posted
I could never understand why only one physical trait ---skin color--- is the identifier for race in the minds of some. Hair type or facial feature is equally valid if we want to play that singular trait race game.
Cheddar man resembles an East Indian when you consider skin, hair and face. If anyone could claim European heritage, it would be them, not Africans. I boggles the mind.
quote:Originally posted by Black Crystal: I could never understand why only one physical trait ---skin color--- is the identifier for race in the minds of some. Hair type or facial feature is equally valid if we want to play that singular trait race game.
Cheddar man resembles an East Indian when you consider skin, hair and face.
You know many people on ES don't think blackness is exclusive to Africa right? But anyway, Cheddar man has been disrespected and frequently called black by the Eurocentric establishment which is why people still call him black. Cheddar man doesn't fully resemble any group of people alive today that I know of.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
I find that the racial term "black" is used in a nebulous way on this form by a few. Most people in the world default black to subsaharan Africans. You'd be hard pressed to find someone racially designating people like East Indians, who have dark or black skin, as "black." Further, I think some on this forum purposely hide behind this confusion as a means to latch Africans onto non African, dark skin people history. Clearly Cheddar man does not resemble an African. So why play the semantics game by calling him "black?"
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Black Crystal: I could never understand why only one physical trait ---skin color--- is the identifier for race in the minds of some. Hair type or facial feature is equally valid if we want to play that singular trait race game.
Cheddar man resembles an East Indian when you consider skin, hair and face.
You know many people on ES don't think blackness is exclusive to Africa right? But anyway, Cheddar man has been disrespected and frequently called black by the Eurocentric establishment which is why people still call him black. Cheddar man doesn't fully resemble any group of people alive today that I know of.
quote:Originally posted by Black Crystal: I find that the racial term "black" is used in a nebulous way on this form by a few. Most people in the world default black to subsaharan Africans.
If you asked most people who an Adamanese, Aeta, or a Melanesian was, many of them wouldn't know they exist. SSA have more global notoriety.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: Cheddar man has been disrespected
posted
Chaddar Man had a haplogroup that is most common with Americans and looks like an American. Redskin helmetish. Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: some people have a political interest in Cheddar man not being very dark
and different people who don't want Cheddar man to be dark may have entirely different motives as to why they don't want him to be dark
I've been around the web, and there seems to be an agenda even among the experts in favor of Cheddar man being very dark because it gives them a foot in the door to claim North Africans and SW Asians as very dark Caucasoids i.e. a revived Hamitic Hypothesis.
Other than that, I don't care what this prehistoric Brit's complexion is. If he truly was that dark, then so be it. However, I find it hard to believe a late UP European living that high a latitude would have skin as dark as one indigenous to equatorial regions.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: some people have a political interest in Cheddar man not being very dark
and different people who don't want Cheddar man to be dark may have entirely different motives as to why they don't want him to be dark
I've been around the web, and there seems to be an agenda even among the experts in favor of Cheddar man being very dark because it gives them a foot in the door to claim North Africans and SW Asians as very dark Caucasoids i.e. a revived Hamitic Hypothesis.
Other than that, I don't care what this prehistoric Brit's complexion is. If he truly was that dark, then so be it. However, I find it hard to believe a late UP European living that high a latitude would have skin as dark as one indigenous to equatorial regions.
You can't change your view of reality just to counter some other agenda
Tibetan man
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: You can't change your view of reality just to counter some other agenda
I'm not! My view has always been the same. However, I can't help but get the feeling that your post above is nothing more than projection on your part as you have a bad penchant of twisting reality for your agenda.
quote: Tibetan man
Your photo above only proves my point. The Tibetan man is obviously dark but not as dark as the reconstructed Cheddar Man whose complexion is that of an equatorial aboriginal.
And yet Tibet is closer to the equator than England.
In fact the Tibetan capital of Lhasa falls about the same latitude as Cairo, Egypt. Please explain your Lioness.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Alright, I had forgotten that Tibet is not that North. One thing about it is the high elevation exposes people (at least their faces) to more UV. Most are not as dark as this man. But some Mongolians are somewhat dark although again we see only northern Mongolia corresponds to London latitudes
My point is that some people want Cheddar man to be black so that they can say "see, blacks in Europe, what did I tell you, the white man is a newcomer. We ruled Europe" but you seem to have this other view with a motive not entirely different but has another angle "we can't have these white racists thinking cheddar man was black. They might attach the word "caucasoid" to it and try to go ham (hamitic)".
I ask you is there a proper definition of caucasoid? Is it a valid term?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
What does Skraeling looking blue eyed black skinned Cheddar Man have to do with the history, genetic or otherwise, of Africa and African peoples? Help me. I see no connections.
Connections to Picts or 'indigenous' Brit Isles blacks as per Mac Ritchie? Ok, yeah maybe.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: Alright, I had forgotten that Tibet is not that North. One thing about it is the high elevation exposes people (at least their faces) to more UV. Most are not as dark as this man. But some Mongolians are somewhat dark although again we see only northern Mongolia corresponds to London latitudes
Yes but NONE approaches the hue of the reconstruction.
quote:My point is that some people want Cheddar man to be black so that they can say "see, blacks in Europe, what did I tell you, the white man is a newcomer. We ruled Europe"...
Yes, but such a view is held by an extreme fringe whom nobody takes seriously. Anyone with brains knows that black does not necessarily equate to African.
quote:but you seem to have this other view with a motive not entirely different but has another angle "we can't have these white racists thinking cheddar man was black. They might attach the word "caucasoid" to it and try to go ham (hamitic)".
No! My motive is entirely different because unlike the Afronuts whom you only criticize I never denied that Cheddar Man was ancestral to white Europeans living in that area and thus NOT having anything to do with the blacks of Africa. My point is the Euronuts will use this as an excuse to revive the Hamitic myth and then claim blacks in North Africa as being related to Europeans and not Sub-Saharans. Unlike the Afronuts whom you only go after, the Euronuts have held such a premise for over a century which went mainstream in academia and may very well rear its ugly head again. Tell me, what Afronut theories like those of Clyde of Marc have ever been in mainstream academia??
quote:I ask you is there a proper definition of caucasoid? Is it a valid term?
I don't know. Is there one for negroid? How about mongoloid??
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
@djhuti you do realize the higher up you go in elevation the sun's effects becomes readily appearent so white skin would have no benefit.
Posts: 1123 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes: So Chedda wasn't haplogroup C?
No, look it up, google
"Cheddar Man" haplogroup
______________________________________
and now you're speaking of C but not indicating Y or mtDNA.
Y DNA "Haplogroup C-M130 is found in ancient populations on every continent except Africa and is the predominant Y-DNA haplogroup among males belonging to many peoples indigenous to East Asia, Central Asia, Siberia, North America and Oceania.
Possible place of origin: South Asia
^Here we have North America included but it's found in many other places so using a picture of an American Indian is not primary representative
______________
Haplogroup C is found in Northeast Asia[2] (including Siberia). In Eurasia, Haplogroup C is especially frequent among populations of arctic Siberia, such as Yukaghirs and Nganasans.[3] Haplogroup C is one of five mtDNA haplogroups found in the indigenous peoples of the Americas, the others being A, B, D, and X. The subclades C1b, C1c, C1d, and C4c are found in the first people of the Americas. C1a is found only in Asia.
So again a picture of an American Indian is not a primary representative. Their ancestors are Siberian.
More than a half of the northern Asian pool of human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is fragmented into a number of subclades of haplogroups C. More than a half of the northern Asian pool of mtDNA is fragmented into a number of subclades of haplogroups C and D, two of the most frequent haplogroups throughout northern, eastern, central Asia and America. Previous studies have proposed that haplogroups C and D originated around 30–50 kya in eastern Asia, from where they subsequently expanded northwards to southern Siberia, and further deep into northern Asia and the Americas, and westwards along the Steppe Belt extending from Manchuria to Europe
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Thereal: @djhuti you do realize the higher up you go in elevation the sun's effects becomes readily appearent so white skin would have no benefit.
Yes, I know this. But the issue here is not altitude but latitude. Melanin is a pigment used to block excess UV rays since such can damage living skin cells. However the skin needs some adequate exposure to UV in order to produce vitamin D which is an essential nutrient for healthy bone growth and development. The lower in latitude i.e. the closer one gets to the equator the more UV ray exposure. Thus equatorial populations aboriginal to an area with maybe the exception of the Americas are very black. The higher in latitude i.e. the farther you are away from the equator the less UV ray exposure. So Europeans especially those of northern areas are pale in complexion and the same is true of northeast Asians because the UV rays are weak in these areas melanin becomes a liability. Certain North Asian populations like the Eskimo are an exception to this rule in that they have relatively dark skins even though they live in polar regions, the reason being that they traditionally lived off vitamin D rich diets of fish meat and marine mammal blubber. This is why dark skinned and especially black people who move to Northern Europe must supplement vitamin D into their diets especially growing children or else they will suffer vitamin D deficiency disorders such as rickets. On the flip side when whites move to equatorial regions they have to use sunscreen or else suffer the consequences of UV skin damage which leads to skin cancer.
^^ However, even if European skin became pale relatively recently, the change couldn't have been from the Nigerian-like complexion of Cheddar Man reconstruction to palor all of sudden. That is why I'm saying Late Paleolithic Europeans probably were dark but not that dark!
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
I never denied that Cheddar Man was ancestral to white Europeans living in that area and thus NOT have anything to do with the blacks of Europe.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
My point is the Euronuts will use this as an excuse to revive the Hamitic myth and then claim blacks in North Africa as being related to Europeans and not Sub-Saharans.
Afroasiatic-speaking ethnic groups such as the Afar (Danakil) were regarded as being of Hamitic origin because of their Caucasoid physiognomies, cultural traits and language.
.
.
Cheddar Man is a human male fossil found in Gough's Cave in Cheddar Gorge, Somerset, England.
I see what you're saying the Euronuts could say the Egyptians were Black English immigrants They could also try to tie it into that red hair Irish theory. We can see the similarity between this Afar and Cheddar man (possible prelude to future Euronut's set up)
Interesting how the BBC online article (bottom photo) shows the same Cheddar man reconstruction looking lighter. They did that with the Tut reconstruction as well as the Barbra Steishand-esque Nefertiti. Some photos have lighter conditions some darker of the same reconstuction-- tricks
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: you mean trying to instigate me to say something against Clyde?
No. Incitement of conflict against other posters is YOUR arena. On the contrary I asked why you only attack fringe Afrocentrics like Clyde and Marc but never the predominant or prevailing Eurocentric ones?? Or perhaps this question to you is rhetorical. LOL
quote:And is not the Hamitic hypothesis something borne out of academia ???
Precisely my point! 'Hamitic' [read: black Caucasoid] was a Eurocentric concotion and I fear that the black Cheddar Man is another return to this.
As of yet, I still haven't gotten a valid answer as to how the experts came to conclusion that Cheddar Man was that dark in complexion.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
^ Based on just looking at this photo and assuming "black" is a valid term,
is this a black man ?
_________________________________________
no answer like "he's a black_______"
"yes" or "no" only please is this a black man ?
'Black' is color descriptive NOT an ancestral one. The answer is YES Cheddar Man as he portrayed above is black. But again, how did the experts come to the conclusion of him being that dark considering this place of origin? That someone has dark skin does not mean he/she was dark enough to be black. Of course we know YOUR agend and why you are pushing this.
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: you mean trying to instigate me to say something against Clyde?
No. Incitement of conflict against other posters is YOUR arena. On the contrary I asked why you only attack fringe Afrocentrics like Clyde and Marc but never the predominant or prevailing Eurocentric ones?? Or perhaps this question to you is rhetorical. LOL
FALSE ! there are hardly even any "Euroecentrics" posting anymore !! FALSE ! I even have urged ES posters to send letters to the creators of reconstructions that they disagree with and listed the email addresses. And I've done it myself. FALSE ! Cass even went so far as to make an anti-lioness channel name to take revenge for me exposing his aliases
Clyde and I are the only Afrocentrics left on this site (we just have minor "issues" at times)
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
As of yet, I still haven't gotten a valid answer as to how the experts came to conclusion that Cheddar Man was that dark in complexion.
because there are alleles they consider to be markers indicating degree of darkness(see supp) However the authors have since said that these markers are not reliable enough to say how dark he was
We know that a dark skinned Cheddar man would attract a lot of attention to the reconstruction team and research authors
But do you believe the reconstruction team said to themselves " we need to darken this ancient Brit's skin tone in our data so later we can use it to revive a Hamitic-like theory for Africa" ?
but they really didn't think he was that dark?
Or did it originate with the authors of the article who said to themselves "let's artificially darken this ancient Brit's skin tone so we can revive a Hamitic-like theory for Africa" ?
That seems peculiar that people who call themselves "white people" would be motivated to do that with nefarious intent
Wouldn't a white nationalist in want the ancient Brits to be as white as they are?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: 'Hamitic' [read: black Caucasoid] was a Eurocentric concotion and I fear that the black Cheddar Man is another return to this.
Have no fear lioness is here
what if the black Caucasoid origin is in Africa ???
then what ??
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
^ Based on just looking at this photo and assuming "black" is a valid term,
is this a black man ?
_________________________________________
no answer like "he's a black_______"
"yes" or "no" only please is this a black man ?
'Black' is color descriptive NOT an ancestral one. The answer is YES Cheddar Man as he portrayed above is black. But again, how did the experts come to the conclusion of him being that dark considering this place of origin? That someone has dark skin does not mean he/she was dark enough to be black. Of course we know YOUR agend and why you are pushing this.
^^ Americans don't call this a black person unless a question about color or skin is asked.
This is reflected in the U.S. Census:
.
You will note "Asian Indian" has it's own category while while "African am" is listed under Black
this despite the fact that many Aframs are lighter than this Indian
That is common usage in America
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Yes the Indian man above like many Indians in the subcontinent are dark enough to be 'black'. But most of India lies in the tropics with its northern area in the same subtropical zone as Egypt. Again Cheddar Man lived all the way in England. Show me a black population indigenous to areas near the subpolar zone.
Even many Khoisan who lived just outside the tropical zone are light-skinned enough to technically not be 'black'!
Yet we expect a Prehistoric Brit to be as dark as Nigerian??
-------------------- Mahirap gisingin ang nagtutulog-tulugan. Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Nigerians have full range of complexions. Your avg Igbo is lighter than your avg Hausa speaking Fulani.
Red Ebo --> Redbone? (Ask a Yardie, but don't you dare call her one. No no.)
Fuck a US census. Identity isn't description. Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans are three separate races? Right! For #9 I have to choose SOME OTHER RACE -- PRINT RACE
Reminder: Little Black Sambo is East Indian. Kipling, raised in India, writes his fellow Brits calls southern East Indians nigger.
OK, now let's turn on a dime. While this thread is still in Egyptology forum let's forego feelings for facts(data) just a for a minute. Comparing any mulberry black skins to Mister Cheddar, what do genetic skin markers (link) show?
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Yes the Indian man above like many Indians in the subcontinent are dark enough to be 'black'.
'Black' is color descriptive NOT an ancestral one.
Again, I have shown that in American word usage calling brown skinned people "black" is determined by color + hair type + features (with certain proportional variances allowed) And we see how that common usage is reflected in the U.S. census and how most people categorize people in America. We may not like it, it may not be ancientgreekcentric but that is the common usage in America, it goes beyond skin , black, "a person who looks African" that is the true current definition according to usage in America and in Europe
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
But most of India lies in the tropics with its northern area in the same subtropical zone as Egypt. Again Cheddar Man lived all the way in England. Show me a black population indigenous to areas near the subpolar zone.
Yet we expect a Prehistoric Brit to be as dark as Nigerian?? [/qb]
I told your ass look at the supplement
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
US census race is for US civil rights monitoring. It doesn't pretend accuracy for what we discuss here. Chinese Japanese and Koreans are not separate races to anybody in the US or anywhere else. Obviously, and by its own admission "The Census Bureau defines RACE as a person's self-identification with one or more SOCIAL GROUPS."
The US gov knows its OBM directive is whack-a-doodle.
quote:
... a growing number of people find the current race and ethnic categories confusing, or they wish to see their own specific group reflected on the census questionnaire. Our research has found that over time, there have been a growing number of people who do not identify with any of the official OMB race categories, and this means that an increasing number of respondents have been racially classified as “Some Other Race." [...] Some Other Race (SOR) population, which was intended to be a small residual category, was the third largest race group.
USgov social group "races" aren't colour driven. No brown, red, yellow, olive, pink or gray races. USgov recognize its own shortcomings getting the popular view all wrong (link)
quote:
... Afro-Caribbean and Middle Eastern or North African populations, did not identify with any of the OMB race categories and identified as SOR.
Evidently its to each their own social opinions. Pop goes the weasel!
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ Yes the Indian man above like many Indians in the subcontinent are dark enough to be 'black'. But most of India lies in the tropics with its northern area in the same subtropical zone as Egypt. Again Cheddar Man lived all the way in England. Show me a black population indigenous to areas near the subpolar zone.
Even many Khoisan who lived just outside the tropical zone are light-skinned enough to technically not be 'black'!
Yet we expect a Prehistoric Brit to be as dark as Nigerian??
Remember that Cheddar Man is thought to have been descended from a fairly recent wave of immigrants who came into Britain from further south around 12,000 years ago.
quote:There has previously been some evidence of settlers in Britain 40,000 years ago. But alternating periods of extreme cold weather had led to sporadic settlement until about 12,000 years ago, where hunter-gatherers were thought to have crossed over from mainland Europe, which was still connected via landmass to Britain. This latest work makes it possible to associate Cheddar Man and his kind in Britain with other hunter-gatherers from the Mesolithic age on the continent, who are better understood.
So he and his people may not necessarily be the result of long-term adaptation to a Northern European environment. They could have ultimately come from somewhere in the Mediterranean basin, for all we know. In fact, I recall Swenet arguing in another thread that he had a bit of "Basal Eurasian" ancestry from northern Africa. Maybe that's where some of his dark-skin alleles come from?
^ Based on just looking at this photo and assuming "black" is a valid term,
is this a black man ?
_________________________________________
no answer like "he's a black_______"
"yes" or "no" only please is this a black man ?
'Black' is color descriptive NOT an ancestral one. The answer is YES Cheddar Man as he portrayed above is black. But again, how did the experts come to the conclusion of him being that dark considering this place of origin? That someone has dark skin does not mean he/she was dark enough to be black. Of course we know YOUR agend and why you are pushing this.
^^ Americans don't call this a black person unless a question about color or skin is asked.
This is reflected in the U.S. Census:
.
You will note "Asian Indian" has it's own category while while "African am" is listed under Black
this despite the fact that many Aframs are lighter than this Indian
That is common usage in America
South Asians where considered black by the British and the Americans for most of it's history. Black in America is the old name of an ethnic group that is now considered African American precisely because some AA's are not "black" at all but are ethnically AA
So quit instigating because you feel bad about your own "black" south asian ancestors. Lioness look in the mirror and own your blackness and quit being an agent for Europeans who treated the Hindoos like black dogs for centuries.
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Afro/African Americans are a culture, ethnicity, lineage of a group of people from chattel slavery AA's are too heterogeneous to be a "race" even if you believe in such a thing as "race"
-------------------- It's not my burden to disabuse the ignorant of their wrong opinions Posts: 2699 | From: New York | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
@ Lioness, nobody cares about what you are saying or any supplement. All you have been supplying is b.s.! I think I already proved my point whereas all you've proven is that you're full of it.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Nigerians have full range of complexions. Your avg Igbo is lighter than your avg Hausa speaking Fulani.
Red Ebo --> Redbone? (Ask a Yardie, but don't you dare call her one. No no.)
Yes, thank you Tukuler. I am well aware of the complexion diversity of Nigerians. I was just speaking in stereotypical sense of course.
quote:Fuck a US census. Identity isn't description. Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans are three separate races? Right! For #9 I have to choose SOME OTHER RACE -- PRINT RACE
Precisely why I chose to ignore the lioness's census crap.
quote:Reminder: Little Black Sambo is East Indian. Kipling, raised in India, writes his fellow Brits calls southern East Indians nigger.
Of course! We all know there are many Indians dark enough to be labeled as black. Well except for her lioness.
quote:OK, now let's turn on a dime. While this thread is still in Egyptology forum let's forego feelings for facts(data) just a for a minute. Comparing any mulberry black skins to Mister Cheddar, what do genetic skin markers (link) show?
Correct. The article you linked to again only proves what I'm saying. Skin complexion is more complex than simply black or white. Again, I never denied that Late UP Europeans like Cheddar Man had dark skin. The question is exactly how dark. What I doubt is that he had a complexion as dark as an equatorial even though he lived all the way in a subpolar area just past the last Ice Age! This is just common sense.
Lioness is nothing more than a troll peddling her wares of b.s.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by EgyWolf: Europe is White, the same thing as most users here claim that Africa is Black
if some Blacks don't think that Parts of Africa were never black why should we believe them when theyre dying to prove that part of Europe was black .
i comfortably dont think that Boris Johnson former foreign secretary had an ancestor from Congo
whoever believes an illusion wont open his eyes to facts and common sense unless he moves far from that illusion
Yes modern Europe IS mostly white. The debate is whether it was always white in it's past. Just because most of Africa hasn't changed so much in phenotype that they would be considered a different race from most of their ancestors doesn't mean that this would apply to everyone.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic