posted
I like how no one is pointing out how Cass is parading around how hes been stating AE were Saharans compared to the Afroloons, yet hes spent the past few weeks claiming AE were Levantine Hamitics and that Musa Keita of Mali was an Arab. d-_-b
--------------------
Meet on the Level, act upon the Plumb, part on the Square. Posts: 574 | From: Guinee | Registered: Jul 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: An animated illustration of Charlie Bass coming to terms with his past mistaken beliefs (which many of us here used to have, until the past few years):
Clearly this man's willingness to admit he was wrong at one point in his life is exemplary.
??? Bull, don't put words in my mouth, since 2005 I have held the same position and never stated Ancient Egyptians were SSA genetically, so don't throw me into that group of people.
But you did (and apparently still seem to) think that AEs and other Saharans would cluster with West/Central Africans (a term I personally prefer to "sub-Saharan", to be honest) sooner than they would any OOA populations. The entire concept of pre-OOA and why it contradicts your original pan-African approach seems to have eluded you. It certainly did not occur to you (and to be fair, myself and almost everyone else in this community) back in 2010.
Posts: 7087 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: R u saying Cass is right and "y'all"is wrong? About what?
So u ain't got no critique for no thing Cass posits?
Yeah, a line has definitely been drawn.
Y r u playing personalities when u oughtta be teaching us what u have come up with.
Y damn people for what they don't know, then mock them instead of upping their knowledge base?
He is correct in stating that folks are lying about their posting history. This is the same thing I said. When I talk about the past Modus Operandi of ES I include MYSELF regarding the belief in some of those doctrines. That is what some of the data supported at that time: OLD Cruciani supports nothing more than the very recent migration of M78 AA speaking Africans from the horn into North East Africa. We know the type of mtdna found in the North East that would support this. NEW Cruciani Paints a very different picture with perhaps a long term separation and different evolutionary history of the two regions in reg to M35. The new ancient Mtnda is somewhat hard to reconcile at the moment. Some folks changed with the data, some didn't. Some folks changed ides after Ancient DNA dealing with skin tone was published, some didnt. Some folks changed their tune regarding ancient Europeans after the sequencing of 3000-35000 year old specimens....some didn't. Some folks had ideas that change with Natufian/PPNB genomes....some didn't.
It was a slow buildup, It was the gradual adoption of ideas based on new facts (and the intellectual honesty/maturity to do so) that some folks went through, and some DIDNT. And this data for some is like walking off a cliff, while others its like walking down one step. Cass, Like i take issues with people basically LYING about their posting history, even when that history is on record. The people are basically saying some of the same stuff (and posting the same images) that put them in this predicament in the first place. People are in essences looking over the cliff and saying "Its just one step for me".
I got lambasted for changing ideas so this is my "I told you so moment". Also folks cannot be helped without admitting they have a problem.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I like how no one is pointing out how Cass is parading around how hes been stating AE were Saharans compared to the Afroloons, yet hes spent the past few weeks claiming AE were Levantine Hamitics and that Musa Keita of Mali was an Arab. d-_-b
That's probably because he is a chronic liar and psycho and therefore not worth any attention. I think the same about lioness, xyyman, Akachi, and several other posters here on ES. I'm willing to engage with Bass because I used to respect him, even if that respect has eroded recently.
Posts: 7087 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
According to the plasticity crew, saying what this paper concluded (that climate-adaptation doesn't fully explain differentiation in the Sahel) is subscribing to the True Negro fallacy.
That is an interesting discovery. In the right pane I saw this following, also by Černư et al.:
quote:
Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Dietary changes associated to shifts in subsistence strategies during human evolution may have induced new selective pressures on phenotypes, as currently held for lactase persistence. Similar hypotheses exist for arylamine N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2) mediated acetylation capacity, a well-known pharmacogenetic trait with wide inter-individual variation explained by polymorphisms in the NAT2 gene. The environmental causative factor (if any) driving its evolution is as yet unknown, but significant differences in prevalence of acetylation phenotypes are found between hunter-gatherer and food-producing populations, both in sub-Saharan Africa and worldwide, and between agriculturalists and pastoralists in Central Asia. These two subsistence strategies also prevail among sympatric populations of the African Sahel, but knowledge on NAT2 variation among African pastoral nomads was up to now very scarce. Here we addressed the hypothesis of different selective pressures associated to the agriculturalist or pastoralist lifestyles having acted on the evolution of NAT2 by sequencing the gene in 287 individuals from five pastoralist and one agriculturalist Sahelian populations.
RESULTS:
We show that the significant NAT2 genetic structure of African populations is mainly due to frequency differences of three major haplotypes, two of which are categorized as decreased function alleles (NAT2*5B and NAT2*6A), particularly common in populations living in arid environments, and one fast allele (NAT2*12A), more frequently detected in populations living in tropical humid environments. This genetic structure does associate more strongly with a classification of populations according to ecoregions than to subsistence strategies, mainly because most Sahelian and East African populations display little to no genetic differentiation between them, although both regions hold nomadic or semi-nomadic pastoralist and sedentary agriculturalist communities. Furthermore, we found significantly higher predicted proportions of slow acetylators in pastoralists than in agriculturalists, but also among food-producing populations living in the Sahelian and dry savanna zones than in those living in humid environments, irrespective of their mode of subsistence.
CONCLUSION:
Our results suggest a possible independent influence of both the dietary habits associated with subsistence modes and the chemical environment associated with climatic zones and biomes on the evolution of NAT2 diversity in sub-Saharan African populations.
—Černư et al.
BMC Evol Biol. 2015 Dec 1;15:263. doi: 10.1186/s12862-015-0543-6.
Variation in NAT2 acetylation phenotypes is associated with differences in food-producing subsistence modes and ecoregions in Africa.
