find something, anything, to attack me.
If you look you will see I responded to his comments with data and sources, but all he could resort to is the usual "you are racist". So i'm not sure exactly how I could respond without derailing the thread (what he started). I only rejoined here to post about the cranial index. Areas I know little to nothing about (e.g. genetics) I do not touch. Anyway if the current Mod wants to remove this, my other reply above, and Claus' offtopic comments - that is fine by me. I certainly don't intent to hang around here.
Indeed you have your views, as does Clause. And indeed the political party either of you endorses has nothing to do with this forum. Since this is not a forum about politics (derictly).
But fact is that a lot of what you've cited was linked or associated with the extreme right wing. In support of the eugenics- dysgenics movement, which is considerd racist on many levels, for obvious reasons. Thus associating with this makes one...?
And yes, I do remember that Charlie Bass intend/ incident.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Originally posted by Anglo/cassiteredes/Gor/ "thule":
You however cling to a discredited typological view of "Africans". The latter you treat as some sort of natural biological grouping or taxon like Linnaeus' Homo Afer. ^No, this is only your own bogus strawman to divert attention from your logical failures. You aren't fooling anyone. In fact you have been debunked numerous times for your typological rubbish as shown below from 2012. Your "name change" doesn't help you. You still stand debunked.
Perhaps this quote will help:
"Individuals, or any kind of organic entities, form populations of which can determine the arithmetic mean and the statistics of variation. Averages are merely statistical abstractions, only the individuals of which the population are composed have reality. The ultimate conclusions of the population thinker and of the typologist are precisely the opposite. For the typologist the type (eidos) is real and the variation an illusion, while for the populationist, the type (average) is an abstraction and only the variation is real." (Mayr, 1959) ^^Witless buffoon. Do you realize that your "supporting reference" just undercut your own arguments and exposed your own errors over these past 2 years?
Who is the one treating "Africans" as some sort of real biological entity (type)? You, not me. I merely pointed out there are statistical averages among populations in Africa: inter-regional trait constellations that are differentiated by their frequency (these phenotypic complexes are just called oids[] or ids, but the name is not important and C. Loring Brace would opt to just name them by their region or geography).
lol.. Below I recap some of the same "typological" thinking you now oh so piously disavow, No one is being fooled your "name change" or alleged "new attitude." You are still running the same old game. You current pose as a repentant "Mr Objectivity" fails miserably. And the fact that trait frequencies are averages does not change the hard data as to tropical African diversity- because the "averages" show just such diversity, as pointed out time and time again, and shown by credible scholars. Your "new thinking" pose is sheer fakery.
And of course this is also arbitrary. It is down to the person conducting the study to choose x[i/], y, z as traits to measure or sample. Forensic scientists however try to limit themselves to diagnostic traits - those that are good indicators of geographical ancestry via the frequency distribution (so a trait that is found everywhere at the same rate is easily disgarded). [/i]
You had no problem with "trait frequencies" when they APPEARED to support your "Nordic Egypt" claims. However the claims vanished under even the most elementary scrutiny. Since when are you this big analyst of "frequencies"? Get real.[/i]
Err no. It is studies on Sub-Sahara Africa arguing that populations there show the highest mean craniometric variation. A different claim entirely to believing Africans have more variation than non-Africans. [/i]
Hey, dummy, think about what you just typed. If the "mean" variation, cutting across several lines of evidence, from crania to DNA shows that Africans have more variation than non-Africans, exactly what is the difference? If your own "mean" shows greater variation, why are you trying to make out as if it somehow doesn't, and that there is some mysterious "difference"? Your logic is rather addled.
Europeans and East Asians have virtually the "full range of diversity" too. You've confused this with highest mean variation, see above. Hapless Dullard, your "new look" still stinks as bad as the old one. If the very same "mean variation" you point to, shows Europeans and Asians have LESS dvesity than Africans, how then can you turn around and insist that - QUOTING YOU: "Europeans and East Asians have virtually the "full range of diversity"..
^^You are debunking and contradicting your own argument, with your own "supporting" data. Have you learned nothing yet after 2-3 years? And can you quote a credible scholar that says Europeans and East Asians have the same degree of genetic diversity or craniometric diversity as Africans? Relethford up above says Africans are more diverse. You claim no, but your opinion is without value. What scholar specifically supports your claim as to the "full diversity" or Europeans and Asians exceeding or the same as Africans? What's taking you so long in producing the data? You were asked above for similar scholarly support of other assertions. What's taking you so long getting those as well?
And who else falls in your "tropical African" cluster? Melanesians and other non-Africans by your own image.
^^Hapless one.. The reason Melanesians cluster as they do is because they are a TROPICALLY ADAPTED population, same as the Egyptians in question. Your "new persona" still puts forward the same DISTORTERic, illogical arguments as the old one. No wonder Claus says your alleged "change of heart" is just bogus window dressing until the heat he brought on you eased. Yo aren't fooling anyone with your bogus "new incarnation."
NOW LET'S RECAP YOUR OWN "TYPOLOGICAL THINKING" OF POSTS PAST.. Only a few items are posted here.. but people will get the picture.. AND LET'S ALSO RECAP YOUR PENCHANT FOR FAKING WHAT SCHOLARS DID NOT SAY
THE ANGLO- EXPOSED - PART 18. The faker says Negroids are defined as having Caucasoid admixture. But when he sees bla-ck models with admixture he suddenly claims they aint black at all. Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: posted 12 June, 2012 05:34 PM http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008168 Topic: Carleton Coon: Negoids are hybrids of Pygmies and Caucasians [QB] Yes. A fact well known today.
''The Negroid type is not homogeneous.'' - Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994.
Hiernaux (1975) distinguishes the Pygmies to Negroids on the grounds the latter are a product of the former (a recent mutation) but that there was probable geneflow with Caucasoids as Coon (1967, 1982) maintains.
Also note that on page 123 of 'Living Races of Man', Coon also states that ''To this combination may have been added remnant Capoid genes''. So Negroids are basically a recent mutation from the Pygmies, but with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture.
^^Dude please. Your own words contradict your claims. Up above you say that "NEgroids" are a recent mutation with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture. Look dummy, look. You say blacks are defined as having that admixture, and quote your favorite racist, Carleton Coon to that effect. But when your hypocrisy is exposed, you all of a sudden deny that the black models posted are "really" black. IN one thread "admixed" Negroes like the black models are black, but when your idiocy is exposed, they suddenly ain't black. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE ANGLO-DISTORTER EXPOSED PART 17: - He says there is no sexual diomorphism in Africans or skeletal differences between men and women, when the very anthropologists he quotes say the opposite.
---------]Originally posted by Anglo- Buffoon: Anglo_Pyramidologist member # 18853 posted 03 June, 2012 05:47 PM
Anglo-Buffoon 17a- "Frost and other anthropologists have noted that sexual dimorphism in Negroids is completely lacking. Check Frost's online blog."
Anglo-Buffoon 17b- "Black females are not lighter or different to black males in craniofacial terms."
^^Rubbish. The very Frost quote you paste says this:
Men and women differ in complexion because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse, 1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and immediately before are actually darker than boys).." FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection? Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85-103u
------- Can't you read dude? ALL females differ from males and are lighter. ALL human humans have sexual dimorphism to one degree or another. SO how can blacks "completely lack" said dimorphism according to you, when your own boy Peter Frost says all human have it?
------- ANd in studies of crania men and women do show differences, and these differences can be detected with a battery of modern measurements, as already shown in previous threads where your idiocy was destroyed- example (zakrewski2004-Intra-population and temporal variation in ancient Egyptian crania)
your own peter frost debunks you:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE DISTORTER'S FAKE QUOTES AND CITATIONS - PART 16
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: [QB] E1b1b is not Negroid.
Read it an weep -
''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade." - Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)
The foul faker doctored the quote not knowing the article has been much discussed at ES. Testifying even more to his incompetence, Cruciani actually does show E3b or E1b1b occuring in numerous places within "sub-Saharan" Africa. The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81, and E-M34) and the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously distributed on the African continent: E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa, E-M81 is restricted t o northern Africa, E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and E-M35* is shared by eastern and southern Africans (Cruciani et al. 2002)" --Cruciani
And there is no "page 74" in the Cruciani article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE FAKER'S BOGUS CLAIM PART- 15 - QUOTE: [QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides: posted 14 January, 2012 11:41 AM If you are a white heterosexual male in Britain you have virtually zero chance of getting a job. All the jobs go to blacks or other immigrants.
^^LOL - DISTORTERic nonsense. As of 2001, 92.1% of the UK population identified themselves as White, leaving 7.9%[270] of the UK population identifying themselves as mixed race or of an ethnic minority. The population of the United Kingdom in the 2001 census was 58,789,194, UK Office for National Statistics- 2001.
That leaves approx 54 million white people. About 33% of that population were adult men. Let's take away 8% or so for minorities. So you are saying then that 25% of the approx 54 million white people in the UK are all unemployed? Damn you are dumb, but you only expose the bankruptcy of your racism.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 13- HIS BOGUS CLAIM OF "NORDIC" EGYPTIAN ROYALTY [QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides: posted 28 December, 2011 05:40 PM Early dynastic & old kingdom royalty was Nordic (blonde and fair skinned)
^^^Ha hahahahah you are clueless.. Up above you reference scholar Frank Yurco, but here is what Yurco said about the 12th Dynasty, debunking your claim of "Nordic" Egyptian royalty. You dumbass.... You are again debunked, with your own "supporting" references... lmao...
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region.4 As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne... Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 12 HE says Egyptologists like Frank Yurco says the Egyptians were "Caucasoid" --- "Virtually every egyptologist believes the egyptians were Caucasoid" --
BUt Yurco says nothing of the sort.. Here for example, is what he says about the 12the Dynasty rulers aho were Nubian descent: They seem really "Caucasoid"... yeah, right.. - quote-
"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.) originated from the Aswan region.4 As expected, strong Nubian features and dark coloring are seen in their sculpture and relief work. This dynasty ranks as among the greatest, whose fame far outlived its actual tenure on the throne... Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs, they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and adopted typical Egyptian policies."
- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient Egyptians black or white?', Biblical Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5, 1989)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 10
quote:Originally posted by cassiterides: ^ Eurafrican is Caucasoid.
^^You are once again exposed. You said EurAfrican is Caucasoid, and cited Serti in support. But using your own citation any reader can see that Sergi considers EurAfricans to be an amalgamation or mixture of many types, directly contradicting your claim.
SErgi says: QUOTE: "This human species, with cranial and facial characters thus well determined, I call Eurafrican; and this because, having had its origin in Africa, where it is still represented by many peoples, it has been diffused from prehistoric times in Europe... The Eurafrican species thus falls into three races: the African, with red-brown and black pigmentation.. Thus the Mediterranean stock is a race or variety of the Eurafrican species." --G. Sergi
You have again failed and are once again exposed. ------------------------------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED- part 8:
quote:
Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes: "Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of Europe."
But then, in your own thread, by your own hand, you present a picture of an African albino that has pale skin, light brown or hazel eyes and fair hair. You said it was impossible, but then debunk yourself with your own posted picture.. This is like the 8-9th time you keep tripping over yourself with lies, contradictions, and bogus claims.
------------------------------------------------------------------ b]The Faker exposed- part 7[/b] Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes: "Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of Europe."
^^Your claim is is completely bogus. Native diversity or albinism causes some tropical Africans to have light eyes and light hair. You fail againn..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6 1-- ^^Faker! In your initial posts you claimed that it was Cavalli-Sforza talking 'bout negroes "mutating" from Pygmies. Now in your "corrected" post, YOU STILL APPEAR A FAKE. You now remove Cavalli- Sforza's name on the "mutant" claim, admitting that you were lying all along! Bwa ha ahaa hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah..
2-- Second point- Peter Frost is debunked by Cavalli-Sforza who says as to his so-called "mutation" theory: QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
Frost mentions Cavalli-Sforza in connection with sexual selection, and movement of some groups from Nigeria-Cameroon to other parts of Africa. He never says Cavalli Sforza talks bout any "negro mutation" and in fact any mutation claim is directly contradicted by Sforza. Sucka, you not only lied bout Cavalli-Sforza, you lied about your own white writer- Peter Frost, and misrepresented him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6 Anglo-Pyr/CassiREDES says: ''There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty''
^^LMAO! Totally fake! Credible up to date sources note that blondism is prevalent in early life BUT, contrary to your claim that: "There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty", the shade of color varies. In maturity the hair usually turns a darker brown color, but sometimes remains blond. See: "Gene Expression: Blonde Australian Aboriginals". Gnxp.com. http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2005/08/blonde-australian-aboriginals.php.
^^Here is one of your Australians over 20 years old who does have blonde hair. YOu are caught out spinning bogus claims AGAIN!. --------------------------------------------------
THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 4 ime and time again, you stand debunked and exposed for falsifying claims and references. Let's recap others:
Originally posted by CASSIFAKedes::
quote: The source is Cavalli-Sforza's book on the Pygmies entitled 'African pygmies' (Academic Press, 1986).
This work shows that Negroids mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 9,000 BC in West Africa. So the 'true' Black African today is a recent mutation. Caucasoids and Mongoloids predate them. [Wink] Negroids only migrated into other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion or slightly earlier. Prior to them, Caucasoids inhabited North Africa and Bushmen (Capoids) to the south who were displaced by the Caucasoids from the Mediterranean around 12,000 BC.
^^A bogus reference. Why should anyone take your word for it given past bogus references? Quote where Cavalli-Sforza says these so-called "negroids" "mutated" from Pygmies. The burden of proof is on you, since you made the claim.
While you scurry to cover your tracks with yet more bogus claims, Cavali Sforza, in his well known The History and Geography of Human Genes, 1994 Cavalli-Sforza summarizes his 1986 work on Pygmies and specifically debunks the "Pygmy as ancestor" theory held by other older writings. QUOTE:
"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
SO much for your lying claims of "mutations" from "Pygymy" ancestors. In short, you lied about Cavalli-Sforza, creating a falsified claim and a bogus "supporting" reference to a claim that is nowhere supported in his work. You are once again exposed as yet another racist faker You are not fooling anyone.
THE FAKER EXPOSED-PART 3- YOu then tried to cover up your lie with even more bogus nformation and STILL fail
You "modified" your Cavalli Sforza claim by including page numbers, and then changing some wording to "adaptive radiation" hoping to divert attention from your exposure.. lmao..
However pages 361-362 of Cavalli Sforza's 1986 book says absolutely nothing about any Negroes "mutating" from pygmies, nor any "adaptive radiation." It merely discusses Pygmy history and geography. You picked out a page at random, not knowing it can be verified via Google Books. You were asked to provide a direct quote but are still running. Now why is that?
""It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place of origin for the Negroid type which includes all West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are not good candidates for a proto-African population."
--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194
THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 2 And Your pathetic "modification" STILL turned out to be bogus. You then said:
"True" Black Africans appear as a recent adaptive radiation apparently branching off from an ancestral Pygmy population - a line of ancestry also indicated by osteological data (Coon 1962:651-656; Watson et al. 1996).
^^But in fact, Watson 1996 has nothing to do with osteological data and does not even mention it. It has to do with mtDNA.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:Originally posted by Gor: The BNP character assassination came from ES member "son of ra" aka big mike m of Zaharans "base", after I posted this:
^ That's the real Zaharan/son of ra there, but these same individuals then come on this forum claiming to be totally neutral or objective regarding race.
lol.. never said I was "neutral" concerning race, for I question the notion of biological "race" altogether. Ranges of diverse populations, yes- biological race, where Africans are "sub-species" and such, no. How could I claim to be "neutral"? And when did you become a paragon of objectivity and neutrality? You are among the most biased here. And I have turned around racist arguments and used them against assorted racists, who get quite upset when I do- they think its all one way, and become the biggest crybabies when their own race models and arguments are flipped around and applied in reverse. And I am not "Big Mike." "Big Mike" is one of a number of people, including myself, who use that solid base of data to hit hard at all comers- assorted racists, "HBDers" and sundry distorters on a variety of web forums & blogs. If "Big Mike" is running his own "pride" threads, good for him, but that's his baby, not mine.
Cosinged strongly!
Ps, "pyramitologist" or something like that was another screen name.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Could this huge zarahan per-made propaganda piece be deleted?
"Gor" said he's denounced his earlier views so therefore we don't need to keep bringing old quotes under his old name Why re-live all this shyt?
If your argumentation skills are up to par you would be able to deal with just what he's saying in this thread
Further zarahan's giant sized "Faker Exposed" series on Cass has been posted numerous times in old threads probably over ten times I've seen this thing why not just put up a link, I've seen that Australian guy with cowboy hat at least 50 times. It's old
And Gor also screwed up the thread with all the dirty laundry delete worthy crap I actually would have preferred him to pretend he was somebody else and stick to a new identity, so we didn't have to hear all the old history gossip either that or be Gor admit he's cass but categorically reply to no posts about his former identity
This is all solved by doing a new Cass' gossip thread where all the old stuff can go down. In Egyptology forum no problem for me, it would be one thread to air all that out
He seems like he's not as bad as he used to be, so why not let him continue on that path. See if he improves further or maybe reverts, see where it goes But yall want to force him to go back to be Anglo, just for the sake of having a whipping boy and feel self righteous about it that's boring though
Posts: 42924 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Troll Patrol why do you quote a big block of text from a poster you think is stupid only to make a one sentence comment?
That's giving him a free repeat of a big paragraph of his remarks - and we all read it before anyway. Why do we need to scroll past that?
Posts: 42924 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
@Lioness Yes, I too was willing to see if he'd reformed - but let's not be naïve about this:
quote: He seems like he's not as bad as he used to be, so why not let him continue on that path. See if he improves further or maybe reverts, see where it goes But yall want to force him to go back to be Anglo, just for the sake of having a whipping boy and feel self righteous about it that's boring though
But then Lioness, we need to remember what you pointed out regarding his recent (his second) acknowledgment that the Egyptians were black Africans: "an astonishing turnaround from the poster formerly known as Anglo_Pyramidologist "
quote: Originally posted by Ponsford: ----------------------------------------------- Yeah it is a shocking turnaround but I am not entirely convinced. -----------------------------------------------
In response to Ponsford you said Lioness,
"yes, on thinking about this one wonders if a person who appears to have a turn around would go back to their oldest member name - a profile that links to all their old evil racist posts and threads
Only a couple of people knew he was ben of Egyptsearch reloaded. I only found out yesterday So when he claims " People here know who I am" who is that, two people? and beyoku seemed not even certain if it was him Who can keep track of all the aliases?
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Troll Patrol why do you quote a big block of text from a poster you think is stupid only to make a one sentence comment?
That's giving him a free repeat of a big paragraph of his remarks - and we all read it before anyway. Why do we need to scroll past that?
Because I'm on the iPad. And it's a pain to erase large paragraphs.
Ps, Zaharan is adding more subs to the series. To show the drastic effect he needs to post entirely.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
No study has ever argued Africans have more physical variation or phenotypic diversity than other continental populations. This is your misunderstanding or misreading of Hiernaux's or Relethford's data, not mine.
What Hiernaux (1975) first showed was that Sub-Saharan Africans have the highest mean craniometric variation/range (at least from those indices or measurements quoted in multivariate studies or used by forensic scientists):
"In sub-Saharan Africa, many anthropological characters show a wide range of population means or frequencies. In some of them, the whole world range is covered in the sub-continent [...] only a narrow range of extremely low means are absent from the African record." (Hierneux, 1975)
e.g. he goes on to say sub-Saharan Africans cover 92% of the world's variation in mean nasal index (to contrast - some places like Australia [aborigines] cover less than 10%). He is talking about the mean-frequency variation/range only, not trying to argue Africans have more cranial diversity than Europeans or Asians.
The arithmetic mean is just the average.
So looking at nasal index: regional or local populations within sub-Saharan African cover 92% of the world's average frequency variation/range.
So while both wide and narrow noses appear at high frequency in Sub-Sahara African populations (compare Somali to Nigerians), only narrow appear at high frequency in Europe, and wide-noses at high frequency in Australia [aborigines]. This does not however mean there are not wide-nosed Europeans or narrow-nosed aborigines, however they are very rare/low frequency.
Instead however you are claiming Africans have more physical variation or diversity, which is totally false. It is only the mean frequency that differs and what sub-Saharans Africans have more variation of.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by tropicals redacted: [QB] @Lioness Yes, I too was willing to see if he'd reformed - but let's not be naïve about this:
It doesn't matter if somebody has reformed or not. This is an open forum where black supermacists and white supremacists and everything in between can converse or debate. Nobody is required to have a viewpoint like other posters. That's boring anyway I think somebody with a racist viewpoint should be able to make arguments in a forum like this just not make racist statements overtly putting down a group, like saying a group is ugly. Communication where people are not insulting each other, between people with opposing views, I think is beneficial
This forum in my opinion should be scientifically oriented. AE forum can be a free for all with no rules as it is
Posts: 42924 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I created an ES-reloaded account to download Angel's paper on the Egyptians several months back. I hardly posted there and I don't see anything offensive I posted. Someone made a post claiming they were sick of seeing white actors playing roles in Egyptian-based films, I merely responded by pointing out blacks have been in stuff like Merlin for years, which is also out of place, and it was hypocritical of them to complain. This is supposedly again 'racism' or "hate propaganda" in Claus' view. Whatever.
I've already explained enough above, so there's no more point in wasting time with it. However I will say that Claus' is/was expecting for too much with his "reform" agenda, which are tied to his own cranky far-left views. The guy is by no means a moderate himself. I am not going to convert to a tree-loving hippy, sorry Claus.
This is his political party. Transgender loos. Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
So they got Ramses and Moses and Tuya as pale Europeans in Exodus, principal roles Yet when there's a token black in a medieval flick he cries. They have been whitenizing Egyptians in Hollywood for years. And now the excuse for is they throw in a couple token side parts in medieval films ( and there were a few blacks around even) Or Merlin which is not even historical
Posts: 42924 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: So they got Ramses and Moses and Tuya as pale Europeans in Exodus, principal roles Yet when there's a token black in a medieval flick he cries. They have been whitenizing Egyptians in Hollywood for years. And now the excuse for is they throw in a couple token side parts in medieval films ( and there were a few blacks around even) Or Merlin which is not even historical
No, not at all. I don't watch these things, and I don't care who stars in them. My simple point was that if we remove all the white actors from Egypt-set films, shouldn't we also remove all the blacks from programmes/films like Merlin, and Thor? Otherwise there would be a double standard.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations.
Note however abstract:
"For both measures, the average level of within-population diversity is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions."
This is what Zaharan failed to take into account again (like Hierneux). None of these papers support his claim that Europeans lack the "full diversity":
"What scholar specifically supports your claim as to the "full diversity" or Europeans and Asians exceeding or the same as Africans? What's taking you so long in producing the data?"
All populations have virtually the "full diversity", they just differ in their frequencies and sub-Saharan Africans cover most of the world's mean range/have the highest mean variation.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's a good quote in Brues (1977) somewhere, where she states that 1 in 100,000 Northern Europeans inherit dark/brown skin. So like I said you can find the "full diversity" pretty much anywhere. The traits just differ by frequency.
Posts: 504 | From: No longer here | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gor: I created an ES-reloaded account to download Angel's paper on the Egyptians several months back. I hardly posted there and I don't see anything offensive I posted. Someone made a post claiming they were sick of seeing white actors playing roles in Egyptian-based films, I merely responded by pointing out blacks have been in stuff like Merlin for years, which is also out of place, and it was hypocritical of them to complain. This is supposedly again 'racism' or "hate propaganda" in Claus' view. Whatever.
I've already explained enough above, so there's no more point in wasting time with it. However I will say that Claus' is/was expecting for too much with his "reform" agenda, which are tied to his own cranky far-left views. The guy is by no means a moderate himself. I am not going to convert to a tree-loving hippy, sorry Claus.
Are you telling that there is a movie, wherein the roleplay of Merlin is done by a black actor? Can you link it?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Human skin color diversity is highest in sub-Saharan African populations.
Note however abstract:
"For both measures, the average level of within-population diversity is higher in sub-Saharan Africa than in other geographic regions."
This is what Zaharan failed to take into account again (like Hierneux). None of these papers support his claim that Europeans lack the "full diversity":
"What scholar specifically supports your claim as to the "full diversity" or Europeans and Asians exceeding or the same as Africans? What's taking you so long in producing the data?"
All populations have virtually the "full diversity", they just differ in their frequencies and sub-Saharan Africans cover most of the world's mean range/have the highest mean variation.
What you lack to understand is MOST diverse. Africans are most diverse in geno- and phenotype.
DETERMINER& PRONOUN
1 Greatest in amount or degree:
2 To the greatest extent:
Origin
old english māst, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch meest and German meist.
You will find a higher variety within/ amongst Africans! Where other geographical locations may have a score of 2 or 5, Africa has a score of 10. Do you see the difference?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
There's no dirt like yours logged on my internet-history, I just changed my position on typology and so forth after reading more literature. 
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic