posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
[qb] Researchers are constantly changing the names of haplogroups. This is especially true of the aDNA to make it appear that ancient populations are not related to Africans. For example, instead of just admitting that Anzick child belonged to the M haplogroup, they identify the skeleton as a carrier of haplogroup D4. At first Ust-ishim, I believe was originally said to belong to haplogroup R, but now is identified as belonging to the Q haplogroup, so it can group his population with mongoloid Native Americans, who predominately carry the Q haplogroup.

Looking at ancient DNA to determine ancient population origins can be misleading. Let’s look at dna of Ust-ishim and Clovis-Anzick man as it compares to modern populations.



Although it is clear that Ust-ishim was T2b3, the popular press claims he belonged to the haplogroup U clade. Look at the cousins of Ust-ishim it is these modern people who belong to the U clade that are his cousins. See: http://www.fi.id.au/2014/11/ust-ishim-ancient-dna-has-matches-with.html


Look at the Clovis-Anzick DNA matches to modern people.



If you look closely you can see how they match many Non-Native Americans. See http://www.fi.id.au/2014/09/clovis-anzick-1-dna-match-living-people.html


What does this mean? It means that researchers may be reporting results that have been contaminated and that they may only be giving us results that match their expectations of how the data should look.

IN relation to Anzick man Felix Immanuel noted that:

quote:

---

Just a quick recap, I processed the raw data for Clovis-Anzick-1 and uploaded into GEDMatch and to my surprise, there are matches as near as 3rd to 4th cousins. Now, that's a real problem because, the matches are to a DNA sample older than 12500 years. This is practically impossible and very mysterious.[/img] I will investigate step-by-step and see what are all the possibilities and failure points, which could solve the problem. But before that, we need to be absolutely sure that these matches are indeed valid. From the matches, I requested for phased kit and I indeed got one - Thanks to Mario Diaz and Veronica.


See: http://www.fi.id.au/search/label/Anzick

---

He added that

quote:

---

Clearly, an IBD segment of 5 cM above 500 SNPs with total IBD segments around 10+ cM cannot be 12500 years old. This is a fact and can be verified using known relationships in families and DNA companies are using these benchmarks all along for showing genetic matches. This fact is more than enough to conclude that the Clovis-Anzick-1 sample is not actually ancient. My best guess is, the infant boy's sample is just from the last century and it was wrongly labeled as 12500 years old or the sample got contaminated.


See: http://www.fi.id.au/search/label/Anzick

---

The major problem in understanding the relationship between Africans, and Blacks in Asia and Native America is the constant changing of the names of haplogroups, like the change of Asian M1 into D(4), and the change of African R-1 into V88.
Another name change is the recent decision to call East Asian , R1 haplogroups, haplogroup Q because these haplogroups have just about the same mutations.
This post illustrates how ancient the DNA is not always a clear marker of actual ancient events, and how researchers can chose almost any haplogroup as representative of an ancient population..

---

^^^ This is nonsense all the links are dead

And the come from an intelligent design blog, the author doesn't even have a bio

http://fi.id.au/

Clyde this is a fail, not legit references

---

Posts: 8805 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Researchers are constantly changing the names of haplogroups.

---

It's called scientific progress.
Of course, new genetic discoveries are being made all the time and the nomenclature gets updated to more precision.
But what you do is mix and match old and new fragments to create fog for the shell game, your preconceive assumptions that haven't changed since 1972

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
I am not the only one. Yao et al, and Fucharoen et al, in their discussion of the haplogroup D mutations were the first to illustrate that haplogroup D(4) was in reality M1, until they changed the nomenclature.

---

You are lying again Yao or Fucharoen did not say D4 was M1, you do not have not quote of them saying that, you are just name dropping

---

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  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.


Reference:

• Skoglund et al (2015), Genetic evidence for two founding populations of the Americas , NATURE ,525 ( 3 SEPTEMBER):104-108. Retrieved 5/1/2016 at : http://www.nature.com/articles/nature14895.epdf?referrer_access_token=4TuRenNBfBRS7tHNMAY1qdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0N6yB-nEyCdRoL51ykMO5E9z_7mdrRF_UTJvxtpDQnayOfwuJnrOCxIhdm8_7djDnDo9O bq-VbpDatHfBozg8WnuFcDDHGC6D1QQbbgmyediLKefzmJLdqOP9IYieqkoaey_M8XA-n4Ua9CD3IbOslIqWUnXzIWbLwafl9bJMOQNAJlELt6cfooH162H7W_3B8%3D&tracking_referrer=mobile.nytimes.com
  
  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

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

quote:

---

Originally posted by the lioness,:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Researchers are constantly changing the names of haplogroups.

---

It's called scientific progress.
Of course, new genetic discoveries are being made all the time and the nomenclature gets updated to more precision.
But what you do is mix and match old and new fragments to create fog for the shell game, your preconceive assumptions that haven't changed since 1972

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
I am not the only one. Yao et al, and Fucharoen et al, in their discussion of the haplogroup D mutations were the first to illustrate that haplogroup D(4) was in reality M1, until they changed the nomenclature.

---

You are lying again Yao or Fucharoen did not say D4 was M1, you do not have not quote of them saying that, you are just name dropping

---

Read the articles. They did not have to say the haplogroups were M1 The description of the shared polymorphic sites within clusters made it clear that subjects in the study were M1 carriers.

When the Yao et al, and Fucharoen et al, articles were published the combination of mutations within polymorphic sites were not called haplogroup M1, or D(4). The D(4) designation came later when the "experts" made East Asian M clade into D, and renamed East Asian M1 into D4. This was much the same way researchers renamed African R1, V88.

---

Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
I am not a fraud. I clearly outline the history of UdFI at our website: http://olmec98.net/UdFI.htm

We are not teaching children or adolescents.

Lying Euronut. UdFI is not a home school. It is a research Institute and we teach on-line courses. [/QB]

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

You've also lied and said you are a professor and that your research institute has an archaeo-genetics department.

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:

quote:

---

You've also lied and said you are a professor and that your research institute has an archaeo-genetics department.

---

Which is pretty stupid since-

http://www.shakelaw.com/blog/lying-on-your-resume/

According to the laws of several states, the cardinal sin of resume fraud is falsifying your educational record.

Under the Texas Penal Code, for example, it is illegal to use, or even to just claim to hold, a postsecondary degree you know to be fraudulent, substandard, or fictitious in order to obtain employment. This makes it illegal to either falsely claim you received a degree from an actual, accredited university, or to list a degree from a “diploma mill” (an unaccredited institution that offers “degrees” for a flat fee in a short amount of time with little to no coursework).

Punishment for resume fraud of this variety varies from state to state. In New Jersey, the use of a fraudulent degree is subject to a civil penalty of $1,000 for each offense. Texas, on the other hand, classifies falsifying your educational record as a Class B misdemeanor (punishable by up to $2,000 in fines and 6 months in prison), and Kentucky raises it to a Class A misdemeanor (punishable by up to a year in prison).

---

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:
LOL!

You disgraced fraud.

Quetazlcoatl already exposed you.

---

I am not a fraud. My credentials are legit. If I was a fraud it would have been proven long ago.

Since 1996 Bernardo Ortiz de Montellano or Quetzalcoatl spent his time attacking my research on-line up to his death. Even though he was a member of the Academe and Establishment , he was not able to publish one journal article attacking my work.

During this same period I have published over 100 articles expressing my ideas about linguistics and archaeogenetics, with some of my articles being published in "Establishment journals".

Stupid Euronut if I was a fraud, do you think my articles would have been published?

Cass you wrote a slanderous article about me for Rationalwiki, to ruin my character, but since its publication I have had at least 20-25 articles published in mainstream history and science publications. It is clear no one is listening to your ranting except other people who are haters, jealous or envious of me.

You should be ashamed of being jealous of a retired old man. But, I guess that being a young man who sees no future for himself as bright as mine, you would find comfort in the dark , attacking me, so no one can see the loser you are.
.


.
I know now you are trolling me. And you hate that even after your lies I am still having my work published by mainstream publications , while your work remains in the top left corner of your dresser drawer.

I don't feel sorry for you. I am happy you are a failure and pray your life remains lonely in your mother's basement.

You are evil and a devil. I pray that any negativity you attempt to send my way strikes you 1000 times.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Cass every time you look in the mirror you hate yourself more wondering why, I have been successful celebrating my history while you sit in your lonely room--without even a girlfriend or boyfriend--even though you have tried to sully my image.

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:
@ Clyde

I have been described as evil and deceptive, but even I wouldn't fabricate/lie like you do about my credentials or academic affiliations. So what does that make you? If I go to your ResearchGate/Academia.edu right now, I still see you list your dubious "Uthman dan Fodio Institute" (a defunct private school for kids), including a false "professor" title and non-existent faculty positon of a genetics department.

Furthermore, you proved you aren't worth more than dog excrement when you started attacking Bernard Ortiz de Montellano, when he recently had died. There was a RIP thread here, and you used it to vilify him.

Btw, unlike Montellano you have no academic legacy. No one will remember your "research" (can we even call it that?) when you die because its so low-quality and nonsense. There are like 3 or 4 black posters in this thread even criticizing you, so you're even an embarrassment to black people.

And I would rather write 1 peer-review article each year than pump out dozens like you do in pseudo-journals. You think its about quantity, when its about quality.

---

Montellano was an enemy--not a friend. Just because a person dies does not take away with them the legacy of good or evil they left behind.

Here you proved exactly why a piece of dog do do like your self is envious of me. Like Bernardo your envy/jealousy is eating you up. You are sad because you have not had one peer reviewed article published in an Establishment journal while I have had many including these three:

1.
A comparison of Fulani and Nadar HLA
Clyde Winters
Indian J Hum Genet. 2012 Jan-Apr; 18(1): 137–138. doi: 10.4103/0971-6866.96686
PMCID: PMC3385173
ArticlePubReaderCitation
Select item 2930572

2.
The Fulani are not from the Middle East
Clyde Winters
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Aug 24; 107(34): E132. Published online 2010 Aug 3. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1008007107
PMCID: PMC2930572
ArticlePubReaderPDF–485KCitation
Select item 3168144

3.
Can parallel mutation and neutral genome selection explain Eastern African M1 consensus HVS-I motifs in Indian M haplogroups
Clyde Winters
Indian J Hum Genet. 2007 Sep-Dec; 13(3): 93–96. doi: 10.4103/0971-6866.38982
PMCID: PMC3168144
ArticlePubReaderCitation

that are listed in the National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health database, which records Establishment peer reviewed articles. See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=clyde+winters

You envy my success in publishing my research in Establishment journals, while you rant hate and slander. Not even Bernard Ortiz de Montellano has a peer reviewed article cited in the ncbi database.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:
@ Clyde

I have been described as evil and deceptive, but even I wouldn't fabricate/lie like you do about my credentials or academic affiliations. So what does that make you? If I go to your ResearchGate/Academia.edu right now, I still see you list your dubious "Uthman dan Fodio Institute" (a defunct private school for kids), including a false "professor" title and non-existent faculty positon of a genetics department.

Furthermore, you proved you aren't worth more than dog excrement when you started attacking Bernard Ortiz de Montellano, when he recently had died. There was a RIP thread here, and you used it to vilify him.

Btw, unlike Montellano you have no academic legacy. No one will remember your "research" (can we even call it that?) when you die because its so low-quality and nonsense. There are like 3 or 4 black posters in this thread even criticizing you, so you're even an embarrassment to black people.

And I would rather write 1 peer-review article each year than pump out dozens like you do in pseudo-journals. You think its about quantity, when its about quality.

---

Montellano was an enemy--not a friend. Just because a person dies does not take away with them the legacy of good or evil they left behind.

Here you proved exactly why a piece of dog do do like your self is envious of me. Like Bernardo your envy/jealousy is eating you up. You are sad because you have not had one peer reviewed article published in an Establishment journal while I have had many including these three:

1.
A comparison of Fulani and Nadar HLA
Clyde Winters
Indian J Hum Genet. 2012 Jan-Apr; 18(1): 137–138. doi: 10.4103/0971-6866.96686
PMCID: PMC3385173
ArticlePubReaderCitation
Select item 2930572

2.
The Fulani are not from the Middle East
Clyde Winters
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Aug 24; 107(34): E132. Published online 2010 Aug 3. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1008007107
PMCID: PMC2930572
ArticlePubReaderPDF–485KCitation
Select item 3168144

3.
Can parallel mutation and neutral genome selection explain Eastern African M1 consensus HVS-I motifs in Indian M haplogroups
Clyde Winters
Indian J Hum Genet. 2007 Sep-Dec; 13(3): 93–96. doi: 10.4103/0971-6866.38982
PMCID: PMC3168144
ArticlePubReaderCitation

that are listed in the National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health database, which records Establishment peer reviewed articles. See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=clyde+winters

You envy my success in publishing my research in Establishment journals, while you rant hate and slander. Not even Bernard Ortiz de Montellano has a peer reviewed article cited in the ncbi database.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:

quote:

---

We have established that your comments on PLoS Genetics and BioEssays were not peer reviewed and have the letters from the editors to prove it. The next one to fall is you "letter" to the Proceedings of the Royal Society-- BTW Busby never replied to it.

Original paper; (submitted May 17 2011; accepted August 17, 2011 i.e peer reviewed)

Busby, B. J. et al. 2012 “The Peopling of Europe and the Cautionary Tale of Y Chromosome Lineage R-M 269,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B 279: 884-892.

Winters’ comment:

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/279/1730/884.e-letters

Winters, C. “The First Europeans were Sub-Saharan Africans,”
Published only electronically March 23, 2012 (no date of submission, PLoS Genetics posted one day after submission)

Letter from Editorial Staff at Royal Society:
peer review
Inbox x

Bernard Ortiz de Montellano <bodemontellano@gmail.com>
Dec 6 (2 days ago)

to publishing


Dear Sirs:
Are e-letters commenting on published articles subjected to peer review before publishing, or are they just routinely vetted by an editor?


Thank You,
Bernard Ortiz de Montellano
Emeritus, Professor of Anthropology
Wayne State University

Vaughan, Debbie <Debbie.Vaughan@royalsociety.org>
9:47 AM (13 hours ago)

to me


Hi Bernard

The latter: routinely vetted by an editor.

Kind regards,

Debbie

As I pointed out in the beginning anything that Winters submits to quality peer reviewed journals is in the nature of comments which are routinely posted and rate NOT peer reviewed. The letter from PNAS is coming and predictably will say the same.

---

=============================================================================

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl:
[
.

---

Clyde, you are taking advantage of some naiveté about peer reviewed journals and Pub Med. What thou claim is not accurate. Most of the "articles" you claim in journals like PNAS are your letters commenting on a legitimate article. These letters are NOT reviewed and just published-- i.e. like the vanity press Current research Journal of Social Sciences which has no review and published your article full of typos so it was not even proofread.
Similarly, the talk that is mentioned at the start of this thread, is NOT peer reviewed. Talks at regional meetings, particularly those that not part of organized sessions on a particular topic are NOT reviewed or given academic approval.

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-:
This is why people need to stop letting Clyde weasel his way around the forum, Imagine if Ra-Hotep or Cass were going around posting stuff about every african civilization was White people here would be up in arms but Clyde's nonsense, linking to Intelligent Design sites, lying, and made up academic titles...

pathetic, he and that fact that he was tolerated here is one of the main reasons why E.S is a joke today

---

Don't forget Clyde also thinks the British monarchy was black during the Middle Ages and even Early Modern Period.

James VI/I a black man according to Clyde.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Clyde Winters:


You claim to be a Scot. King James was Black.




.


.

Stop being ashamed of your Afro heritage.

.

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Original paper; (submitted May 17 2011; accepted August 17, 2011 i.e peer reviewed)

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:
Note also Quetzalcoatl's point about acceptance dates for peer-reviewed paper/article submissions.

quote:

---

Original paper; (submitted May 17 2011; accepted August 17, 2011 i.e peer reviewed)

---

Peer-review doesn't take 24 hours, but usually several months (or at least weeks). In contrast compare the above example of a genuine peer-reviewed article (that took 3 months) to Clyde's letters, that are accepted within a single day of being submitted. This is because they are not peer-reviewed, but just quickly proof-read by an editor.

---

LOL. Jealousy will get you nowhere.

If it is so easy to get an article published, why haven't you or the late Montellano published any recognized peer reviewed articles or letters to the editor like me?

I'll tell you why, you have never done original research.

You are sad because you have not had one peer reviewed article published in an Establishment journal while I have had many including these three:

1.
A comparison of Fulani and Nadar HLA
Clyde Winters
Indian J Hum Genet. 2012 Jan-Apr; 18(1): 137–138. doi: 10.4103/0971-6866.96686
PMCID: PMC3385173
ArticlePubReaderCitation
Select item 2930572

2.
The Fulani are not from the Middle East
Clyde Winters
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Aug 24; 107(34): E132. Published online 2010 Aug 3. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1008007107
PMCID: PMC2930572
ArticlePubReaderPDF–485KCitation
Select item 3168144

3.
Can parallel mutation and neutral genome selection explain Eastern African M1 consensus HVS-I motifs in Indian M haplogroups
Clyde Winters
Indian J Hum Genet. 2007 Sep-Dec; 13(3): 93–96. doi: 10.4103/0971-6866.38982
PMCID: PMC3168144
ArticlePubReaderCitation

that are listed in the National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health database, which records Establishment peer reviewed articles. See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=clyde+winters


Cite and compare the peer reviewed articles I wrote listed at the ncbi site and those of Bernard Montellano.

Oh, yea, that's right like you Cass, he dosen't have any.


.

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

RECAP
CASS/DEAD/ANGLO/THULE/CONNERmOON ETC ETC ADD ANOTHER 20 NAMES





THE ANGLO-IDIOT EXPOSED PART 20: He tries ot make out that only rainforest
areas define the tropics and says:
----------------------------------------------------------------- quote

The climatic tropical zone is limited to mostly western and central sub-sahara africa.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist osted 17 November, 2012 04:53 PM
____________________________________

When in fact any credible geography book denotes the tropics within the zone
marked out by the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn, a denotation itself based
on climate.


THE ANGLO-IDIOT EXPOSED- PART 19: He says there is no
OOA but the very "supporting reference" he proffers directy contradicts
his claim.
-------------------------
[b]Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on 07 May, 2012 08:45 AM:

OOA never happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans
-----------------------------
The idiot gives a Wikipedia "reference" to back up his claim
but the very same "supporting reference" he gives
states that multi-regionalists acknowledge that
hominid species came from Africa in the first place.
Their argument is for continuity and distinct development
in separate locations AFTER the initial
OOA exit putting hominins in different places. This
approach STILL recognizes and acknowledges hominin OOA.

Quote from Anglo-Idiot's "supporting" reference:
This species arose in Africa two million years ago as H. erectus and then spread out over the world, developing adaptations to regional conditions. Some populations became isolated for periods of time, developing in different directions, but through continuous interbreeding, replacement, genetic drift and selection, adaptations that were an advantage anywhere on earth would spread, keeping the development of the species in the same overall direction while maintaining adaptations to regional factors. By these mechanisms, surviving local varieties of the species evolved into modern humans, retaining some regional adaptations but with many features common to all regions.[10]

^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus
came from Africa. In short, the ANglo-idiot's own
"supporting" reference contradicts his claim. What
a pathetic fool.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE ANGLO- IDIOT EXPOSED - PART 18. The faker says Negroids are
defined as having Caucasoid admixture. But when he sees bla-ck models
with admixture he suddenly claims they aint black at all.
Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
posted 12 June, 2012 05:34 PM
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008168
Topic: Carleton Coon: Negoids are hybrids of Pygmies and Caucasians
[QB] Yes. A fact well known today.

''The Negroid type is not homogeneous.''
- Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994.

Hiernaux (1975) distinguishes the Pygmies to Negroids on the grounds the latter are
a product of the former (a recent mutation) but that there was probable geneflow with
Caucasoids as Coon (1967, 1982) maintains.

Also note that on page 123 of 'Living Races of Man', Coon also states that ''To this combination
may have been added remnant Capoid genes''. So Negroids are basically a recent mutation
from the Pygmies, but with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture.

^^Bitch please. Your own words contradict your punk ass.
Up above you say that "NEgroids" are a recent mutation
with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture. Look bich, look.
You say blacks are defined as having that admixture,
and quote your favorite racist, Carleton Coon to that effect.
But when your hypocrisy is exposed, you all of a
sudden deny that the black models posted are "really" black.
IN one thread "admixed" Negroes like the black models are
black, but when your idiocy is exposed, they suddenly ain't black.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


THE ANGLO-IDIOT EXPOSED PART 17: - He says there is
no sexual diomorphism in Africans or skeletal
differences between men and women, when the very
anthropologists he quotes say the opposite.

---------]Originally posted by Anglo- Buffoon:
Anglo_Pyramidologist member # 18853
posted 03 June, 2012 05:47 PM

Anglo-Buffoon 17a-
"Frost and other anthropologists have noted
that sexual dimorphism in Negroids is completely
lacking. Check Frost's online blog."

Anglo-Buffoon 17b-
"Black females are not lighter or different to black males in craniofacial terms."

^^Stupid muthafucka. The very Frost quote you paste says this:

Men and women differ in complexion
because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are
fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse,
1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely
because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and
immediately before are actually darker than boys).."
FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection?
Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85–103u


------- Can't you read imbecile? ALL females differ from males
and are lighter. ALL human humans have sexual dimorphism to
one degree or another. SO how can blacks "completely lack"
said dimorphism according to you, when your own
boy Peter Frost says all human have it?

------- ANd in studies of crania men and women do show differences,
and these differences can be detected with a battery
of modern measurements, as already shown in previous
threads where your idiocy was destroyed- example
(zakrewski2004-Intra-population and temporal variation in ancient Egyptian crania)

your own peter frost debunks you:
---------------------------------------

"If this common selective force were sexual selection, it could have lightened European skin
color by acting on an existing sexual dimorphism. Men and women differ in complexion
because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are
fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse,
1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely
because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and
immediately before are actually darker than boys). Investigators also try to exclude tanning by
measuring under the arm, where there is less subcutaneous fat and probably less dimorphism
in skin color, given that the lightness of a woman’s skin correlates with the thickness of her
subcutaneous fat (Mazess, 1967). In any event, sexual selection may have targeted this sex
difference, as suggested by a cross-cultural male preference for lighter complexioned women
and, conversely, by some evidence of a female preference for darker complexioned men
(Aoki, 2002; Feinman Feinman & Gill, 1978; Frost, 1988; Frost, 1994b; Frost, 2005; Van den Berghe
& Frost, 1986)."

FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection?
Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85–103

and:

"A different perspective on sexual dimorphism in skin pigmentation comes from the
recognition that human females require significantly higher amounts of calcium during
pregnancy and lactation and, thus, must have lighter skin than males in the same environment
in order to maximize their cutaneous vitamin D3 production (Jablonski and Chaplin 2000)...
Thus strong clinical evidence continues to support the hypothesis that lighter skin pigmentation
in females evolved primarily as a means to enhance the the potential for cutaneous vitamin
D production and maintain healthy long-term calcium status and skeletal health."
-- Human Evolutionary Biology. 2010. By Michael P. Muehlenbein
Damm you are one of the most pathetic idiots in existence.

Tell us -- were you born such a retarded shithead,
or were you originally a slug who managed to rise
to such prominence?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------


THE IDIOT'S FAKE QUOTES AND CITATIONS - PART 16

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
[QB]
E1b1b is not Negroid.

Read it an weep -

''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.”
- Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)


^^The only thing is that the "quote above is a complete fake
and was never utter by Cruciani, as can be verified by looking at
his article: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181964/?tool=pubmed

The foul faker doctored the quote not knowing the article has been much
discussed at ES. Testifying even more to his incompetence, Cruciani actually
does show E3b or E1b1b occuring in numerous places within "sub-Saharan" Africa.
The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81, and E-M34) and
the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously distributed on the African continent:
E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa, E-M81 is restricted t
o northern Africa, E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and E-M35* is shared by
eastern and southern Africans (Cruciani et al. 2002)"
--Cruciani

And there is no "page 74" in the Cruciani article.
THE FAKER AND BUFFOON IS AGAIN BUSTED IN A LIE!


THE FAKER'S BOGUS CLAIM PART- 15 - QUOTE:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides:
posted 14 January, 2012 11:41 AM
If you are a white heterosexual male in Britain you have virtually zero chance of getting a job.
All the jobs go to blacks or other immigrants.

^^LOL - Idiotic nonsense.
As of 2001, 92.1% of the UK population identified
themselves as White, leaving 7.9%[270] of the UK
population identifying themselves as mixed race
or of an ethnic minority. The population of the
United Kingdom in the 2001 census was 58,789,194,
UK Office for National Statistics- 2001.

That leaves approx 54 million white people.
About 33% of that population were adult men.
Let's take away 8% or so for minorities. So you are saying then
that 25% of the approx 54 million white people
in the UK are all unemployed? Damn you are dumb,
but you only expose the bankruptcy of your racism.



The Fake C-Ass -Hole exposed PART 14 - BOGUS
"NORDIC BLONDS FLITTING AROUND EGYPT

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides:
posted 29 December, 2011 06:05 AM

Hetepheres II was a blonde

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cassiterides:
posted 28 December, 2011 05:40 PM
Early dynastic & old kingdom royalty was Nordic (blonde and fair skinned)

---

^^^Ha hahahahah you stupid mass of camel vomit!
Up above you reference scholar Frank Yurco, but here is
what Yurco said about the 12th Dynasty, debunking
your claim of "Nordic" Egyptian royalty. You
dumbass.... You are again debunked, with your own
"supporting" references... lmao...

"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.)
originated from the Aswan region.4 As
expected, strong Nubian features and
dark coloring are seen in their sculpture
and relief work. This dynasty ranks as
among the greatest, whose fame far
outlived its actual tenure on the throne...
Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry
had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs,
they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and
adopted typical Egyptian policies."

- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient
Egyptians black or white?', Biblical
Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5,
1989)



THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 12
HE says Egyptologists like Frank Yurco says the Egyptians were "Caucasoid"
--- "Virtually every egyptologist believes the egyptians were Caucasoid" --

BUt Yurco says nothing of the sort.. Here for example, is what he says
about the 12the Dynasty rulers aho were Nubian descent: They seem really
"Caucasoid"... yeah, right.. - quote-


"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.)
originated from the Aswan region.4 As
expected, strong Nubian features and
dark coloring are seen in their sculpture
and relief work. This dynasty ranks as
among the greatest, whose fame far
outlived its actual tenure on the throne...
Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry
had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs,
they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and
adopted typical Egyptian policies."

- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient
Egyptians black or white?', Biblical
Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5,
1989)
-

Another dodge is to twist an old chat/forum discussion
statement by conservative Egyptologist Frank Yurco
out of context. Yurco rejected those who "a
priori" claimed the Egyptians were "black",
that is, a dogmatic claim without presenting
empirical evidence. He never rejected reasonable
argument with data showing the Egyptians were
an indigenous African population -QUOTE:
.. basically a homogeneous African population
had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to
modern times.. (Yurco 1996- An Egyptological
Review, in Black Athena Revisited)


The Faker exposed- part 11

quote:

---

Originally posted by cassiterides:
^You claim Vanessa Williams is a black woman when her heritage is white welsh and native american

---

-------------------------------------------------------------

But when Marc Washingrton smoked him out, and the
actual facts were checked, Anglo-Pyr/Cassifaker is lying
again:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1354054/Vanessa-Williamss-ancestry-revealed-Who-Do-You-Think-You-Are.html

According to the Faker, anyone with any white ancestry is not "really" black.
SO since a majority of African Americans have white ancestry ranging from 5 to 30%
then most Black Americans are not "truly" black you see...


THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 10

quote:

---

Originally posted by cassiterides:
^ Eurafrican is Caucasoid.

---

quote:

---

"I believe all the Blavk bambinos of Italy are negroes- not merely blacks;
this admitted, it would prove they very early date of their entrance into Italy." pg 286
pg 434
"the ancient Eturians had the countenances of Negroes, the same as the images of Buddah in INdia." pg 166
pg 474- "They aere in fact, all one nation, with one religion, that of Buddah, and they were originally NEgroes"
pg 59: "nor can it be reasonably doubted, that a race of Negroes formerly had power and pre-eminence in India"
pg 59- AS TO ETHIOPIA: And it is probable that an Ethiopian, a negro, correctly speaking, may have been meant, not merely a black person; and it seems probable that the following may have ben the real fact, viz, that a race of NEgroes or Blacks, but probably of the former, came to India to the west."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes:
"Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of
Europe."

---

But then, in your own thread, by your own hand,
you present a picture of an African albino that
has pale skin, light brown or hazel eyes and fair
hair. You said it was impossible, but then debunk
yourself with your own posted picture.. This is
like the 8-9th time you keep tripping over yourself
with lies, contradictions, and bogus claims.




------------------------------------------------------------------

RECAP
The Faker exposed- part 7
Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes:
"Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of
Europe."

^^Your claim is is completely bogus. Native
diversity or albinism causes some tropical Africans
to have light eyes and light hair. You fail againn..





bbvv

================================================


THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6
1-- ^^Faker! In your initial posts you claimed that it
was Cavalli-Sforza talking 'bout negroes "mutating"
from Pygmies. Now in your "corrected" post,
YOU STILL APPEAR A FAKE. You now remove Cavalli-
Sforza's name on the "mutant" claim, admitting that
you were lying all along!
Bwa ha aha
a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah..


2-- Second point- Peter Frost is debunked by Cavalli-Sforza
who says as to his so-called "mutation" theory:
QUOTE:

"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place
of origin for the Negroid type which includes all
West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many
earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are
not good candidates for a proto-African population."

--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194

Frost mentions Cavalli-Sforza in connection with
sexual selection, and movement of some groups
from Nigeria-Cameroon to other parts of Africa.
He never says Cavalli Sforza talks bout any
"negro mutation" and in fact any mutation claim
is directly contradicted by Sforza. Sucka, you
not only lied bout Cavalli-Sforza, you lied about
your own white writer- Peter Frost, and misrepresented him.


THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6
Anglo-Pyr/CassiREDES says:
''There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty''

^^LMAO! Totally fake! Credible up to date sources
note that blondism is prevalent in early life
BUT, contrary to your claim that:
"There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty",
the shade of color varies. In maturity the hair
usually turns a darker brown color, but sometimes
remains blond. See:
"Gene Expression: Blonde Australian Aboriginals". Gnxp.com.
http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2005/08/blonde-australian-aboriginals.php.



^^Here is one of your Australians over 20 years old
who does have blonde hair. YOu are caught out
spinning bogus claims AGAIN!. Bwa ha aha
a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah..
-

--------------------------------------------------

THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 5a
[b]So where are these tropical african peoples
with pale white or fair skin? blonde red hair?

^^You fail again. African populations can readily produce blond
or reddish blond hair as noted by hair study author Hrdy
1978 himself, and he references Nubia as an example.
Albinism is another source of red or blond hair
in Africa, and albinism is much more prevalent in
African populations than among Europeans. Even
African Americans produce more albinos than white
Americans. (The pigmentary system: physiology and
pathophysiology- By James J. Nordlund 2006: 603)
(E. Roach and V. Miller 2004. Neurocutaneous disorders.)
QUOTE: "In general, the prevalence of albinism in
Africa is much higher, in the range of 1 in 1
100 to 1 in 3900."

So Africa can and does routinely produce red and blond hair.
All non-Africans are MORE LIMITED subsets of
ORIGINAL African diversity. THe originals
have more built-in diversity than the limited
sub-set populations. This is straight science as
noted by the quote from TIshkoff 2000.

Nor are Africans the only tropical peoples who
can produce reddish hair or blond hair. Among
Australian Aborigines, some tropical groups produce 100%
of individuals with blond hair. Melanesians can
also produce blond or reddish hair, and do so routinely.

White people have no monopoly at all on that hair
color. They merely show more of it, but even among
whites, red hair for example is minor- occurring in less than
5% of the overall European populations, mostly in
northern Europe.

So the claim that there are no tropical Africans with such
variation is once again, proved fake. You made the claim.


-------------------------------------------------------------------

THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 4
ime and time again, you stand debunked and exposed
for falsifying claims and references. Let's recap:



Originally posted by CASSIFAKedes::

quote:

---

The source is Cavalli-Sforza's book on the Pygmies entitled 'African pygmies' (Academic Press, 1986).

This work shows that Negroids mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 9,000 BC in West Africa. So the 'true' Black African today is a recent mutation. Caucasoids and Mongoloids predate them. [Wink] Negroids only migrated into other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion or slightly earlier. Prior to them, Caucasoids inhabited North Africa and Bushmen (Capoids) to the south who were displaced by the Caucasoids from the Mediterranean around 12,000 BC.

---

quote:

---

"Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships.."

---

^^Complete Nonsense. In the Old Testament, the tribe of
Zebulun is mentioned as specifically associated
with ships and maritime elements. QUOTE:

Genesis 49:13

"Zebulun will dwell at the shore of the seas;
Yea, he will be at the shore of the ships, And
his side toucheth upon Sidon. "


Anglo-Pyr/Cassi-Fakdes: MULTIPLE TIMES AT BAT, MULTIPLE
EXPOSURES AS A FAKE...

--fake claim that no Australian Abo over 20 is blonde

-- fake claim that NO tropical Africans have any diversity in hair, skin or eye color

-- fake Cavalli-Sforza citation

-- 2nd fake Cavalli-Sforza reference

-- Faked Watson reference

-- Faked Biblical reference

-- FAke representation of Peter Frost's work

-- Fake claim that "studies" say "egyptians were dark are not like 'light-skinned Europeans". COnveniently, the alleged study is missing..

--Fake Higgins claims

--Fake claim that Guiseppe Sergi's EurAfrican race concept is negro-free

--Fake claim that Vanessa Williams has no black ancestry but is "white and Indian"

--Fake claim that Egyptologists like Yurco consider the Egyptians "Caucasoid"

--Fake claim of white Nordic Egyptian royalty

--Fake claim of "blond" Hetepheres

--Fake claim of white males in BRitain "unable to get jobs"

--fAKE Crucuiani "quote" with "citation"

--fake claim that blacks have no sexual diomorphism and no male-female cranial differences

--Fake CDC claim of AUgust 2006

--Hypocritical double standards- bashing African Americans as black when they can be demonized as criminals but when exposed for hypocritical double standards calling them non-black

--Bogus claim that OOA never happened backed by "supporting" references that say nothingof the sort and directly contradict him.

--Fake claim that the tropics is mostly rainforest area



--------------------
Note: I am not an "Egyptologist" as claimed by some still bitter, defeated, trolls creating fake profiles and posts elsewhere. Hapless losers, you still fail. My output of hard data debunking racist nonsense has actually INCREASED since you began..

Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Your own map shows narrow noses in West/Central
Africa by the way- within tropical Africa, and within "sub-Saharan" Africa.

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Narrow noses appear in "sub-Saharan" Africa routinely and are nothing special.

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:

quote:

---

Narrow noses appear in "sub-Saharan" Africa routinely and are nothing special.

---

Yet the frequency of narrow noses in west/central Africans is 1 to 5 %.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22030966
"The commonest type of nasal variability is Type A (70.5%), Platyrrhine nose, Type B (26.7%) especially in females (mesorrhine) and Type C (leptorrhine) (2.8%)."

Show me a single anthropometric study where a Sub-Saharan African west/central population has a high frequency of leptorrhiny. Otherwise you're just trolling here as usual and making nonsense up. And since narrow noses are so low frequency and rare in west/central Africa it makes no sense to argue leptorrhine nose are "routine" to Sub-Saharan Africa as a whole.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
Cass/Thule/Anglo/Dead/Mppn/other bogus names said:

Any quick glimpse at a nasal index map (based on NB/NH means from population samples) shows you're lying. Narrow noses are not common to western/central (and most parts of east) Sub-Saharan Africa (only excluding the Horn). Narrow (leptorrhine) is yellow and red on this map (< 70).

LOL, your little diversionary ploy fails. I didn't say West Africans have more such
noses than other parts of Africa, just that said noses are nothing special in
Africa. They appear as part of West African built in variability as well as in
East Africa, and elsewhere and show strong correlation with climatic factors.
Deserts produce narrow noses, as does cold high altitude montane, as does cool
coastal area. ALl of these zones make up part of tropical Africa. SO your bogus
"argument by nose" fails miserably. Your own map shows narrow noses in West/Central
Africa by the way- within tropical Africa, and within "sub-Saharan" Africa.
Not only do you (a) fail in your attempt to minimize or downplay African
diversity, but (b) your own "supporting" reference makes my case for me as well.


Show me populations from Sub-Saharan Africa (excluding the very few exceptions I already noted) that have mean NI's under 70. Find me a single population from west Africa that is leptorrhine.

I don't have to show you anything from West Africa for that is not the
issue. The issue is the great diversity of African features and your attempt
to deny or downplay the native variability of sub-Saharan Africans. When I called you out
on it, you proffered a "supporting" reference that undermines your attempts. LOL
your own map shows sub-Saharan west/central zones, and sub-Saharan East African
zones with the narrow noses you tried to downplay or dismiss.


So would you like to retract your statement narrow noses are common/"routine" to west Africa?

LMAO.. lying hypocrite. I did not say they are routine to West Africa- let me quote exactly what
I said- QUOTE: "Narrow noses appear in "sub-Saharan" Africa routinely and are nothing special."

I don't "retract" anything I never said in the first place hypocrite- which is why you are again
caught out n a lie.

---

Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudaniya:
I don't understand why certain features preponderant in Northeast Africa must also be predominant in West Africa to validate the fact that Africa has the greatest variability in every facet. What is the relevance of this in relation to ancient Egypt? Ancient Egypt was a Sudanese transplant (and therefore black), so how does West Africa come into play?

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudaniya:
I don't understand why certain features preponderant in Northeast Africa must also be predominant in West Africa to validate the fact that Africa has the greatest variability in every facet. What is the relevance of this in relation to ancient Egypt? Ancient Egypt was a Sudanese transplant (and therefore black), so how does West Africa come into play?

---

Are you arguing sub-Saharan west/central Africans ("Negrids", Baker, 1974; "Congoids", Coon, 1962 or "broad Africans", Hiernaux, 1975 etc.) form some sort of cluster/race/meta-population with East and even (ancient) Northeast Africans?

---

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:
DEBUNKED (with your own source)

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudaniya:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudaniya:
I don't understand why certain features preponderant in Northeast Africa must also be predominant in West Africa to validate the fact that Africa has the greatest variability in every facet. What is the relevance of this in relation to ancient Egypt? Ancient Egypt was a Sudanese transplant (and therefore black), so how does West Africa come into play?

---

Are you arguing sub-Saharan west/central Africans ("Negrids", Baker, 1974; "Congoids", Coon, 1962 or "broad Africans", Hiernaux, 1975 etc.) form some sort of cluster/race/meta-population with East and even (ancient) Northeast Africans?

---

What do you mean by cluster? If you mean to ask if I think that West Africans are as closely related to the ancient Egyptians as Northeast Africans, then my answer is obviously no.

The three main linguistic groups in Africa diverged 14, 000 years ago, so ancient Egyptians are more associated with their immediate group -- Northeast Africans.

This would be same of the Greeks and their relation to other Southern Europeans. Their relation to Northwest Europeans would be more distant and further back in time.

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:
Lol at this mental midget projecting.

what was that about supporting references ???

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:
DEBUNKED (with your own source)

---

---

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudaniya:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sudaniya:
I don't understand why certain features preponderant in Northeast Africa must also be predominant in West Africa to validate the fact that Africa has the greatest variability in every facet. What is the relevance of this in relation to ancient Egypt? Ancient Egypt was a Sudanese transplant (and therefore black), so how does West Africa come into play?

---

Are you arguing sub-Saharan west/central Africans ("Negrids", Baker, 1974; "Congoids", Coon, 1962 or "broad Africans", Hiernaux, 1975 etc.) form some sort of cluster/race/meta-population with East and even (ancient) Northeast Africans?

---

What do you mean by cluster? If you mean to ask if I think that West Africans are as closely related to the ancient Egyptians as Northeast Africans, then my answer is obviously no.

The three main linguistic groups in Africa diverged 14, 000 years ago, so ancient Egyptians are more associated with their immediate group -- Northeast Africans.

This would be same of the Greeks and their relation to other Southern Europeans. Their relation to Northwest Europeans would be more distant and further back in time.

---

Do you accept Egyptians plot equidistant between their northern (Levant) and southern (Sudan) neighbours? Or more broadly intermediate between West Eurasians and Sub-Saharan Africans? This doesn't seem to be in your posts, but you're arguing Egyptians are closer to all African populations than non-African populations. Can you clarify?

---

Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:
Google Scholar:

Bernard Ortiz de Montellano
http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=NKVMTeEAAAAJ&hl=en

Clyde Winters
http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=uU7HxpMAAAAJ&hl=en&cstart=0&pagesize=20

Three things to note when comparing these-

1. Montellano was an Emeritus Professor of Anthropology, Wayne State University, while Clyde lists himself fraudulently as Professor of Education, Anthropology and Linguistics, Uthman dan Fodio Institute - when the latter is a defunct private home school for children.

2. Montellano's books are printed by academic publishers e.g. Rutgers University Press, while Clyde self-publishes with Lulu.

3. Nearly all of Montellano's articles/papers are peer-reviewed and published in reputable journals, while most of Clyde's are either non-peer reviewed letters or are articles/papers published in pseudo-journals (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pseudojournal) or low-quality predatory open access journals(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_open_access_publishing).

---

quote:

---

Beall's list and the Science sting[edit]
In 2013, Science published the results of a sting operation in which a scientifically flawed spoof publication was submitted to open access publications.[23] Many accepted the manuscript, and a disproportionate number of the accepting journals were on Beall's list.[24] The publication, entitled Who's Afraid of Peer Review?, concluded that Beall is "good at spotting publishers with poor quality control". Of publishers on his list that completed the review process, it was accepted by 82%.[23] Beall remarked that the author of the sting, John Bohannon, "basically found what I've been saying for years".[25]

Counter-criticism[edit]
Phil Davies, in an analysis of the Who's Afraid of Peer Review? sting operation, observed that "Beall is falsely accusing nearly one in five as being a 'potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open access publisher' on appearances alone."[26] He continues to say that Beall should reconsider listing publishers on his 'predatory' list until he has evidence of wrongdoing. Being mislabeled as a 'potential, possible, or probable predatory publisher' by circumstantial evidence alone is like the sheriff of a Wild West town throwing a cowboy into jail just 'cuz he’s a little funny lookin.' Civility requires due process."

Joseph Esposito wrote in the Scholarly Kitchen that he has been following some of Beall's work with "growing unease"[27] and that his "broader critique (really an assault) of Gold OA and those who advocate it ... crosses the line."

Wayne Bivens-Tatum, librarian at Princeton University, published a rebuttal in tripleC, regarding Beall's criticisms of open access publishing. He stated that Beall's "rhetoric provides good examples of what Albert O. Hirschman called the 'rhetoric of reaction'", and concluded Beall's "argument fails because the sweeping generalizations with no supporting evidence render it unsound."[28] City University of New York librarians Monica Berger and Jill Cirasella said his views are biased against open-access journals from less economically developed countries. Berger and Cirasella argue that "imperfect English or a predominantly non-Western editorial board does not make a journal predatory". While recognizing that "the criteria he uses for his list are an excellent starting point for thinking about the hallmarks of predatory publishers and journals,"[29] they suggest that, "given the fuzziness between low-quality and predatory publishers, whitelisting, or listing publishers and journals that have been vetted and verified as satisfying certain standards, may be a better solution than blacklisting." One major journal whitelist is the Directory of Open Access Journals; Lars Bjørnshauge, its managing director, estimates that questionable publishing probably accounts for fewer than 1% of all author-pays, open-access papers, a proportion far lower than Beall's estimate of 5-10%. Instead of relying on blacklists, Bjørnshauge argues that open-access associations such as the DOAJ and the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association should adopt more responsibility for policing publishers: they should lay out a set of criteria that publishers and journals must comply with to win a place on a 'white list' indicating that they are trustworthy.[11] Rick Anderson, associate dean in the J. Willard Marriott Library, University of Utah, challenges the term 'predatory open access publishing' itself: “what do we mean when we say ‘predatory,’ and is that term even still useful?... This question has become relevant because of that common refrain heard among Beall’s critics: that he only examines one kind of predation—the kind that naturally crops up in the context of author-pays OA.” Anderson suggests that the term “predatory” be retired in the context of scholarly publishing. “It’s a nice, attention-grabbing word, but I’m not sure it’s helpfully descriptive… it generates more heat than light.” In its place, he proposes the term "deceptive publishing."[30]

Website removal[edit]
On 15 January 2017, the entire content of Scholarly Open Access website was removed, along with Beall's faculty page on the University of Colorado's website.[31] The removal was first noticed on social media, with speculation on whether the removal was due to migration of the list to the stewardship of Cabell's International. The company later denied any relationship, and its vice president of business development declared that Beall "was forced to shut down blog due to threats and politics".[32] The University of Colorado also declared that the decision to take down the list was a personal decision from Beall.


See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Beall

---

Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

Cass/:
Yugoslavs plot closer to Egyptians than SOuth African blacks.

LMAO- you pathetic fool. Do you think shifting
to "Mexican Indians" and "South African blacks"
will hide your failure or hypocrisy? As the data
clearly shows, the Egyptians cluster most closely
with West African and Central African derived
groups- namely Pygmies and Black Americans than
your touted Yugoslavs. You lose again, no matter what diversions you try.



Your pathetic diversionary ploy fails yet again. But that's
not knew idiot. You have been failing a long time.
Let's recap once again.

RECAP
CASS/DEAD/ANGLO/THULE/CONNERmOON ETC ETC ADD ANOTHER 20 NAMES





THE ANGLO-IDIOT EXPOSED PART 20: He tries ot make out that only rainforest
areas define the tropics and says:
----------------------------------------------------------------- quote

The climatic tropical zone is limited to mostly western and central sub-sahara africa.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist osted 17 November, 2012 04:53 PM
____________________________________

When in fact any credible geography book denotes the tropics within the zone
marked out by the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn, a denotation itself based
on climate.


THE ANGLO-IDIOT EXPOSED- PART 19: He says there is no
OOA but the very "supporting reference" he proffers directy contradicts
his claim.
-------------------------
[b]Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on 07 May, 2012 08:45 AM:

OOA never happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans
-----------------------------
The idiot gives a Wikipedia "reference" to back up his claim
but the very same "supporting reference" he gives
states that multi-regionalists acknowledge that
hominid species came from Africa in the first place.
Their argument is for continuity and distinct development
in separate locations AFTER the initial
OOA exit putting hominins in different places. This
approach STILL recognizes and acknowledges hominin OOA.

Quote from Anglo-Idiot's "supporting" reference:
This species arose in Africa two million years ago as H. erectus and then spread out over the world, developing adaptations to regional conditions. Some populations became isolated for periods of time, developing in different directions, but through continuous interbreeding, replacement, genetic drift and selection, adaptations that were an advantage anywhere on earth would spread, keeping the development of the species in the same overall direction while maintaining adaptations to regional factors. By these mechanisms, surviving local varieties of the species evolved into modern humans, retaining some regional adaptations but with many features common to all regions.[10]

^^Note they say that their founding population Homo Erectus
came from Africa. In short, the ANglo-idiot's own
"supporting" reference contradicts his claim. What
a pathetic fool.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE ANGLO- IDIOT EXPOSED - PART 18. The faker says Negroids are
defined as having Caucasoid admixture. But when he sees bla-ck models
with admixture he suddenly claims they aint black at all.
Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
posted 12 June, 2012 05:34 PM
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=008168
Topic: Carleton Coon: Negoids are hybrids of Pygmies and Caucasians
[QB] Yes. A fact well known today.

''The Negroid type is not homogeneous.''
- Cavalli-Sforza et al 1994.

Hiernaux (1975) distinguishes the Pygmies to Negroids on the grounds the latter are
a product of the former (a recent mutation) but that there was probable geneflow with
Caucasoids as Coon (1967, 1982) maintains.

Also note that on page 123 of 'Living Races of Man', Coon also states that ''To this combination
may have been added remnant Capoid genes''. So Negroids are basically a recent mutation
from the Pygmies, but with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture.

^^Bitch please. Your own words contradict your punk ass.
Up above you say that "NEgroids" are a recent mutation
with Caucasoid/Capoid admixture. Look bich, look.
You say blacks are defined as having that admixture,
and quote your favorite racist, Carleton Coon to that effect.
But when your hypocrisy is exposed, you all of a
sudden deny that the black models posted are "really" black.
IN one thread "admixed" Negroes like the black models are
black, but when your idiocy is exposed, they suddenly ain't black.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


THE ANGLO-IDIOT EXPOSED PART 17: - He says there is
no sexual diomorphism in Africans or skeletal
differences between men and women, when the very
anthropologists he quotes say the opposite.

---------]Originally posted by Anglo- Buffoon:
Anglo_Pyramidologist member # 18853
posted 03 June, 2012 05:47 PM

Anglo-Buffoon 17a-
"Frost and other anthropologists have noted
that sexual dimorphism in Negroids is completely
lacking. Check Frost's online blog."

Anglo-Buffoon 17b-
"Black females are not lighter or different to black males in craniofacial terms."

^^Stupid muthafucka. The very Frost quote you paste says this:

Men and women differ in complexion
because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are
fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse,
1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely
because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and
immediately before are actually darker than boys).."
FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection?
Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85–103u


------- Can't you read imbecile? ALL females differ from males
and are lighter. ALL human humans have sexual dimorphism to
one degree or another. SO how can blacks "completely lack"
said dimorphism according to you, when your own
boy Peter Frost says all human have it?

------- ANd in studies of crania men and women do show differences,
and these differences can be detected with a battery
of modern measurements, as already shown in previous
threads where your idiocy was destroyed- example
(zakrewski2004-Intra-population and temporal variation in ancient Egyptian crania)

your own peter frost debunks you:
---------------------------------------

"If this common selective force were sexual selection, it could have lightened European skin
color by acting on an existing sexual dimorphism. Men and women differ in complexion
because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are
fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939; Frost, 1988; Frost, 2005; Hulse,
1967; Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely
because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and
immediately before are actually darker than boys). Investigators also try to exclude tanning by
measuring under the arm, where there is less subcutaneous fat and probably less dimorphism
in skin color, given that the lightness of a woman’s skin correlates with the thickness of her
subcutaneous fat (Mazess, 1967). In any event, sexual selection may have targeted this sex
difference, as suggested by a cross-cultural male preference for lighter complexioned women
and, conversely, by some evidence of a female preference for darker complexioned men
(Aoki, 2002; Feinman Feinman & Gill, 1978; Frost, 1988; Frost, 1994b; Frost, 2005; Van den Berghe
& Frost, 1986)."

FROM: Frost Peter, 2006. European hair and eye color, evidence of sexual selection?
Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006) 85–103

and:

"A different perspective on sexual dimorphism in skin pigmentation comes from the
recognition that human females require significantly higher amounts of calcium during
pregnancy and lactation and, thus, must have lighter skin than males in the same environment
in order to maximize their cutaneous vitamin D3 production (Jablonski and Chaplin 2000)...
Thus strong clinical evidence continues to support the hypothesis that lighter skin pigmentation
in females evolved primarily as a means to enhance the the potential for cutaneous vitamin
D production and maintain healthy long-term calcium status and skeletal health."
-- Human Evolutionary Biology. 2010. By Michael P. Muehlenbein
Damm you are one of the most pathetic idiots in existence.

Tell us -- were you born such a retarded shithead,
or were you originally a slug who managed to rise
to such prominence?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------


THE IDIOT'S FAKE QUOTES AND CITATIONS - PART 16

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
[QB]
E1b1b is not Negroid.

Read it an weep -

''Sub-Saharan Africans belong to subclades of E other than E1b1b, while most non-Africans who belong to haplogroup E belong to its E1b1b subclade.”
- Fulvio Cruciani et al, Phylogeographic Analysis of Haplogroup E1b1b (E-M215) Y Chromosomes Reveals Multiple Migratory Events Within and Out Of Africa, Am. J. Hum. Genet, p. 74)


^^The only thing is that the "quote above is a complete fake
and was never utter by Cruciani, as can be verified by looking at
his article: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181964/?tool=pubmed

The foul faker doctored the quote not knowing the article has been much
discussed at ES. Testifying even more to his incompetence, Cruciani actually
does show E3b or E1b1b occuring in numerous places within "sub-Saharan" Africa.
The three main subclades of haplogroup E3b (E-M78, E-M81, and E-M34) and
the paragroup E-M35* are not homogeneously distributed on the African continent:
E-M78 has been observed in both northern and eastern Africa, E-M81 is restricted t
o northern Africa, E-M34 is common only in eastern Africa, and E-M35* is shared by
eastern and southern Africans (Cruciani et al. 2002)"
--Cruciani

And there is no "page 74" in the Cruciani article.
THE FAKER AND BUFFOON IS AGAIN BUSTED IN A LIE!


THE FAKER'S BOGUS CLAIM PART- 15 - QUOTE:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides:
posted 14 January, 2012 11:41 AM
If you are a white heterosexual male in Britain you have virtually zero chance of getting a job.
All the jobs go to blacks or other immigrants.

^^LOL - Idiotic nonsense.
As of 2001, 92.1% of the UK population identified
themselves as White, leaving 7.9%[270] of the UK
population identifying themselves as mixed race
or of an ethnic minority. The population of the
United Kingdom in the 2001 census was 58,789,194,
UK Office for National Statistics- 2001.

That leaves approx 54 million white people.
About 33% of that population were adult men.
Let's take away 8% or so for minorities. So you are saying then
that 25% of the approx 54 million white people
in the UK are all unemployed? Damn you are dumb,
but you only expose the bankruptcy of your racism.



The Fake C-Ass -Hole exposed PART 14 - BOGUS
"NORDIC BLONDS FLITTING AROUND EGYPT

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cassiterides:
posted 29 December, 2011 06:05 AM

Hetepheres II was a blonde

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cassiterides:
posted 28 December, 2011 05:40 PM
Early dynastic & old kingdom royalty was Nordic (blonde and fair skinned)

---

^^^Ha hahahahah you stupid mass of camel vomit!
Up above you reference scholar Frank Yurco, but here is
what Yurco said about the 12th Dynasty, debunking
your claim of "Nordic" Egyptian royalty. You
dumbass.... You are again debunked, with your own
"supporting" references... lmao...

"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.)
originated from the Aswan region.4 As
expected, strong Nubian features and
dark coloring are seen in their sculpture
and relief work. This dynasty ranks as
among the greatest, whose fame far
outlived its actual tenure on the throne...
Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry
had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs,
they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and
adopted typical Egyptian policies."

- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient
Egyptians black or white?', Biblical
Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5,
1989)



THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 12
HE says Egyptologists like Frank Yurco says the Egyptians were "Caucasoid"
--- "Virtually every egyptologist believes the egyptians were Caucasoid" --

BUt Yurco says nothing of the sort.. Here for example, is what he says
about the 12the Dynasty rulers aho were Nubian descent: They seem really
"Caucasoid"... yeah, right.. - quote-


"the XIIth Dynasty (1991-1786 B.C.E.)
originated from the Aswan region.4 As
expected, strong Nubian features and
dark coloring are seen in their sculpture
and relief work. This dynasty ranks as
among the greatest, whose fame far
outlived its actual tenure on the throne...
Because the Egyptian rulers of Nubian ancestry
had become Egyptians culturally; as pharaohs,
they exhibited typical Egyptian attitudes and
adopted typical Egyptian policies."

- (F. J. Yurco, 'Were the ancient
Egyptians black or white?', Biblical
Archaeology Review (Vol 15, no. 5,
1989)
-

Another dodge is to twist an old chat/forum discussion
statement by conservative Egyptologist Frank Yurco
out of context. Yurco rejected those who "a
priori" claimed the Egyptians were "black",
that is, a dogmatic claim without presenting
empirical evidence. He never rejected reasonable
argument with data showing the Egyptians were
an indigenous African population -QUOTE:
.. basically a homogeneous African population
had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to
modern times.. (Yurco 1996- An Egyptological
Review, in Black Athena Revisited)


The Faker exposed- part 11

quote:

---

Originally posted by cassiterides:
^You claim Vanessa Williams is a black woman when her heritage is white welsh and native american

---

-------------------------------------------------------------

But when Marc Washingrton smoked him out, and the
actual facts were checked, Anglo-Pyr/Cassifaker is lying
again:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1354054/Vanessa-Williamss-ancestry-revealed-Who-Do-You-Think-You-Are.html

According to the Faker, anyone with any white ancestry is not "really" black.
SO since a majority of African Americans have white ancestry ranging from 5 to 30%
then most Black Americans are not "truly" black you see...


THE FAKER EXPOSED- PART 10

quote:

---

Originally posted by cassiterides:
^ Eurafrican is Caucasoid.

---

quote:

---

"I believe all the Blavk bambinos of Italy are negroes- not merely blacks;
this admitted, it would prove they very early date of their entrance into Italy." pg 286
pg 434
"the ancient Eturians had the countenances of Negroes, the same as the images of Buddah in INdia." pg 166
pg 474- "They aere in fact, all one nation, with one religion, that of Buddah, and they were originally NEgroes"
pg 59: "nor can it be reasonably doubted, that a race of Negroes formerly had power and pre-eminence in India"
pg 59- AS TO ETHIOPIA: And it is probable that an Ethiopian, a negro, correctly speaking, may have been meant, not merely a black person; and it seems probable that the following may have ben the real fact, viz, that a race of NEgroes or Blacks, but probably of the former, came to India to the west."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes:
"Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of
Europe."

---

But then, in your own thread, by your own hand,
you present a picture of an African albino that
has pale skin, light brown or hazel eyes and fair
hair. You said it was impossible, but then debunk
yourself with your own posted picture.. This is
like the 8-9th time you keep tripping over yourself
with lies, contradictions, and bogus claims.




------------------------------------------------------------------

RECAP
The Faker exposed- part 7
Originally posted by Anglo-Pyr/Cassiredes:
"Fair hair and light eyes colours are only found among Caucasoids, esp of
Europe."

^^Your claim is is completely bogus. Native
diversity or albinism causes some tropical Africans
to have light eyes and light hair. You fail againn..





bbvv

================================================


THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6
1-- ^^Faker! In your initial posts you claimed that it
was Cavalli-Sforza talking 'bout negroes "mutating"
from Pygmies. Now in your "corrected" post,
YOU STILL APPEAR A FAKE. You now remove Cavalli-
Sforza's name on the "mutant" claim, admitting that
you were lying all along!
Bwa ha aha
a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah..


2-- Second point- Peter Frost is debunked by Cavalli-Sforza
who says as to his so-called "mutation" theory:
QUOTE:

"It remains difficult to pinpoint an ancient place
of origin for the Negroid type which includes all
West, Central and South Africans. Contrary to many
earlier opinions, modern Pygmies and Khosians are
not good candidates for a proto-African population."

--Cavalli Sforza et al, 1994. The history and geography of human genes. 194

Frost mentions Cavalli-Sforza in connection with
sexual selection, and movement of some groups
from Nigeria-Cameroon to other parts of Africa.
He never says Cavalli Sforza talks bout any
"negro mutation" and in fact any mutation claim
is directly contradicted by Sforza. Sucka, you
not only lied bout Cavalli-Sforza, you lied about
your own white writer- Peter Frost, and misrepresented him.


THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 6
Anglo-Pyr/CassiREDES says:
''There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty''

^^LMAO! Totally fake! Credible up to date sources
note that blondism is prevalent in early life
BUT, contrary to your claim that:
"There are then no Australoids with blonde hair past the age of about twenty",
the shade of color varies. In maturity the hair
usually turns a darker brown color, but sometimes
remains blond. See:
"Gene Expression: Blonde Australian Aboriginals". Gnxp.com.
http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2005/08/blonde-australian-aboriginals.php.



^^Here is one of your Australians over 20 years old
who does have blonde hair. YOu are caught out
spinning bogus claims AGAIN!. Bwa ha aha
a hah a ha ahahaha aha ahah..
-

--------------------------------------------------

THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 5a
[b]So where are these tropical african peoples
with pale white or fair skin? blonde red hair?

^^You fail again. African populations can readily produce blond
or reddish blond hair as noted by hair study author Hrdy
1978 himself, and he references Nubia as an example.
Albinism is another source of red or blond hair
in Africa, and albinism is much more prevalent in
African populations than among Europeans. Even
African Americans produce more albinos than white
Americans. (The pigmentary system: physiology and
pathophysiology- By James J. Nordlund 2006: 603)
(E. Roach and V. Miller 2004. Neurocutaneous disorders.)
QUOTE: "In general, the prevalence of albinism in
Africa is much higher, in the range of 1 in 1
100 to 1 in 3900."

So Africa can and does routinely produce red and blond hair.
All non-Africans are MORE LIMITED subsets of
ORIGINAL African diversity. THe originals
have more built-in diversity than the limited
sub-set populations. This is straight science as
noted by the quote from TIshkoff 2000.

Nor are Africans the only tropical peoples who
can produce reddish hair or blond hair. Among
Australian Aborigines, some tropical groups produce 100%
of individuals with blond hair. Melanesians can
also produce blond or reddish hair, and do so routinely.

White people have no monopoly at all on that hair
color. They merely show more of it, but even among
whites, red hair for example is minor- occurring in less than
5% of the overall European populations, mostly in
northern Europe.

So the claim that there are no tropical Africans with such
variation is once again, proved fake. You made the claim.


-------------------------------------------------------------------

THE FAKER EXPOSED: PART 4
ime and time again, you stand debunked and exposed
for falsifying claims and references. Let's recap:



Originally posted by CASSIFAKedes::

quote:

---

The source is Cavalli-Sforza's book on the Pygmies entitled 'African pygmies' (Academic Press, 1986).

This work shows that Negroids mutated from an ancestral pygmy population around 9,000 BC in West Africa. So the 'true' Black African today is a recent mutation. Caucasoids and Mongoloids predate them. [Wink] Negroids only migrated into other parts of Africa during the Bantu expansion or slightly earlier. Prior to them, Caucasoids inhabited North Africa and Bushmen (Capoids) to the south who were displaced by the Caucasoids from the Mediterranean around 12,000 BC.

---

quote:

---

"Note that in the Old Testament the Danites are the only Hebrew people described as being maritime and associated with ships.."

---

Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

As the data
clearly shows, the Egyptians cluster most closely
with West African and Central African derived
groups- namely Pygmies and Black Americans than
your touted Yugoslavs. You lose again, no matter what diversions you try.

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
[QB] LOL is this all the "rebuttal" you got wanker buoy?

---

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:


This source (the same you used) has Egyptians, who I presume are an ancient rather than living sample at 84.8 mean crural index (this is almost identical to the 84.9 mean for the pooled-sex ancient Egyptian sample in [URL=Raxter, 2011]http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4500&context=etd[/URL]); Yugoslavs score 83.7.

I told you geographical populations between Egypt and Yugoslavia fill in those spaces on the plot between the Yugoslavians (83.7) and Egyptians (84.8), so for example Raxter's (2011)Mediterranean/South European sample is 83.9.

American Blacks score 85.3 and Pygmies 85.1, although Raxter (2011) has the latter on 85.6, but this might be down to the extremely small sample size of only 6 males and 3 females.

All I have to do is add more populations between South Europe and Egypt to close some of the distance between 83.9 and 84.8; it can easily be done since Raxter did not include south Levant samples and if those were included they would be more or less equidistant to Egyptians as the American Blacks and Pygmies. Do you get this yet?

Note though American Blacks don't closely resemble West Africans in crural index because of their sizable European admixture, for example compare American Blacks to West African means in Raxter (2011), the difference is fairly big, 85.3 vs. 86.2.

---

Last I checked, Raxter chose American blacks because of all Americans they approached Egyptian proportions. The excuse of "European admixture" is pathetic considering that both Pygmies and Melanesians cluster closely with the Egyptian sample as well. In your imaginary Y axis, New Mexican Indians align more closely to Egyptians than even the Yugoslavs but funny how you ignore them altogether as having any genetic ties to the Egyptians based on the same premise. LOL This issue was discussed before as I linked above with you (Thule) debunked already!

Get off this forum and take update your meds, psycho.

Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:

You never read my posts properly and constantly troll/misrepresent my position. For starters I said populations from southern Europe are not white, but a faint light brown in pigmentation. I don't consider southern Europeans "white", nor use that term to label them. Does that sound pan-European/white nationalist to you? I am perfectly willing to divide populations in Europe, since unlike you I'm not in this for some sort of pan-continental politics. You revealed your pan-African biases when you started accusing me or others of trying to 'divide' Africa. Normal people wouldn't take offence to this because they don't cling to a pan-African identity; I don't get mad if someone tried to divide Europe into smaller regions, but it upsets you if someone divides Africa for research/analysis and then you start frothing at the mouth and throwing around baseless accusations of "racism".

---

quote:

---

My simple point about Europe being used sometimes in analysis as a geographical label/arbitrary cluster is it is far smaller than Africa. Hence if you look at genetic distances in Europe, they are not very big and for the same reason, there is not a great craniometric distance between Norse/Berg/Zalavar from Howell's database. A "European" group has more utility than an "African" group because there is more similarity in the population sets. The fact there isn't a great difference between European populations in craniometric means, is why 19th century anthropologists thought that Northern Europeans are "depigmentated Mediterraneans", their skull-form being very similar. Again, compare how small Europe is to Africa-

---

quote:

---

This is why Brace et al, often use the following geographical labels:

* Europe
* North Africa
* Sub-Saharan Africa

I never said this was the correct way, but it makes more sense since these divisions are roughly the same size and include a similar number of population samples. In contrast combining North and Sub-Sahara Africa and you end up with a landmass far larger than Europe and too many population samples under one geographical label. Its rather pathetic you think this is some sort of double standard; occasionally Brace et al have actually made smaller regional labels, e.g. South vs. North Europe, and the latter makes more sense if pigmentation is taken into account. Again, as I pointed out - unlike you I don't take offence when this happens.

---

But the division of Africa into North and Sub-Sahara is subjective because North Africa can strictly mean only those nations that border the Mediterranean while the more inclusive definition is all African nations bordered by the Sahara desert which include not only Sudan, but Chad, Mali, and Niger which happen to include populations that approximate the 'true negro' type. Not to mention the fact that during pluvial periods the Sahara did not even exist with North Africa being as green and fertile as sub-Sahara thus NO barrier to population movements and gene-flows. It is for this very reason that Brace's clines model also fails.

In your warped mind, prehistoric populations just moved one way with Africans heading northeast leaving the continent in the initial Out-of-Africa expansion over 65kya during the Pleistocene, thus northeast Africans like the Egyptians would be genetically closer to Eurasians than to sub-Saharans right? The problem is that this premise is based on the assumption that all populations at least in Africa became static after the Out-of-Africa even and no longer moved. This of course is absurd considering that all populations during the Paleolithic were nomadic hunter-gatherers.



From Harich et al (2010):
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...

Mind you the above maternal clade embolden is an African one that diverged well after the Out-of-African, but then we have this...

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.

Again, this shows another African subclade with an even more recent expansion correlating with the Holocene that correspond closer to the roots of the predynastic.

And we also have the Benin form of HBS (sickle cell), the significant occurrence mtDNA type Hpa I in Egyptians and Nubians, and other autosomal studies.

Face the facts, your artificial division between North and sub-Sahara has been debunked.

The ancient Nile Valley dwellers may not have been as closely related to West and Central Africans, as some Afrocentrics wish but they definitely were more related than they were to modern Europeans or Near Easterners.

Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
Problem is afrocentrists (esp. doug) keep setting up the straw man that "eurocentrics" (who don't even exist - no one has ever claimed Europeans founded Early Dynastic Egypt) state the Egyptians were "white".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by JoshuaConnerMoon:
Yet no one has ever claimed Egyptians had skin colour like following:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by cassiterides:
posted 28 December, 2011 05:40 PM
Early dynastic & old kingdom royalty was Nordic (blonde and fair skinned)

---

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

...blonde Nordic racial element was restricted to the egyptian royalty...

---

quote:

---

...proto-dynastic and early dynastic ruling elite were blonde.

---

quote:

---

Raymond A. Dart (1959) estimated the Nordic racial component at 10 percent and considered the Nordic to have represented the ruling "pharonic type".

---

quote:

---

...evidence has revealed a small Nordic and Armenoid presence.

---

And in my other thread I said Dart's 10% was an overestimation, following Wiercinski I estimated Nordics as few as 3-4% of the Egyptian population; that thread can still be found.

So again, please stop distorting/lying about my posts. You're worse than Carlos Coke with this sort of trolling. The fact I said there were white/"Nordic"-pigmentation Egyptians in very small numbers does not mean I ever said ancient Egyptians (on average) were white. By your logic because there was a miniscule number of blacks in Roman Britain (< 1%), does that make the Roman British population black?

Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cass/:
@ Oshun

What I actually wrote in December 2011 was this-

quote:

---

...blonde Nordic racial element was restricted to the egyptian royalty...

---

quote:

---

...proto-dynastic and early dynastic ruling elite were blonde.

---

*I clarified not all of them were of course, hence I've published art of dark haired royals going back to 2010 when I first joined here.

quote:

---

Raymond A. Dart (1959) estimated the Nordic racial component at 10 percent and considered the Nordic to have represented the ruling "pharonic type".

---

quote:

---

...evidence has revealed a small Nordic and Armenoid presence.

---

And in my other thread I said Dart's 10% was an overestimation, following Wiercinski I estimated Nordics as few as 3-4% of the Egyptian population; that thread can still be found.

So again, please stop distorting/lying about my posts. You're worse than Carlos Coke with this sort of trolling. The fact I said there were white/"Nordic"-pigmentation Egyptians in very small numbers does not mean I ever said ancient Egyptians (on average) were white. By your logic because there was a miniscule number of blacks in Roman Britain (< 1%), does that make the Roman British population black?

---

Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged |