The only one making stuff up is YOU! You are obviously too ignorant to realize there was no "sub-Sahara" in certain time periods because there was NO SAHARA at all. Haven't you heard of pluvial or wet periods of geology before??
Notice in the first map subtitled 'before 8,500 B.C.E.' North Africa was desert therefore all the populations were huddled along the Nile. It was only when conditions became moist and North Africa became verdant that populations expanded west deeper into what is today the Sahara. When conditions dessicated again, they retreated either to the Nile or to oases.
Now the burden of proof is on you to prove that these populations have no connection to so-called 'sub-Saharans'.
I don't care about the ecology, my point was geographical distance. Nothing on those maps contradicts what I'm saying and your own posts confirm what I've just said-
"...conditions became moist and North Africa became verdant that populations expanded west deeper into what is today the Sahara."
Yes, Sahara, not Sub-Saharan Africa. In context I'm talking about the geography/latitude not the ecology. Any movement from Egypt was nearby still in Egypt (the west desert) or south to north Sudan (still the Sahara), not Sub-Saharan Africa.
quote:You have yet to do this. Virtually all bio-anthropologists agree that Nile Valley Africans i.e. both Egyptians and their Nubian neighbors are biologically continuous with Africans to their south. Yet you are the only one denying these facts.
I've never denied that cline: Upper Egypt > Lower Nubia > Upper Nubia, but it extends into the Levant from Lower Egypt at the north.
I'm the only person proposing a clinal model here. You afroloons cling to an antiquated racialist model like Linnaeus' Homo Africanus. You think there is some African meta-population/pan-African genetic cluster and therefore a discontinuity between the Levant and Egypt. No. And pretty much all bio-anthropologists disagree with you (even Keita if you read him carefully).
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: You're just making stuff up. Look at the map you posted in other thread-
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
Look at the image before it. AT 5,300 BC it's still green. BETWEEN the periods of 5,300 to 3,500 it looked like this. Around 3,500 to 3,000 BC is the window people usually give for the modern Sahara. At 6k BC there was a temporary arid phase throughout Africa that lasted on average 800-1000 years. Things improved and then collapsed near 3k BC.
Rainfall regimes of the Green Sahara
Jessica E. Tierney1,*, Francesco S. R. Pausata2 and Peter B. deMenocal3
quote:"During the “Green Sahara” period (11,000 to 5000 years before the present), the Sahara desert received high amounts of rainfall, supporting diverse vegetation, permanent lakes, and human populations. Our knowledge of rainfall rates and the spatiotemporal extent of wet conditions has suffered from a lack of continuous sedimentary records. We present a quantitative reconstruction of western Saharan precipitation derived from leaf wax isotopes in marine sediments. Our data indicate that the Green Sahara extended to 31°N and likely ended abruptly.We find evidence for a prolonged “pause” in Green Sahara conditions 8000 years ago, coincident with a temporary abandonment of occupational sites by Neolithic humans. The rainfall rates inferred from our data are best explained by strong vegetation and dust feedbacks; without these mechanisms, climate models systematically fail to reproduce the Green Sahara. This study suggests that accurate simulations of future climate change in the Sahara and Sahel will require improvements in our ability to simulate vegetation and dust feedbacks."
The image could be an oversimplification for that entire period, but probably about accurate if we're talking about how Egypt would've looked by 3000 BC. From 6k BC to 5k BC there was temporary drying. Where it dried was not uniform either. Certain latitudes faced drying periods, others didn't, and they weren't uniform in how long these dry spells went on for. Latitudes 26 and 30 for example didn't have the brief drying event 8kya, but some of the more southernly areas did. A full and continuous effect of the Sahara drying to levels we see today didn't happen until thousands of years later. Even places like South Sudan and Ethiopia were experiencing dry periods that spanned from 800-1000 years. This ironically would explain why so many researchers insisted some populations towards the south moved north to make AE.
quote: Observe most settlement movement is Egyptians moving west (not that far in km) into the desert from the Nile valley and vice-versa back east in Egypt; there was not some sort of mass exodus into Sub-Saharan Africa and the fewer more distant settlements south of Egypt, such as northern Sudan are still in the Sahara if you check the latitude and desert boundary:
Technically this is irrelevant. The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate SSA people had no capability of contact with Egypt for a long period of time. That they adapted in isolation long enough by the time dynastic AE arived to be "non African." Reviewing what genetic data we have and the climate history of Africa, this doesn't seem like what happened at all.
quote:to prove there was a geological barrier. [/QB]
There was no geological barrier. Egypt had the Nile, the temporary arid phase affected both the modern north and south, and the Sahara hadn't gone fully dry until around 3000 B.C. By that time the cultures that formed dynastic Egypt if not AE itself were already there. Ecological pressures were also affecting the south, and it was likely this event that made the people of the desert responded by moving north. [/QB]
See my response above. The ecology changes nothing, my point was geographical distance.
Space itself restricts gene flow, you've completely missed this and keep talking about ecological barriers.
"Panmixia never happens in humans, nor in other animals, for a very simple reason: if nothing else, space exerts a passive restraint on who mates with whom. Sheer physical propinquity determines who has sexual access to whom." - Pierre L. van den Berghe "The Ethnic Phenomenon"
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: I don't care about the ecology, my point was geographical distance. Nothing on those maps contradicts what I'm saying and your own posts confirm what I've just said-
"...conditions became moist and North Africa became verdant that populations expanded west deeper into what is today the Sahara."
Yes, Sahara, not Sub-Saharan Africa. In context I'm talking about the geography/latitude not the ecology. Any movement from Egypt was nearby still in Egypt (the west desert) or south to north Sudan (still the Sahara), not Sub-Saharan Africa.
Apparently you have this false notion that Nile Valley i.e. Egypto-Nubian populations were somehow completely insulated and isolated from other populations in Africa even during the pluvial periods when the Sahara didn't even exist. This makes no sense especially considering that during the paleolithic all populations were nomadic and following herds they hunted. Apparently you are unaware that the Nile Valley recieved gene-flow from the west i.e. the Central Sahara which was a corridor not only between the Mashriq (eastern North Africa) and the Maghreb (western North Africa) but between North Africa and so-called 'Sub-Sahara'.
How else do you explain certain 'Sub-Saharan' genetic elements in said Nile Valley populations such as...
And yes even the presence of alleged 'Sub-Saharan' West African Y chromosomal E-V38 (E1b1a) as found in Ramses III, news of which rought havoc among your Eurocentric ilk! LOL
quote:I've never denied that cline: Upper Egypt > Lower Nubia > Upper Nubia, but it extends into the Levant from Lower Egypt at the north.
No it doesn't extend into the Levant, at least not by late predynastic times as shown by that piece I cited from Barry Kemp. One may argue the late Natufians to be probable continuity of northast Africans but they are an outlier among majority Levantine samples anyway. Also Levantine populations lack the above 'Sub-Saharan' genetic elements found in Egypto-Nubians. Give it up, your arguments are null and void.
quote:I'm the only person proposing a clinal model here. You afroloons cling to an antiquated racialist model like Linnaeus' Homo Africanus. You think there is some African meta-population/pan-African genetic cluster and therefore a discontinuity between the Levant and Egypt. No. And pretty much all bio-anthropologists disagree with you (even Keita if you read him carefully).
LMAO Is this a joke? The only one clinging to racialist models here is YOU! With you relying solely on craniometrics but never non-metric data or even molecular genetics.
I've read Keita's works and even he outright stated that ancient lower Nile Valley populations i.e. Egypto-Nubians are in fact genetically continuous with Sub-Saharans NOT with the Levant! So your arguments contradict Keita whom you now call on as your help! LOL
Seriously, go back to your psychiatrists to update your meds.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: I'm the only person proposing a clinal model here. You afroloons cling to an antiquated racialist model like Linnaeus' Homo Africanus. You think there is some African meta-population/pan-African genetic cluster and therefore a discontinuity between the Levant and Egypt. No. And pretty much all bio-anthropologists disagree with you (even Keita if you read him carefully).
I actually agree. And this is where ES is getting its goose cooked. But this is why your argument comes up short - You have no interest in studying Sub Saharan African populations to even know if what you say is TRUE or not. Your explanation is good in describing the clinal nature of genetic variability based on geography and indigenous populations, but does NOT take into account population migration of other people NOT indigenous to North East Africa.
There is going to be differences between populations that recolonize the Sahara from the South and head into Egypt VS that clinal diversity that already exists.....an its likely those new comers will have more of an affinity to Sub Saharan Africa. Your explanation also doesnt take into account the Northern part of the continent being refreshed by southerners during the Holocene and Neolithic. For instance:
What about L3f about 8-10k years ago leaving from Ethiopia (Sub Saharan African) traveling North? What about L3e about 6-10k years ago leaving from Nigeria (Sub Saharan African) traveling North?
What about the B2a and A3b lineages found in Sudan and Egypt which SEEM more of direct Sub Saharan Geneflow in prehistoric times VS some ancient Cline to be found in the area? Egypt and Sudan are FULL of the African lineages which DONT show deep differentiation in North East Africa and instead show a Mesolithic/Holocene/neolithic entrance and would probably carry different ancestry that would affect that clinal substratum you speak of.
You are simply NOT FAMILIAR enough with Sub Saharan DNA to use your hypothesis to explain Egyptian paternal diversity as seen below:
THIS is where you are in denial, or you are at the point were you dont quite understand African DNA, Structure analysis, uni-parental markers. YES there was a Cline of indigenous ancestry between the Levant. BUT migrants bringing west African plants and culture into the North East would NOT have been part of this cline. Migrants from Central or Southern Sudan may not have been part of this ancestry. etc.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: See my response above. The ecology changes nothing, my point was geographical distance.
Space itself restricts gene flow, you've completely missed this and keep talking about ecological barriers.
If the Eurocentric crew wasn't trying to regionalize a location as big as Sub Saharan Africa you might be able to try to run with this. But SSA spans from it's most northern and southern points a longer distance equal or longer distance from the Sahel to Upper Egypt. Distance is no problem south bound but not northward? THIS is why the Sahara as a barrier is often included in arguments.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: The ancient American skulls STILL resemble African ones but show continuity with modern Natives. There are still TONS of plots that group genetically dissimilar Africans and Australian/Melanesian, like this: You should be smart enough to get this through your head. [/QB]
What ancient American skulls resemble African ones? And I've seen what you've posted, but it goes back to my earlier criticism: too small number of measurements. Brace et al only uses 24 measurements, when Howells' used over 50 (so more than twice the amount). For example, Brace did not include a measurement that is known to show a mean disparity between Australo-Melanesians and Sub-Saharan Africans: "one character (no. 37, glabella projection) showed a strong bimodality with respect to the African and Melanesian units - such that it alone would sort the Africans from Melanesians better than 90% accuracy." (Sarich, 1997) And the latter study itself only used 30 measurements out of 57 (2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, ll, 13, 14, 17, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, 32, 33, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 51, 54). Few measurements have been tested for bimodality/mean disparity (although see NI below), so we don't know many cranial variables or indices that show the greatest intergroup differences to differentiate populations. This is why its more reliable to include all or most measurements available, following Howells (1995), rather than trying to take the forensics "diagnostic variable" approach (since few have been tested).
Nasal index we know shows strong bimodality to distinguish Europeans/West Asians ("Caucasoids") to West/Central Africans ("Negroids") hence old typology focused almost exclusively on the nose to separate these groupings. However, this tells us little to nothing about other populations that score intermediate or overlap these extremes.
The problem with relying on the "diagnostic variable" approach is you can find outliers in any population for certain measurements. This actually shows with the Natufians, hence despite them having nasal indexes that are more in common with "Negroids", they plot closest to Zalavar (Hungarians) when a significant number of measurements are taken that cover the entire skull rather than just the front-nasal section. That's the point I made earlier. That the Natufians are just "Caucasoid" outliers is also seen in the very small population sample; Brace only uses 4 skulls.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
The ancient American skulls that resemble African ones, are the skulls of PaleoAmericans.
Eurocentrists love to lie about history to deny the role of Black people in history. The idea that the first Americans came from Asia had nothing to do with mongoloid people. The Original Asians who researchers thought were the ancestors of American Indians were Black Asians, especially Melanesians.
Using craniometric quantitative analysis and multivariate methods, Dr. Neves determined that Paleo Americans were either Australian, African or Melenesians (Neves , Powell and Ozolins, 1998,1999a,199b; Powell, 2005), in other words they were Negroes . The research of Neves indicated that the ancient Americans represent two populations, paleoamericans who were phenotypically African, Australian or Melanesian and a mongoloid population that appears to have arrived in the Americas after 6000 BC. Archaeologist have reconstructed the faces of ancient Americans from Brazil and Mexico. These faces are based on the skeletal remains dating back to 12,000BC.
Researchers working on these ancient people note that they resemble Negroes, instead of contemporary Native Americans.
In the Smithsonian Magazine Dr. Chatters who found Naia's skeleton, noted that:
“The small number of early American specimens discovered so far have smaller and shorter faces and longer and narrower skulls than later Native Americans, more closely resembling the modern people of Africa, Australia, and the South Pacific. "This has led to speculation that perhaps the first Americans and Native Americans came from different homelands," Chatters continues, "or migrated from Asia at different stages in their evolution."
Although Dr. Chatters believes these Negroes came from Asia this seems unlikely. It is unlikely because the Ice Age would have made it impossible to sail from Asia to Mexico and Brazil at this time. These Negroes were probably Blacks from Africa. This is the most likely origin of these Blacks; the Dafuna boat dating back to 18,000 BC, shows that Africans had boats at this early date.
.
But as we know now the Black Native Americans came from Africa, in addition to Asia.
>>>>>>
Below are articles that say the PaleoAmericans were phenotypically Black. See:
Neves, W. A. and Pucciarelli, H. M. 1989. Extra-continental biological relationships of early South American human remains: a multivariate analysis. Cieˆncia e Cultura, 41: 566–75 Neves, W. A. and Pucciarelli, H. M. 1990. The origins of the first Americans: an analysis based onthe cranial morphology of early South American human remains. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 81: 247. Neves, W. A. and Pucciarelli, H. M. 1991. Morphological affinities of the first Americans: an exploratory analysis based on early South American human remains. Journal of Human Evolution, 21: 261–73. Neves, W. A. and Meyer, D. 1993. The contribution of the morphology of early South and Northamerican skeletal remains to the understanding of the peopling of the Americas. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 16 (Suppl): 150–1. Neves, W. A., Powell, J. F., Prous, A. and Ozolins, E. G. 1998. Lapa Vermelha IV Hominid 1: morphologial affinities or the earliest known American. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 26(Suppl): 169. Neves, W. A., Powell, J. F. and Ozolins, E. G. 1999a. Extra-continental morphological affinities of Palli Aike, southern Chile. Intercieˆncia, 24: 258–63. Neves, W. A., Powell, J. F. and Ozolins, E. G. 1999b. Modern human origins as seen from the peripheries. Journal of Human Evolution, 37: 129–33. Neves W.A . and Pucciarelli H.M. 1991. "Morphological Affinities of the First Americans: an exploratory analysis based on early South American human remains". Journal of Human Evolution 21:261-273. Neves W.A ., Powell J.F. and Ozolins E.G. 1999. "Extra-continental morphological affinities of Lapa Vermelha IV Hominid 1: A multivariate analysis with progressive numbers of variables. Homo 50:263-268 Neves W.A ., Powell J.F. and Ozolins E.G. 1999. "Extra-continental morphological affinities of Palli-Aike, Southern Chile". Interciencia 24:258-263. http://www.interciencia.org/v24_04/neves.pdf Neves, W.A., Gonza´ lez-Jose´ , R., Hubbe, M., Kipnis, R., Araujo, A.G.M., Blasi, O., 2004. Early Holocene Human Skeletal Remains form Cerca Grande, Lagoa Santa, Central Brazil, and the origins of the first Americans. World Archaeology 36, 479-501 Neves, W. A., and M. Hubbe. 2005. Cranial morphology of early Americans from Lagoa Santa, Brazil: Implications for the settlement of the New World. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102:18,309–18,314. NYT (New York Times). (2015) Human’s First Appearance in the Americas . http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/world/americas/discoveries-challenge-beliefs-on-humans-arrival-in-the-americas.html?hp&_r=4
Powell,J.F. (2005). First Americans:Races, Evolution and the Origin of Native Americans. Cambridge University Press.
Many of the articles of Neves can be found at Academia edu.
Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Cass - You are still talking about Skulls, I am talking about DNA. I dont know the specific measurements of the Native American skulls, i do know what I have read about the skulls and what has been talked about in literature (hence the links showing Early Natives look like Africans/Melanesians.) I dont really care, all i know is they are not US (Africans) and they are at the opposite end of the genetic spectrum.
You are really arguing a weak Point, looks like its the only one you know. If you want to know how Caucasoid looking populations can have a genetic affinity to Sub Saharan Africans just check out the results released by DNA tribes, or look at any of the other genetic data I just posted. This is actually DNA from Egyptian mummies. Why are you focusing your attention on skulls of native Americans to prove a point while avoiding the DNA results from the actual mummies you are arguing about?
You are wasting your breath attempting to explain how your old guard craniometic bullshit is still relevant in the age of Genetic science that is LEAPS and BOUNDS over that old data in showing real genetic affinities between humans groups.
How exactly are you different from Afro-Loons when saying "hey we must be related because they look kinda like me....DNA be damned."
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Clyde -They have DNA from these "PaleoAmericans" - None of them have any genetic affinities with continental Africans. Its in the same article you just linked YOU BIG DUMMY:
quote: Though her skull is shaped like those of other early Americans, she shares a DNA sequence with some modern Native Americans.
If you dont understand the significance of this passage just shut up and dont post..........We dont need anymore retards (or counter intelligence agents) on this forum. Its OBVIOUS you are one of them, I am just having a hard time trying to figure out which one.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: This man got manhandled on pg 1. Dragged by lioness pg. 3 Died on pg. 5 Somehow resurrected by pg.7 only to get bopped again by pg.8.
You guys are in the ballroom with a corpse. There's no fundamental argument being made... For the last few pages, all people here have been engaged in semantics under the disguise of "interpretation of evidence."
What does JCM actually believe the AEgyptians were?
FYI The guy is a troll that first showed up in this forum a couple of years ago. He is British and apparently it came out last year that he suffers from mental illness and even apologized to one of forum members in a private message. But now he's back at it. It's obvious the guy is off his meds or perhaps he needs to update his prescription. LOL His attempts to hold up outdated historical doctrines (white Egypt, white North African in general etc. etc.) Since all the evidence we present here debunks his fantasies, he feels the compulsion to troll us. That said, I don't know why you guys even bother arguing with him especially for how many pages.
@Djehuti
I got blackmailed and intimidated in 2013 by Claus3600 (real name Carlos Oliver Coke). This psychopath targeted my parents and family by getting their home address. I didn't even live there, since at the time I was living in London on my university campus where Carlos also said he was going to distribute posters about me with misinformation that I'm a "hardcore racist BNP member" (when I've never been a member of a political party), that he was going to get be beaten up by ANTIFA (communists) and either him, or someone else from Egyptsearch - emailed my tutors, that had no affect. Carlos then sent me dozens of PM's telling me I had to agree with his personal view Egyptians were black Africans or he was posting my parents address on this forum alongside other threats, coercion, libel and harassment. All logged, since at the time I had opened a police case against him; this also explains why Carlos Coke's original account was banned - a first for this forum after I contacted the admin. This was though over 4 years ago now.
Not only did I have to post Egyptians were black Africans, but I had to agree to his terms on other things, such as "renounce racism" (despite the fact Carlos is a racist himself for example he posted he would not send his kids to a white school ) and loads of other nonsense, including confess to mental illness since in his view racism is mental illness. I sent an email to him saying "yes". Pretty much anyone else would have done the same as me in my circumstances, and especially since I was young (I had not even finished university when this happened, this guy is double my age and my 100% focus at the time was my degree). I just agreed to whatever Carlos said so he would stop stalking me, shut up and to avoid this creep going after my parents. Its understandable?
I later learnt in 2014 that Carlos Coke had fallen out with another forum poster here (Swenet) for doing similar things. This includes doxing Swenet (using his real name), posting threats, libel etc. Some old threads where this took place-
Anyone who doesn't agree Egyptians were black, this nutcase Carlos harasses and tries to blackmail/coerce. I'm told he's even sent abusive emails to Egyptologists including Barry Kemp.
Since Swenet was also a victim of Carlos' bizarre online behaviour, he contacted me sometime via email and I corresponded with him for a while.
While I respect Swenet in the sense he's probably the most intelligent poster here on bio-anthropology (Carlos Coke is a complete dunce), I was already fighting another battle with someone else on the internet who actually had also been on this forum (view here if you're so interested: https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Mikemikev#Obsession_with_Oliver_D._Smith). So basically I lost interest in trying to help Swenet against Carlos. That ended up with me trolling the situation to get rid of Swenet, then I stop responding to him completely. Also, I do not want to side with black people, call me a "racist" or whatever.
You keep brining this up, so those are the details.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
I got blackmailed and intimidated in 2013 by Claus3600 (real name Carlos Oliver Coke). This psychopath targeted my parents and family by getting their home address. I didn't even live there, since at the time I was living in London on my university campus where Carlos also said he was going to distribute posters about me with misinformation that I'm a "hardcore racist BNP member" (when I've never been a member of a political party), that he was going to get be beaten up by ANTIFA (communists) and either him, or someone else from Egyptsearch - emailed my tutors, that had no affect. Carlos then sent me dozens of PM's telling me I had to agree with his personal view Egyptians were black Africans or he was posting my parents address on this forum alongside other threats, coercion, libel and harassment. All logged, since at the time I had opened a police case against him; this also explains why Carlos Coke's original account was banned - a first for this forum after I contacted the admin. This was though over 4 years ago now.
Not only did I have to post Egyptians were black Africans, but I had to agree to his terms on other things, such as "renounce racism" (despite the fact Carlos is a racist himself for example he posted he would not send his kids to a white school ) and loads of other nonsense, including confess to mental illness since in his view racism is mental illness. I sent an email to him saying "yes". Pretty much anyone else would have done the same as me in my circumstances, and especially since I was young (I had not even finished university when this happened, this guy is double my age and my 100% focus at the time was my degree). I just agreed to whatever Carlos said so he would stop stalking me, shut up and to avoid this creep going after my parents. Its understandable?
I later learnt in 2014 that Carlos Coke had fallen out with another forum poster here (Swenet) for doing similar things. This includes doxing Swenet (using his real name), posting threats, libel etc. Some old threads where this took place-
....
quote:While I respect Swenet in the sense he's probably the most intelligent poster here on bio-anthropology (Carlos Coke is a complete dunce), I was already fighting another battle with someone else on the internet who actually had also been on this forum (view here if you're so interested: https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Mikemikev#Obsession_with_Oliver_D._Smith). So basically I lost interest in trying to help Swenet against Carlos. That ended up with me trolling the situation to get rid of Swenet, then I stop responding to him completely.
And while that was wrong of these people to do, that doesn't make your history of constant trolling okay.
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Also, I do not want to side with black people, call me a "racist" or whatever.
But you complained cause black people didn't get their capes on for you pages back.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
An once again you prove that your stance is political and not scientific...
to me it seems like you don't even really care about the science at all, just as long as you can be right about something no matter how minuscule or irrelevant it is in the grand scheme of things.
You ignore demographic history to push forward "clinal development" You ignore genetics to argue clinal development You ignore geographical events to argue clinal development You ignore inconsistencies in skull morphology based on genetic relatedness to argue clinal development. You ignore examples of observable interpopulational differences among neighbors which directly goes against clinal development ....to of course push clinal development.
And right now folks are really engaging in debating with you... There's nothing that can be said to you that'd make you adjust your position, there's no need to give this man more sources or data... We're already on the verge of committing necrophilia.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: An once again you prove that your stance is political and not scientific...
to me it seems like you don't even really care about the science at all, just as long as you can be right about something no matter how minuscule or irrelevant it is in the grand scheme of things.
You ignore demographic history to push forward "clinal development" You ignore genetics to argue clinal development You ignore geographical events to argue clinal development You ignore inconsistencies in skull morphology based on genetic relatedness to argue clinal development. You ignore examples of observable interpopulational differences among neighbors which directly goes against clinal development ....to of course push clinal development.
And right now folks are really engaging in debating with you... There's nothing that can be said to you that'd make you adjust your position, there's no need to give this man more sources or data... We're already on the verge of committing necrophilia.
Fatality! Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The competition is tight, but Cass might be the most despicable individual I've ever observed on ES. Maybe even the whole goddamn Internet. At least guys like Carlos and Ausar had originally noble causes despite all the damage they did. Hell, even the typical racist troll has a cause they sincerely believe in, no matter how evil it may be. The closest thing Cass seems to have to an underlying ideology is a desire to stir up **** for everyone. He has no honor whatsoever.
posted
I still think Ausar did the absolute worst damage to this forum, its reputation, and to a lot of the points made here. Cass is a drop in the bucket, racists are a dime a dozen Ausar basically discredited his whole authority and did serious damage to this forum imo.
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @ Cass - You are still talking about Skulls, I am talking about DNA. I dont know the specific measurements of the Native American skulls, i do know what I have read about the skulls and what has been talked about in literature (hence the links showing Early Natives look like Africans/Melanesians.) I dont really care, all i know is they are not US (Africans) and they are at the opposite end of the genetic spectrum.
You are really arguing a weak Point, looks like its the only one you know. If you want to know how Caucasoid looking populations can have a genetic affinity to Sub Saharan Africans just check out the results released by DNA tribes, or look at any of the other genetic data I just posted. This is actually DNA from Egyptian mummies. Why are you focusing your attention on skulls of native Americans to prove a point while avoiding the DNA results from the actual mummies you are arguing about?
You are wasting your breath attempting to explain how your old guard craniometic bullshit is still relevant in the age of Genetic science that is LEAPS and BOUNDS over that old data in showing real genetic affinities between humans groups.
How exactly are you different from Afro-Loons when saying "hey we must be related because they look kinda like me....DNA be damned."
"The idea that morphological variation is less precise at untangling population relationships goes back to the birth of anthropological genetics, where the benefits of studying blood types were lauded over analysis of metric traits (Boyd, 1950). Over the next few decades, new technologies gave way to numerous red (and white) blood cell polymorphisms becoming state of the art, which in turn were largely replaced by the host of new DNA markers available since the late 1980s. Given this history, it is not a surprise that research on craniometrics and other metric traits seems archaic to many (Relethford, 2007). Indeed, I recall mentioning my research on cranial variation to a non-anthropologist and then being asked, “Isn’t that nineteenth century?” The past decade has seen a resurgence in studies of metric traits in studies of human v ariation and evolution (Relethford, 2007; Roseman and Weaver, 2007; von Cramon-Taubadel and Weaver, 2009). The results of such work, some of which has been reviewed in this chapter, shows that craniometric traits can and do provide us with a useful tool for analyzing population structure and history. The molecular revolution has helped lead to this reassessment by providing data from which to derive expectations under a neutral model. This does not mean that craniometric variation is entirely neutral or that natural selection and developmental processes have no influence. Far from it. The point is that although such influences can sometimes obscure underlying population history, they do not erase it. As shown in this chapter, we are still able to see the genetic signatures of human variation produced by our species’ history of an African origin and dispersion. Although deviations from a neutral model occur (most notably size-related variation in extremely cold climates), the overall pattern of craniometric variation is remarkably similar to that seen in DNA markers: higher variation in Africa, an out-of-Africa gradient in within-group variation, and a close correspondence of among-group variation and geography constrained by known migration routes. This is not to dismiss the obvious advantages of DNA markers over craniometric traits. However, on the same hand, the advances in DNA technology should not take away from our appreciation of the wealth of information that we can learn from studying cranial variation. The battles of past decades over whether one should use genetics or anatomy to reconstruct population history are no longer appropriate. Both sources of data tell us something about evolutionary past and present. This new view on cranial variation is best described by the title of Roseman and Weaver’s (2007) review paper, which shows that this is not an either/or s ituation—“Molecules versus Morphology? Not for the Human Cranium." - Understanding Human Cranial Variation in Light of Modern Human Origins (2013) John H. Relethford
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I still think Ausar did the absolute worst damage to this forum, its reputation, and to a lot of the points made here. Cass is a drop in the bucket, racists are a dime a dozen Ausar basically discredited his whole authority and did serious damage to this forum imo.
dude. I did the most damage (literally) to the forum. I was the Donald Trump account last year. Who remembers? I spammed HUGE pictures so no one could post. lol.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
Aethiops has a false/pseudo-etymology, i.e. the word aethiops or aithiops did not originally mean burnt-faced (black). That term only came about when Greeks encountered black peoples from the 6th century BCE, prior to this the word Aethiops had no reference to pigmentation whatsoever and was describing people much closer to Greece. In fact the original east Aethiopia (there were two, an east and west, if you read Homer) might have been Paeonia/Macedonia. I only propose Aethiopia from the 6th century BCE came to mean populations below Egypt; in Homer, Ethiopia isn't even in Africa and the Greeks at that time had no knowledge of Nubia/lands below Egypt.
Pliny the Elder asserted that Aethiops derived from the name of Hephaestu's son -Aethiops. The meaning seems to have morphed when the Greeks encountered the Aethiopians; the Aethiopians essentially re-defined the word merely by existing.
Aethiopia then became to be used as a metonym for the darkest shade of black, and its usage makes it abundantly clear that it was reserved for a specific people , a specific nation -- one with a capital - Meroe. Lower "Nubians", the Nubae (south of Meroe), Blemmyes (North of Meroe), Megabari (eastern desert, North of Meroe) and the Troglodytes were not"Aethiopians", so this notion that "Aethiopia" was the Greek word for black is ludicrous. The Blemmyes (Beja) and the Megabari were recognised as ethnically distinct from the Aethiopians; they were however under the dominion of Aethiopia, and it is only in this sense that they were ever referred to as such -- similar to the usage of Roman.
quote: "The lower parts of the country on either side of Meroê, along the Nile towards the Red Sea, are inhabited by Megabari and Blemmyes, who are subject to the Aethiopians and border on the Aegyptians, and, along the sea, by Troglodytes (the Troglodytes opposite Meroê are a ten or twelve days' journey distant from the Nile), but the parts on the left side of the course of the Nile, in Libya, are inhabited by Nubae, a large tribe, who, beginning at Meroê, extend as far as the bends of the river, and are not subject to the Aethiopians but are divided into several separate kingdoms. The extent of Aegypt along the sea from the Pelusiac to the Canobic mouth is one thousand three hundred stadia. This, then, is what Eratosthenes says.
The ancient Greeks noted that the Aethiopians had people from among them that represented the extreme of blackness the same way they noted that the blonde, blue eyed Scythians represented the extreme of whiteness.
quote: Those Sub-Saharan Africans don't show as close genetic affinity as northern Sudanese and modern Egyptians (to ancient Egyptians). So I would not favour pooling all these together. In cranial metric/non-metric studies, Nubians always plot closer than north Ethiopian (Tigray) or Somali samples. This is simply down to geographical distance.
How so very profound.
Ancient Egypt was a Sudanese transplant and developed concurrently; the Upper Egyptians and the "Nubians" were indistinguishable, and so it's not surprising that they would group closer to each other than their cousins in Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti and Ethiopia.
Afrocentric critic Froment also notes: "Black populations" of the Horn of Africa (Tigré and Somalia) fit well into Egyptian variations." (Froment, Alain, Origines du peuplement de l’Égypte ancienne: l’apport de l’anthropobiologie, Archéo-Nil 2 (Octobre 1992), 79-98)
quote:The speakers of the earliest Afrasian languages, according to recent studies, were a set of peoples whose lands between 15,000 and 13,000 B.C. stretched from Nubia in the west to far northern Somalia in the east. They supported themselves by gathering wild grains. The first elements of Egyptian culture were laid down two thousand years later, between 12,000 and 10,000 B.C., when some of these Afrasian communities expanded northward into Egypt, bringing with them a language directly ancestral to ancient Egyptian. They also introduced to Egypt the idea of using wild grains as food." (Christopher Ehret (1996) "Ancient Egyptian as an African Language, Egypt as an African Culture." In Egypt in Africa Egypt in Africa, Theodore Celenko (ed), Indiana University Press
quote: If you use this reasoning, then Levant and south European are also black - they have brown pigmentation (southern Europeans are a faint light brown or olive complexion). No Afrocentrist however is consistent with this, labelling west Asian and a large portion of (south) European peoples "black" doesn't suit their politicalized pan-African usage of black.
Come back to me when you can show me Italians with mahogany-brown to dark-brown skin... the skin tone that the majority of the ancient Egyptians would have had - like Upper Egyptians and North Sudanese:
Ammianus Marcellinus: "the men of Egypt are mostly brown and black with a skinny and desiccated look."
quote: Pan African lunacy again. And you aren't from Sudan, you're an African-American which is why you cling to this pan-African political ideology.
quote: It is possible from this overview of the data to conclude that the limited conceptual vocabulary shared by the ancestors of contemporary Chadic-speakers (therefore also contemporary Cushitic-speakers), contemporary Nilotic-speakers and Ancient Egyptian-speakers suggests that the earliest speakers of the Egyptian language could be located to the south of Upper Egypt (Diakonoff 1998) or, earlier, in the Sahara (Wendorf 2004), where Takács (1999, 47) suggests their ‘long co-existence’ can be found. In addition, it is consistent with this view to suggest that the northern border of their homeland was further than the Wadi Howar proposed by Blench (1999, 2001), which is actually its southern border. Neither Chadics nor Cushitics existed at this time, but their ancestors lived in a homeland further north than the peripheral countries that they inhabited thereafter, to the south-west, in a Niger-Congo environment, and to the south-east, in a Nilo-Saharan environment, where they interacted and innovated in terms of language. From this perspective, the Upper Egyptian cultures were an ancient North East African ‘periphery at the crossroads’, as suggested by Dahl and Hjort-af-Ornas of the Beja (Dahl and Hjort-af-Ornas 2006). The most likely scenario could be this: some of these Saharo-Nubian populations spread southwards to Wadi Howar, Ennedi and Darfur; some stayed in the actual oases where they joined the inhabitants; and others moved towards the Nile, directed by two geographic obstacles, the western Great Sand Sea and the southern Rock Belt. Their slow perambulations led them from the area of Sprinkle Mountain (Gebel Uweinat) to the east – Bir Sahara, Nabta Playa, Gebel Ramlah, and Nekhen/Hierakonpolis (Upper Egypt), and to the north-east by way of Dakhla Oasis to Abydos (Middle Egypt)."--Anselin (2009)
quote:The initial warming of climate in the Belling-Allerød interstadial, 12,700-10,900 BCE, brought increased rainfall and warmer conditions in many African regions. Three sets of peoples, speaking languages of the three language families that predominate across the continent today, probably began their early expansions in this period. Nilo-Saharan peoples spread out in the areas around and east of the middle Nile River in what is today the country of Sudan. Peoples of a second family, Niger-Kordofanian (EDIT: to which Niger-Congo and Bantu are offshoots) , spread across an emerging east-west belt of savanna vegetation from the eastern Sudan to the western Atlantic coast of Africa. In the same era, communities speaking languages of the Erythraic branch of the Afrasian (Afroasiatic) family expanded beyond their origin areas in the Horn of Africa, northward to modern-day Egypt.
[...]
In the tenth millennium in the savannas of modern-day Mali, communities speaking early daughter languages of proto-Niger-Congo, itself an offshoot of the Niger-Kordofanian family , began to intensively collect wild grains, among them probably fonio.
quote: The Niger – Kordofanian family is composed of three large blocks called the Mande, Niger – Congo and Kordofanian. Niger – Congo occupies the eastern section of West Africa, Mande the Western section and Kordofanian the area to the south west of Sudan. The present geographical location of these three language blocks forms a fanlike structure, which suggests that their homeland is at the south-western Sahara where the boundaries of each group converge. (Jaja, J. M. 2008 “Interdisciplinary Methods for the Writing of “African History: A Reappraisal,” European Journal of Social Sciences 5(4): 55-65
You can believe in whatever you want about my identity but I am a child of Sudan and so I my pride cannot be touched by the likes of you. Sudan helped the South Africans during the terrible days of Apartheid. That is Pan-Africanism. Our President said this about Sudan and the constant lies the Zionist controlled media keeps on perpetuating:
quote:Talk of Arabs killing blacks is a lie. The government of Sudan is a government of blacks, with all different ethnic backgrounds ... We’re all Africans, we’re all black .
posted
Lower Egyptians were indigenous Africans and were only less tropically adapted and seem to have adapted to their environment the same way the San adapted to theirs. Their average skin tone was most likely darker than that of the San.
quote:There is no archaeological, linguistic, or historical data which indicate a European or Asiatic invasion of, or migration to, the Nile Valley during First Dynasty times. Previous concepts about the origin of the First Dynasty Egyptians as being somehow external to the Nile Valley or less native are not supported by archaeology... In summary, the Abydos First Dynasty royal tomb contents reveal a notable craniometric heterogeneity. Southerners predominate. (Kieta, S. (1992) Further Studies of Crania From Ancient Northern Africa: An Analysis of Crania From First Dynasty Egyptian Tombs, Using Multiple Discriminant Functions. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 87:245-254)"
quote:..sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine. The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans." (Barry Kemp, "Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation. (2005) Routledge. p. 52-60)
quote:The question of the genetic origins of ancient Egyptians, particularly those during the Dynastic period, is relevant to the current study. Modern interpretations of Egyptian state formation propose an indigenous origin of the Dynastic civilization (Hassan, 1988). Early Egyptologists considered Upper and Lower Egyptians to be genetically distinct populations, and viewed the Dynastic period as characterized by a conquest of Upper Egypt by the Lower Egyptians. More recent interpretations contend that Egyptians from the south actually expanded into the northern regions during the Dynastic state unification (Hassan, 1988; Savage, 2001), and that the Predynastic populations of Upper and Lower Egypt are morphologically distinct from one another, but not sufficiently distinct to consider either non-indigenous (Zakrzewski, 2007). The Predynastic populations studied here, from Naqada and Badari, are both Upper Egyptian samples, while the Dynastic Egyptian sample (Tarkhan) is from Lower Egypt. The Dynastic Nubian sample is from Upper Nubia (Kerma). Previous analyses of cranial variation found the Badari and Early Predynastic Egyptians to be more similar to other African groups than to Mediterranean or European populations (Keita, 1990; Zakrzewski, 2002). In addition, the Badarians have been described as near the centroid of cranial and dental variation among Predynastic and Dynastic populations studied (Irish, 2006; Zakrzewski, 2007). This suggests that, at least through the Early Dynastic period, the inhabitants of the Nile valley were a continuous population of local origin, and no major migration or replacement events occurred during this time.
Studies of cranial morphology also support the use of a Nubian (Kerma) population for a comparison of the Dynastic period, as this group is likely to be more closely genetically related to the early Nile valley inhabitants than would be the Late Dynastic Egyptians, who likely experienced significant mixing with other Mediterranean populations (Zakrzewski, 2002). A craniometric study found the Naqada and Kerma populations to be morphologically similar (Keita, 1990). Given these and other prior studies suggesting continuity (Berry et al., 1967; Berry and Berry, 1972), and the lack of archaeological evidence of major migration or population replacement during the Neolithic transition in the Nile valley, we may cautiously interpret the dental health changes over time as primarily due to ecological, subsistence, and demographic changes experienced throughout the Nile valley region."
-- AP Starling, JT Stock. (2007). Dental Indicators of Health and Stress in Early Egyptian and Nubian Agriculturalists: A Difficult Transition and Gradual Recovery. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 134:520–528
quote:The period when sub-Saharan Africa was most influential in Egypt was a time when neither Egypt, as we understand it culturally, nor the Sahara, as we understand it geographically, existed. Populations and cultures now found south of the desert roamed far to the north. The culture of Upper Egypt, which became dynastic Egyptian civilization, could fairly be called a Sudanese transplant. Egypt rapidly found a method of disciplining the river, the land, and the people to transform the country into a titanic garden. Egypt rapidly developed detailed cultural forms that dwarfed its forebears in urbanity and elaboration. Thus, when new details arrived, they were rapidly adapted to the vast cultural superstructure already present. On the other hand, pharaonic culture was so bound to its place near the Nile that its huge, interlocked religious, administrative, and formal structures could not be readily transferred to relatively mobile cultures of the desert, savanna, and forest. The influence of the mature pharaonic civilizations of Egypt and Kush was almost confined to their sophisticated trade goods and some significant elements of technology. Nevertheless, the religious substratum of Egypt and Kush was so similar to that of many cultures in southern Sudan today that it remains possible that fundamental elements derived from the two high cultures to the north live on.--Joseph O. Vogel (1997)
posted
The DNA of North American Indians is of African origin. As a result they carry African haplogroups
Craniometric and skeletal evidence indicates that Paleoamericans were related to the Australian, Polynesian or Sub-Saharan type. This is evident in this chart below.
Neves has proven that the Paleoamericans were Black or Negroid, that's why the Amerinds or mongoloid Native Americans are grouped with the Eskimos and other Asian groups.
Even though, Mongoloid Native Americans are not related to the Paleoamericans, who were Black,they do carry Africans genes.
Novembre et al (2016) argue that Kennewick man is related more to modern Native Americans, instead of the PaleoAmericans.
Eurocentrist lie about the relationship of Naia and Kennewick man to mongoloid or contemporary Native Americans. For example, Novembre et al (2015) conclude that Kennewick man is closely related to the South American Karitiana people.
The finding by Novembre et al (2015) that genetically Kennewick man related mostly to the Karitiana falsifies their population. It is falsified because Skoglund et al (2015) found that the Karitiana and other Amozonian people in South America have an Australasian heritage. The identification of a relationship between Kennewick man and the Karitiana would continue to situate this Native American in the Paleoamerican group who was Black--not contemporary Native Americans.
The Amerindian haplogroups (hg) are descendant from the L3(M,N, & X) macrohaplogroup): ABCDN and X. The L3 (M,N,X) marcogroup converge at np 16223.
The mtDNA haplogroups ABC and X are subclades of haplogroup N. In Table 1, we see the distribution of haplogroup N, in the Americas.
The phylogeography of haplogroup C suggest that this American founder haplogroup differentiated in Siberia-Asia (24). The situation is not so clear for haplogrop B2, but A2 and D1 probably differentiated after the mongoloid Native American lineages diverged after crossing the Beringa Straits (24) [ b] Haplogroup A2 has the motif 16111T,16223c, 16290T, 16319A and 16223C (25). Haplogroup A is rare in Siberia (26). Interestingly, haplogroup A absent in western North America is common in parts of Central America and Northern America where the Spanish reported the existence of Black Native American communities(1-2).[/b]
In a recent study of post-Classic Mexicans at Tlatilco , dating between 10-13 centuries the subjects carried the founder haplogroups A (36%), B (13%), C (4.3%) and D (17.4%) (27). We should note, that in Yucatec, the Mayans were predominately haplogroup A, the Maya in Hondurus, a stronghold of the Black Native Americans belonged to haplogroup C.
The mtDNA haplogroup A common to Mexicans is also found among the Mande speaking people and some East Africans (28-29). Haplogroup A found among Mixe and Mixtecs (28).The Mande speakers carry mtDNA haplogroup A, which is common among Mexicans (30). In addition to the Mande speaking people of West Africa, Southeast Africa Africans also carry mtDNA haplogroup A (29). The major American Indian male lineages include R1, C,D and Q3.There is evidence of African admixture in the American y-chromosome haplogroups. The Q y-haplogroup has the highest frequency among indigenous Mexicans. The frequency hg Q varies from a high of 54% for Q-M243, and a low of 46% for QM (34).
African y-chromosome are associated with YAP+ and 9bp. The YAP-à associated with A-àG transition at DYS271 is found among Native Americans. The YAP+ individuals include Mixe speakers (32-33). YAP+ is often present in haplogroups (hg) C and D. The DYS271 transition is of African origin (32).The DSY271 Alu insertion is found only in chromosomes bearing Alu insertion (YAP+) at locus DYS287 (33). The DYS271 transition was found among the Wayuu, Zenu and Inzano. The Mexican Native American y-chromosome bearing the African markers is resident in haplogroups C and D (34).
R-M173 is also found in Mexico. Haplogroups R and Q are part of the CT microgroup which dates back 56kya. Haplogroup R branches from hg Q, with the SNP M242.
The CT haplogroup has SNP mutation M168, along with P and M294. Haplogroup P (M45) has two branches Q (M242) and R-M207 which share the common marker M45.
The M45 chromosome is subdivided by the biallelic variant M173 (35). In Africa we find P (M173), R1b (M343) and V88; and R1b1a2 (M269).
Native Americans carry a high frequency of R-M173 (48). The predominate y-chromosome in North America is R-M173. R-M173 is found only in the Northeastern United States along with mtDNA haplogroup X (25%). Both haplogroups are found in Africa, but is absent in Siberia.
. There are varying frequencies of y-chromosome M-173 in Africa and Eurasia. Whereas only between 8% and 10% of M-173 is carried by Eurasians, 82% of the carriers of this y-chromosome are found in Africa.
This is very interesting given the presence on R-M173 is found among many American Indian groups (48). R-M173 among the North American Algonquian group range from Ojibwe (79%), Chipewyan (62%), Seminole (50%), Cherokee (47%), Dogrib (40%) and Papago (38%) . These Indian groups have a long association with Africans and many live in areas were Europeans found Black Native Americans.
In most studies of North American Indians, any evidence of African haplogroups are excluded from all analyses (47). Exclusion of evidence of non-Amerindian admixture and non-foundational Amerindian haplogroups is regularly left out of publications on Native American DNA (49).
The R haplogroup is carried by Mexicans. The frequency of hg R varies from Tarahumara (5.6%), Otomi (14.3%), Yucateca Maya (10.5%). There is also a high frequency of haplogroup R among the Ch'ol and Chontal which stood around 15% (38). The Ch'ol and Chontal also carry E1b1b (38). The Spanish identified the Otomi as a Black Native American tribe(11).
African ancestry has been found among indigenous groups that have had no historical contact with African slaves and thus support an African presence in America, already indicated by African skeletons among the Olmec and Mayan people. Lisker et al, noted that "The variation of Indian ancestry among the studied Indians shows in general a higher proportion in the more isolated groups, except for the Cora, who are as isolated as the Huichol and have not only a lower frequency but also a certain degree of black admixture. The black admixture is difficult to explain because the Cora reside in a mountainous region away from the west coast" (22).
A recent study of African - Mexican admixture yielded a frequency range between 22-41% (25). In one study the researcher found that 3% of Native Americans showed African haplogroups (25). Underhill et al , noted that:" One Mayan male, previously [has been] shown to have an African Y chromosome" (31). This is very interesting because the Maya language illustrates a Mande substratum, in addition to African genetic markers (3) Plus the Chontal were identified as a Black Native American tribe (11).
The African haplogroups among indigenous Mexicans include L0a1a'3, L2a1, L3b, L3d, and U6a (25). Interestingly, an individual at Laguna de los Condores, Peru dating between AD 1000-1500 carried L3 (36). Green et al also found Indians with African genes in North Central Mexico, including the L1 and L2 clusters (25).
An important indicator of African admixture is 9bp (22,27). Haplogroup B is defined by 9bp (27) and is linked to haplogroup A.
The 9bp marker is reported among the North Mexicans. It is common among the Mixtec (27). Some indigenous Mexicans show the G6PD deficiency. In a study of Yucatecos, Tzellzal-Tzoltzil, Mixteca and Mestizo it was found that people on the Oaxaca coast suffered from G6PD deficiency (22). Lisker also found G6PD deficiency in Costa Chica (22). The G6PD deficiency is usually carried by SSA.
Indigenous Indians at Tlaxcala contains 8% African genes, but historically no Africans lived in the area (37). Researchers have also found L1, L2 & L3 clusters among many Mexicans including the Cora, Mixtec and Zapotecs (39-41)
It is interesting to note that the proportion of African haplotypes roughly equivalent to the proportion of European haplotypes [among North Central Mexican Indians] cannot be explained by recent admixture of African Americans for the United States (41). This is especially the case for the Ojinaga area, which presently is, and historically has been largely isolated from U.S. African Americans. In the Ojinaga sample set, the frequency of African haplotypes was higher than that of European hyplotypes"(41).
Human Leukocyte Antigens (HLA) polymorphism is used to investigate ethnic relationships and origins. Africans and Indigenous Mexicans share HLA alleles. In Table 2 we outline the relationship. Gutherie in a study of the HLAs in indigenous American populations, found that the V antigen of the Rhesus system, considered to be an indication of African ancestry, among Indians in Belize and Mexico centers of Mayan civilization (45). Dr. Gutherie also noted that A*28 common among Africans has high frequencies among Eastern Maya (45).
In addition to A*28 , there is a high frequency of HLA B*35 among Mexicans and SSA (46). The frequency of HLA B*35 among indigenous Mexicans and SSA is high ranging between 22-31% among SSA populations and 30-45% among MA groups (46). It is interesting to note that the Otomi, a Mexican group identified as being of African origin and six Mayan groups show the B Allele of the ABO system that is considered to be of African origin.
It is time that researchers stop claiming the first Native Americans were not Negroes.
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: I'm the only person proposing a clinal model here. You afroloons cling to an antiquated racialist model like Linnaeus' Homo Africanus. You think there is some African meta-population/pan-African genetic cluster and therefore a discontinuity between the Levant and Egypt. No. And pretty much all bio-anthropologists disagree with you (even Keita if you read him carefully).
I actually agree. And this is where ES is getting its goose cooked. But this is why your argument comes up short - You have no interest in studying Sub Saharan African populations to even know if what you say is TRUE or not. Your explanation is good in describing the clinal nature of genetic variability based on geography and indigenous populations, but does NOT take into account population migration of other people NOT indigenous to North East Africa.
There is going to be differences between populations that recolonize the Sahara from the South and head into Egypt VS that clinal diversity that already exists.....an its likely those new comers will have more of an affinity to Sub Saharan Africa. Your explanation also doesnt take into account the Northern part of the continent being refreshed by southerners during the Holocene and Neolithic. For instance:
What about L3f about 8-10k years ago leaving from Ethiopia (Sub Saharan African) traveling North? What about L3e about 6-10k years ago leaving from Nigeria (Sub Saharan African) traveling North?
My point exactly! The insane Anglo is a hypocrite because he brings up Egypt's clinal continuity with the Levant but conveniently leaves out that such genetic ties go back to more remote times whereas Egypt's genetic continuity with 'Sub-Sahara' is more recent. In fact, your example of maternal L3 clades is excellent for this point.
As originally cited by Swenet: Also, one Egyptian L3f2b sequence shares an ancestor with a Chadic one at around 24,809 ± 5,935 years ago. For L3h1a2 haplogroup, one Egyptian and one Lebanese sequences share a coalescence age of 26,281 ± 6,139 years old... One Tunisian and one Egyptian together with four individuals from Burkina, one from Guinea Bissau and two Americans share an ancestor at 14,179 ± 2,352 years ago, belonging to the haplogroup L3e2a. Harich et al (2010)
So obviously populations constantly moved around the African continent between North and so-called 'Sub-Sahara' up until the Neolthic.
quote:What about the B2a and A3b lineages found in Sudan and Egypt which SEEM more of direct Sub Saharan Geneflow in prehistoric times VS some ancient Cline to be found in the area? Egypt and Sudan are FULL of the African lineages which DONT show deep differentiation in North East Africa and instead show a Mesolithic/Holocene/neolithic entrance and would probably carry different ancestry that would affect that clinal substratum you speak of.
LOL He has yet to address my post concerning the Benin form of HBS (sickle cell) that apparently has occurred among ancient Egyptians like Tut and still occurs among modern Egyptians especially in the western oases.
..or the significant occurrence mtDNA type Hpa I in Egyptians and Nubians.
quote:You are simply NOT FAMILIAR enough with Sub Saharan DNA to use your hypothesis to explain Egyptian paternal diversity as seen below:
His ignorance is an understatement. The only thing he knows about Africa are outdated interpretations of skeletal material by folks like Seligman and Coon. LOL
Meanwhile, speaking of haplotype IV it gets worse for the Anglo-nut!
quote:THIS is where you are in denial, or you are at the point were you dont quite understand African DNA, Structure analysis, uni-parental markers. YES there was a Cline of indigenous ancestry between the Levant. BUT migrants bringing west African plants and culture into the North East would NOT have been part of this cline. Migrants from Central or Southern Sudan may not have been part of this ancestry. etc.
Denial could be part of his psychosis. Which is why I recommend he leave this forum and seek out his personal mental healthcare provider.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by beyoku: @ Cass - You are still talking about Skulls, I am talking about DNA. I dont know the specific measurements of the Native American skulls, i do know what I have read about the skulls and what has been talked about in literature (hence the links showing Early Natives look like Africans/Melanesians.) I dont really care, all i know is they are not US (Africans) and they are at the opposite end of the genetic spectrum.
You are really arguing a weak Point, looks like its the only one you know. If you want to know how Caucasoid looking populations can have a genetic affinity to Sub Saharan Africans just check out the results released by DNA tribes, or look at any of the other genetic data I just posted. This is actually DNA from Egyptian mummies. Why are you focusing your attention on skulls of native Americans to prove a point while avoiding the DNA results from the actual mummies you are arguing about?
You are wasting your breath attempting to explain how your old guard craniometic bullshit is still relevant in the age of Genetic science that is LEAPS and BOUNDS over that old data in showing real genetic affinities between humans groups.
How exactly are you different from Afro-Loons when saying "hey we must be related because they look kinda like me....DNA be damned."
"The idea that morphological variation is less precise at untangling population relationships goes back to the birth of anthropological genetics, where the benefits of studying blood types were lauded over analysis of metric traits (Boyd, 1950). Over the next few decades, new technologies gave way to numerous red (and white) blood cell polymorphisms becoming state of the art, which in turn were largely replaced by the host of new DNA markers available since the late 1980s. Given this history, it is not a surprise that research on craniometrics and other metric traits seems archaic to many (Relethford, 2007). Indeed, I recall mentioning my research on cranial variation to a non-anthropologist and then being asked, “Isn’t that nineteenth century?” The past decade has seen a resurgence in studies of metric traits in studies of human v ariation and evolution (Relethford, 2007; Roseman and Weaver, 2007; von Cramon-Taubadel and Weaver, 2009). The results of such work, some of which has been reviewed in this chapter, shows that craniometric traits can and do provide us with a useful tool for analyzing population structure and history. The molecular revolution has helped lead to this reassessment by providing data from which to derive expectations under a neutral model. This does not mean that craniometric variation is entirely neutral or that natural selection and developmental processes have no influence. Far from it. The point is that although such influences can sometimes obscure underlying population history, they do not erase it. As shown in this chapter, we are still able to see the genetic signatures of human variation produced by our species’ history of an African origin and dispersion. Although deviations from a neutral model occur (most notably size-related variation in extremely cold climates), the overall pattern of craniometric variation is remarkably similar to that seen in DNA markers: higher variation in Africa, an out-of-Africa gradient in within-group variation, and a close correspondence of among-group variation and geography constrained by known migration routes. This is not to dismiss the obvious advantages of DNA markers over craniometric traits. However, on the same hand, the advances in DNA technology should not take away from our appreciation of the wealth of information that we can learn from studying cranial variation. The battles of past decades over whether one should use genetics or anatomy to reconstruct population history are no longer appropriate. Both sources of data tell us something about evolutionary past and present. This new view on cranial variation is best described by the title of Roseman and Weaver’s (2007) review paper, which shows that this is not an either/or s ituation—“Molecules versus Morphology? Not for the Human Cranium." - Understanding Human Cranial Variation in Light of Modern Human Origins (2013) John H. Relethford
Your posts are self destructive,
Brenna Henn on panmixia.
CARTA: Ancient DNA and Human Evolution – Brenna Henn: The Origins of Modern Humans in Africa
Brenna Henn (Stony Brook Univ) explores patterns of genetic diversity across Africa and models for modern human origins in this talk. She discusses whether genetic data is concordant with archaeological data and suggests directions for future research. Series: "CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny" [Science] [Show ID: 30979]
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: I don't care about the ecology, my point was geographical distance. Nothing on those maps contradicts what I'm saying and your own posts confirm what I've just said-
Do you have any idea how dumb you look here?
quote:
As you can see on the map, the oases are located in places where the modern rainfall is clearly insufficient to provide adequate drinking water. So we must be talking about climate change. There was a time when the Sahara was immensely rainy, and now it is not. We care because the development of Egyptian civilization and settlement in the Nile Delta was driven by this climate change. We also care because this huge change in climate was not caused by human activity.
The Y-chromosome haplogroup tree has been constructed manually following YCC 2008 nomenclature20 with some modifications.35 The tree (Supplementary Figure S1) contains the E haplogroups of Eritrean populations from this study and those reported in the literature.22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 Genotyping results for E-V13, E-V12, E-V22 and E-V32 reported for Eritrean samples and elsewhere23, 27 were retracted to E-M78 haplogroup level. All the analyses in this study were done at the same resolution using the following 17 bi-allelic markers: E-M96, E-M33, E-P2, E-M2, E-M58, E-M191, E-M154, E-M329, E-M215, E-M35, E-M78, E-M81, E-M123, E-M34, E-V6, E-V16/E-M281 and E-M75.
[...]
Median-joining (MJ) network. Network manipulated to fit the geography of the extant populations. MJ network was constructed using E haplogroup frequencies. Group represented by ITAL contains all the Italian samples pooled. Populations’ descriptions are given in Supplementary Table S1.
NJ tree based on FST values generated from Arlequin 3.11. Population names are as given in Supplementary Table S1. Population life style: circle – agriculturalists; square – pastoralists; triangle – nomads; inverted triangle – nomadic pastoralists; diamond – agro-pastoralists. The populations are colored according to their language family: red – Afro-asiatic; blue – Nilo-Saharan; green – Niger-Kordofanian; yellow – Khoisan; black – Italic and Basque.
[...]
Interestingly, this ancestral cluster includes populations like Fulani who has previously shown to display Eastern African ancestry, common history with the Hausa who are the furthest Afro-Asiatic speakers to the west in the Sahel, with a large effective size and complex genetic background.23 The Fulani who currently speak a language classified as Niger-Kordofanian may have lost their original tongue to as sociated sedentary group similar to other cattle herders in Africa a common tendency among pastoralists. Clearly cultural trends exemplified by populations, like Hausa or Massalit, the latter who have neither strong tradition in agriculture nor animal husbandry, were established subsequent to the initial differentiation of haplogroup E. For example, the early clusters within the network also include Nilo-Saharan speakers like Kunama of Eritrea and Nilotic of Sudan who are ardent nomadic pastoralists but speak a language of non-Afro-Asiatic background the predominant linguistic family within the macrohaplogroup.
[...]
The Sahel, which extends between the Atlantic coast of Africa and the Red Sea plateau, represents one of the least sampled areas and populations in the domain of human genetics. The position of Eritrea adjacent to the Red Sea coast provides opportunities for insights regarding human migrations within and beyond the African landscape.
--Eyoab I Gebremeskel1,2 and Muntaser E Ibrahim1
European Journal of Human Genetics (2014) 22, 1387–1392; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.41; published online 26 March 2014
Y-chromosome E haplogroups: their distribution and implication to the origin of Afro-Asiatic languages and pastoralism EJHGOpen
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Yes, Sahara, not Sub-Saharan Africa.
You still lose, it makes no differences.
quote: “Pleistocene through to the Christian periods, reveals a break in population continuity between the Pleistocene (Jebel Sahaba) and the Final Neolithic (Gebel Ramlah, dating to the first half of the fifth millennium BC) samples. The dental traits from Jebel Sahaba align more closely with modern sub-Saharan populations, while Gebel Ramlah and later align closer to Egypt specifically and to the Sahara in general.”
--Michael Brass
Reconsidering the emergence of social complexity in early Saharan pastoral societies, 5000 – 2500 B.C.
posted
Cass. You better stop lying. I contacted you in 2014 because you had published something on the Saharan genesis of ancient Egyptians (after you came to your senses on the indigenous origin of ancient Egypt) and I was looking to publish something on the some topic. This was before Basal Eurasian was discovered and at the time people were salty because I refused to treat AE as recent transplants from Sub-Saharan Africa. So, naturally, when I saw the title of your publication on the Saharan origin of AE (a view I was leaning towards myself), I was interested in learning your arguments.
Then the conversation evolved to something else in part because you saw me exposing someone on this site and you pitched in privately with your own comments several times. Instead of standing up for yourself you wanted to cower away from your online presence because Coke and your former buddies were on your bumper. I told you to man up and at the end told you to either be helpful or go your own way. I don't see how you can get "rid" of someone when one of the last things they told you is to step up or leave.
And you have a long history of lying. You even admit to your own past lies and use of "dirty tricks" in this thread. You're prone to strange mental outbursts (as shown by your ongoing theft of others' online identities, including Nodnarb's and Morpheus' online persona) and you lie often. Therefore, having a debate with you or engaging you in any other type of conversation is a waste of time.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QB] The DNA of North American Indians is of African origin. As a result they carry African haplogroups
Similarly Donald Trump's DNA is of African origin, right?
I have presented the genomic evidence of the relationship between African and mongoloid Native Americans.
If I am wrong, why don't you present evidence that my findings are incorrect. Show the evidence that the genetic data I presented does not exist.
Until you do this you, and everyone else who fails to dispute the genetic evidence, are talking out of your Arse!
The DNA of North American Indians is of African origin. As a result they carry African haplogroups
Craniometric and skeletal evidence indicates that Paleoamericans were related to the Australian, Polynesian or Sub-Saharan type. This is evident in this chart below.
Neves has proven that the Paleoamericans were Black or Negroid, that's why the Amerinds or mongoloid Native Americans are grouped with the Eskimos and other Asian groups.
Even though, Mongoloid Native Americans are not related to the Paleoamericans, who were Black,they do carry Africans genes.
Novembre et al (2016) argue that Kennewick man is related more to modern Native Americans, instead of the PaleoAmericans.
Eurocentrist lie about the relationship of Naia and Kennewick man to mongoloid or contemporary Native Americans. For example, Novembre et al (2015) conclude that Kennewick man is closely related to the South American Karitiana people.
The finding by Novembre et al (2015) that genetically Kennewick man related mostly to the Karitiana falsifies their population. It is falsified because Skoglund et al (2015) found that the Karitiana and other Amozonian people in South America have an Australasian heritage. The identification of a relationship between Kennewick man and the Karitiana would continue to situate this Native American in the Paleoamerican group who was Black--not contemporary Native Americans.
The Amerindian haplogroups (hg) are descendant from the L3(M,N, & X) macrohaplogroup): ABCDN and X. The L3 (M,N,X) marcogroup converge at np 16223.
The mtDNA haplogroups ABC and X are subclades of haplogroup N. In Table 1, we see the distribution of haplogroup N, in the Americas.
The phylogeography of haplogroup C suggest that this American founder haplogroup differentiated in Siberia-Asia (24). The situation is not so clear for haplogrop B2, but A2 and D1 probably differentiated after the mongoloid Native American lineages diverged after crossing the Beringa Straits (24) [ b] Haplogroup A2 has the motif 16111T,16223c, 16290T, 16319A and 16223C (25). Haplogroup A is rare in Siberia (26). Interestingly, haplogroup A absent in western North America is common in parts of Central America and Northern America where the Spanish reported the existence of Black Native American communities(1-2).[/b]
In a recent study of post-Classic Mexicans at Tlatilco , dating between 10-13 centuries the subjects carried the founder haplogroups A (36%), B (13%), C (4.3%) and D (17.4%) (27). We should note, that in Yucatec, the Mayans were predominately haplogroup A, the Maya in Hondurus, a stronghold of the Black Native Americans belonged to haplogroup C.
The mtDNA haplogroup A common to Mexicans is also found among the Mande speaking people and some East Africans (28-29). Haplogroup A found among Mixe and Mixtecs (28).The Mande speakers carry mtDNA haplogroup A, which is common among Mexicans (30). In addition to the Mande speaking people of West Africa, Southeast Africa Africans also carry mtDNA haplogroup A (29). The major American Indian male lineages include R1, C,D and Q3.There is evidence of African admixture in the American y-chromosome haplogroups. The Q y-haplogroup has the highest frequency among indigenous Mexicans. The frequency hg Q varies from a high of 54% for Q-M243, and a low of 46% for QM (34).
African y-chromosome are associated with YAP+ and 9bp. The YAP-à associated with A-àG transition at DYS271 is found among Native Americans. The YAP+ individuals include Mixe speakers (32-33). YAP+ is often present in haplogroups (hg) C and D. The DYS271 transition is of African origin (32).The DSY271 Alu insertion is found only in chromosomes bearing Alu insertion (YAP+) at locus DYS287 (33). The DYS271 transition was found among the Wayuu, Zenu and Inzano. The Mexican Native American y-chromosome bearing the African markers is resident in haplogroups C and D (34).
R-M173 is also found in Mexico. Haplogroups R and Q are part of the CT microgroup which dates back 56kya. Haplogroup R branches from hg Q, with the SNP M242.
The CT haplogroup has SNP mutation M168, along with P and M294. Haplogroup P (M45) has two branches Q (M242) and R-M207 which share the common marker M45.
The M45 chromosome is subdivided by the biallelic variant M173 (35). In Africa we find P (M173), R1b (M343) and V88; and R1b1a2 (M269).
Native Americans carry a high frequency of R-M173 (48). The predominate y-chromosome in North America is R-M173. R-M173 is found only in the Northeastern United States along with mtDNA haplogroup X (25%). Both haplogroups are found in Africa, but is absent in Siberia.
. There are varying frequencies of y-chromosome M-173 in Africa and Eurasia. Whereas only between 8% and 10% of M-173 is carried by Eurasians, 82% of the carriers of this y-chromosome are found in Africa.
This is very interesting given the presence on R-M173 is found among many American Indian groups (48). R-M173 among the North American Algonquian group range from Ojibwe (79%), Chipewyan (62%), Seminole (50%), Cherokee (47%), Dogrib (40%) and Papago (38%) . These Indian groups have a long association with Africans and many live in areas were Europeans found Black Native Americans.
In most studies of North American Indians, any evidence of African haplogroups are excluded from all analyses (47). Exclusion of evidence of non-Amerindian admixture and non-foundational Amerindian haplogroups is regularly left out of publications on Native American DNA (49).
The R haplogroup is carried by Mexicans. The frequency of hg R varies from Tarahumara (5.6%), Otomi (14.3%), Yucateca Maya (10.5%). There is also a high frequency of haplogroup R among the Ch'ol and Chontal which stood around 15% (38). The Ch'ol and Chontal also carry E1b1b (38). The Spanish identified the Otomi as a Black Native American tribe(11).
African ancestry has been found among indigenous groups that have had no historical contact with African slaves and thus support an African presence in America, already indicated by African skeletons among the Olmec and Mayan people. Lisker et al, noted that "The variation of Indian ancestry among the studied Indians shows in general a higher proportion in the more isolated groups, except for the Cora, who are as isolated as the Huichol and have not only a lower frequency but also a certain degree of black admixture. The black admixture is difficult to explain because the Cora reside in a mountainous region away from the west coast" (22).
A recent study of African - Mexican admixture yielded a frequency range between 22-41% (25). In one study the researcher found that 3% of Native Americans showed African haplogroups (25). Underhill et al , noted that:" One Mayan male, previously [has been] shown to have an African Y chromosome" (31). This is very interesting because the Maya language illustrates a Mande substratum, in addition to African genetic markers (3) Plus the Chontal were identified as a Black Native American tribe (11).
The African haplogroups among indigenous Mexicans include L0a1a'3, L2a1, L3b, L3d, and U6a (25). Interestingly, an individual at Laguna de los Condores, Peru dating between AD 1000-1500 carried L3 (36). Green et al also found Indians with African genes in North Central Mexico, including the L1 and L2 clusters (25).
An important indicator of African admixture is 9bp (22,27). Haplogroup B is defined by 9bp (27) and is linked to haplogroup A.
The 9bp marker is reported among the North Mexicans. It is common among the Mixtec (27). Some indigenous Mexicans show the G6PD deficiency. In a study of Yucatecos, Tzellzal-Tzoltzil, Mixteca and Mestizo it was found that people on the Oaxaca coast suffered from G6PD deficiency (22). Lisker also found G6PD deficiency in Costa Chica (22). The G6PD deficiency is usually carried by SSA.
Indigenous Indians at Tlaxcala contains 8% African genes, but historically no Africans lived in the area (37). Researchers have also found L1, L2 & L3 clusters among many Mexicans including the Cora, Mixtec and Zapotecs (39-41)
It is interesting to note that the proportion of African haplotypes roughly equivalent to the proportion of European haplotypes [among North Central Mexican Indians] cannot be explained by recent admixture of African Americans for the United States (41). This is especially the case for the Ojinaga area, which presently is, and historically has been largely isolated from U.S. African Americans. In the Ojinaga sample set, the frequency of African haplotypes was higher than that of European hyplotypes"(41).
Human Leukocyte Antigens (HLA) polymorphism is used to investigate ethnic relationships and origins. Africans and Indigenous Mexicans share HLA alleles. In Table 2 we outline the relationship. Gutherie in a study of the HLAs in indigenous American populations, found that the V antigen of the Rhesus system, considered to be an indication of African ancestry, among Indians in Belize and Mexico centers of Mayan civilization (45). Dr. Gutherie also noted that A*28 common among Africans has high frequencies among Eastern Maya (45).
In addition to A*28 , there is a high frequency of HLA B*35 among Mexicans and SSA (46). The frequency of HLA B*35 among indigenous Mexicans and SSA is high ranging between 22-31% among SSA populations and 30-45% among MA groups (46). It is interesting to note that the Otomi, a Mexican group identified as being of African origin and six Mayan groups show the B Allele of the ABO system that is considered to be of African origin.
It is time that researchers stop claiming the first Native Americans were not Negroes.
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QUOTE]Originally posted by the lioness,: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QB] The DNA of North American Indians is of African origin. As a result they carry African haplogroups
The mtDNA haplogroup A common to Mexicans is also found among the Mande speaking people and some East Africans (28-29). Haplogroup A found among Mixe and Mixtecs (28).The Mande speakers carry mtDNA haplogroup A, which is common among Mexicans (30). In addition to the Mande speaking people of West Africa, Southeast Africa Africans also carry mtDNA haplogroup A (29).
Please list the ORIGINAL sources that have these Africans carrying these lineages? Mande Speakers, South East Africans, "some" East Africans. What is the ORIGINAL source.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I still think Ausar did the absolute worst damage to this forum, its reputation, and to a lot of the points made here. Cass is a drop in the bucket, racists are a dime a dozen Ausar basically discredited his whole authority and did serious damage to this forum imo.
Ausar was a messed-up guy whose tactics were inexcusable, agreed. But even if you feel his actions had a stronger negative impact on this community, it still seems that he paved that road to hell with altruistic intentions. Cass on the other hand seems to do what he does out of nothing nobler than a selfish desire to cause trouble.
But like I said, it's a tight competition between a number of severely deranged individuals.
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Nodnarb: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I still think Ausar did the absolute worst damage to this forum, its reputation, and to a lot of the points made here. Cass is a drop in the bucket, racists are a dime a dozen Ausar basically discredited his whole authority and did serious damage to this forum imo.
Ausar was barely posting to put it mildly in the few years before he left but would check in every 6 months to be the moderator who permitted everything. This is before he revealed he was white and not Egyptian. His revelation and leaving had no impact. This forum would be exactly the same had he not revealed his true identify and continued being a moderator who checked in every several months and made three or four comments and left again in his BMW. Did you read about any of this in other forums? No, the world didn't notice
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Cass. You better stop lying. I contacted you in 2014 because you had published something on the Saharan genesis of ancient Egyptians (after you came to your senses on the indigenous origin of ancient Egypt) and I was looking to publish something on the some topic. This was before Basal Eurasian was discovered and at the time people were salty because I refused to treat AE as recent transplants from Sub-Saharan Africa. So, naturally, when I saw the title of your publication on the Saharan origin of AE (a view I was leaning towards myself), I was interested in learning your arguments.
Then the conversation evolved to something else in part because you saw me exposing someone on this site and you pitched in privately with your own comments several times. Instead of standing up for yourself you wanted to cower away from your online presence because Coke and your former buddies were on your bumper. I told you to man up and at the end told you to either be helpful or go your own way. I don't see how you can get "rid" of someone when one of the last things they told you is to step up or leave.
And you have a long history of lying. You even admit to your own past lies and use of "dirty tricks" in this thread. You're prone to strange mental outbursts (as shown by your ongoing theft of others' online identities, including Nodnarb's and Morpheus' online persona) and you lie often. Therefore, having a debate with you or engaging you in any other type of conversation is a waste of time.
Ok, you might have started speaking to me about ancient Egyptian biology in 2014, but most your messages were about Carlos Coke, let's not deny this. I get why: Carlos doxed and libelled you, then started misrepresenting your present/former views, like he did mine. For example Carlos lied about my former (pre-2013) position: I've never claimed Egyptians were "Caucasoid" (proper), but varying degrees of mixture (following Baker, Coon, Angel etc.); this has been in my early posts from day one going back to 2010, and I remember in 2012 I had a (now funny looking back) debate with you about Capoid Badarians. Instead Carlos distorted by former position and went around like a lunatic troll saying I think Egyptians were "white" and 100% Caucasoid. You informed me Carlos did something similar to you by quoting your old posts out of context on who is black. Carlos' main-method of attack is to distort what his opponents actually believe. Despite my flaws, I've never done this to people, furthermore I accept people change/modify/revise their views; Carlos manipulates old comments to embarrass, attack or discredit people. The latter includes him going through peoples internet histories to poisoning the well poison the well: "Oliver/Sidney is x, y, z, so don't believe him" and character assassination.
You're inexperienced with internet feuds because at one point you told me you want to get legal advice or file charges against Carlos. What I told you is Carlos' internet shenanigans will come to nothing, but you wanted to take further action against him (the police report I opened up on him - I closed since I realised this). Since we were in contact via email for over a year (2014-2015), I lost interest; you were still talking about taking Carlos to court. I pointed out to you multiple times I had other disputes I was engaged in. The email I spoke to you on, I even deleted and the stunt I pulled at the end was to test who here still had my parents dox; it turns out Carlos still has my family relatives details saving them like a pervert/creep on his hard-drive after years I ceased contact with him.
The ED pages on Brandon Pilcher I got deleted; I understand you and Pilcher don't like me (its fine), but I would rather be on neutral terms with you than enemies. As pointed out in my other respond, I don't want black allies (call me racist). Regardless, let me point out that I'm currently involved in a feud between two groups/parties that includes extortion, defamation, doxing, death threats and even psychos saying they will stalk each other's children in primary schools (http://matthewhopkinsnews.com/?p=4820) and a whole load more nastiness. I get 20+ email threats sent to me (and my family) each day on this. I'm in regular contact with the police, while the FBI monitor all of it. And guess what? No one has ever been arrested for their crimes. This is why I have no faith in the legal system and if these people 20x bad than Carlos cannot be jailed or sued for defamation, then Carlos is a waste of time. I realized this years ago, it why I dish out my own form of justice: someone doxes or harasses me or my family I do it back on 500 forums, blogs etc. Go look at these: http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=012041 http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=012023
Why I not choose to do this to Carlos is because this whole thing is completely trivial, we're arguing over Egyptian biology. Carlos obviously has some severe mental illness since he takes this topic so emotional/serious that he has to harass people over an ancient history dispute. I did though obtain Carlos' old personal house address in Bristol. If this 50 year old pervert wants to start stalking me again, then yes - I'll have to get involved. At the moment though Carlos has gone off the radar.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Miss me with all that "you were super invested" and "you refused to move on and I lost interest" revisionist history.
^Those who use gmail know how to interpret this screenshot. I didn't edit anything other than remove his last name. It clearly shows most of the time (especially towards the end) I was responding to several conversation threads Cass started. The only ones I started was the first conversation thread, which is the one I described earlier, and three others. That's all I have to say about this.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Cass. You better stop lying. I contacted you in 2014 because you had published something on the Saharan genesis of ancient Egyptians (after you came to your senses on the indigenous origin of ancient Egypt) and I was looking to publish something on the some topic. This was before Basal Eurasian was discovered and at the time people were salty because I refused to treat AE as recent transplants from Sub-Saharan Africa. So, naturally, when I saw the title of your publication on the Saharan origin of AE (a view I was leaning towards myself), I was interested in learning your arguments.
Then the conversation evolved to something else in part because you saw me exposing someone on this site and you pitched in privately with your own comments several times. Instead of standing up for yourself you wanted to cower away from your online presence because Coke and your former buddies were on your bumper. I told you to man up and at the end told you to either be helpful or go your own way. I don't see how you can get "rid" of someone when one of the last things they told you is to step up or leave.
And you have a long history of lying. You even admit to your own past lies and use of "dirty tricks" in this thread. You're prone to strange mental outbursts (as shown by your ongoing theft of others' online identities, including Nodnarb's and Morpheus' online persona) and you lie often. Therefore, having a debate with you or engaging you in any other type of conversation is a waste of time.
Well the guy does suffer from mental illness, which is why it's beyond me why you or anybody else takes him seriously. For real though, I have sympathy for his plight but I am not going to actually treat him the way I would a fully mentally competent person.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Miss me with all that "you were super invested" and "you refused to move on and I lost interest" revisionist history.
^Those who use gmail know how to interpret this screenshot. I didn't edit anything other than remove his last name. It clearly shows most of the time (especially towards the end) I was responding to several conversation threads Cass started. The only ones I started was the first conversation thread, which is the one I described earlier, and three others. That's all I have to say about this.
lol. you were posting to me at one stage that you were in London, England working with some lawyer. What happened? nothing of course. It was just all keyboard warrior nonsense. you cannot win in these situations. I'm sure Carlos uses a fake IP like a TOR browser when posting here. If it got to court, all Carlos has to say is he is not claus3600/tropical redacted (like he would do) or he could claim he was hacked when he sent those blackmails/libel - meaning its very difficult, near impossible to jail or take people to court over cyber crimes. That's exactly what has happened so many times when I've initiated the legal route. Its a waste of time.
Do you still hate carlos coke? is it all over? I didn't bring all this up, another poster did here.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Well the guy does suffer from mental illness, which is why it's beyond me why you or anybody else takes him seriously.
You're right. Poor judgment on my part to email him, even if initially just for academic purposes.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
He tried to use me against Carlos. I new the whole time he was playing enemy of my enemy is my friend. I do not buy for one minute this guy was "emailing my academically", 90% of his replies to me were on Carlos.
Why he wants to deny this is unclear, since I don't even deny I used Swenet for the same purpose. We both hate/dislike each other but just used one another since Carlos had harassed us. Our only thing in common was having a greater enemy: Carlos.
lol, is this guy now scared of Carlos or something?
The turning point for me was re-reading recent comments Swenet posted to Brandon, that showed his and Carlos politics are identical. Swenet is on record as saying blacks cannot be racist to whites, some nonsense about a piers morgan quote etc. I don't mind using enemy of my enemy is my friend normally, but I'm not siding with a black supremacist nutjob. This whole forum is psychotic black people who despise white people and swenet isn't even an exception.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: This whole forum is psychotic black people who despise white people and swenet isn't even an exception.
quote:Egyptsearch is a crazy, racist Afrocentric pseudohistory forum where black supremacists post such as "Dr". Clyde Winters, Egmond Codfried and Paul Marc Washington.
- Rationalwiki
quote:Afrocentric cult forum Egytsearch
- egyptnet.proboards.com
quote:Negrocentric forums like Egypt Search
- Forumbiodiversity
quote:Egyptsearch is a hive of illiterate black racists
- YouTube
quote: Egyptsearch is a black supremacist forum
- fstdt.com
quote:delirious Black supremacists of egyptsearch
-allempires.com
quote:the whacky crowd at Egyptsearch... racist and batshit crazy
- mathildasdiary
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
And I'm only posting this so people can make up their mind for themselves. I uploaded a draft (of I paper I was going to publish) for him to comment on. And for the record, many people I talked to online can confirm that I was working on a draft for a paper ~2014. It was called:
The Eastern Saharan Participants of the Near Eastern Neolithic and Their Population Affinities.
He read it and this was his reply to my first email to him:
quote:Originally posted by Cass: I read it, but i'm afraid it is appears far too academic for me. My understanding of genetics is only basic. What I know is that regional genetic variation in humans (which is actually only a very small part of the genome) overwhelmingly matches Sewell Wright's "isolation by distance" model, as opposed to "Island" model. So there are no continental genetic clusters like "African", "European" etc. The ancient Egyptians (excluding the very late periods) for example would fall as a cline between their southern and northern neighbors, meaning it would be impossible to group them with other Sub-Saharan African populations, or put them with West Asians. But at Anthroscape and Forumbiodiversity, you still find these "genetic cluster" sort of people. They're mostly either pan-African nationalists, or "hereditarian" proponents (think controversial people like Richard Lynn, J. P. Rushton) who cling to the old "Caucasoid", "Negroid","Mongoloid" formula.
I did indeed drop all the 'race'/typology junk, alongside other craziness I used to believe in, but as far human evolution is concerned, my views are unorthodox/fringe still, and probably always will be. I guess the closest my views are to someone like M. Henneberg, and I have a problem with the Out of Africa stuff. I can attach his 2001 paper if you like. I don't deny most migrations came out of Africa throughout the Pleistocene, and there was a large dispersal there in the last 100,000 years (Templeton's paper: Out of Africa again and again is pretty good here) but I think movements into Africa have been neglected (there was multidirectional gene flow) and I don't believe in a recent replacement scenario. Brace himself holds many of these views.
However, before I even got the chance to send him this first email, he had already randomly brought up the person he accuses me of mentioning. So, in reality, he is simply projecting. Notice how this liar keeps baiting me. He read my draft and even suggested reading material. For instance:
quote:I remembered L. C. Briggs. He wrote three books on Saharans, I used two of them.
The Stone Age Races of Northwest Africa. (1955). Peabody Museum. The Living Races of the Sahara Desert. (1958). Peabody Museum. Tribes of the Sahara. (1960). Harvard University Press.
Now he's lying, talking about "Swenet contacted me for help to debate others" and "there was no academic conversation". Note that I've already proven that he started 10 conversations, while I only started 4 (all of them in the beginning of my conversations with him, since they're in the bottom of the gmail list). Not only was he messaging me more in terms of numbers, but I messaged him less as time went on (see the screenshot). Somehow, in his mind he's managed to spin this where he is somehow at the center as someone who needed to be recruited. Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: why do you converse with blacks on Egyptsearch?
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Do you think because I dislike blacks, I cannot learn from them?
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: This whole forum is psychotic black people
What's your point? Some of them like Swenet or Beyoku have good genetics or bio-anthropology knowledge (I even said this years ago), but all of them either hate white people or have some chip on their shoulder and have animosity towards whites. Even Swenet has posted black people cannot be racist against whites - this is in his posts. He comes up with the same nonsensical definition blacks why black cannot be racist.
Its impossible for me to work with blacks, since i'm on the opposite side of the spectrum. I've worked with people with different views than my own on many things, feminists included. But black people is too much.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^Well Cass you honestly cant play the victim here, In my experience not everyone here hates white people, most have a negative view but the more academic posters, Swenet included seem to take a more "Liberal" approach to race relations as in they see White Supremacy/White Privelage in society and take a Leftist view on race relations, but like I said your views you posted in the past (Blacks are Ugly, violent, unintelligent etc.) wont help people here warm up to you.
Me I dont mind white people, heck I even made a friendship with a poster who was opposition, Hammer AKA the Professor. and LOL @ places like Forumbiodiversity and Youtube of all places having the nerve to say anything about us, yeah ES is a Gutter now but at one point We were the AUTHORITY on the African Origins of Egypt, many of the Images, Studies, Books, and Articles were first exposed here, We pretty much Debunked the Nordic Egypt nonsense and other Eurocentric flights of fantasy, you yourself a self proclaimed Nordicist and British Israelite saw the light because of us, so please dont throw stones bro, None of those Forums Could f#@k with us back in our heyday, and Most still cant with the Vets on the Forum...
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
He's talking about a post in which I said that African Americans' racism was rarely proactive and almost always reactive. And that proactive racism (e.g. Nazism) and reactive racism (e.g. most Afram hate groups) should not be treated as the same. He thinks subscribing to this view is psychotic and racist. He's only discrediting himself. Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have presented the genomic evidence of the relationship between African and mongoloid Native Americans.
If I am wrong, why don't you present evidence that my findings are incorrect. Show the evidence that the genetic data I presented does not exist.
Until you do this you, and everyone else who fails to dispute the genetic evidence, are talking out of your Arse!
The DNA of North American Indians is of African origin. As a result they carry African haplogroups
Craniometric and skeletal evidence indicates that Paleoamericans were related to the Australian, Polynesian or Sub-Saharan type. This is evident in this chart below.
Neves has proven that the Paleoamericans were Black or Negroid, that's why the Amerinds or mongoloid Native Americans are grouped with the Eskimos and other Asian groups.
Even though, Mongoloid Native Americans are not related to the Paleoamericans, who were Black,they do carry Africans genes.
Novembre et al (2016) argue that Kennewick man is related more to modern Native Americans, instead of the PaleoAmericans.
Eurocentrist lie about the relationship of Naia and Kennewick man to mongoloid or contemporary Native Americans. For example, Novembre et al (2015) conclude that Kennewick man is closely related to the South American Karitiana people.
The finding by Novembre et al (2015) that genetically Kennewick man related mostly to the Karitiana falsifies their population. It is falsified because Skoglund et al (2015) found that the Karitiana and other Amozonian people in South America have an Australasian heritage. The identification of a relationship between Kennewick man and the Karitiana would continue to situate this Native American in the Paleoamerican group who was Black--not contemporary Native Americans.
The Amerindian haplogroups (hg) are descendant from the L3(M,N, & X) macrohaplogroup): ABCDN and X. The L3 (M,N,X) marcogroup converge at np 16223.
The mtDNA haplogroups ABC and X are subclades of haplogroup N. In Table 1, we see the distribution of haplogroup N, in the Americas.
The phylogeography of haplogroup C suggest that this American founder haplogroup differentiated in Siberia-Asia (24). The situation is not so clear for haplogrop B2, but A2 and D1 probably differentiated after the mongoloid Native American lineages diverged after crossing the Beringa Straits (24) [ b] Haplogroup A2 has the motif 16111T,16223c, 16290T, 16319A and 16223C (25). Haplogroup A is rare in Siberia (26). Interestingly, haplogroup A absent in western North America is common in parts of Central America and Northern America where the Spanish reported the existence of Black Native American communities(1-2).[/b]
In a recent study of post-Classic Mexicans at Tlatilco , dating between 10-13 centuries the subjects carried the founder haplogroups A (36%), B (13%), C (4.3%) and D (17.4%) (27). We should note, that in Yucatec, the Mayans were predominately haplogroup A, the Maya in Hondurus, a stronghold of the Black Native Americans belonged to haplogroup C.
The mtDNA haplogroup A common to Mexicans is also found among the Mande speaking people and some East Africans (28-29). Haplogroup A found among Mixe and Mixtecs (28).The Mande speakers carry mtDNA haplogroup A, which is common among Mexicans (30). In addition to the Mande speaking people of West Africa, Southeast Africa Africans also carry mtDNA haplogroup A (29). The major American Indian male lineages include R1, C,D and Q3.There is evidence of African admixture in the American y-chromosome haplogroups. The Q y-haplogroup has the highest frequency among indigenous Mexicans. The frequency hg Q varies from a high of 54% for Q-M243, and a low of 46% for QM (34).
African y-chromosome are associated with YAP+ and 9bp. The YAP-à associated with A-àG transition at DYS271 is found among Native Americans. The YAP+ individuals include Mixe speakers (32-33). YAP+ is often present in haplogroups (hg) C and D. The DYS271 transition is of African origin (32).The DSY271 Alu insertion is found only in chromosomes bearing Alu insertion (YAP+) at locus DYS287 (33). The DYS271 transition was found among the Wayuu, Zenu and Inzano. The Mexican Native American y-chromosome bearing the African markers is resident in haplogroups C and D (34).
R-M173 is also found in Mexico. Haplogroups R and Q are part of the CT microgroup which dates back 56kya. Haplogroup R branches from hg Q, with the SNP M242.
The CT haplogroup has SNP mutation M168, along with P and M294. Haplogroup P (M45) has two branches Q (M242) and R-M207 which share the common marker M45.
The M45 chromosome is subdivided by the biallelic variant M173 (35). In Africa we find P (M173), R1b (M343) and V88; and R1b1a2 (M269).
Native Americans carry a high frequency of R-M173 (48). The predominate y-chromosome in North America is R-M173. R-M173 is found only in the Northeastern United States along with mtDNA haplogroup X (25%). Both haplogroups are found in Africa, but is absent in Siberia.
. There are varying frequencies of y-chromosome M-173 in Africa and Eurasia. Whereas only between 8% and 10% of M-173 is carried by Eurasians, 82% of the carriers of this y-chromosome are found in Africa.
This is very interesting given the presence on R-M173 is found among many American Indian groups (48). R-M173 among the North American Algonquian group range from Ojibwe (79%), Chipewyan (62%), Seminole (50%), Cherokee (47%), Dogrib (40%) and Papago (38%) . These Indian groups have a long association with Africans and many live in areas were Europeans found Black Native Americans.
In most studies of North American Indians, any evidence of African haplogroups are excluded from all analyses (47). Exclusion of evidence of non-Amerindian admixture and non-foundational Amerindian haplogroups is regularly left out of publications on Native American DNA (49).
The R haplogroup is carried by Mexicans. The frequency of hg R varies from Tarahumara (5.6%), Otomi (14.3%), Yucateca Maya (10.5%). There is also a high frequency of haplogroup R among the Ch'ol and Chontal which stood around 15% (38). The Ch'ol and Chontal also carry E1b1b (38). The Spanish identified the Otomi as a Black Native American tribe(11).
African ancestry has been found among indigenous groups that have had no historical contact with African slaves and thus support an African presence in America, already indicated by African skeletons among the Olmec and Mayan people. Lisker et al, noted that "The variation of Indian ancestry among the studied Indians shows in general a higher proportion in the more isolated groups, except for the Cora, who are as isolated as the Huichol and have not only a lower frequency but also a certain degree of black admixture. The black admixture is difficult to explain because the Cora reside in a mountainous region away from the west coast" (22).
A recent study of African - Mexican admixture yielded a frequency range between 22-41% (25). In one study the researcher found that 3% of Native Americans showed African haplogroups (25). Underhill et al , noted that:" One Mayan male, previously [has been] shown to have an African Y chromosome" (31). This is very interesting because the Maya language illustrates a Mande substratum, in addition to African genetic markers (3) Plus the Chontal were identified as a Black Native American tribe (11).
The African haplogroups among indigenous Mexicans include L0a1a'3, L2a1, L3b, L3d, and U6a (25). Interestingly, an individual at Laguna de los Condores, Peru dating between AD 1000-1500 carried L3 (36). Green et al also found Indians with African genes in North Central Mexico, including the L1 and L2 clusters (25).
An important indicator of African admixture is 9bp (22,27). Haplogroup B is defined by 9bp (27) and is linked to haplogroup A.
The 9bp marker is reported among the North Mexicans. It is common among the Mixtec (27). Some indigenous Mexicans show the G6PD deficiency. In a study of Yucatecos, Tzellzal-Tzoltzil, Mixteca and Mestizo it was found that people on the Oaxaca coast suffered from G6PD deficiency (22). Lisker also found G6PD deficiency in Costa Chica (22). The G6PD deficiency is usually carried by SSA.
Indigenous Indians at Tlaxcala contains 8% African genes, but historically no Africans lived in the area (37). Researchers have also found L1, L2 & L3 clusters among many Mexicans including the Cora, Mixtec and Zapotecs (39-41)
It is interesting to note that the proportion of African haplotypes roughly equivalent to the proportion of European haplotypes [among North Central Mexican Indians] cannot be explained by recent admixture of African Americans for the United States (41). This is especially the case for the Ojinaga area, which presently is, and historically has been largely isolated from U.S. African Americans. In the Ojinaga sample set, the frequency of African haplotypes was higher than that of European hyplotypes"(41).
Human Leukocyte Antigens (HLA) polymorphism is used to investigate ethnic relationships and origins. Africans and Indigenous Mexicans share HLA alleles. In Table 2 we outline the relationship. Gutherie in a study of the HLAs in indigenous American populations, found that the V antigen of the Rhesus system, considered to be an indication of African ancestry, among Indians in Belize and Mexico centers of Mayan civilization (45). Dr. Gutherie also noted that A*28 common among Africans has high frequencies among Eastern Maya (45).
In addition to A*28 , there is a high frequency of HLA B*35 among Mexicans and SSA (46). The frequency of HLA B*35 among indigenous Mexicans and SSA is high ranging between 22-31% among SSA populations and 30-45% among MA groups (46). It is interesting to note that the Otomi, a Mexican group identified as being of African origin and six Mayan groups show the B Allele of the ABO system that is considered to be of African origin.
It is time that researchers stop claiming the first Native Americans were not Negroes.
1.Alcina-Franch J.(1985). Los orígenes de America. : Editorial Alhambra. 2. Arnaiz-Villena,A, Moscoso, J.,Serrano-Vela,I. (2006).The uniqueness of Amerindians according to HLA genes and the peopling of the Americas. http://www.inmunologia.org/Upload/Articles/6/7/678.pdf 3.Winters,C. ( 2011 ). Olmec (Mande) Loan Words in the Mayan, Mixe-Zoque and Taino Languages. Current Research Journal of Social Sciences 3(3): 152-179. 4. Winters,C. (2013). African Empires in Ancient America. Createspace,Amazon.com. 5. Winters,C.(2015). Olmec Language and Literature. Createspace,Amazon.com. 6. Winters,C. (2014). History of Blacks in America from Pre-History to 1877. Createspace,Amazon.com. 7. Winters,C.(1977). Islam in Early North and South America. Al-Ittihad, (July-October) pp.57-67. 8.Bazan, R.A.G. (1967). Latin America the Arabs and Islam, Muslim World, pp.284-292. 9.Ferrand,G. (1928). Introduction a l'astrnomie nautique des Arabes, Paris. 10. Orozco y Berra,M (1880). Historia Antigua y de la conquista de Mexico. https://archive.org/details/historiaantigua06berrgoog 11. Quatrefages, A de.(1889) . Introduction a L'Etudes des Races Humaines. 12. Gaffarel,P. (2010). Etude Sur Les Rapports De L'Amerique Et De L'Ancien Continent Avant Christophe Colomb. 13. Marquez,C.(1956). Estudios arqueologicas y ethnograficas. Mexico. 14. Wiercinski, A.(1969). Affinidades raciales de algunas poblaiones antiquas de Mexico, Anales de INAH, 7a epoca, tomo II, 123-143. 15. Wiercinski,A. (1972). Inter-and Intrapopulational Racial Differentiation of Tlatilco, Cerro de Las Mesas, Teothuacan, Monte Alban and Yucatan Maya, XXXlX Congreso International de Americanistas, Lima 1970 ,Vol.1, 231-252. 16. Wiercinski,A. (1972b). An anthropological study on the origin of "Olmecs", Swiatowit ,33, 143-174. 17. Wiercinski, A. & Jairazbhoy, R.A. (1975) "Comment", The New Diffusionist,5 (18),5. 18. Moore,S. (1929). The Bone Change in Sickle Cell Anemia with A Note on Similar Changes Observed in Skulls of Ancient Mayan Indians, Journal of Missouri Medical Association, 26:561 19. Wailoo, Keith. (2002). Drawing Blood: Technology and Disease Identity in Twentieth-Century America. JHU Press. 20. Whittington, S. L., & Reed, D. M. (1997). Bones of the Maya: Studies of ancient skeletons. Washington, D.C: Smithonian Institution Press. 21. Lisker R, et al.(1996). Genetic structure of autochthonous populations of Meso-america:Mexico. Am. J. Hum Biol 68:395-404. 22. Suarez-Diaz,E. (2014) Indigenous populations in Mexico. Medical anthropology in the Work of Ruben Lisker in the 1960's. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 47:108-117. 23. Lisker,R.(1981. Estructura genetia de la poblacion Mexicana. Aspectos Medicos y Anthropologica, Mexico: Salvat. 24. Kumar S, Bells M Z, Melton P E, Blangero J, Currah J E. (2011). Large scale mitochondrial sequencing in Mexican Americans suggest a reappraisal of Native American Origins. BMC Evolutionary Biology 11:293. 25. Guardado-Estrada M, Juarez-Torres, E., Medina-Martinez I.(2009). A great diversity of American mitochondrial DNA ancestry is present in the Mestizo population. Jour of Hum Genet, 54:695-705. 26. Laluezza C, Perez-Perez A, Prats E1997. Lack of Found American Mitochondrial DNA Lineages in extinct aborigines from Tierra del Fuego-Patagonia. Hum Molecular Genet, 6(1)41-46. 27. Kemp B M, Resendez A, Roman J A, Berrelleza R, Malhi R.S. 28. Bonilla C, Gutierrez G, Parra E J, Kline C, Shriver M D. (2005). Admixture of a rural population of the State of Guerrero,Mexico, Am J Phys Anthropol. Dec;128(4):861-9. 29. Salas A, Richards M, De la Fe T, Lareu M V, Sobrino B, Sanchez-Diz P, Macaulay V, Carracedo A. (2002). The making of the West African mtDNA Landscape, Am J. Hum. Genet, 71:1082-1111. 30. Jackson B A, Wilson J L, Kirbah S, Sidney S S, Bassie L, Alle J A D, McLean D C Garvey W T.(2005). Am J Phys Anth. 128:156-163. 31. Underhill,P.A.,Jin,L., Zemans,R., Oefner,J and Cavalli-Sforza,L.L.(1996, January). A pre-Columbian Y chromosome-specific transition and its implications for human evolutionary history, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA,93, 196-200. 32. Lell, J T. (1997) Y chromosome polymorphisms in Native Americans and Siberian populations: Identification of Native American y chromosome haplotypes. Hum Genet, 100(5-6):536-543. 33. Ruiz-Linares, A. (1999).Microsatellite provides evidence for y-chromosome diversity among the founders of the New World. Proc Natl Acad. Sci USA. 96(11):6312-6317 34. Branshi N O. (1997). Origin of Amerindian y-chromosome as inferred by the analysis of six polymorphism markers. Am J. Phys, Anth, 102(1)79-89. 35. Lell, T. (2002). The Dual Origin and Siberian affinities of Native American y-Chromosome. Am J Hum Genet., 70(1)196-206. 36. Genetic Geneology Tools: Ancient DNA. Retrieved 3/12/2015 from : www.y-str.org/p/ancientdna.html 37.Crawford,M.(2001). The Origins of Native Americans: Evidence from Anthropological Genetics. Cambridge University Press. 38. Quito A, Meraz M A, Camacho R, Schurr T, Vilar M(2013). Y-Chromosome diversity in Mayan Ch'ol and Chontal populations from Campeche and Tabasco. Retrieved 1/21/2015 from: http://www.ashg.org/2013meeting/abstracts/fulltext/fl130123072.htm 39. Angelica Gonzalez-Oliver et al. (2001). Founding Amerindian mitochondrial DNA lineages in ancient Maya from Xcaret, Quintana Roo. Am. J Phys Anth, 116 (3):230-235. Retreived 2/9/2006 at: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/85515362/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1& 40. Maere Reidla, et al. (2003).Origin and Diffusion of mtDNA Haplogroup X. Am J Hum Genet. 2003, 73(5): 1178-1190. 41. Green, L.D. (2000) mtDNA Affinities of the Peoples of North-Central Mexico. Am J Hum Genet , 66(3) 989-998 42. Winters,C. (2011a). Comment: Genetic Evidence of Early Migrations into America. Retrived 2/18/2015:http://www.plosone.org/annotation/listThread.action?root=18395 43. Arnaiz-Villena A, Vargas-Alarcón G, Areces C, Enríquez-de-Salamanca M, Abd-El-Fatah-Khalil S, Fernández-Honrado M, Marco J, Martín-Villa JM, Rey D.(2014). Mixtec Mexican Amerindians: an HLA alleles study for America peopling, pharmacogenomics and transplantation. Immun Invest 43(8):738-55. 44. Allsopp, C.E.,R M Harding, C Taylor, M Bunce, D Kwiatkowski, N Anstey, D Brewster, A J McMichael, B M Greenwood, A V Hill.(1992). Interethnic genetic differentiation in Africa: HLA class I antigens in The Gambia. Am J Hum Genet, 50(2): 411-421. 45. Guthrie,J.L. (2006). Human lymphocyte antigens:Apparent Afro-Asiatic, southern Asian and European HLAs in indigenous American populations. Retrieved 3/3/2006 at: http://www.neara.org/Guthrie/lymphocyteantigens02.htm 46. Winters,C. (2014) HLA-B*35 in Mexican Amerindians and African Populations. Forthcoming: Indian J Fund and Applied Life Scien. 47. Bolnick DA, Smith DG (2003) Unexpected patterns of mitochondrial DNA variation among Native Americans from the sou°theastern United States. Am J Phys Anth 122(4): 336-54. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.10284 48. Winters,C. (2011). Is Native American R Y-Chromosome of African Origin?. Cur Res J Bio Scien, 3(6): 555-558. Retrieved 3/16/2015 at : http://www.academia.edu/1898582/Is_Native_American_R_Y-Chromosome_of_African_Origin 49. , Ripan Malhi et al. (2006) Mitochondrial haplogroup M discovered in prehistoric North Am J Arch Scien 34 (2007),http://public.wsu.edu/~bmkemp/publications/pubs/Malhi_et_al_2007.pdf 50. Moreno-Estrada A, Gravel S, Zakharia F, McCauley JL, Byrnes JK, et al. (2013) Reconstructing the Population Genetic History of the Caribbean. PLoS Genet 9(11): e1003925. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1003925. http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1003925 51. Rafinesques, C.(1832). Primitive Black Nations of America. Atlantic Journal,1(3):.85-86. https://books.google.com/books?id=BWo3AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA85&dq=Primitive+Black+Nations+of+America +by+Professor+Constantine+Rafinesques&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VVsIVZbBFcONyASP6oC4AQ&ved=0CC4Q 6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Primitive%20Black%20Nations%20of%20America%20by%20Professor%20Constantine%20R afinesques&f=false
.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like how Clyde keeps trying to convince people that his pseudo-scholarship is taken serious in real academic sources...lol, Stop Clyde Beyoku is an intelligent person she's not buying you're revisionist crap....I think Beyoku is onto something though I think Clyde is Counter Intelligence or some Disinfo-agent of some sort his comment about Mike being "Authentic" research is suspicious..Clyde and Mike were probably paid to destroy the Forum while promoting their pseudo-scholarship at the same time..
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ahhh ok, well that is a reasonable position, I know some Leftists/Liberals spout the idea that "Blacks cant be racist" period...which is a crock of **** because as someone who grew up with black people I can tell you first hand we can be racist but your position is sound IMO...
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: He's talking about a post in which I said that African Americans' racism was rarely proactive and almost always reactive. And that proactive racism (e.g. Nazism) and reactive racism (e.g. most Afram hate groups) should not be treated as the same. He thinks subscribing to this view is psychotic and racist. He's only discrediting himself.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Yep. People like Cass desperately want to pretend they're the same thing because they know that certain groups have committed unprecedented levels of racism. To hide that fact, they will jump on any opportunity to lump a Hitler together with a 'Tyrone' from the neighborhood who is inspired by Malcolm X and has a human emotion in response to oppression but will probably never hurt anyone.
The way I see it, we can either call both racism, but then there needs to be a distinction (e.g. proactive vs reactive racism) or the latter is not 'real' racism on par with the former. Whichever he wants to do is fine by me, but I don't play that "they're all the same" bs.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
I honestly think they are misrepresenting most of our position here, though to their credit they attack Phonecian7 for her(didnt know it was a female) Caucasian Egypt theories...so I guess they're fair at least..lol
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
[/QB]
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
) and loads of other nonsense, including confess to mental illness since in his view racism is mental illness. I sent an email to him saying "yes". Pretty much anyone else would have done the same as me in my circumstances, and especially since I was young (I had not even finished university when this happened, this guy is double my age and my 100% focus at the time was my degree). I just agreed to whatever Carlos said so he would stop stalking me, shut up and to avoid this creep going after my parents. Its understandable?
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic