I have just found a study of Indian Y-chromosomes, "High Resolution Phylogeographic Map of Y-Chromosomes Reveal the Genetic Signatures of Pleistocene Origin of Indian Populations" (R. Trivedi, Sanghamitra Sahoo, Anamika Singh, G. Hima Bindu, Jheelam Banerjee, Manuj Tandon, Sonali Gaikwad, Revathi Rajkumar, T Sitalaximi, Richa Ashma, G. B. N. Chainy and V. K. Kashyap), that reports a significant percentage (36/1152 or approximately 3.1%) of haplogroup K2-M70 in India.
The most surprising aspect of this report was that haplogroup K2-M70 Y-chromosomes were found only in two regions of India: East India, which is considered to be originally territory of the Mundaic peoples (a western subgroup of the Austro-Asiatic language family) later overlain with an Indo-Aryan (primarily Oriya and Bengali) adstratum, and the eastern coast of South India, which is inhabited originally by speakers of South-Central Dravidian (e.g. Telugu) and South Dravidian (e.g. Tamil). Haplogroup K2-M70 was not found among the study's samples of populations in West India, North India, or Northeast India.
Haplogroup K2-M70 was found in 4/179 (2.2%) Austro-Asiatic tribal samples, 14/126 (11.1%) Dravidian tribal samples (mainly among Kurru AKA Yerukalas AKA Erukalas AKA Erukulas), 0/92 (0.0%) Tibeto-Burman tribal samples, 3/108 (2.8%) Indo-European tribal samples, 0/72 (0.0%) Dravidian upper caste samples, 3/58 (5.2%) Dravidian middle caste samples, 0/137 (0.0%) Dravidian lower caste samples, 0/132 (0.0%) Indo-European upper caste samples, 0/117 (0.0%) Indo-European middle caste samples, and 12/115 (10.4%) Indo-European lower caste samples. Every one of the 36 haplogroup K2-M70 samples from East/Southeast India had a distinctive haplotype, which results in a 1.000 (100%) lineage diversity value.
As for the distribution of haplogroup K2-M70 outside of India, it seems that it reaches its highest frequency among certain groups of Fula people (AKA Fulbe AKA Fulani), particularly those dwelling in the Sahel belt that stretches across southern Niger, northern Nigeria, and northern Cameroon. Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
In human genetics, Haplogroup O (M175) is a Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup. Hg O is one of several descendants of Haplogroup K, and is a close cladistic brother group with Haplogroup N (the intermediate being Hg NO).
Origins
Haplogroup O is a descendant haplogroup of Haplogroup NO (M214), and is believed to have first appeared in Siberia or eastern Central Asia approximately 35,000 years ago. Haplogroup O shares a node in the phylogenetic tree of human Y-chromosomes with Haplogroup N, which is common throughout North Eurasia.
Distribution
This haplogroup appears in 80-90% of all men in East and Southeast Asia, and it is almost exclusive to that region: M175 is almost nonexistent in Western Siberia, Western Asia, and Europe and is completely absent from Africa and the Americas, although certain subclades of Haplogroup O do achieve significant frequencies among some populations of South Asia, Central Asia, and Oceania.
Among the subbranches of Haplogroup O are Haplogroup O1, Haplogroup O2, and Haplogroup O3.
Haplogroup O* lineages, which belong to Haplogroup O but do not display any of the later mutations that define the major subclades O1, O2, and O3, can still be detected at a low frequency among most modern populations of Central Asia and East Asia. For example, a broad survey of Y-chromosome variation among populations of central Eurasia found haplogroup O-M175*(xO1a-M119,O2a-M95,O3-M122) in 2.5% (one out of 40 individuals) of a sample of Tajiks in Samarkand, 4.5% (1/22) of Crimean Tatars in Uzbekistan, 1.5% (1/68) of Uzbeks in Surkhandarya, 1.4% (1/70) of Uzbeks in Khorezm, 6.3% (1/16) of Tajiks in Dushanbe, 1.9% (1/54) of Kazakhs in Kazakhstan, 4.9% (2/41) of Uyghurs in Kazakhstan, and 31.1% (14/45) of Koreans.[1] However, nearly all of these Korean O*(xO1a,O2a,O3) Y-chromosomes probably belong to Haplogroup O2b, which has been found in approximately 30% of many samples of Koreans. There is also a possibility that the so-called Haplogroup O* Y-chromosomes that have been found among these populations might belong to Haplogroup O1*(xO1a-M119), Haplogroup O2*(xO2a-M95,O2b-M176), or Haplogroup O2b-M176.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Clyde - I posed some questions for you in the "Were the Pre-Inca or Peruvian an African Peoples? - 4100 BC - 400 AD" thread.
This thread fits well with the questions, so if it's okay with you, I will repost here.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: TheAmericanPatriot - I wish to take advantage of your sudden lucidity, to investigate the mystery of the races in Ancient Asia from a White point of view.
As I have shown, modern Mongols are a hybrid of White and slanty-eyed Blacks. And of course, these slanty-eyed Blacks didn't jump directly TO China. They were also part of the Indus Valley population also.
As you know, the great remaining mystery of the races is; What are White people, and where did they come from (before they settled in Asia)?
Even though meninarmer has provided creditable proof that Whites are derived from Albinos; I am still not convinced, and here is why.
As you can see from this Qin soldier, as recently as 2,000 years ago, the Mongol race was still identifiably Negroid.
But the other day, I perused through pictures of the 54 minorities of China, and I could not find any group that was still "identifiably Negroid". Rather, I found pictures like this. (Ya I know, who says the pictures were accurate, Chinese lie just like White people do - and we already know they don't want to admit that they were originally Black).
These pictures suggest to me that in perhaps the majority of cases, Black genes have almost totally been overwhelmed by White genes in East Asia (China, Japan, Korea).
This further suggests a VERY large White population in China and East Asia, one much larger than the Black population.
When the White population in West and Central Asia is taken into consideration, (those that moved to Europe, and those that stayed behind), it amounts to a HUGE White, or mostly White population in the world.
With all due respect to meninarmer, I just don't see that large a White population deriving from a colony of Albinos.
Unless Whites have lied to us again, and the migration at 50,000 ya WAS the Albinos. With the slanty-eyed Khoisans coming MUCH later.
This scenario WOULD work. Whites have told us that the White race started with just seven breeding pairs. With a head start of thousands of years, Whites would have had a chance to multiply their numbers by the millions in Asia.
Thus when the NORMAL Blacks arrived "much later" they could have been easily absorbed by the Albinos already there. This NEW infusion of genetic material, could also explain why MODERN Whites and Mongols are no longer completely Albino.
I have always wondered why civilization started so late in China (1,500 B.C.), relative to Egypt and the Middle East. And why the Black Jomon and Ainu in Japan never did establish a true civilization.
Could it be that the people who established civilization in China, the Black Xia and Shang, were actually Indus Valley people? The timeframe seems to work.
But explaining the Black Jomon and Ainu in Japan is tougher. They were there since 35,000 B.C. So could it be that they too, were part of the 50,000 ya migration, and they left China to go to Japan before the later arriving Blacks brought civilization? (Maybe they just couldn't stand the Albinos - just kidding).
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: With all due respect to meninarmer, I just don't see that large a White population deriving from a colony of Albinos.
Unless Whites have lied to us again, and the migration at 50,000 ya WAS the Albinos. With the slanty-eyed Khoisans coming MUCH later.
Mike, take note that the Khoisan have one of the highest incident rates of Albinism in Africa, and the world at ~ 1/300. Also note the migration groups out of Africa were relatively small at maximum group sizes of 2000.
The probability that Whites lie about their own, and traceable African histories, 9.99/10. This consistent historic fact can not, and should not be ignored.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Wednesday, January 03, 2001, updated at 14:49(GMT+8) Sci-Edu
Scientists Succeeded in Extracting DNA from Ancient Human Bones
As reported from the Molecular Anthropology and Human Colony Genetics Lab, Chinese scientists have successfully extracted DNA from ancient bones of Shanghai people, dating back to the period of 4,000-5,000 years ago. This marks a big stride forward for China to set its foot into the modern molecular biology field.
Molecular Anthropology and Human Colony Genetics Lab was co-founded by Shanghai History Museum and Genetics Institute of Fudan University. The two research departments have all along been engaged in DNA study of ancient human bones, and so far, a series of results have been achieved by them.
Prior to this, the lab researchers extracted DNA from ancient human bones of 3200 years ago in Hami area of Xinjiang. Sequencing test proved that Caucasus and Mongolian races had ever (always) lived together at that time in Hami.
Up to now, the lab has collected a great number of ancient human bone materials from various archaeological sites all over the country and will set up an ancient Chinese bones gene bank.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^^^How about the rest of it meninarmer, make any sense to you?
Variation in the Response to UVR
Although formal studies that compare world populations with standardized insults have not been performed, sensitivity to the effects of UVR on skin is highly polymorphic within “normal” nondiseased populations. Within Northern European populations, there is a 4–5-fold variation in response, both between persons at the same body site and between different body sites on the same person (Ha et al. 2003a; Waterston et al., in press). To produce the same change in blood flux as is seen in a pale-skinned European, a >100-fold increase in UVR dose is required for a person with black skin from the African subcontinent (J.L.R., unpublished data). If sensitivity is viewed in terms of skin cancer rates, then up to a 500-fold difference in sensitivity is evident (Urbach Urbach, 1999 F Urbach, The cumulative effects of ultraviolet radiation on the skin: photocarcinogenesis. In: JLM Hawk, Editor, Photodermatology, Arnold, London (1999), pp. 89–111.1999; Rees, in press).
In seeking to understand this variation, two rare genodermatoses—albinism (MIM 203100) and xeroderma pigmentosum (XP [MIM 278730])—have offered important insights into the molecular mechanisms underpinning sun sensitivity. When these insights are coupled with the morphological changes seen when skin is exposed to UVR (described above), a simple model to explain variation in sensitivity, both to acute inflammation and to skin cancer, can be suggested.
The first rare Mendelian disorder is albinism (for a recent review, see King et al. [2001]). Albinos are unable to make adequate amounts of melanin, and their phenotype provides a clear example of the role of melanin in protection against the harmful effects of UVR. Albinos are intensely sensitive to the effects of UVR: they develop acute erythema, swelling, blistering, and pain in response to what would be trivial amounts of UVR to others; in the long term, albinism leads to a greatly increased risk of some forms of skin cancer (Kromberg et al. 1989). In equatorial regions, skin cancers—chiefly squamous cell carcinoma rather than melanoma—may develop in albinos during the teenage years, which leads to a significant mortality—as well as morbidity—rate in the 3rd decade of life (Lookingbill et al. 1995).
The second Mendelian disorder is the DNA nuclear excision repair defect syndrome, XP (for a recent review, see Bootsma et al. [2001]). With XP, as with albinism, most subjects are highly sensitive to the harmful effects of UVR, which leads to acute complications similar to those seen with albinism, and—at an even earlier age than for albinism—to the development of malignancies, including melanoma and squamous cell carcinoma (Bootsma et al. 2001).
The heuristic importance of XP is that it has provided links between several originally disparate pathological features—namely, DNA defects, skin cancer, acute erythema, and the DNA action spectrum of UVR. Patients with XP have abnormally increased and prolonged erythemal responses, have increased rates of skin cancer, and are deficient in the particular types of DNA repair that are maximal at those wavelengths that are most effective in the induction of erythema in normal subjects (and of most cancers in experimental animals). Furthermore, within the XP spectrum of disorders, it is possible to associate different repair subtypes (such as transcription-coupled repair and global-damage repair) with particular phenotypes, such as enhanced erythemal response or skin cancer (see Kolgen et al. [2003] and Berg et al. [1998] for further discussion).
These Mendelian disorders, coupled with what we know of the physiology of skin when irradiated, suggest pathways that may be important for explanation of variation in response to UVR within the normal population. First, resting pigmentation (pigmentation prior to sun exposure) can be viewed as a protective factor that acts by preventing harmful photons from reaching the viable part of the skin and causing damage to DNA and other macromolecules. Second, once DNA damage has occurred, DNA repair pathways are activated. Third, in ways that are poorly understood, UVR-induced inflammation and DNA damage are associated with a series of changes that limit further insults from UVR, including an increase in pigmentation (tanning) and an increase in the thickness of the epidermis. Finally, the degree of variation in inflammation (to a uniform insult) is also likely to vary among persons, and, since inflammation may well be related causally to the ability to photoadapt, this variation feeds back into the variation attributable to the other factors.
In practice, the genetics of pigmentation and, to a lesser degree, the genetics of DNA repair are better understood than the genetic factors that determine the degree of epidermal thickening or variation in the inflammatory response between persons (Kulms and Schwarz 2000; Murphy et al. 2001).
World wide reporting of (1) Albinism, and (2) XP, list the following in order of highest incident rate of all world populations.
(1) Albino (All world groups) (2) European descent throughout world (3) Asian, magnitude lower incident than European (4) Other, negligible
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^^^How about the rest of it meninarmer, make any sense to you?
Yes, it makes perfect sense. One scenario you mentioned about "white" genes, or genetic mutations dominating African normalized genes can be possibly explained that more Albinos made the migration out of Africa than blacks who were environmentally acclimated to Africa UV. In Africa, these groups were generally somewhat isolated from other darkened tribe, forming small pockets of Albino tribes in-line with the Native American isolation of Albinos from larger tribes. These small groups would have formed tribal clans and seen an increase in their average life expectancies, from the average 30 years in the hostile African environment to perhaps an 30-60% increase to 40-50 years. With inbreeding amongst tribal members they would have experienced a great increase in populations combined with population increases from incoming clans.
Also, since Khoisan tribes in South Africa evolved eye folds (slanted eyes) I'm not certain if this adaptation is indeed due to Asian/European environmental adaption alone. South African and Asian environments are not similar in this respect where both develop these same characteristics due to environmental reasons. Perhaps more in line with development due to possible Photophobia as South African Khoisan with Albinism may have exhibited.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are no longer any Blacks in China because most were Killed off. During early Han times, they were usually made slaves after the hand took the Culture of the Black Chinese. These Blacks were called: Yueh chih/ Kushana, li min and Qiang. The Qing are frequently mentioned as sacrifice victims in the Oracle Bone writing which was introduced to China by the Mande (Xia) and Dravidian Blacks.
They settled Gansu and remained there until the later part of the 2nd Century BC when they were forced into Central Asia.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Clyde - I posed some questions for you in the "Were the Pre-Inca or Peruvian an African Peoples? - 4100 BC - 400 AD" thread.
This thread fits well with the questions, so if it's okay with you, I will repost here.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: TheAmericanPatriot - I wish to take advantage of your sudden lucidity, to investigate the mystery of the races in Ancient Asia from a White point of view.
As I have shown, modern Mongols are a hybrid of White and slanty-eyed Blacks. And of course, these slanty-eyed Blacks didn't jump directly TO China. They were also part of the Indus Valley population also.
As you know, the great remaining mystery of the races is; What are White people, and where did they come from (before they settled in Asia)?
Even though meninarmer has provided creditable proof that Whites are derived from Albinos; I am still not convinced, and here is why.
As you can see from this Qin soldier, as recently as 2,000 years ago, the Mongol race was still identifiably Negroid.
But the other day, I perused through pictures of the 54 minorities of China, and I could not find any group that was still "identifiably Negroid". Rather, I found pictures like this. (Ya I know, who says the pictures were accurate, Chinese lie just like White people do - and we already know they don't want to admit that they were originally Black).
These pictures suggest to me that in perhaps the majority of cases, Black genes have almost totally been overwhelmed by White genes in East Asia (China, Japan, Korea).
This further suggests a VERY large White population in China and East Asia, one much larger than the Black population.
When the White population in West and Central Asia is taken into consideration, (those that moved to Europe, and those that stayed behind), it amounts to a HUGE White, or mostly White population in the world.
With all due respect to meninarmer, I just don't see that large a White population deriving from a colony of Albinos.
Unless Whites have lied to us again, and the migration at 50,000 ya WAS the Albinos. With the slanty-eyed Khoisans coming MUCH later.
This scenario WOULD work. Whites have told us that the White race started with just seven breeding pairs. With a head start of thousands of years, Whites would have had a chance to multiply their numbers by the millions in Asia.
Thus when the NORMAL Blacks arrived "much later" they could have been easily absorbed by the Albinos already there. This NEW infusion of genetic material, could also explain why MODERN Whites and Mongols are no longer completely Albino.
posted
The Mande and Dravidian speaking people left Africa at the same time. The Dravidian people used the same writing system they had used in Africa.
They migrated across Iran into India , thence Central Asia and China. The Dravidians founded the Indus Valley civilization they mined much of the Lapis lazuri.
Civilization began earlier than 1500 BC. This was the date that the Polynesian people conquered the Dravidian-Shang Dynasty and moved the capital to Anyang. The present Chinese people are Hua Han. They founded the Zhou Dynasty, enslaved the li min and Qiang and began to systematically commit genocide.
The Dravidians were pushed back into India, while the Original African speaking Blacks were forced onto the Pacific islands.
.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Clyde - Following the scenario above:
I have always wondered why civilization started so late in China (1,500 B.C.), relative to Egypt and the Middle East. And why the Black Jomon and Ainu in Japan never did establish a true civilization.
Could it be that the people who established civilization in China, the Black Xia and Shang, were actually Indus Valley people? The timeframe seems to work.
But explaining the Black Jomon and Ainu in Japan is tougher. They were there since 35,000 B.C. So could it be that they too, were part of the 50,000 ya migration, and they left China to go to Japan before the later arriving Blacks brought civilization? (Maybe they just couldn't stand the Albinos - just kidding).
posted
Clyde - Not agreeing or disagreeing with you on the issue of Black genocide in China - I am reserving judgment until I can gather more data.
But for those who think that the very "Civilized" humble, hardworking Chinese, would never engage in mass murder.
Well actually it could be said that the Chinese are the most "blood thirsty" of all people. At each dynastic turnover, people were killed by the TENS OF MILLIONS. I recently watched a television program that detailed the numbers, but I have not been able to find a text listing. If anyone has it, please post it.
As a reminder, the Chinese Dynasties were:
Xiŕ Dynasty - 2100 BCE — 1600 BCE Shang Dynasty - 1600 BCE — 1046 BCE Western Zhou Dynasty - 1046 BCE — 771 BCE Eastern Zhou Dynasty Traditionally divided into Spring and Autumn Period Warring States Period - 770 BCE — 256 BCE
The Qin Dynasty (221 BCE - 206 BCE) was preceded by the feudal Zhou Dynasty and followed by the Han Dynasty in China. The unification of China in 221 BCE under the First Emperor Qin Shi Huang (or Shi Huang Di) marked the beginning of Imperial China, a period which lasted until the fall of the Qing Dynasty in 1912 CE. The Qin Dynasty left a legacy of a centralized and bureaucratic state that would be carried onto successive dynasties.
The Terracotta soldiers that I post, which vary in height (183–195cm - 6ft–6ft 5in). Were guardians in the afterlife for the First Emperor Qin Shi Huang. According to their role, the tallest being the generals. The figures include warriors, chariots, horses, officials, acrobats, strongmen, and musicians. Current estimates are that in the three pits containing the Terracotta Army there were over 8,000 soldiers, 130 chariots with 520 horses and 150 cavalry horses, the majority of which are still buried in the pits.
In the "Were the Pre-Inca or Peruvian an African Peoples? - 4100 BC - 400 AD" Thread, I posted this picture of a Qin soldier to indicate the obvious Negroid nature of the ORIGINAL Mongol people.
Some seemed to doubt this, so I though it educational to post these.
Actually the warriors were originally highly colored.
As can be seen in this Group picture, some still have the original coloring. (Note the ones in the back).
But a far better indicator is this one!!!
For those who doubt the influence of racism in history; note this "Modern depiction" of Emperor Qin Shi Huang.
In this picture "He sure don't look Black to me" I wonder what happened???Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: In the "Were the Pre-Inca or Peruvian an African Peoples? - 4100 BC - 400 AD" Thread, I posted this picture of a Qin soldier to indicate the obvious Negroid nature of the ORIGINAL Mongol people.
His facial features aren't that different from the Chinese people I've seen while living in Hong Kong and Singapore.
Here, some Chinese people for comparison:
Posts: 7069 | From: Fallbrook, CA | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
T-Rex - Below is the crux of the conversation. What is your position?
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: TheAmericanPatriot - I wish to take advantage of your sudden lucidity, to investigate the mystery of the races in Ancient Asia from a White point of view.
As I have shown, modern Mongols are a hybrid of White and slanty-eyed Blacks. And of course, these slanty-eyed Blacks didn't jump directly TO China. They were also part of the Indus Valley population also.
As you know, the great remaining mystery of the races is; What are White people, and where did they come from (before they settled in Asia)?
Even though meninarmer has provided creditable proof that Whites are derived from Albinos; I am still not convinced, and here is why.
As you can see from this Qin soldier, as recently as 2,000 years ago, the Mongol race was still identifiably Negroid.
But the other day, I perused through pictures of the 54 minorities of China, and I could not find any group that was still "identifiably Negroid". Rather, I found pictures like this. (Ya I know, who says the pictures were accurate, Chinese lie just like White people do - and we already know they don't want to admit that they were originally Black).
These pictures suggest to me that in perhaps the majority of cases, Black genes have almost totally been overwhelmed by White genes in East Asia (China, Japan, Korea).
This further suggests a VERY large White population in China and East Asia, one much larger than the Black population.
When the White population in West and Central Asia is taken into consideration, (those that moved to Europe, and those that stayed behind), it amounts to a HUGE White, or mostly White population in the world.
With all due respect to meninarmer, I just don't see that large a White population deriving from a colony of Albinos.
Unless Whites have lied to us again, and the migration at 50,000 ya WAS the Albinos. With the slanty-eyed Khoisans coming MUCH later.
This scenario WOULD work. Whites have told us that the White race started with just seven breeding pairs. With a head start of thousands of years, Whites would have had a chance to multiply their numbers by the millions in Asia.
Thus when the NORMAL Blacks arrived "much later" they could have been easily absorbed by the Albinos already there. This NEW infusion of genetic material, could also explain why MODERN Whites and Mongols are no longer completely Albino.
quote:Mike111 wrote: As I have shown, modern Mongols are a hybrid of White and slanty-eyed Blacks. And of course, these slanty-eyed Blacks didn't jump directly TO China. They were also part of the Indus Valley population also.
Mike111, where did all these slanty-eyed chinese "black" supposedly drop from?
There were never any "black" chinese people, you guys are full of it, only people who suffer from down-syndrome would buy your redicouls illogical theories based on eyeballing and nothing else. I bet the chinese people reading these preposterous claims are having a great moment of laughter.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mike111 wrote: As I have shown, modern Mongols are a hybrid of White and slanty-eyed Blacks. And of course, these slanty-eyed Blacks didn't jump directly TO China. They were also part of the Indus Valley population also.
Mike111, where did all these slanty-eyed chinese "black" supposedly drop from?
There were never any "black" chinese people, you guys are full of it, only people who suffer from down-syndrome would buy your redicouls illogical theories based on eyeballing and nothing else. I bet the chinese people reading these preposterous claims are having a great moment of laughter.
Where do YOU think that the Mongols come from??
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mike111 wrote: As I have shown, modern Mongols are a hybrid of White and slanty-eyed Blacks. And of course, these slanty-eyed Blacks didn't jump directly TO China. They were also part of the Indus Valley population also.
Mike111, where did all these slanty-eyed chinese "black" supposedly drop from?
There were never any "black" chinese people, you guys are full of it, only people who suffer from down-syndrome would buy your redicouls illogical theories based on eyeballing and nothing else. I bet the chinese people reading these preposterous claims are having a great moment of laughter.
Where do YOU think that the Mongols come from??
Certainly not Africa or anywhere close to it.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mike111 wrote: As I have shown, modern Mongols are a hybrid of White and slanty-eyed Blacks. And of course, these slanty-eyed Blacks didn't jump directly TO China. They were also part of the Indus Valley population also.
Mike111, where did all these slanty-eyed chinese "black" supposedly drop from?
There were never any "black" chinese people, you guys are full of it, only people who suffer from down-syndrome would buy your redicouls illogical theories based on eyeballing and nothing else. I bet the chinese people reading these preposterous claims are having a great moment of laughter.
posted
What's your point Doug M? Those people are tropically adapted asians, they have nothing to do with africa, as litle as a midget from korea has anyhting to do with a midget from angola, dark skin is an adaptation to solar radiation, doesn't mean all dark skin people across the globe are related.
Secondly those are not Chinese but SE Asians, Djehuti's people, they live in the tropics.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Mike111 wrote: As I have shown, modern Mongols are a hybrid of White and slanty-eyed Blacks. And of course, these slanty-eyed Blacks didn't jump directly TO China. They were also part of the Indus Valley population also.
Mike111, where did all these slanty-eyed chinese "black" supposedly drop from?
There were never any "black" chinese people, you guys are full of it, only people who suffer from down-syndrome would buy your redicouls illogical theories based on eyeballing and nothing else. I bet the chinese people reading these preposterous claims are having a great moment of laughter.
Where do YOU think that the Mongols come from??
Certainly not Africa or anywhere close to it.
Yonis2: Great answer, the brain power that must have taken - WOW!!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Should be obvious. If you don't see it then the problem is with you not the facts. Again, we all know you only believe the racialist paradigms and ideologies of the racists, therefore whatever you come up with supports them as opposed to rejecting them. So according to this absurd logic of yours, blacks are somehow not indigenous to Asia and can not have "asian" features, unless they are mixed. If that is the case then the San that you love so much are mixed with white Mongoloids.
Which is exactly what the racists believe, because such features cannot be found in blacks, according to their racialist views, which you actually support. So don't claim to be pro black when you aren't.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Doug M Quote: So according to this absurd logic of yours, blacks are somehow not indigenous to Asia.
That is exactly correct Doug; ALL Humans and Humanoids are indigenous ONLY to AFRICA. They are found elsewhere ONLY because of MIGRATION - period!!!
P.S. I though that you already knew that. I assume this is why you were having difficulty with the concepts. I don't have time to go into it right now. But here is a link to National Geographic that will explain it.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Doug M Quote: So according to this absurd logic of yours, blacks are somehow not indigenous to Asia.
That is exactly correct Doug; ALL Humans and Humanoids are indigenous ONLY to AFRICA. They are found elsewhere ONLY because of MIGRATION - period!!!
P.S. I though that you already knew that. I assume this is why you were having difficulty with the concepts. I don't have time to go into it right now. But here is a link to National Geographic that will explain it.
That is incorrect in terms of human features associated with various parts of the planet. Like I said, blacks as the oldest form of modern human in Asia are indigenous to Asia by the fact of the migrations you mentioned earlier. Therefore, they are indigenous to Asia being that they are the first humans of Asia.
Smoke that crack someplace else, because like I said, by this logic, that makes whites, "mongoloids" and non Africans into space aliens who beamed down to earth as part of some cosmic conspiracy, because they aren't real humans indigenous to the earth like black folks.
And I am sure that is what you believe.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike111 Quote: Yonis2 - Where do YOU think that the Mongols come from??
Yonis2 - Certainly not Africa or anywhere close to it.
Well Yonis2, According to John R. Moore on his site; "Black History" The Chinese have been teaching their kids that the Chinese race evolved from Peking Man (actually a Homo erectus). This is also the official view of the Chinese Communist Party.
However, modern genetic research does not support this hypothesis. A recent study undertaken by Chinese geneticist Jin Li showed that the genetic diversity of modern Chinese people is well within the whole world population. This shows that there could not have been any inter-breeding between modern human immigrants to East Asia and Homo erectus, such as Peking Man, and affirms that the Chinese are descended from Africa, like all other modern humans, in accordance with the Recent single-origin hypothesis.
You know what else Yonis2? He don't even look Chinese!
posted
Attention World: The data is piling up, and meninarmer is winning. If you have any data, you better post it!!Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because I have no sexual fetish for naked children until you mentioned it I wasn't even thinking along those lines.
And for that matter you need to tell National Geographic to stop showing pictures of naked children and adults.
These pictures certainly are not about porn and if you are going to have pictures of different cultures around the world then you have to accept that different cultures have different views towards nudity.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Why do you continue to post pics of naked children.
Their is no reason to post those pics. Stop
You can prove your point without the nude pics. Show some class.
King,
The church you attend for communion, they serve grape juice and not real wine, right?
You take this too seriously, and now you have succeeded in nurturing a direct mental association between yourself and any innocent photo shown of a naked child.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
Fetish or not, there is ABSOLUTLY no reason to post picks of children naked.
When I posted the African Picture Threads, NONE of the children were naked. Now are you telling me that the pics of Naked youth are the only ones you can find?
All It takes is a little thought process, to actually look at what you are posting. Think about the people in the pics and ask yourself if it would be okay to post nude pics of children who probably don't even know they are being photographed. Also You can't really tell me that those pics are the only ones you can find to post.
This forum is viewed by people all around the world. Showing some class and respect for the people in the photographs is a must.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
I try not to take this forum too seriously, But I will never understand why pictures of nude children would be okay to post.
Just Imagine you are the parent, Would you be happy if people took photos of your child and posted them on the internet?
As long as I have been on this forum, I don't EVER remember anyone posting pics of Children Nude. This sadly seems to be the norm now that there is no moderation. We have people posting pics of Children nude, posting pics of women being humiliated by men, and animals peeing in the mouth of men.
All this corruption is making me think I should be a moderator.
I am sorry Meninarmer but I really don't know what is so innocent of posting kids naked. It's just something that has no business being posted on this forum.
Peace
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually many people around the world see nakedness as a normal state of life and don't view it sexually. And since I didn't post it in a sexual context, then therefore it is only you who sees it that way. Out of the hundreds of pictures I have posted on this forum for you to sit there and pretend to have sensibility over this is ridiculous. If someone other than you is offended I will surely pay more attention, but as I see it you are being overly sensitive to something harmless.
Like I said, National Geographic shows portraits like this all the time and if you want accuracy about human cultures, then you have to realize that many of these images are of acts and people in public, in broad daylight who aren't the least bit concerned about the issues you are bringing up: ie children on the beach naked and so forth.
If you want to see the "natural" state of people around the world, then that is how they look and many of these people have only covered up relatively recently. In fact in many parts of Africa, Asia and the pacific women and children are quite naked or half naked as a normal everyday occurrence. And you see it in the art from these places as well.
Posts: 8890 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
When did I say anything of it being sexual? The posting of children nude is just not something that needs to be seen on this forum.
National Geographics is a magazine, what they do is on there own conscious. They also post ignorant images of Africans and try to seperate Egypt from Africa. I want to know, do you agree with that also?
It still remains, How does showing children naked something that benefits this forum or the readers viewing this stuff.
Posts: 9651 | From: Reace and Love City. | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Clyde winters wrote: Africans and Dravidians Y-HG K2 Carriers
Haplogroup K2/T is a NE African lineage and not dravidian, it has it's highest frequency among northern Somalis.
Posts: 1554 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
When did I say anything of it being sexual? The posting of children nude is just not something that needs to be seen on this forum.
National Geographics is a magazine, what they do is on there own conscious. They also post ignorant images of Africans and try to seperate Egypt from Africa. I want to know, do you agree with that also?
It still remains, How does showing children naked something that benefits this forum or the readers viewing this stuff.
LOL, before, I hardly took notice, but now every time I see a picture of a naked child I'll think of you.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Any chance of getting back to the thread topic? Otherwise you are just capitulating to his power play.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic