quote: Yes, this was junk I was writing 3-4 years back. Laughable, crackpottery, call it what you want. But nowhere did I ever deny there was some sort of "race mixture" even back then. I regard this stuff to be pretty much crazy now, but i'm just pointing out I never was arguing for a "pure" Caucasoid Egypt.
Now you're trying to bring something resembling consistency and sanity to your position(s)by trying to convince that you were never arguing for a "pure" Caucasoid Egypt." This is an attempted sleight of hand, aimed at preserving what little credibility you have after your wholly unexpected comment last night:
quote: My original position was that they were 1/2 "negroid" anyway
This is false. You've never said that.
In fact, you stated that the reason for the end of Egyptian civilization was due to what you (presumably) regard as miscegenation with 'negroids' later in dynastic history.
quote: Afronuts wrongly portray ''Eurocentrics'' as not believing a single Negroid set a foot in ancient egypt when in contrast, the Negroid caused the downfall of that civilization, so of course there was a Negroid presence there.
And:
quote: By ''Ancient Egypt'' we all know this means in a racial context the original builders from the early dynasties. There were Negroids in Egypt by c. 450 BC, when the Herodotus quote appeared and Greek artforms were prevalent. Go back 2000 years and you don't find them at all .
Like I said, you're all over the place.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
It gets worse. Only yesterday you dismissed academics for referring to statuary in discerning population affiliation:
quote: why trust crappy artwork for nasal form over skeletons we have nasal measurements for?
Yet here we see that you've done something similar:
quote: Something else I posted in 2011:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It has been observed that there are two contrasting racial types of the earliest Badarian and Naqada culture (pre-dynastic) figurines.
The racial variations are briefly discussed by Petrie (''The Races of Early Egypt'', JRAI, Vol. 31, Jan. - Jun., 1901, pp. 248-255) but also in other sources (some more modern).
The Capoid/Bushmanoid (Khoisan) figurines of the Badarian culture show steatopygia, prognathism and wide noses. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Most of the Badari were Bushman, the other type is Caucasoid, which is more apparent in the Naqada figurines . As your study shows Badarian crania is closest to Bushman.
Ahhh! So the distinction between 'Bushmanoids' and 'Negroids' is now one of little consequence:
quote: I'll respond to your other quotes later about the Egyptians being black. I do not see that I contradicted myself, though i will go over it. -------------------------------------------------
This should be interesting...I've reposted yesterday's messages to help you out:
quote:
1/12/2013, I ask you: "In your opinion therefore, are people right when they describe the ancient Egyptians as predominantly 'black Africans', regardless of whether 'black' refers to populations from the Horn of Africa , or groups such as the Tutsis ?"
2/12/2013, you respond:
" Yes they are correct . Two sources from Keita, I had access through a classics archive, which explains this -
Keita, S. O. Y. (1993a) “Black Athena: ‘Race,’ Bernal and Snowden”. Arethusa. xxvi. pp. 295-314. Keita, S. O. Y. (1993b). “Response to Bernal and Snowden”. Arethusa. xxvi. pp. 329-33. [/B]
Everything I posted to you in the last email is true . For me, racialism/racism was delusional and it deteriorated my mental health. I no longer want to write or research this topic , and I have/still am in the process of cutting off all contact. My past is terrible, however I have better help, and am trying to improve."
But then today, we get your suggestion that you were acknowledging them only as ambiguous, peripheral, 'one drop' blacks:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- At the end of the email, you gave me a quote, and I responded "yes". This is exactly how Mary Lefkowitz, or anyone would have responded. It was a quote about African-American social race concept or one drop rule.
(However, as can be seen from my message to you (1/12/2013), there is no quote - you've made this up. And how are Horners and Tutsis 'one drop' blacks?)
But then, half an hour after your above message today, you write -
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My original position was that they were 1/2 "negroid" anyway --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So like Obama you mean, America's first black president? So much then for 'one drop' blacks, or your ESR comment:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anyone claiming the ancient egyptians were 'black' or 'tropical' would then have to argue North Indians and (south) Chinese are also - since these populations are at the same latitude. This is obviously silly .
Following your most recent (false) statement that your original position had always been that they were 'half-negroid', your inconsistency becomes even more entertaining:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By ''Ancient Egypt'' we all know this means in a racial context the original builders from the early dynasties. There were Negroids in Egypt by c. 450 BC, when the Herodotus quote appeared and Greek artforms were prevalent. Go back 2000 years and you don't find them at all .
All over the place.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dead: Yes, this was junk I was writing 3-4 years back. Laughable, crackpottery, call it what you want. But nowhere did I ever deny there was some sort of "race mixture" even back then. I regard this stuff to be pretty much crazy now, but i'm just pointing out I never was arguing for a "pure" Caucasoid Egypt.
What you wrote, 3-4 years back was and still is "Laughable, crackpottery" junk.
quote:Migrations into India “did occur, but rarely from western Eurasian populations.” There are low frequencies of the western Eurasian mtDNA types in both southern and northern India. Thus, the ‘caucasoid’ features of south Asians may best be considered ‘pre-caucasoid’— that is, part of a diverse north or north-east African gene pool that yielded separate origins for western Eurasian and southern Asian populations over 50,000 years ago.
--U.S. biological anthropologist Todd R. Disotell.
quote: Morphological variation of the skeletal remains of ancient Nubia has been traditionally explained as a product of multiple migrations into the Nile Valley. In contrast, various researchers have noted a continuity in craniofacial variation from Mesolithic through Neolithic times. This apparent continuity could be explained by in situ cultural evolution producing shifts in selective pressures which may act on teeth, the facial complex, and the cranial vault. A series of 13 Mesolithic skulls from Wadi Halfa, Sudan, are compared to Nubian Neolithic remains by means of extended canonical analysis. Results support recent research which suggests consistent trends of facial reduction and cranial vault expansion from Mesolithic through Neolithic times.
--Meredith F. Small* The nubian mesolithic: A consideration of the Wadi Halfa remains
So, for Seligman, the "Negroid" mixture in the "Northern Hamites" was minor, while it varied to considerable degrees in the "Eastern Hamites". The ancient Egyptians were put in the latter group by Seligman (Races of Africa, 1930, 3rd rev. ed, 1957). So my original position was that the ancient Egyptians were a "Caucasoid-Negroid" (or rather "Bushmanoid") mix, like Coon, Hooton, Seligman and so on proposed (although they differed on the level of mixture). Nowhere did I ever claim they were some sort of "pure" Caucasoid - all old anthro texts put them on the south periphery of the Caucasoid racial zone, and discuss mixture. Yes, I often created "Caucasoid Egypt" threads, but I usually always clarified about "Negroid" or "Bushmanoid"* mixture, like Horners (also on the Caucasoid periphery of old texts). No anthropologist has ever claimed Horners are Caucasoid: they are described as 3/4 Caucasoid, 1/4 Negroid, or the reverse (Hooton).
1) What is the geographical origin of Caucasoids?
2) Is your current position the ancient Egyptians were a "Caucasoid-Negroid" mix?
3) Is your current position the ancient Egyptians were a "Caucasoid- "Bushmanoid" mix ?
4) Is your current position the ancient Egyptians were mainly native African ?
-dont worry, I'm not going to be quoting your old stuff, we need you to clearly state your current position
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Always on the ball and relevant. Just came across a 2015 study confirming the different oriigins of Hindus and West Eurasians.
The rabid fanatic doesn't understand " Cacausoids "were always in Africa.
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol # Ish Gebor:
quote:
[QUOTE]Migrations into India “did occur, but rarely from western Eurasian populations.” There are low frequencies of the western Eurasian mtDNA types in both southern and northern India. Thus, the ‘caucasoid’ features of south Asians may best be considered ‘pre-caucasoid’— that is, part of a diverse north or north-east African gene pool that yielded separate origins for western Eurasian and southern Asian populations over 50,000 years ago.
--U.S. biological anthropologist Todd ;p=5#000240
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ 1/12/2013, I ask you: "In your opinion therefore, are people right when they describe the ancient Egyptians as predominantly 'black Africans' , regardless of whether 'black' refers to populations from the Horn of Africa , or groups such as the Tutsis ?"
2/12/2013, you respond:
" Yes they are correct . Two sources from Keita, I had access through a classics archive, which explains this -
Keita, S. O. Y. (1993a) “Black Athena: ‘Race,’ Bernal and Snowden”. Arethusa. xxvi. pp. 295-314. Keita, S. O. Y. (1993b). “Response to Bernal and Snowden”. Arethusa. xxvi. pp. 329-33. [/B]
Everything I posted to you in the last email is true . For me, racialism/racism was delusional and it deteriorated my mental health. I no longer want to write or research this topic , and I have/still am in the process of cutting off all contact. My past is terrible, however I have better help, and am trying to improve."
posted
But there is no genetic evidence that European re-entering Aftica until recently. Nein!
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow! You have come a long way! With African cline and all. I agree with all that you said except for …what is meant by “in the black sense”.
Sounds like you are saying, yes, they were indigenous Africans but not “black” in the traditional sense. Whatever that means.
Let’s us break it down.
1. They are indigenous, yes, check. 2. But they were what white, brown, black, tan etc ?
My advice. There are only one or two ways to determine the skin color of AEians. Unfortunately all involve that startling thing called ….science!
Here are a few.
1. UV and geographic position. 2. Allele, SLC24A5 etc 3. Morphological testing. Two results have been cited on this site and ESR both confirming high melanin levels in the AEians. 4. Of course some of you may want to rely on what was “written” by Herodotus etc. ie someone who described the AEians during dynastic times. 5. Keep in mind the closest “living” relatives to the AEians are South Africans, Greal Lakes tribes and West Africans.
Take it from there.
quote:Originally : [QB The quote where I cited Keita, was discussing the Hamitic theory, and that peoples of Sub-Saharan Africa with narrow noses etc., shouldn't be thought of as mixed with "Caucasoid". That was what he debated Snowden on (though Keita basically set up a straw-man since Snowden recognized the indigenous Sub-Saharan African diversity himself; I own his books and can show this). Anyway, the whole context of my email to you was about giving up Hamiticism, and recognizing clines, as opposed to race typology.
My quote was saying I agree and accept the indigenous diversity. I posted for more than a year that the ancient Egyptians were indigenous to Africa, more specifically the Sahara. What I oppose though is pooling any African population together. This would be race typology, and returning back to Linnaeus' Homo Africanus. So I don't believe they were "black" in this racial sense.
I don't see where I contradicted myself, since you have to look what I was replying to in context. [/QB]
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also keep on mind, even to my surprise, since I recognize them as Africans also, the AMARNA'S were NOT closely related the Berbers!! Irregardless of facial/racial features. But looking at it with new eyes(2015). Berbers although African within PN2, have a 15,000y difference from W Africans. So why would the AEians be genetically closer to WAians than Indigenous North Africans? Tic Toc.
AEians were typical SSA. On two fronts. E1b1a and forensic STR. Go figure!
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: My quote was saying I agree and accept the indigenous diversity. I posted for more than a year that the ancient Egyptians were indigenous to Africa, more specifically the Sahara. What I oppose though is pooling any African population together. This would be race typology, and returning back to Linnaeus' Homo Africanus. So I don't believe they were "black" in this racial sense.
Oh dear. With my references to black Africans, Horners and Tutsis, what sense did you mean?
No matter how you try to play at doublespeak, your admission is clear as day...
quote:1/12/2013: In your opinion therefore, are people right when they describe the ancient Egyptians as predominantly 'black Africans' , regardless of whether 'black' refers to populations from the Horn of Africa , or groups such as the Tutsis ?"
2/12/2013: "Yes they are correct . Two sources from Keita, I had access through a classics archive, which explains this -
Keita, S. O. Y. (1993a) “Black Athena: ‘Race,’ Bernal and Snowden”. Arethusa. xxvi. pp. 295-314. Keita, S. O. Y. (1993b). “Response to Bernal and Snowden”. Arethusa. xxvi. pp. 329-33. [/B]
Everything I posted to you in the last email is true . For me, racialism/racism was delusional and it deteriorated my mental health. I no longer want to write or research this topic , and I have/still am in the process of cutting off all contact. My past is terrible, however I have better help, and am trying to improve."
Can I ask, do you think it's fair to say that most people would regard your retraction as evasive? Strange? Mendacious, perhaps?
Also, your admission that you suffer from psychological disorders, is there a wider context that we need to take into account where you didn't actually mean mental health in the sense that most other people would?
Before you answer I need to make you aware that I'm compiling your responses. Along with the e-mails from the academics I've corresponded with, I'm hoping to use them to write a book about the Egyptian race debate. A number of supportive academics have agreed to help me with writing - I've shared your on line activities and e-mail messages with them. If I go ahead, I'll be naming all the individuals that I've communicated with.
Just to let you know.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote: It is unclear why you are always trying to paint me as a white supremacist, or something, and post other slanders. While my old posts were often racialist-based and sometimes insensitive , my theories were always highly unorthodox; I was not posting Stormfront type-content . Furthermore, while I renounced the race stuff over a year ago, I still hold plenty of fringe views . This is clear if you google my name (which you know), yet for some reason you try to degrade people on here with their (lack of) credentials or personal beliefs, if they are quirky or not mainstream .
Sometimes insensitive? wow.The most concerted, calculating racism I've come across on line. I'm entertained though by the way you try to cast your consistent, proactive racism as innocently 'quirky'.
Never mind. People can make up their own minds. You can play victim all you want, but you,so far, have gotten off lightly.
What do you think your parents would make of your on line submissions?
I read an article, in the summer of 2013 I think when internet trolls were in the news. When discovered, they retracted their comments and apologised when threats were made to inform their parents -seems they too were young men living at home.
Do your parents know about your on line links with the far right?
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am still one step ahead if you. Irregardless. It doesn't matter what their mtDNA is! Why? Autosomal and lineage goes together. If the Armanas STR were SSA that means the sex haplotypes or HG is impossible to be anything else but SSA!
One has to complement the other. Get it! Got it!
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: xyyman do you define black as anyone with dark brown skin, for example, certain Indians, both American or Asian?
Also "irregardless" is not a word, the word is regardless
quote:Originally posted by xyyman:
AEians were typical SSA. On two fronts. E1b1a and forensic STR. Go figure!
what were their mitochondrial haplotypes?
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: [QB] Wow! You have come a long way! With African cline and all. I agree with all that you said except for …what is meant by “in the black sense”.
Sounds like you are saying, yes, they were indigenous Africans but not “black” in the traditional sense. Whatever that means.
Let’s us break it down.
1. They are indigenous, yes, check. 2. But they were what white, brown, black, tan etc ?
My advice. There are only one or two ways to determine the skin color of AEians. Unfortunately all involve that startling thing called ….science!
Here are a few.
1. UV and geographic position. 2. Allele, SLC24A5 etc 3. Morphological testing. Two results have been cited on this site and ESR both confirming high melanin levels in the AEians. 4. Of course some of you may want to rely on what was “written” by Herodotus etc. ie someone who described the AEians during dynastic times. 5. Keep in mind the closest “living” relatives to the AEians are South Africans, Greal Lakes tribes and West Africans.
Take it from there.
Populations at that latitude aren't (on average) dark brown skinned, but a light to medium brown. Egypt is at the same latitude as most of Jordan, south Iran, north India, Nepal and south China. Would you call any of these populations black? None are considered to be, and ancient writers never described them as such.
Those populations described as black, are heavy melanated, i.e. dark brown, living at tropical latitude, especially on, or around the equator. Only the extreme south of Egypt falls in the tropics, which is why Yurco, and Snowden pointed out ancient Egyptians at the southern periphery, adjacent to Nubia would have been almost or virtually dark brown.
And "white" would not apply to all Europeans either. It would basically only be the more northern populations who are pale/depigmentated.
The ancient Greeks and Romans contrasted themselves to their northern neighbours in skin pigmentation.
\
How come so many of the Pharoahs prior to late periods, in better preserved art are shown with dark brown skin?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: ^^^ what about my last post ? are you at a loss for words?
Because I don't see most of those as dark brown, but medium brown/reddish-brown. The bust and top photo is probably the closest to dark brown though. Compare however all of those to Nubian:
You are showing a picture from the left, a figure dark brown, followed by a black figure, then another brown figure a slightly lighter brown and then again at the end another black figure
As per the brown figures, they are comparable to some of the pictures I posted and all of these figures have the skin tone range that British and American people regard as the skin tone that "black people" have as well has the darker equatorial type nearing actual pitch black
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Be sure to mention how you have been described as a "hardcore racist" by Dhdoxies. And that the forum owner removed the vast majority of your posts, many which he agreed were breaking laws.
Then sue me. BTW was it you who impersonated me when my account got hacked?
Could you also find that laughable Doxie quote?
My posts were hacked/removed because they exposed you and your online racist activities. Vast majority? No. I'm still wondering as to how you seem to have access to Sami that the rest of us don't.
quote:My accounts here in contrast have always been in good standing.
quote: What connections do I have to the far-right? None, I am ever aware of. As I said in my post in another thread - you don't debate properly, but attack the individual always.
quote:I was an activist for the British National Party for four years
Brandon Pilcher dealt with you on this question before. Do populations stay in situ long enough for these adaptations to happen?
quote: Populations at that latitude aren't (on average) dark brown skinned, but a light to medium brown. Egypt is at the same latitude as most of Jordan, south Iran, north India, Nepal and south China. Would you call any of these populations black? None are considered to be, and ancient writers never described them as such.
Those populations described as black, are heavy melanated, i.e. dark brown, living at tropical latitude, especially on, or around the equator. Only the extreme south of Egypt falls in the tropics, which is why Yurco, and Snowden pointed out ancient Egyptians at the southern periphery, adjacent to Nubia would have been almost or virtually dark brown.
quote: What connections do I have to the far-right? None, I am ever aware of.
I then 'remind' you of your links with the BNP, and you reply:
quote:We already dealt with this before, and the person who first posted this claim, retracted it. It was fishing into my background to slander or character assassinate me.
But then you admit today:
quote: I was a former activist
Can you see how you come across as mendacious, scheming and untrustworthy?
We see you in this very thread trying to retract a clear admission that the ancient Egyptians were a black population.
Could you speak to the following?:
1)Whether you impersonated me when my account was hacked.
2)Your Stephen Lawrence comments.
3)Whether your parents know about your on line links with the far right. If they don't:
4)What you think they would make of your on line submissions.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
Regarding my political affiliations and who I've supported, do you know what a paper candidate is? Not that I'm trying to give any credence to your sick, imbalanced rant against the Greens, but last time I voted(General Election May 2010) it was for the Lib Dems (foolishly). However, whilst I've sympathised with the Greens (2006), and previously also voted Labour(1992), I'm not sure most rational people would regard my political views as extreme. Yours?
quote: I find you on plenty of other sites slandering people for their politics.
No. You don't. You're clearly deranged.
Could you speak to the following?:
1)Whether you impersonated me when my account was hacked.
2)Your Stephen Lawrence comments.
3)Whether your parents know about your on line links with the far right. If they don't:
4)What you think they would make of your on line submissions.
The sense that you don't want to answer suggests that your responses would be damning.
You surely know that it's illegal to hack into someone's account and impersonate them, don't you?Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course the child abuse/child murder scandals are depraved and evil. And I'm pretty sure there was and is an on going cover-up. But not sure what your point is. Are you saying that I and the rest of the electorate are somehow tainted by what's happened? You're using something truly sinister (child abuse and murder) as a smokescreen to deflect from/normalise your own deranged political allegiances. What a sick expedient.
quote: I said it needed a Marine Le Pen to moderate the party
Marine Le Pen?!!! The French far right politician? What?!
You've answered one of the questions.
Now what about the others?
2)Your Stephen Lawrence comments.
3)Whether your parents know about your on line links with the far right. If they don't:
4)What you think they would make of your on line submissions.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tropicals seem to be threatening to snitch this person to reveal his old views to his parents
right wing or left wing extremists are allowed to post in this forum Its called freedom of speech, look into it
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: the black power salute happened. This is all over the internet, just google it. But regardless of the racist salute, he was wearing a jumper with a cannabis motife
He was hardly the saint the media tried to portray him.
What?! Black Power salute? Racist? An image of him wearing a cannabis motif?! Even if it were true, and even if you could produce it ( go on, show me ) it wouldn't make any difference whatsoever regarding the evil that those scum perpetrated on him, nor the injustice that his family suffered.
You're deranged.
But hey, the Lioness wants you to be able to spout your offensive nonsense.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now that you've answered the questions about whether you hacked my account, and shown us (again) your racist interpretation of the media's coverage of the Stephen Lawrence murder case, perhaps you could answer whether your parents are aware of your online activities and far right affiliation.Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Because you would only want to focus on these things if you had a racist agenda.
That's not a black power salute that I recognise, and in any case, I do not consider the black power fist racist. And even if Lawrence's clenched fist is a black power symbol, it has no relevance whatsoever.
How do you know he smoked cannabis? And even if he did, so what? Again, irrelevant.
But keep it coming, remember I'm logging this.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see you're avoiding the questions regarding your parents.
Is it reasonable to say that they're unaware of your links to the far right, and might be shocked at your internet activity?
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
quote: I edited the BNP Wikipedia page, and edited Metapedia. These are online encyclopaedias.
Yeah, that's right, two sites in particular which are entirely uncontroversial. Of course, if you went into a job interview, you would openly provide information on how you edited the websites for racist organisations such as the BNP and metapedia. Wouldn't you?
quote: Not sure why my parents would be shocked I contribute to a variety of online encyclopaedias.
So you're saying they would be comfortable with the scale and nature of your internet activities?
Your attempt at normalising your activities is something else.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Gays lovers? Can you two take it to the bedroom? This he said this and he said that nonsense. Enough already. Anything more on the OP? No one wants to here your dirty laundry. Ie mind your own business. Don't post personal stuff of others against their wishes.
quote:Originally posted by
quote: I edited the BNP Wikipedia page, and edited Metapedia. These are online encyclopaedias.
Yeah, that's right, two sites in particular which are entirely uncontroversial. Of course, if you went into a job interview, you would openly provide information on how you edited the websites for racist organisations such as the BNP and metapedia. Wouldn't you?
quote: Not sure why my parents would be shocked I contribute to a variety of online encyclopaedias.
So you're saying they would be comfortable with the scale and nature of your internet activities?
Your attempt at normalising your activities is something else. [/QB]
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote: Gays lovers? Can you two take it to the bedroom?
Can I ask, why is it every so often you reference homosexuality when commenting on other people's dialogue? It's a theme.
Posts: 805 | From: UK | Registered: Nov 2013
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Without data you are just another person with an opinion - Deming Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't ban you but I would delete any flame inclusive post except this thread is both stupid and personal and only taken seriously by its sparring partners. I haven't even read it but noticed you took my name and decided it not be in vain.
So gwan knock yourself out.
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: @Sage, please don't ban me. I not talking really about his mother. See the quotation marks?
Someone living in their mommies basement?
quote:Originally posted by xyyman: "Tell his mother "? Are we in grade school?
SMH - man amongst boys.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Tropicals seem to be threatening to snitch this person to reveal his old views to his parents
right wing or left wing extremists are allowed to post in this forum Its called freedom of speech, look into it
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dhoxie and her “ilk” like Cass, Lioness, don’t believe Europeans are a sub-set of Africans. MelaninKing/Marmerthoth will call them Albino Africans.
Don’t believe me…here is the latest., fresh off the press. Cass the skull expert can jumo in anytime. He! He! He! Now the morphology corroborates the genetics
I got this!!!!
Quote: -----------------------
Levantine cranium from Manot Cave (Israel) foreshadows the first European modern humans - Israel Hershkovitz1,2* Jan2015
The overall shape and discrete morphological features of the Manot 1 calvaria demonstrate that this partial skull is unequivocally modern. It is similar in shape to RECENT African skulls as well as to European skulls from the Upper Palaeolithic period, but DIFFERENT from most other early anatomically modern humans in the Levant. This suggests that the Manot people could be closely related to the first modern humans who later successfully colonized Europe. Thus, the anatomical features used to support the ‘assimilation model’ in Europe might NOT have been inherited from European Neanderthals, but rather from earlier Levantine populations.
The taxonomic significance of this combination of features is not immediately clear, but hominins with similar combinations persist in the fossil record ACROSS SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA AND THE LEVANT until, and EVEN AFTER, ,35 kyr ago12,14,15. Geometric morphometric methods16,17 were used to place the Manot 1 fossil in the broader context of the fossil record (Supplementary Information E and Extended Data Table 4). The first two principal components of shape space (Fig. 3a, b) explain,62%of the total shape variance. This analysis places Manot 1 within the cloud of recent and Upper Palaeolithic modern humans—namely Mladecˇ 1 (,35 kyr cal. (calibrated years) BP), Preˇdmostı´3 (,30–27 kyr cal. BP), Brno 2 (,29–28 kyr cal. BP), Pavlov (,29 kyr cal. BP), and Oberkassel (,14.7–13.7 kyr cal. BP)—and remote from other fossils from the Near East, such as Shanidar 1, Skhul 5 or Qafzeh 6. A nearest neighbour analysis (Fig. 3c), based on the full Procrustes distance, links the Manot specimen with recent African skulls and with central European Upper Palaeolithic specimens, such as Mladecˇ 1
Manot 1 is thus the first direct fossil evidence that modern humans inhabited the Levantine corridor,55 kyr ago. This period coincides with the timing predicted by GENETIC and archaeological models for a wave of modern human dispersal out of Africa19–22. The Manot 1 calvaria is similar in overall shape to early Upper Palaeolithic European skulls, and its discrete features FORESHADOW those of later Upper Palaeolithic humans in central Europe. This implies that the Manot people could have given rise to the first modern humans to colonize Europe SUCCESSFULLY.
---------------------- .
Oh! Look at fig 3a. Odd they did not include Mechta-Aflou(sp?) in the chart. Although they sated Manot 1 was a close match. Manot1 can’t get more African than that!!!!! He is a distant match to Asian and Australian. Euroepans have always been a subset of Africans. Always!!
Any questions?? Ask the skull expert..Cass
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tropicals isn't it a good thing to have a place where people with extreme opposing views can dialogue ?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with you on this. The strength of this site vs manuy others that are OVERLY censored (hint-wink).
Oh! gayism- give it time. I am deliberate with my choice of words. You should know that by now.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Tropicals isn't it a good thing to have a place where people with extreme opposing views can dialogue ?
Once we don't get too nasty.
Posts: 12143 | From: When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] ^^^ what about my last post ? are you at a loss for words?
Because I don't see most of those as dark brown, but medium brown/reddish-brown. The bust and top photo is probably the closest to dark brown though. Compare however all of those to Nubian:
]
Actually, many Ancient Egyptian wall art on the net have been purposely lighten and do not show the accurate skin colors. I have seen several dozen photos that have been lighten to a more orange/reddish tone when unedited photos show a dark brown skin tone that the Ancient Egyptians painted to depict themselves. Now look see what population match the skin tone of the Ancient Egyptians?
As I see it, any variation among skin tone in Ancient Egyptians is the variation that you will see in Africa. From dark brown to light brown.
Posts: 116 | From: Birmingham, AL | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
\
Printer-friendly view of this topic