quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Read Guglielmo & Salerno's book, Are Italians White?. At one point, American immigration policy was based on favouring northern Europeans (English, Scandinavians, Dutch etc) i.e. southern Europeans like Italians were considered too swarthy skinned and inferior. Old American immigration policy was Anglocentric and/or Nordicist.
Northwest Europeans developed racially re-assuring theories on the ancient Greeks and their origins long before those policies; the most powerful Northwest Europeans (the Anglo-American Establishment) has never conceded that the ancient Greeks and Romans were racially distinct from themselves or that they had no connection or claim (s) to these civilizations.
They claimed that the ancient Greeks and Romans of the glorius Classical age were Nordic in appearance, like the Swedes and the Germans, and that a late period infusion of inferior Semitic and Negro blood debased this supposedly high-octane racial stock - explaining their slightly darker skin. Ancient Greece and Rome has never been relinquished by Northern Europeans.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Italian football team:
Do you see these as "white"? I don't.
Here's what actual white people look like-
Swedish football team.
Yes, both teams are white and you would find it exceedingly difficult to find modern Greeks and Italians that don't consider themselves white. I'm of the opinion that you don't actually believe your laughably weak characterisation of Southern Europeans as anything but white. You're transparent, you know. You're just using this ridiculous line of argument in order to create the illusion of sensible and fair equivalence. It's an altogether insincere, empty rhetorical device meant only to disarm your opponents.
Are we really supposed to just throw out bio-anthropology, genetics, linguistics, archaeology and culture and concede that these disciplines are to be supplanted by subjective colour gradients formulated by a nobody lurking forums on the Internet?
Bottom line: Upper Egyptians and specific "Nubians" (Lower "Nubians" in particular) share a common origin in the predynastic period and were virtually identical anatomocally and culturally, and the fact that you only conveniently concede that "Nubians" were 'black' instead of being consistent and conceding that both siblings were 'black' in recognition of the fact that they both adapted to the same environment and produced remarkably similar cultures exposes your discomfort with these salient facts.
The funny thing is that your white brothers and sisters would be on my side in relation to the racial stock of the Greeks and Italians.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
Yes, both teams are white and you would find it exceedingly difficult to find modern Greeks and Italians that don't consider themselves white. I'm of the opinion that you don't actually believe your laughably weak characterisation of Southern Europeans as anything but white. You're transparent, you know. You're just using this ridiculous line of argument in order to create the illusion of sensible and fair equivalence. It's an altogether insincere, empty rhetorical device meant only to disarm your opponents
Don't forget the racialists' heirachy of the white race
In the 19th-century racial theories of Count Joseph Arthur De Gobineau he argued that cultures degenerated when distinct races mixed. It was believed at this time that the peoples of Southern Europe were racially mixed with non-European Moors from across the Mediterranean Sea, while the peoples of Northern Europe and Western Europe remained pure.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
The simple reason why a back migration was suggested comes from a 2002 paper, here the proposed a phylogenetic inferences based on the lack of certain chromosomes in African populations. This was before DE etc. was found in Africa. Studies today as posted by you still use this old phylogenetic inferences path and totally skip the newer / later evidence.
quote: An ancient human back migration from Asia to Africa had already been proposed by Altheide and Hammer (1997) and Hammer et al. (1998, 2001), on the basis of nested cladistic analysis of Y-chromosome data. They suggested that the presence of YAP+ chromosomes in Africa was due to such an event, but this has recently been questioned by Underhill et al. (2001b) and Underhill and Roseman (2001), primarily on the basis of the Asian-specific YAP+ subclade that neutralizes the previous phylogenetic inferences. Thus, the only evidence of a migration from Asia to sub-Saharan Africa that is fully supported by Y-chromosome data relies, at least for the moment, on the finding of haplogroup IX chromosomes in Cameroon.
Group IX Chromosomes in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Asian Origin?
How can the presence of Group IX chromosomes at considerable frequency in Cameroon be explained? A priori, we can envision three possibilities. First, group IX chromosomes in Cameroon are due to rather recent male gene flow from Europe or the Near East. Second, the entire M9 superclade (haplogroups VII–X) has an African origin. Third, group IX chromosomes in Cameroon represent a footprint of a male back migration from Asia to Africa. The first scenario seems to be very unlikely, because only derived haplotypes, carrying the M269 or M17/SRY10831 mutations, have been detected in western Eurasia. The second hypothesis, an African origin of the M9 superclade that includes haplotype 117, would imply a subsequent impressive extinction of derivative lineages in sub-Saharan Africa, since no other haplotypes carrying the M9 mutation (haplogroups VII–X) have been observed in this region (the only exception being represented by a few haplotype 109 chromosomes found in the Fulbe from Cameroon). The last scenario, that of a back migration from Asia to Africa, currently appears to be by far the most plausible. This is because most of the M9 haplotypes (the majority of group VII and VIII lineages, as well as some group IX and X lineages reported by Underhill et al. [2000]) have been observed only in Asia. Moreover, this possibility appears to be further supported by the recent finding of the UTY2+/M173− intermediate haplotype (Karafet et al. 2001) in central and northeastern Asia (the UTY2 marker in the study by Karafet et al. [2001] corresponds to M207 in the present study).
—Fulvio Crucian et al. A Back Migration from Asia to Sub-Saharan Africa Is Supported by High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Haplotypes
However in the 2011 paper they found chromosomes to be matching, which lacked presence in prior studies, thus the phylogenetic needed a reevaluation. And the painful conclusions can be read, in more recent papers published by Fulvio Crucian et al.
quote: In conclusion, we present here a Y chromosome phylogenetic tree deeply revised in its root and earliest branches. Our data do not uphold previous models of Y chromosomal emergence 15, 16 and demand a reevaluation of some fundamental ideas concerning the early history of the human genetic diversity we find today. 38–40 Our phylogeny shows a root in central-northwest Africa. Although this point requires further attention, we think that it offers a new prospect from which to view the initial development of our species in Africa.
—Fulvio Cruciani et al. A Revised Root for the Human Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree: The Origin of Patrilineal Diversity in Africa
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capra: Sorry for derailing, Oshun. Do all threads around here eventually decay into an endless series of accusations of bias and pictures of Sahelian people?
Actually it wasn't derailed, it is consistent with the pattern asked by Oshun.
quote:Africa is the birthplace of modern humans, and is the source of the geographic expansion of ancestral populations into other regions of the world. Indigenous Africans are characterized by high levels of genetic diversity within and between populations. The pattern of genetic variation in these populations has been shaped by demographic events occurring over the last 200,000 years. The dramatic variation in climate, diet, and exposure to infectious disease across the continent has also resulted in novel genetic and phenotypic adaptations in extant Africans. This review summarizes some recent advances in our understanding of the demographic history and selective pressures that have influenced levels and patterns of diversity in African populations.
—Michael C. Campbell1 and Sarah A. Tishkoff
The Evolution of Human Genetic and Phenotypic Variation in Africa
quote:According to the current data East Africa is home to nearly 2/3 of the world genetic diversity independent of sampling effect. Similar figure have been suggested for sub-Saharan Africa populations [1]. The antiquity of the east African gene pool could be viewed not only from the perspective of the amount of genetic diversity endowed within it but also by signals of uni-modal distribution in their mitochondrial DNA (Hassan et al., unpublished) usually taken as an indication of populations that have passed through ‘‘recent’’ demographic expansion [33], although in this case, may in fact be considered a sign of extended shared history of in situ evolution where alleles are exchanged between neighboring demes [34].
--Jibril Hirbo, Sara Tishkoff et al.
The Episode of Genetic Drift Defining the Migration of Humans out of Africa Is Derived from a Large East African Population Size
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I'm pretty sure capra is anything but a euronut but say what you will on this one Ish
But as far as I am aware, Capra doesn't argue for your lunatic Afrocentric "black Egypt" theory. You slander anyone like him who doesn't believe in "black Egypt" as a "Eurocentrist" and/or "Nazi"…
That is exactly the point.
However, in your delusional eurocentric mind black has a stereotype meaning of the "real negro".
But it is clear as night and days that the majority of ancient Egypt stems from Southern regions, by people who are considered BLACK!!! And how also consider themselves black till this day.
quote: Morphological variation of the skeletal remains of ancient Nubia has been traditionally explained as a product of multiple migrations into the Nile Valley. In contrast, various researchers have noted a continuity in craniofacial variation from Mesolithic through Neolithic times. This apparent continuity could be explained by in situ cultural evolution producing shifts in selective pressures which may act on teeth, the facial complex, and the cranial vault.
A series of 13 Mesolithic skulls from Wadi Halfa, Sudan, are compared to Nubian Neolithic remains by means of extended canonical analysis. Results support recent research which suggests consistent trends of facial reduction and cranial vault expansion from Mesolithic through Neolithic times.
--Meredith F. Small*
The nubian mesolithic: A consideration of the Wadi Halfa remains
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: There are no phenotypic traits exclusive to one population. So it doesn't really matter where such traits originated, but where they are predominant or show disparate frequencies. Narrow noses are very low frequency in West-Central African populations ("Negroids"), but extremely high frequency in European populations ("Caucasoids").
For example only 2.8% of Nigerians have narrow noses:
quote: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%).
This was answered / debunked already, but typical as we know you will iterate on the same stands and point of view.
Your argument deals with sex based diversion (ethnicity). What you consider a low frequency in Nigeria is actually consistent with millions of since Nigeria has a population of 240 million.
quote:Originally posted by Cass/:
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya:
quote:Originally posted by Cass/:
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I'm pretty sure capra is anything but a euronut but say what you will on this one Ish
But as far as I am aware, Capra doesn't argue for your lunatic Afrocentric "black Egypt" theory. You slander anyone like him who doesn't believe in "black Egypt" as a "Eurocentrist" and/or "Nazi"...
So even though Upper Egyptians and specific "Nubians" share a common origin firmly in Africa all throughout the predynastic period, only one group is 'black'? Are Lower "Nubians" 'black'?
To say that a Northeast African population with no origins in "Eurasia", sharing a common origin with other closely related 'black' populations in Upper Egypt and Northern Sudan, with predominantly mahogany-brown skin is apparently crazy, but to assert that the ancient Egyptians were a Levantine transplant (no evidence) is the paragon of sanity?
I provided pictures of 'black' people in Southern Egypt and they undoubtedly would have been considered "lunatics" in Jim-Crow America had they professed that they were not 'black'. No one can dispute that Upper Egyptians and "Nubians" stem from a common origin and that they were virtually identical in the predynastic period, so it's inconceivable that only one can be 'black'.
PS: Unlike you, Capra does not argue that the ancient Egyptians were a Levantine transplant - a "Hamitic" race from "Eurasia" that brought civilization to the Nile valley before the Neolithic.
Its 'inconceivable' to you because you're a proponent of a loon pan-African political theory- where all Africans have to be "black". Let's compare Europe. There's also a skin colour cline/gradient from north-to-south. Southern Europeans are not "white", but a faint light brown so-called olive complexion. I've never labelled or considered Southern Europeans "white". Unlike the Afrocentric nutjobs here, I don't follow some bizarre continental/pan political ideology.
Can you name 5 ethnic groups who have resided consistently in the Sahara for the last 5 thousand years.
Oh yeah, in my family we have different color contrasts from dark to very light vice versa. What should we do, follow your eurocentric ideology or just be who we are?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: @Ish almost 1000 mutations in sequence separates Basal R and DE, unless a haplogroup indicating K is found in DE carriers or absent in African R carriers, the former won't be representative of basal R, even if the polymorphisms are Identical.
I understand this method very well based on the 2002 phylogenetic inferences, but that is not how Fulvio Cruciani estimated the method in his later publications.
quote: In conclusion, we present here a Y chromosome phylogenetic tree deeply revised in its root and earliest branches. Our data do not uphold previous models of Y chromosomal emergence 15, 16 and demand a reevaluation of some fundamental ideas concerning the early history of the human genetic diversity we find today. 38–40 Our phylogeny shows a root in central-northwest Africa. Although this point requires further attention, we think that it offers a new prospect from which to view the initial development of our species in Africa.
—Fulvio Cruciani et al. A Revised Root for the Human Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree: The Origin of Patrilineal Diversity in Africa (2011)
quote:Recently, in a re-sequencing study of the Y chromosome, the root of the tree moved to a new position and several changes at the basal nodes of the phylogeny were introduced [16]. Interestingly, the estimated coalescence age and deep branching pattern of the revised MSY tree appear to be more similar to those of the mtDNA phylogeny [17], [18] than previously reported [1].
—Fulvio Cruciani et al Molecular Dissection of the Basal Clades in the Human Y Chromosome Phylogenetic Tree 2012
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: @Ish almost 1000 mutations in sequence separates Basal R and DE, unless a haplogroup indicating K is found in DE carriers or absent in African R carriers, the former won't be representative of basal R, even if the polymorphisms are Identical.
I understand this method very well based on the 2002 phylogenetic inferences, but that is not how Fulvio Cruciani estimated the method in his later publications.
quote: In conclusion, we present here a Y chromosome phylogenetic tree deeply revised in its root and earliest branches. Our data do not uphold previous models of Y chromosomal emergence 15, 16 and demand a reevaluation of some fundamental ideas concerning the early history of the human genetic diversity we find today. 38–40 Our phylogeny shows a root in central-northwest Africa. Although this point requires further attention, we think that it offers a new prospect from which to view the initial development of our species in Africa.
—Fulvio Cruciani et al. A Revised Root for the Human Y Chromosomal Phylogenetic Tree: The Origin of Patrilineal Diversity in Africa (2011)
quote:Recently, in a re-sequencing study of the Y chromosome, the root of the tree moved to a new position and several changes at the basal nodes of the phylogeny were introduced [16]. Interestingly, the estimated coalescence age and deep branching pattern of the revised MSY tree appear to be more similar to those of the mtDNA phylogeny [17], [18] than previously reported [1].
Molecular Dissection of the Basal Clades in the Human Y Chromosome Phylogenetic Tree Fulvio Cruciani 2012
All Y-clades that are not exclusively African belong to the macro-haplogroup CT, which is defined by mutations M168, M294 and P9.1 [14], [31] and is subdivided into two major clades, DE and CF [1], [14]. In a recent study [16], sequencing of two chromosomes belonging to haplogroups C and R, led to the identification of 25 new mutations, eleven of which were in the C-chromosome and seven in the R-chromosome. Here, the seven mutations which were found to be shared by chromosomes of haplogroups C and R [16], were also found to be present in one DE sample (sample 33 in Table S1), and positioned at the root of macro-haplogroup CT (Figure 1 and Figure S1).
^^ This? THis does not mean haplogroup R originated in Africa
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: Yes, both teams are white and you would find it exceedingly difficult to find modern Greeks and Italians that don't consider themselves white. I'm of the opinion that you don't actually believe your laughably weak characterisation of Southern Europeans as anything but white. You're transparent, you know. You're just using this ridiculous line of argument in order to create the illusion of sensible and fair equivalence. It's an altogether insincere, empty rhetorical device meant only to disarm your opponents.
You're an idiot. Go read a classical text.
Why did Romans think they had to chalk (whiten) their faces to appear like the Gauls?
"Oh! yes,” said Giton, “and please circumcise us too, so that we look like Jews, and bore our ears to imitate Arabians, and chalk our faces till Gaul takes us for her own sons; as if this colour alone could alter our shapes, when it takes a number of points in unison to make a good lie." - Petronius, Satyricon, 102
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: This was answered / debunked already, but typical as we know you will iterate on the same stands and point of view.
Your argument deals with sex based diversion (ethnicity). What you consider a low frequency in Nigeria is actually consistent with millions of since Nigeria has a population of 240 million.
That study covered multiple ethnic groups in Nigeria (Igbo, Yoruba etc.), so its consistent across the whole country. Your estimate for the population size of Nigeria seems quite off- its more like 185 million, but let's say it is 200 to work easy with the percentages If there are 200 million Nigerians and 3% have narrow noses that totals only 6 million; the vast majority 194 million (97%) Nigerians lack this trait. That was my simple point about disparate (very low vs. very high) frequencies.
quote:Oh yeah, in my family we have different color contrasts from dark to very light vice versa. What should we do, follow your eurocentric ideology or just be who we are? [/QB]
And what's your ancestry or ethnic group? If I'm not mistaken you posted once you are mixed race, so why is this a surprise?
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I'm pretty sure capra is anything but a euronut but say what you will on this one Ish
But as far as I am aware, Capra doesn't argue for your lunatic Afrocentric "black Egypt" theory. You slander anyone like him who doesn't believe in "black Egypt" as a "Eurocentrist" and/or "Nazi"...
Capra not agreeing with me doesn't make him a Nazi. You being a racist hood wearing wannabe faux-academic trying to reduce every speck of civilization in Africa to Hamites despite all evidence to the contrary absolutely makes you one. Good day, Nazi. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Stop the BS the revisions are to the positions of haplogroup A1b, A1a and haplogroup B and discovery of new haplgroups
Molecular Dissection of the Basal Clades in the Human Y Chromosome Phylogenetic Tree Fulvio Cruciani 2012
All Y-clades that are not exclusively African belong to the macro-haplogroup CT, which is defined by mutations M168, M294 and P9.1 [14], [31] and is subdivided into two major clades, DE and CF [1], [14]. In a recent study [16], sequencing of two chromosomes belonging to haplogroups C and R, led to the identification of 25 new mutations, eleven of which were in the C-chromosome and seven in the R-chromosome. Here, the seven mutations which were found to be shared by chromosomes of haplogroups C and R [16], were also found to be present in one DE sample (sample 33 in Table S1), and positioned at the root of macro-haplogroup CT (Figure 1 and Figure S1).
^^ This? THis does not mean haplogroup R originated in Africa
___________________________________
Nope, they reevaluated the entire tree of some fundamental ideas concerning the early history of the human genetic diversity we find today, which gave R a different presence, positioned at the root of macro-haplogroup CT.
So I ask you again, how can it be that Seven mutations which were found to be shared by chromosomes of haplogroups C and R [16], were also found to be present were also present in one DE sample? You haven't explained this? We know DE is African.
As we know things, the ancestral to CT is haplogroup BT and the descendants are haplogroup CF and DE.
All I talk about it what I notice they reported, if you call their report a BS revisions, so be it.
See, I also looked at your favorite source wikipedia. And this is what they show:
That tree of course is not found in any Cruciani et al. study. Since they show this:, but it is still a nice summery:
This is by your great friend, Razib Khan who is scared to touch the positioned at the root of macro-haplogroup CT (deep in his heart he knows):
quote:I don’t know the technical details of the calibration well here, last I checked the dates for Y chromosomal lineages were a total mess. So I’m not going to express confidence in this specific value, but, it does align well with a suspicion among many people that the idea of modern humans all tracing back to ancestors on the order of ~50,000 years B.P. just isn’t tenable any longer (this excludes the issue of possible admixture with other lineages such as Neandertals).
You have always looked for different excuses to shift the goal of this study. These always have been unrelated and subjugated.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: This was answered / debunked already, but typical as we know you will iterate on the same stands and point of view.
Your argument deals with sex based diversion (ethnicity). What you consider a low frequency in Nigeria is actually consistent with millions of since Nigeria has a population of 240 million.
That study covered multiple ethnic groups in Nigeria (Igbo, Yoruba etc.), so its consistent across the whole country. Your estimate for the population size of Nigeria seems quite off- its more like 185 million, but let's say it is 200 to work easy with the percentages If there are 200 million Nigerians and 3% have narrow noses that totals only 6 million; the vast majority 194 million (97%) Nigerians lack this trait. That was my simple point about disparate (very low vs. very high) frequencies.
quote:Oh yeah, in my family we have different color contrasts from dark to very light vice versa. What should we do, follow your eurocentric ideology or just be who we are?
And what's your ancestry or ethnic group? If I'm not mistaken you posted once you are mixed race, so why is this a surprise? [/QB]
Yeah, I was wrong on the initial percentage, but still they run in the millions. And that it the point I'm refering at.
The number is dependent on whether these groups decide to have more children eventually, this number effectively will decrease or increase the ethnicity.
I have "black" Levant heritage as well that is true. Somewhat like those Levantine Bedouins I have posted.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Read Guglielmo & Salerno's book, Are Italians White?. At one point, American immigration policy was based on favouring northern Europeans (English, Scandinavians, Dutch etc) i.e. southern Europeans like Italians were considered too swarthy skinned and inferior. Old American immigration policy was Anglocentric and/or Nordicist.
Northwest Europeans developed racially re-assuring theories on the ancient Greeks and their origins long before those policies; the most powerful Northwest Europeans (the Anglo-American Establishment) has never conceded that the ancient Greeks and Romans were racially distinct from themselves or that they had no connection or claim (s) to these civilizations.
They claimed that the ancient Greeks and Romans of the glorius Classical age were Nordic in appearance, like the Swedes and the Germans, and that a late period infusion of inferior Semitic and Negro blood debased this supposedly high-octane racial stock - explaining their slightly darker skin. Ancient Greece and Rome has never been relinquished by Northern Europeans.
Sure, there's always been a Nordicist theory about Greece & Rome. What you've overlooked is this theory only ever proposed an extreme minority of "Nordics" were in ancient Greece and Rome, like the Dynastic Race theory proposed for Egypt. No Nordicist has ever said the average Greek/Roman was white & fair haired. How absurd...
Let's take a look at an academic Nordicist publication about Greece (Peterson, 1974):
quote:Substantial caste-like stratification, accompanied by relatively strict principles of caste endogamy separated the Indo-European-derived Eupatrids from the freemen and slave classes among whom the genetic influence of the autochthonous 'Pelasgian' population may have predominated.
quote:As Childe (1926), Palmer (1955) and others have suggested, the undivided proto-Indo-Europeans probably comprised a numerically small population.
An overview of the above study from a modern day Nordicist (Karl Earlson, author of "Nordic Hellas"):
quote:Peterson (1974), studied portrait busts of famous ancient Greek personages, and concluded that the aristocracies of Hellas were a product of closely interbreeding, Eupatrid clans. These clans were mostly Nordic in type, being largely descended from the Indo-European invaders. The demos, or common people however, as well as most slaves, were of Mediterranean, Pelasgian descent.
Also, his view is the same:
quote:I do not personally believe that the Nordic racial element in ancient Greece was ever predominant, but I do think that it was concentrated in the elites.
Basically these Nordicists are/were arguing for caste-like stratification, where a numerically much smaller Indo-European speaking elite/warrior class with white skin, light eyes and fair hair invaded and ruled over the autochthonous swarthy skinned, brown eyed and dark haired "Pelasgian masses". This is obviously different to what you are stating, that Nordicists claim the ancient Greek population was white, when they only make this claim for the aristocracy, as little as 1% of the population.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is looking at "race" from an antiquated perspective. Today modern "whites" include both Nords and southern Europeans. Please make a new thread to discuss whose white and the evolution of modern whiteness to encompass a singular Pan Euro racial identity. I made this thread to talk about where "Caucasoid" features originated.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are too many Africans that look like those footballers above dipped in chocolate for me to entertain the idea that their ancestors left Africa went to Caucasia did a Caucasian dance failed because they have no rhythm then went back to Africa to breed with more of their ancestors to give them features they never had when they left.
quote:Originally posted by sudaniya: Yes, both teams are white and you would find it exceedingly difficult to find modern Greeks and Italians that don't consider themselves white. I'm of the opinion that you don't actually believe your laughably weak characterisation of Southern Europeans as anything but white. You're transparent, you know. You're just using this ridiculous line of argument in order to create the illusion of sensible and fair equivalence. It's an altogether insincere, empty rhetorical device meant only to disarm your opponents.
You're an idiot. Go read a classical text.
Why did Romans think they had to chalk (whiten) their faces to appear like the Gauls?
"Oh! yes,” said Giton, “and please circumcise us too, so that we look like Jews, and bore our ears to imitate Arabians, and chalk our faces till Gaul takes us for her own sons; as if this colour alone could alter our shapes, when it takes a number of points in unison to make a good lie." - Petronius, Satyricon, 102
You really are a tool, mate.
The ancient Greeks were obviously aware that other Europeans had lighter skin but they never asserted that Northern Europeans belonged to a separate white race and they to another non-white race; they affirmed that the Northern Europeans were excessively white and even related this skin tone to that of their women.
Now, unless you want to assert that ancient Greek women were actually Germanic or Celtic, you really have nowhere to go on this matter. Modern Greeks and Italians consider themselves white and there is no evidence that they are not predominantly European on a genetic level.
Posts: 1568 | From: Pluto | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
The ancient Greeks were obviously aware that other Europeans had lighter skin but they never asserted that Northern Europeans belonged to a separate white race and they to another non-white race; they affirmed that the Northern Europeans were excessively white and even related this skin tone to that of their women.
Now, unless you want to assert that ancient Greek women were actually Germanic or Celtic, you really have nowhere to go on this matter. Modern Greeks and Italians consider themselves white and there is no evidence that they are not predominantly European on a genetic level. [/QB]
The ancient Greeks & Romans recognised their northern geographical neighbours were lighter skinned, while their southern geographical neighbours, darker skinned. Ok. But they didn't invent a classification where they were grouped with northerners as "white". Nor were all southern populations "black". You're wrong.
And there's not a European genetic cluster; Northern Europeans & Southern Europeans can also easily be distinguished into two separate groups based on autosomal DNA:
quote:Using a genome-wide single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) panel, we observed population structure in a diverse group of Europeans and European Americans. Under a variety of conditions and tests, there is a consistent and reproducible distinction between “northern” and “southern” European population groups: most individual participants with southern European ancestry (Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Greek) have >85% membership in the “southern” population; and most northern, western, eastern, and central Europeans have >90% in the “northern” population group.
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: The ancient Greeks & Romans recognised their northern geographical neighbours
The genetic distinction is something that was already known, but was there contact between ancient Greeks and ancient North Europeans?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Do you mean the most salient "Caucasoid" traits like narrow noses and small teeth? Then no.
Just search around online for Pleistocene fossils from Africa, absolutely none have narrow nasal aperture...
Au contraire!
From the Rightmire: In addition to the Gamble’s Cave I1 assemblage, there are the broken parts of a complete individual found by H. Reck at Olduvai in 1913 and also the remains from the Naivasha Railway Site described by Leakey (’42). Both skeletons are associated with Kenya Capsian tools, and the famous “Oldoway Man” from Bed V may be contemporary with the Gamble’s Cave occupation, But neither find has proved particularly useful, though resemblances of both to the Gamble’s Cave people have been claimed; the Olduvai burial is badly crushed, while the Naivasha skull lacks fully half its face. So, of this earlier material, the Gamble’s Cave skeletons are the best preserved, and unfortunately even these reconstructions are far from perfect. Skull number 4 has been warped somewhat, and nearly all of the base as well as a substantial portion of the facial skeleton are present only in plaster. Distortion renders this specimen quite unfit for measurement. Number 5 also lacks much of the occiput, and the missing parts have been filled in with plaster. Proper alignment of the face is thus quite difficult, and apparently one half of the maxilla has been warped backward toward the foramen magnum. Surely some distortion of this sort has produced the curious vertical facial profile, and the nose is also suspect. On the whole, there is rather less deformation of the vault than with number 4, but measurements of either specimen would be unreliable. Although both skulls have been called non-Negro in morphology, the evidence is certainly far from clear cut; any pronouncement of this sort is questionable by virtue of the state of the material alone.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic