Let me clarify that I have virtually no administraition authority on Egyptsearch. The only power I have is to delete threads. The other moderators which have authority are the following: Oscar, sammy, Neal and Amr.
Recently a poster named Africanolmec started spamming this board with random posts. When I deleted his posts I got responses from one of the administrators named Oscar. Oscar has only 7 posts and randomly edits posts which belong to Madlib. This is rather curious considering that every time I send a request to Oscar about banning people he never responds. He does respond when the above mentioned posters get their threads deleted.
I speculate that since the other forums are dead that internal Egyptsearch management are trolling this board to create havoc. This means the racial posts, overexagerated Afrocentric claims and other are probably the products of Egyptsearch management.
This excludes Mike and Ironlion and MeinNarmer(Melanin King) because they actually produce original material and present a depth of knowledge of Afrocentrism above the rudiments of research.
However, the people who cut and past material may be connected to Egyptsearch management. Take this into consideration when responding to new posters.
Posted by Brada-Anansi (Member # 16371) on :
Ausar why do you bother brother man,just become a regular poster until they pull the plug.
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: Ausar why do you bother brother man,just become a regular poster until they pull the plug.
Bredrin, can yuh blame him doah? smh kmrt....I been tell di mon seh it past time fe jus tell di people dem round 'ere (weh talk ish tuh him pon di regular) fe jus gwey guh suck dem madda and drop sleep ina hogpen alongside har cho!
Posted by ausar (Member # 1797) on :
Anasi, I would much rather see your message board succeed but I doubt it will because you lack the web presence of Egyptsearch. Egyptsearch is the only forum you have talking about these issues from which most people in academia hide from. As pointed aby alTakruri; the publishers of National Geographic probably took alot of their arguments against a non-black ancient Egypt from this message board.
I have an obligation to Egyptsearch posters to inform them if I suspect any suspicious activity is occuring.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@Ausar
Thank you. You've given credence to something that I and others have suspected. Pretty fucking sick though that they should use the murder of a young man to antagonise the black membership here and stoke advertising interest.
Lioness has already admitted to being paid per thread and saying that if she didn't post then the site wouldn't have enough of a presence to survive. Her admission came after I stated that although she has been on this forum 4 times longer than me (2 years compared to 6 months) she has posted 40 times the amount of posts.
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
ausar, yuh scandal bag is full lol...yuh fe clean it out nuh star Posted by MelaninKing (Member # 17444) on :
Ausar, if your theory is true, with the owners posting as spammers, I expect the forum to be gone soon, in the near future.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Just as I suspected, the Mods have been doing this for quite a while, it was very obvious. I suspect Lioness, Africanolmec to be suspect.
Posted by xyyman (Member # 13597) on :
This is a job for Lioness but AOlmec. . .he is difinitely here to create havoc and stoke the fire.
so what happened to Mansa Musa(?). He was voted in as a Mod then disappeared.
There is always a reason for things.
eg Why were YOU chosen? Why Mansa Musa and NOT Altk when that election was held several years ago. Were the vote count manipulated etc
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
Great Jew is an overly sensitive pompous azz. His snobbish arrogant style would have meant less traffic for ES and hence revenue. Like or not, that's what its all about. If you want a sober atmosphere with strict rules of engagement where only like minds interact, then you have ESR. The openness is what draws people to ES. This is why even those that complain either stay, or change their name and assume a 'new' personality, or when they leave, like C.Bass, they go to other forums to argue with the same type of folks here, with the same information and the same talking points. In other words, do the same damn thing again.
Posted by ausar (Member # 1797) on :
alTakruri was offered the position and so were many others but all turned the position down. Mansa Musa had prior engagements at a anti-racist site which was meant as a counter to racist websites.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
Thats a bunch of crap. The only thing that drew people to E.S was the amount and quality of Egyptology and Africana and Biological Science this site offered. The openess only attracted trolls. ESR simply lacks the foundation that E.S has, simply put there are not the serious amount of researchers and laymen that was here during the old days of E.S
Posted by ausar (Member # 1797) on :
Don't hold your breathe about Africana ever becoming a popular subject. What matters is a few serious scholars with a legitimate and vocal pressence in academia.
We need a person well versed in all aspects of the soft and hard sciences. The problem is most of these people work for academia which are openly hostile to alot of the ideas expoused on this forum.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
The only reason ES became attractive in the first place was because of the openness which allowed debates with the white racist "trolls" like White Nords etc. Looking back at the old threads, dating as far back as 2004, we saw the same back and forth arguments: the validity of concept caucasian, alleged caucasian admixture in E.Africa, African admixtures in Europe etc etc. If there were no "trolls" there would be no attraction. The information gathered from Keita etc isn't unique to ES. What was unique was the open debates with white racists where people were exposed to the different arguments against a black Egypt and how they were countered. If there were no openness there would've been no heated debates and hence no attraction. Most people are attracted to excitement and thrill of arguing, which is why Bass goes to racist sites to do the same damn thing.
If ES started out like ESR, where overly sensitive mods and to many rules (like debating whether allow the use of the "negro"), it would have never become as "popular" as ES. The only reason ES is "going down" now is because most of the serious posters have left. I suspect its because they got tired of arguing the same things over and over again. Some like Charlie Bass have opt to argue with the same type of racists, arguing the same things, but on a different websites. ES has done its time, however, because of the type of moderation ESR will not take its place.
Posted by -Just Call Me Jari- (Member # 14451) on :
^^^^ True, but at the same time quality work and research was presented here. Despite the back and forth with trolls. The openess of E.S was nice and important but E.S was the only forum I knew of that could back up the Egyptians blackness with facts instead of opinions.
As I said ESR lacks much serious effort by members t present serious academic material. BEsides Brada and a few others no one is really trying to build it up. Its a nice website and I do post there but most of the people who made E.S what it is are not there.
If E.S had not had serious members presenting some of the best info on Africana subjects there would be no need for back and forth with trolls. The White trolls came here because they saw our material and research as a threat.
ESR problem is not Moderation, if you think Brada is a tough mod. your crazy, he let me get away with alot.
Also it is kinda pathetic to go other forums simply to debate Whites, I post on other forums sometimes but I dont try to make Eurocentrics my main focus, although I do run into a Eurocentric every now and then.
Posted by facts (Member # 19596) on :
^Fvck ESR. I tried that spot and was met with cencorship. That Hebrew dude, I forget his name, is on some serious power tripping, crying like a bitch because I used a word he ain't like. ESR is a big fat joke. All that it is good for is Afroloons bouncing off each other the same ol' bullock false nonsense. They are not welcoming critical examination of any of their absurd, pseudo claims.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by -Just Call Me Jari-: ^^^^ True, but at the same time quality work and research was presented here. Despite the back and forth with trolls. The openess of E.S was nice and important but E.S was the only forum I knew of that could back up the Egyptians blackness with facts instead of opinions.
As I said ESR lacks much serious effort by members t present serious academic material. BEsides Brada and a few others no one is really trying to build it up. Its a nice website and I do post there but most of the people who made E.S what it is are not there.
If E.S had not had serious members presenting some of the best info on Africana subjects there would be no need for back and forth with trolls. The White trolls came here because they saw our material and research as a threat.
ESR problem is not Moderation, if you think Brada is a tough mod. your crazy, he let me get away with alot.
Also it is kinda pathetic to go other forums simply to debate Whites, I post on other forums sometimes but I dont try to make Eurocentrics my main focus, although I do run into a Eurocentric every now and then.
I suspect the reason that most of the people who made E.S what it is are not at ESR is because of the lack of trolls to debate. It sounds ironic, but if you think about it, what explains the fact that the same people who complain about trolls here will go to other websites to argue the same things with the same type of people??! It's psychologically more satisfying (and lot more exciting) to "win" arguments than simply posting of information with people like minds. Face it, unless your a snob professor its boring. In fact it may lead to complacency, by debating "trolls" you know how good your are, how up to date your material is, what are the new counter arguments against your position etc etc
quote:ESR problem is not Moderation, if you think Brada is a tough mod. your crazy, he let me get away with alot.
The moderators over at ESR I had in mind was the one and only super sensitive Great Jew.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
by debating "trolls" you know how good your are, how up to date your material is, what are the new counter arguments against your position etc etc
Part of me reluctantly agrees with that - although the superiority of the evidence supporting the African-centred approach to Egypt is there for all to see, the racists and ideologues will keep trying.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
I think one other reason why Bass et al. left was because the more serious "trolls" left too. Notice their absence correlates with the absence of posters like White Nord, Jamie, etc. The "new" inferior trolls like CT, Lioness etc don't offer serious arguments or challenge and hence are poor alternatives.
Posted by facts (Member # 19596) on :
Damn! At least give me more credit than Lioness! Geez!
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: The "new" inferior trolls like CT, Lioness etc don't offer serious arguments or challenge and hence are poor alternatives.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: [QB] I think one other reason why Bass et al. left was because the more serious "trolls" left too. Notice their absence correlates with the absence of posters like White Nord, Jamie, etc. The "new" inferior trolls like CT, Lioness etc don't offer serious arguments or challenge and hence are poor alternatives.
^^^anguishofbeingatroll invite to White Nord
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
LOL! Yeh, I miss that angry white racist. A top class troll compared to your dumbass.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeingatroll: LOL! Yeh, I miss that angry white racist. A top class troll compared to your dumbass.
he's your trolling idol?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
ausar can you delete the "chimpout on a train" thread title up now. Call me crazy but that seems racist
other posters holla if you agree
Posted by TruthAndRights (Member # 17346) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: ausar can you delete the "chimpout on a train" thread title up now. Call me crazy but that seems racist
yep....
Posted by .Charlie Bass. (Member # 10328) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: I think one other reason why Bass et al. left was because the more serious "trolls" left too. Notice their absence correlates with the absence of posters like White Nord, Jamie, etc. The "new" inferior trolls like CT, Lioness etc don't offer serious arguments or challenge and hence are poor alternatives.
no the reason Bass left is because of health issues and a refusal to argue with trolls, get your facts straight moron.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
we need argyle back,
votes:
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Do you really think mainstream scholarship accepts the crackpot afronut theory the ancient egyptians were ''black''?
Name a credible authority who claims this.
I have access to JSTOR and hundreds of other peer review journal sites. Never have i come across a peer-reviewed article claiming the egyptians were Negroid/Black. They don't exist.
Within egyptology and academia there is no debate on this topic. It's just limited to the INTERNET... Every genuine scholar knows the ancient egyptians were North African in phenotype (Caucasoid), not Negroid.
Btw, taking a look at ESR etc, note how the posters there admit the ancient egyptians were thin nosed, wavy-straight haired and orthognathic. Even the afronuts admit the ancient egyptians were Caucasoid, but out of delusion and self-hatred insist that although the egyptians were fully caucasoid in morphology and hair texture, they magically were still somehow ''black''...
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Do you really think mainstream scholarship accepts the crackpot afronut theory the ancient egyptians were ''black''?
Name a credible authority who claims this.
I have access to JSTOR and hundreds of other peer review journal sites. Never have i come across a peer-reviewed article claiming the egyptians were Negroid/Black. They don't exist.
Within egyptology and academia there is no debate on this topic. It's just limited to the INTERNET... Every genuine scholar knows the ancient egyptians were North African in phenotype (Caucasoid), not Negroid.
Btw, taking a look at ESR etc, note how the posters there admit the ancient egyptians were thin nosed, wavy-straight haired and orthognathic. Even the afronuts admit the ancient egyptians were Caucasoid, but out of delusion and self-hatred insist that although the egyptians were fully caucasoid in morphology and hair texture, they magically were still somehow ''black''...
Many Evolutionary biologists of the past 20 years would argue that a more reliable less ambiguous distinction between Negroids and Caucasians than crania are limb ratios and that Negroids have tropical limb ratios and Caucasions don't- and that many of the Egyptian remains have tropical limb ratios meaning that their ancestry as shown by this morphology derives from tropical climates as in Africa rather than cold climate adapted populations of Europe.
I challenge you to reference any peer revied article in a scientific journal of the past 15 years saying that the Egyptians were Caucasoid.
Posted by Oshun (Member # 19740) on :
Lioness vs. Cassi? this should be interesting...
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@anglo Do you really think mainstream scholarship accepts the crackpot afronut theory the ancient egyptians were ''black''?
You're nuts. For starters this woman here is a classicist with a Phd in Ptolemaic Egypt...
I think you're the crackpot here and you know it, you marginalised little boy.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Do you really think mainstream scholarship accepts the crackpot afronut theory the ancient egyptians were ''black''?
Name a credible authority who claims this.
I have access to JSTOR and hundreds of other peer review journal sites. Never have i come across a peer-reviewed article claiming the egyptians were Negroid/Black. They don't exist.
Within egyptology and academia there is no debate on this topic. It's just limited to the INTERNET... Every genuine scholar knows the ancient egyptians were North African in phenotype (Caucasoid), not Negroid.
Btw, taking a look at ESR etc, note how the posters there admit the ancient egyptians were thin nosed, wavy-straight haired and orthognathic. Even the afronuts admit the ancient egyptians were Caucasoid, but out of delusion and self-hatred insist that although the egyptians were fully caucasoid in morphology and hair texture, they magically were still somehow ''black''...
Many Evolutionary biologists of the past 20 years would argue that a more reliable less ambiguous distinction between Negroids and Caucasians than crania are limb ratios and that Negroids have tropical limb ratios and Caucasions don't- and that many of the Egyptian remains have tropical limb ratios meaning that their ancestry as shown by this morphology derives from tropical climates as in Africa rather than cold climate adapted populations of Europe.
I challenge you to reference any peer revied article in a scientific journal of the past 15 years saying that the Egyptians were Caucasoid.
Absolute fantasy.
There is no biological rule positing that people living in tropical areas have ''tropical limb ratios''. The rule only works for colder (northern) climates, Allen's rule.
No such rule for the tropics exists.
The reason there is no such rule for the tropics is because many people living in tropical areas have shown to highly vary in limb portion.
Some indigeous peoples of the Americas on the tropical latitue have cold-adapted limbs, despite living there for 15,000 or more years, in contrast some have longer ratios.
Some northern Australian aborigines also have cold adapted body portions. This is despite the fact they have lived in the hottest regions of Australia on the tropical latitude for 40,000 or more years. It's exactly the same with most Melanesians.
Now on to Africa...
''[...] The bodily build of the African Hamites is typically Mediterranean in the ratio of arms, legs, and trunk'' - Coon, 1939
Somali, Ethiopians have colder adapted body portions, falling in the range of southern europeans. Billy et al. (1988) also confirmed this still extant colder adapted Mediterranean morphological affinity.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
There is no biological rule positing that people living in tropical areas have ''tropical limb ratios''. The rule only works for colder (northern) climates, Allen's rule.
Mainstream biological texts would say mankind began in a tropical region to begin with and later went into progressive colder regions and as you said Allen's rule works for colder climates. Therefore people in those climates have limbs that are shorter in proportion to their trunks, British "white" people for example. But if someone had a given limb ratio and lived in a cold region and then went into a hot region and their limbs did not lengthen it wouldn't matter because we are dealing with the ancient Egyptians located in Africa. That is the starting point, Egypt in Africa.
Caucasians are considered people adapted to colder climates with less sunlight.
Simply, if Allen's rule has affected Caucasians and shortened the proportion of their limbs as compared to their trunks and many ancient Egyptian have limbs that are longer in proportion to their trunks it would suggest that many of them were not Caucasian.
But genetics overide old phenotypic concepts of race. For example two people might have a very similar nose phenotypically but come from parts of the world that are far from each other. The similarity of the phenotypic trait may just be coincidental and cannot locate a person's ancestral location with the precision of DNA analysis. Therefore a phenotypic definition of race is antiquated compared to genotypic characteristics although Allens rule as applied to shortened limbs is more stuctural in relation to climate adpatation than facial features which vary less predictably.
If you say that some Africans have less tropically adapted limbs it doesn't matter because we are dealing with the reamains of ancient Egyptians many of which do have longer limbs in proprotion to their trunks. Therefore if British people or other Western Europeans have cold adpated limb ratios they are excluded from being the ancestors of some of these ancient Egyptians.
Also your chimp out thread was stupid. These kind of associations are not scientific and your message to black people is that they are less than human even though you spend hours debating us here. That was racist political propaganda and shows the worst side of your Asperger's, the lack of empathy.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@Anglo
Far be it from me to take sides with Lioness, but she/he did ask you to provide a peer reviewed source from the last 15 years, which you have failed to do.
You've also failed to post a response to the two links I provided you with.
I think most people wouldn't rate your 'expertise' - a BTEC and a foundation degree in forensic anthropology from a non-university - as adding up to much, especially given your junior world view.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Limb sizes are not a valid criteria of racial classification, if they were then different Amerindian tribes who are of the exact same racial origin would be divided into different races.
Furthermore, tropical limb proportions are not exclusive to Negroids.
Btw, African-Americans don't have tropical adapted limbs.
''[...] contemporary African Americans do not have tropical limb proportions but have in a few hundred years changed to more European body proportions''
O dear...
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@Anglo
Furthermore, tropical limb proportions are not exclusive to Negroids.
I don't remember anyone saying they were, but given Egypt's geographical location- Africa - it would make eminently more sense to posit the origins of the tropically adapted Egyptians to tropical Africa, would it not?
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Limb sizes are not a valid criteria of racial classification, if they were then different Amerindian tribes who are of the exact same racial origin would be divided into different races.
Furthermore, tropical limb proportions are not exclusive to Negroids.
Btw, African-Americans don't have tropical adapted limbs.
''[...] contemporary African Americans do not have tropical limb proportions but have in a few hundred years changed to more European body proportions''
If you say that some Africans or some Amerindian tribes have less tropically adapted limbs it doesn't matter because we are dealing with the remains of ancient Egyptians many of which do have longer limbs in proportion to their trunks. Therefore if British people or other Western Europeans have cold adapted limb ratios they are excluded from being the ancestors of some of these ancient Egyptians.
The limbs don't tell the whole picture but when you add it to the geography more of the picture is told by process of elimination in terms of who the Egyptians weren't.
For example we know that they couldn't be Amerindians because that is too far away to be a possibility. And we know that the Egyptians many of whom were found with longer limbs in proportion to their trunks could not have been Britons because Britons and people in Western Europe have cold adapted limbs. So you are excluded by process of elimination
Posted by Narmerthoth (Member # 20259) on :
LMAO @ whites desperately striving to salvage the validity of their Nazi derived pseudo-scienceS, I.E. Limb proportions, racial evolution, genetics.
If you're black, you require degrees and certifications out the ying/yang to gain credibility.
If you are white/Jew, then you can be trained as a circus clown and go on to start professional organizations like the American Medical or the Bar Associations. What a flip-flop world you've distorted the planet into.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Limb sizes are not a valid criteria of racial classification, if they were then different Amerindian tribes who are of the exact same racial origin would be divided into different races.
Furthermore, tropical limb proportions are not exclusive to Negroids.
Btw, African-Americans don't have tropical adapted limbs.
''[...] contemporary African Americans do not have tropical limb proportions but have in a few hundred years changed to more European body proportions''
If you say that some Africans or some Amerindian tribes have less tropically adapted limbs it doesn't matter because we are dealing with the remains of ancient Egyptians many of which do have longer limbs in proportion to their trunks. Therefore if British people or other Western Europeans have cold adapted limb ratios they are excluded from being the ancestors of some of these ancient Egyptians.
The limbs don't tell the whole picture but when you add it to the geography more of the picture is told by process of elimination in terms of who the Egyptians weren't.
For example we know that they couldn't be Amerindians because that is too far away to be a possibility. And we know that the Egyptians many of whom were found with longer limbs in proportion to their trunks could not have been Britons because Britons and people in Western Europe have cold adapted limbs. So you are excluded by process of elimination
If African-Americans have cold adapted limbs by local adaptation in a few hundred years, what could have stopped the Caucasoids who penetrated Africa from becoming tropically adapted?
Bear in mind Caucasoids have been in North Africa since the Mesolithic.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @anglo Do you really think mainstream scholarship accepts the crackpot afronut theory the ancient egyptians were ''black''?
You're nuts. For starters this woman here is a classicist with a Phd in Ptolemaic Egypt...
I think you're the crackpot here and you know it, you marginalised little boy.
ok so you have a single nutbag, well done. political correctness is driving such people. Did you know they had too remove the ''ginger'' tag of the red-haired egyptian prehistoric mummies in the British Museum?
The earliest mummies unearthed in egypt have flowing wavy bright red or auburn hair. Yet all the labels were removed from these mummies, for the obvious reason red hair is an exclusive Caucasoid trait. So political correctness is another issue in the egyptian race controversy, all the evidence proving a Caucasoid egypt is anyhow silenced as much as possible.
Btw, no such afrocentric has ever explained the predynastic red haired mummies.
Are we expected to now believe negroes have flowing wavy-straight red hair? Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
We have gone through all of the above...why recycle this nonsense? lol
"We also compare Egyptian body proportions to those of modern American Blacks and Whites... Long bone stature regression equations were then derived for each sex. Our results confirm that, although ancient Egyptians are closer in body proportion to modern American Blacks than they are to American Whites, proportions in Blacks and Egyptians are not identical... Intralimb indices are not significantly different between Egyptians and American Blacks... brachial indices are definitely more ‘African ’... There is no evidence for significant variation in proportions among temporal or social groupings; thus, the new formula may be broadly applicable to ancient Egyptian remains." ("Stature estimation in ancient Egyptians: A new technique based on anatomical reconstruction of stature." Michelle H. Raxter, Christopher B. Ruff, Ayman Azab, Moushira Erfan, Muhammad Soliman, Aly El-Sawaf,(Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008, Jun;136(2):147-5
Comparisons of linear body proportions of Old Kingdom and non-Old Kingdom period individuals, and workers and high officials in our sample found no statistically significant differences among them. Zakrzewski (2003) also found little evidence for differences in linear body proportions of Egyptians over a wider temporal range. In general, recent studies of skeletal variation among ancient Egyptians support scenarios of biological continuity through time. Irish (2006) analyzed quantitative and qualitative dental traits of 996 Egyptians from Neolithic through Roman periods, reporting the presence of a few outliers but concluding that the dental samples appear to be largely homogeneous and that the affinities observed indicate overall biological uniformity and continuity from Predynastic through Dynastic and Postdynastic periods.
Zakrzewski (2007) provided a comprehensive summary of previous Egyptian craniometric studies and examined Egyptian crania from six time periods. She found that the earlier samples were relatively more homogeneous in comparison to the later groups. However, overall results indicated genetic continuity over the Egyptian Predynastic and Early Dynastic periods, albeit with a high level of genetic diversity within the population, suggesting an indigenous process of state formation. She also concluded that while the biological patterning of the Egyptian population varied across time, no consistent temporal or spatial trends are apparent. Thus, the stature estimation formulae developed here may be broadly applicable to all ancient Egyptian populations..".
("Stature estimation in ancient Egyptians: A new technique based on anatomical reconstruction of stature." Michelle H. Raxter, Christopher B. Ruff, Ayman Azab, Moushira Erfan, Muhammad Soliman, Aly El-Sawaf,(Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008, Jun;136(2):147-55
quote:Originally posted by AGÜEYBANÁ(Mind718): Of course it does matter...
"The only exception is Robins and Schute's (1983) crural indices for Egyptian Pharaohs, which are lower, although these were derived using a different technique-radiography rather than direct measurement- which could acount for the difference."
Different and new techniques are being used, hence why I said you need to know...
quote:Stature estimation in ancient Egyptians: a new technique based on anatomical reconstruction of stature.
Raxter MH, Ruff CB,
Abstract
Trotter and Gleser's (Trotter and Gleser: Am J Phys Anthropol 10 (1952) 469-514; Trotter and Gleser: Am J Phys Anthropol 16 (1958) 79-123) long bone formulae for US Blacks or derivations thereof (Robins and Shute: Hum Evol 1 (1986) 313-324) have been previously used to estimate the stature of ancient Egyptians. However, limb length to stature proportions differ between human populations; consequently, the most accurate mathematical stature estimates will be obtained when the population being examined is as similar as possible in proportions to the population used to create the equations. The purpose of this study was to create new stature regression formulae based on direct reconstructions of stature in ancient Egyptians and assess their accuracy in comparison to other stature estimation methods. We also compare Egyptian body proportions to those of modern American Blacks and Whites. Living stature estimates were derived using a revised Fully anatomical method (Raxter et al.: Am J Phys Anthropol 130 (2006) 374-384). Long bone stature regression equations were then derived for each sex. Our results confirm that, although ancient Egyptians are closer in body proportion to modern American Blacks than they are to American Whites, proportions in Blacks and Egyptians are not identical. The newly generated Egyptian-based stature regression formulae have standard errors of estimate of 1.9-4.2 cm. All mean directional differences are less than 0.4% compared to anatomically estimated stature, while results using previous formulae are more variable, with mean directional biases varying between 0.2% and 1.1%, tibial and radial estimates being the most biased. There is no evidence for significant variation in proportions among temporal or social groupings; thus, the new formulae may be broadly applicable to ancient Egyptian remains.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Limb sizes are not a valid criteria of racial classification, if they were then different Amerindian tribes who are of the exact same racial origin would be divided into different races.
Furthermore, tropical limb proportions are not exclusive to Negroids.
Btw, African-Americans don't have tropical adapted limbs.
''[...] contemporary African Americans do not have tropical limb proportions but have in a few hundred years changed to more European body proportions''
If you say that some Africans or some Amerindian tribes have less tropically adapted limbs it doesn't matter because we are dealing with the remains of ancient Egyptians many of which do have longer limbs in proportion to their trunks. Therefore if British people or other Western Europeans have cold adapted limb ratios they are excluded from being the ancestors of some of these ancient Egyptians.
The limbs don't tell the whole picture but when you add it to the geography more of the picture is told by process of elimination in terms of who the Egyptians weren't.
For example we know that they couldn't be Amerindians because that is too far away to be a possibility. And we know that the Egyptians many of whom were found with longer limbs in proportion to their trunks could not have been Britons because Britons and people in Western Europe have cold adapted limbs. So you are excluded by process of elimination
If African-Americans have cold adapted limbs by local adaptation in a few hundred years, what could have stopped the Caucasoids who penetrated Africa from becoming tropically adapted?
Bear in mind Caucasoids have been in North Africa since the Mesolithic.
Because after hundreds of years in Europe and America people of African descent still have elongated tropically adpated limbs
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Anglo_Pyramidologist is basically saying that
thin noses and lips = Caucasian
afro kinky hair = Negroid
Prognathism = Negroid
skin tone doesn't matter
______________________________________
Therefore by his defintion any straight haired person with light or dark skin that has thin lips and thin nose is Caucasoid
and a person that has both an afro and thin lips/nose is a mix of Caucasoid and Negroid.
This is his basic philosophy
.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Limb sizes are not a valid criteria of racial classification, if they were then different Amerindian tribes who are of the exact same racial origin would be divided into different races.
Furthermore, tropical limb proportions are not exclusive to Negroids.
Btw, African-Americans don't have tropical adapted limbs.
''[...] contemporary African Americans do not have tropical limb proportions but have in a few hundred years changed to more European body proportions''
If you say that some Africans or some Amerindian tribes have less tropically adapted limbs it doesn't matter because we are dealing with the remains of ancient Egyptians many of which do have longer limbs in proportion to their trunks. Therefore if British people or other Western Europeans have cold adapted limb ratios they are excluded from being the ancestors of some of these ancient Egyptians.
The limbs don't tell the whole picture but when you add it to the geography more of the picture is told by process of elimination in terms of who the Egyptians weren't.
For example we know that they couldn't be Amerindians because that is too far away to be a possibility. And we know that the Egyptians many of whom were found with longer limbs in proportion to their trunks could not have been Britons because Britons and people in Western Europe have cold adapted limbs. So you are excluded by process of elimination
If African-Americans have cold adapted limbs by local adaptation in a few hundred years, what could have stopped the Caucasoids who penetrated Africa from becoming tropically adapted?
Bear in mind Caucasoids have been in North Africa since the Mesolithic.
Because after hundreds of years in Europe and America people of African descent still have elongated tropically adpated limbs
No they don't.
African-Americans don't have tropical adapted limbs -
''[...] contemporary African Americans do not have tropical limb proportions but have in a few hundred years changed to more European body proportions''
And funnily enough the only afrocentric retards obsessed with limb ratios on this forum are African-Americans (Zaharan etc), who themselves aren't even tropically adapted.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Stop lying, African Americans are obviously still tropically adapted, as evidenced by Terry:
I don't care about someones opinion, let's see the data your source used, to arrive at that conclusion, shall we? Where are the hard figures that place their African American sample outside of the African range?
While you're at it, show the Somali and Ethiopian data (I mean the measurements, not the author's conclusions), that supposedly proves they're not tropically adapted.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Stop lying, African Americans are obviously still tropically adapted, as evidenced by Terry:
I don't care about someones opinion, let's see the data your source used, to arrive at that conclusion, shall we? Where are the hard figures that place their African American sample outside of the African range?
While you're at it, show the Somali and Ethiopian data (I mean the measurements, not the author's conclusions), that supposedly proves they're not tropically adapted.
What do you make of this study:
GROUP ............... CRURAL INDEX Lapp ................ 79.0 Eskimo .............. 81.5 Belgium ............. 82.5 American White ...... 82.6 S. African White .... 83.2 Bushman ............. 83.4 Yugoslav ............ 83.75 New Mexico Indian ... 84.6 Melanesian .......... 84.8 Egyptian ............ 84.9 Pygmy ............... 85.1 American Black ...... 85.25 Arizona Indian ...... 85.5 S. African Black .... 86.4
Source: The Emergence of Homo Sapiens: The Post Cranial Evidence, G. E. Kennedy, Man, New Series, Vol. 19, No. 1, Mar., 1984, pp. 94-110.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Are you mentally alright? I mean, you do realize that the Melanesian and African Americans samples shown on that graph you linked to, have the most tropical limbs of all the studied groups, right?
I mean, you realize you've just obliterated your own viewpoints, right?
quote: Originally posted by Anglo-Pyramidologist: African-Americans don't have tropical adapted limbs
quote: Originally posted by Anglo-Pyramidologist: Some northern Australian aborigines also have cold adapted body portions. This is despite the fact they have lived in the hottest regions of Australia on the tropical latitude for 40,000 or more years. It's exactly the same with most Melanesians.
Now, will you finally post that Ethiopian/Somali limb data you were speaking on earlier, so I can have another laugh at you?
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Are you mentally alright? I mean, you do realize that the Melanesian and African Americans samples shown on that graph you linked to, have the most tropical limbs of all the studied groups, right?
I mean, you realize you've just obliterated your own viewpoints, right?
quote: Originally posted by Anglo-Pyramidologist: African-Americans don't have tropical adapted limbs
quote: Originally posted by Anglo-Pyramidologist: Some northern Australian aborigines also have cold adapted body portions. This is despite the fact they have lived in the hottest regions of Australia on the tropical latitude for 40,000 or more years. It's exactly the same with most Melanesians.
Now, will you finally post that Ethiopian/Somali limb data you were speaking on earlier, so I can have another laugh at you?
Jumping to attack, without even reading the studies properly just exposes you as a fraud and a retard.
Those studies obliterate your 'Terry' study.
Yugoslavians come closest to your Terry mean sample of egyptian crural index. 3.75/3.6.
What else? The studies show those classified as Whites in the bottom study have more tropical adapted limbs than the indigenous african bushmen.
Furthermore the 'mean' crural index for African-Americans' wildly ranges from 83. 7 - 85.25 while the bottom study places Whites at 84.3, more than the African-Americans in Terry study. So some whites are more tropically adapted than African-Americans according to the data...
All of this goes to show, as i have been saying -limb ratios are not a valid criteria for racial classification because of obvious overlap. Some classified as 'Whites' measured are coming out tropically adapted, more so than African-Americans and even indigenous african Bushmen.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Your dumb ass just doesn't know how to read the data. Like the idiot that you are, you don't even realize you cannot use the measurements obtained from one study, and apply them to other data, without critically looking at what measurement standards were used to come up with those numbers. The samples were not the same, and ever if they were, there is always the well known phenomenon of researchers coming up with different measurements from the same material as well. You wouldn't know this, of course, being the crude, unsophisticated b!tch that you are, always bragging about your degree in forensic anthropology, but never demonstrating insight beyond trivial concepts such as ''negro'', ''caucasian'' and ''mongoloid''.
The key lesson to take away from all those studies, is that equatorial Africans (and those who descend from them, e.g., African Americans) are - as an average expressed in ratio - never lower or the same as the average of whites who were measured, within that same study.
Kalahari Bushmen lower limb ratio's vis a vis equatorial Africans can be explained by the former group having a lack of cultural buffering in the form of extensive clothing, and their long time residence at a relatively high latitude.
Read a phucking book, dumb ass.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
here is the book quote AP mentioned: Bones and Ochre: The Curious Afterlife of the Red Lady of Paviland By Marianne Sommer pp 272-275 and ftnt 26
With AMH being present in Europe, starting at 40.000bc, the Red Lady specimen, and his people, who are dated to 33.000bc, surely have a longer history of being residents in cold Europe than African Americans have in the Americas.
It is remarkable that this author entertains the preposterous idea of African Americans being in the Americas long enough to attain cold adapted limbs (mostly) on their own, yet, he/she deems it likely that Red Lady, whose people had a longer history in a cold Europe, needed Neanderthals to attain intermediate limbs proportions.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Bergman's rule overides Allen's rule in regard to African Bushman's limb ratios. Being notably shorter than probably any other people they are an exception.
_________________________________________________
somebody needs to purchase this:
Modern human, early modern human and Neanderthal limb proportions A.M.W. Porter
___________________________________________
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 12:25 AM To: Holliday, Trenton W Subject: limb proportions
Mr. Holliday, the comment below is taken directly from a website that uses anthropology to prove a point. After reading the comment you will have correctly guessed some posters are disagreeing with each other on what constitutes the truth. The below is taken directly from ''his'' quote.
Will you please address this: ''Now ask them if them a person's limb proportions can change and adapt to a new environment during a life time...''
''Them'' is a reference to other anthropologists in addition to yourself.
Respectfully.
REPLY:
From: Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 12:25 AM To: Holliday, Trenton W Subject: limb proportions
Hmmm. I can give you an answer that none of them will like - that should be fun!
Limb proportions can change during growth and development in response to the environment (it's too late for adults, of course). For example, they can become foreshortened if a juvenile animal is consistently exposed to cold. The mechanism for this differential growth seems to be reduced blood flow to the distal extremities, and in particular, the growing cartilaginous (epiphyseal) plates, in response to cold (in the last 4 yrs or so, some great papers by Maria Serrat have come out documenting this phenomenon in laboratory animals). That having been said, there's clearly a genetic underpinning to body proportions, and so limb proportions are, like most traits, a combination of "nature" vs. "nurture". In fact, in some of my early professional work, I used limb proportions as a kind of genetic marker, because we see today that they remain remarkably stable in migrants to different climates over multiple generations (at least in the absence of acute malnutrition or the kind of cold exposure I mentioned above). For example, Native Americans in the tropics still have more-or-less "cold-adapted" limb proportions not too different from their Beringea-inhabiting forebears, and their ancestors have been in hot environments for at least 13,000 years. So I can see why people might argue about this from both perspectives - there's truth on both sides of the issue.
Hope this helps, but I suspect it may just muddy the waters, and hopefully Godwin's Rule won't be verified!
Trenton Holliday
(((((((((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))))) Trenton W. Holliday Dept. of Anthropology Dept: 101 Dinwiddie Hall Tulane University 6823 St. Charles Avenue New Orleans, LA 70118 USA e-mail: thollid@tulane.edu webpage: http://www.tulane.edu/~twhollid/webthing.html ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((())))))))))))))))))))
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Your dumb ass just doesn't know how to read the data. Like the idiot that you are, you don't even realize you cannot use the measurements obtained from one study, and apply them to other data, without critically looking at what measurement standards were used to come up with those numbers. The samples were not the same, and ever if they were, there is always the well known phenomenon of researchers coming up with different measurements from the same material as well. You wouldn't know this, of course, being the crude, unsophisticated b!tch that you are, always bragging about your degree in forensic anthropology, but never demonstrating insight beyond trivial concepts such as ''negro'', ''caucasian'' and ''mongoloid''.
The key lesson to take away from all those studies, is that equatorial Africans (and those who descend from them, e.g., African Americans) are - as an average expressed in ratio - never lower or the same as the average of whites who were measured, within that same study.
Kalahari Bushmen lower limb ratio's vis a vis equatorial Africans can be explained by the former group having a lack of cultural buffering in the form of extensive clothing, and their long time residence at a relatively high latitude.
Read a phucking book, dumb ass.
Simpleton, the crural index is the ratio of the length of the tibia (shinbone) to the thigh. The exact same anthropometric measurements are always used, the same as when working out nasal index and facial index. They don't change. They are simple calculated ratios.
According to the data, some 'Whites' are more tropically adapted than African-Americans, and Yugoslavians cluster the closest to Egyptians.
Face it, you've been completely debunked. Hence you are only left, in denial, to claim crural index are now different measurement standards.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@anglo_pyramidologist
ok so you have a single nutbag, well done. political correctness is driving such people .
I think the woman in question has a considerably greater degree of expertise than you. In terms of her stance in relation to mainstream Egyptology, she and her institution, the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge, are ahead of the curve as the Americans would say. She recently did a presentation at the British Museum.
It's notable that you try to dismiss her as politically correct, when you know that most people would listen to her over you. She has a degree in Ancient Greek, an MA in Classics and the Phd covering Ptolemaic Egypt. Compare this to your BTEC, foundation degree in Forensic Anthropology and BNP membership and it's no contest really.
BTW just some of the other Phds who accept/accepted the fact of a Black/ indigenous African Ancient Egypt
Sheldon Peck, an American orthodontist arrived at the conclusion that the sphinx is the depiction of an African. He wrote in to the New York Times with the following in July, 1992
'the Sphinx is likely a facial representation of a black African.'
Maybe you want to revise your wild statement that the idea of a Black African Egypt is Afronut?
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: the crural index is the ratio of the length of the tibia (shinbone) to the thigh.
Birdbrain, bone structures (limbs included) are not simple structures like cylinders and rectangles. Since the bottom and top surfaces of limb bones are not flat, various anatomical marks can be used to measure limb length. Limb length is not the only thing that is measured in several ways. Not surprising that you’re in the dark about this, given your rather sub-par understanding of Anthropological matters, and indeed, science in general.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: The exact same anthropometric measurements are always used,
Wrong
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: and facial index.
Wrong
quote:According to the data, some 'Whites' are more tropically adapted than African-Americans,
Then why doesn’t this manifest itself within studies? Why do you have to frantically scramble and compare data from different papers? You have access to Jstor, right? Name one in which whites have longer tibia’s in relation to their femora, than the measured African American sample, that’s all I’m asking you. Name one, and make yourself useful, for a change.
quote:and Yugoslavians cluster the closest to Egyptians.
This is in line with other work done elsewhere, e.g., Holiday. Ancient Egyptians are closest in body type to Pygmies.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
^^^ so is it possible certain Egyptians had Yugoslav facial features on top a a big sized pygmy body?
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:so is it possible certain Egyptians had Yugoslav facial features on top a a big sized pygmy body?
Yes. Some did. Cleopatra's sister, for instance, was half Egyptian, half Balkanese.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Your dumb ass just doesn't know how to read the data. Like the idiot that you are, you don't even realize you cannot use the measurements obtained from one study, and apply them to other data, without critically looking at what measurement standards were used to come up with those numbers. The samples were not the same, and ever if they were, there is always the well known phenomenon of researchers coming up with different measurements from the same material as well. You wouldn't know this, of course, being the crude, unsophisticated b!tch that you are, always bragging about your degree in forensic anthropology, but never demonstrating insight beyond trivial concepts such as ''negro'', ''caucasian'' and ''mongoloid''.
The key lesson to take away from all those studies, is that equatorial Africans (and those who descend from them, e.g., African Americans) are - as an average expressed in ratio - never lower or the same as the average of whites who were measured, within that same study.
Kalahari Bushmen lower limb ratio's vis a vis equatorial Africans can be explained by the former group having a lack of cultural buffering in the form of extensive clothing, and their long time residence at a relatively high latitude.
Read a phucking book, dumb ass.
Simpleton, the crural index is the ratio of the length of the tibia (shinbone) to the thigh. The exact same anthropometric measurements are always used, the same as when working out nasal index and facial index. They don't change. They are simple calculated ratios.
According to the data, some 'Whites' are more tropically adapted than African-Americans, and Yugoslavians cluster the closest to Egyptians.
Face it, you've been completely debunked. Hence you are only left, in denial, to claim crural index are now different measurement standards.
But of course, "some African Americans" have a relative high dosage of cold adapted West European admixture. Which makes it self-explanatory.
And on the other hand...we have "some whites" with tropical sub -Saharan African admixture. Which makes it self-explanatory.
So it is for your Yugoslavians with tropical sub-Saharan admixture.
Logic follows, in order to have tropical limbs you need to have tropical anscestry. You can't grow "tropical adapted limbs" in a cold region. Hence cold adapted limbs.
Simply put, in understandable ways for you, they have n*gger blood.
Here, we describe a system for the molecular dissection of haplogroup E-M78 (E1b1b1a), consisting of multiplex polymerase chain reaction and minisequencing of M78 and nine population-informative Y-SNPs (M148, M224, V12, V13, V19, V22, V27, V32, V65) in a single reaction.
Phylogeny of Y-chromosome haplogroups and their frequencies (%) in the examined populations. Nomenclature and haplogroup labelling according to the Y Chromosome Consortium (http://ycc.biosci.arizona.edu/) updated according to Karafet et al. 32 *Paragroups: Y chromosomes not defined by any phylogenetic downstream-reported and -examined mutation. aIntrapopulation haplogroup diversity. The terminal markers of haplogroups E-V12 and E-V13 (V32 and V27, respectively) were typed but did not show any variation.
Frequency (left) and variance (right) distributions of the main Y-chromosome haplogroups, I-M423, E-V13 and J-M241, observed in this survey. Frequency data are reported in Figure 2, variance data are relative to the examined microsatellite reported in the Supplementary Table S2. We acknowledge that interpolated spatial frequency surfaces should be viewed with caution because of sample size.41 Data from this study. Frequency and variance values were assigned to sample-collection places (dots). Population samples (geographically close) with less than five observations were pooled and the corresponding variance assigned to a middle position of the pooled sample locations. +Data from the literature.13, 23, 27, 28, 36, 45, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54
Swenet, anthropometric measurement methods don't change, they are standard -
Nasal Index: the ratio of the width of nasal aperture to the height of the nasion (x 100).
Crural Index: the ratio of the length of the tibia (shinbone) to the thigh (x 100).
You don't know the basics of anthropology.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote: Simply put, in understandable ways for you, they have n*gger blood
If they have signficant amounts of Negroid ancestry as you claim, why do they have no Negroid features?
Will you ever stop trolling?
A typical Croatian/Serb:
According to Troll Patrol, Croatians/Serbs who look this are heavily black admixed. Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
Dumbass, why did you drop your initial argument that facial index is always measured in one way?
Oh that's right, you did a quick search on the internet and learned something new, didn't you?
No one said the following was not the case:
quote:Nasal Index: the ratio of the width of nasal aperture to the height of the nasion (x 100).
Crural Index: the ratio of the length of the tibia (shinbone) to the thigh (x 100).
Re-read my post and rid yourself of your stupidity. Then, if you can muster up the balls and actually reply to what was said (and not run off like you always do when I turn the heat on), you can stop using strawman arguments, and get back on track.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @anglo_pyramidologist
ok so you have a single nutbag, well done. political correctness is driving such people .
I think the woman in question has a considerably greater degree of expertise than you. In terms of her stance in relation to mainstream Egyptology, she and her institution, the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge, are ahead of the curve as the Americans would say. She recently did a presentation at the British Museum.
It's notable that you try to dismiss her as politically correct, when you know that most people would listen to her over you. She has a degree in Ancient Greek, an MA in Classics and the Phd covering Ptolemaic Egypt. Compare this to your BTEC, foundation degree in Forensic Anthropology and BNP membership and it's no contest really.
BTW just some of the other Phds who accept/accepted the fact of a Black/ indigenous African Ancient Egypt
Sheldon Peck, an American orthodontist arrived at the conclusion that the sphinx is the depiction of an African. He wrote in to the New York Times with the following in July, 1992
'the Sphinx is likely a facial representation of a black African.'
Maybe you want to revise your wild statement that the idea of a Black African Egypt is Afronut?
Many of those don't claim the AE's were 'black', just indigenous North Africans... afronuts distort this obviously.
Keita for example, who afrocentrics love to quote-mine and distort, completely rejects afrocentrism and has pointed out how he doesn't believe the AE's can be equated to western concepts of 'black'...
So basically what you are doing is finding scholars who claim AE was an indigenous North African civilization, as if that is somehow evidence they were Negroid. Its not at all.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @anglo_pyramidologist
ok so you have a single nutbag, well done. political correctness is driving such people .
I think the woman in question has a considerably greater degree of expertise than you. In terms of her stance in relation to mainstream Egyptology, she and her institution, the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge, are ahead of the curve as the Americans would say. She recently did a presentation at the British Museum.
It's notable that you try to dismiss her as politically correct, when you know that most people would listen to her over you. She has a degree in Ancient Greek, an MA in Classics and the Phd covering Ptolemaic Egypt. Compare this to your BTEC, foundation degree in Forensic Anthropology and BNP membership and it's no contest really.
BTW just some of the other Phds who accept/accepted the fact of a Black/ indigenous African Ancient Egypt
Sheldon Peck, an American orthodontist arrived at the conclusion that the sphinx is the depiction of an African. He wrote in to the New York Times with the following in July, 1992
'the Sphinx is likely a facial representation of a black African.'
Maybe you want to revise your wild statement that the idea of a Black African Egypt is Afronut?
Many of those don't claim the AE's were 'black', just indigenous North Africans... afronuts distort this obviously.
Keita for example, who afrocentrics love to quote-mine and distort, completely rejects afrocentrism and has pointed out how he doesn't believe the AE's can be equated to western concepts of 'black'...
So basically what you are doing is finding scholars who claim AE was an indigenous North African civilization, as if that is somehow evidence they were Negroid. Its not at all.
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: Dumbass, why did you drop your initial argument that facial index is always measured in one way?
Oh that's right, you did a quick search on the internet and learned something new, didn't you?
No one said the following was not the case:
quote:Nasal Index: the ratio of the width of nasal aperture to the height of the nasion (x 100).
Crural Index: the ratio of the length of the tibia (shinbone) to the thigh (x 100).
Re-read my post and rid yourself of your stupidity. Then, if you can muster up the balls and actually reply to what was said (and not run off like you always do when I turn the heat on), you can stop using strawman arguments, and get back on track.
Facial index is measured the exact same way, as is the facial angle, as are cephalometric angles SNA/SNB/ANB. Anthropometric methods don't change.
And you were the one who attacked the fact Crural Index was a standard measurement process, now all of a sudden ''No one said the following was not the case'', after you realised Crural Index is just the the ratio of the length of the tibia to the thigh (x 100). It's a standard measurement, it doesn't change. Thanks for finally admitting the basics.
What do you further want to debate? You just admitted you were wrong.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] Stop lying, African Americans are obviously still tropically adapted, as evidenced by Terry:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] Your dumb ass just doesn't know how to read the data. Like the idiot that you are, you don't even realize you cannot use the measurements obtained from one study, and apply them to other data, without critically looking at what measurement standards were used to come up with those numbers. The samples were not the same, and ever if they were, there is always the well known phenomenon of researchers coming up with different measurements from the same material as well. You wouldn't know this, of course, being the crude, unsophisticated b!tch that you are, always bragging about your degree in forensic anthropology, but never demonstrating insight beyond trivial concepts such as ''negro'', ''caucasian'' and ''mongoloid''.
yet you post a chart that says "blacks" and "whites" which is intended by the authors of that chart to mean "Negro" and "Caucasian" becuase you know that they didn't just mean skin color in this chart, otherwise they would have included some people of East Asian descent in the "White" category and some Asian Indians and Arabs in the "Black" section. But you know they didn't do that and that they intended the more politcially correct terms "Black" and "White" to be equivalent to terms which are not soley based on skin color. And when the authors of the chart compare the Terry collection to Egyptians they are doing exactly what you said is not conclusive comparing data collected and measured under different conditions, the Terry data and the data on the Egyptians.
Of the Terry data one can assume it roughly reflects the demographics of Americans of European descent who are primarily German, Irish and English. It can be assumed that "Whites" of Medditeranean, Central Asian, and South Asian descent are barely covered by this sample probably comprising under 1% of the data
_____________________________________________ Dr. Terry began to collect human skeletons from cadavers used in the Medical School's Anatomy classes. These bodies were primarily obtained from local St. Louis hospital and institutional morgues. There was also a small portion of the cadavers that were collected from other institutions throughout the state of Missouri. The cadavers predominantly consisted of individuals whose bodies became property of the state when they were not claimed, or whose relatives signed over the remains to the state. The bodies were subsequently turned over to the Medical School for cadaver research. The demographic distribution is:
461 White Males 546 Black Males 323 White Females 392 Black Females 5 Asiatic Males 1 Unknown Origin
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote: Simply put, in understandable ways for you, they have n*gger blood
If they have signficant amounts of Negroid ancestry as you claim, why do they have no Negroid features?
Will you ever stop trolling?
A typical Croatian/Serb:
According to Troll Patrol, Croatians/Serbs who look this are heavily black admixed.
Indeed, stop trolling!
What happend to your brown completed vs depigmented Med types?
Say it along, selective pictures.
E3b originated in East Africa and expanded into the Near East and northern Africa at the end of the Pleistocene (Underhill et al. 2001).
E3b lineages would have then been introduced from the Near East into southern Europe by farmers, during the Neolithic expansion (Hammer et al. 1998; Semino et al. 2000; Underhill et al. 2001).
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
her lower lip has three drops of Negro
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:yet you post a chart that says "blacks" and "whites" which is intended by the authors of that chart to mean "Negro" and "Caucasian" becuase you know that they didn't just mean skin color in this chart, otherwise they would have included some people of East Asian descent in the "White" category and some Asian Indians and Arabs in the "Black" section.
You're even dumber than Cassie. As a matter of fact, I bet you're the dumbest on this forum.
When modern Westernized people choose to reserve the word ''black'' for Africans, and ''white'' for Europeans, even though there are others with those skin colors, it means they're automatically talking about the stereotyped Negro and the conflated Caucasian group, per definition?
Wow, sounds like a leap in logic to me. I wish you could get a glimpse of what you're saying through other peoples eyes, so you could read how incredibly retarded you sound. You obviously don't see the depth of your stupidity, because your dumb ass has been repeating that ''black necessarily means negroid, otherwise they would have included Australians'', and ''black necessarily means negroid, otherwise they would have said brown'' crap for years.
Lioness reasoning:
The people in charge of naming the company 'Apple' obviously thought they would be naming a new apple strain, otherwise they wouldn't call it an apple.
tsk tsk tsk. Someone need to bring this retard to an asylum.
quote:But you know they didn't do that and that they intended the more politcially correct terms "Black" and "White" to be equivalent to terms which are not soley based on skin color.
No dumbass, because Anthropologists group people according to presumed common ancestry, not because they share something as trivial as the color of their skin. There is no value in making an imagined black Arabs + black African group, when most people of both camps aren't even closely related.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
her lower lip has three drops of Negro
Well I did not put up that picture.
The funny part is, I know people from the region. And some have indeed brown complected skin. Almost caramel.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
E1b1b is a Caucasoid marker.
Note how E1b1b (E3b) doesn't appear among Negroids, completely absent in West Africa.
Map -
Come back when you learn the basics...
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: E1b1b is a Caucasoid marker.
Note how E1b1b (E3b) doesn't appear among Negroids, completely absent in West Africa.
Map -
Come back when you learn the basics...
If E1b1a (E3a) Is Negroid And E1b1b (E3b) is caucasoid then what is E1b1
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: E1b1b is a Caucasoid marker.
Note how E1b1b (E3b) doesn't appear among Negroids, completely absent in West Africa.
Map -
Come back when you learn the basics...
How is it a caucasoid marker when in arose in deep Dark Africa, amongst n*gger types ?lol
You so know where the caucasus is I hope...because this is getting rediclious.
Shall we go though the diversty of phenotypes in the marker E3b, which is a sibling of E3a?
Remember that E-V13 is a down stream it's not a parent clade. It eventually derived from E35, after I a few mutations.
quote:
"The TMRCA of the European E-V13 chromosomes turns out to be 4.0–4.7 ky (under 2 different demographic expansion scenarios, see Subjects and Methods; 95% CI 3.5–4.6 ky and 4.1–5.3 ky, respectively)."
"Trans-Mediterranean migrations directly from northern Africa to Europe (mainly in the last 13.0 ky)"
"A single clade within E-M78 (E-V13) highlights a range expansion in the Bronze Age of southeastern Europe, which is also detected by haplogroup J-M12. "
Tracing past human male movements in northern/eastern Africa and western Eurasia: new clues from Y-chromosomal haplogroups E-M78 and J-M12.
AuthorsCruciani F, et al. Mol Biol Evol. 2007 Jun;24(6):1300-11. Epub 2007 Mar 10.
E3a
Vs
E3e
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Facial index is measured the exact same way
The determination of the facial index varies according to whether the measurements are made with or without the mandible in position. In the former case the length is measured from the ophryon or nasion above to the mental tubercle below, and compared with the maximum bizygomatic with. […] More usually, however, owing to the loss of the mandible, the proportions of the face are expressed by the superior facial index -Cunningham's textbook of anatomy, Daniel John Cunningham
Like I said, the birdbrain has no clue when the anthropological subject matter extends beyond 'negro', 'caucasian' and 'mongoloid'.
quote:And you were the one who attacked the fact Crural Index was a standard measurement process,
Dumbass, I said there were different standards for measuring limb index, then you came along and posted the names of the bones that are involved in determining crural index (tibia and femur), and what the crural index expresses, as if that was relevant to what I said.
I guess you’re too mentally deranged to understand that saying ''there are differences ways to measure limb length’’, isn’t the same as saying ''crural index doesn’t involve the tibia and femur’’.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
E1b1b is the border marker between Caucasoids and Negroids in Africa.
It's mostly detected the highest in North Africans (Caucasoids), but is also found in Horners (Oromo, Somalis) who are heavily Caucasoid admixed (up to 60%).
E1b1b is completely non-dectectable in Negroids.
No one cares about your bogus ''white'' or ''black'' racial groupings. The fact is you cluster many Caucasoids as ''black''... lol.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
lol at this dummy.
Paragroup E-M78 represents 74.5% of haplogroup E*, the highest frequencies observed in Masalit and Fur populations.
By the way, North Africans aren't caucasiod! lol
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: E1b1b is the border marker between Caucasoids and Negroids in Africa.
It's mostly detected the highest in North Africans (Caucasoids), but is also found in Horners (Oromo, Somalis) who are heavily Caucasoid admixed (up to 60%).
E1b1b is completely non-dectectable in Negroids.
No one cares about your bogus ''white'' or ''black'' racial groupings. The fact is you cluster many Caucasoids as ''black''... lol.
E3a
vs
E3b
The Northeast Africa-based E1b1b1a subclade is defined by SNP M78. Somalia, Sudan and Egypt are among the present day countries with very high frequencies (60-90%) of the E1b1b1a M78 subclade. The STR data also support its origin in this area with a TMRCA estimated at 14-23 kya.
The E1b1b1a1b (V32) subclade is a descendant of E1b1b1a1 (V12). E1b1b1a1b/V32 is highest in Somalia (47-75%),
This somewhat rare haplogroup, E1b1b1e (V6), has only been observed in East Africa with the most appreciable levels seen in Ethiopia (4-17%). Kenya and Somalia also harbor a moderate frequency (5%) of this subclade.
Explain why they are tropical adapted and not extensive hairy? lol
Vs
cold adapted and extensive hairy?lol
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@anglopyramidologist
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @anglo_pyramidologist
ok so you have a single nutbag, well done. political correctness is driving such people .
I think the woman in question has a considerably greater degree of expertise than you. In terms of her stance in relation to mainstream Egyptology, she and her institution, the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge, are ahead of the curve as the Americans would say. She recently did a presentation at the British Museum.
It's notable that you try to dismiss her as politically correct, when you know that most people would listen to her over you. She has a degree in Ancient Greek, an MA in Classics and the Phd covering Ptolemaic Egypt. Compare this to your BTEC, foundation degree in Forensic Anthropology and BNP membership and it's no contest really.
BTW just some of the other Phds who accept/accepted the fact of a Black/ indigenous African Ancient Egypt
Sheldon Peck, an American orthodontist arrived at the conclusion that the sphinx is the depiction of an African. He wrote in to the New York Times with the following in July, 1992
'the Sphinx is likely a facial representation of a black African.'
Maybe you want to revise your wild statement that the idea of a Black African Egypt is Afronut?
Many of those don't claim the AE's were 'black', just indigenous North Africans... afronuts distort this obviously.
Rubbish. You clearly didn't take the time to listen to what each of those individuals had to say, because in the links I provided they all explicitly say that the Egyptians were black, apart from Professor Stephen Quirke and Shomarka Keita. However, Stephen Quirke appears in the Nubian Spirit DVD, which supports the Black Egypt argument. Quirke is also head of the Petrie Museum, which is where the woman you called a nutjob used to work before she went to the Fitzwilliam- the Petrie also hosts events by people like Robin Walker, who fully endorses Black Egypt
Keita for example, who afrocentrics love to quote-mine and distort, completely rejects afrocentrism and has pointed out how he doesn't believe the AE's can be equated to western concepts of 'black'...
So basically what you are doing is finding scholars who claim AE was an indigenous North African civilization, as if that is somehow evidence they were Negroid. Its not at all.
Oh dear.. stand by...from the youtube link that Asante provided, read Shomarka Keita's answer to the the following question
Question: 'The largely Caucasian academic reluctance to accept the African ethnicity of ancient and indeed modern day Egyptians appears to be based less on established evidence and more inherently racist notions of Africans inferiority which in their minds rendered them incapable of being cultural originators of Egypt. Does this therefore suggest that African scholars should not engage in debating or proving anything to the Caucasian world and simply focus on establishing meaning, interpretation and application in current day relevance of Ancient African knowledge?'
Shomarka Keita : 'Uh...absolutely. The African world has to do its own research whether that African world is in Nigeria, or in Brazil, or in Mississippi in the United States, or in Liverpool. On the other hand there are standards of excellence that have to be applied in scholarship, you just don’t stand up and say anything you want and that goes also for the Eurocentrists.'
Also read his comment on the skin colour of the Egyptians
'Without an analysis of histology of the skin and accurate portraits one cannot say how they looked. We can extrapolate by lookng at the variability of the modern Egyptian with a focus on Upper Egyptian , considering a predictive approach based on latitude, and imagining what they would have been like without the gene flow from the Near East and Europe over thousands of years . This will help you conceptualise the variability of the Nile indigenous population...My research cannot indicate skin colour in any empirical sense.'
Regarding cranial affinities, he writes
'I think that the correct comparative series would be indigenous northeast Nilotic and Horn, and northwest Africans.'
Maybe you can provide us with a list of youtube links showing Phds arguing against a Black Egypt? Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Claus3600, as i said to Troll Patrol, no one is interested in your bogus ''black'' or ''white'' clusterings.
Anthropology recognises Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid, these are the scientifically valid racial divisions. Afrocentrics out of self-hatred and denial call North African Caucasoids ''black'', the same with Indians etc.
You know Van Sertima on your list, who i have read plenty of for a laugh, claims that Indians are ''black'', despite the fact they are morphologically predominantly Caucasoid. Afrocentrics will cluster completely distinct races into their own group.
As i clarified in my original post -
quote:Every genuine scholar knows the ancient egyptians were North African in phenotype (Caucasoid), not Negroid.
The reality is EVERYONE knows the AE's were not Negroid in bone structure or phenotype (even you yourself). Don't deny like Troll Patrol you don't know what these traits are.
Yet we are expected to believe by the afronuts that both North Africans (who are thin nosed, wavy haired Caucasoids) are the same as broad nosed, nappy haired Negroes from West Africa... who they both claim are this bogus ''black'' racial division.
You know you are a liar. All afrocentrics do is play with words, they will shift the definition of ''black'' to completely non-Negroid peoples. Compare the above two images.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@Anglo
Such a lame rearguard action. You've lost. The Ancient Egyptians were black Africans, get over it. Go and find your first girlfriend and join with the modern world. You're too young to hold such stupid outdated views.
However, if you insist on adhering to silly dogma, then you might be able to regain what little credibility you have by posting a list of youtube links showing Phds arguing against black Egypt. But you won't be able to because your world view is pitifully marginalised. Must be really difficult for you living in London and seeing the population change, eh?
Van Sertima is far more credible than you. As indeed are all the rest of the Phds I posted links to.
BTW it doesn't matter what I think - I only do the reading, use my common sense and analytical skills - and the information supports Black Egypt.
I'm bored of you now.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] Stop lying, African Americans are obviously still tropically adapted, as evidenced by Terry:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] Your dumb ass just doesn't know how to read the data. Like the idiot that you are, you don't even realize you cannot use the measurements obtained from one study, and apply them to other data, without critically looking at what measurement standards were used to come up with those numbers. The samples were not the same, and ever if they were, there is always the well known phenomenon of researchers coming up with different measurements from the same material as well. You wouldn't know this, of course, being the crude, unsophisticated b!tch that you are, always bragging about your degree in forensic anthropology, but never demonstrating insight beyond trivial concepts such as ''negro'', ''caucasian'' and ''mongoloid''.
Neverthless the terms "Black" and "White" are used by the authors of th chart above with the same "trivial" concept as "Negroid" and "Caucasian"
And when the authors of the chart compare the Terry collection to Egyptians they are doing exactly what you said is not conclusive > comparing data collected and measured under different conditions, the Terry data and the other data on the Egyptians.
_____________________________________________ Dr. Terry began to collect human skeletons from cadavers used in the Medical School's Anatomy classes. These bodies were primarily obtained from local St. Louis hospital and institutional morgues. There was also a small portion of the cadavers that were collected from other institutions throughout the state of Missouri. The cadavers predominantly consisted of individuals whose bodies became property of the state when they were not claimed, or whose relatives signed over the remains to the state. The bodies were subsequently turned over to the Medical School for cadaver research. The demographic distribution is:
461 White Males 546 Black Males 323 White Females 392 Black Females 5 Asiatic Males 1 Unknown Origin
Of the Terry data one can assume it roughly reflects the demographics of Americans of European descent who are primarily German, Irish and English. It can be assumed that "Whites" of Medditeranean, Central Asian, and South Asian descent are barely covered by this sample probably comprising under 1% of the data It can be assumed that "Whites" of , Central Asian,Mediterranean and South Asian descent are barely covered by this sample probably comprising under 1% of the data
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote: Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
As i clarified in my original post -
quote:Every genuine scholar knows the ancient egyptians were North African in phenotype (Caucasoid), not Negroid.
The reality is EVERYONE knows the AE's were not Negroid in bone structure or phenotype (even you yourself). Don't deny like Troll Patrol you don't know what these traits are.
The AE's looked like THIS: /QUOTE]
I think most people would agree, this person with the full lips looks more "Negroid" than "Caucasian". His hair is possible afro. I dare you to post a photo of a modern person with a skin tone no lighter and lips no thinner.
^^^^ Here is a painting and sculpture of Amenhotep III Clearly of Negroid phenotype
Yet you can't deal with it. You just ignore it like a fraud.
^^^^ This is Huni last Pharaoh of Egypt of the Third dynasty. With big lips and prognathic jaw, clearly Negroid
Yet you choose to ignore your forensic observations and simply choose to avoid numerous artficacts like these
this is why you are a fraud and propagandist and have no business being in a scientific profession
lioness.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @Anglo
Such a lame rearguard action. You've lost. The Ancient Egyptians were black Africans, get over it. Go and find your first girlfriend and join with the modern world. You're too young to hold such stupid outdated views.
However, if you insist on adhering to silly dogma, then you might be able to regain what little credibility you have by posting a list of youtube links showing Phds arguing against black Egypt. But you won't be able to because your world view is pitifully marginalised. Must be really difficult for you living in London and seeing the population change, eh?
Van Sertima is far more credible than you. As indeed are all the rest of the Phds I posted links to.
BTW it doesn't matter what I think - I only do the reading, use my common sense and analytical skills - and the information supports Black Egypt.
I'm bored of you now.
I'm interested in proper scientific studies and works from physical anthropologists, very few you posted are credible.
A work i just purchased the other day -
''Egyptians were archetypal Caucasoids, with narrow nose, prominant nasal root, and rather small jaws, brunet in coloring, with dark eyes and hair... We do not hesitate to call them Mediterranean, they were of the basic Caucasoid type of Southern Europe'' - People and Races, Alice M. Brues, Macmillan, 1990 (2nd Ed.), p. 285
Alice Mossie Brues (1914 - 2007) was a Professor of anatomy and physical anthropology, i added her page to Wikipedia.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@anglo ''Egyptians were archetypal Caucasoids, with narrow nose, prominant nasal root, and rather small jaws, brunet in coloring, with dark eyes and hair... We do not hesitate to call them Mediterranean, they were of the basic Caucasoid type of Southern Europe''
Oh dear, now I know you're taking the piss.
BTW isn't it your birthday on Sunday? Might be nice for someone to send your details to the UAF as a present.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
''Egyptians were archetypal Caucasoids, with narrow nose, prominant nasal root, and rather small jaws, brunet in coloring, with dark eyes and hair... We do not hesitate to call them Mediterranean, they were of the basic Caucasoid type of Southern Europe'' - People and Races, Alice M. Brues, Macmillan, 1990 (2nd Ed.), p. 285
Alice Mossie Brues (1914 - 2007) was a Professor of anatomy and physical anthropology, i added her page to Wikipedia. [/QB]
obvioulsy the statement is an over simplification. It applies to some Egyptians and not to others.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @anglo ''Egyptians were archetypal Caucasoids, with narrow nose, prominant nasal root, and rather small jaws, brunet in coloring, with dark eyes and hair... We do not hesitate to call them Mediterranean, they were of the basic Caucasoid type of Southern Europe''
Oh dear, now I know you're taking the piss.
BTW isn't it your birthday on Sunday? Might be nice for someone to send your details to the UAF as a present.
Read and learn something...
A Racial Overview of Prehistoric Egypt
The earliest prehistoric (AMH) skeleton from Egypt is Nazlet Khater Man, which dates to the Upper Palaeolithic (33, 000 B. P.). Based on the most recent craniometric studies, the remains have been identified as ancestral to the Khoisan (proto-Capoid). The mandible of Nazlet Khater Man most closely resembles that of modern Khoisans (Vermeersch, 2002, pp. 325-327). Contrary to Afrocentric claims that Nazlet Khater Man is Negroid, the mandible is Capoid and non-Negroid (Ibid, p. 326). In nearby Sudan, adjacent to the Nile, the earliest Upper Palaeolithic skeletal remains are also proto-Capoid (Bushmanoid). This includes most notably the Singa Skull (Woodward, 1938; Cole, 1954, p. 157; Wells, 1972). Bushmanoid crania has also been discovered at late Pleistocene/Holocene site of Afalou in Algeria (Briggs, 1955; Phillipson, 1993).
That the earliest Upper Paleolithic remains across North Africa have Capoid racial affinities, supports Coon's (1962) theory that the ancestral Khoisan were once native to the northern parts of Africa before being largely displaced by Capsians during the turn of the Holocene. The North African Capsian people were affiliated with the Mouillians who resembled Cro-Magnons, but it is unclear if they evolved from the Mouillians or were a seperate migration having arrived from Asia. Caspian skeletal remains reveals them to have been Caucasoid, of the Mediterrenean subrace, while the Mouillian or 'Mechta-Afalou', who had Cro-Magnon phenotypes were proto-Caucasoid (Briggs, 1955; Coon, 1965, pp. 92-93). Some Mouillian and Capsian crania however shows racial admixture, presumably Capoid (Ibid, p. 94, footnote 3 cf. Biasutti, 1905). Of Caucasoid Badarian crania, all hair samples discovered are brown or black (Brunton, 1928).
Pre-dynastic crania from Egypt (Badarian, c. 4400-4000 BC; c. Naqada 4400-3000 BC; Amratian, c. 4000 - 3500 BC) show a mixture of racial types. According to A. Wiercinski's (1963) study of pre-dynastic skulls, 76% can be classified as Caucasoid (orthognathic, leptorrhine), but Anderson's (1968) study of 117 skulls from Badari revealed the majority, 94, to have mixed racial or affinities, while only 15 as Caucasoid (6 Gracile Mediterrenean, 9 Mouillian Cro-Magnon). Some anthropologists in the early 20th century identified this racial mixture as Negroid, but as Coon noted, this was because Capoid crania was excluded from these studies for comparison (1965, p. 94). When Capoids have been included in craniometric studies they cluster the closest to non-Caucasoid pre-dynastic egyptian skulls (Biasutti, 1905; Johnston, 1913, p. 378).
That the non-Caucasoid pre-dynastic egyptians were Capoid (Bushman) and not Negroid is further supported by archaeological findings such as steatopygous Badarian figurines (Petrie, 1901, pp. 248-249; Perry, 1935; Massoulard 1949, p. 163; Alimen 1957, p. 119). An example is of a steatopygous woman figurine, made of ivory (tomb 5107) who also has a wide Bushmanoid nose. Capoids have steatopygia, a curvature of the lower spine, which leads to a prominant projection of fat in the buttocks: ''Steatopygia is recorded as the shortest distance between the deepest point in the hollow of the back and a plane, placed at right angles to the median sagittal, just touching the most posterior point of the buttocks'' (Baker, 1974, pp. 317-322). Negroids do not have steatopygia, and within Africa only Capoids (Khoisan) and Pygmies do. Heavily admixed Negroids with Capoid genes however have inherited this feature (Coon, 1962; Gayre, 1966, p. 63). This admixture however took place during the Bantu Expansion, many thousands of years after the pre-dynastic period. It is thus clear native North Africans were ancestral to the Bushmanoid race who had lived there from at least the early Upper Palaeolithic (Coon, 1965, p. 62; Jenkins, 1972, pp. 25-26).
Proto-Caucasoids, affiliated with the Cro-Magnons entered North Africa in small numbers and founded the Mouillian culture. It is still disputed if the Caspians evolved out of the Mouillian or migrated from Asia (or Europe), but it appears that the Caspians, a Caucasoid people of the Mediterranean subrace largely absorbed the Cro-Magnons and Capoids by proto-dynastic Egypt.
The Mediterraneanoids were thus the bulk racial component of ancient egypt. Nordics appeared in the late 4th millenium BC, and were almost entirely confined to the minority ruling class.
A Racial Overview of Ancient Egypt
During the (late) 4th millenium BC there was a small migration of fair haired Nordic Caucasoids into Egypt (Gates, 1948, p. 138; Dart, 1959).
The bulk or mass egyptian population however belonged to the Mediterranean Caucasoid subrace (Smith, 1911, pp. 67-69; Coon, 1939; Baker, 1974, pp. 518-521 cf. Morant 1925) who descended from the Mouillian and Capsians through the Badarian and Naqada cultures, and there was also a Capoid (Bushmanoid) racial substratum (Biasutti, 1905, pp. 322-62; Johnston, 1913, p. Massoulard, 1949, p. 163; Alimen, 1957, p. 119). Prehistoic Bushmanoid rock art has also been discovered in Egypt (Ibid, 1957, p. 371).
Negroids only appeared in Egypt as late as c. 2000 BC (Junker, 1921, pp. 121-132).
Nordic arrival in Egypt
Nordics first arrived in Egypt c. 3500 - 3200 BC, during the late pre-dynastic or beginning of the proto-dynastic period. There is skeletal and artistic evidence of a Nordic presence.
Professor Raymond Arthur Dart after studying hundreds of pre-dynastic and proto-dynastic egyptian crania came to the conclusion that: ''...the first exclusively Nordic migration occurred in the Neolithic era'' (1959, p. 30).
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Nordic Egypt by Karl Earlson
In 1925, the Oxford don L. H. Dudley Buxton, wrote the following concerning ancient Egyptian crania:
"Among the ancient crania from the Thebaid in the collection in the Department of Human Anatomy in Oxford, there are specimens which must unhesitatingly be considered to be those of Nordic type. If this is so, it would seem that they probably entered Egypt with the other alien elements which began to filter in from Asia in early dynastic times. How far the Nordics ever formed any appreciable element in the population is doubtful, but these specimens prove their existence." [L. H. D. Buxton, The Peoples of Asia (London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Trübner, 1925), p. 50.]
Harry R. Hall, the Keeper of Egyptian Antiquities at the British Museum in the 1920s, had this to say about the invaders who formed the early dynastic Egyptian type:
"The oldest representations of ruling Egyptians, who may be presumed to belong to this race, shew remarkably a definitely central or even north European type, and it is very probable that this invading people belonged to an early folk-wandering from the 'Nordic' regions that made its way south through Syria, after possibly a period of settlement there." [H. R. Hall, A General Introductory Guide to the Egyptian Collections in the British Museum (London: Harrison & Sons, 1930), p. 24.]
Later in the same work, he refers to the "northern invaders," who formed an "aristocracy of northern (and possibly Nordic) origin," over the native Egyptians. [Ibid., p. 25.]
The American physical anthropologist J. Lawrence Angel, studied a series of Egyptian crania dating from the predynastic period, down to the time of the Ptolemies. He concluded that during the invasion of Egypt by the Hyksos (15th Dynasty), Lower Egypt was settled by large numbers of individuals who were "Nordic-Iranian" in type. [J. L. Angel, "Biological Relations of Egyptian and Eastern Mediterranean Populations during Pre-dynastic and Dynastic Times." Journal of Human Evolution I (1972) pp. 307-313.]
The Scottish physical anthropologist Robert Gayre has written, that in his considered opinion:
"Ancient Egypt, for instance, was essentially a penetration of Caucasoid racial elements into Africa . . . This civilisation grew out of the settlement of Mediterraneans, Armenoids, even Nordics, and Atlantics in North Africa . . ." [R. Gayre of Gayre, Miscellaneous Racial Studies, 1943-1972 (Edinburgh: Armorial, 1972), p. 85.]
When English archaeologist Howard Carter excavated the tomb of Tutankhamen in 1922, he discovered in the Treasury a small wooden sarcophagus. Within it lay a memento of Tutankhamen's beloved grandmother, Queen Tiye: "a curl of her auburn hair." [C. Desroches-Noblecourt, Tutankhamen: Life and Death of a Pharaoh (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1972), p. 65.]
Queen Tiye (18th Dynasty), was the daughter of Thuya, a Priestess of the God Amun. Thuya's mummy, which was found in 1905, has long, red-blonde hair. Examinations of Tiye's mummy proved that she bore a striking resemblance to her mother. [B. Adams, Egyptian Mummies (Aylesbury: Shire Publications, 1988), p. 39.]
The French Egyptologist Christiane Desroches-Noblecourt, has this to say about the famous Egyptian beauty, Queen Nefertiti: ". . . her beauty was of the noble Theban type seen in the necropolis paintings . . ." She goes on to state that ". . . the coloured bust now in Berlin shows the rosy tint of her complexion, which suggests that she was careful to avoid sunlight or, alternatively, that she was of northern stock." [Desroches-Noblecourt, op. cit., p. 90.]
A painting of the mother of Pharaoh Amenhotep IV (18th Dynasty), reveals that she had blonde hair, blue eyes and a rosy complexion. [W. Sieglin, Die blonden Haare der indogermanischen Völker des Altertums (Munich: J. F. Lehmanns Verlag, 1935), p. 132.]
Princess Ranofri, a daughter of Pharaoh Tuthmosis III (18th Dynasty), is depicted as a blonde in a wall painting that was recorded in the 19th century, by the Italian Egyptologist Ippolito Rosellini. [Ibid., p. 132.]
In 1929 archaeologists discovered the mummy of fifty year-old Queen Meryet-Amun (another daughter of Tuthmosis III); the mummy has wavy, light-brown hair. [R. B. Partridge, Faces of Pharaohs (London: Rubicon Press, 1994), p. 91.]
American Egyptologist Donald P. Ryan excavated tomb KV 60, in the Valley of the Kings, during the course of 1989. Inside, he found the mummy of a royal female, which he believes to be the long-lost remains of the great Queen Hatshepsut (18th Dynasty). Ryan describes the mummy as follows:
"The mummy was mostly unwrapped and on its back. Strands of reddish-blond hair lay on the floor beneath the bald head." [Ibid., p. 87.]
Manetho, a Graeco-Egyptian priest who flourished in the 3rd century BC, wrote in his Egyptian History, that the last ruler of the 6th Dynasty was a woman by the name of Queen Nitocris. He has this to say about her:
"There was a queen Nitocris, braver than all the men of her time, the most beautiful of all the women, blonde-haired with rosy cheeks. By her, it is said, the third pyramid was reared, with the aspect of a mountain." [W. G. Waddell, Manetho (London: William Heinemann, 1980), p. 57.]
According to the Graeco-Roman authors Pliny the Elder, Strabo and Diodorus Siculus, the Third Pyramid was built by a woman named Rhodopis. When translated from the original Greek, her name means "rosy-cheeked". [G. A. Wainwright, The Sky-Religion in Egypt (Cambridge: University Press, 1938), p. 42.]
We may also note that a tomb painting recorded by the German Egyptologist C. R. Lepsius in the 1840s, depicts a blonde woman by the name of Hetepheres (circa 5th Dynasty). The German scholar Alexander Scharff, observed that she was described as being a Priestess of the Goddess Neith, a deity who was sacred to the blond-haired Libyans of the Delta region. He goes on to state that her name is precisely the same as that of Queen Hetepheres II, who is also shown as fair-haired, in a painting on the wall of Queen Meresankh III's tomb. He deduced from all of this, that the two women may well have been related, and he suggested that Egypt during the Age of the Pyramids, was dominated by an elite of blonde women. [A. Scharff, "Ein Beitrag zur Chronologie der 4. ägyptischen Dynastie." Orientalistische Literaturzeitung XXXI (1928) pp. 73-81.]
The twentieth prayer of the 141st chapter of the ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead, is dedicated "to the Goddess greatly beloved, with red hair." [E. A. W. Budge, The Book of the Dead (London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Trübner, 1901), p. 430.] In the tomb of Pharaoh Merenptah (19th Dynasty), there are depictions of red-haired goddesses. [N. Reeves & R. H. Wilkinson, The Complete Valley of the Kings (London: Thames & Hudson, 1997), p. 149.]
In the Book of the Dead, the eyes of the god Horus are described as "shining," or "brilliant," whilst another passage refers more explicitly to "Horus of the blue eyes". [Budge, op. cit., pp. 421 & 602.] The rubric to the 140th chapter of said book, states that the amulet known as the "Eye of Horus," (used to ward-off the "Evil Eye"), must always be made from lapis-lazuli, a mineral which is blue in colour. [Ibid., p. 427.] It should be noted that the Goddess Wadjet, who symbolised the Divine Eye of Horus, was represented by a snake (a hooded cobra to be precise), and her name, when translated from the original Egyptian, means "blue-green". [A. F. Alford, The Phoenix Solution (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1998), pp. 266-268.] Interestingly, the ancient Scandanavians claimed that anyone who was blue-eyed (and therefore possessed the power of the Evil Eye), had "a snake in the eye," and blue eyes were frequently compared to the eyes of a serpent. [F. B. Gummere, Germanic Origins (London: David Nutt, 1892), pp. 58, 62.]
In the ancient Pyramid Texts, the Gods are said to have blue and green eyes. [Alford, op. cit., p. 232.] The Graeco-Roman author Diodorus Siculus (I, 12), says that the Egyptians thought the goddess Neith had blue eyes. [C. H. Oldfather, Diodorus of Sicily (London: William Heinemann, 1968), p. 45.]
A text from the mammisi of Isis at Denderah, declares that the goddess was given birth to in the form of a "ruddy woman". [J. G. Griffiths, De Iside et Osiride (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1970), p. 451.] Finally, the Greek author Plutarch, in the 22nd chapter of his De Iside et Osiride, states that the Egyptians thought Horus to be fair-skinned, and the god Seth to be of a ruddy complexion. [Ibid., p. 151.]
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
This particular debate seems awfully familiar. Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
^^^ references older than 15-25 years are outdated
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Yet you can't deal with it. You just ignore it like a fraud.
No that's what you do. You will only cherry pick sculptures of Amenhotep with a wide nose, when plenty exist with him in art or sculpture as much thinner nosed, falling within the Caucasoid range.
There are conflicting scultures of most Pharoahs, some portray them very differently.
The afronuts like you though will only cherry pick, despite the fact there are plenty of depictions of Amenhotep III as much thinner nosed. Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Yet you can't deal with it. You just ignore it like a fraud.
No that's what you do. You will only cherry pick sculptures of Amenhotep with a wide nose, when plenty exist with him in art or sculpture as much thinner nosed, falling within the Caucasoid range.
There are conflicting scultures of most Pharoahs, some portray them very differently.
The afronuts like you though will only cherry pick, despite the fact there are plenty of depictions of Amenhotep III as much thinner nosed.
The fact that there are so many depictions of Egyptians of Negroid phenotype as well as others not of the typical Negroid phenotype means that there is a strong case to be made that many of them, not necessarily all, from the earliest dynasties were Negroid. The Amenhotep painting I showed is clearly Negroid in phenotype. If other depictions look only partially Negroid to you then why do some depictions as well as Huni and thousands of others look Negroid? Because many of these people were Negroid. Comparitively the number of males depicted resembling Nordics is a tiny fraction of this if any
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Facial index is measured the exact same way
The determination of the facial index varies according to whether the measurements are made with or without the mandible in position. In the former case the length is measured from the ophryon or nasion above to the mental tubercle below, and compared with the maximum bizygomatic with. […] More usually, however, owing to the loss of the mandible, the proportions of the face are expressed by the superior facial index -Cunningham's textbook of anatomy, Daniel John Cunningham
Like I said, the birdbrain has no clue when the anthropological subject matter extends beyond 'negro', 'caucasian' and 'mongoloid'.
quote:And you were the one who attacked the fact Crural Index was a standard measurement process,
Dumbass, I said there were different standards for measuring limb index, then you came along and posted the names of the bones that are involved in determining crural index (tibia and femur), and what the crural index expresses, as if that was relevant to what I said.
I guess you’re too mentally deranged to understand that saying ''there are differences ways to measure limb length’’, isn’t the same as saying ''crural index doesn’t involve the tibia and femur’’.
LMAO. Bitchboy doesn't want it with me, he ran off, which is exactly what I anticipated. Anglo bitchboy, you're a coward, and a fraud; you know nothing about anthropology other than memorizing racial labels that are not based on reality.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Muktaba Anglo_Piss: Claus3600, as i said to Troll Patrol, no one is interested in your bogus ''black'' or ''white'' clusterings.
Anthropology recognises Caucasoid, Negroid and Mongoloid, these are the scientifically valid racial divisions. Afrocentrics out of self-hatred and denial call North African Caucasoids ''black'', the same with Indians etc.
You know Van Sertima on your list, who i have read plenty of for a laugh, claims that Indians are ''black'', despite the fact they are morphologically predominantly Caucasoid. Afrocentrics will cluster completely distinct races into their own group.
As i clarified in my original post -
quote:Every genuine scholar knows the ancient egyptians were North African in phenotype (Caucasoid), not Negroid.
The reality is EVERYONE knows the AE's were not Negroid in bone structure or phenotype (even you yourself). Don't deny like Troll Patrol you don't know what these traits are.
Yet we are expected to believe by the afronuts that both North Africans (who are thin nosed, wavy haired Caucasoids) are the same as broad nosed, nappy haired Negroes from West Africa... who they both claim are this bogus ''black'' racial division.
You know you are a liar. All afrocentrics do is play with words, they will shift the definition of ''black'' to completely non-Negroid peoples. Compare the above two images.
Muktaba, the key to your stupidity is. You have never been to any of the places you speak of. Therefore you don't know what you're speaking of. This is reality!
There are people in North Africa with prognathism and without. Thick lips, broad nosed, With and without Afro texture-nappy hair. Others have wavy hair. Bone straight hair is hard to find. Some are dark complected, others light complected. And the irony is, genetically and phenotypical they cluster with other Africans, in particular those from the Sahara and Sahel. Well actually it's not that ironic since modernday science has shown they indeed cluster with other African populations. This has been the outcome time and time again, from different disciplines.
You will post some Central African (of which the source is not given) and claim this as the archaic type of the "negroe", yet ignore all the Kings and Queens of Ancient Egypt with similar facial traits. Although I have explained time over and other again. Even with depictions. And recently in a post prior to this with genetic evidence.
The stuff you post is somewhat laughable, to me. Especially the part in your citation where they claimed that North Africans predate the SanKoi. lol See, you have been proven wrong time and time again. But you are a arrogant uneducated twit. Therefore are stuck on stupid.
Your citations are all outdated and have been debunked time and time again. These citations are from the colonial time and shortly after. That is the pillar and mindset they used, while writing all that crap. White superiority cold adapted Nordic crap.
See, how you have been put to shame, again by Swenet and others, including myself.
The Cambridge Ancient History
Volume 3 Part 3: The Expansion of the Greek World, Eighth to Sixth Centuries B.C.
Chapter Title: Chapter 36b: The Greeks in Egypt
Publication Date: 1982
Author: T. F. R. G. Braun
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) 10.1017/CHOL9780521234474.003
Overview
Greek-Egyptian relations before Psammetichus I
Greeks arrived to settle in Egypt in the reign of Psammetichus I (664–610 B.C.). For the period that follows, Herodotus found that Egyptian and non-Egyptian information could be combined (II. 147). Thanks to Greek settlers mingling with the Egyptians, knowledge was now accurate (II. 154). Significantly, no Greek pottery datable to the period between Mycenaean times and 664 B.C. has so far been found in Egypt. Egyptian trinkets, on the other hand, were reaching the Greek world in the eighth century, and a bronze Egyptian jug at Lefkandi in Euboea would seem to date back as far as the ninth. These could have arrived by way of Phoenicia or Cyprus.
Some contact then, even if indirect, there must have been in the disturbed century before Psammetichus I. The Greeks retained some recollection of the Egyptian history of this time. We have seen how the king of Ethiopia and Egypt, who must have been Shabako (c. 716–c. 702 B.C.) in 711 surrendered Yamani of Ashdod, possibly a Greek (above, p. 16). This ‘Sabakōs’ is an historical figure for Herodotus (II. 137, 139) who in the fifth century could get a fair amount of information about the 25th (Nubian or Kushite) dynasty. Shabako's enemy was the delta king Bakenrenef son of Tefnakhte (c. 720–715 ?), whom he eventually captured and burnt alive. Bakenrenef, as Bocchoris, was to figure in Greek imagination, though Herodotus does not mention him. He is celebrated as a sagacious lawgiver in the Egyptian account of Diodorus (I. 45, 65, 79, 94) which derives from earlier Greek writing – probably in large measure from Hecataeus of Abdera, c. 300 B.C.
The Narmer Palette boasts one of the earliest depictions of a king smiting his enemies. In the second and first millennia B.C., this image symbolized royal power throughout the eastern Mediterranean. On a wall of a temple to Amun at Medinet Habu, in Thebes, Pharaoh Ramesses III (1184–1153 B.C.) pummels an enemy.
The Narmer Palette boasts one of the earliest depictions of a king smiting his enemies. In the second and first millennia B.C., this image symbolized royal power throughout the eastern Mediterranean. The center of a seventh-century B.C., 8-inch-wide silver bowl from Idalion, on Cyprus, also shows a king about to strike an enemy with a mace.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote: Northern Egypt near the Mediterranean shows the same pattern- limb length data puts its peoples closer to tropically adapted Africans that cold climate Europeans
"...sample populations available from northern Egypt from before the 1st Dynasty (Merimda, Maadi and Wadi Digla) turn out to be significantly different from sample populations from early Palestine and Byblos, suggesting a lack of common ancestors over a long time. If there was a south-north cline variation along the Nile valley it did not, from this limited evidence, continue smoothly on into southern Palestine.
The limb-length proportions of males from the Egyptian sites group them with Africans rather than with Europeans."
Barry Kemp, "Ancient Egypt Anatomy of a Civilisation. (2005) Routledge. p. 52-60
quote:"When the Elephantine results were added to a broader pooling of the physical characteristics drawn from a wide geographic region which includes Africa, the Mediterranean and the Near East quite strong affinities emerge between Elephantine and populations from Nubia, supporting a strong south-north cline."
Barry Kemp. (2006) Ancient Egypt: Anatomy of a Civilization. p. 54
quote: "From the Mesolithic to the early Neolithic period different lines of evidence support an out-of-Africa Mesolithic migration to the Levant by northeastern African groups that had biological affinities with sub-Saharan populations. From a genetic point of view, several recent genetic studies have shown that sub-Sabaran genetic lineages (affiliated with the Y-chromosome PN2 clade; Underhill et al. 2001) have spread through Egypt into the Near East, the Mediterranean area, and, for some lineages, as far north as Turkey (E3b-M35 Y lineage; Cinniogclu et al. 2004; Luis et al. 2004), probably during several dispersal episodes since the Mesolithic (Cinniogelu et al. 2004; King et al. 2008; Lucotte and Mercier 2003; Luis et al. 2004; Quintana-Murci et al. 1999; Semino et al. 2004; Underhill et al. 2001). This finding is in agreement with morphological data that suggest that populations with sub-Saharan morphological elements were present in northeastern Africa, from the Paleolithic to at least the early Holocene, and diffused northward to the Levant and Anatolia beginning in the Mesolithic.
Indeed, the rare and incomplete Paleolithic to early Neolithic skeletal specimens found in Egypt - such as the 33,000-year-old Nazlet Khater specimen (Pinhasi and Semai 2000), the Wadi Kubbaniya skeleton from the late Paleolithic site in the upper Nile valley (Wendorf et al. 1986), the Qarunian (Faiyum) early Neolithic crania (Henneberg et al. 1989; Midant-Reynes 2000), and the Nabta specimen from the Neolithic Nabta Playa site in the western desert of Egypt (Henneberg et al. 1980) - show, with regard to the great African biological diversity, similarities with some of the sub-Saharan middle Paleolithic and modern sub-Saharan specimens.
This affinity pattern between ancient Egyptians and sub-Saharans has also been noticed by several other investigators (Angel 1972; Berry and Berry 1967, 1972; Keita 1995) and has been recently reinforced by the study of Brace et al. (2005), which clearly shows that the cranial morphology of prehistoric and recent northeast African populations is linked to sub-Saharan populations (Niger-Congo populations). These results support the hypothesis that some of the Paleolithic-early Holocene populations from northeast Africa were probably descendents of sub-Saharan ancestral populations...... This northward migration of northeastern African populations carrying sub-Saharan biological elements is concordant with the morphological homogeneity of the Natufian populations (Bocquentin 2003), which present morphological affinity with sub-Saharan populations (Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005).
In addition, the Neolithic revolution was assumed to arise in the late Pleistocene Natufians and subsequently spread into Anatolia and Europe (Bar-Yosef 2002), and the first Anatolian farmers, Neolithic to Bronze Age Mediterraneans and to some degree other Neolithic-Bronze Age Europeans, show morphological affinities with the Natufians (and indirectly with sub-Saharan populations; Angel 1972; Brace et al. 2005), in concordance with a process of demie diffusion accompanying the extension of the Neolithic revolution (Cavalli-Sforza et al. 1994)."
---Cranial Discrete Traits in a Byzantine Population and Eastern Mediterranean Population Movements F. X. Ricaut, M. Waelkens. Human Biology, Volume 80, Number 5, October 2008, pp. 535-564
quote:The Upper Palaeolithic Lithic Industry of Nazlet Khater 4 (Egypt): Implications for the Stone Age/Palaeolithic of Northeastern Africa
Abstract:
Between Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 4 and 2, Northeast Africa witnessed migrations of Homo sapiens into Eurasia. Within the context of the aridification of the Sahara, the Nile Valley probably offered a very attractive corridor into Eurasia. This region and this period are therefore central for the (pre)history of the out-of-Africa peopling of modern humans. However, there are very few sites from the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic that document these migration events. In Egypt, the site of Nazlet Khater 4 (NK4), which is related to ancient H. sapiens quarrying activities, is one of them. Its lithic assemblage shows an important laminar component, and this, associated with its chronological position (ca. 33 ka), means that the site is the most ancient Upper Palaeolithic sites of this region. The detailed study of the Nazlet Khater 4 lithic material shows that blade production (volumetric reduction) is also associated with flake production (surface reduction). This technological duality addresses the issue of direct attribution of NK4 to the Upper Palaeolithic.
Authors: Leplongeon, Alice1; Pleurdeau, David2 Source: African Archaeological Review, Volume 28, Number 3, September 2011, pp. 213-236(24)
quote:The oldest skull in Egypt is Nazlet Khater
Nazlet Khater man was the earliest modern human skeleton found near Luxor, in 1980. The remains was dated from between 35,000 and 30,000 years ago. The report regarding the racial affinity of this skeleton concludes: "Strong alveolar prognathism combined with fossa praenasalis in an African skull is suggestive of Negroid morphology [form & structure]. The radio-humeral index of Nazlet Khater is practically the same as the mean of Taforalt (76.6). According to Ferembach (1965) this value is near to the Negroid average." The burial was of a young man of 17-20 years old, whose skeleton lay in a 160cm- long narrow ditch aligned from east to west. A flint tool, which was laid carefully on the bottom of the grave, dates the burial as contemporaneous with a nearby flint quarry.
Thoma A., Morphology and affinities of the Nazlet Khater man, Journal of Human Evolution, vol 13, 1984.
As for East Africa, the earliest modern man there is Idaltu man.
Nature 249, 120 - 123 (10 May 1974); doi:10.1038/249120a0
Barbed bone points from Central Sudan and the age of the “Early Khartoum” tradition
D. ADAMSON*, J. D. CLARK† & M. A. J. WILLIAMS‡
*School of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, New South Wales 2113, Australia †Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720 ‡School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, New South Wales 2113, Australia
Barbed bone points, typical of those from the early Holocene settlement of “Early Khartoum”, have been found at three sites along the White Nile, south of Khartoum. The form of the fragments and the stratigraphy of the sites throw light on the environment and technology of the early settlements along this part of the Nile.
As shown, there is steady African presence continuity all throughout history, in the region. From very early history to modern times.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@Anglo_Pyramidologist:
I'm back...still see that you haven't provided a list of youtube links showing Phds arguing against a Black Egypt.
I also note that you're quoting sources that are in some cases over 70 years old!
Again, you're outdated.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
THE ICING ON THE CAKE!
As we can all see the "Eurasian' component ('light blue') is insignifigant in Ethiopians/Northeast Africans. So you can reburry that "admixture" theory in the same patch that you dug it up from! Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
Some of the most important evidence of early man in Nubia was discovered recently by an expedition of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, under the direction of Dr. Kryzstof Grzymski, on the east bank of the Nile, about 70 miles (116 km) south of Dongola, Sudan. During the early 1990's, this team discovered several sites containing hundreds of Paleolithic hand axes. At one site, however, the team identified an apparent stone tool workshop, where thousands of sandstone hand axes and flakes lay on the ground around a row of large stones set in a line, suggesting the remains of a shelter. This seems to be the earliest "habitation" site yet discovered in the Nile Valley and may be up to 70,000 years old.
What the Nubian environment was like throughout these distant times, we cannot know with certainty, but it must have changed many times. For many thousands of years it was probably far different than what it is today. Between about 50,000 to 25,000 years ago, the hand axe gradually disappeared and was replaced with numerous distinctive chipped stone industries that varied from region to region, suggesting the presence in Nubia of many different peoples or tribal groups dwelling in close proximity to each other. When we first encounter skeletal remains in Nubia, they are those of modern man: homo sapiens*.
Nubia's Oldest Battle?
From about 25,000 to 8,000 years ago, the environment gradually evolved to its present state. From this phase several very early settlement sites have been identified at the Second Cataract, near the Egypt-Sudan border. These appear to have been used seasonally by people leading a semi-nomadic existence. The people hunted, fished, and ground wild grain. The first cemeteries also appear, suggesting that people may have been living at least partly sedentary lives. One cemetery site at Jebel Sahaba, near Wadi Halfa, Sudan, contained a number of bodies that had suffered violent deaths and were buried in a mass grave. This suggests that people, even 10,000 years ago, had begun to compete with each other for resources and were willing to kill each other to control them.
Busharia reveals the precocious appearance of pottery on the African continent around the 9th millennium B.C.
The site of Busharia is located near the desert, at the edge of the alluvial plain and near an old Nile channel. It reveals the remains of human occupation at the onset of the Holocene. The settlement is rather eroded, only a few artefacts, ostrich egg fragments and extremely old ceramic sherds remain. These sherds date to circa 8200 B.C. The ceramic assemblage is homogenous, which suggests the existence of a single occupation phase. The decorations and the use of the return technique, common in the central Sahara around the 6th millennium B.C., are unique in this Nubian context for such an early period.
Remains discovered on site suggest the existence of a semi-sedentary population living from hunting, fishing, and the gathering of wild plants. A trial trench and a small-scale excavation were conducted on this Mesolithic site; however, it is impossible to obtain at present a better understanding of the context related to the first ceramics in the region. As this site is located near cultivated zones, it is thus threatened with short-term destruction.
Three scale models—of the Mesolithic hut of el-Barga ( 7500 B.C. ), the proto-urban agglomeration of the Pre-Kerma (3000 B.C.) and the ancient city of Kerma (2500-1500 B.C.)—give a glimpse of the world of the living. They show the evolution of settlements for each of the key periods in Nubian history. Huts indicate the birth of a sedentary way of life, the agglomeration confirms the settling of populations on a territory and the capital of the Kingdom of Kerma marks the culmination of the complexification of Nubian architecture with its ever more monumental constructions. The three models were created in Switzerland by Hugo Lienhard and were installed in the museum in January 2009.
Wadi el-Arab reveals an almost continuous series of settlement remains spanning two millennia as well as the first Neolithic burials known in Africa.
This site is located today in a desert region. Discovered in 2005, it has been under excavation since 2006. This is an open-air site occupied on several occasions during a period between 8300 and 6600 B.C. Its inhabitants then lived in a rather wooded environment, living on fishing, hunting and gathering.
The site reveals numerous flint tools and flakes, grinding stone fragments, ceramic sherds, ostrich eggshell beads, shells and mollusc remains, fish vertebrae and faunal remains. Rare domesticated ox bones were discovered and dated to circa 7000 B.C. This discovery is important for the question regarding the origin of animal domestication in Africa because it reinforces the idea of a local domestication of African oxen from aurochs living in the Nile Valley.
During the 2006-2007 campaign, six burial pits were excavated in three different areas. Dated to between 7000 and 6600, these burials are the first known Neolithic burials on the African continent.
The Upper Palaeolithic Lithic Industry of Nazlet Khater 4 (Egypt): Implications for the Stone Age/Palaeolithic of Northeastern Africa
Authors: Leplongeon, Alice1; Pleurdeau, David2 Source: African Archaeological Review, Volume 28, Number 3, September 2011, pp. 213-236(24)
Abstract:
Between Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 4 and 2, Northeast Africa witnessed migrations of Homo sapiens into Eurasia. Within the context of the aridification of the Sahara, the Nile Valley probably offered a very attractive corridor into Eurasia. This region and this period are therefore central for the (pre)history of the out-of-Africa peopling of modern humans. However, there are very few sites from the beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic that document these migration events. In Egypt, the site of Nazlet Khater 4 (NK4), which is related to ancient H. sapiens quarrying activities, is one of them. Its lithic assemblage shows an important laminar component, and this, associated with its chronological position (ca. 33 ka), means that the site is the most ancient Upper Palaeolithic sites of this region. The detailed study of the Nazlet Khater 4 lithic material shows that blade production (volumetric reduction) is also associated with flake production (surface reduction). This technological duality addresses the issue of direct attribution of NK4 to the Upper Palaeolithic.
Wadi Kubbaniya (ca. 17,000–15,000 B.C.)
In Egypt, the earliest evidence of humans can be recognized only from tools found scattered over an ancient surface, sometimes with hearths nearby. In Wadi Kubbaniya, a dried-up streambed cutting through the Western Desert to the floodplain northwest of Aswan in Upper Egypt, some interesting sites of the kind described above have been recorded. A cluster of Late Paleolithic camps was located in two different topographic zones: on the tops of dunes and the floor of the wadi (streambed) where it enters the valley. Although no signs of houses were found, diverse and sophisticated stone implements for hunting, fishing, and collecting and processing plants were discovered around hearths. Most tools were bladelets made from a local stone called chert that is widely used in tool fabrication. The bones of wild cattle, hartebeest, many types of fish and birds, as well as the occasional hippopotamus have been identified in the occupation layers. Charred remains of plants that the inhabitants consumed, especially tubers, have also been found.
It appears from the zoological and botanical remains at the various sites in this wadi that the two environmental zones were exploited at different times. We know that the dune sites were occupied when the Nile River flooded the wadi because large numbers of fish and migratory bird bones were found at this location. When the water receded, people then moved down onto the silt left behind on the wadi floor and the floodplain, probably following large animals that looked for water there in the dry season. Paleolithic peoples lived at Wadi Kubbaniya for about 2,000 years, exploiting the different environments as the seasons changed. Other ancient camps have been discovered along the Nile from Sudan to the Mediterranean, yielding similar tools and food remains. These sites demonstrate that the early inhabitants of the Nile valley and its nearby deserts had learned how to exploit local environments, developing economic strategies that were maintained in later cultural traditions of pharaonic Egypt.
DNA analysis shows that Egyptians group with African peoples from the Sudan, Ethiopia, East Africa and parts of Cameroon, not with Europe or the Middle East.
*Notes on E-M78 and Rosa DNA study linking Egyptians with East and Central Africans. DNA study (Rosa et al. 2007) groups Egyptians with East and Central Africans. Other DNA studies link these peoples together. Quote:“the majority of Y chromosomes found in populations in Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia and Oromos in Somalia and North Kenya (Boranas) belong to haplogroup E3b1 defined by the Y chromosome marker M78“(Sanchez 2005). Codes: Egy=Egypt. Or= Oromo, Ethiopia. Am=Amahara, Ethiopia. Sud=Sudan. FCA=Cameroon. Maa= Massai, Kenya. Note: Eighty (80)% or more of the haplotypes in Cameroon are of West African origin (Rosa et al. 2007, Cerny et al. 2006). Ethiopia, Cameroon and most of the Sudan is located below the Sahara, and thus sub-Saharan.-- Rosa, et al.(2007) Y-chromosomal diversity in the population of Guinea-Bissau. BMC Evolutionary Biology. 7:124
Comparisons of linear body proportions of Old Kingdom and non-Old Kingdom period individuals, and workers and high officials in our sample found no statistically significant differences among them. Zakrzewski (2003) also found little evidence for differences in linear body proportions of Egyptians over a wider temporal range. In general, recent studies of skeletal variation among ancient Egyptians support scenarios of biological continuity through time. Irish (2006) analyzed quantitative and qualitative dental traits of 996 Egyptians from Neolithic through Roman periods, reporting the presence of a few outliers but concluding that the dental samples appear to be largely homogeneous and that the affinities observed indicate overall biological uniformity and continuity from Predynastic through Dynastic and Postdynastic periods.
Zakrzewski (2007) provided a comprehensive summary of previous Egyptian craniometric studies and examined Egyptian crania from six time periods. She found that the earlier samples were relatively more homogeneous in comparison to the later groups. However, overall results indicated genetic continuity over the Egyptian Predynastic and Early Dynastic periods, albeit with a high level of genetic diversity within the population, suggesting an indigenous process of state formation. She also concluded that while the biological patterning of the Egyptian population varied across time, no consistent temporal or spatial trends are apparent. Thus, the stature estimation formulae developed here may be broadly applicable to all ancient Egyptian populations..".
("Stature estimation in ancient Egyptians: A new technique based on anatomical reconstruction of stature." Michelle H. Raxter, Christopher B. Ruff, Ayman Azab, Moushira Erfan, Muhammad Soliman, Aly El-Sawaf,(Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008, Jun;136(2):147-55
The nubian mesolithic: A consideration of the Wadi Halfa remains
References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.
Meredith F. Small* et al.
Morphological variation of the skeletal remains of ancient Nubia has been traditionally explained as a product of multiple migrations into the Nile Valley.
In contrast, various researchers have noted a continuity in craniofacial variation from Mesolithic through Neolithic times.
This apparent continuity could be explained by in situ cultural evolution producing shifts in selective pressures which may act on teeth, the facial complex, and the cranial vault.
A series of 13 Mesolithic skulls from Wadi Halfa, Sudan, are compared to Nubian Neolithic remains by means of extended canonical analysis.
Results support recent research which suggests consistent trends of facial reduction and cranial vault expansion from Mesolithic through Neolithic times.
From about 20,000 BCE, there are further refinements in stone technology. Very specialized tools appeared, including arrowheads, fishhooks, grindstones, and awls. These most refined of stone implements have the generic name 'microlithic.' This era of the late Paleolithic also saw the development of complex composite tools such as bows and arrows. As well, fishing equipment, including boats, and even pottery appeared in some environmental niches. As tools became more specialized and finely made, local variations, including stylistic ones, became more and more the rule...
From the standpoint of African history the most important development of the late Stone Age was the emergence of more settled ('sedentary') societies. These probably developed first along the banks of the Upper Nile in the Cataracts region, in modern day southern Egypt and northern Sudan (ancient Nubia). Evidence of barley harvesting there dates from as early as 16,000 BCE. The ability to make greater use of abundant wild grains, probably coupled with greater exploitation of aquatic resources, led to a more settled existence for some people. These more sedentary peoples were a part of what is now known collectively as the African Aquatic Culture/ Tradition. This way of life spread from the Upper Nile into a much larger area of Africa during the last great wet phase of African climate history, which began about 9,000 and peaked about 7,000 BCE. The higher rainfall levels of the period created numerous very large shallow lakes across what are now the arid southern borderlands of the Sahara desert. Inhabitants of shore communities crafted microlithic tools to exploit a marine environment: fishing and trapping aquatic animals. This provided abundant food supplies, particularly high in protein and supported the earliest known permanent settlements. Culturally and linguistically related peoples ancestral to modern Black Africans established settlements throughout this vast, ancient great lakes area. It is theorized that they spoke the mother Nilo-Saharan tongue. Sophisticated water-related technologies supported not only the development of settled communities, but also the invention of things like pottery, which were formerly thought to be associated exclusively with the Food Production Revolution of the later New Stone Age, or Neolithic. While the African aquatic tradition itself lasted only until the beginning of the modern drier period, around 3,000 BCE, its legacy has been felt ever since.
Basil Davidson, Africa in History (1975)
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 121:219–229 (2003)
Variation in Ancient Egyptian Stature and Body Proportions Sonia R. Zakrzewski* Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BF, UK
'The ancient Egyptians have been described as having a “ Negroid” body plan (Robins, 1983).
Variations in the proximal to distal segments of each limb were therefore examined. Of the ratios considered, only maximum humerus length to maximum ulna length (XLH/XLU) showed statistically significant change through time.
This change was a relative decrease in the length of the humerus as compared with the ulna, suggesting the development of an increasingly African body plan with time.
This may also be the result of Nubian mercenaries being included in the sample from Gebelein.
The nature of the body plan was also investigated by comparing the intermembral, brachial, and crural indices for these samples with values obtained from the literature. No significant differences were found in either index through time for either sex. The raw values in Table 6 suggest that Egyptians had the “ super-Negroid ” body plan described by Robins (1983). The values for the brachial and crural indices show that the distal segments of each limb are longer relative to the proximal segments than in many “African” populations (data from Aiello and Dean, 1990). This pattern is supported by Figure 7 (a plot of population mean femoral and tibial lengths; data from Ruff, 1994), which indicates that the Egyptians generally have tropical body plans. Of the Egyptian samples, only the Badarian and Early Dynastic period populations have shorter tibiae than predicted from femoral length. Despite these differences, all samples lie relatively clustered together as compared to the other populations.'
Trotter and Gleser's (Trotter and Gleser: Am J Phys Anthropol 10 (1952) 469–514; Trotter and Gleser: Am J Phys Anthropol 16 (1958) 79–123) long bone formulae for US Blacks or derivations thereof (Robins and Shute: Hum Evol 1 (1986) 313–324) have been previously used to estimate the stature of ancient Egyptians. However, limb length to stature proportions differ between human populations; consequently, the most accurate mathematical stature estimates will be obtained when the population being examined is as similar as possible in proportions to the population used to create the equations. The purpose of this study was to create new stature regression formulae based on direct reconstructions of stature in ancient Egyptians and assess their accuracy in comparison to other stature estimation methods. We also compare Egyptian body proportions to those of modern American Blacks and Whites. Living stature estimates were derived using a revised Fully anatomical method (Raxter et al.: Am J Phys Anthropol 130 (2006) 374–384). Long bone stature regression equations were then derived for each sex. Our results confirm that, although ancient Egyptians are closer in body proportion to modern American Blacks than they are to American Whites, proportions in Blacks and Egyptians are not identical. The newly generated Egyptian-based stature regression formulae have standard errors of estimate of 1.9–4.2 cm. All mean directional differences are less than 0.4% compared to anatomically estimated stature, while results using previous formulae are more variable, with mean directional biases varying between 0.2% and 1.1%, tibial and radial estimates being the most biased. There is no evidence for significant variation in proportions among temporal or social groupings; thus, the new formulae may be broadly applicable to ancient Egyptian remains.
An examination of Nubian and Egyptian biological distances: Support for biological diffusion or in situ development?
K. Goddea, b, Corresponding Author Contact Information
a Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee
b Department of Science, South College
Abstract
Many authors have speculated on Nubian biological evolution. Because of the contact Nubians had with other peoples, migration and/or invasion (biological diffusion) were originally thought to be the biological mechanism for skeletal changes in Nubians. Later, a new hypothesis was put forth, the in situ hypothesis. The new hypothesis postulated that Nubians evolved in situ, without much genetic influence from foreign populations. This study examined 12 Egyptian and Nubian groups in an effort to explore the relationship between the two populations and to test the in situ hypothesis. Data from nine cranial nonmetric traits were assessed for an estimate of biological distance, using Mahalanobis D2 with a tetrachoric matrix. The distance scores were then input into principal coordinates analysis (PCO) to depict the relationships between the two populations. PCO detected 60% of the variation in the first two principal coordinates. A plot of the distance scores revealed only one cluster; the Nubian and Egyptian groups clustered together. The grouping of the Nubians and Egyptians indicates there may have been some sort of gene flow between these groups of Nubians and Egyptians. However, common adaptation to similar environments may also be responsible for this pattern. Although the predominant results in this study appear to support the biological diffusion hypothesis, the in situ hypothesis was not completely negated.
Analysis of Hair Samples of Mummies from Semna South, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, (1978) 49: 277-262
As Brothwell and Spearman (‘63) point out, reddish-brown ancient hair is usually the result of partial oxidation of the melanin pigment. This color was seen in a large proportion of the Semna sample, and also noted by Titlbachova and Titlbach (‘77) on Egyptian material, where it also may have resulted from the mummification process. However, the large number of blond hairs that are not associated with the cuticular damage that bleaching produces, probably points to a significantly lighter-haired population than is now present in the Nubian region. Brothwell and Spearman (’63) noted genuinely blond ancient Egyptian samples using reflectance spectrophotometry. Blondism, especially in young children, is common in many darkhaired populations (e.g., Australian, Melanesian), and is still found in some Nubian villages (J. Zabkar, personal communication).
Only one sample (M197) showed cuticular damage and irregularities definitely consistent with bleaching, although bleaching could not be ruled out in some of the blond samples.
In the early 20th century much was made over the ancestry of Hetepheres II. A relief from the tomb of her daughter, Meresankh III, depicts the queen with blonde hair.
However, closer inspection reveals that she was not a natural blonde, but rather the owner of a unique and, we can speculate, much coveted blonde wig. Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Troll Patrol,
Idaltu man is not H.S.S/AMH but an archaic subspecies of Homo Sapiens.
You've been told this before, but you still continue to post the same ignorance.
All your photos are of mutts, Negroid-Caucasoid hybrids. None are remotely pure Negroid, in West Africa they would stand out like an eskimo would in Italy.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
Y-DNA haplogroup D is seen primarily in Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and in Japan and was established approximately 50,000 years ago. Sub-group D1 (D-M15) is seen in Tibet, Mongolia, Central Asia, and Southeast Asia, and the sub-groups D* (D-M174) and D3 (D-P47) are seen in Central Asia. The sub-group D2 (D-M55) is seen almost exclusively in Japan.
An isolated incidence of haplogroup D has also been seen in the Andaman Islands in the Indian Ocean. This implies that the group may once have had a much greater range, but has subsequently been displaced by more recent population events.
Y-DNA haplogroup D is seen primarily in Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and in Japan and was established approximately 50,000 years ago
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Piss pot: Troll Patrol,
Idaltu man is not H.S.S/AMH but an archaic subspecies of Homo Sapiens.
You've been told this before, but you still continue to post the same ignorance.
All your photos are of mutts, Negroid-Caucasoid hybrids. None are remotely pure Negroid, in West Africa they would stand out like an eskimo would in Italy.
Muktaba, the pictures of the people in my previous post are typically of Northeast African orgin. Descending from the Sahel and Sahara. It was all supported by peer reviewed genetic and anthropological research. They sometimes "look mixed" (to uneducated people such as yourself) because they do fill up the intermediate zone. It has nothing to do with the Caucasian region. To bad for you.lol
I already told you all of this before, but you still continue to post the same ignorance. Speaking of people and places where you have never been, with that dumb British arse of yours. Hilarious!
Now, let's refresh your memory once more!
The new findings, published in the February 17, 2005, issue of the journal Nature, establish Omo I and II as the oldest known fossils of modern humans. The prior record holders were fossils from Herto, Ethiopia, which dated the emergence of modern humans in Africa to about 160,000 years ago.
Scientific American, February 17, 2005.
Previously the oldest known traces of our species were fossils from Herto, Ethiopia, that date to about 160,000 years ago. The older age of the Omo remains is concordant with dates suggested by genetic studies for the origin of our species, says study co-author John Fleagle of Stony Brook University. He adds that "as modern human anatomy is documented at earlier and earlier sites, it becomes evident that there was a great time gap between the appearance of the modern skeleton and 'modern' behavior."
Ofer Bar-Yosef et al., Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, April 10, 2006
"Recent research has provided increasing support for the origins of anatomically and genetically “modern” human populations in Africa between 150,000 and 200,000 years ago"
Yep yep,
quote:
The tribes at the site of Kibish look the pic beneath, and this is where the oldest remains were found. It's the Southeast of Ethiopia, near the so called border of Northern Kenya and guess what: South Sudan!
Interesting is however, that there at the site of Kibish you will find within several tribes, people with several facial features. Small noses, wide noses, thin lips, full lips etc....in all kinds of variety. Yet, these people belong to the oldest groups amongst mankind.
Recent dating evidence re-establishes the Kibish fossils found in Ethiopia as the oldest modern human fossils known, at about 195,000 years.
The Kibish (Omo) fossils were found in 1967 in the Kibish region near the Omo River in Ethiopia. A partial skull and skeleton (Omo 1) and a skull lacking its face (Omo 2) were discovered in separate localities and dating techniques available at the time suggested they might be about 130,000 years old.
Herto skulls
In 2003 two partial and one nearly complete modern human skulls were found in Herto, Ethiopia, and were dated at about 160,000 years old. They were hailed as the oldest relatively complete and well-dated finds of our species Homo sapiens.
A reconstruction of Homo sapiens skull Omo 1 from Kibish, Kenya, re-dated to 196,000 years old, the oldest modern human specimen
quote:
Berkeley University
160,000-year-old fossilized skulls uncovered in Ethiopia are oldest anatomically modern humans
BERKELEY - The fossilized skulls of two adults and one child discovered in the Afar region of eastern Ethiopia have been dated at 160,000 years, making them the oldest known fossils of modern humans, or Homo sapiens.
The skulls, dug up near a village called Herto, fill a major gap in the human fossil record, an era at the dawn of modern humans when the facial features and brain cases we recognize today as human first appeared.
The fossils date precisely from the time when biologists using genes to chart human evolution predicted that a genetic "Eve" lived somewhere in Africa and gave rise to all modern humans.
"We've lacked intermediate fossils between pre-humans and modern humans, between 100,000 and 300,000 years ago, and that's where the Herto fossils fit," said paleoanthropologist Tim White, professor of integrative biology at the University of California, Berkeley, and a co-leader of the team that excavated and analyzed the discovery site. "Now, the fossil record meshes with the molecular evidence."
"With these new crania," he added, "we can now see what our direct ancestors looked like."
"This set of fossils is stupendous," said team member F. Clark Howell, UC Berkeley professor emeritus of integrative biology and co-director with White of UC Berkeley's Laboratory for Human Evolutionary Studies. "This is a truly revolutionary scientific discovery."
Howell added that these anatomically modern humans pre-date most neanderthals, and therefore could not have descended from them, as some scientists have proposed.
The international team is led by White and his Ethiopian colleagues, Berhane Asfaw of the Rift Valley Research Service in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and Giday WoldeGabriel of Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. The results of the find will be reported in two papers in the June 12 issue of the journal Nature.
The research team also unearthed skull pieces and teeth from seven other hominid individuals, hippopotamus bones bearing cut marks from stone tools, and more than 600 stone tools, including hand axes. All are from the same sediments and, thus, the same era.
"These were people using a sophisticated stone technology," White said. "Using chipped hand axes and other stone tools, they were butchering carcasses of large mammals like hippos and buffalo and undoubtedly knew how to exploit plants."
They lived long before most examples of another early hominid, the neanderthal, or Homo neanderthalensis, proving beyond a reasonable doubt, White said, that Homo sapiens did not descend from these short, stocky creatures. More like cousins, neanderthals split off from the human tree more than 300,000 years ago and died out about 30,000 years ago, perhaps driven to extinction by modern humans.
"These well-dated and anatomically diagnostic Herto fossils are unmistakably non-neanderthal," said Howell, a co-author of the Homo erectus paper that details the hominids and an expert on early modern humans. "These fossils show that near-humans had evolved in Africa long before the European neanderthals disappeared. They thereby demonstrate conclusively that there was never a neanderthal stage in human evolution."
Because the Herto fossils represent a transition between more primitive hominids from Africa and modern humans, they provide strong support for the hypothesis that modern humans evolved in Africa and subsequently spread into Eurasia. This hypothesis goes against the theory that modern humans arose in many areas of Europe, Asia and Africa from other hominids who had migrated out of Africa at a much earlier time.
The fossil evidence, said Asfaw, "clearly shows what molecular anthropologists have been saying for a long time - that modern Homo sapiens evolved out of Africa. These fossilized skulls from Herto show that modern humans were living at around 160,000 years ago with full-fledged Homo sapiens features. The 'Out of Africa' hypothesis is now tested, ... (and) we can conclusively say that neanderthals had nothing to do with modern humans. They went extinct."
The fossil skulls
The three fossil skulls remain in Ethiopia, but replicas made from them were compared by the research team with many examples of neanderthal and earlier hominid skulls, as well as those of modern humans. Many of the modern human comparison skulls came from a worldwide sample of skeletal remains in the collection of UC Berkeley's Hearst Museum of Anthropology.
The most complete of the three new fossil skulls, probably that of a male, is slightly larger than the extremes seen in modern Homo sapiens, yet it bears other characteristics within the range of modern humans - in particular, less prominent brow ridges than pre-Homo sapiens and a higher cranial vault. Because of these similarities, the researchers placed the fossils in the same genus and species as modern humans but appended a subspecies name - Homo sapiens idaltu -to differentiate them from contemporary humans, Homo sapiens sapiens.
Idàltu, which means "elder" in the Afar language, refers to the adult male's antiquity and individual age. The man, though probably in his late 20s to mid-30s, had heavily worn upper teeth and a brain size slightly larger than average for living people.
Scientists tracking evolution through changes in mitochondrial DNA, which is passed from mother to daughter, have estimated that humans derive their mitochrondrial genes from an ancestral mother nicknamed "Eve" who lived in Africa about 150,000 years ago. Other scientists studying the male Y chromosome have reached similar conclusions. The new Herto fossils are from a population living at exactly this time.
"In a sense, these genetic findings were impossible to seriously test without a good fossil record from Africa," said White. "Back in 1982, when Becky Cann and Allan Wilson of UC Berkeley were using molecules to study evolution, they concluded that the common ancestors of all modern humans lived in Africa 100,000 to 200,000 years ago. For the last 20 years we've been looking for good, well-dated fossil evidence of that antiquity."
Previously found fossils were younger, from sites scattered around Africa, often poorly dated and incomplete. These include fossil skull fragments from Klasies River Mouth in South Africa, dating from about 100,000 years ago, and Middle Eastern fossils from Qafzeh and Skhul dating from 90,000 to 130,000 years ago. Ethiopia has yielded some modern human fossils, including those from Omo, which are approximately 100,000 years old, and the Aduma fossil finds of the Middle Awash, which date from about 80,000 years.
While these previous discoveries appear also to be Homo sapiens, the new finds from Herto are older, well-dated and more complete without sharing characteristics of more primitive human ancestors such as Homo erectus or the neanderthals.
Discovery
The fossil-rich site was discovered on Nov. 16, 1997, in a dry and dusty valley bordering the Middle Awash River near Herto, a seasonally occupied village. During a reconnaissance, White first spotted stone tools and the fossil skull of a butchered hippo emerging from the ground. When the team returned to intensively survey the area 11 days later, they discovered the most complete of the adult skulls protruding from the ancient sediment. It had been exposed by heavy rains and partially trampled by herds of cows.
A portion of the large adult's left front cranium (the braincase) had been crushed and scattered, but the team was able to excavate the rest of the skull, minus the lower jaw, and reconstruct it.
Over 200 pieces of a child's cranium were found broken and distributed over the surface of sands churned by cattle, goats and camels. The recovered pieces are shown here being assembled by the discoverer, Dr. Berhane Asfaw.
The child's skull, found nearby, was fragmented and scattered from having been exposed for many years. The team recovered most pieces of the cranium, more than 200 in all, from a 400 square-foot area, and Asfaw painstakingly pieced them together over a period of three years.
Based on the presence of unerupted teeth, the skull is that of a child of six or seven. Interestingly, this skull and a second adult's, too fragmentary to reconstruct, showed cut marks pointing to ancient mortuary practices, White said. The child's skull bore marks indicating that, after death, the muscles had been cut from the base of the skull. The rear of the cranial base was broken away and the edges polished, and the entire cranium was worn smooth as if by repeated handling. The second adult skull showed parallel scratches around the perimeter of the skull apparently made by a stone tool repeatedly drawn across the skull's surface in a pattern different from that created during defleshing, as for food. Even the nearly complete adult skull had a few cut marks.
The mortuary rituals of the Herto people differ from those of earlier hominids, some of whom cut flesh from skulls but apparently did not polish or decorate them with scratch marks. Modifications like those seen in the Herto skulls have been recorded by anthropologists from societies, including some in New Guinea, in which the skulls of ancestors are preserved and worshipped.
The Herto skulls were not found with other bones from the rest of the bodies, which is unusual, White said, leading the researchers to infer that the people "were moving the heads around on the landscape. They probably cut the muscles and broke the skull bases of some skulls to extract the brain, but why, whether as part of a cannibalistic ritual, we have no way of knowing."
The team also recovered more than 640 stone artifacts, though they estimate that the entire Herto area contains millions of such artifacts: hand axes, flake tools, cores, flakes and rare blades. Renowned African prehistorian J. Desmond Clark of UC Berkeley analyzed many of them before his death in February of last year. Clark and colleagues Dr. Yonas Beyene of Ethiopia's Authority for Research and Conservation of the Cultural Heritages and Dr. Alban Defleur of Marseilles, France, concluded that the stone tools were transitional between the Acheulean period, characterized by a predominance of hand axes, and the later flake-dominated Middle Stone Age.
"The associated fossil bones show clearly that the Herto people had a taste for hippos, but we can't tell whether they were killing them or scavenging them," said Beyene. "These artifacts are clues about the ancestors who made them."
Ancient lake shore
The early humans at Herto lived along the shores of a shallow lake created when the Awash River temporarily dammed about 260,000 years ago. The lake contained abundant hippos, crocodiles and catfish, while buffalo roamed the land.
The sediments and volcanic rock in which the fossils were found were dated at between 160,000 and 154,000 years by a combination of two methods. The argon/argon method was used by colleagues in the Berkeley Geochronology Center, led by Paul R. Renne, a UC Berkeley adjunct professor of geology. WoldeGabriel of Los Alamos National Laboratory and Bill Hart of Miami University in Ohio used the chemistry of the volcanic layers to correlate the dated layers.
The Middle Awash team consists of more than 45 scientists from 14 different countries who specialize in geology, archaeology and paleontology. In this single study area, the team has found fossils dating from the present to more than 6 million years ago, painting a clear picture of human evolution from ape-like ancestors to present-day humans.
"The human fossils from Herto are near the top of a well-calibrated succession of African fossils," White said. "This is clear fossil evidence that our species arose through evolution."
The work was funded by the National Science Foundation and the Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics at Los Alamos National Laboratory, in combination with the Hampton Fund for International Initiatives of Miami University and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
Pleistocene Homo sapiens from Middle Awash, Ethiopia.
quote: AuthorsWhite TD, et al. Show all Journal Nature. 2003 Jun 12;423(6941):742-7.
Affiliation Department of Integrative Biology and Laboratory for Human Evolutionary Studies, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California.
Abstract
The origin of anatomically modern Homo sapiens and the fate of Neanderthals have been fundamental questions in human evolutionary studies for over a century. A key barrier to the resolution of these questions has been the lack of substantial and accurately dated African hominid fossils from between 100,000 and 300,000 years ago. Here we describe fossilized hominid crania from Herto, Middle Awash, Ethiopia, that fill this gap and provide crucial evidence on the location, timing and contextual circumstances of the emergence of Homo sapiens. Radioisotopically dated to between 160,000 and 154,000 years ago, these new fossils predate classic Neanderthals and lack their derived features. The Herto hominids are morphologically and chronologically intermediate between archaic African fossils and later anatomically modern Late Pleistocene humans. They therefore represent the probable immediate ancestors of anatomically modern humans. Their anatomy and antiquity constitute strong evidence of modern-human emergence in Africa.
From 30,600 to 10,000 BC: "A cultural flow, from the southeast of Subsaharan Africa and to the Sahara, could explain the diffusion of the microlithic industries all the way through West Africa. We observe them initially in Cameroon at Shum Laka (30.600-29.000 BC), then at the Ivory Coast in Bingerville (14.100-13.400 BC), in Nigeria in Iwo Eleru (11.460-11.050 BC), and finally in Ounjougou (phase 1, 10th millennium BC)." — Human population and paleoenvironment in West Africa
DNA analysis shows that Egyptians group with African peoples from the Sudan, Ethiopia, East Africa and parts of Cameroon, not with Europe or the Middle East.
*Notes on E-M78 and Rosa DNA study linking Egyptians with East and Central Africans. DNA study (Rosa et al. 2007) groups Egyptians with East and Central Africans. Other DNA studies link these peoples together. Quote:“the majority of Y chromosomes found in populations in Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia and Oromos in Somalia and North Kenya (Boranas) belong to haplogroup E3b1 defined by the Y chromosome marker M78“(Sanchez 2005). Codes: Egy=Egypt. Or= Oromo, Ethiopia. Am=Amahara, Ethiopia. Sud=Sudan. FCA=Cameroon. Maa= Massai, Kenya. Note: Eighty (80)% or more of the haplotypes in Cameroon are of West African origin (Rosa et al. 2007, Cerny et al. 2006). Ethiopia, Cameroon and most of the Sudan is located below the Sahara, and thus sub-Saharan.-- Rosa, et al.(2007) Y-chromosomal diversity in the population of Guinea-Bissau. BMC Evolutionary Biology. 7:124
Consider the above your birthday gift. It's a present for you, from me.
Now, grow up. And stop Coonin'.
Bye
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
Paragroup E-M78 represents 74.5% of haplogroup E*, the highest frequencies observed in Masalit and Fur populations.
*Notes on E-M78 and Rosa DNA study linking Egyptians with East and Central Africans. DNA study (Rosa et al. 2007) groups Egyptians with East and Central Africans. Other DNA studies link these peoples together. Quote:“the majority of Y chromosomes found in populations in Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia and Oromos in Somalia and North Kenya (Boranas) belong to haplogroup E3b1 defined by the Y chromosome marker M78“(Sanchez 2005). Codes: Egy=Egypt. Or= Oromo, Ethiopia. Am=Amahara, Ethiopia. Sud=Sudan. FCA=Cameroon. Maa= Massai, Kenya. Note: Eighty (80)% or more of the haplotypes in Cameroon are of West African origin (Rosa et al. 2007, Cerny et al. 2006). Ethiopia, Cameroon and most of the Sudan is located below the Sahara, and thus sub-Saharan.-- Rosa, et al.(2007) Y-chromosomal diversity in the population of Guinea-Bissau. BMC Evolutionary Biology. 7:124
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Troll Patty, Anglo_Pyramidolgist says that the thinness of a person's nose indicates where they come from not this silly genetics stuff
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Troll Patty, Anglo_Pyramidolgist says that the thinness of a person's nose indicates where they come from not this silly genetics stuff
L'ass.
You haven't been to any of the places.
And as explained before about the climate zones in these places. This is suited for and what has caused these physical facial traits to appear...hence the mutations deriving from the genetic paragroup.
Divergent situ development.
It's also mentioned it the studies I have posted.
It's really as simple as is explained....
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
[/QB]
This is Sanee Ismail, who's ancestry is partially ARABIC. Look at even her surname.
Stop the self-hate.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Piss pot:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
This is Sanee Ismail, who's ancestry is partially ARABIC. Look at even her surname.
Stop the self-hate. [/QB]
What has a sure name to do with being Egyptian?
All over Africa you will find people with Arabic sure names!lol
Are you really this dumb? lol
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:They sometimes "look mixed" (to uneducated people such as yourself)
They are heavily admixed with Caucasoids.
Pure-blooded Negroids you despise, you will only post heavily Caucasoid admixed individuals out of self-hatred. You are now posting heavily Arabic admixed models, trying to pass them off as ''black''... lol. Your definition of 'black' is shifted to heavily Caucasoid admixed peoples, you show no interest in the true Negroid phenotype from West Africa. I wonder why?
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:They sometimes "look mixed" (to uneducated people such as yourself)
They are heavily admixed with Caucasoids.
Pure-blooded Negroids you despise, you will only post heavily Caucasoid admixed individuals out of self-hatred. You are now posting heavily Arabic admixed models, trying to pass them off as ''black''... lol. Your definition of 'black' is shifted to heavily Caucasoid admixed peoples, you show no interest in the true Negroid phenotype from West Africa. I wonder why?
Dumb ass I gave you studies as references. Genetic and physical anthropological. Showing continuity. The people are indigenous like this because of the climate and region in which they've lived there thousand up on thousands of years, which provided these traits.
I know, you don't. It's that simple you British simpleton.
Bye NBP simpleton.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
Troll Patty do you have any craniological data, nasal index etc, on the 160,000-year-old Afar region skulls or similar prehistoric African skulls?
also how does nose shape relate or not relate to climate?
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Troll Patty do you have any craniological data, nasal index etc, on the 160,000-year-old Afar region skulls or similar prehistoric African skulls?
also how does nose shape relate or not relate to climate?
L' ass stop login in-out account like some wierdo.
I can't respond now, I have things to do. You know, I do have a live, unlike you.
Later, L'ass and alter egos.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
^^^let me know when you come up with something
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:They sometimes "look mixed" (to uneducated people such as yourself)
They are heavily admixed with Caucasoids.
Pure-blooded Negroids you despise, you will only post heavily Caucasoid admixed individuals out of self-hatred. You are now posting heavily Arabic admixed models, trying to pass them off as ''black''... lol. Your definition of 'black' is shifted to heavily Caucasoid admixed peoples, you show no interest in the true Negroid phenotype from West Africa. I wonder why?
Dumb ass I gave you studies as references. Genetic and physical anthropological. Showing continuity. The people are indigenous like this because of the climate and region in which they've lived there thousand up on thousands of years, which provided these traits.
I know, you don't. It's that simple you British simpleton.
Bye NBP simpleton.
They are heavily Caucasoid admixed whether you like it or not.
Bye.
Posted by Vansertimavindicated (Member # 20281) on :
Uhhhmmm well these are black women! In fact these are the black women shown on the walls of ancient egypt! DNA dont lie! and they sure do look like the ancient Egyptians dont they? hehehehe DNA says that ARE the anceestors of the AE
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: blablabalbalbala
LOL. Anglo-Bitch boy isn't even trying to deny that he got his ass handed to him. He's got his *%$# sucking lips sealed tighter than the sphincters of Texas prison inmates during shower time.
Are you going to put those measurements up, that shows Horners as outside of the range of Africans, where limb ratios are concerned, or are you going to run away from that challenge too?
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Piss pot:
quote:Originally posted by Troll Patrol:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Piss pot:
quote:They sometimes "look mixed" (to uneducated people such as yourself)
They are heavily admixed with Caucasoids.
Pure-blooded Negroids you despise, you will only post heavily Caucasoid admixed individuals out of self-hatred. You are now posting heavily Arabic admixed models, trying to pass them off as ''black''... lol. Your definition of 'black' is shifted to heavily Caucasoid admixed peoples, you show no interest in the true Negroid phenotype from West Africa. I wonder why?
Dumb ass I gave you studies as references. Genetic and physical anthropological. Showing continuity. The people are indigenous like this because of the climate and region in which they've lived there thousand up on thousands of years, which provided these traits.
I know, you don't. It's that simple you British simpleton.
Bye NBP simpleton.
They are heavily Caucasoid admixed whether you like it or not.
Bye.
Dumb Muktaba Brit, the traits are indigenous to the region. As has been shown by scientific support. But I also know this from personal experience, unlike you.
We don't need a bunch of of adapted hairy eurasians for that.
Now go back to your Celtic hut and shut up.
Bye dumb Muktaba Brit.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: ^^^let me know when you come up with something
L'ass
Just quickly,
I will, but for now I am busy.
But, you can do some pre-work.
Posted by anguishofbeing (Member # 16736) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Troll Patty, Anglo_Pyramidolgist says that the thinness of a person's nose indicates where they come from not this silly genetics stuff
Interestingly enough that is your line of reasoning also.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Troll Patty do you have any craniological data, nasal index etc, on the 160,000-year-old Afar region skulls or similar prehistoric African skulls?
also how does nose shape relate or not relate to climate?
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: blablabalbalbala
LOL. Anglo-Bitch boy isn't even trying to deny that he got his ass handed to him. He's got his *%$# sucking lips sealed tighter than the sphincters of Texas prison inmates during shower time.
Are you going to put those measurements up, that shows Horners as outside of the range of Africans, where limb ratios are concerned, or are you going to run away from that challenge too?
These folks are getting desperate.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Dumb Muktaba Brit, the traits are indigenous to the region. As has been shown by scientific support.
Horners are heavily Caucasoid admixed.
Let's take a look at Ethiopians -
''Ethiopians appear to be distinct from Africans and more closely associated with populations of the Mediterranean basin.''
(Scacchi et al. 2003)
''Though present-day Ethiopia is a land of great ethnic diversity, the majority of Ethiopians speak different Semitic, Cushitic, and Omotic languages that belong to the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum. Maternal lineages of Semitic- (Amharic, Tigrinya, and Gurage) and Cushitic- (Oromo and Afar) speaking populations studied here reveal that their mtDNA pool is a nearly equal composite of sub-Saharan and western Eurasian lineages.
(Am. J. Hum. Genet., 75:000, 2004)
''East African groups, such as Ethiopians and Somalis, have great genetic resemblance to Caucasians and are clearly intermediate between sub-Saharan Africans and Caucasians''
Basically half of an Ethiopians genepool is of Eurasian (Caucasoid) derivation. They are essentially a hybrid race, a Negroid-Caucasoid (Aethiopid) blend.
Out of self-hatred of Negroid broad traits and nappy hair though, most Negroids like to claim Horners are ''Black'', despite the fact they are half-Caucasoid.
It is their Caucasoid genes that gives them their thinner noses and straighter hair.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: blablabalbalbala
LOL. Anglo-Bitch boy isn't even trying to deny that he got his ass handed to him. He's got his *%$# sucking lips sealed tighter than the sphincters of Texas prison inmates during shower time.
Are you going to put those measurements up, that shows Horners as outside of the range of Africans, where limb ratios are concerned, or are you going to run away from that challenge too?
Horners are heavily Caucasoid admixed.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Dumb Muktaba Brit, the traits are indigenous to the region. As has been shown by scientific support.
Horners are heavily Caucasoid admixed.
Let's take a look at Ethiopians -
''Ethiopians appear to be distinct from Africans and more closely associated with populations of the Mediterranean basin.''
(Scacchi et al. 2003)
''Though present-day Ethiopia is a land of great ethnic diversity, the majority of Ethiopians speak different Semitic, Cushitic, and Omotic languages that belong to the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum. Maternal lineages of Semitic- (Amharic, Tigrinya, and Gurage) and Cushitic- (Oromo and Afar) speaking populations studied here reveal that their mtDNA pool is a nearly equal composite of sub-Saharan and western Eurasian lineages.
(Am. J. Hum. Genet., 75:000, 2004)
''East African groups, such as Ethiopians and Somalis, have great genetic resemblance to Caucasians and are clearly intermediate between sub-Saharan Africans and Caucasians''
Basically half of an Ethiopians genepool is of Eurasian (Caucasoid) derivation. They are essentially a hybrid race, a Negroid-Caucasoid (Aethiopid) blend.
Out of self-hatred of Negroid broad traits and nappy hair though, most Negroids like to claim Horners are ''Black'', despite the fact they are half-Caucasoid.
It is their Caucasoid genes that gives them their thinner noses and straighter hair.
I have no time for this nonsense. I have posted numerous times data disproving this.
Plus Horn people are tropical adapted with very less to no body hair. This is the complete opposite of what you and your data is claiming.
Once again the climate is suited for the facial traits to appear. I know what I speak of and you don't.
As people left East Africa, sub groups descended from these people inherited those traits.
Bye NBP Muktaba Brit.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
For the sake of the argument.
Explain why they are tropical adapted and not extensive hairy? lol
The Northeast Africa-based E1b1b1a subclade is defined by SNP M78. Somalia, Sudan and Egypt are among the present day countries with very high frequencies (60-90%) of the E1b1b1a M78 subclade. The STR data also support its origin in this area with a TMRCA estimated at 14-23 kya.
The E1b1b1a1b (V32) subclade is a descendant of E1b1b1a1 (V12). E1b1b1a1b/V32 is highest in Somalia (47-75%),
This somewhat rare haplogroup, E1b1b1e (V6), has only been observed in East Africa with the most appreciable levels seen in Ethiopia (4-17%). Kenya and Somalia also harbor a moderate frequency (5%) of this subclade.
THE ICING ON THE CAKE!
As we can all see the "Eurasian' component ('light blue') is insignifigant in Ethiopians/Northeast Africans. So you can reburry that "admixture" theory in the same patch that you dug it up from! [/QB]
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Troll Patrol, the most physical diversity is in the Caucasoid race. In body hair (like hair, skin and eye colour) they have the most diversity.
Body hair of all different patterns can be found in the Caucasoid race.
Here is one of the only studies done to date -
Setty, LR (1961). "The distribution of chest hair in Caucasoid males". American journal of physical anthropology 19: 285–7. doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330190309. PMID 13910982.
1100 men studied.
In this study, 56% were discovered to have abundant body hair (Pattern 4). 31% were discovered to have medium body hair (Patterns 2 and 3) and 7% little body hair (Pattern 1).
6% in the study were shown to have ZERO body hair.
Here is what the Patterns look like:
The Caucasoid race has all 4 types, as well as a small minority (6%) having no body hair at all. Negroids and Mongoloids in contrast don't have such diversity.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: Troll Patrol, the most physical diversity is in the Caucasoid race. In body hair (like hair, skin and eye colour) they have the most diversity.
Body hair of all different patterns can be found in the Caucasoid race.
Here is one of the only studies done to date -
Setty, LR (1961). "The distribution of chest hair in Caucasoid males". American journal of physical anthropology 19: 285–7. doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330190309. PMID 13910982.
1100 men studied.
In this study, 56% were discovered to have abundant body hair (Pattern 4). 31% were discovered to have medium body hair (Patterns 2 and 3) and 7% little body hair (Pattern 1).
6% in the study were shown to have ZERO body hair.
Here is what the Patterns look like:
The Caucasoid race has all 4 types, as well as a small minority (6%) having no body hair at all. Negroids and Mongoloids in contrast don't have such diversity.
Sure lol
I have posted post after post...be proud of your fur...lol
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: blablabalbalbala
LOL. Anglo-Bitch boy isn't even trying to deny that he got his ass handed to him. He's got his *%$# sucking lips sealed tighter than the sphincters of Texas prison inmates during shower time.
Are you going to put those measurements up, that shows Horners as outside of the range of Africans, where limb ratios are concerned, or are you going to run away from that challenge too?
Every time I talk about measurements, you seem to get confused. Do you think linking to a dendogram is the same thing as showing that the limb measurements of Horners are outside of the African range?
Additionally, I asked you to show me material that shows that Horners do not group among Africans, and then you redirect me to a dendogram that consists exclusively of Africans, with the exception of four Yemenite samples?
Newsflash, dumbo, the Yemenites you see on that dendogram are grouped among Africans, not the other way around.
EDIT: Anglo-bitch boy is failing epically, as usual.
The dendogram isn't even based on bodyplan measurements; it depicts relations in stature, neurocranium length and breadth, nose height and breadth and face height and breadth.
In the words of G.Billy:
quote:The present study examines 39 East African populations, for each of which means values relating to seven anthropométrie characteristics were considered. The analysis of the morphological distances between these populations according to Penrose has shown the existence of relationships between biological characteristics and the biogeographical environment and the climate.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Piss Pot: Troll Patrol, the most physical diversity is in the Caucasoid race. In body hair (like hair, skin and eye colour) they have the most diversity.
Body hair of all different patterns can be found in the Caucasoid race.
Here is one of the only studies done to date -
Setty, LR (1961). "The distribution of chest hair in Caucasoid males". American journal of physical anthropology 19: 285–7. doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330190309. PMID 13910982.
1100 men studied.
In this study, 56% were discovered to have abundant body hair (Pattern 4). 31% were discovered to have medium body hair (Patterns 2 and 3) and 7% little body hair (Pattern 1).
6% in the study were shown to have ZERO body hair.
Here is what the Patterns look like:
The Caucasoid race has all 4 types, as well as a small minority (6%) having no body hair at all. Negroids and Mongoloids in contrast don't have such diversity.
DUMB NBP MUKTABA, there is not such thing as race, and certainly not a CAUCASIAN RACE? LOL
AFRICANS AREN'T HAIRY, WITH THE EXCEPTION FOR COASTAL AFRICANS LIVING AT THE MEDITERRANEAN COAST! I have debunked this nonsense in the last several posts!
Whether a man is hairy or sports a chest as smooth as an egg depends on the genes he inherits from his parents and his ethnic group...
Mediterranean men have more chest hair than northern white Europeans, while Asian and African men tend to be less hirsute.
Some researchers say body hair keeps us warm. Others even claim that it acts as a signal of virility to prospective mates — like a stag’s antlers or peacock’s feathers, it signals to females that its owner is fit, strong and healthy.
The flaw with that last argument is that chest hair is not a particularly useful signal. For a significant number of women find the prospect of running their hands through a thick carpet of wiry hair a turn-off.
I’m a Mediterranean. I’m hairyish. It’s very rare that you find a Mediterranean guy that isn’t. From my chest down to my legs, the growth is fairly consistent. We’re not talking a thick hairy pelt that could see me confused for a gorilla, nor ridiculously hairy arms like Robin Williams. But I’m hairy, like a pre-Daniel Craig James Bond.
Oh, do put it away, Simon! (The chest hair, that is... you only flash it to prove you're a dominant male)
By David Derbyshire UPDATED: 09:31 GMT, 7 February 2012
Simon Cowell is not a man to let a few inches of snow get in the way of a fashion statement. So it should have come as no surprise to see The X Factor boss on the coldest day of the year with his shirt unbuttoned and his luxuriant chest hair on display yet again.
Cowell’s trimmed fuzz feels like a familiar friend these days. In the past year it’s been paraded on the seafront in Nice, flaunted alongside bikini-clad beauties in Barbados and glimpsed by millions of viewers on Britain’s Got Talent. Given that Cowell is a man who claims to be in touch with what the British public wants, what on earth possesses him to flash his hairy chest at every opportunity?
Cold front: Simon Cowell braving the London snow on Saturday Not least because, these days, most men who flaunt their chests display considerably less hair. Rarely a day goes by without David Beckham’s polished torso making an appearance on a billboard or in a magazine shoot, while fans of the scripted reality show The Only Way Is Essex regularly watch grown men discussing the merits of chest and back waxing without any irony.
So how did British men become so vain about their chests?
For all its celebrity prominence, chest hair remains a poorly understood part of the male body. It appears late on in adolescence when its growth is triggered by a chemical called dihydrotestosterone, a male sex hormone created when testosterone is broken down in the body.
The same hormone is responsible for male pattern baldness. Whether a man is hairy or sports a chest as smooth as an egg depends on the genes he inherits from his parents and his ethnic group.
Mediterranean men have more chest hair than northern white Europeans, while Asian and African men tend to be less hirsute.
Although scientists are unsure why we have chest hair, most agree it is leftover from our days as hairy ape-men living in African forests millions of years ago. They don’t know why most men have kept their hairy chests, legs and backs.
Some researchers say body hair keeps us warm. Others even claim that it acts as a signal of virility to prospective mates — like a stag’s antlers or peacock’s feathers, it signals to females that its owner is fit, strong and healthy.
The flaw with that last argument is that chest hair is not a particularly useful signal. For a significant number of women find the prospect of running their hands through a thick carpet of wiry hair a turn-off.
One of the few scientific studies into chest hair, by Dr Markus Rantala of the University of Turku, Finland, involved women being shown pictures of a male torso from the waist to the neck, before and after he had shaved his chest hair.
Get the rug out: (Left) Cowell leaves Mr Chow's Restaurant in London and (right) on holiday in St Barts
Hirsute: (Left) Leaving the VIP Room in St Tropez, France and (right) on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno
Hair we go again: (left) Exposing his notorious waistline and (right) after a trim on a jet ski while on Christmas Eve in Barbados
Overall, the Finnish women found the smooth chest more attractive. However, older women preferred the hairy chest. Both groups tended to prefer men who most closely resembled their boyfriends or husbands.
When similar studies were carried out in the UK, however, British women preferred hairier chests. In a survey in 2010 of 3,000 women, 85 per cent said they preferred a Seventies-style chest rug and hairy legs to a shaven torso.
Preferences for hairy chests don’t just change from country to country. They have also altered through history.
Classical statues of men suggest that the Ancient Romans and Greeks liked hairless male bodies. Priests in Ancient Egypt had to be completely hairless, and would scrape themselves with pumice stones and knives.
The hairy chest’s heyday was the Sixties and Seventies, when trendy nightspots were packed with ‘medallion men’, who wore their shirts unbuttoned to the navel, doused with Old Spice and accessorised with a chunky necklace — in the belief that a thick thatch would have women swooning. In the intervening years, popular tastes have moved back to less hairy sex symbols. Today’s James Bond, Daniel Craig, was as smooth as Ursula Andress when he emerged from the sea in Casino Royale. The rise of the shaven-chested celebrity has fuelled an industry in male waxing and hair removal. According to the London-based Harley Medical Group, demand for laser hair removal on the chest area is up 22 per cent this year.
So if many women aren’t interested in chest hair — and plenty of men are shaving it off — can showing off your chest hair really be a signal of virility?
There’s certainly no evidence linking body hair to aggression, strength or fertility — all male traits associated with high testosterone levels. ‘Whether a woman likes a hairy chest may depend on her experiences growing up,’ said Dr Nick Neave, a psychologist at Northumbria University.
‘We know women are strongly influenced by the way their father looked. So if a woman’s first experience of a man is a father with a hairy chest, she may use that as a template.’ So why do so many men insist on shaving off their hairy chests? Part of the vogue for smooth chests may lie in the culture of body building. Since the early days of muscle men, weightlifters have shaved their body hair to show off their toned muscles fully.
Once men get sucked into the culture of gyms and body building, the idea of removing body hair doesn’t feel so odd. Other men simply shave their chests in response to changing fashions.
And those who choose to flaunt their chest hair? Dr Neave believes the displays may not be designed to attract women, but to show dominance to other men.
‘Females have an odd view of males,’ he said. ‘They want them to be masculine, but not too masculine. In the animal kingdom, male bodies have evolved not just to attract females but to fight off other males.
‘So when you walk around with the top of a hairy chest showing, you may not be sending a signal to women but telling other males “I’m in charge here and I’m the boss.”
If Dr Neave is right, then it explains Cowell’s love of low-slung shirts even in freezing February. After all, a famous multi- millionaire doesn’t need to try too hard to attract women — but might enjoy reminding other men who is top dog.
But after so many glimpses of the Cowell thatch, I think we’ve all got the message. Next time, Simon, wear a vest.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: blablabalbalbala
LOL. Anglo-Bitch boy isn't even trying to deny that he got his ass handed to him. He's got his *%$# sucking lips sealed tighter than the sphincters of Texas prison inmates during shower time.
Are you going to put those measurements up, that shows Horners as outside of the range of Africans, where limb ratios are concerned, or are you going to run away from that challenge too?
Every time I talk about measurements, you seem to get confused. Do you think linking to a dendogram is the same thing as showing that the limb measurements of Horners are outside of the African range?
Additionally, I asked you to show me material that shows that Horners do not group among Africans, and then you redirect me to a dendogram that consists exclusively of Africans, with the exception of four Yemenite samples?
Newsflash, dumbo, the Yemenites you see on that dendogram are grouped among Africans, not the other way around.
EDIT: Anglo-bitch boy is failing epically, as usual.
The dendogram isn't even based on bodyplan measurements; it depicts relations in stature, neurocranium length and breadth, nose height and breadth and face height and breadth.
In the words of G.Billy:
quote:The present study examines 39 East African populations, for each of which means values relating to seven anthropométrie characteristics were considered. The analysis of the morphological distances between these populations according to Penrose has shown the existence of relationships between biological characteristics and the biogeographical environment and the climate.
Morphologically Horners are shown to cluster with North Africans and Eurasian Caucasoids, this is obvious as they are thin nosed, and orthognathic.
Posted by the lioness (Member # 17353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
Morphologically Horners are shown to cluster with North Africans and Eurasian Caucasoids, this is obvious as they are thin nosed, and orthognathic. [/QB]
^^^ this person is half Caucasoid most Horners are less than half Caucasoid
what location did the first Caucasoids come from?
.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:The study includes data on limb length.
You need to stop your nasty habit of lying. What the study says:
quote:MATÉRIEL ET MÉTHODE Nos comparaisons ont porté sur sept données morphométriques comprenant : la stature, la longueur (M.l) et la largeur (M.3) céphaliques, la largeur bizygomatique (M. 6), la hauteur faciale morphologique (M. 18), la hauteur (M.21) et la largeur (M. 13) nasales selon la technique et la numérotation de Martin et Saller (1957).
Translation:
quote:EQUIPMENT AND METHODOur comparisons focused on seven comprising morphometric data:the stature, the (M.l) length and width (M.3) cephalic, bizygomatique width(Mr. 6), morphological facial height (Mr. 18), height (M.21) andthe nasal (M. 13) width depending on the technique and the numbering of Martin and Saller(1957).
That's:
-stature (1/7) -length (2/7) and width cephalic (3/7) -bizygomatique width (4/7) -morphological facial height (5/7) -height (6/7) and the nasal width (7/7)
It doesn't list limb proportions as a part of their variables, stop lying.
quote:Morphologically Horners are shown to cluster with North Africans and Eurasian Caucasoids,
Metrically, yes. In terms of cranial traits, dental traits, limb proportions, blood group, absolutely not.
Prove that Somali metric characteristics are due to admixture from Northern groups, rather than local evolution.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
The study includes other measurements. You've merely linked to the abtract, and cleary not read the full study. Don't embarrass yourself further.
Blood groups cluster North Africans and Horners with Caucasoids - highest Rh negative.
''[...]Somalis cluster with Europeans before showing a tie with the people of West Africa or the Congo Basin'' - Brace et al. 1993
What's funny is that the Afronuts love to quote-mine Brace, but never this study which proves Somalis cluster with Caucasoids in their craniofacial features, and not Negroids.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
I clearly quoted directly out of that study, not the abstract, which can be seen by the fact that my quote contains the ''materials and method's'' header. No abstract ever has a ''materials and method's'' section.
Furthermore, both the abstract and the ''materials and methods'' section say the study utilized seven variables. All seven variables are accounted for by the seven variables I mentioned.
quote:The study includes other measurements.
Prove it.
quote:Blood groups cluster North Africans and Horners with Caucasoids
Prove it.
quote:''[...]Somalis cluster with Europeans before showing a tie with the people of West Africa or the Congo Basin'' - Brace et al. 1993
I already said Somali's show relations with Eurasians, metrically speaking. This (debating points I'm not contesting) is no doubt your mental retardation manifesting itself.
quote:What's funny is that the Afronuts love to quote-mine Brace
You're the one who is quote mining. In that exact same study you're desperately quoting from, Brace clearly says East Africans, including Horners and Ancient Egyptians, have tropically adapted limbs. He also says cold adapted populations can't acquire tropical limb proportions within a few centuries, or even millenia, after immigrating to a hot region. You lose, again.
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
Use an online English translator, and then read the full study, it covers limb ratios.
Caucasoids are the highest in Rh negative blood (16%) while Mongoloids and Negroids are 0%. African-Americans are 7%, but they are heavily Caucasoid admixed.
Posted by claus3600 (Member # 19584) on :
@Anglo African-Americans are 7%, but they are heavily Caucasoid admixed.
Like the Egyptians then, in your view?
Posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist (Member # 18853) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @Anglo African-Americans are 7%, but they are heavily Caucasoid admixed.
Like the Egyptians then, in your view?
Rh negative blood is a Caucasoid marker. When we look at Africa, the only places it shows up is in North Africa and the Horn (heavily Caucasoid admixed places). Negroids and Mongoloids in contrast are 0%.
African-Americans are heavily Caucasoid admixed, but less so than modern Horners and North Africans who are even more so.
Self-proclaimed 'Blacks' in Britain and Europe are also heavily Caucasoid admixed through the slave trade.
The True Negroid is merely limited to West Africa.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: I think one other reason why Bass et al. left was because the more serious "trolls" left too. Notice their absence correlates with the absence of posters like White Nord, Jamie, etc. The "new" inferior trolls like CT, Lioness etc don't offer serious arguments or challenge and hence are poor alternatives.
lol!
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist:
quote:Dumb Muktaba Brit, the traits are indigenous to the region. As has been shown by scientific support.
Horners are heavily Caucasoid admixed.
Let's take a look at Ethiopians -
''Ethiopians appear to be distinct from Africans and more closely associated with populations of the Mediterranean basin.''
(Scacchi et al. 2003)
''Though present-day Ethiopia is a land of great ethnic diversity, the majority of Ethiopians speak different Semitic, Cushitic, and Omotic languages that belong to the Afro-Asiatic linguistic phylum. Maternal lineages of Semitic- (Amharic, Tigrinya, and Gurage) and Cushitic- (Oromo and Afar) speaking populations studied here reveal that their mtDNA pool is a nearly equal composite of sub-Saharan and western Eurasian lineages.
(Am. J. Hum. Genet., 75:000, 2004)
''East African groups, such as Ethiopians and Somalis, have great genetic resemblance to Caucasians and are clearly intermediate between sub-Saharan Africans and Caucasians''
Basically half of an Ethiopians genepool is of Eurasian (Caucasoid) derivation. They are essentially a hybrid race, a Negroid-Caucasoid (Aethiopid) blend.
Out of self-hatred of Negroid broad traits and nappy hair though, most Negroids like to claim Horners are ''Black'', despite the fact they are half-Caucasoid.
It is their Caucasoid genes that gives them their thinner noses and straighter hair.
Dimwit you must not be familiar with most horners if you think most of them don't have nappy hair and kinky hair. Like I said - stay off the mathilda site. Beja Somali and almost all Cushitic peoples and Ethiopians are mostly kinky and woolly-haired people. And they also rarely have red hair.
Maasai and other Nilotes also have very narrow noses as explained to you previously having nothing to do with Caucasoidality.
Yes - some Horners have absorbed Eurasian blood -but some isn't half. You really need to stop going to the Mathilda website and gleaning photos from there.
Boy, anguishofbeing was right when he said the quality of the trolls here has fallen down a few notches.
People of the Mediterranean basin use to be Naqqada and Amratian-related people such as the purer Somalis. That is the only reason they have a little commonality with the present day inhabitants there. Obviously some Berbers are going to have a degree of similarity being that the original ones were from EAST AFRICA.
I am sorry but its simply going to take a lot more intermixing to turn hairless refined-faced or gracile-boned Somalis and Maasaai into hairsute big-boned built for cold pale and pink-whitish Eurasiatics, which you like to call "Caucasoids".
Be happy with what you are. You don't have to create a whole new racial category to fit in with black skinned Horners who have more biologically in common with the San and Haratin even though they have aborbed EUROAsiatics.
Where are you going to see a single refined or gracile form of face among a European men that looks like these Somalis. NOWHERE! Please stop dreaming and WASTING OUR TIME.
The "refined" African looks of people like these Maasaai warriors are not from Europeans and I'm truly sorry if that hurts. Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: The study includes other measurements. You've merely linked to the abtract, and cleary not read the full study. Don't embarrass yourself further.
Blood groups cluster North Africans and Horners with Caucasoids - highest Rh negative.
''[...]Somalis cluster with Europeans before showing a tie with the people of West Africa or the Congo Basin'' - Brace et al. 1993
What's funny is that the Afronuts love to quote-mine Brace, but never this study which proves Somalis cluster with Caucasoids in their craniofacial features, and not Negroids.
If your going to quote Brace you will need to learn how to interpret a scientific studies.
For the following there is little interpretation necessary.
"The results of a population survey on blood group distribution in Somalia, East Africa, are presented. Over 1,000 subjects were tested for most blood groups included in the survey. The sampling covered the whole country and was well in accordance with the population density as estimated by the recorded birth places of the subjects. Altogether, 46 blood group antigens were tested, partly common antigens within 11 of the major blood group systems, but also infrequent and very frequent antigens, some not tested before in Africa, were included. The results were compared with the available data for other related peoples and for populations from the same geographical area. The standard genetic distances were also applied in the comparison. The results suggest that only a minor component in the genetic constitution of the Somali population can be ascribed to Caucasian admixture. They are markedly in contrast with some earlier findings. During the survey we observed a previously unknown Rh gene complex occurring with a polymorphic frequency in Somalis." P. Sistonend, J. Koistinena, Aden Abdulleb. (1987) Distribution of Blood Groups in the East African Somali Population. Hum Hered. 37(5):300-313
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:Use an online English translator, and then read the full study, it covers limb ratios.
You're a phucking liar. On top of that, you're only showing how illiterate you are by even entertaining the idea that there is such a thing as 'hidden' variables that have not been listed in the 'materials and methods' section, and that variables can just appear out of the blue in the 'introduction', 'results and discussion' or 'conclusions' sections of a study.
Everything you say proves just what a fraud you are. You're lying. You have no Jstor access, and you've never read a study in your life, which is why you're in the dark about the fact that papers have a standardized format, where everything, from variables to the observations, are always put in the same place.
According to your dumb ass, studies are just random unordered narratives, where variables can just appear everywhere.
Even this Billy paper (which was brought up by you) is against everything you say. It supports the position that Horner and Egypto-Sudanese differentiation is due to their adaptation to their climate, regardless of trivial admixture here and there.
YOU are the one who has not read the study, otherwise you would never have dared to even bring it up:
quote:The graphical representation of the hierarchy leads to a tree of classif ication binary where each class is characterized by the distance of meeting of two subclasses only. Such a dendrogram, which allows you to view ENSEM bldees biological distances between populations, can not be confused with a phylogenetic tree (Hiernaux, 1980).
quote:This study provides confirmation first by illustrating the relationship between phenotypic characteristics of sub-Saharan populations and their environment biogeographical environment already highlighted by many authors such Weiner (1954), Hiernaux (1968), Schreider (1971), Crognier (1973) or Passarello and Vecchi (1977-1979). They result in a concentration gradient of elec ements larger heads and faces with narrower by moving from forest to savannah and the steppe. Their interpretation was given as an adaptation mor phologique to different climates.
In other words, the facial configuration of Horners is wholly indigenous.
-No, Horners don't have cold adapted limbs. Indeed, even if that Billy dendogram was partially based on limb proportions, it still wouldn't prove sh!t, as Yemenites group with tropically adapted people in terms of bodyplan.
-No, African Americans don't have cold adapted limbs
-No, there is not one way of measuring facial index
-No, there is not one way of measuring limb length
-No, Somali's do not cluster with Eurasians when it comes to blood groups
-No, Billy did not include limb measurements in the paper you brought up
-No, cold adapted limbs cannot turn tropical within a few generations, centuries, or millenia.
-No, of course limb proportions are not fit for racial classification; they are fit for the classification of groups with a long history of similar climates. Only an illiterate dumbass such as yourself would use the fact that its ''not fit for racial classification'' as an argument against limb proportions
Everything you've said is outright false. You couldn't even get one thing right.
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by claus3600: @Anglo African-Americans are 7%, but they are heavily Caucasoid admixed.
Trotter and Gleser's (Trotter and Gleser: Am J Phys Anthropol 10 (1952) 469–514; Trotter and Gleser: Am J Phys Anthropol 16 (1958) 79–123) long bone formulae for US Blacks or derivations thereof (Robins and Shute: Hum Evol 1 (1986) 313–324) have been previously used to estimate the stature of ancient Egyptians. However, limb length to stature proportions differ between human populations; consequently, the most accurate mathematical stature estimates will be obtained when the population being examined is as similar as possible in proportions to the population used to create the equations. The purpose of this study was to create new stature regression formulae based on direct reconstructions of stature in ancient Egyptians and assess their accuracy in comparison to other stature estimation methods. We also compare Egyptian body proportions to those of modern American Blacks and Whites. Living stature estimates were derived using a revised Fully anatomical method (Raxter et al.: Am J Phys Anthropol 130 (2006) 374–384). Long bone stature regression equations were then derived for each sex. Our results confirm that, although ancient Egyptians are closer in body proportion to modern American Blacks than they are to American Whites, proportions in Blacks and Egyptians are not identical. The newly generated Egyptian-based stature regression formulae have standard errors of estimate of 1.9–4.2 cm. All mean directional differences are less than 0.4% compared to anatomically estimated stature, while results using previous formulae are more variable, with mean directional biases varying between 0.2% and 1.1%, tibial and radial estimates being the most biased. There is no evidence for significant variation in proportions among temporal or social groupings; thus, the new formulae may be broadly applicable to ancient Egyptian remains.
quote:Originally posted by Anglo_Pyramidologist: The study includes other measurements. You've merely linked to the abtract, and cleary not read the full study. Don't embarrass yourself further.
Blood groups cluster North Africans and Horners with Caucasoids - highest Rh negative.
''[...]Somalis cluster with Europeans before showing a tie with the people of West Africa or the Congo Basin'' - Brace et al. 1993
What's funny is that the Afronuts love to quote-mine Brace, but never this study which proves Somalis cluster with Caucasoids in their craniofacial features, and not Negroids.
If your going to quote Brace you will need to learn how to interpret a scientific studies.
For the following there is little interpretation necessary.
"The results of a population survey on blood group distribution in Somalia, East Africa, are presented. Over 1,000 subjects were tested for most blood groups included in the survey. The sampling covered the whole country and was well in accordance with the population density as estimated by the recorded birth places of the subjects. Altogether, 46 blood group antigens were tested, partly common antigens within 11 of the major blood group systems, but also infrequent and very frequent antigens, some not tested before in Africa, were included. The results were compared with the available data for other related peoples and for populations from the same geographical area. The standard genetic distances were also applied in the comparison. The results suggest that only a minor component in the genetic constitution of the Somali population can be ascribed to Caucasian admixture. They are markedly in contrast with some earlier findings. During the survey we observed a previously unknown Rh gene complex occurring with a polymorphic frequency in Somalis." P. Sistonend, J. Koistinena, Aden Abdulleb. (1987) Distribution of Blood Groups in the East African Somali Population. Hum Hered. 37(5):300-313
And that maximum is 10%. Not more!
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Use an online English translator, and then read the full study, it covers limb ratios.
You're a phucking liar. On top of that, you're only showing how illiterate you are by even entertaining the idea that there is such a thing as 'hidden' variables that have not been listed in the 'materials and methods' section, and that variables can just appear out of the blue in the 'introduction', 'results and discussion' or 'conclusions' sections of a study.
Everything you say proves just what a fraud you are. You're lying. You have no Jstor access, and you've never read a study in your life, which is why you're in the dark about the fact that papers have a standardized format, where everything, from variables to the observations, are always put in the same place.
According to your dumb ass, studies are just random unordered narratives, where variables can just appear everywhere.
Even this Billy paper (which was brought up by you) is against everything you say. It supports the position that Horner and Egypto-Sudanese differentiation is due to their adaptation to their climate, regardless of trivial admixture here and there.
YOU are the one who has not read the study, otherwise you would never have dared to even bring it up:
quote:The graphical representation of the hierarchy leads to a tree of classif ication binary where each class is characterized by the distance of meeting of two subclasses only. Such a dendrogram, which allows you to view ENSEM bldees biological distances between populations, can not be confused with a phylogenetic tree (Hiernaux, 1980).
quote:This study provides confirmation first by illustrating the relationship between phenotypic characteristics of sub-Saharan populations and their environment biogeographical environment already highlighted by many authors such Weiner (1954), Hiernaux (1968), Schreider (1971), Crognier (1973) or Passarello and Vecchi (1977-1979). They result in a concentration gradient of elec ements larger heads and faces with narrower by moving from forest to savannah and the steppe. Their interpretation was given as an adaptation mor phologique to different climates.
In other words, the facial configuration of Horners is wholly indigenous.
-No, Horners don't have cold adapted limbs. Indeed, even if that Billy dendogram was partially based on limb proportions, it still wouldn't prove sh!t, as Yemenites group with tropically adapted people in terms of bodyplan.
-No, African Americans don't have cold adapted limbs
-No, there is not one way of measuring facial index
-No, there is not one way of measuring limb length
-No, Somali's do not cluster with Eurasians when it comes to blood groups
-No, Billy did not include limb measurements in the paper you brought up
-No, cold adapted limbs cannot turn tropical within a few generations, centuries, or millenia.
-No, of course limb proportions are not fit for racial classification; they are fit for the classification of groups with a long history of similar climates. Only an illiterate dumbass such as yourself would use the fact that its ''not fit for racial classification'' as an argument against limb proportions
Everything you've said is outright false. You couldn't even get one thing right.
It's very nice to know that Yemenis cluster with tropical adapted Africans. And not just that, but also genetically and historically. Awlad Berry and Dana spoke of this aswell.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
^Yeah, quite interesting that the folks that are supposed to have made Horners cold adapted - i.e., Yemenites - are in fact not cold adapted themselves.
Yemenites have over 30% African mtdna lineages, though I don't see no one cutting their phenotypical variations up into indigenous, and not indigenous.
Posted by asante-Korton (Member # 18532) on :
quote:Originally posted by Swenet: ^Yeah, quite interesting that the folks that are supposed to have made Horners cold adapted - i.e., Yemenites - are in fact not cold adapted themselves.
Yemenites have over 30% African mtdna lineages, though I don't see no one cutting their phenotypical variations up into indigenous, and not indigenous.
And these are the same people some Beja's have mixed with, as was already explained.
Posted by Vansertimavindicated (Member # 20281) on :
I do hope by now that many of you understand that threads like this are just a smokescreen by that scumbag Salsassin! So he creates a thread like this, and then uses his fake names to make posts in it, thus confusing people into thinking that the OWNER is in cahoots! (which he is not) These are all salsassins fake names doing this to throw you off the track that he has taken over this forum with his fake names!
There was a member by the name of Salsassin that has created several fake names and has created several fake personalities which he uses to talk with himself on the board! He has several fake names and I will share with you all a few that exist here right now! 1) Mike111 Member # 9361 This Mike111 name plays the role of a hardcore afrocentric who insists that Whites are Dravidian Albinos even though TRUE Dravidians possess ZERO% Neanderthal DNA
2) the lioness Member # 17353
Lioness plays the role of imbecile and it comes naturally!
3)Clyde Winters Member # 10129 This person has impersonated Dr. Clyde Winters on Egyptsearch for SIX years! The REAL Dr. Clyde Winters is not a member of Egyptsearch and he plays the role of the educated Afrocentrist, but insists that Neanderthal existed in Africa
THE REAL DR. CLYDE WINTERS CAN BE REACHED @cwinters@govst.edu
4) ausar ""Moderator""Member # 1797 is another fictitious name that has made it all the way to the position of Moderator where he has the power to delete posts!
THESE ARE JUST ONE OF MANY OF SALSASSINS FAKE NAMES! PLEASE MAKE NOTE OF IT! There are MANY many more!!!!!
The moron thinks that this is making him famous! LOL
He must have a sad life huh?
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
quote:The study includes other measurements. You've merely linked to the abtract, and cleary not read the full study. Don't embarrass yourself further.
(sound of crickets)
What, waving the white flag, AGAIN, bitch boy? No in-study quotation that proves that I'm ''only embarrassing'' myself when I say Billy didn't use limb proportions? No limb proportion data that shows Somali's as clustering with Europeans? No blood group data that shows Somali's as clustering with Europeans?
quote:Originally posted by Swenet:
quote:Use an online English translator, and then read the full study, it covers limb ratios.
You're a phucking liar. On top of that, you're only showing how illiterate you are by even entertaining the idea that there is such a thing as 'hidden' variables that have not been listed in the 'materials and methods' section, and that variables can just appear out of the blue in the 'introduction', 'results and discussion' or 'conclusions' sections of a study.
Everything you say proves just what a fraud you are. You're lying. You have no Jstor access, and you've never read a study in your life, which is why you're in the dark about the fact that papers have a standardized format, where everything, from variables to the observations, are always put in the same place.
According to your dumb ass, studies are just random unordered narratives, where variables can just appear everywhere.
Even this Billy paper (which was brought up by you) is against everything you say. It supports the position that Horner and Egypto-Sudanese differentiation is due to their adaptation to their climate, regardless of trivial admixture here and there.
YOU are the one who has not read the study, otherwise you would never have dared to even bring it up:
quote:The graphical representation of the hierarchy leads to a tree of classif ication binary where each class is characterized by the distance of meeting of two subclasses only. Such a dendrogram, which allows you to view ENSEM bldees biological distances between populations, can not be confused with a phylogenetic tree (Hiernaux, 1980).
quote:This study provides confirmation first by illustrating the relationship between phenotypic characteristics of sub-Saharan populations and their environment biogeographical environment already highlighted by many authors such Weiner (1954), Hiernaux (1968), Schreider (1971), Crognier (1973) or Passarello and Vecchi (1977-1979). They result in a concentration gradient of elec ements larger heads and faces with narrower by moving from forest to savannah and the steppe. Their interpretation was given as an adaptation mor phologique to different climates.
In other words, the facial configuration of Horners is wholly indigenous.
-No, Horners don't have cold adapted limbs. Indeed, even if that Billy dendogram was partially based on limb proportions, it still wouldn't prove sh!t, as Yemenites group with tropically adapted people in terms of bodyplan.
-No, African Americans don't have cold adapted limbs
-No, there is not one way of measuring facial index
-No, there is not one way of measuring limb length
-No, Somali's do not cluster with Eurasians when it comes to blood groups
-No, Billy did not include limb measurements in the paper you brought up
-No, cold adapted limbs cannot turn tropical within a few generations, centuries, or millenia.
-No, of course limb proportions are not fit for racial classification; they are fit for the classification of groups with a long history of similar climates. Only an illiterate dumbass such as yourself would use the fact that its ''not fit for racial classification'' as an argument against limb proportions
Everything you've said is outright false. You couldn't even get one thing right.
Posted by Swenet (Member # 17303) on :
^
Posted by Troll Patrol (Member # 18264) on :
I found this older post by Mike, it's very interesting and adding to the comprehensive information.
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: Marc - I have no clue as to why some knuckle-heads STILL equate White skin with Europe or Cold weather, when the "WHITE" written history which disproves it, is readily available to all.
Scandinavian history (BLACKS)
The Scandinavian prehistory began when the area became free of ice, at the end of the last ice age, around 11000 BC, with the Ahrensburg culture and hunters living in near proximity to the ice. It took until the 7th millennium BC for forest, wildlife and Mesolithic hunter-gatherers to settle. In southern Scandinavia, a Maglemosian culture (ca 7500 BC–6000 BC) developed. The Maglemosian people lived in forest and wetland environments using fishing and hunting tools made from wood, bone and flint microliths. A characteristic of the culture are the sharply edged microliths of flintstone which were used for spear heads and arrow heads. Microliths finds are more sparse from ca 6000 BC and the period is said to transist into the Kongemose culture (ca 6000 BC–ca 5200 BC). The finds from this period are characterised by long flintstone flakes which were used for making the characteristic rhombic arrowheads, scrapers, drills, awls and toothed blades.
The Ertebølle culture (ca 5300 BC-3950 BC) is the name of a hunter-gatherer and fisher culture dating to the end of the Mesolithic period. It was followed by the Funnelbeaker culture (4000–2700 BC) a culture that originated in southern parts of Europe and slowly advanced up through today's Uppland. Tribes along the coasts of Svealand, Götaland, Åland, north-eastern Denmark and southern Norway learnt new technologies that became the Pitted Ware culture (3200 BC to 2300 BC).
Norsemen (WHITES)
Norsemen is used to refer to the group of people as a whole who speak one of the North Germanic languages as their native language. ("Norse", in particular, refers to the Old Norse language belonging to the North Germanic branch of Indo-European languages, especially Norwegian, Icelandic, Swedish and Danish in their earlier forms.)
The meaning of Norseman was "people from the North" and was applied primarily to Nordic people originating from southern and central Scandinavia. They established states and settlements in areas which today are part of the Faroe Islands, England, Scotland, Wales, Iceland, Finland, Ireland, Russia, Italy, Canada, Greenland, France, Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Germany.
Norse and Norsemen are applied to the Scandinavian population of the period from the late 8th century to the 11th century. The term "Normans" was later primarily associated with the people of Norse origin in Normandy, France, assimilated into French culture and language. The term Norse-Gaels (Gall Goidel, lit:foreign Gaelic) was used concerning the people of Norse descent in Ireland and Scotland, who assimilated into the Gaelic culture.
Vikings has been a common term for Norsemen in the early medieval period, especially in connection with raids and monastic plundering made by Norsemen in Great Britain and Ireland. Northmen was famously used in the prayer A furore normannorum libera nos domine ("From the fury of the Northmen deliver us, O Lord!"), doubtfully attributed to monks of the English monasteries plundered by Viking raids in the 8th and 9th centuries.
Viking Range - pay special attention to the DATES!!
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
Damn! At least give me more credit than Lioness! Geez! ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Yep yep,
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