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: An animated illustration of Charlie Bass coming to terms with his past mistaken beliefs (which many of us here used to have, until the past few years):
Clearly this man's willingness to admit he was wrong at one point in his life is exemplary.
??? Bull, don't put words in my mouth, since 2005 I have held the same position and never stated Ancient Egyptians were SSA genetically, so don't throw me into that group of people.
But you did (and apparently still seem to) think that AEs and other Saharans would cluster with West/Central Africans (a term I personally prefer to "sub-Saharan", to be honest) sooner than they would any OOA populations. The entire concept of pre-OOA and why it contradicts your original pan-African approach seems to have eluded you. It certainly did not occur to you (and to be fair, myself and almost everyone else in this community) back in 2010.
Sub-Saharan to me never meant west/Central Africans, so what are you talking about? Both you and Senet make the same mistake and assumptions Brace made about Diop when he said ancient Egyptians. Sub-Saharan to me never meant solely "Broad trend" Africans, it also included Elongated African types as well. My entire time I was very active here I made this argument that sub-Saharan African traits are NOT a restricted set of traits and yet you and Swenet are doing EXACTLY that, limiting "sub-Saharan" to stereotyped West/West Central Africans. Your definition of sub-Saharan contrasts with mine
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Group 1 we have folks who don't really know what to think or want to express what they TRULY believe, so they just throw insults and try to demoralize others they veiw as "more wrong"
Group 2 we have the spineless, the people who suck up to group 1 and don't even realize their getting shitted on as well.
Group 3 are the slow rollers, too busy arguing with group 1 about thoughts and explanations of the past like it really fvcking matters. they fail to see that simply saying "W/E yeah I believed that in the past, but now I'm readjusting, etc." (even if it isn't necessarily true), will kill the debate and force Group 1 to actually say something of new found substance as opposed to hiding behind insults.
Group 4 we have Cass
Group 5 are the people that chose to chase Group 4 around the roundabout. When the fool is actually more useful than useless at this point in time tbh. Which is absolutely not intentional.
check it out, what I learned on ES in the past 2 days... SSA's are not monolithic. SSA's have recently developed morphology. Contemporary SSA's weren't wide spread below the Sahara. Some SSA's have admixture from Saharans(north Africans?) Egyptians are North Africans/Saharans but not related to those who mixed with west Africans. the SSA's with similar Morphology with A.Egyptians are all mixed But there's no true Negro/SSA model. ...Makes sense.
^lol It's funny because West/central Africans have been receiving North/OOA-like admixture for 9K years+ , East Africans have been exposed recently 4.5KYA max, where is this distinct OOA-like or North African Admixture in East Africa during the Holocene. I ran Henns African data set including Saharan and north African population, a lot of what I read here don't hold up to scrutiny, I can say that now.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tyrannohotep: An animated illustration of Charlie Bass coming to terms with his past mistaken beliefs (which many of us here used to have, until the past few years):
Clearly this man's willingness to admit he was wrong at one point in his life is exemplary.
??? Bull, don't put words in my mouth, since 2005 I have held the same position and never stated Ancient Egyptians were SSA genetically, so don't throw me into that group of people.
But you did (and apparently still seem to) think that AEs and other Saharans would cluster with West/Central Africans (a term I personally prefer to "sub-Saharan", to be honest) sooner than they would any OOA populations. The entire concept of pre-OOA and why it contradicts your original pan-African approach seems to have eluded you. It certainly did not occur to you (and to be fair, myself and almost everyone else in this community) back in 2010.
It depends on which "Sub-Saharans are being used. You guys are limiting sub-Saharan to the stereotypical true Negro type. There are Saharans and Northeast Africans who fall well within the sphere of sub-Saharan variability, my email reply from Colin Groves proves this, so what are we arguing about?
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: Sub-Saharan to me never meant west/Central Africans, so what are you talking about? Both you and Senet make the same mistake and assumptions Brace made about Diop when he said ancient Egyptians. Sub-Saharan to me never meant solely "Broad trend" Africans, it also included Elongated African types as well. My entire time I was very active here I made this argument that sub-Saharan African traits are NOT a restricted set of traits and yet you and Swenet are doing EXACTLY that, limiting "sub-Saharan" to stereotyped West/West Central Africans. Your definition of sub-Saharan contrasts with mine [/qb]
Here the liar admits it again. Elongated Africans (which includes Egyptians) are Sub-Saharan Africans. This is exactly what I mean when I say these liars are playing both sides of the fence.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Notice the Bass seems to have confused "sub-Saharan" with "indigenous African" in those last two posts of his.
Posts: 7087 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This new study on ancient Egyptians from the 3rd Intermediate period does not contradict anything I have said previous in the past so there is no need to go around trying to insult so called "Afrocentrists." It does not debunk an African ancient Egypt, and as the dynasties from the 3rd Intermediate period were mostly of Libyan extraction except for the 25 dynasty I don't see where all the fuss is. The study is not saying ALL of ancient Egypt from the start to end had this kind of genetic make up. I have always argued that there was foreign migration into Egypt or a period of time.
Point of the matter is a lot of are just grasping at straws over an abstract from a study that isn't even full published and open for access and none of you know anything about the mummies studied nor the area in question. Its just all eyes on the results and you ignore all the other pertinent data.
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: lmao this is a mess,
check it out, what I learned on ES in the past 2 days... SSA's are not monolithic. SSA's have recently developed morphology. Contemporary SSA's weren't wide spread below the Sahara. Some SSA's have admixture from Saharans(north Africans?) Egyptians are North Africans/Saharans but not related to those who mixed with west Africans. the SSA's with similar Morphology with A.Egyptians are all mixed But there's no true Negro/SSA model. …Makes sense.
Nice summary. I wonder why the Elmenteita show great similarities with the HK43 Burial, which belongs to the first mummies of Egypt.
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
...for the longest time, despite me asking numerous, numerous, numerous times (and I wasn't the only one) No one define what SSA was, not even genetically and that's the easy way.
But here alas we throw the term around as if there was a consensus. my last post has a lot of words in it, but surely I have hope that some of the spineless can put 2 n 2 together on how ridiculous this circle of discussion became.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
Notice he changed his whole post. He first post said elongated Africans are SSA in ancestry. Then he edited his post to say that elongated Africans in Egypt merely overlap with SSA populations in a metric sense.
He switched to a "merely craniofacial overlap" compromise because he wants to avoid saying in public that he wants AE to be SSA in a genetic sense. I'm telling you, these turds are very calculated in how they play both sides of the fence. I've seen it many times.
They all do it. That's why they'll get exposed soon by Egyptian aDNA. I'm going to put their lies on full display whenever I see it.
Charlie Bass: Egyptians are SSA groups.
quote:Sub-Saharan to me never meant solely "Broad trend" Africans, it also included Elongated African types as well.
Charlie Bass: Egyptians merely overlap with SSA groups, implying they are not a SSA group.
quote:There are Saharans and Northeast Africans who fall well within the sphere of sub-Saharan variability
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: ...for the longest time, despite me asking numerous, numerous, numerous times (and I wasn't the only one) No one define what SSA was, not even genetically and that's the easy way.
But here alas we throw the term around as if there was a consensus. my last post has a lot of words in it, but surely I have hope that some of the spineless can put 2 n 2 together on how ridiculous this circle of discussion became.
Depending on the source and method, Sudan can be sub Sahara, East Africa or North East Africa. But is also the Sahara and Sahel.
The position of ancient Sudan, is fundamental that is for sure.
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by zarahan- aka Enrique Cardova:
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: I'm speaking for myself and I never make those claims that AE=all or mostly SSA. One can have supra-Saharan ancestry and still be black. The results of this study still don't refute or rule out an African Egypt.
Sure and no one credible claims that AEs were mostly SSA at all times, in all places. Who goes about "denying" migration at various levels from the Levant........... Based on the history and application of that construct, AE's would be considered "black" as Mary Lefkowitz herself freely acknowledges, and even Egyptologists like Tyson-Smith 2001, consider the use of the label "black" as reasonable.
Stop lying. You are one of the biggest culprits on the forum! Furthermore we are not debating with the likes of Mary Lefkowitz. This is a prime example of when I talked or ES folks being collectively left in the Dust as far as bio/anthro and how it relates to human populations. You still posting images of Mary......she is no longer the antagonist. You bringing her up is like Trump planning up strategy to destroy imperial Japan and Nazi Germany.
Back to you being the culprit. Nearly every one of your soft core image spams talks about the relation of AE to SSA groups via recent South North migration. Not to North Africans......not to them being distinct in their own right. Not too much on substructure. No it equates AE culture/linguistics/bio history with populations below the Sahara. There is nothing WRONG with this......but don't fake like this ain't your whole modus operati. It's on RECORD.
DNA tribes spam was about you and nearly everyone else tying AE to SSA groups. The 2 counter theories were from Swenet.....saying the data is not literal and Egyptians and horners contain a lot of these alleles.....about North African affinities in SSA due to pastoralism. And myself which argued the affinity is old and Saharan....then I argued the STR affinity was essentially extinct and the results mean very little. ES et al went batshiit.
Did ES argue that those alleles or autosomal components (Great Lakes, Southern African) were North African? Not really. Did ES argue that E1b1a in Ramses III was a North African variant of E-M2.....or that E-M2 itself was North African. Not really. The narrative what strongly in the opposite. Even when I brought up the idea that it could be V-22 folks were going bat shiit crazy.
At this point I dont recall any ES member making statements that Dynastic Egyptians.......REGARDLESS of dynasty/region would be LESS SSA and moderns.......folks want to sit back now and be like "that's what I always thought". Man y'all take a polygraph test that shiit would probably explode.
Looka here dude, your little strawman games don't work with me. The issue at hand is the bogus argument by Cass as to his "climatic races" and similar claims attempting to distort AEs. I fixed him. Why are you involved, save as you are again trying to "spin" some other argument about alleged "denials" of such and such, just like your fake arguments about the monolithic ES "mindset."
And as for Mary Lef, her example and that of other Egyptologists clearly demonstrate why social constructs are still in use, and why they can be reasonable within their terms of reference. She admits it as does Egyptologist Tyson-Smith. Why is that a "problem" for you except that it undermines your continuing effort to denigrate anyone who calls the AE's "black"? These scholars have no problem with the label, within the limits of the construct. Why are you on your continuing campaign to "disavow" what they speak about?
As for tying AE to sub-Saharan Africans, you are still trying to spin a bogus strawman as to people claiming that all AEs were subSaharan. It won't work, and your modus operandi is to spin such strawmen, so that you can "position" yourself as one, oh so wise and clever, nobly "refuting" so-called "Afrocentric error." What? This plays well with the white people over at Forum Biodiversity where you hang out?
ANd who is going about "denying" AE's have some Eurasian elements? Really? They have BOTH "EUrasian" and SSA elements. I have been saying that for years, and defended that against various "black power" types for years- such as the account that was copying over Anthroscape text to ES so we could "debate" them. Likewise I have warned people here and elsewhere not to go out on an extreme limb with black this and that. Similarly in battles outside ES one of the first orders of business I have undertaken is to debunk any "black everything" claims or strawmen. This is standard procedure.
And who is "denying" as you laughably claim - that AE's are not North African or that they are not a distinct culture? Really? Pause.. wait for scent of wafting bullshiit to dissipate.. I have also talked about distinctiveness for years and yes they are North African, but, that does not change the fact that- as Morkot 2005 puts it, (and I have cited him many times): "In sum, ancient Egypt was an African culture, developed by African peoples, who had wide ranging contacts in north Africa and western Asia." (Morkot, Robert (2005) The Egyptians: An Introduction.. p. 10)
I have also quoted Yurco numerous times as to the Nilotic continuty that is AE.
"Certainly there was some foreign admixture [in Egypt], but basically a homogeneous African population had lived in the Nile Valley from ancient to modern times... [the] Badarian people, who developed the earliest Predynastic Egyptian culture, already exhibited the mix of North African and Sub-Saharan physical traits that have typified Egyptians ever since (Hassan 1985; Yurco 1989; Trigger 1978; Keita 1990.. et al.,)... The peoples of Egypt, the Sudan, and much of East Africa, Ethiopia and Somalia are now generally regarded as a Nilotic continuity, with widely ranging physical features (complexions light to dark, various hair and craniofacial types) but with powerful common cultural traits, including cattle pastoralist traditions.." --Frank Yurco, "An Egyptological Review," 1996 -in Mary R. Lefkowitz and Guy MacLean Rogers, Black Athena Revisited, 1996, The University of North Carolina Press, p. 62-100) [/i]
So don't come to me with laughable strawmen about alleged "denials" of distinctiveness or being "North African." Really?
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ISH "Nice summary. I wonder why the Elmenteita show great similarities with the HK43 Burial, which belongs to the first mummies of Egypt. "
Lmaoo.. Dont. Ask. Me.
You probably weren't, but hey just for fVcks and giggles why do ancient Nubian and Lake Turkana show cultural similarities through pottery & cultivation.
Wait, My bad I forgot, Egyptians had nothing to do with Sudan/Nubians. Ptolemy did say that all the way down in Elephantine, the people where definitely distinct from Subsahara... ehem* I mean Nubians. ...I wonder if Sudaniya solved this mystery yet.
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: I wonder why the Elmenteita show great similarities with the HK43 Burial, which belongs to the first mummies of Egypt.
So, TP, you're saying that the Hierakonpolis burial shares these affinities with the Elmenteita?
Don't play yourself and end up with a position you're not willing to commit to.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: @ISH "Nice summary. I wonder why the Elmenteita show great similarities with the HK43 Burial, which belongs to the first mummies of Egypt. "
Lmaoo.. Dont. Ask. Me.
You probably weren't, but hey just for fVcks and giggles why do ancient Nubian and Lake Turkana show cultural similarities through pottery & cultivation.
Wait, My bad I forgot, Egyptians had nothing to do with Sudan/Nubians. Ptolemy did say that all the way down in Elephantine, the people where definitely distinct from Subsahara... ehem* I mean Nubians. ...I wonder Sudaniya solved this mystery yet.
That is indeed an interesting proposition.
quote:
During three seasons of research (in 2000, 2001 and 2003) carried out by the Combined Prehistoric Expedition at Gebel Ramlah in the southern part of the Egyptian Western Desert, three separate Final Neolithic cemeteries were discovered and excavated. Skeletal remains of 67 individuals, comprising both primary and secondary interments, were recovered from 32 discrete burial pits. Numerous grave goods were found, including lithics, pottery and ground stone objects, as well as items of personal adornment, pigments, shells and sheets of mica. Imports from distant areas prove far-reaching contacts. Analysis of the finds sheds important light on the burial rituals and social conditions of the Final Neolithic cattle keepers inhabiting Ramlah Playa. This community, dated to the mid-fifth millennium B.C. (calibrated), was composed of a phenotypically diverse population derived from both North and sub-Saharan Africa. There were no indications of social differentiation. The deteriorating climatic conditions probably forced these people to migrate toward the Nile Valley where they undoubtedly contributed to the birth of ancient Egyptian civilization.
—Michał Kobusiewicz, Jacek Kabaciński, Romuald Schild, Joel D. Irish and Fred Wendorf
Burial practices of the Final Neolithic pastoralists at Gebel Ramlah, Western Desert of Egypt
British Museum Studies in Ancient Egypt and Sudan 13 (2009): 147–74
--M. Kobusiewicz, J. Kabacinski, R. Schild, J.D. Irish, M.C. Gatto, F. Wendorf, Gebel Ramlah, Final Neolithic Cemeteries from the Western Desert of Egypt, Poznan 2010
It could be that Kadada, Qadan is the key to your quest.
quote: Extensive excavations in Wadi Halfa, in Sudan,1 lead to the discovery of what is arguably the oldest evidence for human settlers in the Nile Valley, which was dated to the Paleolithic Age (Qadan- 13000-8000 BC). Other Paleolithic sites were located in the south of Lower Nubia including in Toshka and Gebel Sahaba.
[…]
In spite of the intensive archeology in Lower Nubia, no significant Neolithic graves were uncovered. The only Neolithic discoveries were found in central Sudan, particularly in Khartoum, Kadruka, Shabona, el Ghaba , and Kadero.3 However, the most important excavations were conducted in Khartoum. The excavations revealed a culture that dates back to about 6900 years ago.4
[…]
Dating to the Neolithic period, in el Ghaba, considerable amounts of circular or sub-circular pits (diameters varying from 120cm to 160cm) were found. There, the bodies were adorned with personal commodities like bracelets and necklaces, lip-plugs, stone and bone tools, pottery, ostrich feathers, and water mollusc shells. Clothes made of natural local materials, headrests and footrests, and traces of facial painting (i.e. perhaps an indication of tribal identity) were found. The finding of mollusk shells, probably obtained from the Red Sea, represents one of the world's earliest evidence for human trade and exchange.
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: This guy is clearly putting words in my mouth. I never said they were genetically SSA. Clustering craniometrically is another thing, funny you dug hard for something then created a strawman.
Setting up such strawmen is convenient, allowing the creators to then "position" themselves as these wise, "objective" types, nobly "refuting" alleged "Afrocentric error." Such allows a certain amount of self-congratulation as to how much mo betta they are than those awful "Afrocentrics" at ES, with themselves as surely the logical "alternative."
But some might ask, what are experts like Beyoku doing here? Why are they still here? Time and time again they come and run down ES and the people here, and they have intimated in the past that they don't care to waste their time with this "failed" forum. They condemn much here as oh so bad, so wrong, so terrible. And they say that ES folks are "being left in the dust" by the fine denizens of other, so much better places. OK. If this is the case, why are they still posting on the "failed" ES forum. especially when they intimated earlier that they don't care to waste their precious time on it, and haven't contributed anything in depth for years.
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
My god you guys are everywhere. Did ya not just see how I demonstrated that on a forensic level with a shatty African database all of the royals tested were more SSA than me even when you include North Africa. I may have some mixed ancestry but I'm not that mixed. Net Geo has me me at like 68% SSA 65% West/Central 3% East. I don't pass in any state. I look like a fat uglier Michael Strahan. I also demonstrated that the dnatribes MLI score is more accurate in determining ancestry than forensics (and they don't even have Mangbetu).
Now if you are going to say the Fayum mummies changed your perspective um ok I get that since its older than Rome/Greece/Persia. Even though the neck of the Delta is dicey for military reasons one would figure that they can't all be Hyksos.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I like how no one is pointing out how Cass is parading around how hes been stating AE were Saharans compared to the Afroloons, yet hes spent the past few weeks claiming AE were Levantine Hamitics and that Musa Keita of Mali was an Arab. d-_-b
Shifting from a autochthonous Egyptian [Saharan] model to Hamiticism isn't too problematic. Hypothetically the Proto-Hamitic urheimat was in south Levant or Arabia, right next door to Egypt, so migration was not over a long distance.
In recent years ancient DNA has shown substantial Anatolian ancestry in Early Neolithic southern Europeans, like Aegeans. Something similar to this is going to show for North Africa via Levant, but the admixture took place end of the Epipaleolithic or Mesolithic (early Holocene) rather than Neolithic (?).
Not sure why you're criticizing me for changing my views in response to new evidence/data; the Afrocentrists in contrast just come up with excuses to dismiss the ancient DNA because it doesn't fit their theory.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: I wonder why the Elmenteita show great similarities with the HK43 Burial, which belongs to the first mummies of Egypt.
So, TP, you're saying that the Hierakonpolis burial shares these affinities with the Elmenteita?
Don't play yourself and end up with a position you're not willing to commit to.
I say so based on a physical observation, not based on metrics. Does the DisPop result on Egypt speak of these Hierakonpolis burials like the HK43 Burial?
quote: Gamble’s Cave One of two adjacent rock- shelters with substantial internal and external Stone Age deposits. The site, overlooking Lake Elmenteita in the Eastern Rift Valley in Kenya, was formed by wave action in the wet period of the early Holocene when the level of Lake Elmenteita rose to combine with Lake Nakuru, forming a vast expanse of water that overflowed into the Nile basin. The archaeological potential of Gamble’s Cave was appreciated in the 1920s by Louis Leakey (1931) who thus undertook one of the first excavations of note in East Africa. The upper deposits contained ‘ELMENTEITAN’ lithics and pottery; below were encountered various stages of a blade tradition which Leakey at first called ‘Kenya Aurignacian’, and later ‘KENYA CAPSIAN’. The lowest levels of the site lie on a beach sand and are now dated to c.7000–5000 BC (much later than Leakey had imagined); finds here include a bone harpoon fragment of Nile basin type and a few sherds of pottery also of the Nilotic and Saharan ‘AQUALITHIC’ (or ‘Khartoum horizon’ style) of the early Holocene.
—L.S.B. Leakey: The Stone Age cultures of Kenya colony (Cambridge, 1931), 90–175; J.E.G. Sutton: ‘New radio- carbon dates for eastern and southern Africa’, JAH 13 (1972), 3–4. JS
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Notice he changed his whole post. He first post said elongated Africans are SSA in ancestry. Then he edited his post to say that elongated Africans in Egypt merely overlap with SSA populations in a metric sense.
He switched to a "merely craniofacial overlap" compromise because he wants to avoid saying in public that he wants AE to be SSA in a genetic sense. I'm telling you, these turds are very calculated in how they play both sides of the fence. I've seen it many times.
They all do it. That's why they'll get exposed soon by Egyptian aDNA. I'm going to put their lies on full display whenever I see it.
Charlie Bass: Egyptians are SSA groups.
quote:Sub-Saharan to me never meant solely "Broad trend" Africans, it also included Elongated African types as well.
Charlie Bass: Egyptians merely overlap with SSA groups, implying they are not a SSA group.
quote:There are Saharans and Northeast Africans who fall well within the sphere of sub-Saharan variability
Yes, ELONGATED Africans do include people in sub-Saharan African like Somalis and Bahima/Tutsis. Stating that a group shows similarity to a group of people is NOT saying they are the same damn thing. Thats your dumb assumption. To quote Keita et al:
Now for the last damn time,, saying that Ancient Egyptians show overlap or similarity to certain groups from SSA is not a backdoor way or ulterior motive way of saying they ARE SSAs. I can't stand when Knee grows try to be politically correct and dishonest to the point of absurdity with their assumptions. Now back the hell off with these strawmen arguments.
And I state again, this latest study on mummies from the Third Intermediate Period in NO WAY refutes anything said by so called "Afrocentrists," and if you or any other person wants to come after me in particular with that "bash the Afrocentrist" BS you had better have your ducks in order because I am no damn joke.
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Punos_Rey: I like how no one is pointing out how Cass is parading around how hes been stating AE were Saharans compared to the Afroloons, yet hes spent the past few weeks claiming AE were Levantine Hamitics and that Musa Keita of Mali was an Arab. d-_-b
Shifting from a autochthonous Egyptian [Saharan] model to Hamiticism isn't too problematic. Hypothetically the Proto-Hamitic urheimat was in south Levant or Arabia, right next door to Egypt, so migration was not over a long distance.
In recent years ancient DNA has shown substantial Anatolian ancestry in Early Neolithic southern Europeans, like Aegeans. Something similar to this is going to show for North Africa via Levant, but the admixture took place end of the Epipaleolithic or Mesolithic (early Holocene) rather than Neolithic (?).
Not sure why you're criticizing me for changing my views in response to new evidence/data; the Afrocentrists in contrast just come up with excuses to dismiss the ancient DNA because it doesn't fit their theory.
It remains interesting, at best.
quote:She lacked the derived variant (rs16891982) of the SLC45A2 gene associated with light skin pigmentation but had at least one copy of the derived SLC24A5 allele (rs1426654) associated with the same trait.
—M. Gallego-Llorente, R. Pinhasi et al.
The genetics of an early Neolithic pastoralist from the Zagros, Iran
quote: Populations for which the ancient Caucasus genomes are best ancestral approximations include those of the Southern Caucasus and interestingly, South and Central Asia. Western Europe tends to be a mix of early farmers and western/eastern hunter-gatherers while Middle Eastern genomes are described as a mix of early farmers and Africans.
[…]
Caucasus hunter-gatherer contribution to subsequent populations. We next explored the extent to which Bichon and CHG contributed to contemporary populations using outgroup f3(African; modern, ancient) statistics, which measure the shared genetic history between an ancient genome and a modern population since they diverged from an African outgroup.
Discussion
Given their geographic origin, it seems likely that CHG and EF are the descendants of early colonists from Africa who stopped south of the Caucasus, in an area stretching south to the Levant and possibly east towards Central and South Asia. WHG, on the other hand, are likely the descendants of a wave that expanded further into Europe. The separation of these populations is one that stretches back before the Holocene, as indicated by local continuity through the Late Palaeolithic/Mesolithic boundary and deep coalescence estimates, which date to around the LGM and earlier.
—Jones, E. R., G. Gonzalez-Fortes, S. Connell, V. Siska, A. Eriksson, R. Martiniano, R. L. McLaughlin, et al. 2015.
“Upper Palaeolithic genomes reveal deep roots of modern Eurasians.” Nature Communications 6 (1): 8912. doi:10.1038/ncomms9912. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9912.
Origin and spread of proto-Afrasan, Afrasan and / into substratum of Semitic.
Posts: 22244 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
And I will say again in case people do not get it, this study on Abusair mummies from the Late 3rd Intermediate Period in no way rules out a tie between Ancient Egyptian and sub-Saharan Africans(East). And I do notice how some of you knee grows are not even calling out Cass and his lies, well noted. Nobody addressed anything I said as far as modern sub-Saharan Africans likely not being genetically identical to sub-Saharan Africans from the ancient Egyptian time period. You all would rather grasp at straws and claims that no one has made, why?
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You don't have to east in parentheses. The ancestors of west Africans are east Africans.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Beyoku: Back to you being the culprit. Nearly every one of your soft core image spams talks about the relation of AE to SSA groups via recent South North migration. Not to North Africans......not to them being distinct in their own right. Not too much on substructure. No it equates AE culture/linguistics/bio history with populations below the Sahara. There is nothing WRONG with this......but don't fake like this ain't your whole modus operati. It's on RECORD.
Also notice none of the soft core models on his pictures were North African. Most were African-American. His main agenda with these images is to cluster AA's with Egyptians and he even wrote that on some of them "Egyptians group with African-Americans":
quote:Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: You don't have to east in parentheses. The ancestors of west Africans are east Africans.
With the way these fools are making assumptions I had to. They realy thought that me saying AEs had similarity craniometrically with some SSA groups was a back door way of saying the were full blown, stereotypical SSAs from West and central Africa which by the is their way of saying those people are the only "true" SSAs. Its annoying seeing these Knee Grows use the same SSA=True Negroes only methodology to refute so called Afrocentrists.
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Beyoku: Back to you being the culprit. Nearly every one of your soft core image spams talks about the relation of AE to SSA groups via recent South North migration. Not to North Africans......not to them being distinct in their own right. Not too much on substructure. No it equates AE culture/linguistics/bio history with populations below the Sahara. There is nothing WRONG with this......but don't fake like this ain't your whole modus operati. It's on RECORD.
Also notice none of the soft core models on his pictures were North African. Most were African-American. His main agenda with these images is to cluster AA's with Egyptians and he even wrote that on some of them "Egyptians group with African-Americans":
Like Bass, he's in complete denial of his posts since being exposed here.
I'm not lying about a damn thing, you as well well as some of these lame Knee grows are grasping straws. That's why you can't dig up any posts of m making any such claims and instead you resort beating on strawmen.
You weren't just arguing for some vague relative distance, but "very close" in the sense these populations cluster together in morphometric space. Stop denying your post history. As Nodard says, if you've changed your view (fine - many of us here including myself have changed our minds on different things), but just admit this instead of psychotically denying your entire post history for the past decade.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
You weren't just arguing for some vague relative distance, but "very close" in the sense these populations cluster together in morphometric space. Stop denying your post history. As Nodard says, if you've changed your view (fine - many of us here including myself have changed our minds on different things), but just admit this instead of psychotically denying your entire post history for the past decade.
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: Yes, ELONGATED Africans do include people in sub-Saharan African like Somalis and Bahima/Tutsis.
We have already established that your elongated Africans have North African ancestry. The more you talk the more I realize that it's not ignorance, but stupidity that's your problem. You don't even know what an index is. I don't expect you to understand why it's circular reasoning to use populations that have a large chunk of non-SSA ancestry, as stand ins for SSA groups. Duplicitous turd.
Might as well call this site Egyptturds.com. You turds are just squeaking on bought time at this point. I'm going to let time take care of you. Soon it will be all over.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: I've been on Egyptsearch since 2003, what the hell is this Negro talking about. N o one can post one quote where I said ancient Egyptians were genetically SSA.
Here is the turd who talks about himself in third person in 2010 saying "elongated Africans" underwent microevolution in SSA:
quote:The traits are not "Caucasoid" traits, they have nothing to do with so called "Caucasoids" nor are they adaptively trivial, he offers no proof they are, the traits are elongated East Africans traits, traits that evolved through microevolution is SSA, end of debate. Next time try reading the full text of what you read instead of cherry picking.
You obviously still believe this, otherwise you wouldn't talk about "climate-adapted" SSA groups that cluster with Egyptians. Why would climate adaptation matter if you're not ultimately trying to sneak in the lie that AE were originally SSA and later "morphed" into "elongated Africans". Isn't this faith-based narrative your whole point? That they were originally SSA, but later changed due to climate? Idiot.
Guy's losing it.. Busy name calling. Need be fact checking.
I see Hiernaux asno special friend of Africa but he was kiboshing Hamitcisms by declaring all kinds of South of Sahara Africans elongated to rid ethnology of negroid and other useless terms foolishly resurrected here.
Nothing but SSAs according to the table's label.
Mythbusting geno-hamiticists are counting on readers being unfamiliar with the literature.
Hamiticism equates pastoralism to NA lineage. Geno-hamiticists say elongation calls for NA gene flow.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: Yes, ELONGATED Africans do include people in sub-Saharan African like Somalis and Bahima/Tutsis.
We have already established that your elongated Africans have North African ancestry. The more you talk the more I realize that it's not ignorance, but stupidity that's your problem. You don't even know what an index is. I don't expect you to understand why it's circular reasoning to use populations that have a large chunk of non-SSA ancestry, as stand ins for SSA groups. Duplicitous turd.
Might as well call this site Egyptturds.com. You turds are just squeaking on bought time at this point. I'm going to let time take care of you. Soon it will be all over.
Dear Dummytard. ELONGATED AFRICAN is a phenotypic description. The narrow noses and slender body plans, NOBODY is speaking of genetics. North Africans are not known to have tropically adapted bodies so why do you keep bringing up North African ancestry. Masai, Tutsis, Bahimas have NO NORTH African ancestry. Stop wasting my time playing games.
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: With the way these fools are making assumptions I had to. They realy thought that me saying AEs had similarity craniometrically with some SSA groups was a back door way of saying the were full blown, stereotypical SSAs from West and central Africa which by the is their way of saying those people are the only "true" SSAs. Its annoying seeing these Knee Grows use the same SSA=True Negroes only methodology to refute so called Afrocentrists.
We have ignored a deeper conversation. I'm probably more Balanta than anything. Still waiting on an SNP test. But so far more Balanta than anything. Balanta, Ovambo, Fang, Ashanti.
quote: Oral tradition amongst the Balanta has it that they migrated westward from the area that is now Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia to escape drought and wars.
quote:Originally the Ashanti lived in the grasslands of the western Sudan where presumably they were sedentary gardeners. This we know only from their oral traditions.
Dnatribes and Tukuler's PopSTR both cased that I'm more related to damn near everyone than I am Yoruba however I have read that most African Americans are related to Yoruba who also trace their history to the Sudan.
Look at both of Oprah'stribes
Kpelle
quote: The Kpelle or Guerze lived in North Sudan during the sixteenth century, before fleeing to other parts of north west Africa into what is now Mali.[2] Their flight was due to internal conflicts between the tribes from the crumbling Sudanic empire.[2] Some migrated to Liberia, Mauritania, and Chad.[2] They still maintained their traditional and cultural heritage despite their migration. A handful are still of Kpelle origin in North Sudan. They are mixed with the Nubians of the North Sudan where they remain a large minority.
Bamileke
quote: The Cameroon-Bamileke Bantu people cluster encompasses multiple Bantu ethnic groups primarily found in Cameroon, the largest of which is the Bamileke. The Bamileke, whose origins trace to Egypt, migrated to what is now northern Cameroon between the 11th and 14th centuries.
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.: I've been on Egyptsearch since 2003, what the hell is this Negro talking about. N o one can post one quote where I said ancient Egyptians were genetically SSA.
Here is the turd who talks about himself in third person in 2010 saying "elongated Africans" underwent microevolution in SSA:
quote:The traits are not "Caucasoid" traits, they have nothing to do with so called "Caucasoids" nor are they adaptively trivial, he offers no proof they are, the traits are elongated East Africans traits, traits that evolved through microevolution is SSA, end of debate. Next time try reading the full text of what you read instead of cherry picking.
You obviously still believe this, otherwise you wouldn't talk about "climate-adapted" SSA groups that cluster with Egyptians. Why would climate adaptation matter if you're not ultimately trying to sneak in the lie that AE were originally SSA and later "morphed" into "elongated Africans". Isn't this faith-based narrative your whole point? That they were originally SSA, but later changed due to climate? Idiot.
Guy's losing it.. Busy name calling. Need be fact checking.
I see Hiernaux asno special friend of Africa but he was kiboshing Hamitcisms by declaring all kinds of South of Sahara Africans elongated to rid ethnology of negroid and other useless terms foolishly resurrected here.
Nothing but SSAs according to the table's label.
Mythbusting geno-hamiticists are counting on readers being unfamiliar with the literature.
Hamiticism equates pastoralism to NA lineage. Geno-hamiticists say elongation calls for NA gene flow.
The idiot knee grow Swenet is trying to use "North African" mixture in the same manner as Hamites by Sergei and Selligmann.
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Swenet and the like who are drunk off these genetic studies have fallen back into the true Negro theory. He states this b trying to say the only real Sub-Saharans are those without any mixture, well by his logic that would exclude Bantus with some called "Cushitic" mixture, Bantus with Pygmy mixture, and Bantus with Khoisan mixture. This would leave very few "real" sub-Saharans....by his dumb logic only. That kind o stupidity happens when you are heavily influenced by Forumbiodiversity-retards.
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Egyptturds.com doesn't want to admit that their elongated Africans are differentiated because of this:
quote:West Eurasian components were masked out, and the remaining African haplotypes were compared with a panel of sub-Saharan African and non-African genomes. We showed that masked Northeast African haplotypes overall were more similar to non-African haplotypes and more frequently present outside Africa than were any sets of haplotypes derived from a West African population. Furthermore, the masked Egyptian haplotypes showed these properties more markedly than the masked Ethiopian haplotypes', pointing to Egypt as the more likely gateway in the exodus to the rest of the world.
--Pagani et al 2015
Egyptturds.com wants to attribute "elongated features" to climate and diet. And here comes the joke: they expect others to fall for it. When the world doesn't follow them in the figments of their imagination, they think it's other people that are going on a limb, not them.
No wonder why they're the laughing stock everywhere.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you saying that Elongated tropically adapted bodies come from non-African mixture? So everyone from Fulani, Somali, Tutsi, Maasai, Bahima, comes from mixture? Why aren't the non-Africans this supposedly came from "Elongated" with the same body build? Show me the Eurasian ancestors who have this elongated body plan
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Damn you're stupid. You don't even know what an index is and you can't even read an abstract.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^Damn you're stupid. You don't even know what an index is and you can't even read an abstract.
NO you are stupid trying to equate Elongated Morphololgy with non-African and or North African mixture.
The Tutsi and Hutu have intermixed to some degree but, as groups, they reamin strikingly different. The Tutsi exhibit 'Hamitic' facial features to a marked degree. Do they systematically differ from the Hutu in the direction of Caucasoids?
The Tutsi are taller than the Hutu by nearly ten centimetres; the average male stature is 176 cm. such tallness is by no means characteristic of North Africa or Western Asia: for example, the inhabitants of the central plateau of Yemen have an average stature of 164 cm. In skin colour, the Tutsi are darker than the Hutu, in the reverse direction to that leading to the caucasoids. Lip thickness provides a similar case: on an average the lips of the Tutsi are thicker than those of the Hutu. In most cases, however, they are not everted as in many West Africans. Like that of the Hutu, the hair of the Tutsi is spiralled(perhaps less tightly so, but this has not been quantified).
In detailed study, relative growth in the two groups and in Europeans has been compared. In the development of a number of body proportions with age, which appears to be largely determined by heredity, the Tutsi are more different from Europeans than the Hutu[96]. In cephalic index, the Hutu are nearer to Yemenites than the Tutsi, whose long, narrow head makes their index lower than that of the other two groups..............
These comparisons do not lend support to the idea that the Tutsi are a mixture of Caucasoids and West Africans. If the West African element, introduced by mixing with the Hutu, were subtracted, their physique would differ even more from North Africans or Western Asians. Apparently, either 'Hamitic' facial features developed in the Tutsi's ancestral line independently of any exotic source or, if an exotic element was introduced, it was such a long time ago that selection has thoroughly remodelled the resulting gene pool. Even if the second hypothesis was correct, the physical appearance of the Tutsi would result from evolution which took place in sub-Saharan Africa.Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This shriveled turd thinks he can troll me and wish away what I said.
Charlie's elongated Africans have non-SSA ancestry. Being as duplicitous as he as, he's using them as stand ins for SSA populations that don't have this, so he can muddy the water and claim AE "cluster" with SSA groups:
quote:West Eurasian components were masked out, and the remaining African haplotypes were compared with a panel of sub-Saharan African and non-African genomes. We showed that masked Northeast African haplotypes overall were more similar to non-African haplotypes and more frequently present outside Africa than were any sets of haplotypes derived from a West African population. Furthermore, the masked Egyptian haplotypes showed these properties more markedly than the masked Ethiopian haplotypes', pointing to Egypt as the more likely gateway in the exodus to the rest of the world.
--Pagani et al 2015
Just as misleading as his word games talking about "West Africans come from the Sahara". Egyptturds.com posters are very good at packaging their duplicitous agendas in misleading terminology and hi-fiving amongst themselves that they're on to something.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^ Good information. I have to say from experience here that certain members are committed to denying that very Hapi Valley Origin and Dispersal of most "Sub Saharan" Africans (except for the Khoi and Twa) that you've detailed. It really is that simple!
Posts: 348 | From: Atlanta | Registered: Jan 2014
| IP: Logged |
I don't have a problem with the in situ theory of the "elongated African"/"Nilotid" morphology. However, "elongated Africans"/"Nilotids" don't have narrow noses. The Dinka, Shilluk and Nuer are platyrrhine (wide nosed) while Maasai are mesorrhine (medium nosed). https://landofpunt.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/hiernaux1974nilotemeans.jpg
If you look at Somalis, with few exceptions they're mesorrhine; I posted nasal indices from skulls from Somaliland burials (250 years old), they don't have narrow nasal aperture.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Line up genomes from Charlie's Sahelian (Bulala) and "elongated African" (Hema) with neighboring populations and you can immediate see why he's a trolling liar:
The Hema (and obviously, Tutsi) are an isolated island among neighboring Central African populations with North African and heightened East African ancestry.
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by .Charlie Bass.:
.
But Keita dodged the bullet.
He full well knew he should've used north Meds. He didn't. He stacked the deck.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Line up genomes from Charlie's Sahelian (Bulala) and Elongated African (Hema) with neighboring populations and you can immediate see why he's a trolling liar:
26 SNPs? loll Ok.
Posts: 2596 | From: Vicksburg | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Slow it down Chazz you starting to act out of reflex.
Dont think every reader is one of the Charismatic's cult of personality groupies.
Curs continually snapping at a lion's feet will weary out the king of the sveldt making him box wild.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic